Matrix Games Forums

Grigsby's original SPI boargame "War In the East" [the one with cardboard and paper ] used to have an excellent rule whereby German Infantry Divisions could force march in a given turn. I vaguely recall use of forced march option allowed the unit to double 2X its normal movement rate (or maybe it was 1.5X the normal movement rate). However, the catch was the unit had a chance of being reduced to a kampgruppe as a result of using the forced march option. I think it was 1/6 chance of being reduced to KG -- maybe it was a 1/3 chance (I don’t recall all the particulars anymore).

The use of forced marching -- particularly during the campaigns of the summer of 41 and summer of 42 had a fair bit historical precedence. So in that sense it was a "realistic" game option. I suppose I would argue the Red Army should have had the same option available to it.

But my question is why did this particular aspect of the original Grigsby's approach to the simulation get removed from the modern incarnation. In the original game this particular option did provide the German side with some additional (and arguably very important) operational and tactical level game options to consider and utilize. But exercising the option comes with a potential cost in terms of forced march effects on units. Given the amazing complexity and excellent diversity of the computerized incarnation of "War in the East" in terms of uber detailed casualty tracking, unit morale effects, fatigue, CV effects, etc etc, it just "feels" like the game could really sink its teeth into a more accurate representation of forced march effects. And giving German Infantry (and arguably the Soviet Infantry as well) a forced march option would give players additional planning and maneuver options.

I don't think forced marching is in any way crucial to the existing game, but it was kind of a cool option and arguable realistic option in the original cardboard and paper version of WiTE, and was curious why it didn't make it into this new vision of the game.

I wouldn't take the similarity in name to mean the two games is similar or identical. There's little in common really. If you want a modern incarnation of the SPI game, look up Decision Games, which has put War in Europe into PC.

The old WitE allowed up to 2 times movement allowance for 'forced march' infantry of any nationality provided the unit didn't enter enemy ZOC, and with a 1/6 chance of reduction to BG status. This WitE doesn't even have BGs, but it, like the PC WiE, has a form of attrition caused by movement- the more you move, the more your units become tired and their equipment can be damaged. Also, you can pay APs to temporarily motorise a unit. So the option is still available in different forms.

ORIGINAL: marty_01

I don't think forced marching is in any way crucial to the existing game, but it was kind of a cool option and arguable realistic option in the original cardboard and paper version of WiTE, and was curious why it didn't make it into this new vision of the game.

You can temporarily motorize infantry divisions, that has roughly the same effect.

Actually it was 1/6 chance it got reduced to Kangruppe as I played that game extensively.

As pointed out before yes you can temporarily motorize your infantry but it costs you. They are two completely different games. As I enjoyed that SPI games extensively in my 20's I expect to enjoy this game extensively in my 50's. lol

ORIGINAL: findmeifyoucan
As pointed out before yes you can temporarily motorize your infantry but it costs you. They are two completely different games. As I enjoyed that SPI games extensively in my 20's I expect to enjoy this game extensively in my 50's. lol

LOL! Same here!

I had also commented on the forced march comparison over a month ago in the forum just before I purchased this game but no one commented on it. I also commented on the fact that the Germans did have some limited amphibious capability and maintained a small navy in the Baltic Sea to keep the Russian navy in check but no one commented on that either. lol
In the SPI game "War in Europe" monster board game, the German's could invade by amphibious both Riga and that far northern Russian port just south of Helsinki on turn 1 plus transport a limited amount of German troops to Helsinki!

Yeah -- I've used unit motorization once or twice and it's a nice game feature to have for sure. It provides some additional depth to a player's in-game options. And it has historical precedence so is also a "realistic" player option. However, temp-motorization is immensely expensive in terms of APs and truck use and truck damage. A full German Infantry division can cost upwards of 25-APs to motorize. Temporary motorization doesn't allow movement through enemy controlled hexes. I don’t think it allows movement through contested hexes either – although I don’t recall for sure on this latter bit. All of which limits player applications for temp-motorization. And to be clear I am not arguing any of these in-game limitations are good or bad for temp-motorization. I am simply elaborating upon the scale of the temp-motorization capability versuses allowing any infantry division to force march in a given turn (with associated consequences associated with a forced march capability – morale, fatigue, reduction of CV, No Deliberate attack option, or even no Deliberate and No Hasty Attack option or whatever).

In terms of enhancing a player’s operational maneuver options -- at least relative to how the forced march function was modeled within Grigsby’s original War in the East -- the limited ability to motorize an infantry division or possibly two in a given turn is not on the same scale as an all encompassing infantry forced march capability.

