New Features

[battlevonwar]

Been gone since 2021 what I've noticed since:

The retreat/surrender/overrun rules:

You rarely get units destroyed allowing for awkward strategies. For instance you don't invade Holland cause you don't have to and it wastes resources/effectiveness ... Germany doesn't have to worry about this so why do it? This makes taking down France a tiny bit easier cause you will lose about 10% of your effectiveness on 2 or 3 Panzers flanking. Plus 2-4 intercepts on the air. . . Later you can come through the South with Mechs/Armor and just bang through with 2-3 HP Loss, bingo Holland.

Battle of France: You rarely kill a Panzer or Army. It's a narrow corridor but little risk. I have seen 1 Army destroyed so far in 4 or 5 battles for France. Most units retreat to the rear with the 3 hex rule all damaged. In The French situation you never much worry about it as you disband a few of those and let the manpower and energy fill the front or leave them there if the Germans try to go through the whole of the nation.

The USSR: You rarely kill Mechanized or Armored Formations unless you surround them or have Monster Odds against them. So the game favors much more encirclement and cutting off tactically rather than brut force. That or if you run your USSR incorrectly the Germans just push her off the map entirely which I have had happen.


Naval Bombardment:

Extremely OP, but I suppose this allows for the ability to break a coastal entrenched Corp. I can't say it's all bad and it allows thing to run more smoothly for naval invasions!


Greece-Bulgaria-Yugoslavia: Bulgaria would of joined if the Axis pushed hard to get to Greece and then Yugoslavia would of joined encouraged by the British. Seems like everyone ignores Greece cause who wants to guard 3 more Ports for almost little or no gain. You get a Strategic Resource and I doubt you cover the cost for the Sentries. Varna should have a Corp on her and the Bulgarian Army was quite large for a tiny little nothing. At least this way she can't be Division Amphib'd and then loaded up?

Give the Germans a Port in the Atlantic! There are no ports in France for them to resupply or repair for long and there are no U-boat Dens so you effectively don't really want to wander into the Atlantic after the British setup their Air Defense. So to simulate the U-Boat Dens a Port on the Azores to simulate resupply would make for a more interesting Atlantic Campaign. Maybe having it blown at a certain point ...

Add higher damage values for Strategic Bombers? Germany has way too much Resources and Strategic Bombers don't really diminish it enough. Maybe the key would be this, if you have a full AntiAir City the damage is mitigated but if you don't it's obliterated? And up the price of AA Guns. Too cheap and too gamey ... Both sides can exploit using them!

Oh and let me not forget that Surface Raiders for the Germans are practically useless. I have tried them and they use to have good results but now they have terrible results. Leading to the Allies more or less ignoring the Kriegsmarine...which was was an effective raider force.


Any other additions or ideas from players?

P.S. DO not allow for the Qattara Supply Cut Off... Really annoying. Brits should be able resupply their bridgehead into Libya by sea ... 1 Corp lands behind the Brits on that 1 rail line and bingo Libya for the Brits. I imagine a massive air resupply-naval resupply would of taken place and trucks would of scrambled through that to cut off units. There should be some leeway here. It's one chokepoint on the map which I find annoying. (I remember reading on the Desert Campaign and whole supply convoys just drove through the lines in the desert to resupply some units) Perhaps a % chance a unit receives supply rather than 0 across the map? It realistically resembles how it takes a long time for encirclement to be effective as it often wasn't ... numerous instances in the war of it!

[AlvaroSousa]

I am trying to get the game more of a retreat game pushing fronts instead of smashing them. This way front lines don't collapse completely with open fields. It is better for the A.I. games and the players.

France is just a timer not a game determiner. Either you take it early, historical, or late. But it feeds into my point above.

Naval Bombardment only adds up to the value of the units attacking over a 2 week period. But it is something that is hard to balance correctly. Even in World in Flames it seems OP.

Germans have 3 ports in the Atlantic to repair. Brest, Saint-Nazaire, Bordeaux. They are all level 5 ports.

RHBYG nations - The SR in Greece nets on average ~5.25pp per turn. That's 409pps over 42, 43, and 44. Bulgaria shouldn't be in Russia but I have no way to work this mechanism.

