FOG OF WAR

[mantrain]

How can I be sure it is actually working? When I begin a pbem game I can still see enemy units, even though the setting under advanced options is "FOW OFF." I can't actually see what units are of the enemies, but I do see certain hexes controlled by the enemy, even though it is first move and no engagments have occured.

Also, has anyone play advanced tactics? If so, is it better or not as great as OAW? THANKS!

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: mantrain
How can I be sure it is actually working?

I'm not sure how you can asertain that FOW is actually working but when it's "on" you will see the enemy units in hexes that are "observed" and or "spotted". I've always played with FOW "on" and don't know how it looks or plays with FOW "off".

ORIGINAL: mantrain
When I begin a pbem game I can still see enemy units, even though the setting under advanced options is "FOW OFF." I can't actually see what units are of the enemies, but I do see certain hexes controlled by the enemy, even though it is first move and no engagments have occured.

It sounds like to me that the FOW is still turned on, but I'm just guessing since I've never played with FOW turned off.

ORIGINAL: mantrain
Also, has anyone play advanced tactics? If so, is it better or not as great as OAW? THANKS!

Never played advanced tactics, sorry, but TOAW III is the only thing I play anymore...it's that good.

[mantrain]

I meant to say "FOW ON."  Certainly we want realism. Thanks Larry, I have enjoyed your postings.  just curious, what grabs you so much about FITE? And also, as you take enemy territory in that campaign, as in resources, do the resource losses effect anything, as they would in say, strategic command. or hearts of iron.  For example, If axis make it into the caucauses and the oil, how does that effect Soviet economy, war-effort, etc. THANKS!

[noxious]

In TOAW, you model this by events reducing/augmenting the supply pool triggered by occupation of a particular hex (or any other trigger set by the designer), combined to events deleting or adding supply points.
Up to the scenario designer to implement all of it.
Haven't played FITE so not sure how it's dealt with in that scenario.

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: mantrain
...what grabs you so much about FITE?

It has both styles of play for both players: I mean that at the start of the game the Axis player is attacker and the Soviet is the defender and after turn 40 or so the opportunities for attack start to accumulate for the Soviet player and the Axis player can practice his defensive skills. Especially in the later years of the conflict ( 1944-1945). Also, it was the battle that had the most resources committed in the history of this planet. Millions of men died in this battle alone. Also, I've never won a FITE game, so I guess I need to practice still or something.

ORIGINAL: mantrain
And also, as you take enemy territory in that campaign, as in resources, do the resource losses effect anything, as they would in say, strategic command. or hearts of iron.  For example, If axis make it into the caucauses and the oil, how does that effect Soviet economy, war-effort, etc. THANKS!

Um....FITE simulates the loss of resources by keying the production rate(s) of the equipment pool(s) to the main production cities. Minsk, Kiev, Leningrad, etc. are important in that the loss of that city will mean a 5% or 10% loss in the production rate of equipment. You can see the production rate of the various different pieces of equipment in the inventory and losses report screen. Here's the first screen of Axis losses in my D21 game as of turn 50 round 1:



EDIT: I should point out that the production rate doesn't change for the Axis player, rather the loss of a production city by the Soviet player causes the 5% or 10% loss in production for the Soviet player. Around turn 48 or so the rates double as the Soviets "gear up for war". And the 5% or 10% losses are applied to the higher production rates.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the production rates for the Soviet player. The production rate for Rifle Squads is 851 now but used to be 900+ It's lower now because of the fall of Leningrad ( a 10% loss ).

[mantrain]

As I said Larry, I have enjoyed reading your posts, especially in the FITE AAR, but really I haven't the time to read in much depth, I am sure I could lear alot though.  Prior to FITE, if you don't mind me asking, which scenarios did you enjoy most?  What could you reccomend as overall balanced between forces? Did you find any that have a good blend of naval support for the ground troop? I am playing guadalcanal now, and that seems to. post!

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: mantrain
Prior to FITE, if you don't mind me asking, which scenarios did you enjoy most?

I must have played Barbarosa 41 about a dozen times before I found out about FITE. B41 isn't balanced however since the Russians seem to win a disproportionate number of times. And then I dabbled with Overlord 44. Well, I say dabbled, I played the whole scenario hotseat once, all 100+ turns. Took me about a month as I recall. I tried a scenario about WWII in the Pacific whose name escapes me at the present moment but I think it was called Pacific Struggle or something like that. I tried it but I found that the naval combat never approximated what would happen in real life and I lost interest. Then I tried playing a couple of South Vietnam scenario's: Boonie Rats and Campaign for South Vietnam and of the two I liked CSV better. Then I started playing PBEM and a whole new wargaming world opened for me. Playing TOAW was a lot more fun. My early opponents wanted the exotic scenarios: those about africa or little known wars in the balkins or something. Then Karri E. from Finland suggested FITE and we fought for something like a year, he as Axis and me as Soviets and he won. Then we decided to do a mirror game and he took the Soviets and he won.

ORIGINAL: mantrain
What could you reccomend as overall balanced between forces?

Curt Chambers and I played two mirror games of Campaign for South Vietnam and both times the Allies won. So he is making changes to CSV even as we speak so that it is more balanced between the Allied Forces and the Peoples Liberation Army of North Vietnam.

ORIGINAL: mantrain
Did you find any that have a good blend of naval support for the ground troops?

I was a playtester for the early versions of TOAW III and as I recall it was the unanimous opinion of the playtesters that the naval aspects of the game are wanting. Either the combats were too bloody or naval support for the troops was lacking.

Also we found that the air defense weapons were too puny. Changes to TOAW III has since made the air defense weapons much too effective in my opinion so that a tiny squad of VC can shoot down B-52's which is somewhat unlike real life. Curt Chambers is attempting to adjust the numbers of aircraft to compensate for that. I'm not familiar enough with the various scenarios to speak to the balance between forces. I do know for sure that Barbarosa 41 isn't balanced. FITE seems to be balanced but it's hard to say for sure since it's rarely playted to completion ( all 400 turns ).

I would be curious to know what everyone is playing out there and what they have found to be balanced. Maybe we should do a poll or something.