Why I'm Not Buying (Yet)

[DD696]

Just want to say that I was also "not buying yet" due to purchasing the, in my opinion, very unfinished War in the East, and finally having to give up on it due to numerous unresolved issues.

However, I have purchased WitW today due to the LACK of tech support issues. Playing the Husky tutorial and enjoying to so far. It does appear that the issues that made War in the East so unappealing to me have been resolved with War in the West.

I extend my congratulations to the team that put this together. It has to be one of the most bug free games ever released by Matrix, and I am truly amazed by this wonderful turn of events in the release of games.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

[Canoerebel]

I started this thread back in December, I think on the day of WitW's release. (I should have waited a few days, as Bullwinkle suggested, to give the launch some breathing space before injecting a thread that was cautionary to negative.)

What I've seen thus far is a game that is complex, that some players love passionately, but that most of the wargaming community has turned it's shoulder to. There's almost nobody left in this forum. The AARs are few. Interest is waning. Judging by that, I'd say the markeplace has spoken.

Alot of time and effort went into a game. We're lucky an effort was made, but unfortunately it seems to have missed the mark.

It'll be interesting to see what happens next. Where is the future of strategic wargaming of the WWII era. If WitW hasn't satisfied, what will?

Meanwhile, check out the sustained interest in the WitP:AE forum. After six years, interest in that game seems to be increasing. [X(]

[RedLancer]

I think comparing WitP:AE with WitW is comparing apples with pears. However it is an interesting study in game development.

WitP:AE is a product of a single clear line of development from UV to WitP and then WitP:AE over very many years. All in the same theatre of operations and with the same basic construct. You could argue the perfect approach to game development and AE has had further patches in the last 12 months. The calls on the WitP:AE forum for further development are great and show that people want more. I love WitP:AE. My very small part in helping John III and the team with Reluctant Admiral & BTS proves this.

WitE delivered the complete eastern front in one go. To do so forced a number of abstractions and such a complex endeavour was always risky. I argue that the early WitE balance issues demonstrate the inherent risk in this approach. None of the games in discussion were perfect on release but WitP had UV as a precursor.

In moving from east to west the development of WitW forced a major de-abstraction for the air model. Invasions forced a huge development of the logistics model. This was a different set of development problems to the Pacific theatre games. For WitW starting in 43 allowed heavy abstraction of the naval game. WitW still took four years! However the compromise was the inevitability of the winner and the Axis on the retreat.

Like boxing everyone wants a knockout, no-one likes losing and winning on points is a necessary evil. Personally I hate VPs and when I design a scenario setting them is by far the least enjoyable task. The start date of WitW forced a VP approach and I think that VPs have been a huge bone of contention.

WitP and WitE have appeal as everyone thinks that as Japanese or Axis a good start will make all the difference. WitW does not have that but it is still great and I'm very proud of my involvement.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

It'll be interesting to see what happens next. Where is the future of strategic wargaming of the WWII era. If WitW hasn't satisfied, what will?

warspite1

The million dollar question, but the answer I see recurring time and time again is to model a game that both sides can win, that is on a knife edge from the word go. Can there be such a game in WWII? Well yes, definitely and I simply fail to understand why war in the Mediterranean from 1940 hasn't been properly done - with a proper stab at what is an exceptionally interesting naval situation. There are also relatively small numbers of land units allowing a game at detailed level on land as well as at sea and in the air.

This would have to be a winner surely??

[IslandInland]

WITW is not without it's issues, in my opinion the Axis seem to be overpowered, but I love the game and in an age of mobile "apps" I'm just glad games like this continue to be made.

It may take several years until the game is perfectly balanced and patched but I'm prepared to wait and hope more games and expansions are made with this map and this system. Hopefully the whole of WWII in Europe can be successfully simulated in those games and expansions.

[JocMeister]

I predicted this a couple of months back. I was then accused of making "threats" which was about as far from my intentions that you could come... I wanted this game to succeed badly. I love WitE and my personal favorite have always been the Western Front. So this was my dream come true I thought.

I´m not going to go into details on why I think WitW failed but I´ll give some advice for "next time" if there is one.

- Don´t put an outrageous price on a product unless its absolutely 100% worth the money. WitW did not and still doesn´t warrant the insane price tag. People in this niche is willing to pay a lot of money for certain products but then it needs to deliver.
- Let your testers play the ENTIRE game. I was told by Helpless a while back that the wern´t allowed to do that which is absolutely insane. A lot (if not most) of the issues could have been avoided if at least SOME GCs would have been played in its fullest.
- Look at the whole picture and ask the big questions. THE most important one: Is this fun to play? Will it still be fun after a couple of months?
- When numerous people who have bought the game (and paid almost double that of a AAA title) express alarm on the forum about the game. Take that seriously. You didn´t with WitW and I´m sure that didn´t go unnoticed among people "on the fence".
- If you know a mechanic in the game is controversial (negative VP system). Why on earth use it?

