Does anyone feel the same way about this game?

[Tom Hunter]

Jan 1 1942 5.7 million plus losses of all type 3.1 million = 8.8 million. Actual losses by the Soviets in the first two quarters of 1941 4.4 million from G. I. Krivosheev. Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses W. Victor Madeja in his The Russo-German War says the Soviets had 6.9 million men in December 1941, though the book is from 1987 there may be a better number out there. 6.9 million men plus 4.4 million casualties is 11.3 million. Net by December 1941 2.5 million Russians are missing. Another way of looking at it, is if the Russian player takes historical casualties he will end 1941 with an army of 4.4 million, instead of the historical army of 6.9 million.

It gets worse over time in the game because the replacement rate simply is not there, every year you play millions of Russians who were actually in the war do not show up.
I’m not suggesting the missing troops should go back into the game, no one would play Germans if the replacement rate was at the historic level. I am saying that this game is not a close historical simulation at even the most basic levels. We are not fighting the Red Army vs the Wermacht.

I'll add that your question about training units and unsuitable people applies much more to Western and German armies than it did to the Red Army in 1941.

[rmonical]

I'll add that your question about training units and unsuitable people applies much more to Western and German armies than it did to the Red Army in 1941.

This is not something I have examined so I do not have a strong opinion other than wishing I had more manpower in my game against Toidi. Note that in WITE, each continuously active Soviet manpower center produces 7050 troops during the war. Each German manpower center produces 1535 which are shared with the other fronts.

[GamesaurusRex]

ORIGINAL: SigUp

ORIGINAL: Tom Hunter

I’m enjoying myself picking the game apart as I play Saper222, but I’m not trying to pretend that its world war II in Russia, its just a game.

While I'm in favour of historical plausibility I also recognize that there are elemental problems in the attempt to completely remodel the Eastern Front. Just take the issue of the low replacement rate for the Soviets. If the Soviets get their historical units, what would happen in the current engine? The German wouldn't stand even the slightest chance, as the Soviet player wouldn't make the mistakes Stalin did. In the end you would have the Red Army in Berlin in 1943, which would deter most German players. So if you introduce historical replacement rates you have to introduce some simulation of the political situation in the Soviet Union, forcing the player to make at least some of the mistakes Stalin did. That in return could deter people who don't like seeing their operational freedom restricted too much.

Does WITE have much improvement potential? Yes, of course. There are many issues which have me on the fence. But designing an East Front game isn't really the easiest task there's out there.

Ding Ding Ding, We have a winner !

What COULD be done is to put those missing reinforcements back into the game and let the Russian use them to defend Mother Russia in the early phase of the game, while allowing the Germans to still advance at historic rates and pocket historically massive prisoners... Why is the Russian going to fight forward and not run with the increased troops you say ?... Because while increasing the Russian reinforcements to historic levels, you are also going to put time sensitive VPs that the Germans can capture on all the major urban areas that the Russian will have to defend. Once the time expires for each urban center, the VP for that urban center disappears and the Russian can retreat.

Rather than what we have now with Germans exploiting logistics to break the Russian below critical troop mass and Russians running to keep critical troop mass up... we would have a German capable of pocketing massive prisoners while capturing VP points, but a Russian with the capacity to absorb and expend massive human resources, while defending what needs to be defended just long enough to hopefully deny the VPs to the Germans. It would solve both the problem of the game-ending first turn pocketing (because even with the pockets, the Russians will still be left with critical mass) and the Russian incentive to just run (because they must defend the VPs).

[pz501]

ORIGINAL: SigUp

ORIGINAL: Tom Hunter

I’m enjoying myself picking the game apart as I play Saper222, but I’m not trying to pretend that its world war II in Russia, its just a game.

While I'm in favour of historical plausibility I also recognize that there are elemental problems in the attempt to completely remodel the Eastern Front. Just take the issue of the low replacement rate for the Soviets. If the Soviets get their historical units, what would happen in the current engine? The German wouldn't stand even the slightest chance, as the Soviet player wouldn't make the mistakes Stalin did. In the end you would have the Red Army in Berlin in 1943, which would deter most German players. So if you introduce historical replacement rates you have to introduce some simulation of the political situation in the Soviet Union, forcing the player to make at least some of the mistakes Stalin did. That in return could deter people who don't like seeing their operational freedom restricted too much.

Does WITE have much improvement potential? Yes, of course. There are many issues which have me on the fence. But designing an East Front game isn't really the easiest task there's out there.

