WHICH GAME WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE RELEASED NEXT?

[ivanov]

Since WITW has been released, maybe it's time for a little OT I realize that there is a long way ahead before we see next title released but maybe we can provide the developers with some hints what would be our preferences;)

I personally don't care so much about the early war, plus I think it wouldn't work so well in this scale with one week turns. So I would love to see an updated WITE 2 as soon as possible. I also think that the North African campaign would be interesting. It's a small adventure in terms of the forces involved, but the area is big, it would stretch from 1940 to 1943, providing players with a lot of space for the maneuver, so I would gladly see it released too. So what would be your preference?

[jnpoint]

My wish might be unrealistic, but I would like to see the whole ww2 in Europe with an upgrade of the naval war too [:)]

[Bamilus]

WITE 2 but they've made it clear that that is 2-3 games away. I say expecting WITE 2 before late 2017 is a pipe-dream. They say North Africa/Med scenario and 39-40 scenarios are next.

[Chris21wen]

ORIGINAL: katukov

I personally don't care so much about the early war, plus I think it wouldn't work so well in this scale with one week turns. So I would love to see an updated WITE 2 as soon as possible. I also think that the North African campaign would be interesting. It's a small adventure in terms of the forces involved, but the area is big, it would stretch from 1940 to 1943, providing players with a lot of space for the maneuver, so I would gladly see it released too. So what would be your preference?

Wonder if the game system would work with smaller units, say companies through to Rgt and played on smaller scaled map of the whole of the N. Africa area then it could be interesting.

[amatteucci]

I too would like to have my hands on WitE 2.0 next year but I understand that this, probably, is not going to happen... [;)]

More realistically, I hope that the next title in the series will be something like a 1940-1943 War in the Mediterranean.
This will allow 2by3 to develop the expected detailed naval combat system and to have a self-contained theatre of war with clear strategic goals and a sense of completeness and continuity (just like it is with WitE and WitW).
Things that, in my humble opinion, will be absent in a possible 1939-1940 game. Because if you are interested in the operational aspects of the early campaigns (Poland, Finland, Norway, France) the WitE/WitW game engine is too... claustrophobic, if you are interested in the grand strategic scope of the war, you will be baffled anyway by the forced 1940 ending.

In addition, I hope that the development of the next games in the series will be speedier now and that this will make possible the parallel development of games like WitE 2.0 or War in Europe 1943-45 (that is, basically, WitW with the WitE 1943 Camapign scenario grafted on) where no new engine features are needed and the map/OOB work is already done.

[ivanov]

ORIGINAL: Chris H

ORIGINAL: katukov

I personally don't care so much about the early war, plus I think it wouldn't work so well in this scale with one week turns. So I would love to see an updated WITE 2 as soon as possible. I also think that the North African campaign would be interesting. It's a small adventure in terms of the forces involved, but the area is big, it would stretch from 1940 to 1943, providing players with a lot of space for the maneuver, so I would gladly see it released too. So what would be your preference?

Wonder if the game system would work with smaller units, say companies through to Rgt and played on smaller scaled map of the whole of the N. Africa area then it could be interesting.

I think that the 1940 campaign in order to work should be done in a different scale - roughly 5km hexes, regiments that can be broken up into the battalions and shorter, possible 1 day turns. But I think that the devs intention is to create something that could be easily incorporated into the current system, so I'm not very convinced about the whole idea...

[JWW]

An easy one would be North Africa 1942-43, starting with the Operation Torch landings. You could do that scenario and then add in a 1942 start date campaign game giving the Allied player the same options and arguments that went on in the Allied command structure at that time.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: katukov


I think that the 1940 campaign in order to work should be done in a different scale - roughly 5km hexes, regiments that can be broken up into the battalions and shorter, possible 1 day turns. But I think that the devs intention is to create something that could be easily incorporated into the current system, so I'm not very convinced about the whole idea...

Early war can't really be done without a Battle of the Atlantic and Norway, which both are big naval models. If the BOTA were just an off-map, off-screen thing similar to how Russia is handled in WitW, that would remove any interest in an early-war game for me.

