Game Suggestions:

Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.

The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).

Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21

timmyab
Posts: 2047
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 7:48 pm
Location: Bristol, UK

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by timmyab »

You read about it time and time again though.The T-34 and the KV-1 had a fearsome reputation for a very good reason, as did the German 88mm.In fact, if I recall correctly the 88 was the only weapon the Germans had during Barbarossa that could knock out the KV-1 at any sort of range.
User avatar
Tarhunnas
Posts: 2954
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:19 am
Location: Hex X37, Y15

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by Tarhunnas »

Please, It would really be nice if it were possible to go back and look at past turns in server games, not to play, but just to take screenshots for AARs or just look back and ponder the situation while waiting for the next turn.
------------------------------
RTW3 Designer
glvaca
Posts: 1312
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 12:42 pm

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by glvaca »

A HUGE FAT +1 [&o]
User avatar
Balou
Posts: 849
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 7:12 pm

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by Balou »

Perfectly right. I learn a lot from good AARs, but a lot of interesting info is seemingly gone forever, when people mistankingly forget to post/copy it immediatly.
“Aim towards enemy“.
- instructions on U.S. rocket launcher
User avatar
Rufus T. Firefly
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2012 1:03 am
Location: Chicago, IL

RE: Game Suggestions: Weather

Post by Rufus T. Firefly »

Here's an idea in case you haven't followed my random or nonrandom weather poll.

Quite a few people have advanced the idea of having some intermediate forms of weather, so for instance, when you have a random mud turn in the middle of the summer it wouldn't bring operations to a screaching halt, just slow things down. Additional weather zones was also an interesting suggestions.

I imagine this is the sort of thing that will have to wait for WitE 2, but it seems like an idea worth giving serious consideration.
Rufus T. Firefly: Do you realize our army is facing disastrous defeat? What do you intend to do about it?
Chicolini: I've done it already. I've changed to the other side.
Firefly: What are you doing over here?
Chicolini: Well, the food is better
Rom3l
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:33 am

RE: Game Suggestions: Weather

Post by Rom3l »

First sorry for my English (I hope you understand).
It would be nice to click on enemy units and see the COMBAT UNIT DETAIL (manual 5.4.13),(as we do in friendly units) and that this information is affected by the fog of war. Something like the example:

Image
governato
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 4:35 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

Game Suggestions: what additional scenarios?

Post by governato »

While many people on the forum focus on the opening stages of the war, it would be fun to have one scenario about the Vistula-Oder offensive in 45, possibly continuing to the Battle of Seelow Heights and the fall of Berlin. I do not think I have seen Berlin fall in any of the human vs human AARs, it would be great for those who like to play the Russians and as epic in scope as any other large offensive on the East Front.

More general question for the developers: any plans for additional smallish scenarios?



User avatar
Zemke
Posts: 665
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 12:45 am
Location: Oklahoma

RE: Game Suggestions: what additional scenarios?

Post by Zemke »

There are too many artificial triggers in the game, forcing artificial decisions.

1. Make National Morale a push - pull system instead of by year. This could be done using both casualties and terrain loses/gains.

2. Combat system still needs work, Germans take too few casualties in the summer and too many in the winter. The 41 Blizzard is still primary artificial trigger to balance the game, not combat operations.

3. Weather should be more random, not all one type everywhere.
"Actions Speak Louder than Words"
SBD
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:19 am

RE: Game Suggestions: what additional scenarios?

Post by SBD »

1. I would like to be able to combine sapper battalions into regiments instead of having to disband the battalions & create new regiments from scratch.

2. As others have said, an intermediate weather type such as "light mud."

3. Combat seems overly favorable to the attacker.

4. Fix the production system so it is more important for the Soviet player to save his heavy industry from being overrun.
User avatar
Footslogger
Posts: 1250
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:46 pm
Location: Washington USA

RE: Game Suggestions: Grand Campaign

Post by Footslogger »

Think of a grand campaign that would start in 1939 to 1946 where the player controls the enitre German armed forces. If someone has already posted this, please disregard. [;)]
JamesM
Posts: 1026
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 8:00 am
Location: QLD, Australia

RE: Game Suggestions: Grand Campaign

Post by JamesM »

Just finished my first campaign and at the end of all previous of Gary's grand campaign games they would go into a mode where you could completely view both sides (production units, replacements, etc) which I always licked to check. to my disappointment when WitE ended it went straight to the game menu screen. It would be great to have this complete view mode available when a game has been completed. sorry if this has been mentioned before.
swkuh
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 9:10 pm

RE: Game Suggestions: Grand Campaign

Post by swkuh »

Sorry if these suggestions are redundant, but haven't time to review all prior posts. Please consider my best thoughts so far. (BTW, I play against AI only; I'm not yet ready for PBEM games!)

