OT: WitE Forum

[Commander Stormwolf]

War in the West (both the actual game and Dali's mod) will be a lot of fun.

now .. better use our time to discuss WITP 2

[janh]

ORIGINAL: moonraker
WiTE just doesn't have the same feel to it. That's the only way I can describe it really. I find it a bit mundane compared to AE and the fiddly bits are nowhere near as interesting [&:]

ORIGINAL: Apollo11
Gary and Joel decided to use IGYG instead of WEGO (that they used in UV and WItP) because it would be very hard to plot all the movements for all hundreds and hundreds of on-map counters!

The UV and WitP are so much simpler (sounds strange isn't it but it is that way ) because all ground combat is simplified in fe HEXes and naval and air combat is also happening in "packets" (i.e TFs for ships and waves for aircraft strikes) - in WitE there can be combat in literally hundreds of HEXes each turn including hundreds of individual counters...

Also they told us that IGYG would give better "feedback" for attacking player - it sounded strange for be as well in the beginning but after few weeks in ALPHA/BETA I got adjusted very quickly to the new system (and I used to play TOaW a lot years and years ago)!

Leo "Apollo11"

I totally agree, there is nothing more "exciting (...or grieving)" than to watch an AE turn resolution with important developments, or sometimes even just side shows. Simultaneous resolution is more realistic, and adds in things like meeting engagements and the possibility to intercept or interpose in the enemy advance, which I-Go-U-Go all completely lacks. You could add some "reaction order" a la the naval rules in AE, but they don't seem to want that. Also the air war... is a faint abstraction of what one is used from AE. Ok, AE may be on the other end with pilot micromanagement for some, but somehow all this adds a lot to the "overall feel".

WiTE is beer-and-pretzels style, as they wanted it to be, and I-Go-U-Go certainly makes the complex planning with so many units in tight spaces easier (as Apollo says). The movement rates are huge for Panzers and Mech, and imagine plotting a "7 day turn" with all units in AE if many "could" move 20 hexes. They'd have had to reduce to 3 or 1 day turns again, and change the land movement more towards the mile based counting in AE, but they obviously wanted to avoid such a monster game with a duration of years. In the end, it is more of a game, than AE, although both certainly also qualify as "simulations" in another sense. The excitement planning in AE and watching plans unfold is just much greater than the "push this unit than that stack" routine in WiTE.

The plus side with WiTE is that the AI is really pretty good. Much better than the partially scripted AE AI, it is much more dynamic. No wonder, with the more abstracted air war the problem it needs to treat is roughly almost just "one-dimensional" East-West, instead of AE which is at least "five-dimensional" (East, West, South and North expansions, plus serious air war and naval/amphib in the mix). Alas, I found it well worth my money and I spent many hours with it... WitW (43-45) is obviously coming around the corner with a much more sophisticated air model, an abstract naval/amphib model (nothing near AE), and plenty of new ideas like an intricate supply model taking into account rail lines and infrastructure, forward depots etc. which are going to affect pace and style of operations.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: moonraker

WiTE just doesn't have the same feel to it. That's the only way I can describe it really. I find it a bit mundane compared to AE and the fiddly bits are nowhere near as interesting [&:]

I was disapointed in WitE. It overloads the player with detail and detail control. The ability of the Soviet side to build a custom style army to take maximum advantage of the rules is a huge potential game breaker, especially given the diverse types of units that can be "built." There were also serious issues with the airpower component (some which i hear have been addressed)

I also don't like the IGO/YouGO system. Feel the older WEGO combat resolution was better with an initiative roll being made. Required more careful thought in how one set up their moves.

[Icedawg]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: moonraker

WiTE just doesn't have the same feel to it. That's the only way I can describe it really. I find it a bit mundane compared to AE and the fiddly bits are nowhere near as interesting [&:]

I was disapointed in WitE. It overloads the player with detail and detail control. The ability of the Soviet side to build a custom style army to take maximum advantage of the rules is a huge potential game breaker, especially given the diverse types of units that can be "built." There were also serious issues with the airpower component (some which i hear have been addressed)

I also don't like the IGO/YouGO system. Feel the older WEGO combat resolution was better with an initiative roll being made. Required more careful thought in how one set up their moves.

Exactly my point in post #19. But as Apollo 11 pointed out above, I guess it wasn't feasible to use WEGO in this game.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Icedawg
Exactly my point in post #19. But as Apollo 11 pointed out above, I guess it wasn't feasible to use WEGO in this game.

Interesting way of looking at it i guess.

