Matrix Games Forums

Thats not right. The 1941 Campaign is 225 turns. Looks like a typo.

Trey

ORIGINAL: jjax

Maybe it's early morning fog, but please do not tell me this item from the product page is true

10 scenarios range in length from 10 turns to 25 turns

10 scenarios....very good, the longest scenario is 25 turns...not so much. Somehow I suspect it should be over 200.

ORIGINAL: Lützow

ORIGINAL: randallw

It seems to me that the admin points system could be a major bottleneck in getting a player's forces into the fight.  Is this something a real theatre commander would have to deal with, to this level of constriction?

Why? According to beta testers it's not as initiative rolls in WbtS, but works rather like admin points in WitP. That concerns at least the Axis side, while the Sovjets also need those points for production purpose. Finding the right balance between a maximum of freedom, while, on the other hand, not blowing up Russian forces too much might be a challenge though and will become subject to arguments once WitE is released.

The one gripe I have about Gary's desing concepts is, that he wanted to attract casual gamers with his later releases. The WaW series was an epic fail from a grognard's perspective, WbtS had become a better game again, but wore out too fast due to restrictions, pace and lack of details. However, people still play Steel Panthers and WitP AE marks the pinnacle of wargaming. I hope 2by3 learned from this.

Maybe they did, but you do know that 2by3 didn't do most of the work on WITP-AE? Henderson Field Designs (I believe that is the name) is the company that deserves much praise.

ORIGINAL: el hefe

Thats not right. The 1941 Campaign is 225 turns. Looks like a typo.

Trey

ORIGINAL: jjax

Maybe it's early morning fog, but please do not tell me this item from the product page is true

10 scenarios range in length from 10 turns to 25 turns

10 scenarios....very good, the longest scenario is 25 turns...not so much. Somehow I suspect it should be over 200.

No typo - I think the game distinguishes between short scenarios and longer campaigns (eg Road to Moscow is a scenario, whereas the Grand Campaign lasts for the whole 4 years at 52 weeks per year). Now playing that by email to the very end will be a labour of love! I look forward to defending to the last in Berlin with my trusty ear and stomach volksgrenadier battalion and a couple of panzerfausts.

I just thought that most of the monster wargames i've had they did not have admin points required to activate reinforcements and shuffle leaders.

When we first started testing admin points were high. We found that unhistorical events occured. We tweaked down, then down agian, and now at the level its at. Trust me its another brilliant addition that other games dont have in order to make the game more historical.

best regards, well, anyway, in virtue of the main game's page, there will be an scenario editor, so, i guess, the admin. points may or will be some that the players will be capable of change/tweak from the scenario editor, i do it, well, example given, with war between the states, increasing initiative and commander's ratings and unit's movement, well, modding, some not needed with a good scenario editor,
 
with best regards,
 
Murat30.

ORIGINAL: Murat30

best regards, well, anyway, in virtue of the main game's page, there will be an scenario editor, so, i guess, the admin. points may or will be some that the players will be capable of change/tweak from the scenario editor, i do it, well, example given, with war between the states, increasing initiative and commander's ratings and unit's movement, well, modding, some not needed with a good scenario editor,

with best regards,

Murat30.

You don't need the editor to change admin points, it's an option at game start.

best greetings, thanks for the advice, i was about to ask the question if the game will have the "set-up" new game main menu that makes even more better previous Gary Grigsby titles, "A world divided" and "war between the states", so, i guess, there will be some options from that, what is great, i just love these main menu customization options from previous titles, so, thanks again for the great advice about it, as for a german "free set-up", it may be done from the editor and then saved as a starting alternate position, as in "Advanced Tactics", in example.
 
with best regards,
 
Murat30.

Looking forward to the imminent release now, there is one more question which comes to mind. I still don't see why everybody call it a monster game. WitP was a monster, as well as BtR in regard to both of the grand campaigns, and so are some of the large TOAW East Front scenarios, like Direktive 21 and Fite. But what in particular makes WitE 'monster'? Is it the length of 200+ turns, the Sovjet production? The latter one merely concerns one side and reading through all these AAR's I receive the impression that logistic and micromanagement aren't that labor-intensive here. Obviously one can switch divisions between HQ's and re-attach support units, but that is linked to available admin points and hence subject to restrictions.

Talking from the Axis perspective, and aside of the fact that 2by3 usually delivers a well-thought-out ruleset, what makes this game so outstanding? That's not meant as critics and I'm going to buy WitE the minute it get released. However, I don't want to talk myself into a hype either and with the current level of information it rather looks like a medium TOAW classic scenario in terms of comprehensiveness. While 'monster' doesn't necessarily stand for 1k+ counters to move at every turn, for me it implies a plethora of available details and stats which are not just for watching, but have to be taken meticulous into consideration for planning actions. There are two ways to deal with these details from a developers side. The kind of it got treated in WitP and - as negative example - what Pd made in Victoria 2. V2 still has a similar detail-level as the predecessor, but it's just meaningless fluff anymore and can be ignored for the most part, since the the altered game mechanic restricts direct player influence.

Wish I could participate on the dev chat but that will become unfortunately too late for me.

I think the term "Monster" game is a throw back to the era of boardgames produced by SPI and GDW in the mid-late 70's. Certainly Joel refers to SPI's War in the East as being a major inspiration for GGWITE.

