ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive
...
I think the idea of the game being scripted is an interesting one - the way I see it is that (with the VP system in place) any game that goes into 44/45 is going to feel 'scripted'. As any major departure from the historical 'script' will result in a sudden death victory for one side or the other. So if you have two roughly equal players the tide will inevitably turn against the Axis in late 42/1943. For me at least if that is happening that is not a negative thing about the game being 'scripted' but a positive thing that the game is reflecting the historical reality???
As far as I can tell from the AARs that have been posted if there is a large enough gap in player ability the game will go 'off script' and will end either by sudden death or by resignation.
my view on the VP system in the game is basically designed around 3 of the tests, the axis auto-win targets for late 42/early 43, the test vs HWM on 1 Jan 45 and then a combination of the Soviet auto-win or Berlin rules for 1945. In a 'balanced' game those should all affect player decision making and ideally be real opportunities or threats that influence choices.
the others are there to put a mis-match out of its misery, gives a natural end point to a game that is one-sided for whatever reason.
I agree in that I struggle to see how historical inputs (reinforcements but also assets such as manpower or tanks) and the NM rules make the game 'scripted'. Once we turn our back on a HOI style game, then any reintroduction of historical constraints bounds the game and the WiTx series so far have a consistent philosophy on all this.
Steven may disagree with me, but I broadly think we are where we are in this game off a series of mistakes. I think I got T1-8 pretty much right (apart from my side tour of the Valdai), I made an utter mess of T10-14 when a series of exciting squirrels grabbed my attention. I think I neutered his winter attacks fairly well (based off some practice and a good logistics system), he 'won' 1942 in that for all I attacked I never really did any damage (in part my squirrels coming home to roost, in part the patch we started under).
But the cost of that win was I emerged on a good defensive line with a good logistics system behind me. That has so far stopped him building any real momentum in 1943.
This is why I don't think the game can be described as scripted. Between player agency and multiple sources of advantage, its often possible to turn something around (or make it worse).
There's a lot said about axis options post-42 but with precious little empirical data. Going by the AARs, most axis vs AI games are seeing the Germans win in 1943, or if they miss the mid-43 check, winning relatively easily vs the 1944 HWM test. There are now 4 or 5 active AARs with a MP game into late 42 or 1943, they are all very different in how the axis is entering the transition phase, which may start to offer a better set of data points for the later parts of the game.
The data doesn't need to come off a detailed AAR, no reason why someone can't describe what is happening in their game and how they feel the Axis forces perform as 1944 moves along and the various VP tests.
While StB is both a good game, and incredibly useful to test out this phase, by its nature it starts somewhere that I can't see any players actually managing to replicate.
Roger
but it will not change anything.
