War in the West

[gradenko2k]

It's likely that the time scale will be the same as WITE, since they're planning on merging the two in the nebulous future. The scale might be the same as well, unless they fudge it a bit by drawing some line of demarcation across Germany where one scale ends and the other begins.

Thinking of a merged WITE-WITW game reminds me of a certain boardgame where one side would control the Western Allies and the Germans facing East, while the other player would control the Russians and the Germans facing West. First to Berlin wins.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: Jeffrey H.

Hrrm, well one thing I'm curious about with the coming WitW game is when does it start ? I mean does it begin with D Day or does it start with buildup and strategic air or does it begin after D Day?

War in the West begins with the Allied invasion of Sicily (July, 1943).

[Micke II]

ORIGINAL: jaw

War in the West begins with the Allied invasion of Sicily (July, 1943).

I hope we will have different choices as for example test Churchill's recommended road with the invasion of Greece instead.

[gradenko2k]

While I agree that it would be nice hypothetical scenario, I think it would also have been quite impractical/unfeasible. Churchill only wanted to invade through Greece because he was afraid of the Soviets laying their paws on the Balkans and turning the whole thing Communist. Otherwise, the rough terrain all around and the distance from both Germany and Italy would probably have tied down less troops and hampered the Axis regime much less than the actual Italian invasion.

Again, not trying to rain on your suggestion, just pointing out that the plan was probably more politically motivated than anything else.

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

A buyer of a game has every right to be disappointed in a product that they buy. Tastes vary, and different people are looking for different things. You have every right to express your disappointment with specifics with what you don't like. As long as people keep things civil, they are free to post, that's the point of the forum. There is always something that can be improved in any game, and no game is perfect. We don't claim WitE to be perfect, and no doubt it could be improved by constant attention from programmers and other development personnel. However, based on the feedback of many, and the many awards that WitE received and continues to receive, I feel we succeeded with WitE

Since we're always wanting to talk history, allow me to remind people who develop computer games that once upon a time, another company with a rock-solid past built what they felt (internally) was the best game in its class out there. It won many significant awards

And it did not listen to anyone from its consumer base that did not share its own opinion of what consumers liked, with the following results:
Within 9 months of release, it had lost half of its active consumer base, losing over 1.09 billion (US) dollars. (See link above)

I coined the term 'Sovie-o-phile' to identify a market segment and its consumer attitudes toward WitE. The Sovie-o-phile market segment appears to me to be the market segment that 2by3 most wishes to please with the WitE design. This symbiosis results (I assert) in group-think between designers/programmers and the "sovie-o-phile" market segment, with the latter forming a protective circle of bias and dismissal around critics from at a minimum, my market segment (people who believe design outcome produces a game that pits a highly optimized Soviet army against a historically tightly constrained Axis, resulting in predictable and dull outcomes when I play either side).

I became angry and at times have been uncivil because it has been my experience that the Sovie-o-phile community behaves as anti-bodies whose sole purpose is to reject divergent opinion, particularly criticisms of the game aimed at giving Germany more gameplay options, and better competitive footing for a 225-turn game.

Despite past praise of the title, and recommendations to newcomers to the community to purchase the product, my well-intended game critiques were greeted with hostility among the Sovie-o-philes (though never by 2by3 or Matrix personnel), and the reflexive dismissal of anything deemed pro-Axis (especially by authors other than me) required me to treat that segment of the audience as hostile, and to 'raise my voice' accordingly (it has been my experience that people who share my market segment attitude feel similarly bullied by the Sovie-o-philes, regardless of our tone and intent, and it's really disappointing to note the silence with which 2by3 personnel react to this reflexive dismissal and unkindness, if not to me, than to others more disciplined in tone than I).

Now that I have reached the realization that nothing significant is going to change in WitE without the expenditure of more money on additional 2by3 products (and particularly in the context of my $80 early adopter investment), I feel betrayed, and lied to.

The two purposes in continuing to make these posts as dispassionately as I can is to tell the Sovie-o-philes to check themselves, because they might just be driving away 2by3 business. Now, maybe they're fine with that, but I doubt Matrix is, and my particular consumer advocacy is solely aimed at keeping people from my market segment from buying future titles if they're this expensive and beta-ish at release, and if the bias-bullying reveals itself as strongly in future titles as it has in WitE.