As to what make the game so outstanding, I think you will find everyone who has played the game, i.e. the testers will each have a different aspect that they find outstanding. For some it will be the dynamic TOE's that recreate the evolution of the 2 armies from the very different fighting forces they were at the beginning and end of the war, for others it will be the logistics system, others the command and control system and for others it will be the ability to appoint their favourite general to OKH/Stavka and see what direct influence they can have on the outcome of campaigns.

Personally, I find the commander's report to be a truly outstanding feature, but then I'm anally retentive, and can spend days just analysing the data and using it to figure out better ways to use my units and leaders.

To me the simplest explanation of monster is the size and scope of the game, represented in size of map, number of turns, and number of units. This game has a 25,000 hex map, 225 turn campaign game, and hundreds if not thousands of units per side. That's a monster to me. Those are all traditional boardgame measurements. With computer games you can look at the detail side of things as well, and in this game you have that too (units composed of individual aircraft, AFV's, guns and squads, and lots of details and options to be chosen).

Do replacements for airborne units come from the same rifle/infantry replacement pool that infantry/armor units draw from?  I would think that perhaps they would be different, though some would call this nitpicky.

Also, do the separate Axis countries have separate production/replacement rates, both for infantry and equipment?  What about overlapping equipment types?

ORIGINAL: randallw

Do replacements for airborne units come from the same rifle/infantry replacement pool that infantry/armor units draw from?  I would think that perhaps they would be different, though some would call this nitpicky.

Also, do the separate Axis countries have separate production/replacement rates, both for infantry and equipment?  What about overlapping equipment types?

Replacements come from the same pool, but they lower experience of the unit, and the unit must have a minimum level of experience to be able to paradrop.

Each Axis country has it's own production and replacement rates. Some German equipment will be exported to Allied countries as it was historically.

Can someone provide a few more details about building fortified zones/areas? I understand that they cost APs, but what about personnel/equipment? Are these drained off replacements/reserve pool? From the AARs, building forts dosen't seem to be very popular. It must not be very worthwhile. Are there other ways of building prepared positions behind your line to fall back on, as was often done historically?

Hello all!

I continue to eagerly await the release of the most highly anticipated wargame of the last few years. At least, for me!

In any case, I was wondering about a few things:

1) Firstly, I was interested  in how the game engine handles 'booty' troops. Available Soviet manpower was highly affected by the ebb and flow of the strategic battlefield. In 1941 and 1942, the Soviet Union lost access to areas containing up to 60 million of its citizens, in the face of the German advance - and, obviously, was not able to tap into that pool for military manpower. Later on, in 1943 and 1944, as these areas were recovered, there was an enormous influx of 'booty' troops. Men who were recruited from the liberated regions to serve in the RKKA (Red Army). In many units, 'booty' troops came to constitute almost 15% of personnel.

Does the game simulate the decrease/increase in manpower based on the loss and recovery of strategic centers and areas? Further, does it also simulate the fact that millions chose to abandon their homes and flee eastwards, instead of staying in areas about to fall to the Axis -  that is to say, is the manpower simulation nuanced enough to include such variables?

2) Is the editor based on modifying a 'stock' database, or is it simply a means to produce 'scenarios' with individual datasets? In other words, if I wanted to create a number of scenarios based on the same, modified dataset, is that possible? Or would I have to reproduce the data in each subsequent scenario?  

Hi all,
 
Very looking forward to this......
 
Question regarding Tutorial/small/easy scenario's.
 
Just thinking first off I'll definitetly be trying something small to get used to things. Could you tell me if there's a tutorial or what small scenario's lend themsleces to learning the game? Also which side would you assume is best to learn with? Maybe Axis on small scenarios or Russians in Grand Campaign......
 
Thanks

i are not a developer or beta developer, but i think there are one tutorial scenario in the main menu, about the velikie luky battle theme, i have read some about it before, hope it helps to some degree,

best regards,

murat30.

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Hi all,

Very looking forward to this......

Question regarding Tutorial/small/easy scenario's.

Just thinking first off I'll definitetly be trying something small to get used to things. Could you tell me if there's a tutorial or what small scenario's lend themsleces to learning the game? Also which side would you assume is best to learn with? Maybe Axis on small scenarios or Russians in Grand Campaign......

Thanks

Martin, there is tutorial (quite big) in documentation as well as plethora of small(er) scenarios to try first!

I think you will like the WitE... [:)]


Leo "Apollo11"

Velikiye Luki - teaches basics and has step by step written tutorial to accompany it.
Road to Minsk - 3 turns for Axis to refine "Blitzkrieg" techniques, to make maximum use of early bonuses.

The other "Road to" scenarios look at each Sector - North Centre and South, and allow both sides to practice attacking and defensive techniques. Road to Moscow and and Road to Dtown (can't spell Dneprt...) are hypothetical scenarios exploring the options of 2nd Panzer Group not being sent South.

Operation Typhoon is a "mini" campaign, as all 4 weather conditions are experienced, and both sides get to attack and defend.

Before taking on a full-length campaign, I would recommend the following route:
Velikiye Luki
Road to Minsk
Road to X
Operation Typhoon

It is important that the Axis player has experienced Blizzard conditions before taking on a 1941 campaign PBEM, preferably the full 12 turns rather than just the 5 turns in Operation Typhoon.

Does the game simulate the decrease/increase in manpower based on the loss and recovery of strategic centers and areas? Further, does it also simulate the fact that millions chose to abandon their homes and flee eastwards, instead of staying in areas about to fall to the Axis -  that is to say, is the manpower simulation nuanced enough to include such variables?

Yes, manpower changes/movements are well modelled.