Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

ORIGINAL: Aurelian


OK How is that silly Lvov Opening going to be dealt with?

I assume you are talking about the standard version rather than mine [;)]. The trouble is that if you don't do it, you will not get very far in '41 because you won't kill enough communists in the first few turns.

[:D]

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

Possibly but I'm not sure what Trey has planned for the Soviets.

We do now have the functionality to set renames in the editor which can be triggered by turn, or TOE change, or depletion, or destruction.

Good to hear.

I was thinking that by the late war, the Shock armies should have any bonus they might have either greatly reduced or gone all together.

They were intended to smash through stubborn defenses to clear the way for the mobile units. But late in the war (44 on), they became for the most part regular armies.

Trey would know better than me I would guess.

Oh, I'm not going to be upset if doesn't happen

Silly and Michael T,

obviously the first release was tested and balanced with this pocket since early beta, so this is the only and obvious way to start now.
We agree that GER needs a perfect start, otherwise all went "Schlieffen" - but I still think it could solved a little bit more elegant. Heeresmission Roumania for example was no way ready for the surprise attack.

The feeling is just not right, there must be psychological stress, fear, suprise, unknown things from the very first moment,as no plan survive the first contact. It's a wargame, not chess! In the end it's all a question of balancing, or maybe just an extra quarterturn or something else.
But I dislike opening theory in chess, too.

an example might be the original TOAW Korea Scenario by Norm K. himself, allthough the destruction of the ROK forces has a very fluid variability, North Korea could adapt and the total impact is in 95% neglectable

(by the way, Red, I hope you find some time to look at some other classics too, as even crap like HOI has some really great ideas and potential solutions)

We have added code that sets soviet motorized units to reserve with 50MPs to increase reserve activation on T1 if the Axis player is human.

This is great to hear. While the command and control of the Soviet forces was a shambles, there were instances where counter attacks were attempted on June 23. Hopefully this new feature will give some more interesting variations in T1.

btw, a significant number (probably more than 5) rifle divisions in the Baltic destrict defected nearly immeadidly and united, as they were mainly former Latvian, Estonian and Lithuanian soldiers. These gaps were used for the Panzers.

Well IMO the game has always given the Soviets way too much latitude in C&C for the first few months. The Lvov opening compensated for that in a way. If you are now going to give all those Soviet troops back, then I trust, surely the devs have devised some way to give the Axis some other advantages. Just some ideas from other games I have played in no particular order:

Whenever a Soviet unit is selected to move and then moved there is a C&C check done, maybe the unit won't move at all, maybe it will go all the way, maybe some where in between.

The Soviet's are forced to attack with non isolated units (Ordered by Stalin) failure to do so incurs some penalty.

A random chance applied to all units that they will just 'freeze' for the turn.

Anyone who has read even an ounce of material on the early days knows these kind of things are simply not reflected in the game and they should be. It needs to happen.

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

We have added code that sets soviet motorized units to reserve with 50MPs to increase reserve activation on T1 if the Axis player is human. As reserve activation is roll related this increases the variability of T1.

Based on the system now that will only help the axis as it pulls units towards the panzer armies. I would be afraid that the next system would only speed up the demise of motorized units with this approach. I am ignorant on computer programming, but could you not just toggle off AI with player versus player ? Also it seems my comments may have stirred people up, and that was not my intention. I enjoy these games and appreciate the hard work you put into them

c00per, stirring people up means that you are making an impact in the world

FYI, we are in very early alpha testing. Many new systems are still being designed and coded. Many changes to old systems (whether they be from WitE1 or WitW) still require much work. We brought in a few testers to help us start finding basic issues and to give Gary some early feedback on his early AI work. This product will go through many stages of testing with lots of testers. We love getting testers that push the envelope and show us problems to be worked on. Of course, the reality of a game this big and that takes months (years?) to play one game is that we can never get enough human testing before release. The vast majority of players don't push the system, and those that do, often take awhile before they get up to speed enough to figure out where the holes are. Testing isn't easy and isn't for everyone. Things change during the testing process so few games are "clean" tests. I can say that before release we will try to bring in talented gamers that can try to identify most of the issues before release. No doubt many items won't be found until the larger community is playing the game, but that doesn't mean that the game can't be enjoyed from day 1. Our goal is to release a game we're proud of and that can be enjoyed "out of the box".

I try to read this forum periodically. I want to thank Red Lancer for taking his time trying to answer questions and passing on info here re WitE2. For those that don't know it, John does it all. He has written scenarios, provided artwork, been a major contributor to improving the map data, and has tried to keep us honest with regards logistics (which he seems to know an awful lot about from his day job). He wrote the player's handbook for WitW (and created the one-page guides), and helps out in a million other ways I haven't mentioned. Thanks John.

Playing against the AI, I am always pushing the limits of the game. at least as the soviets. Could I volunteer for Alpha testing?

PM Sent

I think Pelton should be allowed into the beta test (if he isnt already). I know he can be obnoxious and I used to get upset when I read his posts but fact is that few appear to be as passionate about the game and eager to improve it as he is. I think most of the stuff he writes isnt meant to be offensive it just comes across that way. Having him play the game early and give his feedback would improve the game in the long run. Just my 5 cents.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Well IMO the game has always given the Soviets way too much latitude in C&C for the first few months. The Lvov opening compensated for that in a way. If you are now going to give all those Soviet troops back, then I trust, surely the devs have devised some way to give the Axis some other advantages. Just some ideas from other games I have played in no particular order:

Whenever a Soviet unit is selected to move and then moved there is a C&C check done, maybe the unit won't move at all, maybe it will go all the way, maybe some where in between.

