Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: janh

Trey, Joel, just to clarify what I think to recall from your earlier explanations:

The resources used to reconstitute these historically destroyed formations are figured into the resource pools that the German player gets, right?
(a) Meaning that if 6th is not destroyed, in essence what is happening is that he experienced formations leave, but at least the replacements can make up for the numerical loss by boosting the remainder of the Eastern Wehrmacht? So in principle you "just" loose some shells?
(b) If 6th Army were to be destroyed in your particular game, then you are going to see things happen just they way they did back then, i.e. units being rebuild from the pools before leaving. So net, no difference here?

Sounds like an alternative solution to case (a) would be if the engine would create some "extra" shells that the player could then fill or disband (in case the remainder of his units were in acceptable shape), or even better, the player could decide to built extra units.

Trey, I agree with more randomization and uncertainty, as well as the idea to have players determine which sufficiently powerful formations could be easily spared in the actual game. Ultimately I think the combat boxes in old days were a neat little idea. I am already very curious about the new boxes system in WitW!

ORIGINAL: jaw

No, Administrative Points are designed to simulate the difficulty of doing certain things like transferring units between corps/armies or organizing men and equipment into new formations (Soviet). If you delay a withdrawal then the military situation on the front that unit was supposed to go to (and almost all withdrawals are going to other fronts) will be adversely effected for every turn the unit is delayed. That adverse effect should cost you victory points not AP points.

ORIGINAL: Panzer Meyer

I think the issue many are having here is that the 6th Armee wasn't withdrawn to serve on the Western front. It was destroyed at Stalingrad and then reconstituted in the West. When several crises arose in North Africa and Italy Germany had no choice but to use those divisions to fill in the gaps. It simply made sense given their proximity to the Mediterranean theater. The problem many people have with the seemingly arbitrary withdrawal schedule is that the game makes no allowance for players who chose a different path from history. If the Axis does not suffer a "Stalingrad" like disaster in the winter of 42/43, then it makes no sense to remove the 6th army. Of course since we do not have command of all theaters, it is reasonable to siphon off strength from the eastern front to deal with developments in the west. In my opinion it would be better to have a withdrawal schedule that forces the axis player to remove X number of infantry, motorized, and panzer formations at the end of their turn.

ORIGINAL: Jeffrey H.
Another old board game era solution to the same problem. The player must withdraw a certain number of units with a certain strength at a certain time. Not specific units, just a number of the type.

ORIGINAL: Panzer Meyer

I think the issue many are having here is that the 6th Armee wasn't withdrawn to serve on the Western front. It was destroyed at Stalingrad and then reconstituted in the West. When several crises arose in North Africa and Italy Germany had no choice but to use those divisions to fill in the gaps. It simply made sense given their proximity to the Mediterranean theater. The problem many people have with the seemingly arbitrary withdrawal schedule is that the game makes no allowance for players who chose a different path from history. If the Axis does not suffer a "Stalingrad" like disaster in the winter of 42/43, then it makes no sense to remove the 6th army. Of course since we do not have command of all theaters, it is reasonable to siphon off strength from the eastern front to deal with developments in the west. In my opinion it would be better to have a withdrawal schedule that forces the axis player to remove X number of infantry, motorized, and panzer formations at the end of their turn.

ORIGINAL: Schmart

ORIGINAL: Jeffrey H.
Another old board game era solution to the same problem. The player must withdraw a certain number of units with a certain strength at a certain time. Not specific units, just a number of the type.

Man...in many ways the old board games were much easier to deal with: "Create new holding box on scrap piece of paper. Remove from board counters totaling 50 CV before March 1943." Done! No prgramming, no bugs, etc.

ORIGINAL: Panzer Meyer

ORIGINAL: Schmart

ORIGINAL: Jeffrey H.
Another old board game era solution to the same problem. The player must withdraw a certain number of units with a certain strength at a certain time. Not specific units, just a number of the type.

Man...in many ways the old board games were much easier to deal with: "Create new holding box on scrap piece of paper. Remove from board counters totaling 50 CV before March 1943." Done! No prgramming, no bugs, etc.

That's how I remember Rise and Fall of the Third Reich handling it if you played the Barbarossa scenario.

ORIGINAL: Von Hindenburg

Or both? As you say, "Administrative Points are designed to simulate the difficulty of doing certain things like transferring units between corps/armies," so why not take the axis corps/armies one step further and include axis fronts? I kind of view Victory Points as rewards for deystroying the enemy and capturing various locations but agree incentive is needed.

That aside, I do feel the front holding boxes from The Second Front and requiring AP points would be a better solution. And again, my lazy self would like a holding box for country side partisan duty with diminishing supply delivery for fewer units in this box.

ORIGINAL: el hefe

Joel will need to answer this one. I'm just not sure.

Trey

ORIGINAL: janh
Trey, Joel, just to clarify what I think to recall from your earlier explanations:

The resources used to reconstitute these historically destroyed formations are figured into the resource pools that the German player gets, right?
(a) Meaning that if 6th is not destroyed, in essence what is happening is that he experienced formations leave, but at least the replacements can make up for the numerical loss by boosting the remainder of the Eastern Wehrmacht? So in principle you "just" loose some shells?
(b) If 6th Army were to be destroyed in your particular game, then you are going to see things happen just they way they did back then, i.e. units being rebuild from the pools before leaving. So net, no difference here?

ORIGINAL: janh

For WitEurope I would hope the Axis finally gets this kind of flexibility from the get-go.

ORIGINAL: RCH

ORIGINAL: janh

For WitEurope I would hope the Axis finally gets this kind of flexibility from the get-go.

I wouldn't hold your breath. The whole theme of the game to the Axis player is, "Germany lost the war get over it." I imagine this theme will run throughout the entire series.

Design decisions made because of historical dates and nothing to do with in game situations.

Hard line no "what ifs" for the Axis side.