Matrix Games Forums

This game has nothing in common with HOI3 nor would I want it to. (That game permanently ruined Paradox so far as I'm concerned. They are dead to me.) It is grognard's game made by and for grognards.

The level of detail is by design. This is wargaming haute cuisine, ladies and gentlemen, if you are looking for a big mac to mindlessly snarf down here, forget it.

It may be daunting at first to deal with it, and your best bet is probably to start off with the scenarios and gradually work your way up to the campaign games. But this idea of giving objective commands to your HQs and letting the AI do the rest is a non starter and I doubt would much appeal to most of the people playing this game once they've actually started playing it. It doesn't appeal to me, anyways.

Pushing those units around is what makes the game fun, it is incredibly fluid, and presents considerable tactical challenges. Once you've gotten a taste of those panzer divisions and tank corps, they'll have to pry them out of your cold, dead fingers.

Needless to say, I was not expressing a hope that WitE would 'be like HoI3'.  Nor was I suggesting that WitE should give the player an AI/auto-control option for his forces.  I sincerely doubt that anyone who has a serious interest in this game will be looking for 'mindless' 'Big mac'-like consumption.

Much maligned though it is, and some of it deservedly so (although the game has been improved since it was released), one of the things HoI3 does well is reflect the operational element of the war.  It does this in an abstracted way that is not likely to satisfy a self-described grognard.  Nevertheless, the developers of the game deserve some credit for creatively & intelligently addressing this essential aspect of strategic warfare.

I guess I fundamentally disagree with the idea that, with games as deep and complex as WitP:AE and WitE, you simply have to accept from the outset that a lot of your planning and organizing is going to be done on pen and paper.  It seems to me that there are creative ways that the UI could be developed to minimize (if not completely eliminate) the need for pen & paper, or out-of-game organizers like WitP-Staff.  I cited HoI3 and Ageod's WW1 as games that address operational organization in some helpful (but hardly perfect) ways.

I don't do any planning with pen and paper. Mileage may vary.

The game does come with a very helpful macromanagement tool called the commander's report, which can be used to globally set a lot of things, or more selectively through the use of filters. Combat and air unit modes, replacement settings, etc. It also tracks combat results, leadership status, and many other things.

You guys blow my mind. For 28 months I still play this every day, and it was ugly at the start. Hell I had another weird dream about what I should do today. The AI responded well to get supply to a huge pocket I enveloped... I can post alot SS's, however some of you still arn't on the page where were in alot of tweaking...Should I post some SS's, I'm on turn 11 in a 42 game...Hum, 8 posters will get some SS's...I'm bad huh...

"No plan survives first contact with the enemy."

This is so true in WITE too. I tried writing down which units would receive reinforcements once, but tore it up in 2 turns. You have to react on the fly to deal with attacks that don't go your way and figure out the best way of exploiting successes. The risk/reward decisions that have to be made each turn and dealing with the results of those decisions are what makes this a truly great game.

I don't think I would want an AI assistant making any of those decisions for me, however much I may want a scapegoat to blame for my next loss to Flavio!

ORIGINAL: Northern Star

This way to play the game is not implemented, and imo it will give you much less fun. The best thing to do is to control everything about ground and air combat, and then if something goes wrong search what happened and try to improve. This is the beauty of micromanagement [:)]

Well, I was only speaking about having the option, of course I would never want to take away the detail altogether.
The reasons I would welcome that option (although it is by no means important to me) would be
1) to delegate some less important duties - sometimes there are situations that don't present challenges but involve only mindless "work", like mopping up weak, cut-off enemy units or advancing against little to no resistance, and in such cases it would be actually more fun for me to be able to concentrate on the areas that count, and
2) to have a more "realistic" High Command feel. In reality a supreme leader does not move regiments around, he gives general orders and then watches how things unfold. Of course I would not want to play like this very often, but once in awhile it could be interesting, a bit like playing a football manager and watching your players play according to your instructions.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

This game has nothing in common with HOI3 nor would I want it to. (That game permanently ruined Paradox so far as I'm concerned. They are dead to me.) It is grognard's game made by and for grognards.

