Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: loki100

...

In my personal opinion (and that is all this is), WiTE2 does a better job at locating the roles of the Axis and Soviet players. In #1 they are sort of a guddle of Hitler/Stalin, their respective high commands and, of course, all the way down the command chain. I think the new game (& the VP system has been designed within it as an integral part) makes this a bit clearer - you are the OKH/Stavka. And there is this small bit of having to deal with somewhat external demands on your activities. ...

For my personal taste I like the "pressure from above" the VP system imposes. More immersive.

With all the improvements concerning unit movement, rail capacity for movement and logistics, etc. (what a HUGE amount of material that "etc." entails!) - this game will define the WW2 Eastern Front conflict as no other previous title has. A very promising and most impressive-looking game!

The next ten days is going to pass very s-l-o-w-l-y. Speaking of which, I have not played any computer games since seeing the WitE2 video on 5th March; that's probably a first for me since the Commodore 64 days! I hope I am not getting too hyped, only to be disappointed; but I think not. I don't want to play anything else, I want this game. Very envious of those selected for the Beta.

The 525 is a fairly forgiving mark on the wall (as is the 575 in ‘42), mostly it exists to call it early if it’s really that bad (as opposed to certain disappearing acts), but it has a few other effects. For one, it keeps some pressure on to distribute forces equitably, or win your gamble if you don’t. One early testing game saw the classic “give AGS a couple bonus corps” meet serious problems and be under really pressure when the Rzhev-Kalinin-Orel line of cities were all still firmly in Russian hands by mud season. Being a bit faster in the south couldn’t pay off under resourcing the center, and the Germans were fighting hard to make their target points. Even if it’s past, there’s a strong incentive to push for 575 for a safe ‘42, so it’s really only if the Germans have cleaned up that they are likely to dig deep in November as opposed to throw themselves forward. (Bobo is doing this to me, incidentally, so I don’t know how to say this doesn’t always happen this way...but really, for the majority of the games we’ve seen played, the Germans really are feeling pressured in the fall to either make the cut or buy a safety margin in ‘42).

ORIGINAL: GloriousRuse

The 525 is a fairly forgiving mark on the wall (as is the 575 in ‘42), mostly it exists to call it early if it’s really that bad (as opposed to certain disappearing acts), but it has a few other effects. For one, it keeps some pressure on to distribute forces equitably, or win your gamble if you don’t. One early testing game saw the classic “give AGS a couple bonus corps” meet serious problems and be under really pressure when the Rzhev-Kalinin-Orel line of cities were all still firmly in Russian hands by mud season. Being a bit faster in the south couldn’t pay off under resourcing the center, and the Germans were fighting hard to make their target points. Even if it’s past, there’s a strong incentive to push for 575 for a safe ‘42, so it’s really only if the Germans have cleaned up that they are likely to dig deep in November as opposed to throw themselves forward. (Bobo is doing this to me, incidentally, so I don’t know how to say this doesn’t always happen this way...but really, for the majority of the games we’ve seen played, the Germans really are feeling pressured in the fall to either make the cut or buy a safety margin in ‘42).

It's obviously something that would need to wait for potential DLCs and additional VP setups (and would also require a great deal of testing time spent on sorting out the game balance) but it could be interesting to have an alternate campaign with VPs being gained/lost through casualties as they are in WITW. Sadly (in historical terms) I think that the current VP system is pretty realistic in terms of the attitudes of Hitler/Stalin towards the colossal loss of life that was occurring on the Eastern Front.

But for players who want to play a bit more of a 'what-if' game it could be interesting to have a VP design where the a player (whether Axis or Soviet) could win the game by losing/reaching Berlin at the historical date but with a much better casualty ratio than history.

That said, whilst I think that design would be interesting from a theoretical perspective and might in theory be popular with Axis players that want more 'freedom' in the way they run the war I think in practice it would be a pretty unsatisfactory gaming experience - you would have a pretty static front line gradually moving towards Berlin with few risks being taken by either side and the eventual outcome most likely depending on which player is best able to micromanage their forces in a 'WITE1 fashion' that I sense the developers are trying to move away from as far as possible.

[/quote]

This is consistent with the VP system - the resources/industrial locations are in the same place as the VPs. In very rough terms you consider where the RL axis were at the beginning of Summer 1942 and how it fits with the current VP system they were essentially choosing (assuming a successful campaign) between getting 60 points in one go for taking Moscow or getting 30 points from Stalingrad plus 10 each for Maikop/Grozney/Baku.


[/quote]


Hello,

Really looking forward to this game which most likely will be my main game for years to come, it looks really great so far I think.

Just reading the above quote and of course not really knowing all the details I feel those vp numbers possibly need a look at. Yes terrain is worse around Moscow but assuming a normal 41 campaign I am guessing slogging through some hexes around Moscow in 42 seems a lot easier than capturing both Stalingrad and Baku but if the numbers are correct these are considered of equal value. I am guessing the Axis will way more often go for Moscow than the Caucasus. I might well be wrong maybe it is possible to really defend Moscow in 42 but without experience the numbers look suspicious [:)].

