WitE 2

[Michael T]

Good to see you around Ketza. If only PC War game programmers had a deeper/richer board game pedigree. Many of these debates would be moot as the devs would already be familiar with the problems we describe. I think that's half the battle. Getting the programmers to understand where their programs are lacking and how these problems impact on playing the game.

[morvael]

V for Victory also had variable ZOC strength, due to limitations of 1990's computers it was in range 0-15 (so as to use only one byte per hex for two ZOC strengths). I think it's wise to have more gradual effects in computer war games, now that we have much more computational power. Binary ZOCs and other binary rules (and small integers that's hard to tweak since even 1pt change means huge change, like MP) are so "paper-boardgamey" and they should have no place in PC games. But it's a real problem if you would like to change one of the base rules in a mature engine. So much things to rework, so much things could break.

[zakblood]

i loved V 4 victory in it's day and played it to death, also loved Arnhem and Desert Rat, ah good old days and fun[&o]




Bob Smith

Arnhem (CCS)
Desert Rats (CCS)
Vulcan (CCS)

[Michael T]

Stalingrad was great, the original Avalon Hill precursor was great, way ahead of its time.

[Capitaine]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

In my experience, players, if given the chance will have as many on map units as they can. Because the ants create friction as equally well as larger formations. I realize there will be less ants in WITE 2.0. As there are no on map tank brigades. A big improvement.

However as long as the player can put them on the map he will. Because there will always be circumstances when belts of sticky ants will serve a purpose. But that purpose (a carpet of ants) is not in any way realistic in the effect they have.

If you can say that a carpet of ants is not possible anymore then bravo, case solved. Let's move on. But since the Soviet as far as I know will still have many dozens of INF brigades, security regiments, AT brigades etc then the potential for carpets is still there.

Since WitE/WitW are supposed to be divisional scale games, why not just impose an absolute [low] limit on the number of brigade-sized units a side can deploy? Sort of like a countermix limit in a board wargame? Then, in a very appropriate situation a brigade unit can be deployed, but a wide-ranging use of brigades would not be possible. I'm not sure what the limit would be because I've never played a full campaign game of WitE and wouldn't use the tactic anyway, but I'm thinking like a dozen brigades wouldn't be amiss.

[MechFO]

ORIGINAL: Capitaine

ORIGINAL: Michael T

In my experience, players, if given the chance will have as many on map units as they can. Because the ants create friction as equally well as larger formations. I realize there will be less ants in WITE 2.0. As there are no on map tank brigades. A big improvement.

However as long as the player can put them on the map he will. Because there will always be circumstances when belts of sticky ants will serve a purpose. But that purpose (a carpet of ants) is not in any way realistic in the effect they have.

If you can say that a carpet of ants is not possible anymore then bravo, case solved. Let's move on. But since the Soviet as far as I know will still have many dozens of INF brigades, security regiments, AT brigades etc then the potential for carpets is still there.

Since WitE/WitW are supposed to be divisional scale games, why not just impose an absolute [low] limit on the number of brigade-sized units a side can deploy? Sort of like a countermix limit in a board wargame? Then, in a very appropriate situation a brigade unit can be deployed, but a wide-ranging use of brigades would not be possible. I'm not sure what the limit would be because I've never played a full campaign game of WitE and wouldn't use the tactic anyway, but I'm thinking like a dozen brigades wouldn't be amiss.

Would be completely arbitrary with no way of balancing or judging what is "reasonable" based historical background. This will lead to endless vitriolic discussion.

[Capitaine]

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: Capitaine

ORIGINAL: Michael T

In my experience, players, if given the chance will have as many on map units as they can. Because the ants create friction as equally well as larger formations. I realize there will be less ants in WITE 2.0. As there are no on map tank brigades. A big improvement.

However as long as the player can put them on the map he will. Because there will always be circumstances when belts of sticky ants will serve a purpose. But that purpose (a carpet of ants) is not in any way realistic in the effect they have.

If you can say that a carpet of ants is not possible anymore then bravo, case solved. Let's move on. But since the Soviet as far as I know will still have many dozens of INF brigades, security regiments, AT brigades etc then the potential for carpets is still there.

Since WitE/WitW are supposed to be divisional scale games, why not just impose an absolute [low] limit on the number of brigade-sized units a side can deploy? Sort of like a countermix limit in a board wargame? Then, in a very appropriate situation a brigade unit can be deployed, but a wide-ranging use of brigades would not be possible. I'm not sure what the limit would be because I've never played a full campaign game of WitE and wouldn't use the tactic anyway, but I'm thinking like a dozen brigades wouldn't be amiss.

