Next qualitative leap for WitE

[Blubel]

You also have to count into this the amount of high morale infantry divisions you loose. There are about 30 good infantry, tank and motorized divisions after the first turns left. I find the infantry toe change way more damaging.

[randallw]

ORIGINAL: veji1

Sigh... Aurelian you are aware that the Soviet player can form armies, whether regular, schock or Guard, attribute units to those, farm for guars units, build SUs at wish, etc...

The Soviet side can form a regular ( combined arms ) army or tank army ( beginning mid 1942 ). Shock armies arrive only by timetable, and Guard armies only come around with enough victories.

[veji1]

ORIGINAL: randallw

ORIGINAL: veji1

Sigh... Aurelian you are aware that the Soviet player can form armies, whether regular, schock or Guard, attribute units to those, farm for guars units, build SUs at wish, etc...

The Soviet side can form a regular ( combined arms ) army or tank army ( beginning mid 1942 ). Shock armies arrive only by timetable, and Guard armies only come around with enough victories.

I know; lets not nit-pick here you got my drift I believe...

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: AFV

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: AFV

Exactly how many of these high CV tank/mechanized divisions are present at the start of the game, that do not get destroyed in the Llov pocket?

Anyways, good point Klydon.

You do know that they are also elsewhere on the map?

I asked a question, if you don't know the answer, then say "I dont know".

I could also of said "Look it up for yourself. If that's beyond you, then say so."

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: veji1

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: Klydon



As a general rule of thumb, I think most German TOE changes were forced by the material and manpower losses the Germans suffered and their inability to replace them as the war went along. The Russian changes were more driven by experience and study of what was working and what needed some work to improve it.

Yes, the Soviet ones were. But still, change one, you have to change the other. If the Axis player gets to decide if he wants to change his TOE, (and I don't think that was in the purvue of OKH. Could be wrong there.), then the Soviet player gets to decide what does and does not work. Especially as STAVKA was higher up the food chain than a theatre command.

And TOEs can change without loses. (The number of panzer divisions before Jun 22 were doubled by splitting the exsisting ones in half IIRC.)


It's all academic anyway. Jaw's already stated he isn't going to change the TOEs.

And I kind of doubt they'll take time away from WiTW to make what would probably be a drastic change.

Sigh... Aurelian you are aware that the Soviet player can form armies, whether regular, schock or Guard, attribute units to those, farm for guars units, build SUs at wish, etc..

Really? I never knew that. Whew, load off my mind. Oh BTW, Shock/Guard armies either come on a set schedule, (Shock), or come about from victories, (Guard.) And as the Axis player can also attribute units to all of theirs, I fail to see your point.

[Schmart]

For those wishing for Axis TOE changes (or rather eliminating certain changes) and changing the reinforcement/withdrawl schedule for the 'Stalingrad' divisions, these are all quite easy changes in the editor, considering that it doesn't appear the developers are going to move on this any time soon. Changing the TOE upgrade path for a unit takes like 3 mouse clicks. One could very easily create an alternate Axis TOE/OOB grand campaign.

[heliodorus04]

To Vicberg:
I'm on your side about the pointlessness of playing Germany against a human opponent (it's an enjoyable game with the right tweaks when you play against the AI).

Here are the major factors that defeat Germany with no assistance provided by the Soviet player. In other words, these are all handicaps by design that Gary Grigsby and the community felt are acceptable. I believe each and every one of these is unacceptable and completely a-historical.

1) Morale
The morale equation is now a secret, although I do seem to recall it being published once as follows:
Die roll 75. If DR75 is less than (National Morale - Unit Morale) then morale will go up. If not, then morale stays the same. On the surface, this would make it appear that any German unit with a morale above 75 cannot increase it's morale in 1941, and we know this isn't true. There are some factors, like leadership rolls, that allow these units to increase.

