Winter Idea......Comment

[pat.casey]

ORIGINAL: alfonso

ORIGINAL: 1275psi



And thats why i am un installing. Some one decided that the game MUST reflect real life in losses - how many times do we see comment -nearly mirrors real life -so its OK in the test AARs?
No matter what you do -you get crushed!
i took Moscow -besieged leningrad against AI -ON EASY level -just to see what would happen - dug in two turns before the mud - and still got crushed.
God help me in PBEM -that would be madnes to start.
There is no reward for the German player -you get crushed
No choices, no options -the blizzard starts-and its the end. I have tried limited attack -got crushed, stopped at somolensk - got crushed, all out -got crushed
I am sorry, thats not a game.
great potential -wonderful detail, brilliant mechanics.
No fun to play all the way through.

my two cents

1) What part of the Manual led you to think that digging all over the frontline was the best strategy for blizzard?

2) Have you read the posts by BigAnorak on how to fight during Blizzards?

I for one *am* slightly peeved to have folks keep telling me that my blizzard experience is because "I'm doing it wrong". There seems to be a subset of folks posting here that are happy to opinion that the blizzard is survivable with the proper, mysterious, strategy.

Show me a human vs human AAR where an axis player successfully defends the blizzard please.
Every one I've read stopped by mid january because the axis army had vaporized.

[alfonso]

ORIGINAL: pat.casey

ORIGINAL: alfonso

ORIGINAL: 1275psi



And thats why i am un installing. Some one decided that the game MUST reflect real life in losses - how many times do we see comment -nearly mirrors real life -so its OK in the test AARs?
No matter what you do -you get crushed!
i took Moscow -besieged leningrad against AI -ON EASY level -just to see what would happen - dug in two turns before the mud - and still got crushed.
God help me in PBEM -that would be madnes to start.
There is no reward for the German player -you get crushed
No choices, no options -the blizzard starts-and its the end. I have tried limited attack -got crushed, stopped at somolensk - got crushed, all out -got crushed
I am sorry, thats not a game.
great potential -wonderful detail, brilliant mechanics.
No fun to play all the way through.

my two cents

1) What part of the Manual led you to think that digging all over the frontline was the best strategy for blizzard?

2) Have you read the posts by BigAnorak on how to fight during Blizzards?

I for one *am* slightly peeved to have folks keep telling me that my blizzard experience is because "I'm doing it wrong". There seems to be a subset of folks posting here that are happy to opinion that the blizzard is survivable with the proper, mysterious, strategy.

Show me a human vs human AAR where an axis player successfully defends the blizzard please.
Every one I've read stopped by mid january because the axis army had vaporized.

Is that an answer to my questions?

[mmarquo]

"Quite a simplified calculation. Did you read the Q-Ball's AAR?"
 
An "n" of one? Not a very scientific approach; certainly not a large enough sample size to make any valid conclusion one way or the other. I, for one, simply enjoy the game - it is what it is, and I think we can all agree that it is fun and are thankful for the on going efforts to refine the experience.
 
But...reading the comments on the forum is almost more fun than playing WITE.
 
Marquo [:)]

[pat.casey]

ORIGINAL: alfonso

ORIGINAL: pat.casey

ORIGINAL: alfonso




1) What part of the Manual led you to think that digging all over the frontline was the best strategy for blizzard?

2) Have you read the posts by BigAnorak on how to fight during Blizzards?

I for one *am* slightly peeved to have folks keep telling me that my blizzard experience is because "I'm doing it wrong". There seems to be a subset of folks posting here that are happy to opinion that the blizzard is survivable with the proper, mysterious, strategy.

Show me a human vs human AAR where an axis player successfully defends the blizzard please.
Every one I've read stopped by mid january because the axis army had vaporized.

Is that an answer to my questions?

I have read a variety of post by a variety of players, including BigAnorak on how to fight the blizzard.
I have also watched various HVH games where axis players actually tried to implement those strategies (Q-Ball went so far as to try a bunch of different ones to test them out).
I have yet to read a HVH AAR where any of these "advanced" blizzard strategies worked.

[alfonso]

ORIGINAL: pat.casey


I have read a variety of post by a variety of players, including BigAnorak on how to fight the blizzard.
I have also watched various HVH games where axis players actually tried to implement those strategies (Q-Ball went so far as to try a bunch of different ones to test them out).
I have yet to read a HVH AAR where any of these "advanced" blizzard strategies worked.