Strat bombing is an attrition game. By estimate research and consulting with my expert we figured Germany lost ~30% of her production from the strat bombing campaign. But it is really hard to figure this out. Run the 1944 scenario heads up and do bombing runs. On the first turn you can KO ~6.5% (~40pp + damage) of their production next turn and level a city like Essen. The air costs is about 2:1 favoring the Axis. This is with 4 strat bombers. So you can do some real damage to them. Not to mention the AA they have to buy, the air sups they have to spend. It's attrition warfare where the Allies spend 2 to kill 1.... well at least that is what I am shooting for. So depending on how much you want to commit to the campaign is the effect on Germany. I'd say it is a zero sum gain. You might make that decision early if you see the Russians are losing to pull PP and resources back to Germany. You should always have 2 strats available as it forces the Germans to respond spending PP on defenses much like you should always have a German navy as a threat to the UK to keep a portion of their fleet occupied.

Surface Raiders - did about 20% of the damage to the convoys in the Atlantic. I ran the 1st turn of the 1941 campaign sending 3 ships. They sink ~6-7 MMs per turn stationary and half that if they move. Considering the UK usually should have ~200 MMs thats upto 3% of their total. Not unreasonable. Then they have to chase them down. The same 3 sub group does ~4 MM of damage. But they are far cheaper, about 75% less, to build and can stay out twice as long while not being intercepted. I think the ratios are about right. The UK also has to focus on MM production or lose it all.

Libya - As the UK you should have fleets out at sea all the time to stop the Italians. WP2 will improve this and make it easier. If the Axis want to make a back landing expending mountains of resources it is too costly. The right approach is Cyprus for the airbase and landing in Syria... both unrealistic of course but this is a game. If the Axis are doing an end around maybe you don't have enough ships in the area? What lacks in these games is the Allies building ships which they did in massive numbers to secure the sea lanes.

What isn't accurate is that DDs didn't have the range to move as far as they do in WP. One of the reasons the Italians didn't play in the Eastern Med. DDs couldn't reach. Naked BBs get sunk. This will be something implemented in WP2.

[battlevonwar]

The German Atlantic Ports all can be hit by air ... Pretty effectively and it's not very cost effective in transferring the u-boats to and from the baltic over 3 turns which it takes to get them operational in either theater(a loop would be nice and for the Med-Atlantic). U-boats could operate just about anywhere in the world historically and had pens to protect from air. Great AA... They did get hit going in and out. Just seems like their ability to function in the Atlantic is rough. You can post 6 AA on a port with fighters/naval Bomber and units to build a defensive blockade but that's it. You will have to devote 500 Production to defend your French U-boat Pens and an aggro Allied Player will make you do it or 4 Bombers + CVs can punish you and sink your whole U-boat fleet in Port remember ... I've lost U-boats in Rostov Port to Naval Bombers from England to the point I have to move them to Konisberg! What makes you think France is safe? In 1943

409 PPs, but you really need a Corp on Athens + 2 Divisions on the other 2 Ports of Varna and is it Thesaloniki? You can use Minors but it's pushing 300 Production+ to guard till 1944 where you will be losing it. Your loss is immediate and it includes invading Greece. Which is -200 Production in Naval assets. Maybe -300 if the invasion goes poor so you have to plan for that and pay for it ahead of time. Then you have to take Crete and your losses air+land+naval+oil close to Barb. You can go by land but you will interfere with Barbarossa. So you're covering 5 ports about...

So ultimately you can pay up to 500+ with reinforcements to go by land if you perfectly time the attack in Clear Weather or finish France early enough to do it. Or up to -800 in a Sea Invasion + garrisons. If you leave just a Div on Athens and the ports the Allies will load it up for certain and use it as a base. You're not including garrisons in the Aegean and or any Naval Losses incurred either. which could cost upwards of a 1000 if you don't have the Luftwaffe at your Disposal and RA-RM. As I would think 1 Naval Bomber able to be placed here with naval assets a decent idea. Greece is a PP Sink! Yugoslavia costs about 100 Production to take why so much for the other?