[Titanwarrior89]

WitpAE has custom build in it as well(to a certain point) on the Japanese side of things(air power) and thats not mentioning the Super Carrier Group KG(so why not build a custom army). Which is not a game breaker but certainly not histoical at all. So my question is why do some, see the faults of that game but incline not too see them in WitpAe. Just a thought and my opinion.[;)]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: moonraker

WiTE just doesn't have the same feel to it. That's the only way I can describe it really. I find it a bit mundane compared to AE and the fiddly bits are nowhere near as interesting [&:]

I was disapointed in WitE. It overloads the player with detail and detail control. The ability of the Soviet side to build a custom style army to take maximum advantage of the rules is a huge potential game breaker, especially given the diverse types of units that can be "built." There were also serious issues with the airpower component (some which i hear have been addressed)

I also don't like the IGO/YouGO system. Feel the older WEGO combat resolution was better with an initiative roll being made. Required more careful thought in how one set up their moves.

[Walloc]

Hi Nika,

In trying to get u to that 25k post count!(blah u alrdy made it!!! gratz)

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
I was disapointed in WitE. It overloads the player with detail and detail control.

Could u expand on that or specify?
i know ur love for AE and well I wouldnt call AE a no micromangement game. So im curious what part of WiTE u found to detailoriented/control.

The ability of the Soviet side to build a custom style army to take maximum advantage of the rules is a huge potential game breaker, especially given the diverse types of units that can be "built." There were also serious issues with the airpower component (some which i hear have been addressed)

About the custom build its really a myth created at some point. Ppl see a choice and conclude that a choice is per default better, than no choice. Instead of comparing to what the reality would be if there wasnt that choice.
Read: ill give u a choice of getting 1$ or 2$. If there is no choice i will give u 5$. So which is better?
Yes its true that u will see players foucs on specific stuff but that is more out of need than want. There are plenty a maths done by ppl showing its simply impossible to build a historic army unit wise. U are on a strict AP/build limit. So no u wont see any1 with the 513 AA btn and so on that is historicly on the 1943 summer soviet oob. U simply dont have the AP and prolly not even the armaments to build em.
In fact the opposite is true. There are ppl, but far from all, losing games or being severly restricted in building what is needed to make a russian army capable of advance in 43 and to some extend in 44. Because its a system u can target in it self. So as it stands currently the build feature is more of a liablity than a option to go crazy. Compared to using a soviet historic OOB like on the german side.

About airwar yeah ur correct much has been done to improve it and while its not perfect its much better. It should be interresting to see what is done in WITW as much is made of the improvements thats being done too the aircomponent in WiTW.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

WitE forum is doing just fine - thanks for asking! [:)]

The WitE, as per Joel, sold similarly to WitP and is expected to have same grand total in long run...

Also please note that most players play WitE vs. AI (same case as with UV / WitP and WitP-AE)!

BTW, the number of post in WitP-AE forum is rather constant but, apart from AAR section, almost all post are "OT" (i.e. general military / historic stuff) and made by the very same core of old posters... [:D]


Leo "Apollo11"

I understand your attachment to the game, but I've been looking in there for about 18 months and traffic is nowhere near what it was as recently as Feb. Some people read, but few post. I see 3-4 new posts per day outside the AARs, and of those there are only a couple of active ones whereas last winter there were a dozen or more. (About half of them Q-Ball's. [:)])

I also don't see a lot of newbie posts, as you say.

On Joel's numbers, I note he says sales are versus WITP, not WITP and AE. If WitE sold as many as both WITPs I'd be very surprised.

The test will be WitW. I think there will be more who wait and see how the balance works than there were for WitE, especially at the price point.

[GreyJoy]

WITW sounds good, but i'd like them to implement the great air combat system of BTR...we, hardcore gamers, need that kind of details for the air war which was one of the most important part of WITW...with the naval system of AE, the air system of BTR and the ground combat of WITE (in a WEGO resolution) we could have the perfect game!

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89

WitpAE has custom build in it as well(to a certain point) on the Japanese side of things(air power) and thats not mentioning the Super Carrier Group KG(so why not build a custom army). Which is not a game breaker but certainly not histoical at all. So my question is why do some, see the faults of that game but incline not too see them in WitpAe. Just a thought and my opinion.[;)]

Topic of the thread was WiTE. I own it and have played it so i weighed in. Since your asking about AE, I've long said that I don't like player manipulable economies and would prefer neither side in AE have the ability to alter things except in a specific alternate scenario.

As for "super carrier groups", I don't know what your referring too. Both sides can stack CV's together far in excess of what was done in real life. Both sides can stack land air groups though AE introduced penalties to reign this in.

