ORIGINAL: Walloc
ORIGINAL: Pelton
Games are based on what ifs not players have to do what is 100% historical.
I have no issue with SHC running, because it is 100% an historical possibility.
I have no issue with GHC running, because it is 100% an historical possibility.
Before T-1 Hitler and Stalin are in control not Pelton vs fbs, once T-1 starts Pelton and fbs are in control of GHC and SHC not Hitler and Stalin.
I agree in as much. At leased if u impose restriction or as in this case non u should do in a manner where its fitting with history. Stalin wasnt the only one that interfered in 41. So did Hitler. As far as i know on 17 occations alone in 41 he interferes with operational matter. Any how the game treats this fairly and non of the sides are imposed by such, which is fine by me.
The Lvov pocket is 100% historical as it stands now with the newest beta patch and so is GHC and SHC running.
The big sales pitch on this game was you can be Hitler or Stalin and command the armies of the eastern front.
WitW will be sold as "You can command the armies of the western powers or GHC and prove your skills at commanding the forses of WW2 in the west" not you will be hog tied to repeat all the failures of WHC and GHC.
Really people think.
Problem is this is only partly true and in large its a strawman argument.
Lets review some gaming history. Back in the days of Second front and WiR it was physically impossible to get to Minsk in the first turn as it was 6 hexes away from the border and u could only move 5 hexes. So u couldnt mirrow the historic advance. I remember the constantion if not to say outrage that occured.
Same would be true in the case of WiTE. If germans couldnt have made it to Minsk in the first week ppl would have been miffed and lets it be known. "
"I cant do what i historicly could do, this game is crap"
Who says mot units should have a MP of 50. Its arbitary number ofc teh designers put thot into it, but this might as well have had been 40 or 30 and to some extend its pulled out of a hat. The only 2 turns u in the entire war that saw advances that neared those distances was the first 2 turns. Never for either side was that ever replicated in the rest of the war.
So while the history is out on turn 1 it happens within some parameters that ppl may or may not agree in but there are there. If they wasnt and russians could counter attack on turn 1 driving the germans back to Berlin by turn 15. No need to say what ppl would say then. So the plausibility of how the campaigns evolve has alot to say about the perception of a game and its historicy.
So while i agree. If u have no restrictions and u dont in the case of WiTE ppl should be allowed to do as they please, but that this shouldnt happen within set parameters is simply not true. Ppl might tell them themselfs that but it isnt true. In the case of Pelton, i've seen plenty a complaints about X ability.
This is from the moral discussion thread:
ORIGINAL: Pelton
The game is currently unplayable as GHC.
So even for Pelton parameters matters or it couldnt be a problem that the russians got X in moral, funnily enough as originally intended and as described in the manual.
Then comes the Lvov pocket. No it isnt historical and it shouldnt be particular possible. Not because that the german players shouldnt be allowed to try or for that matter move forces from AGC to the AGS area. Its because the parameters surrounding the AGS area isnt showed in game. Things that is pre turn 1 historics.
The designers have choosen or not choosen as the case might be. Not to in effect make any difference on the defensiveness of the russians in the AGS area vs AGC and AGC. At end of turn 1 u in large was still fighting the initial border forces in AGS area in the first 2-3 hexes in. Replicating such is simply impossible in game. Showing the parameters are off base here. U cant replicate history nor do better for 1 side. u automaticly do better for one of the sidess. The fact that the russian had 4500 tanks in some of the better Mech corps and that was alerted and in fact reacted to a degree higher than in AGC area isnt taken into account. In game those 4500 tank through the workins of the engine/choose parameters has no impact, u can just bypass/they cant react. Nor is teh fact that the germans them self tell in they cant cant even deploy the troops they had in the area so logic is more wouldnt have helped is shown in game.
In reality and the german should so be able to be negated and destroy those but it toke and should take time. It doesnt in game. It isnt a question of the players doing their thing and doing better than history. Its a question of the parameters is off ingame here. AGC/AGNs advance rate has been the yard stick and been in effect applied to AGS area instead of showing the realities was indeed different there. it has zero to do with history out the window from turn 1 and ppl are in charge. That has never been mine or as far as i know Flavs issues with it. Correct me if im wrong Flav.
What if 2By3 games instead had chosen to use the historic yard stick from AGS and u only could in the AGN/AGC area advanced 3-4-5 hexes in the first turn. Im pretty sure the argument of history is out the window on turn 1and now im in charge wouldnt have been the applied with no regards to the parameters of the campaigns.
Hey its just a question of the russian player automaticly doing better.
Parameters define the game and how the campaign evolve just as much as player ability with in the before mentioned. Saying u cant discuss that or that if some thing is to the advantage of 1 side then is a question of im in charge now so this is historical and then saying "the game is unplayble if moral is X" for the other side is simply hipocracy. Case in point being my OP of teh realismn discussion.
Kind regards,
Rasmus
The problem Walloc and Flaviusx knows this and I am sure 2by3 does also.
IF there is no Lvov pocket the game is over turn 1.
SHC will simply run.
As I have stated at least 85% of the games end by March 42 as both players know based on past AAR's that SHC will be in Berlin in Dec 44 or Jan 45, EVEN if GHC does better then historical by taking Leningrad.
WitE is right now as good as it will be under the current engine.
A handful of GHC players can win or draw because they know the fuel or morale systems better then anyone.
95% or more of the people playing this game have no chance of drawing or winning as Germany vs a below average SHC player.
Walloc my statement is a fact, for most people the game is broken for GHC players. They can do far better then historical and lose by February 45.
WitW hopefully will be better, the bitch about logistic is a strawman argument all together.
Germany went from Kiev to Rostov in a few weeks and were 100's and 100's of miles past railheads.
The HUGE problem for 2by3 is Germany could and did require far less troops, equipment, ammo and supplies to do what Russia/America/England could do.
Its almost like there would have to be 2 logistic system for both sides.
——————German——————-Russian————Ratio
1941
3rd—————551,000——————2,795,000———-5 to 1
4th—————280,000——————1,598,000———-5.7to 1
1942
1st—————280,000——————1,686,000———-6 to 1
2nd—————220,000——————1,395,000———-6.3 to 1
3rd—————383,000——————2,371,000———-6 to 1
4th—————177,000——————1,281,000———-7.2 to 1
1943
1st—————498,000——————1,908,000———3.8 to 1
2nd—————110,000——————444,000———-4 to 1
3rd—————533,000——————2,633,000———-5 to 1
4th—————381,000——————1,939,000———-5 to 1
1944
1st—————423,000——————1,859,000———-4.4 to 1
2nd—————352,000——————1,021,000———-3 to 1
3rd—————879,000——————1,771,000———-2 to 1
4th—————297,000——————1,086,000———-3.6 to 1
Where wite falls horribly short is the combat ratios in 42 and 43. I have bitched about this from day one.
Currently wite in 42 and 43 the combat ratio is 2.5 to 1. That's not even close to historical. There were very few pockets in 42+43.
This is the core issue that's screwing wite.
IF IF IF the engine was reflective of historical combat ratio's then you could dump the Lvov pocket, the Middle Earth Blizzard and "fix" the logistics system.
My issue with WitW is the current engine will work fine because the lose ratio in the west was 2.5 to 1 (throwing out surrenders), but will do nothing to fix wite 2.0. Nerfing logistic will simply make for WW1 on the Eastern Front.
