Some Suggested Changes

[canuckgamer]

There have been a lot of changes to the game since it was released and a lot of them was to improve the game balance but I think that with equally skilled players the Axis will win most games. In my opinion the Allies should win most games. I remember saying that after hearing the news about the U.S. entering the war even though the Hitler accelerated that a few days by declaring war on the U.S. he had the best sleep of his life because he knew that the war was won.

Here are some suggested changes.

1. The Italian ground and air units plus all units for the Romanians and Hungarians should have the same experience level as the Russians, 20%. The Italians even though they greatly outnumbered the British in North Africa in 1940 were routed back to Tripoli with the British taking thousands of prisoners. When the Italians invaded Greece they were stalemated until the Germans came to rescue again. Don't understand how the Hungarians and Romanians have higher experience than the Russians considering their armed forces weren't even in the conflict until Barbarossa.

2. Russian armour, mechanized and winterized units should be able to move in snow months at the same rate as clear months. The wider tracks of the Russian tanks made them much more maneuverable in the snow.

3. For the first winter that the Axis are in Russia there should in addition to the current rules on loss of effectiveness also the loss of strength points. They lost thousands of men due to frostbite and the severe winter conditions due to the fact that they were not equipped for winter conditions.

4. The Germans had zero capability for amphibious invasions. The only major amphibious invasion they made was Norway where German infantry were carried close to shore by destroyers and then transferred to small boats to land. The Germans had no landing craft capable of landing heavy equipment and tanks except at a port. Compare this to the specialized landing craft the Allies developed during the war such as LCI and LCTs. To still allow the Germans to develop the capability maybe the cost of landing ships should be doubled and the build time increased.

5. I don't know what the effect Malta has on Axis supply in Africa but it seems to be minimal even though from what I've read it had a significant impact on the Axis supply. How about a port supply interdiction roll every turn if the Allies have an air unit in Malta even if it is only a fighter.

6. Roads in Russia should provide no movement benefit. The roads in Russia were primitive compared to western Europe which greatly contributed to the Axis supply problems as they advanced. In the game now it is even easy to move through the Pripet Marshes because of the roads there. Speaking of roads, a unit should have to play the normal terrain cost when entering a road hex from a non road hex or a road hex that is not connected to that road hex.

7. Tank and mechanized units should not be allowed to attack in to mountain hexes or the penalty should be more severe. I have played games where German panzers were attacking in the Caucasus mountains.

8. If a unit embarks at a port that is in range of a naval or air unit then interception attempts should take place. As it is now, interception only takes place in destination hexes but not embarkation hexes.

9. Finnish units should only be allowed to advance so far in to Russia which I believe was the case historically. Similarly the governments of Romania and Hungarian restricted the deployment of their forces to specific countries.

10. You should not be allowed to invade friendly beaches. I've seen this happen as a way to land units when ports are in range of interception.

11. Full FOW for naval vessels in very low recon hexes like it is in War Plan Pacific.

We are having a blast playing War Plan and think is the best strategic level computer game we have played. The current version is vastly different from the release version. We look forward to more changes and War Plan 2. In regards to War Plan 2, I hope there will be full replays where we can see the units moving and attacking. When there is a lot of activity it is difficult to determine the sequence of moves and attacks and advances.

[canuckgamer]

In my first paragraph, I was referring to what Churchill said.

[canuckgamer]

Forgot one other suggestion for roads in Russia. In regards to supply each road hex should count 2 op points instead of 1.

[stjeand]

There have been a lot of changes to the game since it was released and a lot of them was to improve the game balance but I think that with equally skilled players the Axis will win most games. In my opinion the Allies should win most games. I remember saying that after hearing the news about the U.S. entering the war even though the Hitler accelerated that a few days by declaring war on the U.S. he had the best sleep of his life because he knew that the war was won.

Here are some suggested changes.

1. The Italian ground and air units plus all units for the Romanians and Hungarians should have the same experience level as the Russians, 20%. The Italians even though they greatly outnumbered the British in North Africa in 1940 were routed back to Tripoli with the British taking thousands of prisoners. When the Italians invaded Greece they were stalemated until the Germans came to rescue again. Don't understand how the Hungarians and Romanians have higher experience than the Russians considering their armed forces weren't even in the conflict until Barbarossa.

The Russian units that are a 20% are there as speed bumps. The Russians build 40% units.
I know that their training was at issue as well as command and control, since they were all "purged".
That is why they are 20%.
I don't think Romania and Hungaria should be like that...
The Italians already are terrible because they only have small corps...
I would like a Morale value rather than just "experience" and "efficiency". Maybe in the future.