[Titanwarrior89]

yea you do....didn't mean to hit the wrong side off you. And I know what the topic is. I don't need you telling me that....get over it. I was just comparing.[:-]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89

WitpAE has custom build in it as well(to a certain point) on the Japanese side of things(air power) and thats not mentioning the Super Carrier Group KG(so why not build a custom army). Which is not a game breaker but certainly not histoical at all. So my question is why do some, see the faults of that game but incline not too see them in WitpAe. Just a thought and my opinion.[;)]

Topic of the thread was WiTE. I own it and have played it so i weighed in. Since your asking about AE, I've long said that I don't like player manipulable economies and would prefer neither side in AE have the ability to alter things except in a specific alternate scenario.

As for "super carrier groups", I don't know what your referring too. Both sides can stack CV's together far in excess of what was done in real life. Both sides can stack land air groups though AE introduced penalties to reign this in.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Walloc

Could u expand on that or specify?
i know ur love for AE and well I wouldnt call AE a no micromangement game. So im curious what part of WiTE u found to detailoriented/control.

AE is a micromanagement game. It gives the players considerably more detail control than stock WitP. Not all of it do i personally consider a good thing. In regards WitE, an example would be the need to supliment an exp level for each and every subunit thats part of a division or a brigade/regiment, even though on average the #'s only variable by a few points between them. It creates a hell of a screen clutter and is remenicent of looking at a spreadsheet. I prefer a simple singular exp value to cover a unit. Getting to various parts of a unit org or structure requires drilling down through several menus.

About the custom build its really a myth created at some point. Ppl see a choice and conclude that a choice is per default better, than no choice. Instead of comparing to what the reality would be if there wasnt that choice.

I don't see it as a myth based on reading some of the AAR's and playing around with it myself. Its natural that some types of units built en-mass work better than others. Like the manipulable economy, the more you tinker and change the farther removed from historical constraints and realties one gets. Thus in AE and in previous 8-bit versions of Grigsby games you got odd situations like for example, all FW190's with 109 production halted, then early jets. Or in WitP's case (stock more than AE), hordes of Franks and other advanced airframes. In WiTE, i've seen arguments about the mass deployment of small units to create situations that prevent or retard breakthrough. I've found that Fortified units can reap unusual benefits.

Yes some people like that along with the detail but then complaints range along lines of, why can't the German side customize it's formations and units as well? (similar to the AE argument about a US manipuable economy.)

All in all......i felt the game was overly bloated on details and player choices. Based on playing and on developing i see this as an ongoing issue. Building a better wargame doesn't necessarily indicate that one must increase detail levels to the point where one isn't just being the General or Admiral, but production manager, Army staff in charge of organization and quartermaster general of all armed forces.

At least WitE preserved the one week turn, otherwise there'd be no getting through the monster campaign. Like i said.....i enjoyed some aspects of it and appreciate the work that went in to it, but ultimately i felt it tried rather too hard to reinvent the wheel and instead of solidifying game play by correcting the faults of older versions it adds too many fancy bells and whistles. Thus it failed to keep my interest. I put in hundreds of hours on the last two versions that Grigsby made. They were far more playable IMHO. I know others like the morass of choices given to them though i think they're a small minority. Myself, i'd rather focus on generaling vs. managing. I have a day job for that.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89

yea you do....didn't mean to hit the wrong side off you.

excuse me?

[FatR]

I might be interested in playing WitE seriously if two things happen:

1)If it ever leaves "huge, sweeping balance changes can arrive with every new patch" phase. The last time I looked at the WitE forum about a month ago, it still didn't.

2)If by the moment the balance settles down it will be giving a roughly historical feeling. Again, the last time I looked at WitE, for example, active defense/counterattacking for USSR in 1941 was still not viable, even though IRL the same was true for passive defense.

[Walloc]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Walloc
About the custom build its really a myth created at some point. Ppl see a choice and conclude that a choice is per default better, than no choice. Instead of comparing to what the reality would be if there wasnt that choice.

I don't see it as a myth based on reading some of the AAR's and playing around with it myself. Its natural that some types of units built en-mass work better than others. In WiTE, i've seen arguments about the mass deployment of small units to create situations that prevent or retard breakthrough. I've found that Fortified units can reap unusual benefits.

