Amazed at the german invasion response

[GrumpyMel]

All I can say is that if I'm putting 10,000 hours into something, it better be paying me a salary [;)].

Players expect different things out of their game experience, even with a game as hardcore as WitW. Obviously against another human, the difficulty will be dependent upon the quality of your opponent, which is beyond anyone's control, that's a given.

We can disagree about whether certain mechanics work well from either a game-play or historical perspective. That's not bashing on the developers. I've written games, designed scenario's for computer wargames and proffesionaly developed applications for business. Putting your ego on the shelf kinda goes with that territory so I don't think the Dev's are going to be terribly wounded by people pointing out things that they think could work better. One of the things that I've learned from my time as a developer/designer is that all feedback is useful, even when the user is off-base because their impressions didn't come from nowhere.

I'm not going to get into a huge arguement about whether the mechanics should be working differently, I've offered my impressions on that for whatever they are worth.

What I will strongly suggest is that perhaps the easier levels of the A.I. are worth a second look. I'm really not sure the helper levels alone are cutting it. On something like "easy" or even "normal", I don't think a player would expect the A.I. not to be able to make some of the same strategic blunders that were made historicaly in terms of uncertainty, delays and confusion in response to an invasion...rather then astute, massive and rapid response being the routine.

What really matters (IMO) for games against an A.I. opponent is to be able to match the players expectation of the level of difficulty against how the A.I. actually performs and the level of difficulty advertised with the setting. It wouldn't matter if a game had a litteral "I win" button in the interface against an A.I. opponent as long as the difficulty level setting advertised produced an expectation of that (e.g. it said "Player Wins"). When dealing with solo play, the only person impacted is the user of the product playing solo. It's actually a good thing for an application to be able to accomodate as many users expectations as practical as long as it doesn't impact the applications core intended audience.

With changing core game mechanics that obviously impacts every player. With putting in different A.I. options and levels, that only impacts directly the players selecting those options. The only impact to others would be the resources used to do that.... which obviously the Developers have to judge the various levels of demand and the product that they want to produce.

I would at least offer the suggestion that several players have indicated that the A.I. may be performing too effective a job in it's response at levels lower then "challenging".

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: GrumpyMel

I would at least offer the suggestion that several players have indicated that the A.I.
may be performing too effective a job in it's response at levels lower then "challenging".

That might be true.

I played WitE allot and know the ground game about as good as it can be mastered.

I think right now the issue is people new to WitW playing allies can generally "master" the air game because the WA's simply over power Germany an its impossible to screw that side of things up and its seems "easy" or "normal".

The ground war is another story and requires at least average knowledge/"mastery" or it seems like the AI is uber over powered. When you compare that to air war, yup I feel same way being new to game system.

Just because the hex has 3 divisions and CV say 60- x values does not mean that's the value because of FoW.

the combat system rewards the side attacking.

You have to have the right units, leaders, SU's ect ect and you can drop those X cv hexes with out to much trouble.

I have had someone invade Italy with 15+ divisions and he had control of the air generally as he was far more skilled then me in the air game,
but I drove him into the sea with just 6 panzer divisions.

And believe it or not I simply don't don't think they understand the logistics system. I thougt I would hate it, but now that I understand how to manipulate it I really love it.

I think right now people need to master the ground system more. I have 7 games on going and only 1 of the other players ( WitE vet ) is giving me any trouble on the ground.

I see allot of threads be moaning stuff and most is ground war issue's an I think its simply because of a lack of understanding of the ground engine. This is based on my exp playing a WitE vet and others who are new - its truly night and day.

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: Pelton
I think right now people need to master the ground system more. I have 7 games on going and only 1 of the other players ( WitE vet ) is giving me any trouble on the ground.

I see allot of threads be moaning stuff and most is ground war issue's an I think its simply because of a lack of understanding of the ground engine. This is based on my exp playing a WitE vet and others who are new - its truly night and day.

Any hints on where to start reading? Are there any guides or good threads somewhere?
-How to use the SUs? Where to put them? Corps? Army? Divisions? What goes where?
-Leaders? What to look for? Who to place where? Etc etc... [:)]

[Smirfy]

I think your missing the point of people's "moaning", it seems they arnt convinced with what they are experiencing in relation to certain aspects of the game.

[tevans6220]

Guys I think maybe part of the problem with interdiction in the D Day scenarios and possibly others is that there is no ground interdiction until the player orders his air forces to do it. Naval interdiction shows but no ground. Weren't the Allies interdicting and bombing France well before D Day in preparation for the landings? None of that is reflected at the start of the scenario.