Modern-WiTE is indeed a different game. Yet after playing it a few times, I am becoming aware of a number of vaguely familiar aspects to New-WiTE -- the occasional flash of da-ja-vu -- at least for me. The original WiTE was really just another step in a series of games by Grigsby that were developed using the same overal game system (France 1940, Battle for Moscow, Battle of Leningrad, etc. etc.). A great game system. Each game in the series improving upon the last. But, at the same time maintaining interesting and successful aspects of previous games within the series.

I think the forced march option in the original WiTE was a nice option and am more curious as to why it was set adrift. Is it crucial to my fun time in playing Modern-WiTE – no. But, its worth talking about as I don’t think anyone will argue that the ability of infantry to enhance movement rates via forced marching would somehow be “unrealistic”.

I think the potential consequence of forced march within the original game felt rather abstracted -- but I liked very much that there were potential consequences to use of the option. A player had to weigh the pro’s and the cons of using forced march. What I see within this modern version of WiTE is a huge amount of behind the curtain detail. There is the ability of the designers of Modern-WiTE to more directly address consequences of forced march. Moreover, the original WiTE obviously did not include unit morale, or unit fatigue, nor was it tracking casualty rates at such a detailed level as modern-WiTE. Many of the intangible, but incredibly important factors that determine a given units combat power and maneuver capability are now being routinely modeled within computer simulations by various algorithms. Why not take advantage of the detail of this simulation to directly tackle those aspects of gaming that could not be tackled in the oldin' days with games like the original WiTE?

Anyway -- nuff said by me. Normally I just want to say my piece and be done with it in one post to a particualr thread topic. But I thought forced march option was such a nice -- and at the time of old-WiTE -- such a very unique feature in boardgaming -- that I felt a bit more then my typical distracted interest in the topic.

ORIGINAL: marty_01

In terms of enhancing a player’s operational maneuver options -- at least relative to how the forced march function was modeled within Grigsby’s original War in the East -- the limited ability to motorize an infantry division or possibly two in a given turn is not on the same scale as an all encompassing infantry forced march capability.

I would agree with that. I can take the truck loss, but the AP cost feels too high to me.

I believe War in the East was a Jim Dunnigan game...

You're right...my bad [;)] -- removes foot from mouth. I've been associating the game title as a computerized revamp of the original board game by the same designer ever since I first heard of the game. I guess that would explain why forced march didnt carry over. Did Grigsby ever work for SPI or S&T?

ORIGINAL: findmeifyoucan

Actually it was 1/6 chance it got reduced to Kangruppe as I played that game extensively.

As pointed out before yes you can temporarily motorize your infantry but it costs you. They are two completely different games. As I enjoyed that SPI games extensively in my 20's I expect to enjoy this game extensively in my 50's. lol

2x normal movement allowance. Rolling a one = KG. Fins and Security units can't force march. No over runs allowed. [8D]

Forgot. Not allowed to enter enemy ZOC.

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

ORIGINAL: findmeifyoucan
As pointed out before yes you can temporarily motorize your infantry but it costs you. They are two completely different games. As I enjoyed that SPI games extensively in my 20's I expect to enjoy this game extensively in my 50's. lol

LOL! Same here!

hehehe same here. Spend many a day and night, playing War in Europe in my 20's and most of SPI's games later as well.

If I remember right, one couldn't force march a security division (to have them keep up) and hope you got a "1" so they would kg into a 1-5 that could move faster and be rebuilt into a real division

I remember all those Soviet 1-4s who went poof if they failed.

4-4s were good (and even turned into battlegroups) but the 5-5 guards?  Heaven.  Two stacks of them could also have 3 10 strength artillery behind them and punish the Germans.

Yes, I remember that game well (War in Europe by SPI). Blew away many simester's in college for that game. lol

No FOW in that game though so both sides new exactly where everything was. As the Germans I just loved to invade Turkey in the previous year and create a southern front for the Russian come turn of invasion through the Caucaus mountains!! Oh and of course take over all of Iran, Iraq, Suez and all of North Arfrica as I had a steady line of supply. No need to worry about Ampib transport points, hee, hee!!

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

ORIGINAL: findmeifyoucan
As pointed out before yes you can temporarily motorize your infantry but it costs you. They are two completely different games. As I enjoyed that SPI games extensively in my 20's I expect to enjoy this game extensively in my 50's. lol

LOL! Same here!

+1

A lot of us old fogeys around it seems.

Yes, there are a bunch of us it seems. I sure did love those SS Panzer Divisions (13-10's)! The only one's that could overrun Russian 3's!!!! lol Hated the Russian Artillery as the German though. Nothing could stand up to them if you gave them time to setup. Solution was retreat one hex per turn!

You might be interested in this: http://www.consimworld.com/tagged/featured
Every Friday they review an SPI game.