Page 2 of 3
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2020 10:51 pm
by composer99
ORIGINAL: brian brian
soapbox...
[8|][8|][8|][8|]
Every single WW2 game makes enormous compromises with respect to historical accuracy for the sake of such factors as playability, simplicity, victory conditions, etc. etc. etc.
I'm happy to lean into those compromises for the sake of having fun. If that means almost always leaving out "destroyer escorts assigned to capital ships but subsumed into their counters for the sake of ease of play and the legacy of printing costs" whenever referring to an individual ship in the game, then so be it.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go and enjoy my tasty "obtuse sausage".
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2020 11:55 pm
by brian brian
Yeah, it remains a great game. But I just think this has to be said once in a while. Anyone on this site knows lots about WWII, that is a given. But unless you take a specific interest in the Battle of the Atlantic, the techniques used to play the game really twist perception of this part of the war. All games must compromise/summarize details to simulate history, and WiF does a remarkably good job of that, except in this particular area.
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2020 12:10 am
by rkr1958
ORIGINAL: brian brian
Yeah, it remains a great game. But I just think this has to be said once in a while. Anyone on this site knows lots about WWII, that is a given. But unless you take a specific interest in the Battle of the Atlantic, the techniques used to play the game really twist perception of this part of the war. All games must compromise/summarize details to simulate history, and WiF does a remarkably good job of that, except in this particular area.
I agree, but I must admit I've often sent BB's out on ASW duty which in real life would have be suicidal. In CE, where playing with CLIF is now pretty much standard and under which BB's have now ASW, this fixes this one heresy.
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:09 am
by Centuur
ORIGINAL: brian brian
I wanted to comment on something I read in your chat logs:
"[al] Medals all around for the crew of Norfolk."
This was after an inconclusive round of Axis attempts to use SUBs vs. Convoy Points in the North Atlantic.
I think as the decades roll along and WWII becomes ever more mysterious for all but the really, really interested, there is one thing in World in Flames that just kind of rots the brains of players who haven't read much on this subject:
HEAVY CRUISERS WERE NOT ASW PLATFORMS!
If the HMS Norfolk found itself on patrol in the North Atlantic in the winter of 1940, it would be doing so via a steady series of high-speed zig zag plots as it tried to perform it's job - looking for undetected German surface raiders - while it tried to avoid German U-Boats.
The Norfolk was one CA selected for routine patrol work off Norway and assisted HMS Suffolk in shadowing the Bismarck as it made for the Denmark Strait.
With the exception of troop convoys and when German surface raiders were known to be in the Atlantic, Heavy Cruisers (and Light), did not sail along with convoys to battle U-Boats. Cruisers were quite vulnerable to enemy submarines and many were lost, on both sides, to subs.
In World in Flames, CAs and CLs are given ASW points as a straight playability fudge so that attritional submarine vs merchant battles can use the same combat resolution systems as all other naval battles.
Recently, on another website I read some comments on this from a key figure in the player community who helped develop Collector's Edition rules. He said that if Axis SUB pressure in the Atlantic ends up lessening Royal Navy fleet commitment in the Pacific, then the game is doing its job better now. That is totally preposterous - the U-Boat war was won by ships smaller than the ones we have on WiF counters. The course of the Battle of the Atlantic had little to do with what the RN could send beyond the Mediterranean, as that was determined by German and Italian surface threats, not their total Submarine forces. Heavy combat ships stayed away from merchant shipping unless absolutely necessary, as off Norway where the Kriegsmarine heavy units were lurking. HMS Edinburgh and another CL (Fiji?) payed the ultimate price on that duty.
Sometimes, what we call "SCS" counters had to stay in port as all their potential destroyer escorts were busy on convoy duty. Note those 2 words - "Destroyer Escorts." What were the DDs supposed to escort? That's right, they served as anti-submarine protection for Cruisers, Battleships, and Carriers - they needed escorts - they were NOT escorts.
The ASW vs SUB system in World in Flames makes for a simple playable 'battle'. But it is obtuse sausage making of a high degree. Please don't forget that when playing World in Flames.
You are right, when looking at the Battle of the Atlantic. However, in the coastal waters of the Med, the cruisers were necessary to be included as convoy escorts for protection against the Italian navy and to increase the anti aircraft fire.
That's why I hope that the optional rules for ASW escorts will be included in the game in the future.
