Matrix Games Forums

This wouldn´t quite make me happy, it just means US power is exaggerated as well.

I agree. I would say that allowing the invasion of England is probably an oversight by the Allied player that wouldn't normally happen. I've seen quite a few beginer A&A British players get taken out by one of my surprise German invasions.

But the result is a complete loss of North Africa by the Allies and if they can recover from that kind of mistake without a corresponding German mistake later, it seems to me that the Allies are too strong. IMHO.

it's time for a tutorial on the different supply modes in the game...

there are 3 variations of supply rules that can be selected when starting a game of GGWAW

1. Simple Supply - Supply needs to be produced, but it is magically consumed by any unit that needs supply anywhere on the map.

2. Advanced Supply + Auto Supply - Supply needs to be produced but there must be an unbroken chain of Transports (at sea) and Rail (on land) from the supply unit (usually at the Factories) to the unit that needs the supply for the supply to be consumed.

3. Advanced Supply + NO Auto Supply - Supply needs to be produced and Supply must be moved manually via unbroken chain of Transports (at sea) and Rail (on land) to the region that contains the unit that needs the supply.

Without supply a unit cannot move (and attack).

We are playing with option 1 a very simplistic supply simulation so we can focus on the other game mechanics (move, combat, production, research). I personally play with option 2 in single player games, it creates a lot more realism.

Notice with option 2 or 3 that the attack on England would have been ALOT harder if the supply chain of transports needed to be maintained.

Also no need to worry about the middle east if we look at a logistics view of the map there is no rail in Persia so that is as far as the Germans go (no supply into Persia = no movement), and Africa has no means of supplying unitts either except the coastal regions by Sea.

Logisitics View (lower right number is rail, 1 rail = 35 Transport Capacity):

ORIGINAL: Becket

...As to the US, I'm sure there are those who know better than me what the US response would have been to a German invasion of Britain.

US entry should definitely be variable, for reasons of both historicity and playability. There is no conflict here: Both things point to rolling on a US entry table, with appropriate modifiers due to German actions/successes.

Variable US entry, imo, is really a must, if the game is to have some historical plausibility. Also, Germany should be forced to maintain a reasonable garrison in the East, or Soviets may enter early.

Winter 1941, Western Allied Turn

still rebuilding England, but my Navy was active, i ventured into the central Med and took down the Italian Navy. they have 4 Transports and 2 subs left. any ships they might have are back in the production queue being repaired. I sallied forth with some Indian Ocean Light Fleets and destroyed the IT BB that was in the red sea. It was at a heavy cost of 2 of my Light Fleets though...

Here is the Force Pool and Production Queue at the end of Winter 1941...

Ah good! I see that tank production in the Soviet Union is up. All hail the heroic workers!

One quick question on Rail. When you capture an area do you capture the rail also? Is/can the rail be destroyed?

Thanks for the AAR guys. Extremely interesting. This definitely looks like a must-buy for me.

When you capture an area all infrastucture (Rail, Resource, Factory) are damaged to level 2. At level 2 damage an infrastructure is useless, at level 1 damage it is 1/2 as effective, and at level 0 damage it is at full effectiveness.

- It takes 5 supply to repair each infrastructure unit 1 level.
- Infrastructure can be bombed by air units.
- You can never "destroy" infrastructure.
- You can never move infrastructure (maybe RU Factories can be moved, not sure just now).
- You can not build Rail and Resources.
- You can build Factories.

Germany Turn 5 - Spring 1941

Our new ships were put to some good use & we re-invaded England. The our heavy air units (supported by a tac air unit) also destroyed the British infantry in Scotland and devastated the infrastructure there.

Using our heavy fleet, supported by two light fleets, we supported the reinforcement of our position in England to massive levels - Scotland will be next on our list & we will reinforce the Isles to prevent any attempts to recapture the territory.

One of our U-Boat units survived the past turn & was joined by another sub & they both destroyed an English transport unit (two total).

Although British ships now rule the Med, they do so only to see their homeland fall in their rear. We docked the majority of our ships, waiting for a new opportunity to present itself. One Italian sub joined the battle in the Atlantic & destroyed another British Transport - while the Italian sub in East Med roamed into the Arabian Sea & destroyed another transport.

Our Asien Corps was active as well, taking Bahrain/Aden from the British & attacking British positions in Western India (which fell to our forces). We've shuffled some of our ground units around for better protection....supplies are a concern, so we shall make a concentrated effort to improve the situation on the ground.

Our production continued unimpeded - with new transports & armor coming off the lines, while new subs & infantry, along with air support are in the pipeline.

We hope our Japanese allies are able to take advantage of the situation and make some land grabs of their own....

The situation in the Middle East & India

I don't think there is enough provinces in europe! i can't take a game serious if one turn you invade england, the next turn they retake it, the next you take it back,and so on,etc.

hmmm, i have to check my save file. i swore there was only 1 transport in Germany and 1 does not provide enough Amphib capacity to land an infantry...

the only reason my fleet is in the Med is you didn't have any Amphib capacity.

