Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: wodin

As for results...it's solely based on how I feel, just like IGOUGO is for you.

My opinion is not based upon "feelings", but results:

Hmmm..now as I'm useless gamer if I'd played that game it wouldn't be something to show the merits of IGOUGO:) Plus I'm sure someone could show clips of CM or Flashpoint to show "results" of WEGO. For me my mind says life doesn't happen in your turn my turn but all runs at the same time.

Still this is silly, we can go around in circles here for ever. One thing at least we have to take turns post on forums:)

WHich ever system you prefer you'll think is best, obvious really.

ORIGINAL: wodin

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: wodin

As for results...it's solely based on how I feel, just like IGOUGO is for you.

My opinion is not based upon "feelings", but results:

Hmmm..now as I'm useless gamer if I'd played that game it wouldn't be something to show the merits of IGOUGO:) Plus I'm sure someone could show clips of CM or Flashpoint to show "results" of WEGO. For me my mind says life doesn't happen in your turn my turn but all runs at the same time.

Still this is silly, we can go around in circles here for ever. One thing at least we have to take turns post on forums:)

WHich ever system you prefer you'll think is best, obvious really.

Life doesn't run in brainless plotted movement paths either. Which is more important, though?

Here's what I believe in: Evidence!

I think my "France 1944" test is hard to beat. Lodgement established about as historically. Beach connection at the right time. Breakout maybe a turn late. Paris captured a couple of turns late. Offensive runs out of steam right about the historical point after Market-Garden.

Plenty of evidence for IGOUGO doing a bang-up job. Where's the evidence for WEGO? How do they get off claiming to be a superior system if they can't produce superior results?

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Life doesn't run in brainless plotted movement paths either. Which is more important, though?

Here's what I believe in: Evidence!

I think my "France 1944" test is hard to beat. Lodgement established about as historically. Beach connection at the right time. Breakout maybe a turn late. Paris captured a couple of turns late. Offensive runs out of steam right about the historical point after Market-Garden.

Plenty of evidence for IGOUGO doing a bang-up job. Where's the evidence for WEGO? How do they get off claiming to be a superior system if they can't produce superior results?

Good point.

Edit: In my humble opinion, of course. [:)]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Plenty of evidence for IGOUGO doing a bang-up job. Where's the evidence for WEGO? How do they get off claiming to be a superior system if they can't produce superior results?

well, there is this game called War in the Pacific: Admiral Edition...

Turn types may depend on abstract OOB and earlier time period than WW1 I guess. Sea battles another puzzle.

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Plenty of evidence for IGOUGO doing a bang-up job. Where's the evidence for WEGO? How do they get off claiming to be a superior system if they can't produce superior results?

well, there is this game called War in the Pacific: Admiral Edition...

May he can't handle it. Maybe it is too complicated for him . . . [;)]

ORIGINAL: wodin
Hmmm..now as I'm useless gamer if I'd played that game it wouldn't be something to show the merits of IGOUGO:) Plus I'm sure someone could show clips of CM or Flashpoint to show "results" of WEGO.

On YouTube there is a whole list of Flashpoint AARs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M58ncvQ ... 6n&index=2

I'm not part of it (I don't do videos), but I really, really liked this game. A perfect WEGO, IMHO, which actually used an "asymmetrical" kind of WEGO (more mobile and agile forces could get orders more often than "slow" ones, with variables ranging from doctrine to "too many orders to process" to the effects of the electronic battlefield).

Hmmm... Thanks to wayback machine, BTW, I was able to find the original review on Wargamer - the one that sold me. Why the "new and improved" version of the site doesn't keep available these reviews - exp. considering that many games are still sold - is beyond me.

http://web.archive.org/web/201411241530 ... -interview

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Plenty of evidence for IGOUGO doing a bang-up job. Where's the evidence for WEGO? How do they get off claiming to be a superior system if they can't produce superior results?

well, there is this game called War in the Pacific: Admiral Edition...

Plenty of IGOUGO renderings of that campaign as well. Doesn't prove anything unless there are side-by-side comparisions.

Did you see my post 63 about my experience with Pacific War?

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: wodin
Hmmm..now as I'm useless gamer if I'd played that game it wouldn't be something to show the merits of IGOUGO:) Plus I'm sure someone could show clips of CM or Flashpoint to show "results" of WEGO.

On YouTube there is a whole list of Flashpoint AARs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M58ncvQ ... 6n&index=2

I'm not part of it (I don't do videos), but I really, really liked this game. A perfect WEGO, IMHO, which actually used an "asymmetrical" kind of WEGO (more mobile and agile forces could get orders more often than "slow" ones, with variables ranging from doctrine to "too many orders to process" to the effects of the electronic battlefield).