Ok, thanks for the information

[mmarquo]

What would be the result of a, "successful" blizzard strategy? What should happen?
 
Marquo
 

[pat.casey]

ORIGINAL: Marquo

What would be the result of a, "successful" blizzard strategy? What should happen?

Marquo

In my opinion:

If the axis player is overextended and in an offensive deployment (the historical situation), then I'd expect soviet gains in line with history with the ability of the soviets to support two major thrusts and an ability to inflict significant german casualties.

If the axis player is more conservatively deployed than was historically the case, I'd expect the ability of the soviets to launch limited spoiling attacks to solve "problem" areas of the lines, clean up bridgeheads, etc.

As it stands right now, regardless of the axis player's deployments, the soviets are going to take more ground and inflict more casualties than the historical counterattack did.

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: alfonso
1) What part of the Manual led you to think that digging all over the frontline was the best strategy for blizzard?

Digging in should buy you at least a turn or two, because at first turn of blizzard units have not suffered attrition (only CV loss) and are inside a level 3 fort. Basically, that's the ideal situation they can be in, on the FIRST turn. It will not get any BETTER than that, only worse, when attrition kicks in and they lose fort positions.

When I saw ALL my level 3 forts with full SS divisions crumble on the very first blizzard attack (and in previous turn they were invulnerable Death Stars) that's when I threw my hands in disgust and realized the game's way of simulating 41 is basically two waves of "supermen vs retards" (first German supermen vs Sov retards then the other way round).

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: alfonso

Show me a human vs human AAR where an axis player successfully defends the blizzard please.
Every one I've read stopped by mid january because the axis army had vaporized.

Is that an answer to my questions?

You didn't answer his question either [;)]

There's not one HvH AAR showing that blizzard is survivable, but there are many that show that even with proper homework, really big advances, victories, forts, prepaprations, what have you.... Axis still suffer defeats on scale that can only be described as ridicolous.

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Marquo

"Quite a simplified calculation. Did you read the Q-Ball's AAR?"

An "n" of one? Not a very scientific approach; certainly not a large enough sample size to make any valid conclusion one way or the other. I, for one, simply enjoy the game - it is what it is, and I think we can all agree that it is fun and are thankful for the on going efforts to refine the experience.

But...reading the comments on the forum is almost more fun than playing WITE.

I agree with your last comment, seriously. WITP and WITE boards were always fun to read and participate in. Especially during the periods of not playing the game, because something is bugged and you wait for a patch, as appears to becase with this winter stuff. I am too having way more fun with the forum than with the game right now (because I stopped playing), although I'd wish it to be at least equal.

As for the sample size - just play the HvH game as German. You may remember me as laughing to "Axis fanboys" for being dramatic. I still laugh at their drama, but in this winter issue, I went all the way to the pro-Axis camp.

For the record: I still think German summer supermen are almost as overpowered as Soviet winter supermen, and almost as irritating. So I am not taking sides here. WITE's way of dealing with 41 seems to be using two waves of supermen having it at each other, which is a) wrong, b) too one sided to be enjoyable as a game.

[pat.casey]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

<snip>

For the record: I still think German summer supermen are almost as overpowered as Soviet winter supermen, and almost as irritating. So I am not taking sides here. WITE's way of dealing with 41 seems to be using two waves of supermen having it at each other, which is a) wrong, b) too one sided to be enjoyable as a game.

I actually agree with you on this as well, Axis are overpowered in the summer of 1941; probably because given more historical strengths and competent human players on both sides, the historical high water mark of Barbarossa wasn't going to be reachable.

From an irritation standpoint though, the summer of '41 doesn't bother me as much as the winter mechanics. Playing as the soviets, there are things I can do to at least partially cope with the overpowered germans and end up in positions not unlike the actual war. I can run away. I can dig into sacrificial hedgehogs. I can even occasionally counterattack.

In the blizzard turns, playing as axis though, there really doesn't seem to be anything I can do except run away faster than the soviets can advance, and even that causes huge losses since I have to displace troops into the open.

[Redmarkus5]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Emir, unless I was on drugs, I am pretty certain the experts (aka the testers) said somewhere and not only once that:

a) they could survive the blizzard (Big Anorak perhaps?)

and

b) a Soviet player CAN stop the Germans IF he plays correctly (Flavio certainly) [;)]

Now of course I might be wrong and NEVER read that... but I doubt it [:)]

These two questions deal with both the German and Soviet supermen (summer and winter that is).

