WitE 2

[swkuh]

Hmmm... have always thought "renaming" would be a nice feature to suggest, but maybe its too costly when there are many other desired features.

Some suggestions:

commentary lines in HQ & unit displays,
jump to unit on map from displays with unit lists,
aggregate CVs for HQs to reflect subordinated CVs,
Commanders' Reports to show OOB structure w/CVs or new summary OOB w/CVs report.

[SuluSea]

Will be buying WITE2 the day it's released.

Keep up the great work guys!!

[Mehring]

Reintroduce leader loss. Now at late 1942 and I haven't lost a single officer, don't think my Russian opponent has lost too many either in spite of numerous pocketed HQs. I don't think pandering to player whinging cos they lost their favourite commander is a good enough reason to immortalise the officer corps. At least, please give us a game option to make them human.

[Mehring]

What about city migration management?

Russian player designates cities to be evacuated and it takes X weeks to fully complete, or at least, to evacuate the not old and sick. During this time, a reduction according to population size is made to rail capacity and the eagerly awaited hex supply/movement throughput capacity along local high infrastructure (quasi road) hexes. If a captured city is not so designated, its population stays in place if surrounded and captured; a very high proportion of population remains if captured while un-surrounded.

[LiquidSky]

I've seen lots of leaders lost in WiTW....Bradley in II Corp invading Sicily. I have even seen Goering removed from Luftwaffe Command, OKL.

[chaos45]

Officers still die in the WITE game I'm playing.

Think you have just been lucky on the rolls. All they did was reduce the % chance of officers being casualties which makes sense from the absurd loss rate it was previously from my understanding.

Corps/Army commanders didnt really become KIA all that often when think of the overall amount of commanders on the battlefield in this game. Usually only in catastrophic situations did corps/army commanders become losses or fluke accidents/bad luck. Not sure what the % is at current but I have lost commanders on the Soviet side for sure in me and Peltons game.

[Bozo_the_Clown]

Now at late 1942 and I haven't lost a single officer, don't think my Russian opponent has lost too many either in spite of numerous pocketed HQs.

The old system was silly. I don't want to see games anymore were players do bombing runs on HQs to kill leaders. Ideally, you could have a slider for this game function to adjust the likelihood that leaders get killed. Also, it would be nice if the dismissal of leaders would actually be related to performance. My impression is that this is all totally random.

[Mehring]

Revisiting WitE 2 suggestions, expanding unit stances? This would help raise losses and might enhance representation of national characteristics.

How about-

Defence- per hex
Delay- low morale threshold for retreat, no entrenching past level 1. Mot/Mech/Cav units receive bonus to retreat undamaged heavy equipment w/o loss chances.
Default- Normal morale threshold for retreat.
Determined. Modified by unit morale, defenders will take high losses before breaking, with increased rout/shatter risk if threshold is crossed. Entrenching bonus. Soviets might get an early war morale bonus defending cities.

Attack-

Assault Preparation- Supply priority, somewhat like current HQ buildup with movement penalty. Unit stance.
Reserve- As is- Unit stance.
Determined Attack- Higher morale threshold before attack called off. All units in an attack
Default- Normal attack, no bonus/penalty. All units in an attack
Scout/probe- Hasty attack option. All units in single attacking hex

So that would be three new stances.

Also, has the ability to convert adjacent hexes/exert ZOC according to actual unit size and composition rather than size designation been considered? Apart from the obvious absurdity of weak and depleted "divisions" having more such power than stronger brigades and regiments, I've often wondered about the value of ACs and other light recon vehicles. I assume they have little combat ability but they could and I think should add to these unit capabilities

[chaos45]

I always like the old europa game series theory that for units to exercise a Zoc required at least a regiment of artillery. So usually only divisions had Zoc's unless you also had smaller units deployed with independent artillery regiments if I remember right.

[rlp2]

Bozo_the_Clown,

I have to say I'm really enjoying your avatar pictures of Hitler. The one with the dolphin jumping thru the hoop while Hitler is giving his speech was great!

This one with the table is also great!

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: chaos45

I always like the old europa game series theory that for units to exercise a Zoc required at least a regiment of artillery. So usually only divisions had Zoc's unless you also had smaller units deployed with independent artillery regiments if I remember right.

Interesting angle on what a ZOC represents. I'd always thought it was whatever caused a hostile unit to approach and, probably more importantly, attempt to disengage, with caution. Artillery is part of that, but without spotters/observation points, it's redundant. All the same, I suspect a 10k strong brigade in a ten mile hex is going to be much more willing and able to maintain contact with and harass a withdrawing enemy than a 5k divisional shell, whatever the relative strengths of their arty.

[Bozo_the_Clown]

I have to say I'm really enjoying your avatar pictures of Hitler. The one with the dolphin jumping thru the hoop while Hitler is giving his speech was great!

Thanks for the comment, Bob. The dolphin gif is probably my favorite too. And the one were he plays banjo.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Bozo_the_Clown

I have to say I'm really enjoying your avatar pictures of Hitler. The one with the dolphin jumping thru the hoop while Hitler is giving his speech was great!

Thanks for the comment, Bob. The dolphin gif is probably my favorite too. And the one were he plays banjo.

glad to see the dolphin back ...

[demyansk]

ORIGINAL: Rongor

ORIGINAL: Kharkov
However I always thought that instead of taking on the whole German side or Soviet side in the grand campaign, it would be more my playstyle just to control a subset of units, maybe an army or Army Group and letting the AI play the other units on my side.

That would actually be great. Imagine to hand over the control of the adjacent Heeresgruppe to a buddy in Multiplayer.
Imagine 3+ guys sharing the work, each one doing an army or Heeresgruppe or the Air force. And the enemy players doing the same. What a great Multiplayer experience that would be[&o]

This is what I want to see, I would like to control army groups but not the entire mess. Hitler did that and it doesn't work.

[LiquidSky]

I've always like this one:

[chaos45]

Well that was Europas theory---basically the ground combat unit is the spotter for the Artillery regiment....and since most artillery above 100mm had a 10+ mile range the theory was if you occupy a 10-15 mile hex the unit could positions its 100mm+ artillery to exert fires on the surrounding hexes thus limiting enemy movement.

Keep in mind its a mainly divisional level game so most non-divisional units are regiment/BDE level some battalions but mainly divisions/regiments/bdes.

So very simliar scale.

[Bozo_the_Clown]

I've always like this one:

Yes, I downloaded that one too. I wonder what he is listening too. Maybe rap?

Disco-Adolf is fun too!

[Bozo_the_Clown]

Or maybe Trumpet-Adolf with Eva in the background all jiggly.

[Bozo_the_Clown]

Or maybe E-Guitar-Adolf?

[KWG]

Two types of attack - One type of defense.

Which means all defenses are hold at all cost.

The Furhrer says SIEG MEOW!!! Sometimes it's better to be mice.