WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 7 - Amphibious Ops

Gary Grigsby’s War in the West 1943-45 is the most ambitious and detailed computer wargame on the Western Front of World War II ever made. Starting with the Summer 1943 invasions of Sicily and Italy and proceeding through the invasions of France and the drive into Germany, War in the West brings you all the Allied campaigns in Western Europe and the capability to re-fight the Western Front according to your plan.

Moderators: Joel Billings, RedLancer

User avatar
RedLancer
Posts: 4338
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:09 am
Location: UK

WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 7 - Amphibious Ops

Post by RedLancer »

Just like with the use of airborne forces WitW has had a complete revamp of amphibious ops - not surprising when you consider their importance in the game. The cornerstone of amphib ops is the Amphibious HQ. This new unit type is the pivotal element in all aspects of planning and launching an invasion.

Firstly it provides the ability to target an invasion. This can only be done when the Amphib HQ is in a port. Just like with Airborne Ops once you have targetted a hex the preparation points begin to accumulate.

Of course an Amphib HQ is only one element of an invasion force. The invasion force is prepared by stacking units with the Amphib HQ. This means that up to two divisions can accompany each Amphib HQ (ships permitting). However the larger the units, the more of them and the smaller the Port the slower prep points will accumulate. In addition only Commando or Ranger Units and Naval Support Groups can be attached to the Amphib HQ to provide support during the invasion.

When sufficient prep pts have accumulated (50 for Amphib HQ and 30 for Combat Units) you can invade.

The invasion itself takes place automatically once you press the INVADE button on the Amphib HQ counter in the Unit Bar. The invasion itself takes place between your turn and your opponent's. The invasion assault looks to place your combat units in the targeted invasion hex with the Amphib HQ staying in an adjacent sea hex. An attached commandos will look to occupy an empty hex adjacent to the invasion hex. The only support units that take part are those attached to the assault units or the naval support groups attached to the Amphib HQ.

Once ashore your opponent has the chance to drive you back into the sea before you get to establish things further with follow up forces. When you get to your turn you will notice that the Amphib HQ has done three more things: firstly it has created a temporary port to allow you to unload units and freight; secondly it has created a depot to hold and distribute freight and finally created an air base for you to fly in air supporting units.

The screenshot shows Amphib HQ and its co-stacked units ready to invade Omaha from T1 of the 1944 (D-Day Start) Campaign.


Image
Attachments
Omaha.jpg
Omaha.jpg (258.44 KiB) Viewed 1251 times
John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev
User avatar
AZKGungHo
Posts: 506
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 6:26 pm
Contact:

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by AZKGungHo »

Very impressed with this so far but admit to being puzzled about the Amphib HQ setting up an airbase. Is that the same as an air field? Why not just fly the airforce from England as done historically until some airfields are captured? Or am I missing something here (pretty sure I am)?
"In Arduis Fidelis"
Louie Marsh

Books:
Once A Raider… http://tinyurl.com/89mfnnk
Getting Real - http://tinyurl.com/7zhcjlq
Websites:
www.usmcraiders.com
discipleup.org
User avatar
RedLancer
Posts: 4338
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:09 am
Location: UK

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by RedLancer »

Certainly in Normandy the invading forces built their own airfields.
John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev
User avatar
zakblood
Posts: 22782
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:19 am

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by zakblood »

from what im seeing also so far it's looking very good, but the more i see, the harder it seems to be as well, this maybe it's downfall, information overload?

too much to do and see and control, more than a game it's a sim, even more so than WITE?
Windows 11 Pro 64-bit (25H2) (26200.7309)
User avatar
RedLancer
Posts: 4338
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:09 am
Location: UK

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by RedLancer »

I'm simply showing why Gary Grigsby’s War in the West 1943-45 is the most ambitious and detailed computer wargame on the Western Front of World War II ever made

I think I've only a few more big difference topics to cover - Weather, the EF Box and Garrisons.
John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev
User avatar
bairdlander2
Posts: 2374
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 9:25 am
Location: Toronto Ontario but living in Edmonton,Alberta

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by bairdlander2 »

It takes more patience than WitE.My current game '43 campaign I have invaded Sicily successfully,but am having to wait for port capacity numbers to go up to to move more troops to Sicily.From my understanding supply moves first and whats left is used for troop transport???
marion61
Posts: 1706
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 10:57 am

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by marion61 »

ORIGINAL: zakblood

from what im seeing also so far it's looking very good, but the more i see, the harder it seems to be as well, this maybe it's downfall, information overload?

too much to do and see and control, more than a game it's a sim, even more so than WITE?