This is the 2nd high profile launch that ended in a big disappointment. Realize you have some fundamental issues in your process and try to correct them. You are slowly but surely losing the reputation you spent years and years building up. You are now in a situation where people are "getting used" to overpriced products that don´t deliver. So they will no longer buy at launch but wait and see how its received and/or buy at a sale. This puts you in a position when you have to deliver a close to impeccable product or lower prices to get people to buy.

I really hope the next big launch works out. I need to have some faith restored. [:)]

PS. A big kudos to all the WitW BETA testers that did more then could have ever been expected to help people here on the forum and address concerns! [&o]

[zakblood]

no comment

[bairdlander2]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

- Let your testers play the ENTIRE game. I was told by Helpless a while back that the wern´t allowed to do that which is absolutely insane. A lot (if not most) of the issues could have been avoided if at least SOME GCs would have been played in its fullest.

[&:][&:]I dont understand this,I finished my full game as a tester with Shermanny,at no time was I told by anyone from 2by3 to stop.It is pinned in the AAR section.[&:][&:]

[RedLancer]

That was news to me too but what would I know? I was only the Test Co-ordinator! The other suggestions made are much more valid, but if you agree with them, really only possible with the benefit of hindsight.

[JocMeister]

No need to be smug. Obviously I misunderstood Helpless.

But if players were allowed to play entire GCs I fail to understand how some major issues were not addressed before release?
-Supply bug in some Italian bases
-Naval interdiction completely out of control making landings almost impossible.

These are just two game breaking things that was fixed after a month or two. I wasn´t t out to point to specific issues but rather the fact that you when you charge close to 100 Euro for a game people expect (rightly so) perfection. Or very close to it. WitW didn´t deliver that and it was obvious on the forum that some people (including me) wasn´t very happy. This undoubtedly scared off many people that was "sitting on the fence" waiting to see how the game was received.

I´m not forcing my advice on anyone. I´m just giving it. I´m disappointed in the direction Matrix seem to be heading. I´m definitively not alone in that. Feel free to continue with the indifferent approach that was showed on the WitW forum after launch. After all that seemed to have worked out splendid...

I´m not going to eagerly throw my money at the next major title. And I bet I won´t be alone on that fence...You need to either up your game or cut your prizes in half. You can´t charge gold for bronze.

PS. Shame you didn´t accept my bet. Those beer would have been perfect today. All sunny and warm today! [;)]

[zakblood]

no comment

[bairdlander2]

2by3 is responding here and if you notice the new beta patch has dealt with a lot of issues re vp's,bugs etc.No new release is perfect and bug free.

[carlkay58]

I was/am a playtester that worked on WitW from the beginning. At no time was there explicit pressure to not finish grand campaign scenarios and everyone that did finish and posted the results got good feedback from 2by3. The fact that the updates come weekly for testing does have a bearing on the completion rate however. If the new update changes/tweaks existing features that have an important bearing on the grand campaign then, as a playtester, you wonder if your time and effort should continue with the older code and finish the grand campaign or start over again with the new code and see what the changes do? I tended to start over again if there was any major changes in the base code for either the land or air mechanics. That allowed me to get to know how things flow in 1943 VERY well and I can spot what effects the new code has had on the overall process of the game during that time period. I did complete four different grand campaigns during my pre-release playtesting and each of them gave good data for 2by3 as to where the overall game was in different areas.

There were a few major changes that occurred right before the release that probably caused several of the large problems on release. I know that a few of the bugs that had been taken care of shortly before the release seemed to have surfaced again with the release. I also know that the VP system was in major flux during the weeks just before release - but the VP system core is solid it is just adjustments that will continue to be made by 2by3 as the product matures. We still have not finished that many campaigns as of yet for a true adjustment of VPs to take place. Too many games go for a bit and then one or the other drops out because of setbacks or bad player morale without continuing to see what could happen if you played it out. I am just as guilty of that as everyone else.

War in the West is a more complex game and situation than War in the East. You don't have the grand pocket forming offensives that WitE situation gives you and the air war at times eclipses the ground war in importance. The first half of WitW has the air war being more important than the ground war overall with most of the ground war being limited to the Italian campaign - a real slug fest on the ground. This makes WitE a much more attractive game to play and the types of players who will enjoy WitW over WitE are a different group.

[HMSWarspite]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Can there be such a game in WWII? Well yes, definitely and I simply fail to understand why war in the Mediterranean from 1940 hasn't been properly done - with a proper stab at what is an exceptionally interesting naval situation. There are also relatively small numbers of land units allowing a game at detailed level on land as well as at sea and in the air.

