Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not

[Manstein63]

I also prefer to play Random weather as I think that the uncertaincy makes the game more fun. Saying that I also think that there should be more weather types so as you don't have clear on one turn then mud the next & then back to clear the turn following. I also think that smaller weather zones would be helpful perhaps dividing the existing zones by 3 so as you have a north center & south weather subzone maybe it will feature in WitE 2.0
Manstein63

[Rufus T. Firefly]

The forces of Randomness have dealt a severe blow to the forces of order and predictabilty who were routed after the forces of Randomness achieved an 8:1 superiority (16 votes to 2).

Fortunately, the forces of predictabilty appeared in full divisional strength with 2 command points. Had they appeared with only a single brigade, rather than routing with heavy casualties they would have retreated 10 miles and I would have to run the same poll tomorrow![:D].

It looks like I'm going with random weather. Thanks for giving your opinions! I'll also make a post in in the suggetions thread about providing intermediate forms of weather, as that seems to be a popular (and very good) idea here, just in case the mods aren't paying attention.

Firefly

[Shupov]

Are you playing against the AI or human opponents? Random gives the Axis the advantage of knowing what the Soviet player's weather will be, but not the other way around. IMO this is a considerable advantage.

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: Shupov

Are you playing against the AI or human opponents? Random gives the Axis the advantage of knowing what the Soviet player's weather will be, but not the other way around. IMO this is a considerable advantage.

This is why I think there should be a next turn 'weather forecast' when using random weather.An uncannily accurate one.

[invernomuto]

So I'm interested in seeing what the majority opinion of the more experienced players will be.

Generally I like to play with historical weather.

[juret]

non random only.

[jaw]

This is one area where I disagree with just about everyone else on the development team: at a scale of one week turns and 10 mile hexes random weather is neither historicaliy nor meteorologically accurate. The amount of rain you need to produce mud conditions over hundreds of square miles of terrain cannot be produced by any fast moving summer shower. It requires sustained rain, day in and day out for days on end. At minimum, the probability of mud between July and September should be ZERO at this scale. Once the weather does deteriorate it should be very difficult, if not impossible, for it to improve before the season changes. So in the Fall, Clear can turn to Mud but Mud can't turn back to Clear, Mud can turn to Snow and Snow to Mud (if still in the Fall) but Blizzard can only be more Blizzard or Snow.

If the Random weather table had this structured variability I'd be all for it; as currently designed I'll stick with non-random weather.

[hfarrish]

As one who uses random weather I don't disagree with any of the above; that said I think its almost an essential balancing mechanism for 41 at this point (especially for the summer but also for the blizzard). As others have noted it is a substitute slowing mechanism for a true logistics model.

[glvaca]

ORIGINAL: jaw

This is one area where I disagree with just about everyone else on the development team: at a scale of one week turns and 10 mile hexes random weather is neither historicaliy nor meteorologically accurate. The amount of rain you need to produce mud conditions over hundreds of square miles of terrain cannot be produced by any fast moving summer shower. It requires sustained rain, day in and day out for days on end. At minimum, the probability of mud between July and September should be ZERO at this scale. Once the weather does deteriorate it should be very difficult, if not impossible, for it to improve before the season changes. So in the Fall, Clear can turn to Mud but Mud can't turn back to Clear, Mud can turn to Snow and Snow to Mud (if still in the Fall) but Blizzard can only be more Blizzard or Snow.

If the Random weather table had this structured variability I'd be all for it; as currently designed I'll stick with non-random weather.

amen!

[danlongman]

I worked around weather and forecasting in aviation for the last 30 years or so. The idea of weather forcasting beyond a few days is ludicrous as far as specific
conditions are concerned. Some gross overall trends in the macro scale might be anticipated but given 1940's technology only a couple of days worth could be
predicted with any accuracy. Those damn butterflies would sabotage any long range prediction. In an overall sense the Germans were "upstream" of Russia
and could monitor weather across the atlantic and europe since things tend to flow from west to east in the northern hemisphere but not always. The famous
D-Day forcast was for the next morning and it could have been wrong. Weather is so capricious the idea of having weeks notice of the changes is like giving
the players a weather necromancer or a division of Panzer Dragons and comissars with magic swords. The old adage is climate is what you expect weather is what you get.
I think Twain or somebody said that. These last two weeks in Alberta in the year 2012 with satellite observation and a world wide forecast network undreamed of
in 1941 the daily forecasts have been wrong as often as right on a daily basis. If you want weather in a game the only way to put it in simply is to look at the climate trend
assign values and roll the dice. Warm and maybe rainy in summer, cold and maybe snowy in winter....spring and fall as before but with mud especially with autumn rains
and spring break up. The year 1941 could have had a long, hot dry summer, a late fall and a dry mild winter it happens some years. Other years summer is rainy and cool
winter comes early and she is a bitch.
cheers

