Page 11 of 11
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 1:55 pm
by Zovs
ORIGINAL: Lobster
It doesn't matter what method you use. It doesn't matter, there's nothing to counter the discrepencies introduced with turn based games. The Command Ops system comes about as close as I know to a war game being a model of the real world when large numbers of troops are involved. That system could even be used for a larger scale game using operational level units.
And I completely disagree with your opinion on Movement as part of combat.
In WiTE2 combat is a function of movement and thus costs MPs. There are two types of combat: Hasty and Deliberate (23.4). Hasty Attacks cost less MPs but you can only attack from a single stack with reduced commitment and support fire. Deliberate Attacks cost more MPs but allow you to select multiple stacks to participate in the attack.
22.2.7. Combat Delay Movement Costs
Whenever ground combat takes place in a hex, a combat delay cost will usually be generated for the hex which will slow down future movement from this hex during the current movement phase.
This combat delay usually accumulates with every battle in the hex up to a maximum of nine points. This combat delay is listed at the bottom of the hex pop up and can be displayed in the hex inside a small movement compass the same colour as the non-phasing player.
As always it must have enough MPs to successfully complete the move or it is not allowed. All combat delays are removed out at the start of the next logistics phase.
Combat delay points are added to a hex as follows:
* 3 Points – Deliberate attack with final odds < 5 to 1.
* 2 Points – Deliberate attack with final odds >= 5 to 1 and < 10 to 1.
* 1 Point – Deliberate attack with final odds >= 10 to 1.
* 1 Point – Hasty attack with final odds < 10 to 1.
* 0 Point – Hasty attack with final odds > 10 to 1 unless there is an enemy unit (including the original defender) still adjacent to the hex. In this case a delay of 1 is still imposed.
* 0 Point if the attack failed but was changed to a scouting battle (23.4.2).
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 2:21 pm
by Lobster
Entirely arbitrary. Arbitrary: based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.
In other words it has no basis in fact. Battle time stamps are a bit less so but still things happen contrary to fact. In both systems allow movement of units to locations that still affect events that have already happened in the past based on the time it took to get there. 'Surrounding' units is one of the most skewed events.
I suppose if you wanted a war game that mirrors real world physical possibilities you could gather 30 million of your closest friends and replay WW2. [:D]
Turn based games will never get you there in the digital world.
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 2:57 pm
by supersixfour
Waiting for the day when Hearts of Iron III and WITE 2 have a baby.
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 3:48 pm
by RFalvo69
ORIGINAL: supersixfour
Waiting for the day when Hearts of Iron III and WITE 2 have a baby.
That would be the day when "Road to Moscow" is published.
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 4:26 pm
by ernieschwitz
I am not sure this discussion of Realtime vs. WeGo vs. IGOUGO is anything that we can agree on. Each has its reasons, and disadvantages as well as advantages.
Personally I hate realtime, not a fan of WeGo and find IGOUGO a necessary evil.
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 4:48 pm
by Tejszd
There is a reason I still have the Atomic V for Victory (1991-1993) and World At War (1994-1995) games on my computer still.
While I play turned based games there is something missing in that there is less coordination and surprises in them compared to WEGO....
Wish the Flashpoint game engine was adjusted and used for WW2....
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 5:06 pm
by Kuokkanen
ORIGINAL: RFalvo69
ORIGINAL: supersixfour
Waiting for the day when Hearts of Iron III and WITE 2 have a baby.
That would be the day when "Road to Moscow" is published.
https://www.matrixgames.com/game/frontl ... -to-moscow
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 6:32 pm
by supersixfour
ORIGINAL: RFalvo69
ORIGINAL: supersixfour
Waiting for the day when Hearts of Iron III and WITE 2 have a baby.
That would be the day when "Road to Moscow" is published.
Ugh. Must be an adopted one.
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 7:28 pm
by gamer78
ORIGINAL: ernieschwitz
I am not sure this discussion of Realtime vs. WeGo vs. IGOUGO is anything that we can agree on. Each has its reasons, and disadvantages as well as advantages.
Personally I hate realtime, not a fan of WeGo and find IGOUGO a necessary evil.
I think depends a bit about game topics irregular or regular wars. WEGO (IMHO) seems to do better in irregular Wars such as in Civil Wars. AGEOD game turns was successfull about it in Rus&Espana Civil War. From my understanding TOAW still have potential if skirmishes and big battles have any differences during turns.
