Gary Grigsby’s War in the West 1943-45 is the most ambitious and detailed computer wargame on the Western Front of World War II ever made. Starting with the Summer 1943 invasions of Sicily and Italy and proceeding through the invasions of France and the drive into Germany, War in the West brings you all the Allied campaigns in Western Europe and the capability to re-fight the Western Front according to your plan.
On paper everything is better, and I am sure that a lot of work went in WitW. But something (what? that is the key question) just does not feel right : no tension, no excitement, not much interest. I do not regret putting some money in it however, because it fuels the development of the system and having WitW behind us brings us one step closer to the good game I trust WitE II will be.
Its witw 43-45, half campaing, mutilated, and without naval system and production worth 80$?? [:-] in my humble and idiotic opinion...of course. 40$ would have been the right amount...but m8 they saw the sky open when wite came out and it turned into a massive hit...
warspite1
And in response to your edits:
Who says $40? Based on what? What market research are you privvy to to "know" that and, by implication, Matrix are fleecing the specialist war gaming public (such that it is) with rip-off pricing?
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Maybe im wrong guys. Dont know. Maybe u are right. Its possible im seeing this subject with the wrong eyes.
I will think about. Sincerely. I see your points. No real base for the 40$ and yes didnt think too much about before witp...Maybe it was a very simplistic and stupid view for my part. And trully dont being cinical.
I'm sort of with the OP a little. The game is great but the scenarios aren't all that compelling to me. With WiTE and WiTP AE, the Axis forces can actually run wild for a year or two. In WiTW scenarios, it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that the Allied side will win. No running wild by the Axis here as the Allies pretty much have the initiative and keep it. There's really no back and forth as in AE or WiTE. Maybe different scenarios in the form of DLC or expansions will change things but until then it is kind of boring playing as the Allies. I've played Operation Husky at least a dozen times as the Allies and never came close to losing. Played it a couple of times as the Axis and got beat pretty badly. Played the Air War scenario. It's almost impossible to lose as the Allies. I know the game has only been out a week, but in my opinion, it needs a better variety of scenarios. North Africa, Norway and France 40 come to mind. There was a lot of back and forth in those campaigns. Punch and counterpunch. In the stage of the war that WiTW currently represents the Axis is overmatched and stays overmatched. It's not as fun as WiTE or WiTP where as the Axis you can throw your weight around but know eventually the Allies can and will turn things around.
You do know that Husky is the training scenario, right? Have you played it on Challenging AI with FOW on... the GE will retreat immediately to the Etna line and are very difficult to shift economically... First time I played I hadn't really even got them to start evacuating the island by turn 7. But that is beside the point; play a larger campaign. The choices as Allies are huge, and thus the decisions for Germany are equally huge. Are they going to do Anzio? Or even Husky? Do I contest Sicily seriously or just a fighting retreat... I am playing the 43 campaign as Allies. Based on locating 3 reinforcement PG and a Pzr Div in Sicily, I am completely revising my timetables/plans. I was going to take Sardinia in Mid August, then Italy in Sept. Now I am working out how to trap what is a very strong PzK - almost a full Pz Group (HG, 16Pz, 15PG, 90PG, 29PG, 3PG, not to mention a Pz Bde) in NE Sicily. Not to mention how on earth to shift them with the supplies I can get in... I would reinforce 8th Army but I cant get enough supply in through the damaged ports. I need to move my amphib task forces to NA to a bigger port to prepare to invade the Boot, but this cuts port capacity further. Catania was a mess when I got it, ditto Syracuse. If I take the temporary size 2 ports out before I repair them, Panzer Amree Sicily could probably roll me back in to the sea!
How is that not interesting?
Oh, and love the railway limits. Was shifting 5th Army east to Tunis... 1 corps maxes out the railways! You have to walk the rest. Oh how Wite needs the logistic changes in WitW
As a moderator can I draw a small line under this discussion.
As someone with a little insight into the process I observe it is driven by what is possible in the time rather than squeezing the last penny out of the wargaming community. Many of us involved are volunteers. If I magically added the volunteer element professional hourly rate to pay for every hour us volunteers have spent on the game then you could probably add at least a zero to the price or double the time to deliver if we went on strike for improved conditions.