Hmmm... Thanks to wayback machine, BTW, I was able to find the original review on Wargamer - the one that sold me. Why the "new and improved" version of the site doesn't keep available these reviews - exp. considering that many games are still sold - is beyond me.

http://web.archive.org/web/201411241530 ... -interview

"Red Storm" is hypothetical, right? So how could it be evaluated for historical performance?

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Plenty of evidence for IGOUGO doing a bang-up job. Where's the evidence for WEGO? How do they get off claiming to be a superior system if they can't produce superior results?

well, there is this game called War in the Pacific: Admiral Edition...

Plenty of IGOUGO renderings of that campaign as well. Doesn't prove anything unless there are side-by-side comparisions.

Did you see my post 63 about my experience with Pacific War?

Are you referring to the original DOS game Pacific War?

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: wodin
Hmmm..now as I'm useless gamer if I'd played that game it wouldn't be something to show the merits of IGOUGO:) Plus I'm sure someone could show clips of CM or Flashpoint to show "results" of WEGO.

On YouTube there is a whole list of Flashpoint AARs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M58ncvQ ... 6n&index=2

I'm not part of it (I don't do videos), but I really, really liked this game. A perfect WEGO, IMHO, which actually used an "asymmetrical" kind of WEGO (more mobile and agile forces could get orders more often than "slow" ones, with variables ranging from doctrine to "too many orders to process" to the effects of the electronic battlefield).

Hmmm... Thanks to wayback machine, BTW, I was able to find the original review on Wargamer - the one that sold me. Why the "new and improved" version of the site doesn't keep available these reviews - exp. considering that many games are still sold - is beyond me.

http://web.archive.org/web/201411241530 ... -interview

"Red Storm" is hypothetical, right? So how could it be evaluated for historical performance?

Are you telling me that we can't evaluate almost half of TOAW IV scenarios? [&:]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Plenty of evidence for IGOUGO doing a bang-up job. Where's the evidence for WEGO? How do they get off claiming to be a superior system if they can't produce superior results?

well, there is this game called War in the Pacific: Admiral Edition...

Plenty of IGOUGO renderings of that campaign as well. Doesn't prove anything unless there are side-by-side comparisions.

Fine, let's do this then. Let's say that, on the right side, we have a WEGO game about the whole PTO that is consistently played since 2009, with many campaigns finished, that shows, on the average, historical results, generated a whole subculture and that is still going strong after 12 years.

On the left, on the IGOUOGO side we have, as the comparable title...?

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: wodin
Hmmm..now as I'm useless gamer if I'd played that game it wouldn't be something to show the merits of IGOUGO:) Plus I'm sure someone could show clips of CM or Flashpoint to show "results" of WEGO.

On YouTube there is a whole list of Flashpoint AARs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M58ncvQ ... 6n&index=2

I'm not part of it (I don't do videos), but I really, really liked this game. A perfect WEGO, IMHO, which actually used an "asymmetrical" kind of WEGO (more mobile and agile forces could get orders more often than "slow" ones, with variables ranging from doctrine to "too many orders to process" to the effects of the electronic battlefield).

Hmmm... Thanks to wayback machine, BTW, I was able to find the original review on Wargamer - the one that sold me. Why the "new and improved" version of the site doesn't keep available these reviews - exp. considering that many games are still sold - is beyond me.

http://web.archive.org/web/201411241530 ... -interview

"Red Storm" is hypothetical, right? So how could it be evaluated for historical performance?

Various Ministries of Defence, and Military Colleges, use wego and igoyougo games for evaluating strategies and tactics to respond to probable situations they are likely to encounter. The games they use cover different periods of history. Especially at the college level.

If Wego is good enough for them. Then it is good enough for me.

ORIGINAL: z1812

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69



On YouTube there is a whole list of Flashpoint AARs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M58ncvQ ... 6n&index=2

I'm not part of it (I don't do videos), but I really, really liked this game. A perfect WEGO, IMHO, which actually used an "asymmetrical" kind of WEGO (more mobile and agile forces could get orders more often than "slow" ones, with variables ranging from doctrine to "too many orders to process" to the effects of the electronic battlefield).

Hmmm... Thanks to wayback machine, BTW, I was able to find the original review on Wargamer - the one that sold me. Why the "new and improved" version of the site doesn't keep available these reviews - exp. considering that many games are still sold - is beyond me.

http://web.archive.org/web/201411241530 ... -interview

"Red Storm" is hypothetical, right? So how could it be evaluated for historical performance?