The issue is "Regression to the Mean" and how a base 75 die roll fucks over Germany hard core starting in January 1942, and exacerbating its problem each and every January. Simultaneously, each and every January, the Soviet army's chances of improved morale go up (a little or a lot, depending on the year), AND the base 75 roll factored against (National Morale minus Unit Morale) gives the Soviet side a huge probabilistic advantage to raising unit morale with each successive attack (think of the Blizzard, too, and how this catapults Soviet morale).

If the equation above is close to accurate (when last I read the forum regularly, no one would share the morale equation any more, which tells me all I need to know about my point's veracity), then if you have any understanding of standard deviations, you can see that the game has Germany on a ladder to decreasing morale, and Soviet on a ladder to increasing morale.

This is compounded by the Refit morale increase mechanism, which realistically gives the Soviet side an advantage that Germany can never achieve. The reason for this is that the Soviet can sit on a lot of idle units, and (see above) Regression to the Mean of the morale formula drives up their morale without having to engage in combat. The issue here is the base75 die roll. Setting it at 75 is an artifice to keep German morale low, and enables 'ceiling space' that allows Soviet morale to grow, even in idle units with fractional TOEs.

Morale is the number one issue holding Germany down.

2) Brigades and the lack of Over-run
I completed a game in which I captured (POWs only) over 3 million Soviets, and killed another 1.5 million (KIA and disabled). At exactly the moment when I achieved numerical parity with the Soviet Union (I was within 500,000 men and near equal in guns), the Soviet brigades start to arrive.

These brigades arrive with minimal TOEs, and yet they cost a German division exactly as much MPs to attack, with no consideration given to the concept of 'over-run'. As more Soviet brigades arrive, the Soviets can force Germany to spend a disproportionate amount of MPs on Soviet units that are less than 50% TOE. So a panzer division with 100 tanks and 12K men are unable to pin down and eliminate 1,000 Soviets with 15 tanks. Over the course of a week. Ludicrous.

Without a consideration given to over-run, and with no consideration that the Soviet be required to field combat units only when they have some standard level of preparedness (as in TOE/morale/training), the Soviet is free to remove field divisions from the front and replace them with speed bump brigades.

Now add this factor in to my point above: Brigades allow the Soviet to withdraw combat units, place them on refit in the rear, and raise their morale and TOE for the upcoming blizzard.

Soviet brigades should not be allowed to move until they are in a Ready state. New divisions and brigades that are attacked while Unready should pay a heavy price in casualties (as in, shatter/surrender), but this is not the case.

3) German withdrawals versus Soviet guards cavalry
a) There is no limit on the amount of cavalry and guards cavalry that can be acquired by the Soviet in the game. As a result, Soviet cavalry dominates the bad weather of 1941, they then benefit from the 1:1 -> 2:1 rule, and upon winning a fight, they benefit from the morale rules that force their morale up faster and easier than Germany will ever face throughout the remainder of the game.

b) Germany must withdraw units by specific identity. This is to speak little of the issue with Stalingrad's surrendered divisions being withdrawn even if Stalingrad never happens. If Germany has a premier infantry division that managed to defy the morale rules and get to 91 morale, it just may be the division that is forced to withdraw. Further, if that division is at 100% TOE, it takes it ALL with it, whereas, if it's below 75% TOE, it will leave only after it sucks out Eastern Front-allocated replacements from the pool.

4) Air War
Biplanes, need I say more? Soviets rule the skies starting in 1941 unless 'nice' players use house rules. The air war can be gamed by the side with quantitative advantage. That side is never Germany.

5) Soviet command re-organization is done for free.
a)
At Turn 1, when Germany should be at its zenith of organizational preparedness, it is saddled with over-command burdens in AGS and AGC, and those will never dissipate before late 1942. Even the advent of AG B does little to mitigate this problem (and Rostov is typically a difficult target to take anyway, so AG B isn't likely going to happen in 1941).