(it gives strategic options that aren't worth it aside the VPs but it would be easier to take Vichy and pays better and since the weather there stays good for a bit you can clear it out or punish the British if they intervene which is a win/win...not win/lose and this is a definite staging ground against you in the near future)

A player tried a Strategic Bombing Campaign and yes I know historically the debate on their effectiveness is a hugely contested subject. We fought down to 1945 the very last turn and I think I held Berlin. I didn't run out of cash from his air offensive but it did hurt earlier. Though with the Industry Multipliers and all the Real Estate I held I really felt Manpower/Oil to be a more dire resource. Early in the game it appears Production is an issue for the Germans. The Italians/Minors are poor! Now cost benefit ratios I have no clue. Nobody ever goes all Strato vs Armor/Mechs and Tactical as that is a GTD return on your investment. Taking out 15-25% of the German economy isn't equal to forcing the Germans to put 25% of it's Offensive Army into France or Italy/NAfrica in 1942 to guard against Allied incursions?

I don't think a Strategic Bombing Campaign will hurt if you know how to Min/Max your resources. 3 Fighters, 20-30 AA guns are the investment to beat one off... The cost in Bombers and Losses really kick the Allied Rear End. It's almost an even trade off. Sure it helps the Russians some since your Naval Invasions don't work. I would guess it's historical at least...

I'm having terrible results with Surface Raiders, I will have to test them out again. I have sent them out 10 Xs and got 8 Merchant Marine Hits. I stop bothering, oil/pp sink.

Remember now the UK/US/Japanese Naval assets would fuel their Destroyers I imagine that gave them the range you don't have. I doubt the Italians had the resources and so would the Germans. Resupply ships were a very real thing. Invading Cyprus and Syria with the kind of Naval Assets the Allies had was very unrealistic but if you leave it empty I guess that's your own grave.

The Italians never really went to sea much they couldn't afford the fuel to do it and when they did it didn't really work out so well for them... Not like World of Warships... I think they were just outmatched by a more modern Navy. Their Naval Air Power was formidable they trashed the Resupply Missions to Malta...


As for the retreat Rules...I find them to be a little gamy, I played a game where I have 15 or 20 enemy Mechs/Armor Surviving on 3-4 HP Points. To come back later to haunt me. Despite the fact I attack them over/and over and over... In real life such units would be disbanded and renamed and refitted often.

I lost more Generals in my last game than I did Mechs and Armor up until Summer of 1944 as the Germans in the East and that's no exaggeration .... 4 Generals and 3 Mechs-Armor...I could of lost I think just 1 Mobile Unit if I had been hyper conservative about it! 4 Top Brass Generals were killed and 2 Mechs 1 Armor by Summer of '44 as I recall as the Axis. I did overrun a few of his mechs and armor but mostly they just escaped as did the infantry. The drain on his manpower was more damaged... So land and attrition becomes more important than kills often(as unless you get a good encirclement) it's hard to get them.

I am trying to get the game more of a retreat game pushing fronts instead of smashing them. This way front lines don't collapse completely with open fields. It is better for the A.I. games and the players.

France is just a timer not a game determiner. Either you take it early, historical, or late. But it feeds into my point above.

Naval Bombardment only adds up to the value of the units attacking over a 2 week period. But it is something that is hard to balance correctly. Even in World in Flames it seems OP.

Germans have 3 ports in the Atlantic to repair. Brest, Saint-Nazaire, Bordeaux. They are all level 5 ports.

RHBYG nations - The SR in Greece nets on average ~5.25pp per turn. That's 409pps over 42, 43, and 44. Bulgaria shouldn't be in Russia but I have no way to work this mechanism.

Strat bombing is an attrition game. By estimate research and consulting with my expert we figured Germany lost ~30% of her production from the strat bombing campaign. But it is really hard to figure this out. Run the 1944 scenario heads up and do bombing runs. On the first turn you can KO ~6.5% (~40pp + damage) of their production next turn and level a city like Essen. The air costs is about 2:1 favoring the Axis. This is with 4 strat bombers. So you can do some real damage to them. Not to mention the AA they have to buy, the air sups they have to spend. It's attrition warfare where the Allies spend 2 to kill 1.... well at least that is what I am shooting for. So depending on how much you want to commit to the campaign is the effect on Germany. I'd say it is a zero sum gain. You might make that decision early if you see the Russians are losing to pull PP and resources back to Germany. You should always have 2 strats available as it forces the Germans to respond spending PP on defenses much like you should always have a German navy as a threat to the UK to keep a portion of their fleet occupied.

