TOAW - A Pain in the Butt

[Karri]

Yeah, I'd be interested in examples as well because I've seen no game where you can end the turn in one area and then move into another with a similar setup as in TOAW.

[ralphtricky]

ORIGINAL: Karri

Yeah, I'd be interested in examples as well because I've seen no game where you can end the turn in one area and then move into another with a similar setup as in TOAW.

Me too, I've never been afraid to steal good ideas.

[E]

ORIGINAL: Karri

Yeah, I'd be interested in examples as well because I've seen no game where you can end the turn in one area and then move into another with a similar setup as in TOAW.

What I think he meant was that you can use up all your move/attack points for all units, every turn. I.e. Move & attack with units 1-20 in the north part of any scenario. Then be able to move & attack with units 21-40 in the south part of the same hypothetical scenario. _Then_, end your turn. What he doesn't appear to want is the current situation, where you can only attack with so many units either in the north or south or both, before your turn automatically ends.

Currently, the game runs a bit like Grigsby's Panzer Strike (et al) with "limited orders" turned on (although Grigsby's incarnation was a set number of orders per side, versus TOAW's variable number of orders). He wants the ability to turn that off so you can issue orders until no one has any points left to use.

[Abnormalmind]

I've never quite seen my opinion before, so here it is. I think TOAW's play style is what sets it apart from the rest of the pack. It limits the "do everything" and end the turn style, which if you pardon one guy's opinion, has been beat to death in almost every board wargame and most computer wargames. The move and attack, rinse and repeat, ad nauseum routine is quite old. I've consider TOAW an initiative-style game, similar to the old Empire rules for Napoleonic miniatures, but with its own twist. The game feels like you are taking the initiative for a period of time, and when that runs its course, your opponent gets their initiative phase. The old move and attack component is still experienced, but overall you generally are unable to move and attack with everything since your side will lose the initiative eventually! The extra dimension of losing your initiative prior to accomplishing your turn's goal is truly remarkable, and should never been undone.

Well, that's one guy's lousy opinion.

[Zaratoughda]

The 'theater' approach was the designer could define 'theaters' and each formation would start the game assigned to a particular theater and the player could re-assign formations and individual units to this theater or that. Then, if you moved some units and attacked the MP loss reduction would only be applied to the units of that theatre.

So, in the Weserubung scenario the designer could define the 'Narvik' theater and assign the formations and/or units that operated in that area to that theater, and the player could then handle everything in that area and then move on to other 'theaters' (e.g. Stavenger, Oslo, etc).

In the WAW scenario, the designer could define a Russian theater and a Western Allies theater, then the western allies and Russian players could do their turns indepentantly rather than having to do all movement first, then resolve all combat, etc. You might also break down the Western Allies into French, British, American, etc.... whatever the designer chooses and, the designer could probably leave some choices to the players.

As far as the poster that wanted to know of any games where you could end the turn in one area before moving on to the next... not sure where he was coming from... I don't beleve anyone talked about actually ending the turn so... maybe he didn't read the previous posts very good.

Zaratoughda

[E]

ORIGINAL: Abnormalmind

I've never quite seen my opinion before, so here it is. I think TOAW's play style is what sets it apart from the rest of the pack.

Originally, it's ability to "do everything" is what set it apart from the pack. But currently, I think you're right, being as the "construction-kit-minded" crowd has dwindled over the years.

ORIGINAL: Abnormalmind
The move and attack, rinse and repeat, ad nauseum routine is quite old.

For me, I still like that in many games.

ORIGINAL: Abnormalmind
I've consider TOAW an initiative-style game,

I like that analogy, holes and all.

I personally have no problem with the current way things work. I've always taken it to simulate and/or encompass a lot of intangibles and really adds to the "fog of war" (which most people think only applies to locating the enemy. Which in and of itself is usually true in wargaming contexts).

[Zaratoughda]

What sets TOAW apart from other games more than anything else, is it's ability to simulate ANY operational conflict in the history of the planet (hmmm... doubt there is anyone from other planets reading these forums... but you never know. Who, me?).

However, the biggest problem that TOAW has, is it is not a fun game to play (except for micromanagement freaks). There are LOTS of players that have both TOAW and Advanced Tactics, and the general consensus is that TOAW is the better game historically but AT is the more fun game to play.

Also, there are various other problems that TOAW has besides the 'staggering attacks' problem.... 'ants blocking retreats'... 'no chain of command'.... 'rivers running through hexes rather than hexsides'.... etc, etc, etc.