This would have to be a winner surely??

There have been appeals for a Med40 on game in WitP forums for ever, but I have always been very cool about a WitP engine Med... the ground combat game just isn't good enough. I think we have now got the jigsaw pieces for such a campaign... WitW ground/mainland combat/logistics, naval derived from WitP. I think that could work. Do I want it before WitE 2.0... not sure.

[Mac Linehan]

Gents-

Just time for a quick comment. I have WitE and WitW, but all my time is spent playing WitP AE. Purchased WitW upon release and spent my two weeks of Christmas Vacation (Life is Good!) intensely studying the rules; and eventually playing the Cobra scenario.

I am a (very!) detailed kind of guy who will spend three or more hours immersed in a WitP AE turn; thus the level of detail in WitW is exactly what I wanted to see. The supply system design and implementation is absolutely outstanding. To put things into perspective, AE could really be called "Logistics in the Pacific"- if you don't master the logistical aspect of the game, all is lost.

Please consider, that the original WitP was released in 2004, AE followed in 2009. Since that point a steady flow of patches and modifications have turned AE into the finest Pacific War operational game- period. All of this takes time- I expect the WitW / E series to follow the same path.

Consider the improvements and changes that have occurred since WitE was released; I am utterly confident that 2by3 games will continue to Measure Up and improve both games; we are, in reference to AE, just after release in 2009.

2by3 is a very small team that produces some of the most exceptionally detailed, top notch monster games yet produced. It is humbling to think that the team not only supports their current projects (see the recent update for WitE); but will also find time (somehow) to prepare the next iteration of this series.

I have the utmost respect for the 2by3 Team, and a deep appreciation for those players on this forum who have far, far more experience than I with WitW and East. Your thoughts, opinions and comments do count and are important towards shaping future patches and releases. Periodically I will take a break from AE, and just want to play something that moves faster - WitW or WitE. The downside is that I am cursed with the "gotta read all the rules again"- but that then, is the price of excellence, the cost to squeeze the most out of each game. There is also this wonderful forum that will answer any question- in a very timely manner.

OK- all for now. Stick with it- each issue or concern will be dealt with; "Patience is a Virtue".

And:

HMSWarspite- great to see you, and other AEists (is that a real word? <grin>) on this forum.

Mac

[center]“Every action done in company ought to be done with some sign of respect to those who are present”[/center]

Rule Number One from the 110 Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior in Company and Conversation, studied by George Washington from the Book “1776” by David McCullough

[JayTac]

So which game would you guys recommend? AE or WitW? I'm mainly just looking for strategic depth.

[marion61]

Get both! That way you don't have to choose![:D] I have poor impulse control myself when it comes to strategic games. AE is good, but it's very time consuming and it takes years to finish a MP game. WitW has a higher learning curve in some respects due to having evolved from AE, but if your looking for deep this is the game. The replayability for the allies is great, but the axis are sort of stuck responding to what the allies do. Once the balance issues with the EF box are better, I like what if scenarios, and the EF box can give you a pretty good punch, but it's like a candy store now that has no real cost until you pull the entire front.

[rroberson]

ORIGINAL: JayTac

So which game would you guys recommend? AE or WitW? I'm mainly just looking for strategic depth.

AE and it's not even close.

I have both, and I finally surrendered to WITW. Just didn't enjoy it. Back to WITPAE which is likely far more complicated and remains a much better playing experience.

Just one man's opinion.

[RedLancer]

ORIGINAL: JayTac

So which game would you guys recommend? AE or WitW? I'm mainly just looking for strategic depth.

Difficult question as although they are both extremely detailed wargames with 'Gary Grigsby's War in the ...' title with strategic depth you seek they are essentially quite different.

WitP:AE is a WEGO game with daily turns focused on naval combat in the Pacific with abstracted ground combat whereas WitW is an IGO:UGO game with weekly turns focused on ground combat in Europe with abstracted naval combat. Both have excellent air and logistics models that are tailored to support the key combat.

In WitP:AE you can change Japanese production. WitW has fixed production. WitP:AE is older and more polished. WitW is quicker.

Given the investment in time that is required to play either of them I would recommend the game that best reflects your interests - Ground, Naval, Japanese or German etc.

[decourcy2]

I prefer WitW. I worked on CHS and love the work we did on WitP but daily turns and by summer '42 Japan has no chance makes me uninterested in playing. I won two games as the Japanese in WitP and they were both Allied resignations where I feel they could have won.

WitW is not easy for the Axis but if you are smart and not defeatist, and use all weapons available to you fore one decisive attack can crush an Allied landing which could, and probably would, win the game for the Axis.