WitE 2

[EwaldvonKleist]

Hello, some more WITE 2 questions/suggestions:
Blizzard: Will there be a non-artificial way to simulate the first winter? The soviet offensive should be made possible by generic rules. It was the consequence of worn out units, supply restrictions, attrition (especially of trains and trucks). When blizzard sets in the supply system collapses further and the counterattack can begin. If germans rest and refill the units, build fortifications and build up some supply reserves there should not be artificial rules to drop CV.

Stats: WITE provides so many numbers. Please include a good stats tracker in WITE 2. Suggestions:
-save stats in a text document for further use (like WITE already does)
-track everything possible: men, trucks, planes, Tanks lost/damaged/repaired this turn, ammunition and fuel used, industry and manpower output, VPs, average morale and whatever. If possible, even separated stats several kinds of losses ( trucks lost moving supplies/moving units/captured, losses to surrender/fighting/attrition).
-create a table similar to the CR (so you can order your turns after the men lust for example)
-create a chart which visualizes all the data in the table. Immersion will be even greater if you can see the losses peak when the soviet counterattack begins etc.

Game rules: Please create an ingame overview of hardcoded things like weather tables, NM, manpower factory & eastern front share multiplier and how it will change over the next 150 turns. Things like this change often and are not always updated in the manual so having an ingame window which is connected to the stats in the code would be great. In addition, you do not always have to open the manual Pdf to look for numbers you have forgotten.

Unit stacking: I think there is already an improved system on the way?

Thanks for the update Red Lancer!

[Stelteck]

Wow it looks very interesting, but at the same time quite complicated.

WITE 1 interface & looks is already quite elegant in my opinion.

Just a little advice from a software dev. I'am not sûre it is relevant or not but always something to keep in mind.
Be careful to avoid the "second system effect" when adding feature.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-system_effect

WITE is already quite complex, i'am not sûre it would be a good idea to increase the overall complexity and especially turn time.

[EwaldvonKleist]

@Stelteck: Very true.
The thing is: The stats tracker is an additional feature one can ignore. Same for the hard coded data overview. One just need to ignore the two extra buttons and won't have a disadvantage. Turn time won't be increased because you can just ignore it or, in case of the hardcoded data, even saves time because you don't need to open the manual.
I agree that WITE is elegant, especially when you take the complexity into account (its not hard to make the Tetris interface elegant). There are some things I do not like but this is probably not the right place to discuss it.

[RedLancer]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

Hello, some more WITE 2 questions/suggestions:
Blizzard: Will there be a non-artificial way to simulate the first winter? The soviet offensive should be made possible by generic rules. It was the consequence of worn out units, supply restrictions, attrition (especially of trains and trucks). When blizzard sets in the supply system collapses further and the counterattack can begin. If germans rest and refill the units, build fortifications and build up some supply reserves there should not be artificial rules to drop CV.

Stats: WITE provides so many numbers. Please include a good stats tracker in WITE 2. Suggestions:
-save stats in a text document for further use (like WITE already does)
-track everything possible: men, trucks, planes, Tanks lost/damaged/repaired this turn, ammunition and fuel used, industry and manpower output, VPs, average morale and whatever. If possible, even separated stats several kinds of losses ( trucks lost moving supplies/moving units/captured, losses to surrender/fighting/attrition).
-create a table similar to the CR (so you can order your turns after the men lust for example)
-create a chart which visualizes all the data in the table. Immersion will be even greater if you can see the losses peak when the soviet counterattack begins etc.

Game rules: Please create an ingame overview of hardcoded things like weather tables, NM, manpower factory & eastern front share multiplier and how it will change over the next 150 turns. Things like this change often and are not always updated in the manual so having an ingame window which is connected to the stats in the code would be great. In addition, you do not always have to open the manual Pdf to look for numbers you have forgotten.

Unit stacking: I think there is already an improved system on the way?

Once again I emphasise that nothing is fixed but this is where we are todayish.

Blizzard: We have only just (this week!) added the first elements of this code. I don't want to get into specifics as things will no doubt change. Current rules include additional costs for truck movement, a reduction in Axis rail capability and frostbite rules to damage Axis ground elements and aircraft (reduced by terrain and fort levels). My view is that with increased losses the need to impose draconian blizzard rules is less to achieve historical parity.