It may appear hard, but it really isn't. Once you set an invasion up for yourself you'll see. Just RTM before you do, so you don't overload the port with too many units. Supply in this game is the key, and it is done way better than WiTE. It's actually much simpler to use, and some of it's ease is due to interface changes.
User avatar
zakblood
Posts: 22782
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:19 am

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by zakblood »

glad to hear it, but it hasn't put me off as i'll buy it anyway, ty
Windows 11 Pro 64-bit (25H2) (26200.7309)
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: zakblood

from what im seeing also so far it's looking very good, but the more i see, the harder it seems to be as well, this maybe it's downfall, information overload?

too much to do and see and control, more than a game it's a sim, even more so than WITE?

It is more "complex", but the scale or size of the forces is much smaller then WitE.
So once you get a handle on how things work play time per turn is much less then WitE.

I am not the brightest light bulb in the room and I was able to play vs the AI withen a few hrs as Germany.

Best way to learn these monster games is play the short scenarios first vs AI, then work your way up campaign.

Just doing that took me almost a year playing WitE, WitW will not take nearly that long.

While your doing that read the AAR's and forums as you will pick up more and more little things about the system.


Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
Duck Doc
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 12:22 am

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by Duck Doc »

How do follow-on forces work? Is it the same?

How are attached naval assets handled?

Will the AI or a human Axis player be able to rush forces to the invasion area with, for example, a Normandy landing by the Allies?

Thanks,
User avatar
RedLancer
Posts: 4338
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:09 am
Location: UK

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by RedLancer »

How do follow-on forces work? Is it the same?
No - you need to move them in normal shipping mode. The limiting factors are port capacity, available shipping and space on the beaches.
How are attached naval assets handled?
The only naval assets are the naval support groups attached to the Amphib HQs and automatically fire in support of combat in adjacent hexes.
Will the AI or a human Axis player be able to rush forces to the invasion area with, for example, a Normandy landing by the Allies?
Yes - the Allies need to destroy railyards and impose air interdiction to make reinforcement difficult and costly. The Axis turn between invasion and the next Allied turn is important in sealing up an invasion.
John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev
Zorch
Posts: 7087
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:21 pm

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by Zorch »

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

I'm simply showing why Gary Grigsby’s War in the West 1943-45 is the most ambitious and detailed computer wargame on the Western Front of World War II ever made

I think I've only a few more big difference topics to cover - Weather, the EF Box and Garrisons.
The new stuff takes WitW a step beyond WitE.
Is 'GG's War in Europe' the next step after WitW, just like SPI did back in the day?
User avatar
Balou
Posts: 849
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 7:12 pm

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by Balou »

What about preparation (points?) on the Axis side. I mean every Axis leader knew about an imminent Allied invasion and we also knew about fortifications, mining, etc. In other words, will there be such a thing as Axis preparation?
“Aim towards enemy“.
- instructions on U.S. rocket launcher
Numdydar
Posts: 3283
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by Numdydar »

ORIGINAL: Zorch

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

I'm simply showing why Gary Grigsby�s War in the West 1943-45 is the most ambitious and detailed computer wargame on the Western Front of World War II ever made

I think I've only a few more big difference topics to cover - Weather, the EF Box and Garrisons.
The new stuff takes WitW a step beyond WitE.
Is 'GG's War in Europe' the next step after WitW, just like SPI did back in the day?