Various Ministries of Defence, and Military Colleges, use wego and igoyougo games for evaluating strategies and tactics to respond to probable situations they are likely to encounter. The games they use cover different periods of history. Especially at the college level.

If Wego is good enough for them. Then it is good enough for me.

And real time, I guess. IIRC, Armored Task Force by ProSimCo is based on a real training tool used by the US Army.

LOL! [:D]

Does anyone here go to the zoo and tease the lion? [;)]

Pretty soon we will be down to; "It does."
Reply; "No it doesn't". [8|]

RR

ORIGINAL: MrRoadrunner

LOL! [:D]

Does anyone here go to the zoo and tease the lion? [;)]

No need to go to the zoo. Just go to the WitP: AE forum and post about your doubts that this game isn't the absolute pinnacle of PTO wargaming [;)]

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69



On YouTube there is a whole list of Flashpoint AARs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M58ncvQ ... 6n&index=2

I'm not part of it (I don't do videos), but I really, really liked this game. A perfect WEGO, IMHO, which actually used an "asymmetrical" kind of WEGO (more mobile and agile forces could get orders more often than "slow" ones, with variables ranging from doctrine to "too many orders to process" to the effects of the electronic battlefield).

Hmmm... Thanks to wayback machine, BTW, I was able to find the original review on Wargamer - the one that sold me. Why the "new and improved" version of the site doesn't keep available these reviews - exp. considering that many games are still sold - is beyond me.

http://web.archive.org/web/201411241530 ... -interview

"Red Storm" is hypothetical, right? So how could it be evaluated for historical performance?

Are you telling me that we can't evaluate almost half of TOAW IV scenarios? [&:]

You can't evaluate hypotheticals for historocity, that's for sure!

NATO ends up in Vladivostok or Warsaw Pact ends up in San Francisco. Neither case (nor anything in between) could be refuted.

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

Fine, let's do this then. Let's say that, on the right side, we have a WEGO game about the whole PTO that is consistently played since 2009, with many campaigns finished, that shows, on the average, historical results, generated a whole subculture and that is still going strong after 12 years.

Same is even more true of D&D. What does that prove?

On the left, on the IGOUOGO side we have, as the comparable title...?

I own three:

USN, SPI, 1971
War in the Pacific, SPI, 1978,
Pacific War, VG, 1985.

Not played anymore, of course, but they had their time in the sun.

Reaching the historical result in this campaign isn't much of an achievement since it was so lopsided.

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
I think my "France 1944" test is hard to beat. Lodgement established about as historically. Beach connection at the right time. Breakout maybe a turn late. Paris captured a couple of turns late. Offensive runs out of steam right about the historical point after Market-Garden.

Plenty of evidence for IGOUGO doing a bang-up job. Where's the evidence for WEGO? How do they get off claiming to be a superior system if they can't produce superior results?

So you're claiming that IGOUGO has "superior results" on the basis of one playthrough of one scenario of one game? Really? That's what you call "evidence"? That's completely, utterly ridiculous. IGOUGO might be better for many wargaming scenarios, but you've done nothing to demonstrate that.

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay



"Red Storm" is hypothetical, right? So how could it be evaluated for historical performance?

Are you telling me that we can't evaluate almost half of TOAW IV scenarios? [&:]

You can't evaluate hypotheticals for historocity, that's for sure!

What is "historicity" if not a "scenario" played once - and thus not comparable with anything similar?

We will never know how the Allies' performance in '44-'45 fell on an hypothetical "probability curve". Maybe they rolled two six-sided dice, were unlucky, and got a "3". Maybe had Market-Garden been a bit more lucky they could have been in Berlin for Christmas. Maybe, had the campaign be played ten times, we would have discovered that the Allies won the war earlier eight times out of them. We will never know.

What we do know is that "the historical result was 3". So we build a top-down model that has 3 as the average: two six-sided dice with only 1s and 2s on their faces. This way we concede that the Allies can got a "2" or a "4", with the historical "3" as the most probable result. But we can't refuse the idea that the model is skewed: you can't shop it around as "correct", because we can't compare what it models (i.e. the real campaign) with anything. It was artificially built to get a specific result.

NATO ends up in Vladivostok or Warsaw Pact ends up in San Francisco. Neither case (nor anything in between) could be refuted.

Maybe not, but I do have a pretty good idea about why we never saw many plans tackling those "cases" [:)]