Play along with me! - Global War Solitaire AAR

[joshuamnave]

ORIGINAL: Majorball68

Zartacla, love your AAR. It is a good example of what not to do in a lot of areas [:)]

There's no doubt that I'm learning a lot while doing it. Between forcing myself to play the game out and having to justify or rationalize my choices, I'm seeing a lot of things I hadn't seen before. But I'm also trying some things I haven't tried much before - in the words of my regular gaming group, I'm "pushing buttons and pulling levers". For example, I've never been so aggressive with the British army so early. My gut has always told me that putting it in harms way when it's so small and badly outnumbered is too expensive for not a lot of gains. I still think there's a time and a place for it, but I went way overboard with it this game. I was also more willing to run Japanese units around behind Chinese lines, even unsupported. In the future, China will have to be much more careful about garrisoning things in the rear. This is also the first game I've played without partisans. On the one hand, not having to deal with partisans has been great for the axis. On the other hand, having nothing forcing me to garrison rear areas has cost me on both sides. I'm learning a lot about the give and take in the US entry system and about what options I need to take and when.

[joshuamnave]

With clear skies everywhere (except rain in the arctic), the axis powers all take land actions. Germany still needs to get some of its air moved, but more of it is now available on the eastern front. Japan needs to finish up in the Philippines and prepare for more invasions this summer. Italy would like to secure North Africa, before the Americans arrive in force. Already Italy is going to need more German support in the west.

On the 5th attempt, the Italians finally flip the French infantry in Oran. Japanese bombers are as ineffective as ever.

In Russia, german fighters down a short range Russian bomber trying to provide a little ground support. The Japanese liberate their Philippine brethren (and begin immediately slaughtering them or converting them to slave labor). MacArthur vows to return. Germany moves some air forward, and the impulse ends. Here's a fresh save.

[joshuamnave]

Things are heating up in North Africa

[joshuamnave]

The Allies may be on the offensive in Morocco and soon Algeria, but in the East it's all Italy. With the CW's ability to bring in reinforcements hampered at the moment, it shouldn't take long for Egypt to fall. Then Palestine and Syria, at which point Italy will have no problem bringing Iraq and Persia in to the war. The main concern is doing it before the US starts slapping them around too hard in the west.

[joshuamnave]

The allies could try to pass out the turn, which would give the turn a 50% chance of ending. But that's a bit dangerous now, with so much empty space in front of the northern german army. If just Russia takes an action, the turn would end on a 4 or less. Tempting, but the US would really like to move some ground units around. So the allies do not pass, and will still have a 30% chance of ending the turn.

In the western med, the allies find the Axis with enough surprise points to force a surface combat against the german and Italian convoys. This puts the Italians in north west Africa out of supply for the moment.

Having already used up the Axis fighters covering north france earlier in the turn, the British send their strat bombers over Lille and Brussels. The Russians hit Ploesti again. The total damage is 1 BP and 1 resource lost for the turn.

The Russians rail some of their newly arrived militia from central Russia toward the front lines. At a minimum, Russia needs to garrison the cities between Poland and Leningrad to slow the advance of the German war machine. Cities make nice defensive terrain that Germany can't afford to ignore since they also sit on the rail lines that Germany will rely on for supply. And speaking of supply, Germany also has to be careful not to outrun theirs, particularly in the north.

American infantry moves along the Moroccan rail line toward the Morocco/Algeria border. Back at home, ground units begin consolidating in major ports to be picked up soon.

On the southern flank, Russia continues to take pot shots at the Rumanian army when and where it can.

[joshuamnave]

Even with a roll of 6, Russia clears the hex with no losses (they made the partial odds roll). Even though it's a hex surrounded on 3 sides by the enemy, Russian generals decide the value of defending in a forest is worth it and they order the troops to occupy the hex.

Even without passing, the turn ends with a roll of a 3. Good news for the allies. In all, it was a fairly good turn for the allies. Sure, Japan accomplished their objectives for the turn, but those were relatively limited objectives. Singapore is untouched and the units in French Indochina didn't have time to send one of their number up the rails toward canton and Hong Kong. The German offensive into Russia took some mostly empty terrain in the North, made negative gains in the south, and killed a moderate to small number of Russians in the center. German and Italian uboats didn't manage to hurt British production for the turn, but Germany is down a half dozen BP's thanks to strat bombing campaigns. Italy is threatening Egypt, but the Americans have landed in North Africa, with more quickly on the way. And it was a reasonably short turn.