Surface Raiders - did about 20% of the damage to the convoys in the Atlantic. I ran the 1st turn of the 1941 campaign sending 3 ships. They sink ~6-7 MMs per turn stationary and half that if they move. Considering the UK usually should have ~200 MMs thats upto 3% of their total. Not unreasonable. Then they have to chase them down. The same 3 sub group does ~4 MM of damage. But they are far cheaper, about 75% less, to build and can stay out twice as long while not being intercepted. I think the ratios are about right. The UK also has to focus on MM production or lose it all.

Libya - As the UK you should have fleets out at sea all the time to stop the Italians. WP2 will improve this and make it easier. If the Axis want to make a back landing expending mountains of resources it is too costly. The right approach is Cyprus for the airbase and landing in Syria... both unrealistic of course but this is a game. If the Axis are doing an end around maybe you don't have enough ships in the area? What lacks in these games is the Allies building ships which they did in massive numbers to secure the sea lanes.

What isn't accurate is that DDs didn't have the range to move as far as they do in WP. One of the reasons the Italians didn't play in the Eastern Med. DDs couldn't reach. Naked BBs get sunk. This will be something implemented in WP2.

[AlvaroSousa]

WP2 will have sub pens BTW. Just something I didn't think about in WP1.

The Balkans is much like Norway. A hard place to balance. Then there is the strategy of sucking in. Is it a mistake for the Allies to land in Greece and push North into the mountains which is an easily defendable line? It sucks resources.

The added retreat rules apply to units that have over 1/3rd their strength and get blasted. No reason for them to explode and die. They have enough of a full force to retreat before destroyed. But you also played before the 3 hex retreat rule was added.

Naval is tough to mimic. I want players to have fun.

And if you got to the last turn holding onto Berlin having a tough time with oil and manpower and you are one of the better players that's a pretty good game.

[stjeand]

For Atlantic ports I use Bordeaux ONLY. Very few air can get there...
6 AA guns and a fighter will deter the one plane that they upgrade at least until late 42 / early 43 when they may have more.

NOW the issue is CVs...they just roll up and hammer it.
So I keep a Tactical bomber there too...IF I want to use it.

Hopefully the subs are in and out....and the CVs have been busy hunting them so they are worn and low on fuel.


Greece is an odd duck.
The main reason to take it is that the Axis unit in Athens is WAY stronger than the Greek unit. Leaving it guarantees the Allies go through Athens. Even to just draw Axis units to defend away from Russia and Italy.

It is costly though PP wise. What do you get in return?
1 PP from Greece, multiplied by the German multiplier. SO lets say 1.5 per turn to be safe.
1% to your PP...that is approximately 2 PP per turn...and 5 PP from Bulgaria. So each turn you have Greece you get 8.5 PP. Over a year that is 221...IF you can take it in 40 and hold it till 44...say what 3.5 years you get just about 800 PP....so pretty even IF you can hold it...and do not lose the Italian Navy in the process.

I have not played a game in a while but when I used Surface raiders it was hit or miss...One time it was crippling...I sank 18 MM in one turn...another time they hit 2 and the entire fleet was caught and sunk...
I think WPE needs hidden fleets for the German surface fleet to have much use.
I was actually trying to test it but can't get the scenario to work in WPP...I have to mess more with it I think.

[battlevonwar]

Yeah, I can understand certain game features are hard to implement post release.

I had a game vs sveint where he invaded Greece/Bulgaria with the British. He placed all his Infantry and Armor along the Balkan Mountain Ranges. He did this to pin 10-15 Units. I was curious why not push? His entire goal was to tie down German Units that could not be in France or Russia. It worked quite well for him. He likely could of pushed through with enough resources but saw the better opportunities and invaded France where clear terrain is optimal and juicy Production Cities are right there. Romania would be a gift but it was later in the war. I had to operate in 15-25 Units initially to stop him. Then he just said heck with this, I'm going through France and using the Russians since you're divided. It worked out well...