Meanwhile, as each Soviet division is destroyed, it arrives for free back to STAVKA where it can be re-assigned for free to whatever HQ best fits it. The result is that the Soviet gets to re-organize its army in 1941 for zero AP costs. While some will point to the German army getting the same zero-AP re-assignment cost for free, that's a Red Herring argument.

b) AP costs to switch divisions
The point is that Germany should be better organized and optimized for its doctrinal flexibility of command, and the Soviets should be harder to optimize than they are. Moreover, in the average game, how many German divisions are going to be destroyed in the first year of the war between Germany and the Soviet, and who benefits more from this design decision?

This is compounded by the enigmatic decision to make German divisions cost 5 to 7 times as much to change HQs than Soviet divisions (do the math, I'm not doing it for you again, as I already have). Aggregate German leadership advantage is only 20%, yet Germany pays 500% (minimum average!) to change commands than Soviet. No design decision says "Fuck German Gameplay" to me like that decision.

I've heard many players argue to me that this AP switch cost difference is immaterial, and to them, I challenge them to play as Germany against whatever difficulty of AI they usually play against, only give Germany a 400 setting in Admin, and see what happens. Even if you don't use the extra AP to streamline your command (assuming you want more handicap), the fact that German leaders always make their Admin roll, reducing the cost by half to change HQs, is a massive help. It enables Germany to gain benefit from moving units in and out of Corps-level commands for refit. It enables German players to organize their corps-HQs around roles, because you can move divisions into gameplay appropriate positions. It enables Germany to make the most of the infernally variable movement point allowances of its infantry. Faster divisions can swap into the better HQs. Slower ones can fall back and refit. The way the game is set up, AP matter a lot more to Germany than most players realize. Think alone of how much easier it is to move German SUs if you had those AP costs normalized between Soviet division and German division.

6) Soviet Rail Capacity and Hindsight
It's clear to everyone now that there's little need to move Heavy Industry in the game, ever. Some players do. But since it's not necessary to move it, Soviet players have a huge hindsight advantage, and can ensure no armament points are at risk. Further, they can use the rail capacity that historically the Soviet command used to move Heavy Industry and instead move combat units around. By the Blizzard, this excess rail capacity that historically moved population and industry is instead used to create a super-mobile Train Reserve (often made up of ... wait for it... guards cavalry).

Vicberg, all the German-side-favoring players have moved on. All that remain are the beta testers who, by my definition, are biased and closed-minded.

Take your lessons from the bad taste in your mouth that this title engendered, and go to other, better games.

[vicberg]

ORIGINAL: kg_1007

I admit to being lost in the term "muling" which has come up several times here...what exactly is this?

It's a practice of reassigning all divisions out of a panzer HQ, keeping that HQ back and doing a buildup, then moving it up and reassigning divisions into it. Rinse, repeat. So cycle the HQs, mule up the fuel. The cost for HQ buildup when no divisions are assigned is small. The affect is that you can keep the majority of your panzers running near full speed every turn.

It's the great equalizer in this game and in the hands of someone like Michaelt, unstoppable.

[vicberg]

heliodorus04, totally agree an all points.

I think the main point that everyone should start really understanding is that many, many games now are repeating the same pattern. The soviet players have gotten wise to fighting forward and risking encirclement. They put pickets then checkboards then carpets, relying heavily upon reserve mode, to prevent both encirclement and capturing production before it's railed out. They use the logistical dead zone in the south, east of the Denpr and before the rail heads have crossed the river, as a major defense, while focusing the bulk of their defenses on tying up PZG4 around Lgrad for as long as possible and defending Moscow. I've said this many times, but in one game I took both Lgrad and Moscow and still faced an 8 MILLION man army. Do these things as the Soviet and the Germans are facing the Soviet steam roller in 42. IMO, preserving the Red Army is about 10 times more important than production. It shouldn't be that way, but it seems to be that way.

I could add to your list heliodorus04. Hasty attacks from two hexes, which could help in dealing with checkerboards, no recon or probe type attack to deal with extreme FOW. 80-1 odds for a deliberate attack is silly and should become an overrun. Being able to unit bomb at any point in the turn, not just the beginning. The list goes on.