That said it has taken three years to add the improved logistics, map, air war, amphib etc beyond WitE. Alongside the programming is hours and hours of research into the data and scenarios. If you add in more functionality, complexity and a wider timescale then the time taken to product release increases exponentially.
Many of us involved are volunteers. If I magically added the volunteer element professional hourly rate to pay for every hour us
volunteers have spent on the game then you could probably add at least a zero to the price or double the time to deliver if we went on
strike for improved conditions.
warspite1
As one of those unpaid volunteers involved (albeit only in a small way) in MWIF, I fully appreciate the effort that goes into the making of these monster games.
I may have reacted a little strongly toward the OP but its just too easy to rubbish people's efforts, so felt it necessary to step in.
I've said my piece on this subject.
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Thanks for the info Red. Well i was completely out of line. Sorry for adding the new subtopic to the main one.
I have to stop thinking that all the companys are like Ubisoft. My mistake. Its unfair.
ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite
The choices as Allies are huge, and thus the decisions for Germany are equally huge. Are they going to do Anzio? Or even Husky? Do I contest Sicily seriously or just a fighting retreat... I am playing the 43 campaign as Allies. Based on locating 3 reinforcement PG and a Pzr Div in Sicily, I am completely revising my timetables/plans. I was going to take Sardinia in Mid August, then Italy in Sept. Now I am working out how to trap what is a very strong PzK - almost a full Pz Group (HG, 16Pz, 15PG, 90PG, 29PG, 3PG, not to mention a Pz Bde) in NE Sicily. Not to mention how on earth to shift them with the supplies I can get in... I would reinforce 8th Army but I cant get enough supply in through the damaged ports. I need to move my amphib task forces to NA to a bigger port to prepare to invade the Boot, but this cuts port capacity further. Catania was a mess when I got it, ditto Syracuse. If I take the temporary size 2 ports out before I repair them, Panzer Amree Sicily could probably roll me back in to the sea!
How is that not interesting?
Oh, and love the railway limits. Was shifting 5th Army east to Tunis... 1 corps maxes out the railways! You have to walk the rest. Oh how Wite needs the logistic changes in WitW
Great post. The logistics system in WitW takes what could have been an invade and conquer type wargame and makes it so much more. Perhaps Germany can't win in the sense that it can invade London but there are still so many ways to bog down the Allies. The options available to both sides are fascinating.
As a moderator can I draw a small line under this discussion.
As someone with a little insight into the process I observe it is driven by what is possible in the time rather than squeezing the last penny out of the wargaming community. Many of us involved are volunteers. If I magically added the volunteer element professional hourly rate to pay for every hour us volunteers have spent on the game then you could probably add at least a zero to the price or double the time to deliver if we went on strike for improved conditions.
That said it has taken three years to add the improved logistics, map, air war, amphib etc beyond WitE. Alongside the programming is hours and hours of research into the data and scenarios. If you add in more functionality, complexity and a wider timescale then the time taken to product release increases exponentially.
Well Said John
"We are going to attack all night, and attack tomorrow morning..... If we are not victorious, let no one come back alive!" -- Patton
WITE-Beta
WITW-Alpha
The Logistics Phase is like Black Magic and Voodoo all rolled into one.
To extend the discussion for those worried that it is like WitE Germans in 1943-45 (i.e. slow boring push back); so is WitW less or more flexible/varied in outcome/events than WitE?
I would say it is much more varied! In WitE, June 1941, the Germans run amok - huge offensives, huge Soviet losses. But there is one, maybe 2 choices to make for the Germans, and after that it is 'execute the plan - do it right and you might win, do it wrong and you've lost'. The choices are basically 'to Lvov or not to Lvov', and Moscow in late 1941, or hold back, damage Sovs, so its fall in the 1942 offensive is inevitable'. Almost any other choice is a null one.
Most of the debates about balance have been around 'can Germany do enough damage to Russia by late 1941 to carry on and win in 1942?' So: to summarise - to win, Ge goes for Moscow and Leningrad. Do it wrong, or be outplayed and thats game over. Likewise the Russian choices are 'slow the Germans down economically without losing 2m prisoners'. Then build up, and nibble back for 2 years from 1943. The choices are roughly 'which side of the head to punch'. There is little scope for creative planning, its all in the execution for both sides.