Erm, I almost always agree with you but I recall a senior tester admitting in the forums a month ago that at the time of release nobody had even played the game through to 1945. Several people remarked on this when it was posted. At the time, I thought this meant that they had played satisfying games up to 1943 and the combat was still going on somewhere in Russia, but now I am not so sure.

Is it that no games could be played through to '45 because the game is so badly balanced? Are the testers under NDA? Perhaps they are not allowed to tell us all that they know...

[alfonso]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

ORIGINAL: alfonso

Show me a human vs human AAR where an axis player successfully defends the blizzard please.
Every one I've read stopped by mid january because the axis army had vaporized.

Is that an answer to my questions?

You didn't answer his question either [;)]

There's not one HvH AAR showing that blizzard is survivable, but there are many that show that even with proper homework, really big advances, victories, forts, prepaprations, what have you.... Axis still suffer defeats on scale that can only be described as ridicolous.

Well, I have no problem: I have not seen any AAR in which the Axis player is completely succesful with the defense,but this is in part because I dont know what should be defined as succesful. Q-Ball is doing nicely (much better than me against AI), and ComradeP has made some suggestions to improve his performance even further.


Besides, at first we saw a lot of AARs in which Axis players did a rather poor blitzkrieg: now we see much more succesful early turns from the Axis. What we are seeing now in the AARs is the first experience of blizzard for the players doing the AARs. I think that from "inexperienced Axis players cannot survive winter" to "it is impossible for an Axis player to survive winter" still remains a logical gap. I have never seen anybody solve the Rubik's cube in less than a minute in their first try. But I know than with proper training, it is a trivial task.

As a matter of fact, there are not many AARs in which Blizzard begins at historical settings (4.3 million Soviet casualties, Axis at the gates of Leningrad, Moscow, Rostov (Ukrainia in German hands!))


If one of the Axis testers is defeated by the blizzard after a succesful 1941 campaign against a newby Soviet player, that would indeed be a strong indication that something is not working properly.

Please note that I don't have an informed opinion about this issue, because I really think that there are not enough data at the moment. My impression is that the game is unbalanced, but in the sense that it seems much more difficult to master from the Axis side (the 41 GC at least).

Maybe we are seeing a race between a walking man a man with a bicycle. The latter lags behind because he has not yet learnt how to ride the bicycle. But when he finally learns....

[TulliusDetritus]

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Emir, unless I was on drugs, I am pretty certain the experts (aka the testers) said somewhere and not only once that:

a) they could survive the blizzard (Big Anorak perhaps?)

and

b) a Soviet player CAN stop the Germans IF he plays correctly (Flavio certainly) [;)]

Now of course I might be wrong and NEVER read that... but I doubt it [:)]

These two questions deal with both the German and Soviet supermen (summer and winter that is).

Erm, I almost always agree with you but I recall a senior tester admitting in the forums a month ago that at the time of release nobody had even played the game through to 1945. Several people remarked on this when it was posted. At the time, I thought this meant that they had played satisfying games up to 1943 and the combat was still going on somewhere in Russia, but now I am not so sure.

Is it that no games could be played through to '45 because the game is so badly balanced? Are the testers under NDA? Perhaps they are not allowed to tell us all that they know...

Redmarkus, but on this issue only the 1941 winter is relevant [:)]

[PeeDeeAitch]

ORIGINAL: alfonso

Please note that I don't have an informed opinion about this issue, because I really think that there are not enough data at the moment. My impression is that the game is unbalanced, but in the sense that it seems much more difficult to master from the Axis side (the 41 GC at least).

Maybe we are seeing a race between a walking man a man with a bicycle. The latter lags behind because he has not yet learnt how to ride the bicycle. But when he finally learns....

And this is key. All I know now is my Socratic stupidity (the only thing I know is that I am stupid) concerning this game still, and it will take some time to digest and learn. Your point about the initial blitzkriegs is important, the first few AARs did not show the panache of more recent ones.

Again, I am not saying that there are things not broken here, I am saying that the wailing and gnashing of teeth seems to be a bit premature. I wail and gnash all the time about the blizzard, but mostly it is because I really can't put things into practice that I think might work (see comrade P and his discussion in Q-Ball's AAR).