The level of detail is by design. This is wargaming haute cuisine, ladies and gentlemen, if you are looking for a big mac to mindlessly snarf down here, forget it.

Where does this leave me? I finally like HOI3 now ie 1 year on with Semper Fi mod, but I don't ever leave it to the AI to do anything. I am also really looking forward to this game as well. WitE seems to have the balance right ie AI control over support units but player controls which HQs have them ( the preparation for an operation?) and some flexibility eg with aircraft. Does this make me a Haute Grognard, whatever that means?

I don't want WitE to copy HOI or v versa - although I personally lament the lack of a production control option in WitE. Most of all I don't want WitE to copy HOI3 in taking a year + an extra purchase to be worth playing or even playable. Fortunately that does not seem to be something that is going to happen here.

On the other hand, WitE on the scale of HOI with production control, millions of hexes, weekly turns that take a week to do looks like a retirement dream. Oh well, it is supposed to be good to have some impossible dreams

There will be no HOI3 fiasco here. Period. The game will be playable from the getgo.

I'm gobsmacked by people wanting to compare a turn based, IGOUGO monster wargame with roots in the classic boardgames to some claptrap RTS game that plays itself, badly. These things couldn't be more different if you tried. As for HOI3's "production" model, it is beneath contempt. The game as a whole has no resemblance whatsoever to anything like WW2.

Semper Fi didn't fix the basic problems of the game. It merely made it playable. (The supply system in the game still doesn't work, imo.) Bottom line: it doesn't have anything to do with WW2 on any level save the most cosmetic. For any true wargamer who values historicity and authenticity, it's crap, plain and simple. Paradox sold out and is just chasing the buck now, there is no forgiving what they did with the initial HOI3.

I could see how an organiser, or virtual chief-of-staff of some kind, could be of use to some, especially those who are very methodical, and who would actually use an aide-mémoire/planner etc (as Mat is by using his pen and paper) - but probably not for me, and I'll try to explain why below.   (BTW, I don't know about HoI3 - although I would be interested to see how such an in game sub-programme assistant or virtual aide-de-camp would work.)

I have a fair idea of what I want to do at the strategic level, the arrows you refer to - although these are strictly broad brush and subject to revision as operations deploy.  Then I get down and dirty with the units on the ground and try and work the advantages as they present themselves without taking too many silly risks.   This idea of 'how things present themselves' is the real beauty of this game for me.    You don't know what's going on, in detail,  until you make your move - and once moved you are committed.   This is the continuing excitement and risk of the game, the gamble if you will, especially in the fluid attack.  

I am thus working at an OKH level, then down to Army Group.   I use my armies in combination within each group to mutually support one another, especially as they tend to be mobile or infantry armies, and you need them together to both create and mop up encirclements, provide flank defence, reserves etc.  Then I spend most of my time as a corps commander, working out the detail of how to take out the enemy by assault or break through, or, recently, working out the detailed defence.  This is the real business end and I really wouldn't want to delegate it - it's an art for me, not a science and the AI will simply miss opportunities.  I also enjoy deploying support units where they are needed - although I am sure I could be more methodical about this - and squeezing all the advantage I can.

I then work at the level of the army commander to ensure everyone is in supply and in command range etc, and again juggling the support, ensuring that there are reserves in the right place(that is when I don't get over excited and throw in everything I have! ...and let's face it there are times when it's a matter of the it being down to the last battalion!), filling the gaps with infantry divisions etc.

What I do mainly leave to the AI, is the air war - although even this I use directly in crucial areas.   This is to do with my learning curve (and personal interest/motivation) - I haven't needed to learn how to get the most out it, yet.   I know I will, of course, especially for PBEM - otherwise the other will have an edge over me.

The idea that I would leave the mop up or the rapid advance to the AI assistant is out of the question.   Having been stuck for an hour in the close detail of a multi-corps slogging battle, to break out into open country is a joy - it's exhilarating.   Even working out the best place to rail up and deploy your reserves is exciting!

Not long now...