It's easy to see what I'm talking about. Turn off FOW and start the D Day scenario. There is damage to some ports and railyards but no ground interdiction. Run a turn and see naval interdiction show but still no ground. Somehow I think that if that were taken into account at scenario start you wouldn't see half the German Army responding to an invasion. Anybody invading on or near the historical dates isn't going to cause enough interdiction to slow the enemy down.

Not really well versed in the editor right now but somebody could test this by giving all of France an interdiction level of 7, 8 or 9 at scenario start and then see what happens. Seems to me the interdiction (railyards, bridges, roads) took place weeks and months before the actual invasion. That's not reflected when you start the D Day scenarios. The only scenarios that the player should actually have a major effect on interdiction is the grand campaigns. The shorter scenarios should already reflect interdiction prior to the scenario starting. Unless I'm missing something, which is possible, it doesn't seem to show any.

[RedLancer]

ORIGINAL: tevans6220

Not really well versed in the editor right now but somebody could test this by giving all of France an interdiction level of 7, 8 or 9 at scenario start and then see what happens. Seems to me the interdiction (railyards, bridges, roads) took place weeks and months before the actual invasion. That's not reflected when you start the D Day scenarios. The only scenarios that the player should actually have a major effect on interdiction is the grand campaigns. The shorter scenarios should already reflect interdiction prior to the scenario starting. Unless I'm missing something, which is possible, it doesn't seem to show any.

You can't set interdiction in the Editor although you can set the first turn ADs that generate interdiction. Naval Patrols are different as they can happen automatically.

[Joel Billings]

Interdiction does not last from turn to turn. What does last is damage to railyards, ports and other factories, as well as damage to depots (i.e. what is started in the depot vs what could be there if there had been no interdiction). In the D-day campaign the railyards and ports start heavily damaged and the depots have a lot in them.

[marion61]

tm.asp?m=3778468 tm.asp?m=3783691 tm.asp?m=3783270. These are very helpful.

As for su's, it is dependent on what your wanting them to accomplish. I assign every division I can, most experienced first, with a Tank Bat., Tank Destroyer Bat., and an Engineer support unit. This way I make sure I have armor and engineers in battles instead of depending on two admin. checks to see if they are sent to fight. Artillery and ranged su's, I normally keep in Corps and Army HQ. More so Corps HQ because they are the main support for the divisions. Also have some construction units in the Corps and Army HQ's so that if your in an isolated area, like an island, you can get the priority work done more efficiently. That's my rule of thumb, but sometimes you make do with what you have. Tank su's are good for offense, tank destroyer and engineers help with defense and reducing forts.

As for leaders, you want your best ground and mech. leaders in your Corps HQ's. They direct the battles for the divisions under them, and try not to let them have a bad admin. rating. Your higher admin. leaders you may want to put into your higher level commands. This helps with admin. checks that go up the line, and a good admin. at Army level and above helps get bullets and beans to the front.

[tevans6220]

Maybe it should. Maybe ground interdiction should be cumulative to reflect damage done to the road network and bridges prior to the start of the scenario. If I'm well supplied and don't use the rail network and ports, I can move pretty easily because interdicting for one turn isn't strong enough to slow me down. That's why I suggested being able to set it in the editor.

[Joel Billings]

The system doesn't allow that as interdiction is zeroed out at the beginning of each air resolution phase.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

ORIGINAL: Pelton
I think right now people need to master the ground system more. I have 7 games on going and only 1 of the other players ( WitE vet ) is giving me any trouble on the ground.

I see allot of threads be moaning stuff and most is ground war issue's an I think its simply because of a lack of understanding of the ground engine. This is based on my exp playing a WitE vet and others who are new - its truly night and day.

Any hints on where to start reading? Are there any guides or good threads somewhere?
-How to use the SUs? Where to put them? Corps? Army? Divisions? What goes where?
-Leaders? What to look for? Who to place where? Etc etc... [:)]

Here's some general stuff, some may not translate that well as (for both sides) WiTE has a far greater number of units and that builds in some flexibility:

a) Command matters, the ideal is your best leadership in a chain so that if one level misses a check it can be picked up. Usually the corps has the most immediate impact but leaders at Army/Army Group level can affect a much greater number of formations - so this is a trade off. Also some leaders may be better with no armour, or lots of armour so don't be afraid to shift them around
b) with the Anglo-Allies you have lots of capacity to commit Support Units, so make sure your key divisions have the full number of slots and make sure that artillery etc is at corps level as well
c) terrain matters, not just with the obvious multipliers/divisors but also that armour works very badly in cities and high level defensive terrain - this means that tank SUs (above) may not always be the equipment of choice, more engineers or more artillery may do you more good
d) tiredness kills, watch your fatigue levels, this start to impact really badly on combat capacity
e) tiredness kills, make sure your opponent has high fatigue, attacks to force commitment of reserves, shifting the focus of your offensive etc all help here
f) disruption causes fatigue ... bit obscure but if you disrupt, even if you don't attack, there is a possibility that in curing the disruption, a unit builds up fatigue -- so a sustained air war can really pay off indirectly
g) disruption means you don't fight .. a disrupted element cannot fight, so the more long range weaponry (ie artillery) you have, the more disruption you cause before combat comes down to the serious business of taking ground ... in effect the same notional cv without artillery is less dangerous than with artillery
h) Elements matter, the make up of your units is important. Not just the obvious armour-infantry distinction but also that each element fires, so the more elements/cv the more activity. This is a common issue in WiTE where Soviet units can be relatively weak (in cv terms), but have loads of elements, and thus generate a lot of (weak) firepower ... each hit can cause disruption ... see above
i) Supply and ammo matter, make sure that you are not attacking with low ammo, it really degrades your effectiveness, low supply has an impact on unit morale
j) reserves matter, the final odds are not just the units in the designated hexes but the commitment of reserves. Make sure your attacks are organised so you can pull in reserves, watch out for enemy reserves. With the allies, getting high interdiction around a critical battlefield is important here. Reserve commitment is linked to good leadership and also is more likely if you have broken down into regimental sized units. But, esp with the Germans, if you commit reserves in an area of high interdiction, they will be disrupted etc by the the time they fight and may well be useless afterwards
k) indirect attacks work, this is harder in WiTW (less units) but if you really want hex #a and you fear strong reserves, hit hex #b with a force strong enough to worry the enemy and pull in his reserves there (think of the interaction between Goodwood and Cobra). You need to make your secondary attack feasible or the combat routine will not trigger reserves (and of course make sure your own reserves don't go off and join in - flip reserve status on (if attacking) when you want it
l) intelligence matters, esp in WiTW on initial contact a unit may not be telling the truth with its cv, if you can wait a turn to see what is there before you commit, if you can't wait, then assume its far more powerful than is being indicated
m) never attack beyond the corps command limit, so for landings make sure your corps are offshore. Equally its better to avoid those niggly 10% malus for mixing corps etc, again with the allies in particular there is no reason not to juggle corps to avoid problems in this regard

The two sides in WiTW have different advantages here. The Allies via airpower can cause lots of disruption and raise fatigue levels as well as strangle re-supply chances. The Axis are on the defense (so may need to move less) and the Allies have supply delivery problems.

In effect, the displayed cv is very useful but its a guide not the answer. There are things you can do to make actual performance better or worse at the point of combat and a lot you can do to set things up in your favour.

The best learning tool is the advice in WiTE, save your game, set up an attack (this is assuming you are playing the AI as this means repeating the combat), set the resolution relatively low (say 4 or 5) and watch what fires when, the interaction of air/artillery on the combat. Do it again with different SU assignments. Do it again (be aware there is a large random element at play). Come to a feeling when a notional 1-1 attack may well succeed say 80% of the time (I've learnt how to manage this in WiTE), equally when does a notional 2-1 fail?

There is no harm to doing a turn or so left hand vs right hand so that you can adjust the force mix on both sides - any of the France 1944 scenarios are good for this.

Pelton is right, its easy to overlook the ground war in WiTW as the air war seems to be so powerful, while the airwar sets the scene it still comes down to being able to use the combat engine to gain ground.

[Numdydar]

ORIGINAL: tevans6220

Maybe it should. Maybe ground interdiction should be cumulative to reflect damage done to the road network and bridges prior to the start of the scenario. If I'm well supplied and don't use the rail network and ports, I can move pretty easily because interdicting for one turn isn't strong enough to slow me down. That's why I suggested being able to set it in the editor.

If planes are not actually flying overhead, then there is no interdiction with normal ground movement of troops/supplies. The Germans could and did constantly move units during the day throughout the war. They just had to be very careful. Since each turn is a week, interdiction in the game represents that X amount of your AF is flying around looking for moving targets to shoot at. If the interdiction level is high in a hex, that means you have a lot of AC loitering around that are waiting for something to move. Once the planes go away, then there is nothing to stop things from moving again.

Interdiction in this game has been separated out from what many people consider interdiction (which I think is a good thing). When people hear interdiction, they thing ALL movement, ground, RR, etc. That is not the case in WitW. Interdiction applies just to normal movement of forces/supplies. If you want to prevent supplies/forces from getting to the front at all, that is not interdiction, it is bombing RRs and Rail Yards. The bombing of these targets IS persistent and causes long term impacts if done consistently. Unlike interdiction which only happens if a plane is in that area at the time a movement of any kind occurs.

I hope this helps.