2. Russian armour, mechanized and winterized units should be able to move in snow months at the same rate as clear months. The wider tracks of the Russian tanks made them much more maneuverable in the snow.

While I do think they should move faster just not full speed. Sorry but snow still did bother their tanks just less so. I think the penalty should be half for Russian mechanized / armor in the winter.

3. For the first winter that the Axis are in Russia there should in addition to the current rules on loss of effectiveness also the loss of strength points. They lost thousands of men due to frostbite and the severe winter conditions due to the fact that they were not equipped for winter conditions.

I had thought about this...but honestly the number is so low I was never sure it was worth the code. Thousands were lost...but thousand is basically 1 STR point. So if you tell me they lost 5000 men that would be 5 Str points...
Overall pretty small.

4. The Germans had zero capability for amphibious invasions. The only major amphibious invasion they made was Norway where German infantry were carried close to shore by destroyers and then transferred to small boats to land. The Germans had no landing craft capable of landing heavy equipment and tanks except at a port. Compare this to the specialized landing craft the Allies developed during the war such as LCI and LCTs. To still allow the Germans to develop the capability maybe the cost of landing ships should be doubled and the build time increased.

You are correct...though it was because they spent their resources in other places. If they had spent the time and resources on amphibious invasions then I suspect they would have had exceptional LCs...
I do not mind increasing their cost but it again may be minor overall.

5. I don't know what the effect Malta has on Axis supply in Africa but it seems to be minimal even though from what I've read it had a significant impact on the Axis supply. How about a port supply interdiction roll every turn if the Allies have an air unit in Malta even if it is only a fighter.

Malta only affects supply if it has an air unit, bomber to be exact.
The effect is small overall if I remember but still there. I would have to read more regarding how much of an effect it had...

6. Roads in Russia should provide no movement benefit. The roads in Russia were primitive compared to western Europe which greatly contributed to the Axis supply problems as they advanced. In the game now it is even easy to move through the Pripet Marshes because of the roads there. Speaking of roads, a unit should have to play the normal terrain cost when entering a road hex from a non road hex or a road hex that is not connected to that road hex.

I agree regarding moving onto a road. That makes sense.
As for the roads...keep in mind if you eliminate them for the Germans you do so for the Russians. They need them post 42 for sure...
I would like there to be "mud" though...after winter / rain.
But fitting that all in, in a two week window is odd.

7. Tank and mechanized units should not be allowed to attack in to mountain hexes or the penalty should be more severe. I have played games where German panzers were attacking in the Caucasus mountains.

The penalty is brutal attacking a mountain for armor. I could be wrong but to start 50% because it is rugged terrain then another -60% so the unit is basically 25%.
Then the defender is 2x...so that is pretty much like having 10% attacking...not going to go well unless the unit you are attacking is exhausted and crippled.

8. If a unit embarks at a port that is in range of a naval or air unit then interception attempts should take place. As it is now, interception only takes place in destination hexes but not embarkation hexes.

Not sure how feasible to say you want to intercept when loaded and when disembarking.
I can see the reason but perhaps you only want to defend against attacking units and not leaving? Would be tougher to cover both.
My bigger concern is when you have battleships sitting outside the port and units load up and move out and your ships just watch them. They should attempt an intercept for sure...
I suspect that is not easy to code though.

9. Finnish units should only be allowed to advance so far in to Russia which I believe was the case historically. Similarly the governments of Romania and Hungarian restricted the deployment of their forces to specific countries.

This Al said was difficult to program.
Perhaps in WP2...

10. You should not be allowed to invade friendly beaches. I've seen this happen as a way to land units when ports are in range of interception.

This you can ONLY do IF you just took over a hex but have never entered it with a unit.
Not sure if that makes sense...BUT...IF you move a unit next to a landing hex and the ZOC captures that hex, you are still able to land there. You cannot land in a spot that friendly units have entered before.

11. Full FOW for naval vessels in very low recon hexes like it is in War Plan Pacific.

Agree...not sure if possible in the current version.
But there needs to be messages for the Allies to know that the Bismarck has left port. They watched that ship like a hawk and knew.

[canuckgamer]

stejand, thanks for your reply and as always you make some good points. I am wondering if you think the game is balanced in it's current state?

Morale is a good idea as the Italians, Romanians, and Hungarians were not exactly happy or motivated to be in the war. However I don't think their experience levels should be equal to UK units even if they are small corps.

Since it is +1 when you move in snow, one way to make the Russians faster would be having Russians, Finns, and winterized units of any nation play +1 while all others pay +2 in snow turns.