[Cerion]

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

However, I do agree with those that think random weather can be a bit too random. I would like to see some kind of light mud or similar during the summer months.

ORIGINAL: jaw

This is one area where I disagree with just about everyone else on the development team: at a scale of one week turns and 10 mile hexes random weather is neither historicaliy nor meteorologically accurate. The amount of rain you need to produce mud conditions over hundreds of square miles of terrain cannot be produced by any fast moving summer shower. It requires sustained rain, day in and day out for days on end. At minimum, the probability of mud between July and September should be ZERO at this scale. Once the weather does deteriorate it should be very difficult, if not impossible, for it to improve before the season changes. So in the Fall, Clear can turn to Mud but Mud can't turn back to Clear, Mud can turn to Snow and Snow to Mud (if still in the Fall) but Blizzard can only be more Blizzard or Snow.

If the Random weather table had this structured variability I'd be all for it; as currently designed I'll stick with non-random weather.

ORIGINAL: 76mm

In theory I would like to play with random weather, but currently it is just too random. If they can't introduce something between clear and mud, I would like for them to introduce a "random-lite" option in which mud/blizzard can vary by +/- two or three turns, just to keep things interesting...

+1 all three. In theory, I like Random weather but ........... best implemented.

[Schmart]

TOAW had the ability to apply weather for individual hexes. You could have (for instance) mud every few hexes (or blotches of it here and there), but it wouldn't be until major seasonal weather changes came that you could get mud across the board. Fog/clouds could also limit air support in individual hexes. I wouldn't say that the TOAW weather mechanism always worked the way it was supposed to, but a different way of doing things.

Maybe a WitE option might be to create more weather zones, or at least breakup the existing zones into numerous sub-zones that can randomly and independently change within the larger zone.

[Redmarkus5]

I often feel that the German's 'surprise' when the mud or winter weather arrived is over-stated. Surely the point is not simply about the ability to forecast the timing of the major seasonal changes, but also the effect of those changes on operations?

The German Army fought in Russia during the First World War and many of the officers who served under Hitler had experienced Russia before. Secondly, it's not as though Russia is on the far side of the moon. Even the Nazis had been trading extensively with Stalin over several years, many military exchanges had taken place and the Germans had also closely studied the performance of the Soviet troops in winter in Finland. They were fully aware of the effects of the Russian weather but they didn't anticipate the Red Army's ability to adapt to it.

The real surprise the Germans suffered was that the Red Army was still fighting when the weather changed. The Germans fully expected the weather to change but also assumed that they would be in winter quarters by the time that happened and that major combat operations would be over.

Therefore, non-random weather makes sense in the game. One thing that doesn't make sense is the ability of an Axis player to pull his whole army back to avoid the winter - what a nonsense. Another is the way that random weather affects the entire front all at one go instead of being regionalized. It is these regional random events that Danlongman is really referring to, I think, not the major seasonal variations - wet in the autumn and spring and bloody cold in winter. As Schmart points out below, TOAW had this solved ten years ago, if not longer.

[Schmart]

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

I often feel that the German's 'surprise' when the mud or winter weather arrived is over-stated. Surely the point is not simply about the ability to forecast the timing of the major seasonal changes, but also the effect of those changes on operations?

Yet the Germans were completely unprepared for the first winter. Partially that was because they didn't/couldn't supply enough winter gear in the fall, and partially no one could've predicted the severity of the winter of 41-42 (which was unusually cold). But as players, we all know well in advance the effects that the first winter will have on both sides. It just feels a little odd. I've always thought that it would be interesting to make each winter random: You will always get at least one severe winter in each game, but you never know when it'll happen. It could happen historically, it could happen at Stalingrad, it could happen at the gates of Berlin (and to the Russian's detriment)...