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Mon Jan 13, 2020 12:48 pm
by TeaLeaf
All games must compromise/summarize details to simulate history, and WiF does a remarkably good job of that, except in this particular area.
Besides this BotA, there are more game elements in WiF where historical simulation has been compromised for increased game balance.
Production for example.
Axis production in WiF is a quite a bit stronger than historically justified.
If we take allied production in WiF as benchmark, WiF Axis production should be about 18% lower up until '44, roughly 16BP every month.
(One of the reasons why I really like to play with the food in flames optional, because then the simulation of Allied production versus Axis production becomes 2% more accurate [;)].)
If war production in WiF needs a 100% simulation After '44, the Allies probably need a total of >300BP...
Or the war in China.
China being a complete walkover (if Japan wants to have it and has a bit of luck with the dice), is ofc nowhere near an accurate simulation of historical possibilities. It's a rather big compromise in favor of game balance.
Or the abscence of the supply problems the Germans faced in Russia, keeping all their troops in fighting order...
Long story short: I'd rate WiF a 50% simulation, 50% game (I'd rate Axis and Allies, for example, 10% simulation 90% game).
I really love to play (M)WiF, but I do realise every "what if" scenario we WiF players come up with is probably only 50% accurate [;)]. Even less in the future if the rules keep trending more towards game balance.
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Tue Jan 14, 2020 12:59 am
by brian brian
Just wanted to note that my comment on Sir 99’s comment wasn’t really about his comment at all, which was just a normal live game comment.
As for production comps, keep in mind that the game system gives the Allies certain things for free. One is USA logistical shipping - read recently that the USA built something like 180 Convoy Points in the war. All of those ships sailed with cargo, too. But in WiF, the > 10,000,000 American personnel outside of North America in 1945 can all be fed and armed with just a dozen or so convoy points, that are all theoretically moving natural resources at the same time.
Another free item is the ASW built into certain counters.
Another item to consider is all the Light Cruisers - Italy put a good amount of steel production into those. WiF players do not. Italy is usually held up as an example of Axis ‘over production’ in WiF.
Meanwhile, Germany built 13,000 Me-109s in 1944. Does anyone really want to play with 26 German FTR2 counters on the map in 1944, plus another 14 Fw190s?
This is why the scale of the counters in the game is deliberately vague. The point of the design is to experience the basic decision making on each side and use only some of the nitty gritty tactical and operational details. Otherwise the Germans would get those 26 Me-109 counters but they would all suffer from low factors due to their oil crunch / pilot training death spiral as they faced 80 or whatever P-51 counters.
I often think the logistics rules are pretty generous, but logistics meant different things to the different powers. The Germans could get more done on a shoe-string than other armies in the war; some powers basic lack of concern for their soldiers lives (sadly) gave them a different advantage over a well supplied opponent ... until the scales tipped too far and your counter pays the flipped, out-of-supply penalty. A recently isolated American unit might still have better supplies on hand than a Japanese unit attacking it while still in contact with its own understaffed logistical tail.
Overall, the simulation is the command decisions. Though I do always hope the realism in China could improve, that is almost as an intractable problem to simulate as the Japanese high command schism between IJA & IJN. The result is - Action Limits.
This game is rolling along nicely. PBEM + live chat is the way to play WiF remotely.
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:33 am
by TeaLeaf
ORIGINAL: brian brian
(...)
This game is rolling along nicely. PBEM + live chat is the way to play WiF remotely.
Second that [:)].
As long as the players don't mind all the comments hehheh [;)].
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 3:58 am
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: composer99
So I must report that one of the grand old dames of the Royal Navy, HMS Warspite, went down around Christmastide fighting the Regia Marina in Egyptian waters.
warspite1
[coughing and spluttering] Don't be ridiculous. How is that even remotely possible?!?! Either you don't understand the rules or the game is borked. I demand a recount! call the Militia! Turn the machines back on, turn the machines back on!!.....
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 1:21 pm
by Centuur
ORIGINAL: warspite1
ORIGINAL: composer99
So I must report that one of the grand old dames of the Royal Navy, HMS Warspite, went down around Christmastide fighting the Regia Marina in Egyptian waters.
warspite1
[coughing and spluttering] Don't be ridiculous. How is that even remotely possible?!?! Either you don't understand the rules or the game is borked. I demand a recount! call the Militia! Turn the machines back on, turn the machines back on!!.....