[amatteucci]

ORIGINAL: katukov

I think that the 1940 campaign in order to work should be done in a different scale - roughly 5km hexes, regiments that can be broken up into the battalions and shorter, possible 1 day turns. But I think that the devs intention is to create something that could be easily incorporated into the current system, so I'm not very convinced about the whole idea...

Exactly. The game's ground and time scales are set in stone for the motives you just mentioned. And this is why a 1940 game with this engine will, as I said, feel too... claustrophobic and, IMHO, will have sense only as a moment of a wider scope grand campaign and not as a standalone game (even if covering also Poland and Norway).

ORIGINAL: JW

An easy one would be North Africa 1942-43, starting with the Operation Torch landings. You could do that scenario and then add in a 1942 start date campaign game giving the Allied player the same options and arguments that went on in the Allied command structure at that time.

I'm wondering if the game engine is sufficiently modular to lend itself to the creation of expansions that are not only mere scenario packs but expands the nations/units available (and the playable portion of the general map) without adding new game features. More or less something similar to the BFC modules for the current generation of Combat Mission games.

This could work greatly for settings that are not grand enough in scope to have a dedicated new game, like the 1942-43 North Africa campagn you proposed or the 1943-45 War in Europe I mentioned before.

[warspite1]

My vote would be the War in the Mediterranean 1940-43.

I do not understand why this theatre has been so neglected generally. It's full of opportunities for both sides and will find favour (done correctly) with lovers of the land war and the naval war - the latter in particular.

[ivanov]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: katukov


I think that the 1940 campaign in order to work should be done in a different scale - roughly 5km hexes, regiments that can be broken up into the battalions and shorter, possible 1 day turns. But I think that the devs intention is to create something that could be easily incorporated into the current system, so I'm not very convinced about the whole idea...

Early war can't really be done without a Battle of the Atlantic and Norway, which both are big naval models. If the BOTA were just an off-map, off-screen thing similar to how Russia is handled in WitW, that would remove any interest in an early-war game for me.

Sure, a new naval system would need to be in place first, so an early Med campaign could be next in order to introduce it.

[ivanov]

ORIGINAL: JW

An easy one would be North Africa 1942-43, starting with the Operation Torch landings. You could do that scenario and then add in a 1942 start date campaign game giving the Allied player the same options and arguments that went on in the Allied command structure at that time.

To be honest I would interested in the whole Med campaign 1940-43

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: katukov

ORIGINAL: JW

An easy one would be North Africa 1942-43, starting with the Operation Torch landings. You could do that scenario and then add in a 1942 start date campaign game giving the Allied player the same options and arguments that went on in the Allied command structure at that time.

To be honest I would interested in the whole Med campaign 1940-43

warspite1

Agreed, I don't understand what adding a Torch scenario adds?

The time for the Axis to (at least try) and correct their mistakes is 1940 - 1942.

On the other hand it would give the would-be Cunningham's amongst us the chance to smack seven bells out of the Regia Marina.

Admiral Cunningham "Oi Churchill you parsimonious old git". "Tell that mob at the Admiralty to give me some proper battleships - you know, one's that travel at more than 10 knots - and I shall kick Campioni from here to kingdom come".

[carlkay58]

The easiest would probably be either WitE 2.0 or War in the Med (40 - 43).

War in the Med will require a better naval engine as the Italian and British navies will be facing off against each other. You also have the battles of the supply convoys, etc. that will need to be covered in better detail than WitW does for the true flavor and effects on North Africa.

WitE 2.0 could be as easy as moving the WitW engine back to the East. There is still a lot of work that would have to be done with the Soviet factory evacuations, etc. But this would not require an entire new engine (the naval) to be created and debugged.

Reality states that the next project will not start until late next year as the WitW game is tweaked as to supply, production, air war, etc. This engine will be the base for further expansions and needs to be working properly before propagating it into new products.

[micheljq]

ORIGINAL: jnpoint

My wish might be unrealistic, but I would like to see the whole ww2 in Europe with an upgrade of the naval war too [:)]

I have the same wish as you, a whole european campaign 1939-45. It is a long shot.