Here's the dead pool for the turn. Note the Finnish HQ - died along with one other Finnish unit when I rolled snake eyes against a flipped Soviet unit along the border.

[joshuamnave]

Production:
Germany, down to 34 - 3 pilots, 2 sub, Lnd (4), 2 Lnd (2), Ftr (3), 2 Ftr (2), Kesselring, Arm

Ok this is odd. I went back and double checked, and my records show that I built Kesselring last turn, but he's in my available build pool again. Even worse, I just double checked, and he's back in the force pool now, after building him (and paying the build points) but Mannerheim was built instead. When I chose to build an Inf HQ, Kesselring was the one that was removed from the force pool. It appears that this turn, he was swapped out for Mannerheim after I approved the builds, but no idea what happened to him the previous turn. I'll post a save file at the end of production if anyone wants to look into this.

Italy, 14 - Pilot, Nav (3), Lnd (3), 2 CP, Roma, Sub
Japan, 25 - 2 Pilots, 2 CVP (1), 3 CVP (2), 2 BB, CV, Hata
CW, 28 - 3 pilots, 4 CPs, 3 CVP (1), Ftr (2), Ftr (3), Lnd (4), CV, BB, CA, Terr
USA, the giant is awake... 53 - O-chit, 4 CV, Lnd (4), Lnd (3), Nav (3), 2 CVP (2), 2 Ftr (3), pilot, MacArthur, mech div
USSR, 41 - Lnd (4), Lnd (3), Ftr (3), Ftr (2), 2 pilots, arm, mech, Vatutin, 3 inf

[joshuamnave]

And now I too am experiencing the joy of this new bug. Between this and the outdated air units I have on board that can't be removed under the current version of the game, I think I need to put this AAR on hold until the next patch, at least.

It really is quite frustrating to have a $100 game that really can't be played all the way through even after a few months of patching. When did it become standard acceptable practice for game companies to release games with so many bugs, and make the people who paid full retail act as QA? It's not just Matrix, it's not just WiF, this is now standard industry procedure and I can't think of any other industry in which this would be tolerated by consumers.

/rant off.

[AxelNL]

ORIGINAL: Zartacla

Production:
Germany, down to 34 - 3 pilots, 2 sub, Lnd (4), 2 Lnd (2), Ftr (3), 2 Ftr (2), Kesselring, Arm

Ok this is odd. I went back and double checked, and my records show that I built Kesselring last turn, but he's in my available build pool again. Even worse, I just double checked, and he's back in the force pool now, after building him (and paying the build points) but Mannerheim was built instead. When I chose to build an Inf HQ, Kesselring was the one that was removed from the force pool. It appears that this turn, he was swapped out for Mannerheim after I approved the builds, but no idea what happened to him the previous turn. I'll post a save file at the end of production if anyone wants to look into this.

The picking of builds is random. When hitting the final acceptance of your builds the game does the real random drawing of units. This behaviour is documented, and prevents picking a nice unit above another by repeatingly canceling a draw inside the production window. You can off-course use the save-reload scenario to get Kesselring, but I think WiF was meant to be played using these random draws.

re: your Ozzie inf placement. I will try to run your latest savegame against the beta version of the coming release this evening, Placing units problems has been a major content in this release.

[Cad908]

ORIGINAL: AxelNL

ORIGINAL: Zartacla

Production:
Germany, down to 34 - 3 pilots, 2 sub, Lnd (4), 2 Lnd (2), Ftr (3), 2 Ftr (2), Kesselring, Arm

Ok this is odd. I went back and double checked, and my records show that I built Kesselring last turn, but he's in my available build pool again. Even worse, I just double checked, and he's back in the force pool now, after building him (and paying the build points) but Mannerheim was built instead. When I chose to build an Inf HQ, Kesselring was the one that was removed from the force pool. It appears that this turn, he was swapped out for Mannerheim after I approved the builds, but no idea what happened to him the previous turn. I'll post a save file at the end of production if anyone wants to look into this.

The picking of builds is random. When hitting the final acceptance of your builds the game does the real random drawing of units. This behaviour is documented, and prevents picking a nice unit above another by repeatingly canceling a draw inside the production window. You can off-course use the save-reload scenario to get Kesselring, but I think WiF was meant to be played using these random draws.

re: your Ozzie inf placement. I will try to run your latest savegame against the beta version of the coming release this evening, Placing units problems has been a major content in this release.

Axel,

You are correct about the random draw of the HQ for M/A 40's builds (both are INF) but Zartacla's point was that he paid for an INF HQ during J/F 40's builds. I looked through the saves and the only German INF HQ available then was Kesselring.