Any experienced Beta tester have any insight?

/MM

they work fine to be honest. Have a look at the Soviet AAR, post #12, that will give you an idea both where the Axis 1941 targets are and their relative values.

I think Moscow or Baku are not equal. If you take a historical route in 42, you will capture Stalingrad (30), Voronesh (10), Krasnodar (10), Grozny (10), Baku (10), Astrakhan (10), Maikop (10) and Makhachkala (10) with a total of 90 plus 48 bonus points. Moscow in 42 are 60 points maybe 80 with Tula and Kalinin and 18 bonus points.

So it will depend on how good 41 was and how many points I want to score for a possible sudden victory. I think its interesting to have the options.

What may be missed here is that the germans wanted the oil in the caucasus above all in order to be able to sustain a longer war. I have not yet read anywhere whether this has an effect on the supply situation of the german units. If so, it would probably be necessary to launch a campaign in the south.

Hello Marco [:)]

Have you been studying in preparation of our games? [:)]. Thank you for the answer. In all honesty almost as soon as I posted I thought that there probably are more cities to take on the way to Baku.

/MM

Thank you, I was thinking mostly of 1942 and forward but Marco below gave a good answer.

I must say I really like the idea behind the Vp system will be interesting to see how it plays out. At least I want that feeling that you have to overextend yourself a bit to reach your objective and it seems like the VP system tries to achieve that.

/MM

ORIGINAL: MagicMissile



...

Really looking forward to this game which most likely will be my main game for years to come ...

You are not alone thinking that. While I am looking forward to DC Ardennes - and I also play other than hex-based games as well - this game has captured my interest like no other. It looks extremely well thought-out and designed.

ORIGINAL: MagicMissile

Hello Marco [:)]

Have you been studying in preparation of our games? [:)]. Thank you for the answer. In all honesty almost as soon as I posted I thought that there probably are more cities to take on the way to Baku.

/MM

I have to prepare myself so that I don't lose the game to you in 1941, as I did with Warplan. [:D]
A third option, by the way, would be to conquer Leningrad and Moscow in 42 instead of the caucasus. I think Leningrad will be difficult for the russians to reconquer, since the railway network and terrain there probably do not allow for a large-scale offensive.

I am going to open the the discussion here:

- Where will you place your 40 fortified zones? (no zones are needed vs Finland anymore.)

- Where will you place your 10 city forts?

ORIGINAL: juv95hrn

I am going to open the the discussion here:

- Where will you place your 40 fortified zones? (no zones are needed vs Finland anymore.)

- Where will you place your 10 city forts?

Does that mean that Finland is not part of the game?

ORIGINAL: FriedrichII

ORIGINAL: juv95hrn

I am going to open the the discussion here:

- Where will you place your 40 fortified zones? (no zones are needed vs Finland anymore.)

- Where will you place your 10 city forts?

Does that mean that Finland is not part of the game?

It´s now a theatre box instead.

Thanks for the answer. I am not sure if this is a good idea, but I have to admit I am new to this game. What could be the reason that Finland will be a theatre box? What is the benefit?

In WITE1 the Soviet player would build a line of 15 (?) forts along the Svir, and 4 north of Leningrad, and that was the extent of the Finnish theatre until 1) Germany would take Leningrad, or 2) USSR would knock Finland out of the war.

Once Leningrad was taken, Finnish troops could be used as Blizzard-proof space marines in front of Moscow during winter 1941.

Not sure the Finnish front will be missed that much...

Thank you for the explanation. As I said I am new to this game and I did not know that reason before.

Maybe most important for a USSR (or Axis) strategy will be the settings. Do you play vs AI or a human opponent? What are your AI settings?

"Before going on, the AI is far better in WiTE2 than in any of the earlier games. It will shift strategic direction as well as make better operational choices. At the start, I strongly suggest do not give it any bonuses till you understand the main game mechanisms. After a while set the Soviet AI to at least 110 (if you are playing the Axis) and the Axis AI to at least 120. As ever, in a game with the AI you can adjust these but at those levels the AI gains substantial benefits that will ensure a much better game."

Personally I feel that maybe a setting of 115-120 for the Axis and 100 for the USSR will be a "normal" setting to play vs. Axis AI. I hope a sort of category for players will develop quickly, to make it easier to compare games (balance, etc) with each other.

Finland is a theater box precisely because the Finns were not an extension of the Ostheer.

ORIGINAL: GloriousRuse

Finland is a theater box precisely because the Finns were not an extension of the Ostheer.

there is a more pragmatic reason. Partly not much happened apart from at the beginning and the end. More relevantly, it proved very hard/impossible to teach the AI how to handle a long front with low unit density (and probably battalion level breakdowns).

Since the bulk of the long term testing and exploration of the late game has been by running AI-AI tests that is an important consideration.

One still gets to play with some Finns if Germany takes Leningrad.