There's a lot of truth to this.

Here's an example of how most of Gary's games are inter-related and share a common database: For the East Front - "War in Russia" (1984) > "Second Front" (1991) > "War in the East" (2010). For the Pacific - "Guadalcanal Campaign" (1982) > "War in the South Pacific" (1986) > "Pacific War" (1992) > "Uncommon Valor" (2002) > "War in the Pacific" (2004) > "War in the Pacific-AE". For General WW 2 Air War: "USAAF" (1985) >
"12 O'Clock High" (1999) > "Battle of Britain" (1999) > "Bombing the Reich/Eagle Day". For the Western Front (1944-45)- "West Front" (1991) > upcoming "Western Front".

I've owned and played all of these, and I'll bet a lot of people here have too. The one thing they all have in common is a very similar database and rating system for individual AFV's, aircraft, ships, etc. As they've progressed through the years, they have added more and more detail, such as individual pilots for aircraft (not in WiE).

Under the hood, WiE still bears a strong family resemblance to "War in Russia" from 1984.

I love the ultra detail, and really like being able to view the detailed TO&E for say, a Panzer-Division, or a Guards Mech Corps. Sometimes I think it would be easier, and almost as accurate to go to the old Attack-Defense-Movement factor system, with step reductions, and replacement steps instead. I could live with either system, but that's probably because I've played SPI's "War in Europe", and GDW's "Europa" series of games.

I wonder if in some cases simpler isn't better? It's up to the individual player and designer of course.

I'll second the motion that the more detailed and complex designers try to make things, the more prone they are to long term flaws within a game system.

[carlkay58]

Some numbers on Soviet manpower:

1941 is the best year for Soviet manpower increases. They are able to call up soldiers that have served two to three years within the last five years so training is at least present. The casualty rate from illness (which was 70+% inhibiting of further service) was only in the 10-12% rate. They were able to be supplied (food, uniforms, and equipment) from stocks that had been stored in local armories and other stockpiles. These pre-stocked supplies were gone by the end of August or early September for the most part. After that, the new recruits had to forage on their own.

1942 is where there starts to be real problems in the manpower pipeline. Recruits were trained while on transit to the front. Minimal training overall. Recruits were rarely used as replacement but rather as new units. While this also happened during 41, the men were either totally inexperienced in military matters or had spent ten or more years since their training. In other words, the recruits and new units were mobs. Equipment, uniforms, and food were almost non-existent for the recruits. The casualty rate from illness (which included desertion, starvation, and exposure) was over 40% - in some units it was 100%. These casualties were usually incurred over 100 miles from the nearest enemy. Entire units disappeared while travelling from their recruiting spots and the rear assembling areas. There is some doubt in researchers' minds on whether these recruits were even recruited in the first place or merely fictional in order to meet their quotas.

1943 and later saw dwindling manpower along with a continued high casualty rate. The game is not that far off of effective manpower. The initial casualties for the new units/mobs in 42 were over 50%. Rather than have special rules about new Soviet units and increasing their casualties, etc. it is easier to simplify the numbers.

Unfortunately WitE suffers from over detail in some areas. Because it does give casualties as individual men/artillery/afvs any deviation from historical norms is a reason to gripe. This is a two-edged sword, the system actually deals with individuals but the numbers will never total up right.

[Michael T]

I love the ultra detail, and really like being able to view the detailed TO&E for say, a Panzer-Division, or a Guards Mech Corps. Sometimes I think it would be easier, and almost as accurate to go to the old Attack-Defense-Movement factor system, with step reductions, and replacement steps instead. I could live with either system, but that's probably because I've played SPI's "War in Europe", and GDW's "Europa" series of games.

Check out Schwerpunkts WWIE, it might do what WITE does not. It's more in a boardgame mold with the advantages a PC offers. I will be giving it considerable time when it is released.

[Flaviusx]

I tried their Russo German War game long ago and was very unimpressed.

For better or worse WITE is the current gold standard and nothing else comes close. I think there is an untapped market out there for a corps/army level Eastern Front computer wargame, though. And that lends itself to a higher level of abstraction than WITE.

Maybe a computer port of this promising design: https://www.gmtgames.com/p-352-the-dark-valley.aspx

The Operational Art of War has a few scenarios that try to do this but the engine really isn't designed for it.