I am not against the units retreating. I do see the answer to this though is being less Infantry Armies. You see with Armor/Mechs you get encirclements.(air gets vital with the mobility factor they destroy) So more and more in my games I am seeing 50% Mech/Armored Armies. (more even on the front lines and the infantry just space filler) this is going to be the META from now on. There are places Infantry are still effective and you get a lot of free ones so. Though like Russia/Germany...it's a manpower drain!

Tough to have good naval battles, it's also tough to make naval battles worth the cost. To balance the fun aspect with the direct in game effect. I really don't know what to do with a Navy. Big Battleships and powerful Ships were awesome spectacles. The Brits feared them and their loss was even a Prestige Morale loss.

Yes it was an excellent game, MagicMissile was my opponent and he is quite elite in comparison with me. He did say, "had I properly Fortified Italy," he would of had no chance. I am not sure if he could of but he had to really hammer Taranto against my foolish Romanian(AT) corp who was not up to snuff. He had issues with the way I utilize attacks. I learned a lot from playing 2 years ago against KomradeKorp. Guys theory was attack/never stop attacking/destroy everything. When the retreat rules were different you'd easily lose TONS of units pre 1943-44. We'd be down to 35% manpower for all nations but the USA. Preserving our Elite Units for hammering any unsuspecting Units before they gain initiative.

WP2 will have sub pens BTW. Just something I didn't think about in WP1.

The Balkans is much like Norway. A hard place to balance. Then there is the strategy of sucking in. Is it a mistake for the Allies to land in Greece and push North into the mountains which is an easily defendable line? It sucks resources.

The added retreat rules apply to units that have over 1/3rd their strength and get blasted. No reason for them to explode and die. They have enough of a full force to retreat before destroyed. But you also played before the 3 hex retreat rule was added.

Naval is tough to mimic. I want players to have fun.

And if you got to the last turn holding onto Berlin having a tough time with oil and manpower and you are one of the better players that's a pretty good game.

[MagicMissile]

Yes it was an excellent game, MagicMissile was my opponent and he is quite elite in comparison with me.

Battlevonwar is too modest we are I think on a similar level but yes it was a very nice game . I took Berlin on the last turn on my last possible attack but I would have won on VPs in any case . Whats interesting is the fact that if the Axis had taken Athens they would have won on Vps if I had not taken Berlin.You can possibly hold Athen for many years so quite a number VPs to be had which can be more important than one might think.

I am playing a nice game with Nirosi also that will be two games as allies that will go all the way in 1.19 patch when that is finished I will write about the way I see the game right now.

/MM

[AlvaroSousa]

So what you guys are telling me is that two of the best players of WP had a really good game to the last turn.

That is a really good sign.

I have played a lot of World in Flames games. Map laid out with a variety of opponents. One of the players being better than the rest. I have seen a lot of different situations. Luckily I had this experience over a 10 year period to get a good feel for how a system as old as WiF works and the issues they run in to.

I KOed a lot of them with the release in 2019 but with any system it still needs to be modified.

WP2 will introduce full single capital ships with groups of other types. Individual everything would be a nightmare to manage. Other elements will be included in attributes like range and speed.

Land units will be divisions in corps with certain rules that allow a unit to act like armor. A minimal ratio of armor/mech to infantry for example.
Air units will be wings in corps (~100 planes per counter). Players can make large or small air units, mix plane types.

It will be a split scale map though. The Pacific is 4x as large as Europe and current both games are manageable. Pacific on Europe scale will make player's heads explode. It will be pretty impossible for me to write a Pacific A.I.

I was going to put a beta patch out this weekend but I had other things to take care of. March I start the next step in a project I am on which will update both games.

[stjeand]

I would be thrilled to see a full size Pacific map but for PBEM only...

NO AI in it.

Honestly I am fine with that. Others who knows.

Had thoughts on at least limiting the AI issues but you are not in the spot to ponder that yet.

[sveint]

So what you guys are telling me is that two of the best players of WP had a really good game to the last turn.

MM is being too modest. He absolutely dominated as the Axis and just won as Allies.