Stats: We are adding to the WitW graphical charts. If you've not seen one I can post a screenshot.

Rules: Weather is not scripted like WitE, it's like WitW and is much more dynamic. Most of this data can be seen in the editor but having a hard code screen is a good idea but no promises.

Unit Stacking: in debate with no firm decision yet.

@ Stelteck: I understand your point of view completely. We are working hard to reduce complexity for the player but maximise some of the better systems (which are inherently more complex) like the logistics and air models to make the system more realistic.

- One suggestion that was posted in this thread by Sillyflower (afair) was to add an Auto Depot Creation system. We have done so.
- Air Divisions have been added to make moving air groups easier.
- We have taken Tank Brigades off the map and made other Bde units multirole so the player can choose. This has reduced counter count.
- We have simplified factory evacuation (not a simple task) - all factories are now set to evacuate to their historical locations at historical times. You can move them early and they will auto move if capture is imminent with 100% damage. So for the soviet player you can ignore the factory evacuation system completely if you so wish.
- Garrisons. This has yet to be added but I'm on pretty safe ground saying that it won't be like the WitE whackamole system.

[EwaldvonKleist]

@Red Lancer:
Thx for the reply!
Blizzard rules sound really good, I never liked the "germans suddenly forget how to fight and learn it again after the winter" approach.
Stats: Yes, please show one of the WITW graphical charts. I don't care that much about western front so I hardly read in the WITW forum.
Dynamic weather sounds good too. I still advocate however for my idea for everything that is really hardcoded.

I know things can change but it looks very promising.

[RedLancer]

Like this:

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Stelteck

...

WITE is already quite complex, i'am not sûre it would be a good idea to increase the overall complexity and especially turn time.

I think its a mistake to assume the new stuff in WiTE2 is added onto WiTE. While a lot is going to be recognisable many systems are designed from bottom up and actually far more logical and less demanding.

So WiTW/WiTE2 does not need HQBU as an essential set of special rules designed to reflect supply prioritisation - with all the abuses that have grown up around it over the years.

In WiTW/WiTE2 you have essentially two tools and they are both relatively intuitive. Depots pulll supply into a region and do so on the basis of how large they are, how well connected (one on a dual train line might be able to pull in more than one on a single track line) and how important you make it. You can automate their construction (though playing the Germans I quite like to have control) and you can set priority but you have no control over size/rail links.

The second stage is to set the priority of supply for the commands reliant on that group of depots (borders are porous as you can use trucks to pull in supplies from further afield). This prioritisation both determines which units are supplied first (or possibly at all) and also how much supply (as a % of their need) they take up. So if you make everything low priority, supply will build up in the depots rather than go forward to the combat units.

Finally the game system moves 'freight' and then breaks that out to fuel/supply/ammo/replacements on delivery.

It does take some getting used to but its neat and elegant. If you have WiTW, I'd suggest playing the 3 France 44 scenarios as that will teach you a lot about how to use these building blocks and what happens to units put low down the supply delivery priority list and so on.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

Like this:

I see dead people or exploits all the same to me

Some times Red less is better then more

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: Stelteck

...

WITE is already quite complex, i'am not sûre it would be a good idea to increase the overall complexity and especially turn time.

I think its a mistake to assume the new stuff in WiTE2 is added onto WiTE. While a lot is going to be recognisable many systems are designed from bottom up and actually far more logical and less demanding.

So WiTW/WiTE2 does not need HQBU as an essential set of special rules designed to reflect supply prioritisation - with all the abuses that have grown up around it over the years.

In WiTW/WiTE2 you have essentially two tools and they are both relatively intuitive. Depots pulll supply into a region and do so on the basis of how large they are, how well connected (one on a dual train line might be able to pull in more than one on a single track line) and how important you make it. You can automate their construction (though playing the Germans I quite like to have control) and you can set priority but you have no control over size/rail links.