[Skanvak]

ORIGINAL: PeeDeeAitch

ORIGINAL: alfonso

Please note that I don't have an informed opinion about this issue, because I really think that there are not enough data at the moment. My impression is that the game is unbalanced, but in the sense that it seems much more difficult to master from the Axis side (the 41 GC at least).

Maybe we are seeing a race between a walking man a man with a bicycle. The latter lags behind because he has not yet learnt how to ride the bicycle. But when he finally learns....

And this is key. All I know now is my Socratic stupidity (the only thing I know is that I am stupid) concerning this game still, and it will take some time to digest and learn. Your point about the initial blitzkriegs is important, the first few AARs did not show the panache of more recent ones.

Again, I am not saying that there are things not broken here, I am saying that the wailing and gnashing of teeth seems to be a bit premature. I wail and gnash all the time about the blizzard, but mostly it is because I really can't put things into practice that I think might work (see comrade P and his discussion in Q-Ball's AAR).

+1

That why we should have an AAR of people doing trying to mimics the historical moves to see if the rules have really created supermen (german or russin) or not. That is the scientifc way of doing thing. I am still waiting for such an ARR from all the one accusing the developpers.

[Redmarkus5]

ORIGINAL: bdtj1815

I bought this game on the day it was released and I think it has many things going for it. What I did not realise when I paid my £70 was that I was not buying a finished product. So far I have had to download six patches and still I read that the "game will only be balanced" when enough people play it who can point out its faults.

35 years ago my first wargame, bought as a present for my fifteenth birthday, was "Drang nach Osten" by GDW. In real terms it probably cost more than WITE but worked "straight out of the box" and is still playable today without amy major modifications.

When I bought WITE I wish someone had written on the Matrix website that "this game will be great when you all find what is wrong with it now".

+1. I owned the same game 35 years ago and I share your views, sir.

[Redmarkus5]

ORIGINAL: pat.casey

ORIGINAL: Marquo

What would be the result of a, "successful" blizzard strategy? What should happen?

Marquo

In my opinion:

If the axis player is overextended and in an offensive deployment (the historical situation), then I'd expect soviet gains in line with history with the ability of the soviets to support two major thrusts and an ability to inflict significant german casualties.

If the axis player is more conservatively deployed than was historically the case, I'd expect the ability of the soviets to launch limited spoiling attacks to solve "problem" areas of the lines, clean up bridgeheads, etc.

As it stands right now, regardless of the axis player's deployments, the soviets are going to take more ground and inflict more casualties than the historical counterattack did.

+1. A logical and coherent analysis of a key problem.

My impression is that during development and testing some serious game mechanics problems must have been identified. To address these, 'superman' status was assigned, first to the Axis in '41 and then to the Soviets during the blizzard. If further 'refinements' are all we can hope for, we are unlikely to see a satisfactory fix. A major re-work of the game design is what is needed. See my Updated Master List of Issues thread in the Tech Support forum for details - just sort by most hits and it comes to the top

[2ndACR]

Turn 31 against Kelblau, 15 Jan 42.

The average German infantry div has 6000 men in them. Morale is around 40ish. Both mountain div are at 7500 men. The is no Romanian army anymore. I have 8 div completely depleted. The blizzard is only half over yet the German army has vaporized completely. I have held in a few places inflicting 6500 casualties to a couple attacks. Managed to punt a few tank brigades back. But basically, it is all she wrote. I have been kicked all the way back across the Dnepr. I am seeing my div suffering an average of 3 attacks per turn. That basically destroys the div. So far none surrounded but I cannot stop him, cannot even force him to pause. Pskov will soon fall or face isolation.

And seeing the strength of my units, there is no way I will be able to force a river crossing again against level 4+ forts. Game over.

[Zort]

Guess I am confused concerning the Axis superman status in 41.  I have been playing 2 CG games on the server, and did several against the AI to get my feet wet (didn't finish any though, got thru blizzard on a couple).  So far the only reason I have gotten further then historical is because my opponent retreated more.  When he has been doing the forward layered defense I am behind historical.  I am not an expert player and I don't think most people are so I must be missing something.  What is this axis ability?

So my other question is if you do away with the "superman" status for the axis in 41 will they have the ability to get as far as they did historically against an average soviet player?