Michel.

[ivanov]

ORIGINAL: carlkay58
WitE 2.0 could be as easy as moving the WitW engine back to the East. There is still a lot of work that would have to be done with the Soviet factory evacuations, etc. But this would not require an entire new engine (the naval) to be created and debugged.

Makes sense and I hope that someone is listening

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: katukov

ORIGINAL: carlkay58
WitE 2.0 could be as easy as moving the WitW engine back to the East. There is still a lot of work that would have to be done with the Soviet factory evacuations, etc. But this would not require an entire new engine (the naval) to be created and debugged.

Makes sense and I hope that someone is listening

I'm not so sure this is quite the case. I understand the logic, and would love to see WiTE with this supply and air system, as well as the capacity for units not to collapse one week after being encircled (plus all the rest). I think the challenge with WiTE is not the question do the sub-systems work but do they work in combination?

Add on, the nature of that game means that it tends to attract shall we say some of our more *competitive* colleagues, which has a good side (the intersection of rules gets exploited to death) and bad (too much looking for secret loopholes to exploit). My suspicion is, with a small team, once WiTE2 is the new product they are going to be bogged down on this sort of endless balancing and correcting, probably to the detriment of other potential developments.

So I'd really like to see 40-43 in the Med, as above that is a good testing ground for the naval war systems but in a relatively confined space. If it included the Balkans, then scope for a more 'political' set of dynamics (which would help the late war WiTE phase), perhaps a better modelling of the partisan war (ditto, esp as both Yugoslavia and Greece went beyond partisans as sabotage to control of territory) and the ebb and flow of the war in North Africa (plus the Lebanon and Iraq events).

I say this as someone who is really looking forward to WiTE2, but I sort of suspect that wider development will get bogged down at that stage.

For me personally, I think the 'grand europa' development takes the game engine into all sorts of difficulties. Modelling the dynamics of the early war, keeping a balance between player freedom and locking them in, are all serious challenges to any strategic WW2 game. And there is no point in having the sort of historical details of this game system if it has gone well off the reservation by 1941.

[amatteucci]

ORIGINAL: loki100

For me personally, I think the 'grand europa' development takes the game engine into all sorts of difficulties. Modelling the dynamics of the early war, keeping a balance between player freedom and locking them in, are all serious challenges to any strategic WW2 game. And there is no point in having the sort of historical details of this game system if it has gone well off the reservation by 1941.

I agree with you. Possibly, after a WitM 1940-43 game, an interesting course of action might be to develop a War in Europe 1940-1945, starting after the fall of France, before tinkering with the early war years (where, as you said, the danger of railroading the players' strategic decisions, negating the very purpose of starting in 1939, is very real).

Anyway it seems that the general consensus (or, at least, the opinions of those who posted in this thread) says that 2by3 should aim at a War in the Mediterranean 1940-43 as its next tile... while working in parallel on a WitE 2.0 [;)]

So, if all goes well, we'll have WitM 1940-43 in 2016, WitE 2.0 in 2017 and WiE 1940-45 by the end of 2018. [8D]
But, maybe, my prediction is overly optimistic! [:D]

[Great_Ajax]

Hmmm. Interesting.

Trey

ORIGINAL: JW

An easy one would be North Africa 1942-43, starting with the Operation Torch landings. You could do that scenario and then add in a 1942 start date campaign game giving the Allied player the same options and arguments that went on in the Allied command structure at that time.

[Banquet]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

My vote would be the War in the Mediterranean 1940-43.

I do not understand why this theatre has been so neglected generally. It's full of opportunities for both sides and will find favour (done correctly) with lovers of the land war and the naval war - the latter in particular.

Couldn't agree more. It's probably a difficult one AI wise - but this would be my choice. I'd have less interest in France 40 land war, but the Battle for the Atlantic and trying to find the German surface raiders (Hood - Bismark, pocket battleships, etc) would be great fun to play.

As a future option I would love to see the chance to pick, or hand over to the AI - land/sea/air so we could watch the campaign unfold while just concentrating on just naval, say. Or just air, etc