If you read through this entire thread, or the extended LVOV pocket thread, or BigAgnorak's strategic principle thread in the War Room, you'll see that more and more Germans (and some Soviet) players are coming out and saying the games are mirroring one another. There's always exceptions, but if the Soviet player doesn't make a serious mistake, the game is pretty much over by 42.

Oh and to be extremely clear....the above assumes that the German is NOT using mules.

[vicberg]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

Vicberg, all the German-side-favoring players have moved on. All that remain are the beta testers who, by my definition, are biased and closed-minded.

Take your lessons from the bad taste in your mouth that this title engendered, and go to other, better games.

You may be right. I'm going to take an extended break from it. However, I forget when WITP came out. It was a long time ago and it's taken them many, many years to come up with what is a very good game now. They went away from the allied, must be historical, fanboys and provided capabilities to the japanese that were very non-historical. The result is a very active game, with lots of people willing to play both sides, and it won't be going away for a long time.

We'll see with this one. It's probably going to take years also. They've started the down the path of balancing the game. It's really hard to imagine that things were even worse for the Germans, so it's a real head scratcher what the designers/devs were thinking about with this game. History? Buy a book and it's cheaper. Game? Has to be fun for both sides and competitive.

[AFV]

ORIGINAL:  Aurelian

I could also of said "Look it up for yourself. If that's beyond you, then say so."

That is about as helpful as you can be. And I expect no more from you. Its not beyond me, I could have, and thought about it, but I actually thought, since you had brought that up you would have an idea- I should have known better than that.
Everytime you post, I find myself leaning more towards the Axis viewpoint, even though I prefer playing Soviet.
You really should consider other viewpoints, instead of just throwing out the predictable knee jerk pro soviet responses.
 
vicberg and heliodorus
- I agree with most your points. While there is value to a good, historical simulation, the devs need to keep in mind this is a game. It needs to have a good re-playability value. Without options, it becomes dull. It fades, and goes away. Dies. For example, sure, an option to control TOES might not be for everyone, but it sure would be something for many. Sure, there is an editor. There also is a customer, and many of us would like options to make this a richer game,
It really is simple to dominate as the Soviet in this game. We don't see it to an extreme degree in the AARs since many of those are by really good Axis players (Pelton and MichaelT), so the cry "we don't see that in the AARs" is irrelevent. Granted, you don't dominate by employing an upfront defense, just outrun Axis supplies, wait for mud, refit, tear the axis a new one in Blizzard, and play pretty much toe to toe the rest of 42, then in 43 its all over. All you have to do, as vicberg suggested, is not get encircled and lose divisions en mass. Theres no reason to hold territory, its easy to evac all the arms you need and the few factories you need.
 
I like playing the Soviet side because it is more fun, you have more options, your not so handcuffed. Unlike you helio, I am not disatisfied with my purchase- I think its a good game, as is. It could be so much better though. The forced withdrawals, is, silly. If that same logic is applied to the Soviet side, then we would need to withdraw all the Soviet divisions that were encircled and destroyed in 1941- even if you never encircle any of them.
 
The pro soviet posters will rant about historical this, historical that. And guess what- after this game dies because it was just not that fun to play one of the sides, no one will hear them.
 
I don't have WITPAE, but I think it was a genius move to put some ahistorical Japanese capabilities in it (according to vicberg). It makes it fun- for both sides.
There is nothing wrong with fun. If there were additional options in WITE, then people would be able to either play the vanilla game (Aurelians of the world vs the AI basically, since Axis players will have left or do not want to play that) or a game with options, which increase the replayability of the game and the fun factor (basically, most everyone else). Of course, also fix the stuff that appears to be broke also (much of what was in helio's post, although there can be some disagreement to a degree on much of it- but still some damn good points to consider).

