Any first impressions??

[Tzar007]

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

You can be on the other side of the map from where your main supply areas should be and as noted above, you are not next to enemy units, your unit could get fully supplied and get full replacements [X(]. For example I easily ran a unit up to Riga in the AGN campaign and resupplied it along the way. Even when I was hexes away from any road.

Since the unit density is so low (too low imho) it is very easy to slip units through the front lines and run amuck behind the lines will no ill effect. Which kind of ruins the game for me so I really hope something is done to address this.

Personally I would love rail lines to be on the map and had to be repaired as in WitE. It just seems wrong to be playing on Eastern Front maps that have no railroads. Especially how critical they were in real life.

While I do like the low unit density, I think it is way too low and should be at least 50% higher than it is currently. So maybe that can be addressed as well.

Thanks for the feedback. Although I would not expect a sophisticated supply system in a game of that scope, I would still expect something a little better than that. Even in Panzer Corps with all its simplicity, you will not be able to reinforce or resupply your units if you are behind enemy lines, you've got to have some kind of line of communication.

[ComradeP]

What units should fill up the map? There often were just a handful of units behind the frontline. If you create a game at a divisional scale, the result is that there are fewer units on the map than on a closer to tactical scale. In WitE, the Soviets in 1941 also do not have nearly the kind of reserves they can muster in mid/late 1942 and beyond. It might seem like the unit density is high, but that might be due to the size of the map and HQ's and air bases being on-map units. Remove those, and the area behind the frontline is often empty.

When you get units behind enemy lines in GaW, in most cases you would've made a breakthrough and there would as such be a supply line. Although I can agree that it might look odd, situations where one of your units is driving around behind the frontline without any kind of connection to the rest of your units should be rare.

In most games, a line of supply or communication is a highly abstracted concept in any case (often just a number based on a calculation from how far a unit is from a supply unit or supply source).

Could it be more detailed? Certainly. Is the current supply system unusual for wargames of this complexity? No.

[colberki]

Bought the game; played the first scenario on Hard. Great game. The unit promotions allow a lot of nice decisions around unit traits.

One question - I was wondering if it would make for a better game as if the Soviets were not given 50 bonus experience points to all units but in turn, the Advanced Supply rule is invoked. Would this rule affect the Axis only or both sides?

[Numdydar]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

What units should fill up the map? There often were just a handful of units behind the frontline. If you create a game at a divisional scale, the result is that there are fewer units on the map than on a closer to tactical scale. In WitE, the Soviets in 1941 also do not have nearly the kind of reserves they can muster in mid/late 1942 and beyond. It might seem like the unit density is high, but that might be due to the size of the map and HQ's and air bases being on-map units. Remove those, and the area behind the frontline is often empty.

When you get units behind enemy lines in GaW, in most cases you would've made a breakthrough and there would as such be a supply line. Although I can agree that it might look odd, situations where one of your units is driving around behind the frontline without any kind of connection to the rest of your units should be rare.

In most games, a line of supply or communication is a highly abstracted concept in any case (often just a number based on a calculation from how far a unit is from a supply unit or supply source).

Could it be more detailed? Certainly. Is the current supply system unusual for wargames of this complexity? No.

Please remember I did buy the game [:)].

The following screenshots may help. One is from WitE Road to Lennigrad while the other is from the GaW AGN campaign. Both games are covering the same exact area, abet WitE's scale is twice as big so I would expect units in GaW to be more spread out. However, it seems that there should be at lot more units involved on both sides in GaW that what is currently in the AGN scenario.

Also as the map scale decreases, the unit density should increase accordingly as you will be modeling smaller scale units like Brigades/Regiments versus Divisions/Corps. So with GaW's scale being half the size of WitE's, it seems like there should be more units, not less.

[Numdydar]

Here is the WitE screenshot

[Ronald Wendt]

Hello,


if both games depict divisions, and one has twice the hexes per area (GaW), units would be spread wider and be less dense. Even though we have smaller units in it, they usually are army/army group units that support a certain offense which were limited in numbers.

Regards,

[vonGekko]

I've played the game for about 12 hours and I've enjoyed it quite a bit. I play with the chit icons and I am happy with the graphics. I really like the unit experience progression and the enhancements you can choose to customize your units. I also like the interesting messages that pop up when you capture certain points.

I find that the smaller units (engineers, recon, anti-tank) are a fragile enough that you have to be very careful or they'll be wiped out. Consequently, while I have many experienced infantry and armor divisions, my smaller units don't seem to progress very much.

Great game!

[Numdydar]

ORIGINAL: Ronald Wendt

Hello,


if both games depict divisions, and one has twice the hexes per area (GaW), units would be spread wider and be less dense. Even though we have smaller units in it, they usually are army/army group units that support a certain offense which were limited in numbers.

