Matrix Games Forums

Are we talking about the 1941 scenario? I do not have a problem with supply. I did have to bring in a Chinese leader for one hex. Otherwise supply exists, and is strong in some places.

Adding a leader

Sorry I should have posted this first.

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

ORIGINAL: Meteor2

WPP is absolutely a good game, but now I am waiting, how things settle with new patches.

What are you waiting for? New features?

No, it is not about features. I have the Impression, that the correcting and tuning phase is not finished yet. And I am not talking about finetuning.
The strategies regarding India, Australia or the carrier mechanics were debated for a long time, so I decided for myself to follow the discussion and wait, how things settled in the end.

I grabbed it during this sale and have been enjoying it so far. I'd argue it needs a few more smaller scenarios, or a later campaign start date.

@Meteor2 - this last patch there was a lot of balancing to slow the game down. I played 2 games of which both Australia and India were invaded and defended by the Allies successfully. I also added the important of major ports and port upgrades.

@MarechalJorrre - Most played don't play the small scenarios or beta test them. So when I make a small scenario it is often not balanced properly and untested. Luckily the China one was tested enough in Beta to pass the sniff test.

I just purchased WP & WPP last Monday, and I must say that I am having a blast. However, to answer your question I as an example, personally ever if at all, post on forums. I lurk far more than I will ever post.

Moreover, I believe that most of the posts on a forum are by a minority if all players. I suspect that if you took a count that you would find that the vast majority of the posts are by a small percentage of the game's actual number of players.

As an aside, I am like Remington700 and prefer hot-seat by myself. [:D]

As a question for Alvaro, What is the reasoning behind the consumption of LCs in an invasion? At the end of the war the USN had over 6000 ships, and 85% of those were Landing Craft. Without an actual air strike or naval damage, it it hard to justify taking out an LST or APA. [:)]


Cheers, Thor

Enjoy your games Thor [;)]


Probably you are right. But I was comparing with respect to WitP-AE. If only a minority of the players post in the forum, how many people play that monster game?!


Regarding one of the problems, the admirals or the lack of them. This is a pic from Ageod last Napoleonic game (Nelson and his Mediterranean Fleet hunting the French Fleet [:D]).

You see Nelson commanding it but in the map, the counter is ship. Nice solution.

Can this be done In WPP?

Besides some top admirals commanded from land. Nimitz in Pearl Harbor (Pacific Fleet HQ) and Yamamoto from Kure or Truk (Combined Fleet HQ).

On the lack of leaders, I wholeheartedly agree. I firmly believe that leadership is a larger force modifier than most game designers give it credit for.

Cases in point. For poor leadership affect on a campaign we have to look no further than Singapore and Percival. He totally screwed the pooch for the Brits. For a good leadership example, and as a US Marine Vet, we can look at Col. Edson on Guadalcanal. His outnumbered forces held Bloody Ridge against overwhelming odds. He knew what to do, and when to do it.

These examples are just two of so many that exist in military history.

So, IMHO, I think that a military simulation without leadership is removing one of the most important force modifiers to ever exist. In brief, I would hope that the developer would consider adding leaders to the Global version of the Warplan series. Otherwise it just boils down to a numbers game...

Cheers, Thor

Welcome to the forums Thor.

Nikel you are killing me. First CW2 and now this. The screenshot of Wars of Napoleon brings back such good memories and disappoint. Thank you for posting it! And I agree with both of you about leadership.

ORIGINAL: Remington700

Nikel you are killing me. First CW2 and now this. The screenshot of Wars of Napoleon brings back such good memories and disappoint. Thank you for posting it! And I agree with both of you about leadership.

LOL [:D]


Nice screenshot, is it not?

WoN disappointed indeed, buggy and unfinished, that is the story of Ageod, too small company and then never finishing a game because they had to create the next one... And very slow engine for their awesome games.

Unfortunately very true. AGEOD is to well known for their buggy games that will never get patched correctly.
Strange concept for a game company.
Alvaro, I think, is very reliable in this regards and I am very sure, that WPP ends up very solid.
And if there is an global game in the future, I have enough trust to buy it day one.

ORIGINAL: Thorgrimm

I just purchased WP & WPP last Monday, and I must say that I am having a blast. However, to answer your question I as an example, personally ever if at all, post on forums. I lurk far more than I will ever post.

Moreover, I believe that most of the posts on a forum are by a minority if all players. I suspect that if you took a count that you would find that the vast majority of the posts are by a small percentage of the game's actual number of players.

As an aside, I am like Remington700 and prefer hot-seat by myself. [:D]

As a question for Alvaro, What is the reasoning behind the consumption of LCs in an invasion? At the end of the war the USN had over 6000 ships, and 85% of those were Landing Craft. Without an actual air strike or naval damage, it it hard to justify taking out an LST or APA. [:)]


Cheers, Thor

It is a function of abstraction and simplicity. It is the cost of planning and preparing for an invasion. The A.I. can't handle managing a ton of transports and merchant marine. Notice there is no World in Flames A.I. that I know of. That task is too difficult. Also makes it easy on the human player to manage these things. It requires strategic planning but not micromanagement.

WPE and WPP have land leaders. If I add naval leaders Axis players will be frustrated as Japanese naval commanders tended to be timid for battle. Now you will have a Japanese player constantly moving their one aggressive leader, Tanaka, around for every battle. Also the constant change in fleets and fleet configurations will make it a pain in the ass to constantly move a leader around.

For land it is easy. They are attached to HQs.

Alvaro, thank you for the answer. I suspected that was the case, but just wanted to be sure. [:)]

Cheers, Thorgrimm

I am certainly waiting for this game to get to Steam. I don't really like buying stuff on the Slitherine/Matrix sites because of the lack of refund option. I need to play this for a few hours before I decide whether to keep it or not. I just bought one old game that I used to have, luckily only for £7, and decided after playing it for a few minutes that it wasn't for me - but now stuck with it. That's not happening again.

Great thread - have been looking at WPP for a while and plan to jump-in soon (too busy with Strategic Command WW2: World at War at the moment).

WPE has only had a 10% return rate on Steam which is the normal. Means the game is good.

@nats - Take your time. I returned a few games I didn't like. Mostly because the UI was a nightmare to handle. Right now we have it scheduled for March.

After all it seems I was wrong [:'(]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSZlZQRt1S0

Well deserved!