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: Schmart

For those wishing for Axis TOE changes (or rather eliminating certain changes) and changing the reinforcement/withdrawl schedule for the 'Stalingrad' divisions, these are all quite easy changes in the editor, considering that it doesn't appear the developers are going to move on this any time soon. Changing the TOE upgrade path for a unit takes like 3 mouse clicks. One could very easily create an alternate Axis TOE/OOB grand campaign.

Jaw said the same thing in another thread. Use the editor. In the same thread he said he isn't going to do it. tm.asp?m=3055488&mpage=1&key=&#3055867

But the ones who want the change don't want to bother.

[vicberg]

Aurelian I agree with you about modding.

Have you seen the editor though? OMG, it's a bear and that's being nice. Can't even filter the lists by nationality and the search is terrible. Everything is there to be modded, with the designer notes pretty clear about the dangers of changing production because it's pretty much hard coded, so you can whack production into left field if you mess with it too much. Even figuring out where units are from the editor to the map isn't easy and the tool gets lost in itself if you click back and forth too much. The editor feels like an afterthought.

I may revist it and see if I'm up for the emmense task. I would play around with soviet starting morale to prevent lvov pocket. See if I can adjust starting forts in Lgrad to make that harder. Make production loss of the cities west of denpr heavier, to intice a fight, adjust VPs for a more forward fight. This would assume mules can't be used. The hard part would be slowing down soviet production into 42 or increasing german production. None of this is historically based. It's balanced based. The goal is a competitive 42 not as dependent upon 41. It would take months not including play testing.

[vicberg]

ORIGINAL: AFV

I don't have WITPAE, but I think it was a genius move to put some ahistorical Japanese capabilities in it (according to vicberg). It makes it fun- for both sides.
There is nothing wrong with fun. If there were additional options in WITE, then people would be able to either play the vanilla game (Aurelians of the world vs the AI basically, since Axis players will have left or do not want to play that) or a game with options, which increase the replayability of the game and the fun factor (basically, most everyone else). Of course, also fix the stuff that appears to be broke also (much of what was in helio's post, although there can be some disagreement to a degree on much of it- but still some damn good points to consider).

Check out the AARs for WITPAE. People put a phenominal amount of work into them. There's so many games going on right now. I guess some of the AARs want to stand out.

Is the game Historical? No. Subs have been nerfed and japanse ASW increased otherwise there'd be no japanese merchant marine fleet left after 43. The japanese can escalate production of various airframes, so more of the advanced planes can get into the battle earlier with good pilots. It's the exact opposite situation than this game. Japanese have control of their production and Allies don't.

Check out greyjoy vs. radar. Radar is an experienced japanese player who ran over a newbie (greyjoy) everywhere and then suddenly Greyjoy invaded, out of nowhere, the japanese home island of Hokkaido from the Aluetians. Took Radar totally by surprise. Titanic air battles, thousands of planes, naval battles, strategic bombing of japanese industry...epic. Just when the japanese looked crushed, greyjoy got a bit of victory disease and tried an invasion away from his land based cap and lost 16 of 24 carriers in another epic battle.

Historical? No frikken way, but fun as heck to watch. This game needs to go the same route. If done right, there can be historical campaigns and not-historical campaigns.

[veji1]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: Schmart

For those wishing for Axis TOE changes (or rather eliminating certain changes) and changing the reinforcement/withdrawl schedule for the 'Stalingrad' divisions, these are all quite easy changes in the editor, considering that it doesn't appear the developers are going to move on this any time soon. Changing the TOE upgrade path for a unit takes like 3 mouse clicks. One could very easily create an alternate Axis TOE/OOB grand campaign.

Jaw said the same thing in another thread. Use the editor. In the same thread he said he isn't going to do it. tm.asp?m=3055488&mpage=1&key=�

But the ones who want the change don't want to bother.

Look Aurelian, I suppose this is the last time I post anywhere you do, because you are worse than D-Stop to kill off any discussion about any improvement.