The second stage is to set the priority of supply for the commands reliant on that group of depots (borders are porous as you can use trucks to pull in supplies from further afield). This prioritisation both determines which units are supplied first (or possibly at all) and also how much supply (as a % of their need) they take up. So if you make everything low priority, supply will build up in the depots rather than go forward to the combat units.

Finally the game system moves 'freight' and then breaks that out to fuel/supply/ammo/replacements on delivery.

It does take some getting used to but its neat and elegant. If you have WiTW, I'd suggest playing the 3 France 44 scenarios as that will teach you a lot about how to use these building blocks and what happens to units put low down the supply delivery priority list and so on.

Kinda funny after yrs your now finally in the ball park.

1.0 and WitW and just a guess 2.0 is more about art then math.

[Peltonx]

intuitive.

in·tu·i·tive


/inˈt(y)o͞oədiv/


adjective

adjective: intuitive




using or based on what one feels to be true even without conscious reasoning; instinctive.

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=in ... definition

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

intuitive.

in·tu·i·tive


/inˈt(y)o͞oədiv/


adjective

adjective: intuitive

using or based on what one feels to be true even without conscious reasoning; instinctive.

Pelton

I'm sorry but I totally fail to understand the point you are trying to make?

As in WiTW I am sure you can build a detailed spreadsheet that combines depot capacity with typical unit needs and control it all that way. But as in WiTW this is a bit tricky as while the depot-unit relationship is clearly geographical units can pull supply from further away (at a cost in trucks). This is realistic enough as there are reports from July 41 of German formations sending part of their supply trucks back to Poland to grab supplies.

The consequence is I don't think there is a purely mathematical relationship between depot capacity and unit need on most of the map in good weather. Things are more problematic say in the Valdai where the Germans will struggle to get a decent depot system in place and once the weather starts to turn (when truck movement is restricted).

Now I'll be honest, I don't spend my gaming time looking for gamey exploits but since the game is being tested like everyone I am looking to stretch game systems to see where they break. So far the WiTE2 logistical model gives broadly sensible results consistently. If you have discovered an exploit from WiTW don't you think you should share it?

[charlie0311]

Uh, like really.

The "secret sauce" routine is getting old

[No idea]

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

Hello, some more WITE 2 questions/suggestions:
Blizzard: Will there be a non-artificial way to simulate the first winter? The soviet offensive should be made possible by generic rules. It was the consequence of worn out units, supply restrictions, attrition (especially of trains and trucks). When blizzard sets in the supply system collapses further and the counterattack can begin. If germans rest and refill the units, build fortifications and build up some supply reserves there should not be artificial rules to drop CV.

Stats: WITE provides so many numbers. Please include a good stats tracker in WITE 2. Suggestions:
-save stats in a text document for further use (like WITE already does)
-track everything possible: men, trucks, planes, Tanks lost/damaged/repaired this turn, ammunition and fuel used, industry and manpower output, VPs, average morale and whatever. If possible, even separated stats several kinds of losses ( trucks lost moving supplies/moving units/captured, losses to surrender/fighting/attrition).
-create a table similar to the CR (so you can order your turns after the men lust for example)
-create a chart which visualizes all the data in the table. Immersion will be even greater if you can see the losses peak when the soviet counterattack begins etc.

Game rules: Please create an ingame overview of hardcoded things like weather tables, NM, manpower factory & eastern front share multiplier and how it will change over the next 150 turns. Things like this change often and are not always updated in the manual so having an ingame window which is connected to the stats in the code would be great. In addition, you do not always have to open the manual Pdf to look for numbers you have forgotten.

Unit stacking: I think there is already an improved system on the way?

Once again I emphasise that nothing is fixed but this is where we are todayish.

Blizzard: We have only just (this week!) added the first elements of this code. I don't want to get into specifics as things will no doubt change. Current rules include additional costs for truck movement, a reduction in Axis rail capability and frostbite rules to damage Axis ground elements and aircraft (reduced by terrain and fort levels). My view is that with increased losses the need to impose draconian blizzard rules is less to achieve historical parity.

Stats: We are adding to the WitW graphical charts. If you've not seen one I can post a screenshot.

Rules: Weather is not scripted like WitE, it's like WitW and is much more dynamic. Most of this data can be seen in the editor but having a hard code screen is a good idea but no promises.