Regards,

I do not have an issue with the units being more spread out as I expect that if the unit scale (Divisional) stays the same. However, the way the AGN is setup, the Germans do not really need to attack a single Russian unit on the front line, unlike WitE. They can just bypass the entire Russian line and ignore them completely by moving though the spaces and gaps in the Russian line. Since supplies can be gotten anywhere, there is no downside to doing this.

As long as you protect the VP hexes you own and capture the Russian ones, you will win. Since the unit density is such that there are plenty of holes in the Russian line to move through, there is nothing the Russian player or AI can do to stop this tactic. So feel free to zoom off to Riga and Kranus and ignore everything else [:)]

I can't be the only person that sees an issue with this.

[lparkh]

As a prospective buyer this is disconcerting. Can one really win this way?

[Ronald Wendt]

Hello,

maps have objectives, if you achieve them you win.
Many battles in the A-A campaign are aimed rather at key points than direct confrontiation.
But this becomes harder to achieve as the campaign progresses.

Now what happens e.g. in WiTE ? Do you attack every unit in every turn ? I do not. Especially at the beginning its better to pierce the flanks and encircle units.
Later in the war you get into the fronline situation were its harder to breakthrough and form cauldrons.

In other missions of GaW you have to destruct certain amounts of strength points or specific units, secure & repair bridges etc. at the mentioned RIga map, its certain towns. So to come to an end, yes in that map you can win by driving by the Soviets and get to the key cities.

What could be done is to add a mob up phase to such a scenario to add the feel of having overwhelmed the enemy.


Regards,

[ComradeP]

Numdydar: keep in mind that in that WitE screenshot, there are only 6 actual Rifle divisions, the rest of the units are fortified regions (represented in GaW in the shape of bunkers) and NKVD regiments (not represented in GaW mostly, aside from NKVD Rifle divisions).

[Numdydar]

Which is why as the scale got smaller in GaW from WitE more Regiments/Brigades should have been added versus keeping everything in divisions. A division had a frontage of about 10k iirc. So a division at the scale of GaW should be spread over two hexes instead of still being in one. This would make things in GaW work far better and more realisticly than they do now for both sides.

So far this is the biggest flaw in the game to me (along with the ridiculous movement rate of AC). The scale doubled from WitE but the unit density stayed the same. So that there is no reason to attack except the VP hexes since you can get through the lines without any problem. I have stopped playing the campaigns because of this. The scenario's seem much better in this regard. But as I bought the mainly for the campaigns, that does not do much for me.

Your earlier post about not having to attack every unit in WitE to break through the lines is correct. But even in GaW you should have to at least attack SOMETHING to be able to do the same thing. The fact that you can just drive on by and wave is very ahistorical to say the least. So I am REALLY hopeful this gets addressed soon in a patch. Especially since I (and likely others) were hoping for a PC in a real historical setting. You have 2 out of three, historical maps and PC mechanics. Now if you can get a better historical behavior for how you need to attack units not in VP hexes and no resupply anywhere you want, we will be good [:)]

[rodney727]

Again not to pick on this poster but really now... What do you expect ? Whole panzer divisions that have only one panzer type? Sounds like PC to me. While I have only played three sen. In this I am TOTALY turned off by the unrealistic feel of this game. Sure the units have names. Big deal!!!

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Which is why as the scale got smaller in GaW from WitE more Regiments/Brigades should have been added versus keeping everything in divisions. A division had a frontage of about 10k iirc. So a division at the scale of GaW should be spread over two hexes instead of still being in one. This would make things in GaW work far better and more realisticly than they do now for both sides.

So far this is the biggest flaw in the game to me (along with the ridiculous movement rate of AC). The scale doubled from WitE but the unit density stayed the same. So that there is no reason to attack except the VP hexes since you can get through the lines without any problem. I have stopped playing the campaigns because of this. The scenario's seem much better in this regard. But as I bought the mainly for the campaigns, that does not do much for me.

Your earlier post about not having to attack every unit in WitE to break through the lines is correct. But even in GaW you should have to at least attack SOMETHING to be able to do the same thing. The fact that you can just drive on by and wave is very ahistorical to say the least. So I am REALLY hopeful this gets addressed soon in a patch. Especially since I (and likely others) were hoping for a PC in a real historical setting. You have 2 out of three, historical maps and PC mechanics. Now if you can get a better historical behavior for how you need to attack units not in VP hexes and no resupply anywhere you want, we will be good [:)]

[produit]

Played a part of the campaign, AGS until Rostov. In comparison to Panzer Corps, I feel that this game is really harder. I used perhaps too many pricey units, thus increasing the cost of reinforcement. Moreover, a scenario such as Crimea is quite tough. You really have to stick to objectives if you want to achieve victory.

On the other side, this game is really on another scale as Decisive Campaign or WiTE. The last two are so much more complicated and in this game, scenario are quite fast. On this aspect of fast to play and having to find the right strategy, this game make me also think about Unity of Command also.

On a graphical aspect and easiness of handling the UI, explanation of the concepts and rules, the game is worse on my point of view as PC. But it has a flavor that PC does not have.