You know very well that there is a world of difference between modding a change in yourself, and have it incorporated in the official release through a patch. If a player uses the editor than he creates his version, basically a mod, where if he wants to play PBEM with someone he needs to convince that person of the change, etc... While a great deal of players don't get to enjoy a change that would enhance play experience.

On the other hand when a change is incorporated in the official release, it becomes the standard default setting for all players, pbems, etc... The difference isn't hard to see. If someone has to edit a change it means the devs don't consider the change appropriate or right, if it gets in the official release, it means the opposite.

No, everytime anyone has suggested lately not a "fix" to a problem à la 2/1 ratio, HQ build-up, but an improvement to gameplay experience for the axis in the late war while making the game settings more coherent with the way the actual game is being played by that player, he has been chastised and told in susbstance, really allow me to say it again "that's what the editor is for whiners"...

You can think whatever you want but this forum is vastly more hostile to change and defensive than the UV, WITP and AE forums have ever been, where after 10 years the same guys still duke it out in a fun forum.

So I just leave you guys to enjoy saying "Nein, niet, no" and "edit it yourself whiner" and will pop back in a year or so to see if their has been any change.

Cheers.

[AFV]

Well Aurelian, there you go. This is what your attitude brings. Killing the game, one player at a time. Happy?
 
I guess not totally since you couldnt kill the alternate victory condition scenario and the HQ displacement fix. Can't win em all.
Oh and you owe the jar several more dollars.

[Tarhunnas]

ORIGINAL: vicberg

ORIGINAL: AFV

I don't have WITPAE, but I think it was a genius move to put some ahistorical Japanese capabilities in it (according to vicberg). It makes it fun- for both sides.
There is nothing wrong with fun. If there were additional options in WITE, then people would be able to either play the vanilla game (Aurelians of the world vs the AI basically, since Axis players will have left or do not want to play that) or a game with options, which increase the replayability of the game and the fun factor (basically, most everyone else). Of course, also fix the stuff that appears to be broke also (much of what was in helio's post, although there can be some disagreement to a degree on much of it- but still some damn good points to consider).

Check out the AARs for WITPAE. People put a phenominal amount of work into them. There's so many games going on right now. I guess some of the AARs want to stand out.

Is the game Historical? No. Subs have been nerfed and japanse ASW increased otherwise there'd be no japanese merchant marine fleet left after 43. The japanese can escalate production of various airframes, so more of the advanced planes can get into the battle earlier with good pilots. It's the exact opposite situation than this game. Japanese have control of their production and Allies don't.

...

Historical? No frikken way, but fun as heck to watch. This game needs to go the same route. If done right, there can be historical campaigns and not-historical campaigns.

Good point! I agree! There must be a reasonable blend of game and history.

[janh]

I don't want to spoil your comparison to WitP:AE, but...

ORIGINAL: vicberg
Is the game Historical? No. Subs have been nerfed and japanse ASW increased otherwise there'd be no japanese merchant marine fleet left after 43.

Neither the ASW nor the subs have been nerved intentionally; both are a matter of ongoing debate and perhaps will be addressed one day. There is even the Da-babes mod for increased realism that address this among other issues that have been found by the AE community. AE's design team clearly considered realism over balance. Note that I say "realism", meaning historically accurate realism, i.e. historical capabilities.

ORIGINAL: vicberg

ORIGINAL: AFV
I don't have WITPAE, but I think it was a genius move to put some ahistorical Japanese capabilities in it (according to vicberg). It makes it fun- for both sides.

The japanese can escalate production of various airframes, so more of the advanced planes can get into the battle earlier with good pilots. It's the exact opposite situation than this game. Japanese have control of their production and Allies don't.

The way AE took to get a more balanced competition for PBEM was through optional rules, like the 1st turn movement, or production and R&D.