So from post #165 Zartacla listed:

Germany, 40 - Kesselring, 3 pilots, Seylitz, Lnd (4), Lnd (3), 3 Ftr (2), 2 subs, arm, mech, 2 inf

Then I loaded the M/A 40 turn and checked the pools for each unit and they all are in the proper pools except Kesselring.

However, doing the math I get:

3 pilots x 2 BP = 6 BP
CVL Seylitz x 2 BP (2nd Cycle) = 2 BP
LND(4) x 4 BP = 4 BP
LND(3) x 3 BP = 3 BP
3 FTR(2) x 2 BP = 6 BP
2 SUB x 1 BP = 2 BP
ARM x 6 BP = 6 BP
MECH x 5 BP = 5 BP
2 INF x 3 BP = 6 BP

So I see 40 BP spent without Kesselring and there is no saving BP in this game. Zartacla, I replicated the draws from your save game and did not see a problem. Do you recall anything odd during that particular phase?

-Rob

[joshuamnave]

No, I'm sure I made a mistake while transcribing my builds. Probably intended to build Kesselring and wrote it down, then didn't follow through. But as for the randomization after you finish building, I don't understand the rationale for that. Yes, WiF is meant to be played with random draws, but you can see them as you draw them. That may well influence the rest of your builds. For example... if Germany has a 4 pt Stuka and a 2 pt Stuka in the build pool and draws the bad bomber, Germany might decide to build a second bomber. I had been playing that way for a while and hadn't noticed that my builds were changing after I picked them.

Yes, it would be bad to be able to undo/redo builds until you got the right one. That would be a form of cheating, but no more so than manually entering the die roll, or saving/loading until you get the result you want. Or the game could just not allow you to undo builds (or require an override button) much the same way that you can't undo certain moves. But it's not a bug... just a feature I happen to find annoying

[Cad908]

Zartacla,

I finished running a parallel French surrender test from your first save. I did not replicate every action you took, but instead wanted to see if the underlying code was functioning properly. I did not debug anything, the only manipulation was determining the dice rolls.

Germany did a conventional opening conquering, Poland, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium and then invaded France proper. Italy declared on France only and occupied a factory in Southern France. The Balkans were left alone and Japan moved a few units around in China, captured a few cities but accomplished very little.

The save is set at Jul/Aug 40 Production. In the previous turn (May/Jun 40) Germany occupied Paris and held enough factories (with Italy) for France to surrender. Germany declined Vichy and France did not surrender. Now, Germany does not have a land unit is Paris so only France will be offered to surrender. This reflects the situation in France from your game and with the notes you posted.

In every test the code works without issue. I tried a surrender / non-surrender sequence and then went back to the previous turn and installed a Vichy regime and/or French surrender and they all are proper.

The save is attached, but I have been testing with a Beta release. You might have to wait until Steve releases the next version, but when you get a chance try running it through once. Quite honestly I hope it crashes as that will give us something to pursue. If it does not, then I am out of ideas.

-Rob

[joshuamnave]

I can't open your save using version 1.09.

[Cad908]

ORIGINAL: Zartacla

No, I'm sure I made a mistake while transcribing my builds. Probably intended to build Kesselring and wrote it down, then didn't follow through. But as for the randomization after you finish building, I don't understand the rationale for that. Yes, WiF is meant to be played with random draws, but you can see them as you draw them. That may well influence the rest of your builds. For example... if Germany has a 4 pt Stuka and a 2 pt Stuka in the build pool and draws the bad bomber, Germany might decide to build a second bomber. I had been playing that way for a while and hadn't noticed that my builds were changing after I picked them.

Yes, it would be bad to be able to undo/redo builds until you got the right one. That would be a form of cheating, but no more so than manually entering the die roll, or saving/loading until you get the result you want. Or the game could just not allow you to undo builds (or require an override button) much the same way that you can't undo certain moves. But it's not a bug... just a feature I happen to find annoying

Yes, and that "feature" has caused confusion for most of the new Beta testers, including this one. I posted a long bug report about this during my first few weeks on the project, which the veterans quickly shot full of holes. [8|] However, I did identify several production glitches, which Steve quickly fixed, so the effort was not a total waste.

Ancient history but every tester, and now customer, has aspects of the interface they do not like (Production Planning anyone? [X(]). Steve did fix many, but its the old story of limited time and resources. Probably not a good answer to questions on why the interface is not "better", but that is the reality of MWiF.