Thx for answering Nikademus,

There are potential issues in the tactic u descripe. Problem is ppl see this as a cause of the build system. Its not. What is the alternative to the build system. its using a historic oob like its done at the axis side. Where when units die, they come back for free but with out manpower. As the historic OOB have tons more units than what ur able to create in the build system, this only makes the points, you point out worse. Hench the problem u point out isnt attribuated to the build system, but other mechanics of the game. Ppl just dont realize this, not that i blame them. Most ppl prolly dont know the historic oobs by heart and therefor have nothing to compare too.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

[janh]

Rasmus is right, there wasn't an AAR yet where a player was able to built an Soviet Army that could outfight the historical one. The starting scenario for 1944 has a huge Soviet OOB, much more sophisticated than any GC 1941 AAR has produced yet.
Most players end up with more specialized Armies, but much smaller due to Prestige Point limitations (which are needed for so many things from building fort zones, assigning leaders, reassigning units and HQ etc, which renders them more than much too scarce to both built units and optimized command structures at the same time; in fact, they are probably even too scarce if you just focused on building the units the Soviets raised historically). So far the more "specialized" Armies leaving out units that based on game stats are less useful haven't proven the key since only very few Soviet players have made it into Berlin by summer 1945 yet. And those mostly because of major errors on Axis side at some point.

As FatR mentioned, there still are balance issues. One is that the Soviets are pretty weak in 1941 presently, basically unable to survive a harsh counterattacking strategy and very forward defense we know from the books. The Germans are highly mobile as the supply system is very forgiving on the offensive, and also since any kind of reaction moves during the opponent movement phase are present. They just can overun the slow and weak Soviets and capture huge numbers. Combined with the latest tune-down in Soviet replacements (manpower), they hardly can recover and most games show both Leningrad and Moscow lost by November while even in the South no compromise in progress has to be made as Axis player. Certainly with more than historic infrastructure losses for the Soviet, a smaller Army is a logical consequence.

[Puhis]

I can't play WitE because mud map is so ugly... [X(]

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

WitE forum is doing just fine - thanks for asking! [:)]

The WitE, as per Joel, sold similarly to WitP and is expected to have same grand total in long run...

Also please note that most players play WitE vs. AI (same case as with UV / WitP and WitP-AE)!

BTW, the number of post in WitP-AE forum is rather constant but, apart from AAR section, almost all post are "OT" (i.e. general military / historic stuff) and made by the very same core of old posters... [:D]

I understand your attachment to the game, but I've been looking in there for about 18 months and traffic is nowhere near what it was as recently as Feb. Some people read, but few post. I see 3-4 new posts per day outside the AARs, and of those there are only a couple of active ones whereas last winter there were a dozen or more. (About half of them Q-Ball's. [:)])

I also don't see a lot of newbie posts, as you say.

On Joel's numbers, I note he says sales are versus WITP, not WITP and AE. If WitE sold as many as both WITPs I'd be very surprised.

The test will be WitW. I think there will be more who wait and see how the balance works than there were for WitE, especially at the price point.

First of all I have no understanding with stand:

"US" vs. "THEM"

(and "US" meaning "WitP-AE")


Why would one even think of undermining our Grognard community with stand like this at first place? [:(]

The "elitism" of "US" leads nowhere... [:-]


Leo "Apollo11"

[crsutton]

I never picked up WITE. It was not the money thing or interest it simply is that I just decided that I did not have the time to commit to another monster. I have a job and wife to appease.

Frankly, I played PAC WAR to death and have been immersed in the UV,WITP,AE mess for a decade now. (just look at my post numbers-all on this forum) I am an old board gamer but this one has been my focus for a good while now. I just like the game and the Pacific Naval war in general. I never in my life thought that a game of this scope was possible. (well playable) Computers have made a big difference. But how many computer games have a life longer than a year or two? This is a rare one and for that reason I would love to see it continue. I am reluctant to invest a lot more that 50 bucks into a computer game because quite frankly, I find that only about one in ten is worth the money. However, I have no problem with investing in another WITP game as I know it is a proven system and that the various people who have worked on over the years have a proven record of turning out quality products and support.

I would have no trouble spending $200 on a new WITP. Yesterday, I spent $12 bucks on a burger at Five Guys. It was good but only lasted me about 15 minutes and was then gone. We don't think twice about dropping $200 bucks on a new smart phone every two years. I have spent less than $200 on this system in the past decade. It the best deal I have seen since "free government cheese."

[SuluSea]

I purchased WITE on the day it was released. It's collecting dust right now but have to admit the game has probably changed quite a bit since I last played it but it seemed to me the Soviets benefited too much from hindsite and Germany was almost hardcoded to their past mistakes. Before anyone jumps to conclusions please note it's been a long time since I played and I understand at this stage with the new patches the game probably has changed and improved to a degree.