Game Suggestions:

Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.

The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).

Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21

User avatar
Tarhunnas
Posts: 2902
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:19 am
Location: Hex X37, Y15

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by Tarhunnas »

ORIGINAL: 76mm

One thing is starting to drive me crazy: let's say I attack an enemy unit and force it to retreat. I then want to move a stack of three units into the newly-vacated hex, and the units have different CVs (lets say 14, 12, 10).

Very very very often, I cannot simply move the stack into the hex: I have to move the unit with 14 MP first. It's presence then allows the unit with 12 MPs to move into the hex, but not the unit with 10 MPs. Once the units with 14 and 12 MPs have both moved into the hex, then the unit with 10 MPs can also move in. So I can move the whole stack, but only one at a time, but takes a long time. Why not just allow the stack to move in from the beginning?

Good point! I am annoyed about this too. I have a suspicion it might have to do with the units having different morale and thus paying different costs for entering a hex previously in enemy control. Still, as all units have the MPs to enter the hex, they ought to be able to do it as a stack.
------------------------------
RTW3 Designer
Pawlock
Posts: 412
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 11:39 pm
Location: U.K.

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by Pawlock »

Something in the game I think works quite well, but I think it could be made better in the future is "Recon". As it stands now the maximum DL that can be achieved for non air units away from the frontline is 4. Perhaps make a facility where you could do 2 types of Recon, ie normal and low level. Normal as it is now, but low level gives a better chance of detecting and say raising the DL to 7 at perhaps a cost of highter interception and AA loss rates.
User avatar
76mm
Posts: 4766
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 4:26 am
Location: Washington, DC

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by 76mm »

I find recon rather problematic for several reasons:

1) Why is it that only recon planes can fly recon missions? While I understand that you don't want to allow entire air fleets to fly recon missions, it seems odd that all fo the other thousands of aircraft can't see anything. As Soviet player, I've had many turns where I've gotten ZERO recon flights in particular areas, and I have no idea why.

2) Again, as Sov player I'm rather surprised how often I have virtually no idea where entire panzer armies are, despite doing as much recon as I possibly can. You would think that reporting the locations of panzer and mechanized units would be a rather high priority taks for partisans, so maybe such units within a few hexes of a partisan unit should be detected. This would also give greater incentive to develop (for Sovs) and squash (for Germsns) partisan forces.
marcpennington
Posts: 327
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:07 pm

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by marcpennington »

ORIGINAL: 76mm

I find recon rather problematic for several reasons:

1) Why is it that only recon planes can fly recon missions? While I understand that you don't want to allow entire air fleets to fly recon missions, it seems odd that all fo the other thousands of aircraft can't see anything. As Soviet player, I've had many turns where I've gotten ZERO recon flights in particular areas, and I have no idea why.

2) Again, as Sov player I'm rather surprised how often I have virtually no idea where entire panzer armies are, despite doing as much recon as I possibly can. You would think that reporting the locations of panzer and mechanized units would be a rather high priority taks for partisans, so maybe such units within a few hexes of a partisan unit should be detected. This would also give greater incentive to develop (for Sovs) and squash (for Germsns) partisan forces.

I agree with the problems on recon. One additional issue I have is that recon seems far too strong for behind the front lines, particularly as far as the Germans go. Historically throughout the war (but particularly in 1941), the Germans rarely had an idea when and where (or for that matter that they even existed) the Soviet reserve formations would appear--- Glantz's Barborossa Derailed has good examples of this. My sense is that recon is far too strong for anything 3-4 hexes beyond the front line, giving the Germans an ahistorical strategic advantage in 1941---- you may not be able to tell exactly which specific divisions are there, but one can tell by the mass of counters where the Soviet armies are and where their next line of defense is going to be, leading to little chance of unwelcome surprises for one's panzers.