Would be completely arbitrary with no way of balancing or judging what is "reasonable" based historical background. This will lead to endless vitriolic discussion.

Yes, in a division level game I have no problem with an arbitrary limit on breakdown brigades allowed. I think it's a playability issue, not an historical or realism issue. If you allow breakdown brigades in all cases, it effectively becomes a brigade level game if a player so desires. Again, I have no problem with an arbitrary rule. It's still a game. (I would not include brigades that are part of the normal OOB; only those that are produced by breaking down divisions.)

[MechFO]

My personal take is:

The ability to exert ZOC in reality is based on a combination of CV and mobility.

To exert it you need at least a small mobile, or a large immobile formation. As such I would think ZOC can best be expressed as a function of CV and MP. This arguably ignores one of the most important means of exerting influence, artillery, but short of Morvaels Alt-CV calc being generally implemented I don't see a "quick" and "easy" way of including it. This should be mitigated by WITE units having real unit templates, so there should be few edge cases.

Ideally every hex would consider all influencing units. This would allow for thin delaying screens and dense defensive belts.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Capitaine

ORIGINAL: Michael T

In my experience, players, if given the chance will have as many on map units as they can. Because the ants create friction as equally well as larger formations. I realize there will be less ants in WITE 2.0. As there are no on map tank brigades. A big improvement.

However as long as the player can put them on the map he will. Because there will always be circumstances when belts of sticky ants will serve a purpose. But that purpose (a carpet of ants) is not in any way realistic in the effect they have.

If you can say that a carpet of ants is not possible anymore then bravo, case solved. Let's move on. But since the Soviet as far as I know will still have many dozens of INF brigades, security regiments, AT brigades etc then the potential for carpets is still there.

Since WitE/WitW are supposed to be divisional scale games, why not just impose an absolute [low] limit on the number of brigade-sized units a side can deploy? Sort of like a countermix limit in a board wargame? Then, in a very appropriate situation a brigade unit can be deployed, but a wide-ranging use of brigades would not be possible. I'm not sure what the limit would be because I've never played a full campaign game of WitE and wouldn't use the tactic anyway, but I'm thinking like a dozen brigades wouldn't be amiss.

problem is there are two types of on-map 'brigades' in the game. One is a conventional division (or later game Soviet tank or mech corps) split off into individual parts. This is popular with some axis players as it improves the chances of reserve reactions and is mainly an option open to the axis side.

Both sides also deployed some formations which were independent brigades. The Axis-Allied armies used a lot of these and so do the late game Germans. The Soviets at the end of 1941 were awash in them. They were a purely pragmatic solution - they had real problems of competent command at the divisional level so it broke those formations down. It was also a bit easier to raise combat units at the brigade level from specialist sources.

In WiTE2, the Soviet tank brigades are now completely off map. This is good as it'll see the creation of mixed cavalry and armour formations and then the surviving brigades will become the basis of the 1942 Tank Corps.

The various variants of the rifle brigades can be on-map (as in WiTE); merged into a rifle division to bring it up to strength (and lost forever), attached to an army as a support unit (and allocated to combat on that basis) or attached to a division as support unit (and effectively part of the unit till you re-assign). Anti-Tank brigades are similar - I can see a use for them now and you could build a Kursk style infantry-AT defensive set up using these tricks.

MichaelT is ignoring the real gains to these three options - understandable as I don't think he has really played WiTW. What you can do is to create an army built around say 6-8 rifle divisions. Each gets an attached rifle brigade and then you can more rifle brigades in the HQ (this is close to real OOB of the early shock armies). I reckon you could stack about 12 cv (offensive), plus the likelihood of support units plus the new rules that reward combat preparation. That crashing into an over-extended German line is going to be very bad news for the Axis - but of course comes out being weak elsewhere.

He might be right in the end but I think he's being a bit dismissive of the ways that the game is evolving to be honest.

[rmonical]

The end of the world dynamic.
This situation comes up from time to time. Because the map ends, there are odd supply dynamics. And of course, Soviet units cannot move further south.

Is this dynamic fixed in WITE2? Would also be nice to extend north.

[morvael]

Only a full globe map would solve this (or at least a map expanded beyond the range of conflict) [:)]

[rmonical]

Not really. Extending the map north to the Arctic ocean and south to Turkey/Iran border would cover most of this situations that arise. In the south, the Axis player can explicitly play to the "end of the world" By providing special Iran rules (British support if the German's get too close) these implausible situations will not have a huge impact on the game.

[morvael]

What about east? To Vladivostok?

