Poll - War In Spain

[jwilkerson]

What aspect of War in Spain needs most improvement ?

[jwilkerson]

Thanks for the votes ! We would also appreciate any specifics around your votes (post a reply here)
. Thanks again !

[josemanuel2804]

Please respond to the poll - thanks !

Sorry the poll is what about, likes or dislikes ? Other ?
Thanks

[wdolson]

The poll is about what needs improvement. And discussion is encouraged. If there are things in other games you like, please let us know about it and why you think that would be better. Or if you have an idea for something to be better, let us know. We're willing to consider any idea as long as it isn't turning it into something completely different. We're not in the business of making the next Fortnite.

[josemanuel2804]

The poll is about what needs improvement. And discussion is encouraged. If there are things in other games you like, please let us know about it and why you think that would be better. Or if you have an idea for something to be better, let us know. We're willing to consider any idea as long as it isn't turning it into something completely different. We're not in the business of making the next Fortnite.

Hi
To me the game is just perfect the way it is, it fulfills all my expectations
To me the problem is just about the mechanics and the supply system that should be better explained
Thanks
JMA

[Dreamslayer]

1) Less micromanagement
2) Improve the ground battles
3) OOB-viewer
4) Adequate chain of command
5) Production system

The devs don't need to reinvent the wheel. Just look at other games/wargames. E.g. War in the East series, it has good things about ground warfare and production. Other wargames exist too.
It looks like somebody keep the devs team in the bunker and order them to make games only like WitP/AE/WPO. Guys if it so then give some sign.

[vinnie71]

If I may, I would go for ironing out any outstanding issues at this stage.

Then we can enjoy this game in many different ways, in different eras and so forth!

[Nikel]

Jison making all the art and graphics of the game, not only the map.

[rmeckman]

Overall, I've enjoyed playing WiS. It focuses on a conflict that has not been covered that much and therefore offers new terrain and units to consider. Like WitP AE, it has "staying power" in the sense that I can continuously play it longer than other games before needing a break and moving on to something else for a while.

One of my main issues so far has been logistics. Recently, I captured Iznailoz (playing Nationalist side, v 1.65.53.01) and uncovered this 1 billion+ ton hoard of fuel.

Iznailoz.png (639.87 KiB) Viewed 1029 times

Others have seen something similar at Bilbao. This basically eliminates in September 1936 a large fraction of the fuel logistical challenges for the remainder of the campaign, since there doesn't seem to be any spoilage.

The Logistics network link at each base is not really that useful. It lists possible sources of supply but not which sources were actually used in the current turn. Perhaps it would be better to do something similar to WitE2 and list the amount of supply/fuel actually obtained from each source. WitE2 provides similar information for each LCU, so you can see which bases each unit is actually drawing from when out in the field.

I'm still wondering why rail transport requires packing but sea transport does not. This does seem to warp the logistics associated with moving the Nationalist troops from Africa.

I've found it surprisingly difficult to run Nationalist TFs through the Mediterranean between Spain and Italy. Republican biplanes seem to strafe/bomb even well-armed Italian cruisers all the way down to the African Coast. Was naval bombing really that effective in this period? Could the Republican AF really control the Mediterranean sea lanes this well?

[Q-Ball]

A couple good suggestions here I would echo.

1. As last poster suggested, one way to slow down the Army of Africa transfer is to require packing; I think Transport load/unload is too fast (except for Fuel, which is fine). Requiring units in Transport to be in Strategic Mode would be a good change IMO

2. I would advocate for some reporting improvements/changes, including
a) Cumulative loss numbers for Ground Elements
b) "Sunk by" on the Ship Loss report; this is shown in WITP-AE. I am in a game where my oppoent and I have no idea why he lost a tanker off Valencia. Neither of us! It would be good to know why.
(c) Would love to know the total number of troops on both sides (or if FOW, at least my side).