The standard historical scenario without production and R&D is probably also most realistic, although with hindsight you can already here improve Japanese chances a lot (subwarfare not only against warships, early pilot training, using large merchant convoys and subhunter groups, etc.). Even with production and R&D, scenario remains the real challenge since you are quite limited by resources and especially land combat units. In fact, production and R&D are more stings in the Allied side here than major advantages, but it is fun to optimize production and advance R&R of one or the other plane type by a few weeks.

More important was that they added alternative scenarios (Scenario 2 Iron Man scenarios etc.) which enhance the capabilities of either side. Allied Ironman,for example, is to enhance Allied AI capabilities when playing as the Japanese since AI has to struggle with a much more complex "air-naval-land-command" problem that even gives humans plenty of headaches to manage. Clearly, WitE AI excels here big time.

The beefed up scenarios for the Japanese side come with additional "fictional" ships, additional squadrons, planes and pilots in the pools, and more ground units that can be freed up for offensive duties. The aircraft industry is so much stronger that for a good time you can fight a battle of attrition in the air against the Allies. However, recently more AARs reached the late stage of the war and it seems that this enhanced Japanese industry and military can hardly be sustained even if the historically gained resources are still in Japanese hands by mid 44 and the merchant fleet operating at full pace. Either you also remain conservative with the production expansion, or you may run your economy dry before the end.

But, to give you that point, I also find it more natural to offer the underdog the benefit of the production and R&D feature.

ORIGINAL: vicberg
Check out greyjoy vs. radar. ... Just when the japanese looked crushed, greyjoy got a bit of victory disease and tried an invasion away from his land based cap and lost 16 of 24 carriers in another epic battle.

That is another topic of debate, i.e. that not even a very large CAP cannot guarantee that bombers won't come thru and do still so much harm. Some people like this phenomenon as little as the effects of 4EB pulks on low-naval or port strikes. Greyjoy and Rader even tested a modified exe with a 300 passes limited for fighters as compared to 200 in stock.

ORIGINAL: vicberg
Historical? No frikken way, but fun as heck to watch. This game needs to go the same route. If done right, there can be historical campaigns and not-historical campaigns.

If you are so unhappy with the state of the Axis, you can do the same as the AE team did: In the spirit of the Ironman versions, create fictional alternative scenarios. You could beef up manpower and armament pools, create additional PzV factories that come into play later, and even add some fictional divisions with full equipment, whatever you can wish for. I think this should be easily doable with the editor. If you find the right balance, and perhaps even improve the Soviet problems at turn 1 a bit, this might be interesting for the PBEM crowd?

[pompack]

What janh said [:D]

In any discussion of AE, it is important to realize that most of the features people talk about are not code related but Order of Battle related and incorporated in mods, some official and others "unofficial" but available and extensively played. And those mods were created by volunteer labor from both the test community and the dedicated player community. And I don't believe that a single one of those volunteers contributed their time and effort because they were constantly insulted in the forums.

The old saying of "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" seems to be unknown in this forum. If you want something changed and don't want to do it yourself, it often is possible to encourage others to do it for you. However insulting someone's intellegence, morals, and/or integrity rarely accomplishes this.

Now I am not talking about any post in this thread, but I am advocating an approach to achieve the "Next qualitative leap for WitE". Who are the people who would be willing to create a mod/mods to incorporate some/any/all of the ideas presented in this thread and how can we encourage and support them?

[traemyn]

ORIGINAL: pompack
The old saying of "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" seems to be unknown in this forum. If you want something changed and don't want to do it yourself, it often is possible to encourage others to do it for you. However insulting someone's intellegence, morals, and/or integrity rarely accomplishes this.

Agreed!

There is a distinct difference between a constructive and destructive post. There are a few loud, destructive people in this community but I see the majority just want a better game and are willing to work on both sides (German/Soviet) to get there.

To all, please don't let the destructive posts fuel you as this just leads to name calling and entrenched positions.

The devs have repeatedly stated certain features are off limits for WiTE(1) so rehashing this just to complain really isn't helping at this point. The focus should be on what can we do via the editor, as pompack noted, to 'please' to the community that wants changes.