Finally, the game crashed some 10 times in 10 hours of play, mostly when I am going into the objectives or army screen. Hoping that patches will solve this.

[colberki]

The secret is out. WiTE is the most realistic Eastern Front game. But GaW is more realistic albeit is my subjective view than PC any day and stays more true to Panzer General. But kudos to Matrix/Slitherine for having a game for everyone in the Eastern Front space. Clearly PC had many fans. I hope the same will be the case GaW.

[Ronald Wendt]

Hello,

ORIGINAL: produit
Finally, the game crashed some 10 times in 10 hours of play, mostly when I am going into the objectives or army screen. Hoping that patches will solve this.

no one experienced this during beta. If this happens again, could you please secure a savegame and the logs directly after the crash and send it to us (either at wendt@anvil-soft.com or as attachment in the forum).

Savegames are here:

C:\Users\YourName\Saved Games\Germany at War

Logs are here:

C:\Users\YourName\AppData\Local\Germany at War

And could you please state your systems specifiation:

OS, RAM, CPU and graphics card ?

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

[ComradeP]

Which is why as the scale got smaller in GaW from WitE more Regiments/Brigades should have been added versus keeping everything in divisions. A division had a frontage of about 10k iirc. So a division at the scale of GaW should be spread over two hexes instead of still being in one. This would make things in GaW work far better and more realisticly than they do now for both sides.

So far this is the biggest flaw in the game to me (along with the ridiculous movement rate of AC). The scale doubled from WitE but the unit density stayed the same. So that there is no reason to attack except the VP hexes since you can get through the lines without any problem. I have stopped playing the campaigns because of this. The scenario's seem much better in this regard. But as I bought the mainly for the campaigns, that does not do much for me.

Your earlier post about not having to attack every unit in WitE to break through the lines is correct. But even in GaW you should have to at least attack SOMETHING to be able to do the same thing. The fact that you can just drive on by and wave is very ahistorical to say the least. So I am REALLY hopeful this gets addressed soon in a patch. Especially since I (and likely others) were hoping for a PC in a real historical setting. You have 2 out of three, historical maps and PC mechanics. Now if you can get a better historical behavior for how you need to attack units not in VP hexes and no resupply anywhere you want, we will be good

Making it a regiment(/brigade)/battalion level game would at the least triple the number of units. That's sort of the problem with scale in wargames: if you go down one unit size level, the number of units is generally at the least tripled. Maybe there will be a mod for that in the future.

As to getting through lines without any problem: that's mostly something the Panzer divisions can do, and it can indeed feel a bit gamey in some instances, but in the case of a breakthrough there would be little to nothing to stop them for a significant distance during an actual battle as well, unless the enemy has reserves. In the opening scenarios, the Soviets have few reserves, because most of their units are at the frontline or close to it.

Again not to pick on this poster but really now... What do you expect ? Whole panzer divisions that have only one panzer type? Sounds like PC to me. While I have only played three sen. In this I am TOTALY turned off by the unrealistic feel of this game. Sure the units have names. Big deal!!!

If a wargame doesn't feature individual elements, the unit will always be resembled by its most common equipment type. If you feel that is unacceptable, maybe you should play a game/series that includes individual unit elements instead of single units (like WitE, Decisive Campaigns or TOAW).

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: Numdydar
Which is why as the scale got smaller in GaW from WitE more Regiments/Brigades should have been added versus keeping everything in divisions. A division had a frontage of about 10k iirc. So a division at the scale of GaW should be spread over two hexes instead of still being in one. This would make things in GaW work far better and more realisticly than they do now for both sides.

You'll notice in GAW that divisions, brigades and battalions do behave differently in terms of how the combat system works, but I agree that divisions would work better with a larger zone of control. That was discussed in development, but could not fit into this release as it is a major change to many systems. I expect that we will in the future "upgrade" divisions to allow them to affect a larger area, but the existing scenarios play quite well with the current system.

Regards,

- Erik

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: rogo727
Again not to pick on this poster but really now... What do you expect ? Whole panzer divisions that have only one panzer type? Sounds like PC to me. While I have only played three sen. In this I am TOTALY turned off by the unrealistic feel of this game. Sure the units have names. Big deal!!!

I'm not sure I understand the critique here. I believe you enjoy Panzer Corps. This was billed and is a more realistic version of the Panzer General / Panzer Corps style gameplay. It is a similar game though - this is not War in the East or Decisive Campaigns and was never made out to be something other than what it is. The units not only have realistic names but also realistic sizes, attachments and upgrades and a consistent map scale and appropriate movement, fuel and supply, along with a realistic branching campaign.

Regards,

- Erik

[Erik Rutins]

Hi Produit,

ORIGINAL: produit
Finally, the game crashed some 10 times in 10 hours of play, mostly when I am going into the objectives or army screen. Hoping that patches will solve this.

Sorry about that - if you have any information on those crashes, please post it for us in the tech support forum and we'll fix them ASAP. We also posted a new public beta update yesterday.

Regards,

- Erik