Unit Stacking: in debate with no firm decision yet.

@ Stelteck: I understand your point of view completely. We are working hard to reduce complexity for the player but maximise some of the better systems (which are inherently more complex) like the logistics and air models to make the system more realistic.

- One suggestion that was posted in this thread by Sillyflower (afair) was to add an Auto Depot Creation system. We have done so.
- Air Divisions have been added to make moving air groups easier.
- We have taken Tank Brigades off the map and made other Bde units multirole so the player can choose. This has reduced counter count.
- We have simplified factory evacuation (not a simple task) - all factories are now set to evacuate to their historical locations at historical times. You can move them early and they will auto move if capture is imminent with 100% damage. So for the soviet player you can ignore the factory evacuation system completely if you so wish.
- Garrisons. This has yet to be added but I'm on pretty safe ground saying that it won't be like the WitE whackamole system.

Thank you for the answers and the good work. Are you rethinking the way of attaching and meddling with support units? And, regarding that, any quick an easy way to know where they are to be able to choose where they are needed?. I spent a good amount of my playing time clicking and cliking just to attach support units or detaching them. You told mesome time ago that a windows system (like the one the OS system uses) was not posssible, but do you have other ideas to get rid of so much clicking?

[RedLancer]

It's not on the list. Can I suggest that others chime in with their thoughts. (It can be beneficial as I haven't revealed all that is on the cards.)

[Stelteck]

Relative to support unit, why not decreasing the numbers of support units to really "strategic assets". Rare. Such as heavy artillery&mortars, Heavy elite tank regiment/bataillon, etc...
Things with a substantial effects.

The common support (sappers, normal arty, DCA, ski, recon, construction) are part of all HQ, so it is more tedious than interesting to manage them.
They can be removed, or mixed with the default table of equipment of HQ. It is not interesting to manage them.

[NotOneStepBack]

The support unit system is great in WITE. The way to administer it is not. I think a lot of it is the GUI. Could there be a screen to simply list all the support units and then tell them where to go by one click or drag and dropping?

[Stelteck]

ORIGINAL: NotOneStepBack

The support unit system is great in WITE. The way to administer it is not. I think a lot of it is the GUI. Could there be a screen to simply list all the support units and then tell them where to go by one click or drag and dropping?

Maybe a way to define template and assign a standard set to all HQ according to their level ?

[speedyglides]

Completely agree. GUI needs to allow a general picture of SUs distribution so decisions can be made having a global picture and, at the same time, change SUs from unit to unit with 1-2 clicks. A table would be a good solution, where even the type of unit (Art, AA, AT, eng, etc.) could be better differentiated.

[EwaldvonKleist]

My idea: Give player full control of rail construction units so they work like mini FBDs/NKPs units. Automatic commitment only for emergency partisan repair

For the rest:
-create a single table containing all support units with information about type, current superior unit (either HQ or ground combat unit), whether they are eligible for further reattachments and maybe a few stats. From here, they can be assigned.
-support units can be reassigned for free multiple times per turn, if they not yet had the chance to be involved in a battle (support units attached to a fighting HQ, which had the chance to be commited but weren't, will be counted as locked on this way). This avoids exploiting of the support units rules
-if you change nothing in your turn, every support unit will remain in place
-a national support unit pool allows safe storage of support units so they can't be committed by mistake
-the single table makes reassigning much easier, because now you can easily filter for all heavy siege gun support units and attach them for your assault on sevastopol. If there is a misclick, you can easily undo it because of unlimited reassignment until the unit had the chance to fight
-if you want to skip the micromanagement, a template function allows the configuration of standard setups for Panzer Korps, Infantry Corps, Army HQs etc. which the AI will try to reach. This system is easier than the current "support level" system, but at the same time offers more possibilities and flexibility.

Edit: Red Lancer pointed out, that reassignement will have logistics cost. This does not change my proposal, it just makes reassignin a unit multiple times less attractive.

[RedLancer]

I ought to highlight that in the new system moving SUs has in impact on logistics and costs freight (like replacements). There is no magical movement of SUs across the map.