Now, I am aware that WitE has been optimsed for years and hence a lot of dead ends have withered away, whilst WitW has not, but I suspect there will always be choices. To pick one... Calais or Normandy. Over time the idea German defence for each will doubtless be identified. But I don't think both will be possible, and thus we will always have the choice - Germany guesses wrong, and will suffer. Thus the best hybrid defence will emerge. But do the Allies need to Invade in the north in May/June 1944? What about reversing Anvil/Dragoon and Overlord? Is it possible to stop southern France being overrun whilst defending the Atlantic wall? Not a clue. I suspect it might be (at the expense of weakening the wall). But weakening the wall opens Allied options. Unless they committed too much south...
What I am trying to say is there is 'one' way to win WitE (for each side) and correct execution is far more important than anything else because the correct plan is a given. I suspect (certainly hope) that there will not be a single plan that works in WitW - I think it will be a case of flexibility, agility and responsiveness that will work - combined with a bit of Lizard-Spock. Convinced your opponent will invade Normandy, and got the courage to secretively weaken PdeC? Go for it, you deserve to win big. The flip side is you will lose big as it should be.
I can not see a WitE German saying 'Leningrad and Moscow are for wimps, I am going to surprise Stalin... 1, 2,3rd PzrG vorwarts to Stalingrad. We will be there for Easter 1942!' Well, I might, but my opponent could only lose if he laughs too much to play properly!
Just my 2p to get this debate somewhere more interesting...
Oh, and this is a completely different game guys, come on in, the water is lovely!
It's perfectly fine to express your opinion on the game. It's not ok to engage in speculative bashing of 2by3 or Matrix. As John said above, you're off-base in where you took this thread. I'm sorry the game is not your cup of tea - there are folks who did not like WITE, WITP and every other game we've made. There's no need to search for any hidden agenda on our part or to assume that everyone feels the way you do. We love this game and many wargamers will as well - it's ok to disagree. With that said, personally I think it's pretty early to form such conclusions. I can't imagine you've played through more than 5-10% of the content and gameplay at this point and the game has a lot to offer in terms of strategic choices and solid systems.
The medium scale scenarios IMHO are a lot of fun (Westwall, Breakout, Bulge) and the full campaign from 43 brings the strategic guesswork and planning inherent in any wargame with good fog of war to a whole new level. I hope you find the motivation to revisit WITW and that a second look gives you a different impression.
I understand and as i said before sorry. I apologize. No real and contrastable base in what i said regarding dlc and modules. But its good to have some discussion about the new game. That was my only real interest. And i dont think its a bad game. No. Nice new stuff. Good western 43-45 warfare simulation. Really. But its not for me. No instant love feeling as with wite...I will give another hard go...sure.
You do know that Husky is the training scenario, right? Have you played it on Challenging AI with FOW on... the GE will retreat immediately to the Etna line and are very difficult to shift economically... First time I played I hadn't really even got them to start evacuating the island by turn 7. But that is beside the point; play a larger campaign. The choices as Allies are huge, and thus the decisions for Germany are equally huge. Are they going to do Anzio? Or even Husky? Do I contest Sicily seriously or just a fighting retreat... I am playing the 43 campaign as Allies. Based on locating 3 reinforcement PG and a Pzr Div in Sicily, I am completely revising my timetables/plans. I was going to take Sardinia in Mid August, then Italy in Sept. Now I am working out how to trap what is a very strong PzK - almost a full Pz Group (HG, 16Pz, 15PG, 90PG, 29PG, 3PG, not to mention a Pz Bde) in NE Sicily. Not to mention how on earth to shift them with the supplies I can get in... I would reinforce 8th Army but I cant get enough supply in through the damaged ports. I need to move my amphib task forces to NA to a bigger port to prepare to invade the Boot, but this cuts port capacity further. Catania was a mess when I got it, ditto Syracuse. If I take the temporary size 2 ports out before I repair them, Panzer Amree Sicily could probably roll me back in to the sea!
How is that not interesting?