[RedLancer]

WitE2 has the same large map as WitW so you can go to Turkey/Iran. Whether we make it playable that far has yet to be decided.

[rmonical]

ORIGINAL: morvael

What about east? To Vladivostok?

IMHO, if the Germans force the Soviets off the east edge of the map, there is no chance of recovery. If the Germans take Baku, there is. Especially if the Front that is trapped between the Caucuses and the edge of the map is not eliminated.

Making Tbilisi a supply source would do a lot to eliminate the problem.

[Michael T]

@Loki you are only thinking in an offensive context. A player on the back foot in 1942 is going to swamp the landscape with a carpet of brigades. You simply have not played enough to realize this. Check the AAR's. It's an accepted defensive technique. And to keep comparing WITW with WITE in this context is like apples and oranges.

They are two completely different types of war. The allied player in WITW (if he knows his business) is rarely if ever going to be concerned with defensive lines. Whereas with the Russian it is his primary concern for the best part of two years.

I don't know why people try to derail simple suggestions with unrelated bull dust. The question is NOT how or when a player should use his brigades. The question is should a brigade have as much stickiness as a hex full of Mech units. Simple.

Either it will change or it won't. To argue though that the game would be no better with a more sophisticated zoc rule set is beyond my ability to comprehend. Trying to be non offensive here.

For some strange reason, you want to insist that it is not a problem and it won't matter because players will, for goodwill I guess, decline to create a carpet defense with ants.

I am going to leave the subject now. I can add no more. The naysayers can have sway.

[chaos45]

IDK about the carpet being all that effective honestly esp with more shatters now on just BDE units. With the new supply system a huge carpet probably wont be needed. In Wite 1 you need the carpet because the otherside can concentrate a massive amount of force in a very small area. Unlike real life you will commmonly see 20+ German C/M divisions concentrated in 1 push, and the same on the soviet side. This allows some fairly gamey play on both sides really.

You easily see it with in me and Peltons game where in 1942 he has massive concentrations punching through just about where ever he wants, and then once the tide turns I turn the exact same tactic on the Germans. The game system without a hex delay or a huge supply limitation for massive forces in a small area just breaks down. A sea of ants wont matter against those size force concentrations. As once you break the line the next division or corps just hasty attacks a huge amount of ants out of the way for little MP cost.

Both sides can do this at different time periods in the current game. In real life terms a 3-5k man unit defending one hex is still going to cause issues to the attacker no matter how strong. Will the attacker defeat the defender, almost certainly yes...however that unit will still inflict losses and slow or delay the attack. Not to mention unlike in the game the attacker probably wouldnt know its only a BDE esp after he has already had to fight through several defensive belts at the main front.

Both sides had this lack of real accurate recon on advances past the MLR. Often German motorcylce units just sprinting ahead till they met resistance then trying to figure out what that resistance was. So IMO even just a BDE should zoc/delay an advance because the turns are only 1 week and defeating a BDE in combat even with superior forces would take most likely a day of action or so.

Recon probably needs to be one of the bigger changes in the game as enemy units and strength is way to easy to know/see. In real life the estimates were never all that accurate. For the MLR decent recon levels are probably accurate however if they units dont start next to each other the recon needs to be alot more limited than it is.....as they have had very limited time to figure out who they ran into.

[rainman2015]

ORIGINAL: chaos45

Not to mention unlike in the game the attacker probably wouldnt know its only a BDE esp after he has already had to fight through several defensive belts at the main front.

Both sides had this lack of real accurate recon on advances past the MLR. Often German motorcylce units just sprinting ahead till they met resistance then trying to figure out what that resistance was. So IMO even just a BDE should zoc/delay an advance because the turns are only 1 week and defeating a BDE in combat even with superior forces would take most likely a day of action or so.

Recon probably needs to be one of the bigger changes in the game as enemy units and strength is way to easy to know/see. In real life the estimates were never all that accurate. For the MLR decent recon levels are probably accurate however if they units dont start next to each other the recon needs to be alot more limited than it is.....as they have had very limited time to figure out who they ran into.

I like the idea of a more limited recon ability for units that you didn't start the movement phase next to (i.e. more limited air type recon). That would make a much different game, although speaking as one that mostly plays the Germans, not sure i like it (hmmm)! You would need to know the basics of what you were attacking to know how much force to bring to bear or any tiny unit would force you to 'overspend' combat force/MPs to attack, but i like the concept.

Randy

[RKhan]

So, how far away are we from having WITE 2.0 available, even as beta? Is there a place one can look for updates on the release date?

[RedLancer]

You won't get a better answer than Post #522 above.