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Sun Dec 05, 2021 4:18 am
by RFalvo69
That's not the one I'm talking about. In the late '90s-early 2000s we were all waiting for this title that aimed to re-create "Barbarossa" with a continuous time system and OOBs' structure - basically "Command Ops 2" at strategic level. The programming must have been quite advanced, because I remember an ecstatic hands-on preview of the beta being published on "The Wargamer" (or maybe "The Gamers"). Then the project was abandoned.
I don't know if the designers found it to be more complex than they thought, if they finished the money or what, but a lot of people were left disappointed.
Today in HOI 3 (still the best of the bunch IMHO) you have the whole WWII in continuous time, Barbarossa and beyond included, and that's proof that it can be done. WitE 3 with continuous time would be a insta-buy. I would pay $150 for such a game.
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Sun Dec 05, 2021 10:13 am
by Erik Rutins
ORIGINAL: RFalvo69
BTW, I'm about to play your "Cobra" scenario [:)] CfnA gave me months of fun back in the day.
How are you liking it so far?
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2021 2:47 am
by beyondwudge
The rules of games are driven by the technology they are played with.
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2021 4:54 am
by RFalvo69
ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
ORIGINAL: RFalvo69
BTW, I'm about to play your "Cobra" scenario [:)] CfnA gave me months of fun back in the day.
How are you liking it so far?
I'm really liking it even if I'm still at turn 4. I'm breaking out (I didn't start with the D-Day version because a ballet was the last thing I needed right now) but my guess is that I'm slightly behind the timetable. Anyway, it is clear that it was designed so to take advantage of what TOAW does best.
The big problem I'm having is technical. Until mid-January I'm only able to play on my Macbook Pro using VMWare Fusion to run Windows 10 - and TOAW IV's engine is VERY heavy. I tried some off the solutions suggested in the game's tech forum but no-joy. This is strange, because on the same setup I run, among other things, GG WitE/W and I play those games just fine. I think that part of the problem is that at its core TOAW is a very old program.
RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2021 8:02 pm
by EwaldvonKleist
ORIGINAL: Zovs
ORIGINAL: Lobster
It doesn't matter what method you use. It doesn't matter, there's nothing to counter the discrepencies introduced with turn based games. The Command Ops system comes about as close as I know to a war game being a model of the real world when large numbers of troops are involved. That system could even be used for a larger scale game using operational level units.
And I completely disagree with your opinion on Movement as part of combat.
Does anyone have information/screenshots of this early 2000s Barbarossa/Road to Moscow real time game? I have heard quite a few rumours about this.
In WiTE2 combat is a function of movement and thus costs MPs. There are two types of combat: Hasty and Deliberate (23.4). Hasty Attacks cost less MPs but you can only attack from a single stack with reduced commitment and support fire. Deliberate Attacks cost more MPs but allow you to select multiple stacks to participate in the attack.
22.2.7. Combat Delay Movement Costs
Whenever ground combat takes place in a hex, a combat delay cost will usually be generated for the hex which will slow down future movement from this hex during the current movement phase.
This combat delay usually accumulates with every battle in the hex up to a maximum of nine points. This combat delay is listed at the bottom of the hex pop up and can be displayed in the hex inside a small movement compass the same colour as the non-phasing player.
As always it must have enough MPs to successfully complete the move or it is not allowed. All combat delays are removed out at the start of the next logistics phase.
Combat delay points are added to a hex as follows:
* 3 Points – Deliberate attack with final odds < 5 to 1.
* 2 Points – Deliberate attack with final odds >= 5 to 1 and < 10 to 1.
* 1 Point – Deliberate attack with final odds >= 10 to 1.
* 1 Point – Hasty attack with final odds < 10 to 1.
* 0 Point – Hasty attack with final odds > 10 to 1 unless there is an enemy unit (including the original defender) still adjacent to the hex. In this case a delay of 1 is still imposed.
* 0 Point if the attack failed but was changed to a scouting battle (23.4.2).
True, but you can still
1) Clear the units that exert ZOC over a certain movement path, then move the next units around the combat delay.
2) Sneak a unit around into the rear using all its MPs (time) to manipulate the retreat paths of the defenders. This is a very important tactic for herding and to create breakthroughs efficiently, but it is completely unrealistic.
3) You can first launch the northern part of a pincer movement, see how well it goes, and then launch the Southern pincer knowing how the other one plays out. IRL you would have to launch both at the same time, not knowing if the other one can reach its required depth.
Regarding the early 2000s Road to Moscow, here is a thread:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3833761