1. Provide a "compare results" feature that would provide net differences between 2 saved results (assuming comparable files.) Show net differences in forces, losses, territory, game points for one side or the other. BTW, there could be game points assigned for territory controlled, as this was an objective of some value for each side.

2. Provide ability to direct AFV (& special battalions) assignments much like aircraft can be directed. Direct a change and see it happen after some reasonable time while affected SUs are tied up.

3. At start I find Support Unit (SU) assignments to be quite unusual and certainly not realistic. Typically there's a corps in 9th Army that has evrything and some corps that have nothing. Spend a lot of admin points to reassign. Takes away game play time.

4. Would like to find and reassign a lot of the German super artillery pieces (>210mm) to critical areas and see what they can do against fortified and heavily reinforced enemy. But it takes time to search them out and realign their assignments.

5. Of course, anything done for Germans should have appropriate features done for Soviet Union.

6. Must say that SU means support unit but also means Soviet Union to me. Find myself tripping over the term most times I encounter it. What to do?

7. Would like more freedom to merge units. Right now, most attempted merges fail. BTW, seems to take 2 or 3 clicks to find out that attempted merge is not possible. Can this be known at first click?
Walloc
Posts: 3143
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 1:04 am
Location: Denmark

RE: Game Suggestions: Grand Campaign

Post by Walloc »

It isnt as much as suggestion for WiTE but possibly WiTW and a possible WiTE 2. i like the idea that moral, affects the MP required to enter enemy hexes as a concept.
I was thinking that it could be a concept that could be expanded. In some senses as it is now it pays off having depeleted mot/pz unit. Its actually easier to get it insupply/fuel cuz of less vehicles/men in it. In effect upping its MP as it gets smaller, via airdropped fuel/supply, compared to a larger unit. Some recent example of a div consisting of basicly 100 men, a few motorcycles and a few 222s.
Non the less it has the same abilities to move deep once a defensive line is broken by other units of converting hexes via ZoCs capturing 500.000 man cities assuming no unit is in it, even a 40k city might slow such a unit enough to make it wanting to avoid it completely. Also breaking rails and so on. At the same time having more MP in effect to do it cuz its smaller size.
So i was thinking that maybe ToE %,(or below certain ToE thresholds), CV value of how ever one can think of it could have an impact on ability to enter enemy hexes like moral does now. Another way could be reducing MPs in same situasion as the divs has near no integrity( or capping MP to certain ToE thresholds). Or treating it as a in game reg/bde as of now with that penalties that follows with that. Reflecting that players might not care, but commanders in RL would have to a larger extend.
Could possibly also be used in curtailing very low str divisions of both sides in blocking effects/zoc hex swapping effects.

Kind regards,

Rasmus
timmyab
Posts: 2047
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 7:48 pm
Location: Bristol, UK

RE: Game Suggestions: Grand Campaign

Post by timmyab »

I'd like to see the defensive properties of towns reflected in the game.My suggestion would be CV x 125% for one level towns, x 150% for level two, x 175% for level three and x 200% for level four.So for example a level two town situated in a light woods hex would be x 250%.
I'd also like to see some sort of supply bonus for HQs and combat units that are in towns and cities.I don't understand the supply rules so not certain how, or even if, this could be achieved.
PMCN
Posts: 625
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Germany

RE: Game Suggestions: Grand Campaign

Post by PMCN »

Last time I played after 8 hours of so of a turn, I went to save. At this point I got a run-time-failure message. Would it be possible to introduce saving automatically during the player turn? Say a temp, and overwritten file saved every user set time interval (every 10 min, ever 30 min or something like that).