Not quite although I hope to live long enough (and the 2by3 team as well [:D]) to see that day [:)]

WitE 2.0 is next to get it into the same system. Then Africa/Med 1941. After that (and depending on sales of course) the start of the war. THEN we may have some over 'linking' game that ties all the above together to give us what we REALLY want [&o]
Zorch
Posts: 7087
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:21 pm

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by Zorch »

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

ORIGINAL: Zorch

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

I'm simply showing why Gary Grigsby�s War in the West 1943-45 is the most ambitious and detailed computer wargame on the Western Front of World War II ever made

I think I've only a few more big difference topics to cover - Weather, the EF Box and Garrisons.
The new stuff takes WitW a step beyond WitE.
Is 'GG's War in Europe' the next step after WitW, just like SPI did back in the day?

Not quite although I hope to live long enough (and the 2by3 team as well [:D]) to see that day [:)]

WitE 2.0 is next to get it into the same system. Then Africa/Med 1941. After that (and depending on sales of course) the start of the war. THEN we may have some over 'linking' game that ties all the above together to give us what we REALLY want [&o]
And after that...a link to War in the Pacific! With full USA and GB production rules! No more mandatory withdrawals from one theater to another!
Coming to a PC near you in 2025 or so.
User avatar
warshipbuilder
Posts: 3042
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 8:52 pm
Location: C-eh-n-eh-d-eh

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by warshipbuilder »

Lonely voice in the wilderness here. I would like to see a 1940-45 strategic-tactical air war game. BTR&ED on steroids so to speak. Also a similar treatment for the naval side of things in the Atlantic. I have always been a dreamer.
warshipbuilder

Any ship can be a minesweeper, once.
ED/BTR Ressurection Project
https://www.bombercommandmuseumarchives.ca/
User avatar
Joel Billings
Posts: 33611
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Contact:

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by Joel Billings »

ORIGINAL: Balou

What about preparation (points?) on the Axis side. I mean every Axis leader knew about an imminent Allied invasion and we also knew about fortifications, mining, etc. In other words, will there be such a thing as Axis preparation?

There are garrison requirements for the Axis that need to be met putting some limitations on German deployments. Aside from that, you can spend your admin points if you want to build fort units which will allow you to build a more formidable Atlantic Wall ring of fortifications.
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
Numdydar
Posts: 3283
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by Numdydar »

ORIGINAL: warshipbuilder

Lonely voice in the wilderness here. I would like to see a 1940-45 strategic-tactical air war game. BTR&ED on steroids so to speak. Also a similar treatment for the naval side of things in the Atlantic. I have always been a dreamer.

Well compared to the PTO, the ETO would be very boring. Convoy A goes there and comes back. Or wait a sub is near change course and send some DDs after it or a plane. Resume course minus any losses.

Even in the Med it would not be a whole lot better. Allies stay away from any LBAs and the Axis stay away from any Allied naval forces. Then the Allies get air superiority and all the Italian navy is sunk.

It would definitely not be a game that I would want to play [:)]

Now combining that with the land war, like HoI or WiF, then we are talking [:)]
User avatar
warshipbuilder
Posts: 3042
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 8:52 pm
Location: C-eh-n-eh-d-eh

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by warshipbuilder »

Well compared to the PTO, the ETO would be very boring. Convoy A goes there and comes back. Or wait a sub is near change course and send some DDs after it or a plane. Resume course minus any losses.

Even in the Med it would not be a whole lot better. Allies stay away from any LBAs and the Axis stay away from any Allied naval forces. Then the Allies get air superiority and all the Italian navy is sunk.

I respectfully disagree. Suppose you had to decide how many escorts to assign to a convoy, how many do you have available, how many are you building. What happens if you don't get those 50 destroyers from the USA? Oh good grief I now have to find escorts for Russian convoys. How fast is the Type 271 radar being built? What ships do I give them to? See depending on the level of detail, I think it could be a lot of fun. Then again I am a micromanagement freak.

BUT if anybody is LISTENING and or CARES, what I would really like is nice complex strategic-tactical comprehensive air war game.

Is there a wish list forum somewhere I can go and rant and p in to the wind?
warshipbuilder

Any ship can be a minesweeper, once.
ED/BTR Ressurection Project
https://www.bombercommandmuseumarchives.ca/
dukewacoan
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 4:30 pm

RE: WitW: The Big Differences from WitE - Part 6 - Amphibious Ops

Post by dukewacoan »

Can you really get more complex than Eagle Day To Bombing The Reich?
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the West”