So, IMO TOAW is worth having, if for nothing else to bring up and look at all the scenarios that have been done for it but... uh, I and a lot of others find it more frustrating than fun to actually play.

Zaratoughda

P.S. Trying to play the Weserubung scenario really got to me re the 'staggering attacks' problem. So, it has a much more severe impact there but, the same problem is there in all scenarios, though with lesser impact.

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: E
I personally have no problem with the current way things work.

me too neither.

[erichswafford]

Dude, you somehow missed out on about 10 years of wargaming history. I'm talking about Korsun Pocket et al. The latest is Kharkov: Disaster on the Donets. These are fantastic operational level wargames. You are truly in for a treat if this is your first notice of them. They cover most of the major theaters (East, northwest Europe aka Normandy, Bulge, Italy/Sicily). There's also a wonderful mod called On to Moscow that covers Typhoon (most important operation IMHO). You can find additional scenarios at run5 (http://www.ssg.com.au/).

http://www.matrixgames.com/products/358 ... the.Donets

ORIGINAL: Zaratoughda

So, what are the SSG games you are talking about? I had some experience with the SSG command/control in games like 'Decisive Battles of the American Civil War' and, was not impressed (but, of course others liked those).

Yeah, I am waiting for WiTE to get released this coming summer.. but would be interested in looking at other possibilities.

Zaratoughda

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

ORIGINAL: E
I personally have no problem with the current way things work.

me too neither.

Guys, don't take this the wrong way, but - do you still work full time? I'm a physician and though I'm as dedicated a wargamer as you'll find (I actually buy games just to keep the publishers in business), I've only ever slogged through a few turns of, for example, Barbarossa 41.

Don't misunderstand me. I love to just load up the scenarios and marvel at the research that went into them (remember McBride's monsters?). But play them? Seriously? You mean you're actually going to go all the way up the entire Eastern Front, moving units just a bit, scheduling attacks, execute, then repeat maybe 2-4 times per phase? With about 400 units, you're talking a full-time job there.

[E]

ORIGINAL: Zaratoughda

However, the biggest problem that TOAW has, is it is not a fun game to play (except for micromanagement freaks).

Ignoring the faux pas, you seem to imply the game would be more fun with less micromanagement, but it sounded like your biggest complaint is that the game won't let you manage more of your units in every turn?

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: kondor999
With about 400 units, you're talking a full-time job there.

I'm playing a game of FITE with Dave right now and there's 1,000+ units for each side and my first turn to him took me about 24 hours to do because there was about 5 combat rounds. But it was a micromanagers labor of love.

[erichswafford]

I think the issue is that an incredible amount of manual counter-moving is needed per turn. Far more than any other game...ever. You're talking to someone who once set up Guderian's Blitzkrieg II (don't ask how much it cost on eBay) in his office and played it solitaire for months, so I'm no dilettante! But I was really hoping the computer would reduce the workload of the old monsters - not replicate it.

Still, I will always love TOAW. I just wish there were some way to retain 90% of it's accuracy while losing 50% of the minutia. My feeling is that some sort of phasing system that is less granular could work.

Instead of 10 phases, make it about 3. Call them Recon, Engage, and Exploit. The OCS series (of which the aforementioned Guderian's Blitzkrieg II is the best example) had a system something like that. And it's generally considered to be the most accurate operational level wargaming system thus far. Certainly, it felt exactly right and gave historical results.

ORIGINAL: E

ORIGINAL: Zaratoughda

However, the biggest problem that TOAW has, is it is not a fun game to play (except for micromanagement freaks).

Ignoring the faux pas, you seem to imply the game would be more fun with less micromanagement, but it sounded like your biggest complaint is that the game won't let you manage more of your units in every turn?

[ralphtricky]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

ORIGINAL: kondor999
With about 400 units, you're talking a full-time job there.

I'm playing a game of FITE with Dave right now and there's 1,000+ units for each side and my first turn to him took me about 24 hours to do because there was about 5 combat rounds. But it was a micromanagers labor of love.

These guys are on turn 76 so far.
http://www.si-games.com/forums/showthre ... 84&page=52
http://www.si-games.com/forums/showthre ... 86&page=16

I do want to put in the capability to allow 'Elmer' the AI to take over some of the formations. I'd love to play some of the monster scenarios, but I don't have the time. I figure that if I give the big orders and he carries them out, we've got a chance against 'them'[:D]

Ralph

[E]

ORIGINAL: kondor999

Guys, don't take this the wrong way, but - do you still work full time?

Not presently. but when I was, I usually got one (and sometimes two!) day(s) off a week. *grin*

ORIGINAL: kondor999
I'm a physician

How do you get the time to even load a scenario to look at?!?