[Michael T]

RGW was not so good. AGW is ok but not quite there. Maybe WWIE will hit the mark. I agree WITE is top dog, but its still falling short in many areas. While the level of detail in WITE is the primary motivation for many, for me I would prefer less Micromanagement and more emphasis on a nice clean logistics and combat system. The Schwerpunkt game offers this. But we shall see. GG games seem to get bogged down in too much detail IMO. Detail that does not necessarily add to the game play aspect. I mean do you really need to know exactly how many PzIIF's are in each Pz Div?

Also the Schwerpunkt design is phased. So no weird time and space problems that lead to things like Lvov. I also like the scale of 7.5 miles per hex, rather than the 10 miles we have for WITE.

[rmonical]

John tiller's First Battles system has promise. 10 KM scale, two day turns. I like the stacking model , but not the blocking zones of control. Continuous combat factors (from 1-150ish) a nice artillery model.


Enough defects I did not bond with it. I think he is focusing on operational games.

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: Michael T
While the level of detail in WITE is the primary motivation for many, for me I would prefer less Micromanagement and more emphasis on a nice clean logistics and combat system.GG games seem to get bogged down in too much detail IMO. Detail that does not necessarily add to the game play aspect.

I agree. I think the microscopic detail is a disaster for the combat system in particular, leading to all sorts of crazy stuff. They need to concentrate primarily on getting realistic combat results and build the level of detail around that. WITE puts the cart before the horse so to speak. Same with logistics, too much focus on unnecessary details and not enough control at higher levels.
Also I've banged on since the start, but the Soviet command weakness through the first 18 months of the war is nowhere near adequately modeled.

[pzgndr]

ORIGINAL: Michael T
RGW was not so good. AGW is ok but not quite there. Maybe WWIE will hit the mark. I agree WITE is top dog, but its still falling short in many areas. While the level of detail in WITE is the primary motivation for many, for me I would prefer less Micromanagement and more emphasis on a nice clean logistics and combat system. The Schwerpunkt game offers this. But we shall see. GG games seem to get bogged down in too much detail IMO. Detail that does not necessarily add to the game play aspect. I mean do you really need to know exactly how many PzIIF's are in each Pz Div?

I agree. Not mentioned was Schwerpunkt's latest Middle East game that introduced a new interface and simplified the supply rules from AGW (which got a bit too complicated.) Also, the combat system is now using more odds-based modifiers to make large and small battles more consistent. WWII-E should be much more playable like the boardgames of yesteryear. Which, in retrospect, wargames like AH's Russian Campaign and Russian Front were pretty fun to play for both sides for the entire duration of the conlflict 1941-1945. It never ever bothered us to not know how many PzIIFs were in each Pz Div. [;)]

[swkuh]

Game has microscopic detail in most things and that is the bane of the game, but also, its pleasure. What's needed is help to control details through some sort of player process.

Maybe there could be a lottery for how high v1.x will go before v2.0 is released. Proceeds to the developers from appreciative players.

Hope that v2.0 is released with best printed manual possible and less issues than 1.x.

[pz501]

I've taken a look at Schwerpunkt site, and it looks like he (Ron Dockal) has learned a lot over the years. His latest seems to be improved in every way, with what looks like a simple, and elegant system of play and combat compared to his earlier work. I've also read some of his updates on the Wargamer site, and if things continue the way they are, this just might be what I'm looking for.

I suppose what I've really wanted all along is a "serious" simulation at Division/Brigade level with 10-20km map scale and weekly turns. I really don't (after thinking about it) need every 105mm howitzer, or AFV accounted for, but would like to be able to attach support units to individual divisions, etc. Leaders seem to be too much, but higher HQ units with command functions would be good. A simpler production/replacement routine would be nice as well (maybe limited to spending industrial, personnel, and fuel points?).

John Tiller, as someone else mentioned, looked as if he was headed in this direction when he started his "WW II in Europe" series, but that hasn't gotten any attention or updating in a long while, and only 2 titles have appeared. He seems to be devoting most of his time now to mobile devices, and government contracts.

Maybe Ron at Schwerpunkt will have just the right thing.

WiTE II is also supposed to be much improved, and hopefully a clean sheet of paper design approach has been adopted.