The Soviet's are forced to attack with non isolated units (Ordered by Stalin) failure to do so incurs some penalty.

A random chance applied to all units that they will just 'freeze' for the turn.

Anyone who has read even an ounce of material on the early days knows these kind of things are simply not reflected in the game and they should be. It needs to happen.

Perceived bias is always a emotive topic.

Your suggestions are well made but should we not, for balance, code for the German failure in 1941 to follow the first principle of war - the selection and maintenance of the aim? How far should the player be tied to history?

The Lvov Pocket is an excellent case study. On the one hand attempting it should be allowed as historically it ought to be possible, on the other its success shouldn't trigger unfreeze code that is ahistoric. Should it be a prerequisite in balancing 1941?

I could show them the HQ bug, from 1.0

but

RL is RL

I know 2.0 is not WitW

But you still can't find the HQ bug or the fuel Bug WitW.

Yes 2.0 is so different or is it?

MT you alrdy know the answer to the question, but u never paid the cash for WitW.

Sapper already knows , guessing TDV and Clown boy already know

Think MT think [&o]

Your a good teacher, but a poor student unlike some.

Yup the all seeing eye is seeing [8D] and has been for over 17 months.

They will not get the 17 months[>:]

The problem ultimately is time scale. The increments (one week) are too long. 4 days would make a much better game.

But WITE 2.0 is really going to be WITE 1.5

If I were designing WITE 2.0

Map scale 10Km per hex, 4 day turns, and take out a lot of unnecessary micro management. This would compensate for the extra turns, more of them but shortened due to less MM.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

The problem ultimately is time scale. The increments (one week) are too long. 4 days would make a much better game.

But WITE 2.0 is really going to be WITE 1.5

If I were designing WITE 2.0

Map scale 10Km per hex, 4 day turns, and take out a lot of unnecessary micro management. This would compensate for the extra turns, more of them but shortened due to less MM.

Your right about some things

See u in a week or so

FOW?

I haven't played WitW, so perhaps some of this is no longer relevant

Playing the soviets for the first significant amount of time I notice two bits of Information that give opponents too much intel (IMO): (this with full FOW on)

1) I find it awesome (I mean too powerful) that I can inspect the Axis rail network hex by hex and see the exact status of it. Just knowing if it was damaged or working would be a lot of knowledge, but I can see the exact % of repair. And this without so much as air recon or any units within 100km. Seems like air recon could detect if trains are running or not, but I think you should have to conduct a mission on the hex/area first.

2) Soviet Factories (well anyone's factories). I can understand Axis knowing the disposition of factories in June 1941, that is information that could be gathered over time ahead of time. But once the factory relocates, should they be able to see that its missing from a city 100s of km away? And also see that it was added to a city 1,000km away? I don't really think so. If you flew air recon you might be able to notice that not many tanks are rolling out of that factory anymore, but down to the number of armament factories in existence after T1 in each location seems implausible.

Just some observations/opinions and hope for something more subtle in WitE 2.0

ORIGINAL: uw06670

FOW?

I haven't played WitW, so perhaps some of this is no longer relevant

Playing the soviets for the first significant amount of time I notice two bits of Information that give opponents too much intel (IMO): (this with full FOW on)

1) I find it awesome (I mean too powerful) that I can inspect the Axis rail network hex by hex and see the exact status of it. Just knowing if it was damaged or working would be a lot of knowledge, but I can see the exact % of repair. And this without so much as air recon or any units within 100km. Seems like air recon could detect if trains are running or not, but I think you should have to conduct a mission on the hex/area first.

2) Soviet Factories (well anyone's factories). I can understand Axis knowing the disposition of factories in June 1941, that is information that could be gathered over time ahead of time. But once the factory relocates, should they be able to see that its missing from a city 100s of km away? And also see that it was added to a city 1,000km away? I don't really think so. If you flew air recon you might be able to notice that not many tanks are rolling out of that factory anymore, but down to the number of armament factories in existence after T1 in each location seems implausible.

Just some observations/opinions and hope for something more subtle in WitE 2.0

Not to mention exact strength of the enemy army.

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Well IMO the game has always given the Soviets way too much latitude in C&C for the first few months. The Lvov opening compensated for that in a way. If you are now going to give all those Soviet troops back, then I trust, surely the devs have devised some way to give the Axis some other advantages. Just some ideas from other games I have played in no particular order:

Whenever a Soviet unit is selected to move and then moved there is a C&C check done, maybe the unit won't move at all, maybe it will go all the way, maybe some where in between.

The Soviet's are forced to attack with non isolated units (Ordered by Stalin) failure to do so incurs some penalty.

A random chance applied to all units that they will just 'freeze' for the turn.

Anyone who has read even an ounce of material on the early days knows these kind of things are simply not reflected in the game and they should be. It needs to happen.

Perceived bias is always a emotive topic.

Your suggestions are well made but should we not, for balance, code for the German failure in 1941 to follow the first principle of war - the selection and maintenance of the aim? How far should the player be tied to history?

The Lvov Pocket is an excellent case study. On the one hand attempting it should be allowed as historically it ought to be possible, on the other its success shouldn't trigger unfreeze code that is ahistoric. Should it be a prerequisite in balancing 1941?

So then why not force the Axis to follow Hitler's orders? Never see Axis players demanding that they follow his orders. (Like not taking Leningrad. Or no retreating during the first winter to name just two.) But they sure like throwing Stalin's orders in the mix