EDIT. crap, you had 2 more transports tc=ucked up in the Baltic i did not see.

oh, well. i've made too many mistakes and am doing this game a dis-service by not paying enough attention. shall we scrub it?

everyone else: 1, me: 0

I like the look of the game, but am very sceptical about getting the balance right. And even more of a sceptic about the Ai. With the (relatively) many provinces and stuff, the Ai could well be even worse than Axis&Allies.

If people are going to jump to so many conclusions based on an early AAR, then it's a waste of the ALPHA team's time to even post them...be patient for goodness sake and give the playtesting and the game some time to evolve!....EDITED to change what I thought was a BETA version to the actual ALPHA version, as noted in later post...this in fact makes Count Bobby to be an even bigger fool than I originally thought.....

ORIGINAL: Count Bobby

I like the look of the game, but am very sceptical about getting the balance right. And even more of a sceptic about the Ai. With the (relatively) many provinces and stuff, the Ai could well be even worse than Axis&Allies.

Look, you made 8 posts so far on Matrix boards and more than half of them (if not all) were expressing scepticisms and criticisms based on *ALPHA* PBEM AAR we beta testers post here to, kinda, quench the thirst of the other players.

You are sceptical about getting the balance right? This is *alpha* - no one even claims that the game is balanced at this phase. You are sceptical about the AI? Based on what? On PBEM AAR, where there is NO AI, only human players?? Geez, some people.

Go drink a beer or something and let us continue having fun with the friggen *ALPHA* version of the game.

O.

Soviet turn again, everywhere we look, ominous signs of military buildups. What's this world coming to?

Oleg

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
Look, you made 8 posts so far on Matrix boards and more than half of them (if not all) were expressing scepticisms and criticisms based on *ALPHA* PBEM AAR we beta testers post here to, kinda, quench the thirst of the other players.

You are sceptical about getting the balance right? This is *alpha* - no one even claims that the game is balanced at this phase. You are sceptical about the AI? Based on what? On PBEM AAR, where there is NO AI, only human players?? Geez, some people.

Hey, I also said I like the look, so not all of my post was sceptic. [8|]

Your argument it´s an Alpha appears to be sound, but after the game is ready, it will be too late to express scepticism. Best to talk about a problem when it can still be squashed.

And you didn´t get my argument about the ai. It´s based on the large number of provinces, supply rules etc. Axis & Allies had an atrocious ai even though the game was much simpler. So it would be a small wonder, if ai creation here will not run into problems. I say this based on experience with near 20 years strategy gaming. [8|]

Well...with 20 years of strategy gaming, one would think you'd be aware of the credentials of Gary Grigsby and his team. [:)]

The AI in Uncommon Valor is fun, though no AI is as good or as fun as playing a human. I have faith that the AI will provide a fun game, but, if it makes you feel better, I will suffer the sacrifice of becoming a beta tester to confirm this faith.

ORIGINAL: Count Bobby

Your argument it´s an Alpha appears to be sound,

It's not an "argument" per se it's a simple fact [8D] Anyway all comments are welcome as long as they are: a) constructive (ie contain some suggestions or ideas); b) clearly have in mind that the game is in alpha phase (this being one of the first 4-player PBEM games in the history of WAW testing - wow this sounds preposterous, but is true).

And you didn´t get my argument about the ai. It´s based on the large number of provinces, supply rules etc. Axis & Allies had an atrocious ai even though the game was much simpler. So it would be a small wonder, if ai creation here will not run into problems. I say this based on experience with near 20 years strategy gaming. [8|]

Without really getting into AI argument, I can tell you one thing right away, alpha or no alpha - IMO this game is MEANT to be played PBEM. I mean every other good wargame is meant to be played PBEM if you want real challenge, but this one especially so. Even the longest scenario is still reasonably long (25+ turns max), and turns don't take long time, so the usual argument of the "PBEM dodgers" ("I don't have time for PBEM yadda yada") goes right outta window...

This game offers one of the most enjoyable PBEM experiences I ever saw. I tried just this one game where my side didn't even take part in actual combat so far and I can hardly think of going back to play vs. AI (except for testing and training purposes of course [:D])

Oleg

Im sorry to say [;)] I agree with Bobby to a degree. That being said, please don't be so offended when someone criticizes the game at this point. It should be and only because like Bobby already stated, it's good to get the kinks out early and being critical of said game is one way. If nobody was to criticize nothing would move. We know it's early in the process trust me. Have a look at the AAR's for WiTP. Tell me there hasn't been heavy debate there with many being critical. We also want the game right. Believe me. Im going to go broke as I PLAN on purchasing WiTP, GGWaW and BiN. I havn't been so excited about a game lineup since I was a kid! All from one company to boot! So that being said. Try not to be so critical of one doing the criticizing.

BiN? which one is that