The Axis lost about 500,000 of their 3,000,000 invasion force in 1941. In the summer and fall they destroyed and captured hundreds of thousands of Russians while suffering minimal losses. However this changed when winter hit so I am thinking that a significant number of the 500,000 occurred due to or partly due to the winter weather which they were woefully unprepared for. In WP all units incur the penalty for attacking in snow except for winterized units and with only 4 Siberian units in late 41 there is no way the Russians can inflict losses equal to 1/6 of the initial Axis force so implementing a rule that would inflict losses on the Axis the first winter would bring the game more in line with history.

Hitler had planned to take Malta with an airborne assault but changed his mind and took Crete instead. Through out the war, both sides took significant naval and air losses contesting Malta so it must have been important but that is not reflected in this game. Basing a bomber in Malta puts it at the maximum range from Tripoli so the odds are slim that any supply is interdicted. I don't recall ever seeing a message saying that supply to Tripoli had been interdicted. Instead a closer port like Tunis or Sousse lost some supplies. This is why I think there should be default die roll rotating between Tripoli and Tobruk. Regardless, it doesn't seem to have much impact in WP.

As I mentioned, the roads in Russia were primitive compared to western Europe which is why German supply was mainly be rail. If supply in Russia was only allowed by rail then advances by both sides would follow rail lines. In any case, the roads there should not be treated the same as those in France and Germany and especially not in the Pripet Marshes which split the eastern front in two.

In regards to invading friendly beaches the situation in our current game was this. The Allies had taken the port at 153,33 and already held the 2 ports in Corsica. They stationed subs within 4 of hexes of Caligaria the last port in Sardinia still held by the Axis. To avoid reinforcements being intercepted by the subs the Axis player landed on friendly beach hexes north of Caligaria more than 4 hexes away from the subs. To me this is an exploit.

Another suggestion that I forgot to make in my initial post. There should be interdiction of rail lines. In the months leading up to D-Day the Allies bombed the rail lines leading to Normandy and Pas de Calais where Hitler expected the invasion to come. For WP allow bombers to bomb a rail hex and if successful, that rail hex would be in operable for the next Axis turn. The Axis should be allowed to do this too but the Allies took it to another level since they had total air superiority by 1944. As this would be an easy way to cut off supply it should only impact units moving by rail.

[Chronic]

Your suggestion on German casualties is incorrect.

Yes, they achieved severe casualties from the Soviets for a comparatively small price. No, the high degree of casualties was not from the winter. By the time the Germans were assaulting the gates of Moscow, they had been campaigning nonstop since June. Their panzer regiments were trashed, their infantry likewise exhausted.

Some parts of the front were quiet; others, they were beaten bloody. Yes, the winter offensive lost then a great deal, but it was 700k casualties worth.

[stjeand]

stejand, thanks for your reply and as always you make some good points. I am wondering if you think the game is balanced in it's current state?

I am not 100% sure...
For me the best scenario at the moment is the Severe Winter one as it hammers the Germans with blizzards. The main issue with the game is the weather at the moment. The Germans always seem to get a "cold" turn in Russia during the winter of 1941 and that normally caused a break in the Russian lines that they rarely recover from.

BUT I have yet to play with the new upgraded Soviets. I have started two games just recently...so I will tell you.

Another major thing is player experience. This to me is even bigger than game changes.

Morale is a good idea as the Italians, Romanians, and Hungarians were not exactly happy or motivated to be in the war. However I don't think their experience levels should be equal to UK units even if they are small corps.

The German allies experience is not equal to the UK...Italy has 45%...Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary are 40%...the UK is 50%. All other than the UK can "rise" based on attacks...but VERY slowly from what I have seen.

Since it is +1 when you move in snow, one way to make the Russians faster would be having Russians, Finns, and winterized units of any nation play +1 while all others pay +2 in snow turns.

I do agree here but to be honest it should only be in 1942 and beyond...early in the war Russia was highly under supplied...even for winter...outside of the Siberians. I do think they should not be penalized in Winter movement wise if they have the winter specialty.

The Axis lost about 500,000 of their 3,000,000 invasion force in 1941. In the summer and fall they destroyed and captured hundreds of thousands of Russians while suffering minimal losses. However this changed when winter hit so I am thinking that a significant number of the 500,000 occurred due to or partly due to the winter weather which they were woefully unprepared for. In WP all units incur the penalty for attacking in snow except for winterized units and with only 4 Siberian units in late 41 there is no way the Russians can inflict losses equal to 1/6 of the initial Axis force so implementing a rule that would inflict losses on the Axis the first winter would bring the game more in line with history.