Assessing the situation then forming and implementing the plan, moving your forces into position and watching the results is what wargaming is all about for me. And to have an opportunity to do so on the Steppes of Russia for the first time since Avalon Hill's Stalingrad (never got into War in Russia) is incredibly exciting to me. I simply cannot wait to get my paws on this game.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

There will be no HOI3 fiasco here. Period. The game will be playable from the getgo.

I'm gobsmacked by people wanting to compare a turn based, IGOUGO monster wargame with roots in the classic boardgames to some claptrap RTS game that plays itself, badly. These things couldn't be more different if you tried. As for HOI3's "production" model, it is beneath contempt. The game as a whole has no resemblance whatsoever to anything like WW2.

Semper Fi didn't fix the basic problems of the game. It merely made it playable. (The supply system in the game still doesn't work, imo.) Bottom line: it doesn't have anything to do with WW2 on any level save the most cosmetic. For any true wargamer who values historicity and authenticity, it's crap, plain and simple. Paradox sold out and is just chasing the buck now, there is no forgiving what they did with the initial HOI3.

1 I trust you.
2 playable is good - but clearly 'playable after 1 year' is not ideal
3 The classic boardgame had a production system too
4 I reckon I'm a true wargamer. started 40 years ago and have won championships here and in USA and played all the WWII classic AH/SPI etc inc DNO and war in Europe to death. Doesn't stop me liking HOI3 despite it's flaws. Maybe I just have Stockholm syndrome after the vanilla shambles. I like Civ series too and that isn't too historical.
5 Equally it is the historical depth behind WitE, the quality of the AARs, info in Q&As etc which mean I will buy this the day it comes out, and I'm sure it will be more than merely likeable!

Long time lurker of the forums and I have been taking an interest in this game recently. I have read several of the action reports and it looks exciting. I am a veteran gamer of many FITE/Scorched Earth games. We have played with mostly historical setup, but did a German "free setup" once.
 
I have also played many computer games over the years and could care less about how something looks as long as the AI is fairly good. I also played WIR back in the day.
 
From what I have seen, this game plays a lot like FITE, but with additional issues of logistics and also attrition is much easier to incorporate over a board game. I also consider myself a student of history and agree with the strats that PD used in both his games (IE, Leningrad should be the primary target in 1941 to disengage the German left and make a final concentrated thrust on Moscow for the 1941 game and in 1942, the Germans still needed to defeat the Russian army in the field. Hitler thought the Russians would stand and fight in the south to protect their resources; he was wrong. He attacked in the one spot the Russians could afford to give up space. Cleaning up Leningrand and then dropping the hammer on Moscow would have achieved the showdown he was after). At any rate, I digress..
 
Pretty much everything I have seen played against the AI is from the German perspective with the AI on defense. I am wondering how the AI has been doing on the attack, be it German early or Soviet later on. Unfortunately, it was fairly easy to put a stop to the Germans in WIR in 1941 to the point that even at the highest levels of difficulty, they were getting slammed well short of historical progress. The one 1943 game shown as the Soviets shows exactly what the Soviets should do and that is play the Red jello.. oozing with constant pressure against the German lines, playing meat grinder.
 
Looking forward to seeing this one come out.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

There will be no HOI3 fiasco here. Period. The game will be playable from the getgo.

I'm gobsmacked by people wanting to compare a turn based, IGOUGO monster wargame with roots in the classic boardgames to some claptrap RTS game that plays itself, badly. These things couldn't be more different if you tried. As for HOI3's "production" model, it is beneath contempt. The game as a whole has no resemblance whatsoever to anything like WW2.

Semper Fi didn't fix the basic problems of the game. It merely made it playable. (The supply system in the game still doesn't work, imo.) Bottom line: it doesn't have anything to do with WW2 on any level save the most cosmetic. For any true wargamer who values historicity and authenticity, it's crap, plain and simple. Paradox sold out and is just chasing the buck now, there is no forgiving what they did with the initial HOI3.

+1

that broken game has forced me to really research my game purchases. I like you will never buy a paradox product again. While do not expect a fantastic AI I do expect it not to self-destruct within 1 year of game play.

WitE has my vote so far and before I buy I will watch the bug reports and the general feedback on the boards. With a decent review it will open my wallet.