Oh, and love the railway limits. Was shifting 5th Army east to Tunis... 1 corps maxes out the railways! You have to walk the rest. Oh how Wite needs the logistic changes in WitW
Everything you listed are minor choices compared to WiTE and WiTP. With those games as the Axis you are on the attack for at least a year then the tide turns. In WiTW, with the current scenarios, the Axis is on the strategic defensive from the start and stays on the defensive. I'm not saying there aren't choices to be made. I'm saying that the choices don't make that much difference in the time time period represented. By then then the war was a foregone conclusion. The Allies are always on the attack. Some different and varied scenarios would have been better. France 40, North Africa and Norway come to mind. Even some alt history scenarios such as Sea Lion or Spain would have been good. Scenarios where both sides have a chance of winning outright instead of losing the war but winning on points because you caused more damage than historical. I realize WiTP and WiTE are set up the same way but if you play the full campaigns as the Axis you get to push the Allies around for awhile. Then you dig in and wait the inevitable Allied attacks. Still a points game but much more fun than just sitting on the defensive responding to Allied attacks.
As for Husky, I know it's a starter scenario. And I have played it with FOW and CHALLENGING settings. The results are usually the same. The only difference is in the point differential. Last night I actually lost by being "outpointed" even though I did seize the island. That's my point. With the scenarios we currently have, the only hope for an Axis player is to win on points. They can't win outright.
The Axis can't win outright in WITP or WITE, either, can it? There's auto-victory in WITP, but that hardly means Japan has won the war. The Axis is doomed in any WW2 game.
You don't find D-Day interesting? The Battle of the Bulge? Market Garden? Anzio?
Regarding the timeline Joel said this during the Reddit AMA:
We're hoping to finish some additional Western Front products in 2015 and 2016, and after that will probably be moving east.
And of course this was stated in the Wargamer interview:
We hope to produce products that cover the battle in North Africa in late 42-43, Poland 1939, France 1940 (and possibly a campaign that links the two). We’re also looking at earlier battles in North Africa.
Maybe the scale doesn't suit the OP? I can find high scale wargames difficult to get immersed and enjoy them. Very few have managed to do it, WW1Gold and the Decisive Campaigns games (DC3 is looking perfect for what I want in Operational and above wargame) are the main ones that come to hand.
Maybe he needs to look at Grand Tactical and Tactical wargames instead, as from what I've read this looks like a perfect game for those who enjoy this scale.
WitW 43 - 45 starts when it does as that was earliest date deemed suitable for a game that didn't require a more in depth naval game and ends unsurprisingly with the defeat of Germany.
As has been mentioned before the wider the scope the longer the development.
I'd love to magic a War in Europe 39-45 out of thin air tomorrow but unfortunately creating games of this complexity take time.
I like the game, but I can also understand where the other side is coming from.
I think are a number of issues in some peoples mind perhaps many who are comparing WitW to WitpAE and WitE
1. Saying to themselves why couldn't WitW be the same and start in 39 or 41 and end in 45/46 like the other 2 monster games.
2. WitP AE and WitE gives an Axis player a carrot before the big stick. The Axis player gets a carrot in the form of being able to run wild for a year or 2, before the Allied's get the big stick and take the Axis player to the woodshed to be thoroughly whipped. In WitW all the Axis player can look forward to is taken to the woodshed to be whipped.
3. Witp AE and WitE are not cheap games, but you can pay the price and get a full game that stands alone on its own. With WitW you pay the same price as WitP AE and WitE, but it's looking like it will be something upwards of $200-300 to get the full 1939/41 to 1945/46 game and adding in any DLC that may be put out there the cost of ownership may be even higher.
For someone like me cost isn't a big issue, but for others out there it very well may be. The target audience is older. I would say on average 45+. That is a target group that has been hit fairly hard by the current economic climate. I know many who lost jobs in 2008 and are still out of work. Those who found work are working for less. They may also have other obligations. For those living on a fixed income price can really make a difference.
Someone mention that while Matrix doesn't release sales number they would be surprised if more than 10,000 copies will be sold.
It will be interesting to see how the 41 module and any DLC is priced.
You have to walk the rest. Oh how Wite needs the logistic changes in WitW