[Michael T]

John Tillers WWIE had tremendous promise. I actually built a War In the Desert CG that worked (with a little bit of manual bookkeeping). I also hacked in to the code and created a Barbarossa AGS game as 'War on the Southern Front' provided enough of southern Russia on the map to create such a scenario. I was actually recruited to help design the next module which was going to be North Western Europe 1944 and there were lots of new features planned. But they decided to build a Arab-Israeli game which did not really interest me. And since then nothing has occurred. The system is dead, sadly.

FWIW I should point out 10Km per hex works much better at Divisional scale than 10 miles per hex like WITE. Also First to Fight is a very nice game of France 1940.

[Flaviusx]

The last really good Arab-Israeli computer wargame that I played was Norm Koger's Conflict: Middle East...made way back in 1991.

Seems to me like the subject is overdue for a fresh treatment.

[pz501]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

John Tillers WWIE had tremendous promise. I actually built a War In the Desert CG that worked (with a little bit of manual bookkeeping). I also hacked in to the code and created a Barbarossa AGS game as 'War on the Southern Front' provided enough of southern Russia on the map to create such a scenario. I was actually recruited to help design the next module which was going to be North Western Europe 1944 and there were lots of new features planned. But they decided to build a Arab-Israeli game which did not really interest me. And since then nothing has occurred. The system is dead, sadly.

FWIW I should point out 10Km per hex works much better at Divisional scale than 10 miles per hex like WITE. Also First to Fight is a very nice game of France 1940.

It must have been you then, who years back had commented on the "Blitz" boards that the series was possible to mod. I vaguely remember Glenn Saunders asking you not to do anything, or share the knowledge.

Sad to hear that the series is dead though. Last I knew, Wig Graves had lost a lot of research material, but claims were still being made that the series was alive. Glad you've cleared that up. I remember seeing shots of the entire map, and being frustrated when Southern Front appeared with a good portion of it's map being made "unplayable". Sort of reminds me of when "France '14" came out, and I asked via email if its map couldn't be adopted to "France '40" in order to create an almost full scale Fall Gelb scenario....I never did get a response from anyone.

HPS/Tiller appear to be at a standstill now beyond mobile apps, and few unknown projects. Communications have never been their strong suit, and the lack of a dedicated forum on their websites doesn't help either. Even Glenn Saunders seems to have disappeared without trace from the "Blitz". Here, even though Gary never comments (it's not his style if remember correctly), Joel does, and Erik appears from time to time. A much better approach.

Beyond what 2x3 and Schwerpunkt have going on in development right now, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot to look forward to. Even Decision Games "Computer War in Europe" looks to have ceased all development. All that was needed there was just a bit more patching, and a full, complete, editor to use. No one wanted or needed an AI either. A big, simple, fun game none the less.

[Gabriel B.]

ORIGINAL: Tom Hunter

Jan 1 1942 5.7 million plus losses of all type 3.1 million = 8.8 million. Actual losses by the Soviets in the first two quarters of 1941 4.4 million from G. I. Krivosheev. Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses W. Victor Madeja in his The Russo-German War says the Soviets had 6.9 million men in December 1941, though the book is from 1987 there may be a better number out there. 6.9 million men plus 4.4 million casualties is 11.3 million. Net by December 1941 2.5 million Russians are missing. Another way of looking at it, is if the Russian player takes historical casualties he will end 1941 with an army of 4.4 million, instead of the historical army of 6.9 million.

Defectors .
Seriously,
"keeping in mind the losses, the red army should have in total 14,197,000 men .
In fact, acording to the data of the statistical evidence ofice, as of 1st of march 1942 the actual number is 9,315,000."
Col. Efremov, 1 MAY 1942 publised in : S.N MIHAILEV book : LIUDSKIE POTERI V VELIKOI OTCESTVENOVOI VOINE 1941-1945 g
statisticeskoe issledovanie . ( human losses in the greath patriotic war of 1941-1945)
reference TSAMO (CENTRAL MILITARY ARCHIVES ) F 14 ,OPIS 113, FOLDER 1, FF 228-238 .


No comment on almost 5 milion men, 4,882, 000 to be exact, missing .

Must be those 5 million called up in July alone which from whatever reason did not bother to show up.

[Michael T]

It must have been you then, who years back had commented on the "Blitz" boards that the series was possible to mod

Yes that was me. I got kicked out because I exposed a cheat. I hacked open his file and exposed him. They did not like that. Anyway I had built a France 44 mod from the TFB game. But they got me to pull it down.

From the look of the JTS site it seems they are all about modding all their existing titles in to mobile apps and nothing else.

Ron's game holds a lot of promise.