ORIGINAL: kondor999
Don't misunderstand me. I love to just load up the scenarios and marvel at the research that went into them (remember McBride's monsters?). But play them? Seriously? You mean you're actually going to go all the way up the entire Eastern Front, moving units just a bit, scheduling attacks, execute, then repeat maybe 2-4 times per phase? With about 400 units, you're talking a full-time job there.

Besides the fact there are smaller scenarios all over the place, there is this thing called a "save game" function. *big grin*

But, I do know what you mean... *wink*

[ralphtricky]

ORIGINAL: E

ORIGINAL: kondor999
I'm a physician

How do you get the time to even load a scenario to look at?!?

I'll second that. I don't know how many people remember Tom vs Bruce (was that CGW?) but they have a podcast now. http://threemovesahead.libsyn.com/

That came to mind because Bruce is a Neurosurgeon and was talking about his busy schedule recently.

Ralph

[Zaratoughda]

ORIGINAL: kondor999

Dude, you somehow missed out on about 10 years of wargaming history. I'm talking about Korsun Pocket et al. The latest is Kharkov: Disaster on the Donets. These are fantastic operational level wargames. You are truly in for a treat if this is your first notice of them. They cover most of the major theaters (East, northwest Europe aka Normandy, Bulge, Italy/Sicily). There's also a wonderful mod called On to Moscow that covers Typhoon (most important operation IMHO). You can find additional scenarios at run5 (http://www.ssg.com.au/).

Actually, I was indeed away from wargaming for almost 15 years having gotten back into it a few years ago. But, I had seen the games you mention and, a consideration from my perspective... was just curious as to exactly what games you were talking about and if it was something I had missed.

Zaratoughda

[Zaratoughda]

E.... if you want to undestand what I am talking about re the 'staggering attacks' problem, just read back in the thread and see if you can understand what I am saying.

If you still don't get it... try again if you are so inclined but, no, I am not gonna try to explain it all over again.

Zaratoughda

P.S. Really, I posted my comments here and Ralph and the TOAW community can take them or leave them... their call. Moved on but then someone posts something agreeing with me and... sheesh... the whole thing starts all over again... including those asking me to explain my comments all over again. Guess it is best if I do NOT COMMENT on this subject again. Otherwise, a waste of my time.

[E]

ORIGINAL: Zaratoughda

E.... if you want to undestand what I am talking about re the 'staggering attacks' problem, just read back in the thread and see if you can understand what I am saying.

No, that's not what I asked about at all. I was talking about your wanting to do more managing per turn, but disliking micromanaging. I thought I understood your original post enough to try and clarify it. But your seemingly contradictory later statement proved me clueless. Not real important that I understand. I'm personally happy with the game as is.

TOAW is not for everyone. No game is. We've all worn the "this-isn't-what-I-hoped/thought-I-was-paying-for" hat. But the tricky part is that if we wear it outside, we often find that everyone else is using an umbrella at that moment. *grin*

[Karri]

ORIGINAL: E

ORIGINAL: Karri

Yeah, I'd be interested in examples as well because I've seen no game where you can end the turn in one area and then move into another with a similar setup as in TOAW.

What I think he meant was that you can use up all your move/attack points for all units, every turn. I.e. Move & attack with units 1-20 in the north part of any scenario. Then be able to move & attack with units 21-40 in the south part of the same hypothetical scenario. _Then_, end your turn. What he doesn't appear to want is the current situation, where you can only attack with so many units either in the north or south or both, before your turn automatically ends.

Currently, the game runs a bit like Grigsby's Panzer Strike (et al) with "limited orders" turned on (although Grigsby's incarnation was a set number of orders per side, versus TOAW's variable number of orders). He wants the ability to turn that off so you can issue orders until no one has any points left to use.

Okay....so what happens at the portion where the two theathers meet? What about air units? Naval units? Say I have two theathers that meet at hex x. I then have units in hex z and y. I first use the whole turn to attack the enemy in it's hex which is in theather z, these units now have zero movement. I then expoit the attack by moving units from theather y which have not moved at all. This would make no sense. And do remember that the theathers HAVE to meet somewhere.

[E]

ORIGINAL: Karri

ORIGINAL: E

ORIGINAL: Karri

Yeah, I'd be interested in examples as well...

What I think he meant was...

Okay....so what happens at the portion where...

I dunno... (if you read the rest of the thread you'll find I really didn't have any idea what he wants, and further that I'm happy with the game as-is. read: I've given up my translating position! *grin*)