3. Static Units should be Static. "They already are" you say? "Detachments" and "Disband" should be disabled on Static Units, otherwise they aren't really Static, and I think that defeats the spirit of it

Things that are great:

1. The MAP. It's a great map, don't change anything in future games (except the actual location of course!)
2. The meticulous OOB
3. I think the combat system is working pretty well overall

[Alessandro S.]

One of my main issues so far has been logistics. Recently, I captured Iznailoz (playing Nationalist side, v 1.65.53.01) and uncovered this 1 billion+ ton hoard of fuel. Iznailoz.png Others have seen something similar at Bilbao. This basically eliminates in September 1936 a large fraction of the fuel logistical challenges for the remainder of the campaign, since there doesn't seem to be any spoilage.

This is a known issue of 53 and before. The cause got fixed in V 54, but the fuel that got created did stay.
The issue was introduced by the rule for not disbanding near enemy, and the AI does merge it's RSV into one unit, transferring all items and then disbanding. This would not disband due to the new rule and items merged with other AI units next turn again, causing them to multiply each day.
Finally disbanding would then either dump the items to a base, or give it to a LCU that "killed" the respective AI units.
I think we will no longer see that issue with games started under V 54 and above.

[rmeckman]

The fix for the fuel-stockpile bug doesn't appear in the v 54 changelog as far as I can tell.

I haven't upgraded to v 54 due to the problems encountered by early adopters. It isn't entirely clear whether players are better off sticking with v 53 for now or upgrading to v 54 and then applying the additional fixes required. Maybe those who have gone through the upgrade can provide feedback.

Is there any way to remove these fuel stockpiles in an ongoing game using the editor? I've opened the scenario files in the editor, but there doesn't appear to be any way to open individual turn files.

[Q-Ball]

The fix for the fuel-stockpile bug doesn't appear in the v 54 changelog as far as I can tell.

I haven't upgraded to v 54 due to the problems encountered by early adopters. It isn't entirely clear whether players are better off sticking with v 53 for now or upgrading to v 54 and then applying the additional fixes required. Maybe those who have gone through the upgrade can provide feedback.

Is there any way to remove these fuel stockpiles in an ongoing game using the editor? I've opened the scenario files in the editor, but there doesn't appear to be any way to open individual turn files.

I would upgrade to v 54, then immediately apply that fix. It works fine, and is better than v 53. But you absolutely need the fix.

[RangerJoe]

The poll is about what needs improvement. And discussion is encouraged. If there are things in other games you like, please let us know about it and why you think that would be better. Or if you have an idea for something to be better, let us know. We're willing to consider any idea as long as it isn't turning it into something completely different. We're not in the business of making the next Fortnite.

Hi
To me the game is just perfect the way it is, it fulfills all my expectations
To me the problem is just about the mechanics and the supply system that should be better explained
Thanks
JMA

There are two supply systems that can be used.

Simple: Supplies, fuel, resources, and/or oil flow to where it is needed if there is a land route available.

Detailed: Supplies, fuel, resources, and/or oil are shipped to bases that need them if the logistical capabilities are available. Consider ammo to be supplies. The RR logistical units are the heavy lifters but they only travel from train depot to train depot. A train depot can only handle the number of cars based upon the size of the depot. So if Barcelona has a train depot of size 120 with a RR logistical unit with 120 RR devices but it is shipping to a size 10 train depot then only 10 RR devices will haul supplies there from Barcelonabut the other 110 RR devices can ship to other train depots. The receiving train depots or any other base can then use the logistical devices in units to send the supplies, fuel, resources, and/or oil to other bases and/or units in the field. Units in the field can use their logistical devices to retrieve supplies and/or fuel from bases. So set up a "hub and spoke" system where the supplies go to the bases with the train depots and then are sent to other bases without the train depots and/or units in the field. You should move your logistical units forward as needed.

