Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: PyleDriver

Well theres been some talk among us testers of our desire to go ito a "War in the West" game after this. Agian it's us talking, not Gary and Joel, who make the choices...There are alot of reasons why we should and I've voiced them. We have the engine in place, and the thousands of hours behind us perfecting it. Once were complete with this, give us a great map agian, and the hard part begins, research. I think theres better info out there on the west also. Even the naval aspect Gary took care of in WitP...So one step at a time, and as Jim said and I will reinforce, I would like to see a "War in Europe" in my lifetime...

ORIGINAL: bjfagan

I miss the many hours of playing Fire In The East and Scorched Earth, so I can't wait for this game to come out. The maps and counters look great, btw.

I am curious though... considering how the map cuts off the northern part of Finland, how is the battle for Murmansk factored in? If at all.

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

It's a lack of resources versus the return. To include the area to the north, we would have had to add a huge number of hexes to the map. The map already has 183 by 140 hexes (25,620 hexes), and we really didn't want to add on another 45 rows to the map (another 8,235 hexes) just to get Murmansk into the game. Funny that no one mentions Iran, the source of 70% of the lend lease (not sure of that, but I think that Murmansk was small compared to Iran and the Pacific routes). Also, with large amounts going through the Pacific route, Murmansk was not the the huge factor that some of you are making it out to be. Would it be better if we included Murmansk? Yes, but we think not by much, and all games have trade-offs. We felt the cost for adding Murmansk (art, code, memory, testing, balance) was too much relative to the benefits gained.

It's a lack of resources versus the return. To include the area to the north, we would have had to add a huge number of hexes to the map. The map already has 183 by 140 hexes (25,620 hexes), and we really didn't want to add on another 45 rows to the map (another 8,235 hexes) just to get Murmansk into the game. Funny that no one mentions Iran, the source of 70% of the lend lease (not sure of that, but I think that Murmansk was small compared to Iran and the Pacific routes). Also, with large amounts going through the Pacific route, Murmansk was not the the huge factor that some of you are making it out to be. Would it be better if we included Murmansk? Yes, but we think not by much, and all games have trade-offs. We felt the cost for adding Murmansk (art, code, memory, testing, balance) was too much relative to the benefits gained.

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

It's a lack of resources versus the return. To include the area to the north, we would have had to add a huge number of hexes to the map. The map already has 183 by 140 hexes (25,620 hexes), and we really didn't want to add on another 45 rows to the map (another 8,235 hexes) just to get Murmansk into the game. Funny that no one mentions Iran, the source of 70% of the lend lease (not sure of that, but I think that Murmansk was small compared to Iran and the Pacific routes). Also, with large amounts going through the Pacific route, Murmansk was not the the huge factor that some of you are making it out to be. Would it be better if we included Murmansk? Yes, but we think not by much, and all games have trade-offs. We felt the cost for adding Murmansk (art, code, memory, testing, balance) was too much relative to the benefits gained.

Why would we mention Iran? There was no realistic plan to attack Iran, whilst there was a war on around Murmansk. You're saying that an active combat zone is not on the map, using as an excuse that a country that wasn't even entered by the Axis isn't on the map either and that most of the Lend-Lease was shipped through there. That's a pretty poor excuse. You can't really blame us for asking for an important part of the fighting on the northern front that just isn't on the map and we can do nothing about to resolve in our favour.

The Caucasus and, I believe, all major ports around the Caspian Sea are on the map, so we can cut those off, forcing the Soviets to move supply overland through what is now Turkmenistan and Kazachstan. In short: the Axis player could lower the Lend-Lease coming from Iran with what's on the map.

If those over 8000 hexes would be added, the map of the relevant portions of the Soviet Union would be complete. Currently, it isn't as an important portion of the northern front is missing.

Moreover, the capture of Murmansk and Leningrad would've allowed several German elite divisions to move to other duties and the frontline to wheel south. Parts of the Finnish army could demobilize, lowering the strain on the Finnish economy whilst possibly strengthening the remaining Finnish forces and fewer Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine assets would be needed in Norway. The capture of Murmansk and Leningrad would've offered the Axis a lot more initial benefits as, say, the capture of Stalingrad or even the success of the 1942 summer offensive.