I think the Soviets should get an advantage in long range recon, particularly after 1941, tied to both partisans and far better strategic level intelligence then the Germans ever had (Gehlen's apologias aside). Even in 1941, it's striking how detailed the Soviet knowledge of the German OOB was, as evidenced again in the summarized daily reports in Glantz's Battle of Smolensk book, which repeatedly show fairly accurate information down to a divisional level or below, and a good and timely sense of the movement of German reserves.
User avatar
Monter_Trismegistos
Posts: 1359
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 8:58 pm
Location: Gdansk

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by Monter_Trismegistos »

Ability to put all Fortified Regions on bottom of stacks...
Nec Temere Nec Timide
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą
wpurdom
Posts: 441
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Decatur, GA, USA

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by wpurdom »

Purely chrome - would like to be able to rename Fronts.
User avatar
dasboot1960
Posts: 437
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 1:38 pm
Location: St Augustine, Florida

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by dasboot1960 »

umm. look at opart iii for inspiration? shade the relevant hexes or ring them? My toe is just now wet with this game...
Down like a CLOWN!
User avatar
Der Lwe
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:54 am

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by Der Lwe »

I would like some kind of "winterezition" rule. If you can motorize your units temporarily, why cant you train some of the German units to be prepared for winter. It has to be costly unless the germans will all wear furs for the winter. Maybee if you use the Mountain troops as "trainers" and cadre for this it would not be to widespead. So here goues. Removing a mountain unit would give you a winter training pool and cadre, for example one division would bring 9 units a brigade 3 or four. each of these batalion cadres could be used as support units. Every division that has such an SU attached would be better off from the first winter rules. How much would need to be tested. Beeing suport units the cadres could only be attached to the same nationality.

EDIT
Next, as I understand the german Jager division was trained for warfare in "rough" terain. Would some kind of momement cost adjustment for svamp, heawy woods and maybe rough be apropriate?
Der Löwe
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4445
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by Michael T »

This is the only divisional game that I have seen where the light divisions don't have some kind of movement increase or bonus over regular foot troops. Isn't this why they were made 'light' in the first place?
User avatar
sillyflower
Posts: 3509
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Back in Blighty

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by sillyflower »

ORIGINAL: Michael T

This is the only divisional game that I have seen where the light divisions don't have some kind of movement increase or bonus over regular foot troops. Isn't this why they were made 'light' in the first place?

I think there should be a rule reducing all Michael T's units' MPs by 10% as he's too good already
web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?
User avatar
morganbj
Posts: 3472
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:36 am
Location: Mosquito Bite, Texas

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by morganbj »

Add in a few levels of bad weather with different effects than what you have now.

I would suggest a "thunderstorm" event that occurrs only in the summer. (No more mud turns in Summer). This level would reduce the motorized units movement, but much less so leg units. Some effects on supply.

Then add a light mud. This level would have about half of the effect of the current mud turns. I see this as a way to slowly increase the effects of mud in the fall, then slowly return them to normal in the spring.

The same thing for snow. Add "flurries," and "light snow" to the game. Have a turn or two of these leading up to a full snow turn. Have blizzard turns randomly, but not consistently, in the winter. Say a 40% probablility. (Perhaps 60%, or something, the first winter.) The snow effects can slowly go away as spring approaches.

Then, carefully craft probabilities of when all the events will begin and end, but in a much more realistic way than we see now. If this is done correctly, the the 'historical" weather option would not be necessary. The problem is that in the variable weather, events are sudden and seemingly sometimes out of place, in my opinion.
Occasionally, and randomly, problems and solutions collide. The probability of these collisions is inversely related to the number of committees working on the solutions. -- Me.
randallw
Posts: 2060
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:28 pm

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by randallw »

The computer's troubles with selecting a proper HQ for on-map units ( such as deciding to give German divisions a Hungarian Corps HQ instead of a German HQ ) is distracting, and probably inefficient.
User avatar
Shupov
Posts: 355
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 3:02 am
Location: United States

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by Shupov »

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

One thing is starting to drive me crazy: let's say I attack an enemy unit and force it to retreat. I then want to move a stack of three units into the newly-vacated hex, and the units have different CVs (lets say 14, 12, 10).