So, only have logistical RR units at a base without more RR devices than the train depot can handle. Horse wagons, carts, horse, mule, support, and/or camel support devices haul supplies but they use a lot of supplies doing so. Trucks don't use supplies but use fuel. If there is rough terrain, forest, and/or mountains on the supply route then you need to use at least some horse, mule, support, and/or camel support devices to haul supplies.

I hope that helps. I have covered at least some of this in my AARs.

[jwilkerson]

54 fixes the cause of the fuel thing, but not the effect.

[jawi]

I agree with the previous speakers.

And then definitely modernize the graphics (individual units, menus, game interface): similar to WitE 2.

(The map looks quite good.)

[RangerJoe]

I like the UIUX, just don't change it too much if it is changed at all.

[burningman]

Just an observation from someone who didn't play WitP before:

The game screens rarely display any units, so you don't know if a number is a abstration or it's mm, inch, yards, tons, hexes, whatever. Sometimes it's derivable, sometimes it isn't.

In general, more readable display of information would be very nice! Instead of "Max Speed: 16 (76)" on the ship detail screen it should read Max Speed: 16 kts (76 hexes/day). I mean, why not? There's plenty of screen space to write things out .. *or* - implement tooltips, like, a lot of tooltips.

(And something else: When you select a non-Combat Operations Mode (like move or Rest/Training), Combat Orders should be made non-selectable. As of now, you can combine any OP mode with any Combat Order, which is misleading, right?)

[A21]

I think the game is in a bad state regarding UI/UX. To the point where I cannot really play it because it is so painful. The choice of conflict is not the problem, maybe not so much naval action is going on, but the problem is the engine itself.

Here are the things that bother me the most:
(1) Font is bad. It is heavily pixelated (or was.. it's now blurry) and it is very hard to read. It's possible that you are trying to scale a smaller font onto a bigger "texture" and thus we see scaling artifacts. Fixing font, maybe even providing an ability to replace it with concrete font sizes would go a long way.

(2) There is no button feedback. I want to see a button highlighted when I click it. In WiTP:AE color and sprite change when you hover/click a button and it is a very important feedback.

(3) Ground war management is exhausting:
(a) LCU List is excel-like: there are no icons, it is hard to read and it is flickering constantly. The is no confirmation that the unit started (or failed to start) moving after you click move.
(b) Lack of on-map info: there is no path prediction (and ETA, maybe even time estimation for every hex in path) when you are trying to set a destination for a unit.
(c) Lack of on-map info: It is generally very hard to read the unit disposition since there are almost no icons and color coding of values. Also I am now trying to see that path that my unit is going to take but I can't for some reason. I remember that there was a way to see it - but it's not working right now for some reason.
(d) There is no indication of units moving when having the "modern" overlay that shows AV values. And there is very little indication of when using "legacy" WiTP:AE view. Reading the movement situation is very problematic right now.

(4) LCU List is often stealing focus from the map when I am trying to move camera left.

(5) Proper font scaling is needed. Fonts are too small right now for many resolutions.

My own preferences. I don't claim they are real problems, just maybe useful considerations/my thoughts:
- You should be brought back to port/task force/previous panel and not the map when pressing escape when viewing a ship.
- Tooltip should disappear the moment I am not hovering over the target. Like it currently works in WiTP:AE. It feels much snappier and satisfying.
- Tooltip details feel more organized in WiTP:AE, at least for bases (LCU details are horrible..). I don't know why, maybe that's just habbit. Maybe there should be a single piece of information per line. Right now there are often two: fuel/supply, oil/coal, etc.
Maybe some spacing between categories will be useful..

The game needs a lot more polish. But I am happy that we have a new WiTP-like game. Hopefully we are going to enjoy the Western Front like we enjoyed the pacific. Because the engine is there, it just needs a decent UI/UX.

[vinnland]

while I selected "pick a different conflict", that is because I want more of this game. I'm still new to historical war games but WiS is my fav by a large margin.