Take care,

-Rob

[Cad908]

ORIGINAL: Zartacla

I can't open your save using version 1.09.

Rats, I was afraid of that. There is no way for me to go back and reset it on my system, so could you try this after the next version is uploaded? You will be able to load it then without any problem.

Thanks,

-Rob

[AxelNL]

Rob - thanks for diving into this. I am still steaming from another thread and was too fast in drawing conclusions.

Zartacla - to share some experience: as a relative new betatester (started 2 months before release) I ran into the same experience as you recently. Even so, I bought this heavyweight, paying more than full price, in Essen. I see where it is heading, I want to support it and I enjoy being part of the journey (except for that one thread I already mentioned). Having followed Steve's monthly report for over 4 years is perhaps part of my drive.

Enjoying your AAR immensely - will try to support you when I can, but I think Rob has the same inclination and beat me to it!

About the missing HQ. I had an experience when in a hot seat session with a friend he moved a fast panzer into a marsh without flipping, destroying my carefully placed front. I spent quite a bit of time researching what went wrong and discovered in the end I was playing without the motorised rule. The game was right. Too much exposure to bugs is not good, as your first reaction in such cases is that it must be a bug. I am sure that will pass, and than we have an engine which helps us through the rules - even if we don't like individual ones. Luckely there are many options to choose from.

Anyhow - the next version is not far from us. Will enjoy you picking up your saga again. Am interested how you will deal with the Gibraltar/north Africa situation and the Russian slaughterhouse.

[joshuamnave]

ORIGINAL: AxelNL

Anyhow - the next version is not far from us. Will enjoy you picking up your saga again. Am interested how you will deal with the Gibraltar/north Africa situation and the Russian slaughterhouse.

I think there's an interesting dynamic at work. In some ways, the Axis are doing very well - China is out of the game, the US is behind on builds, the Royal Navy is nowhere near what it should be. At the same time, the Japanese could have done so much more with a surprise impulse (I think, although my inexperience makes it hard for me to judge), and the US troops landing in morocco without a strong Axis garrison in north Africa, combined with a late and weak Barbarossa will make things interesting. The Axis position in North Africa is further hampered by the inability to trace supply through each other's convoys, but now that the med is shut that should be less of an issue.

[joshuamnave]

ORIGINAL: AxelNL


Zartacla - to share some experience: as a relative new betatester (started 2 months before release) I ran into the same experience as you recently. Even so, I bought this heavyweight, paying more than full price, in Essen. I see where it is heading, I want to support it and I enjoy being part of the journey (except for that one thread I already mentioned). Having followed Steve's monthly report for over 4 years is perhaps part of my drive.

I more or less knew it would be this buggy when I bought it as well. A lot of my frustration, as I alluded to in another post, is directed at the industry as a whole. I don't understand how it is that the entire industry can get away with pushing incomplete and/or defective products and charging what really amount to legions of beta testers full market for the product. The ones who wait 6 months or a year pay a fraction of the cost and get a more complete product. It's a trend that seems to be getting worse, not better. So I don't blame Steve, or the beta testers, but since the bean counters who demand the games get released ready or not aren't ever on the forums, it's usually the front line people that get the abuse.

[AxelNL]

ORIGINAL: Zartacla

ORIGINAL: AxelNL


Zartacla - to share some experience: as a relative new betatester (started 2 months before release) I ran into the same experience as you recently. Even so, I bought this heavyweight, paying more than full price, in Essen. I see where it is heading, I want to support it and I enjoy being part of the journey (except for that one thread I already mentioned). Having followed Steve's monthly report for over 4 years is perhaps part of my drive.

I more or less knew it would be this buggy when I bought it as well. A lot of my frustration, as I alluded to in another post, is directed at the industry as a whole. I don't understand how it is that the entire industry can get away with pushing incomplete and/or defective products and charging what really amount to legions of beta testers full market for the product. The ones who wait 6 months or a year pay a fraction of the cost and get a more complete product. It's a trend that seems to be getting worse, not better. So I don't blame Steve, or the beta testers, but since the bean counters who demand the games get released ready or not aren't ever on the forums, it's usually the front line people that get the abuse.

The first Windows releases last century are the biggest examples. Time-to-market is however not a particular bean counter drive. Marketeers worrying about market share are a bigger force.

[Centuur]

Marketeers... Often they don't know what they are doing. Market share isn't everything as any financial guy will tell you. It's all about profits and maximising them. Sometimes it is better to have a lesser market share than a bigger one...