Very very very often, I cannot simply move the stack into the hex: I have to move the unit with 14 MP first. It's presence then allows the unit with 12 MPs to move into the hex, but not the unit with 10 MPs. Once the units with 14 and 12 MPs have both moved into the hex, then the unit with 10 MPs can also move in. So I can move the whole stack, but only one at a time, but takes a long time. Why not just allow the stack to move in from the beginning?


Good point! I am annoyed about this too. I have a suspicion it might have to do with the units having different morale and thus paying different costs for entering a hex previously in enemy control. Still, as all units have the MPs to enter the hex, they ought to be able to do it as a stack.

I raised this issue in the Tech Support forum here:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2826497

It's a known issue and the workaround is to move units one at a time.
"The Motherland Calls"

Mamayev Kurgan, Stalingrad (Volgograd)
User avatar
76mm
Posts: 4766
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 4:26 am
Location: Washington, DC

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by 76mm »

ORIGINAL: Shupov

It's a known issue and the workaround is to move units one at a time.

I realize that's the work around, I describe it in my post. The thing is that I don't want to have to move units one at a time.

[EDIT] And actually, the thread you link to refers to a different issue, just that the MP display is incorrect under certain circumstances. The issue I am referring to is not the MP display, but the actual MP.
Djouk
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:49 pm

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by Djouk »

[font="Times New Roman"][/font] I like this game more and more and with practice i saw that when you active fortified icons (f hotkey) these icons are just in front of soft factor data (not a problem of zoom). Please just put fortify icons righter on counters. There is also certainly a rule with air lift support that is not explained in manuel. Using shift key sometimes some squadrons are ready for this rather than others after picking an other nationality or army group (not due to the range) when air transport mode is active. No where in manual i saw a rule about that, i discovered this at practice.
User avatar
kvolk
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 9:09 pm

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by kvolk »

Put a turns until withdrawing in the commaders report. That way when you filter for withdrawing units it not only shows you that unit but it tells you what turn in is withdrawing on up to 10 turns out from current.
Leadership is intangible, and therefore no weapon ever designed can replace it.
Omar N. Bradley
Rom3l
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:33 am

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by Rom3l »

ORIGINAL: WarHunter

The ability to Click on a FBD unit and give it a path to repair. Instead of clicking on each and every hex. Each and every turn.

The ability to Toggle Rail damage for both Axis and Soviet rail nets.


+1 please
Harrybanana
Posts: 4098
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 12:07 am
Location: Canada

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by Harrybanana »

I would like to see a feature added to HQ units that allows them to go into refit mode as well. Without this feature the problem is that Soviet manpower and replacements only get added to the soviet ground units that are in refit mode and the HQs get very little. As a consequence all those new Army HQs assigned to STAVKA seem to take forever to get up to strength. Not a big deal, but I don't see why a player shouldn't be able to set an HQ to refit mode as well.
Robert Harris
User avatar
BletchleyGeek
Posts: 4460
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by BletchleyGeek »

By way of Lannister at www.puntadelanza.es, a couple requests/suggestions:

1. Something that would add some chrome to Wite would be the ability to add their historical badges to Axis units. This could be achieved by having some "generic" badges (country flags) somewhere in Dat/Art/Units which would be loaded if there wasn't present in that folder a file with a specific filename. For instance, if the file "logo814.tga" was present, then Unit 814 - 11 PzDiv - would have its generic badge replaced. Here's a mockup of what I have in mind:

Image

2. Something that would probably help to better navigate the command structure would be that when the unit info panel is invoked by clicking on a combat unit ID appearing on the ATTACHED UNITS list in HQ unit info panel, a link that brought you to the location of the unit appeared (very much like as you can do from the Command Report).
User avatar
Tarhunnas
Posts: 2902
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:19 am
Location: Hex X37, Y15

RE: Game Suggestions:

Post by Tarhunnas »

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

By way of Lannister at www.puntadelanza.es, a couple requests/suggestions:

1. Something that would add some chrome to Wite would be the ability to add their historical badges to Axis units.

That's cute! I like version 2 better.

But why restrict it to Axis units? Admittedly Soviet badges would be either Guards or not I suppose, but still. Or were the Soviet branches of service badges used already during WW2?
------------------------------
RTW3 Designer
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series”