Trading Places, wasn't it for the last quote...[:D]
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 2:25 am
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: Centuur
ORIGINAL: warspite1
ORIGINAL: composer99
So I must report that one of the grand old dames of the Royal Navy, HMS Warspite, went down around Christmastide fighting the Regia Marina in Egyptian waters.
warspite1
[coughing and spluttering] Don't be ridiculous. How is that even remotely possible?!?! Either you don't understand the rules or the game is borked. I demand a recount! call the Militia! Turn the machines back on, turn the machines back on!!.....
Trading Places, wasn't it for the last quote...[:D]
warspite1
Yes indeed! [:)]
Official #2: [Randolph Duke has just collapsed with shock] Mortimer, your brother is not well. We better call an ambulance.
Mortimer Duke: F*** him! Now, you listen to me! I want trading reopened right now. Get those brokers back in here! Turn those machines back on!
[shouts - it echoes pathetically throughout the trading hall]
Mortimer Duke: Turn those machines back on!
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Tue Feb 11, 2020 9:00 am
by TeaLeaf
What happened to the allied part of this game O.O
It's 'all quiet at the western front'? Doesn't look so from the number of reports coming in from the Axis part...
[:D] It's very tempting to look in the axis thread to see how this game develops!
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Tue Feb 11, 2020 8:25 pm
by Courtenay
Yes, Ronnie is posting all the game reports for both sides. Don't know why they aren't in global.
Right now it is either S/A '40 or the turn has just ended.
Paris fell at end of J/A to a bad mistake by the Allied player. Japan and Russia are at war, and a lot of Russian units are in Manchuria. A good attack on Harbin just failed when the Allied player rolled a 3.
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Tue Feb 11, 2020 8:37 pm
by rkr1958
ORIGINAL: Courtenay
Yes, Ronnie is posting all the game reports for both sides. Don't know why they aren't in global.
I debated (with myself at lost!) about that but in the end decided not to duplicate a lot of posts. While 95% of the game reports are neutral comments, the other 5% contains strategy comments and reactions which I wanted to keep in my axis thread.
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Wed Feb 12, 2020 2:44 pm
by TeaLeaf
While 95% of the game reports are neutral comments, the other 5% contains strategy comments and reactions which I wanted to keep in my axis thread.
So if I understand this correctly, the Axis thread and the global comments are the only ones that will be kept up to date?
Well, so far it seems only the Axis one [;)].
That's ok, I 'll check the Axis thread (and keep my mouth shut)... I have my needs [:D]!
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 12:09 pm
by rkr1958
Hey, guys. Just wanted to let you know that my game with composer99 is still going at a steady pace. We just finished turn 10, March/April 1941 and are almost through the end of turn phases.
I've fallen over a turn behind in my private axis AAR thread about this game. What I'm thinking I'm going to do is stop the "play-by-play" with strategy/tactical comments in the axis thread and post "neutral" info about our game in this thread so all that are interested can follow.
I will then just use my private axis AAR for comments, questions and such on axis strategies/tactics. I will post some "catching" up from previous turns summaries in this thread. Though please be patient. I currently have three games going and dealing with retirement paperwork, which is almost finished. The retirement paperwork that is and not my three games. [;)]
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 12:17 pm
by Courtenay
That seems like a good idea.
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 12:34 pm
by rkr1958
Also, who knew during my over 61 years on this planet that my desire for private time was just, "Social Distancing". I must be a man way ahead of his years. [:D]
MWiF on-line is the prefect game for us social distancers. [8D]
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 1:14 pm
by rkr1958
In looking back through this thread I see that no game session reports of any substance have been posted. I'll just start from the beginning and post summaries. Mostly from end of turn in order to start with and continue on with a cohesive narrative.
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 1:19 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 1. Sep/Oct 1939. Poland Invaded.
Germany decides not to mess around with the invasion of Poland. The majority of German land, including all three HQ's, and air forces are setup and move against Poland from the start of the game. Shown here is the situation in Poland at the end of the first axis impulse of the game.
RE: Global comments on Ronnie versus Composer
Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 1:23 pm
by rkr1958
Turn 1. Sep/Oct 1939. Axis #3. Poland.
The fine weather continues for the axis and Germany easily finishes off Poland with the capture of the last allied controlled Polish factory in Lodz.