I also determined that I can only play this game during holidays since the "just another army group's movement more" is bad for issues like sleep during a regular work week. But I can't think of anything that would deal with that issue!
captain18
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:09 pm

RE: Game Suggestions: A Critical Concern

Post by captain18 »

G'day,
First kudos to WIE a brilliant game........however one glaring oversight and one significant ommission, The latter is bearable the former is a significant enjoyment detraction from the game.

Firstly I am an old GDW/GRD Europa grognard so have slaved over maps lager than most peoples houses for decades. WIE was the obvious heir apparent to the Fire In the East/ Scorched Earth genre.
Overall I applaud the detail in the game well done.
Now the major objection....Finland!
Now I understand the production schedule arguement, but than the exapnsion was Don to Danube, what about Finland?
My oponnent and I just played till 1942 and the Finnish front was so ahistorical it more likely resembled the Somme than any respect for the flanking tactics of the Finnish army.
The absence of Murmansk is critical as is the absence of the whole Karelian Front and the German mountain army.
In Europa the Soviet player was often faced with a choice varying from concentric allocation of resources to shut down Finland (at the cost to other fronts) or play it historically, however any threat that appeared to Murmansk had to be immediately dealt with regardless of what was happening elsewhere.
WIE by contrast by ommitting the Karelian and arctic fronts reduces the Finnish participation to something resembling WWI western Europe.

This severly detract from an otherwise great game. It seriously needs to be addressed in any second edition or expansion.

The second whilst not so serious and more resembling a wish list(but a very needy one) is the need for a more appropriate naval system, i.e actual naval units. Whilst not absolutely critical there is no doubt it is mostly desired by all and sundry. Europa went through a simila evolutionary process as a result of player demand, I imagine the WIE community would feel similarly. The naval issue you can play with.

But Finland fellas come on lets get serious its needs to be fixed.

thanks for listening
Captain

swkuh
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 9:10 pm

RE: Game Suggestions

Post by swkuh »

Certainly some interesting scope issues have been posted, but my current thoughts & this post address the micro-level, as follows:

Map appearances are not consistant when toggling the hex shading feature. If different options were chosen for "show allowed movement" and "show allowed path" you get a very different response to the map display when the cursor is droppeed on the map.

The AI reported Soviet losses at turn end do not add up to the actual permanent troop loss. Might want some variance over time, but turn-by-turn should have realistic estimates. Seeing Soviet losses <1000 but total goes up by a realistic number doesn't make sense. (Maybe something else is intended.)

There is a lot of information reported about the opponent, but it isn't all that easy to collect and assess. Could use an "Intelligence Assessment" screen that brings it all together as if senior staff had prepared for commanders. Do it differently at various levels, from corps up to national command, 4 levels. Should include mis-assessments as well as accurate assessments.

Manual needs work, still puzzling out how to assign specific air units to specific bases and how to use the commanders' report.

Haven't solved using Editor, but not tried very hard.

User avatar
Joel Billings
Posts: 33579
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Contact:

RE: Game Suggestions: A Critical Concern

Post by Joel Billings »

The map we've produced while working on War in the West includes all of Finland, so when WitE 2.0 is done in the future, it should be fully covered. We also hope to have a full naval system in WitE 2.0 as we plan on designing a naval system for WitW 40 and 41-43 and then transporting it to WitE. This is less certain depending on the timing of all of the games, but that's the hope.
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
captain18
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:09 pm

RE: Game Suggestions:Finland

Post by captain18 »

Praise to the Gods...and production crew.[&o]
Now I don't have to shelve WIE in search of a new definitive East front game (or dig out my old Fire In The East/Scorched Earth boards LOL)
Well will hold you to that Joel regards Finland[:-]
Seriously it is such a major fault. Like someone painting the Mona Lisa but forgeting to paint one of the eyes.i.e a flawed masterpiece.
Anyway am happy it is in the next edition/expansion, it really needed to be, if it was to be considered a serious East Front game.

As for the naval changes, well they 'have' to be better than the non-existant situation now. I am sure all are excited to see what you come up with.

So whilst the momentum is rolling do we have a prouction date for WITE2 ? [:D]
User avatar
Joel Billings
Posts: 33579
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Contact:

RE: Game Suggestions:Finland

Post by Joel Billings »

2020? [;)]
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series”