Hitler had planned to take Malta with an airborne assault but changed his mind and took Crete instead. Through out the war, both sides took significant naval and air losses contesting Malta so it must have been important but that is not reflected in this game. Basing a bomber in Malta puts it at the maximum range from Tripoli so the odds are slim that any supply is interdicted. I don't recall ever seeing a message saying that supply to Tripoli had been interdicted. Instead a closer port like Tunis or Sousse lost some supplies. This is why I think there should be default die roll rotating between Tripoli and Tobruk. Regardless, it doesn't seem to have much impact in WP.

Malta should have a greater effect...but that is difficult to reproduce on a small scale.

As I mentioned, the roads in Russia were primitive compared to western Europe which is why German supply was mainly be rail. If supply in Russia was only allowed by rail then advances by both sides would follow rail lines. In any case, the roads there should not be treated the same as those in France and Germany and especially not in the Pripet Marshes which split the eastern front in two.

This has been an issue for a while...I think the only way to make this truly work would be less rail and less ability to repair it. I did play a board game once where the Germans had 2 rail repair units that could fix 1 rail per turn. I think this would be a good balance.
Normally you can take the rail and it is all the way to Moscow by start of 1942.
Also you should not be able to repair rail in the winter or if so slower...to add when there are partisans they should break the rail and have it potentially require extensive repairs.
Perhaps rail lines could would like strategic damage...1 repair per turn...but a partisan will prevent this and do 1 damage per turn. Bombers could cause 1 damage if successful in hitting..
But that would be for WP2

In regards to invading friendly beaches the situation in our current game was this. The Allies had taken the port at 153,33 and already held the 2 ports in Corsica. They stationed subs within 4 of hexes of Caligaria the last port in Sardinia still held by the Axis. To avoid reinforcements being intercepted by the subs the Axis player landed on friendly beach hexes north of Caligaria more than 4 hexes away from the subs. To me this is an exploit.

You can not invade friendly beaches...you have to invade an enemy one...
I suspect the beach was Allied so the Axis could invade it...perhaps due to a ZOC?

You can test this...I have tried and wished I could invade a friendly hex...though can't.

[Nirosi]

You can test this...I have tried and wished I could invade a friendly hex...though can't.

Yes it is possible, I did it, but very rarely, to rush reinforcements. It is even in the rule book.

Can't remember if I ever tried it on a beach however, probably not.

PS : what I am saying might also not be true anymore if a patch removed that possibility since last time I did it.

[stjeand]

Yes it is possible, I did it, but very rarely, to rush reinforcements. It is even in the rule book.

Can't remember if I ever tried it on a beach however, probably not.

PS : what I am saying might also not be true anymore if a patch removed that possibility since last time I did it.

Really? When I load units no beach that I own appear as landing spots when I press Z. And I can't disembark.

NOW if the hex was recently captured via landing you can land there.
what I have noticed also is you an only land one unit in one spot.
What I mean is...you land on a beach and move inland. You can not, at least I can not, land another unit on that same beach to bring in more reinforcements.

AGAIN would have to test that nothing has changed. That was the last time I did a landing and I am always mixing up Europe and Pacific...

[Nirosi]

Well, I never tried on a friendly beach. But friendly coastal did work for sure in Europe (and was RAW). Will have to check if it still does.

[AlvaroSousa]

You can always land on a friendly beach. You can't move 2 operation points and invade/unload on a beach.

[stjeand]

Wow never noticed...always hit a Z and only non-owned lands showed up so would not risk it.

[boldairade]

Some interesting ideas here

JMO

In its current state:

I’ve never seen a wargame model the Italians as well as WP

For me their limitations and capabilities feel just right

I haven’t played with the ‘new’ Russia yet

But I always thought they were well modeled as well. The transition from the early ineptitude and feeling of panic to machine like juggernaut is very enjoyable and always felt about right to me. I think it is quite ab accomplishment really, that WP managed this as well as it does. It must have been a challenge.

Because these nations seem to ‘feel’ very right I’d be cautious about making major changes. It seems likely to me we could end up with a less playable/realistic game instead of a better one.

This is just MO.

As far as German landing craft I again think this is superbly handled.

You want landing craft? Well, because Germany is working on Bismarck for the first year, you are going to be behind in the sub war. That’s a big sacrifice.

The idea that Germany couldn’t have built landing craft if it sacrificed other production doesn’t seem right. And also, forcing a player to toe the historical line in choices/production seems decidedly less fun.

I hope WP2 does not go that route.

Choices are fun.

It’s even fun when your opponent does something very unexpected.