But the more important reason is to tell 2by3 that I'm a consumer who tells you to your face, "I feel lied to." And I'm looking to see if you care about that, because if you don't, then my prior allegiance to your company is no longer appropriately placed in your company and your products. If you don't care, and WitW releases at a similar price point and the community expresses similar attempts to homogenize opinion, I will share my opinion of War in the East in forums and message boards where my opinions might be most helpful in keeping people in my market segment from walking into a place where they will feel lied to after purchase as well.

The way you have handled people from my market segment is wrong, and the way these Sovie-o-philes have been allowed to treat people from my market segment (with the exception of me myself, because I deserve what I've gotten, and gave what I felt was deserved back) approaches despicable.

[Krafty]

All I want is the ability to cancel production of one item, and that freed up production goes to the other items still being built.

And cancelling would cancel the upgrade path as well.

Cancelling Panzer IIIf production would never allow the H model. But it would up slightly other production across the board. Same could be done of aircraft.

[LiquidSky]

Cancelling production for the Germans is easy...the allies do it for you! Once city at a time...[:D][:D][:D]

[Tophat1815]

Pardon heliodorus04 but those of us following this thread have over and over again gotten your point and your feelings about being lied to. Why do you continue to post this same point again and again and again? Stop beating the dead horse man! I enjoy to playing the Germans myself,though I am a novice compared to Pelton,but far from feeling betrayed i am getting a tremendous amount of playing time on this game. Also i at least am enjoying myself playing the game and i certainly don't think i fall into your Sovie-o-phile subgroup. Now do you consider this bias-bullying because i enjoy the game?

You keep saying "you feel lied to" and what are they going to do about that? Where others post suggestions about the destroyed units and automatic withdrawal issue in hopes of making the problem known and discussing various solutions for it.

[gradenko2k]

Good lord heliodorus, it's not as though you bought Master of Orion 3, give it a rest. You sound worse than Pelton on one of his bad days.

[Toby42]

Heliodorus04, no one is paying attention to you. If you don't like the game, stop playing it and take your act somewhere else! Somehow you think that you have the right to be rude and insult the Dev's because you think that they lied to you! Grow up man. It's only a game, and apparently not your cup of tea!!!!

[Schmart]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04
...and the way these Sovie-o-philes have been allowed to treat people from my market segment...

You mean equally biased axis fanboys!? I don't see any of these 'sovie-o-philes' bitching about axis fanboys and their lying redneck conspiracy whinny carebear flying pigs.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Axis players are consistently achieving greater than historical strengths in the game, and there are plenty of AARs showing Axis players doing better than historical. I fail to see how all that adds up to a soviet bias.

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: gradenko_2000

Good lord heliodorus, it's not as though you bought Master of Orion 3, give it a rest. You sound worse than Pelton on one of his bad days.

I am afraid I have to disagree that this is even remotely like Pelton. Pelton is a bit ([:D]) over the top and sometimes gets carried away with his own sarcasm but at heart he is passionate about the game. Even at his most extreme Pelton is always striving (admittedly a bit counter-productively at times) to improve it.

[Jeffrey H.]

ORIGINAL: jaw

ORIGINAL: Jeffrey H.

Hrrm, well one thing I'm curious about with the coming WitW game is when does it start ? I mean does it begin with D Day or does it start with buildup and strategic air or does it begin after D Day?

War in the West begins with the Allied invasion of Sicily (July, 1943).

Ahh ok, sounds interesting. I guess that leaves North Africa for another day. Sounds like an interesting way to start things off.

[Erik Rutins]

Let's keep this civil and not make this personal please. We do not view our customers through the filter of "Axis Fanboys" or "Soviet Fanboys". We welcome all historical and factual criticism, as long as it has a constructive goal. We welcome any constructive criticism really.

Heliodorus, I do not understand despite your posts how you feel that _we_ lied to you or betrayed you, through the act of you purchasing this game. That's quite a leap from saying that you might have made some different design choices to feeling lied to. We consulted a wide variety of historical sources during the research phase of War in the East and we always consider historical accuracy when making design decisions. Our goal is the most historically accurate wargame possible, within the bounds of what most wargamers can reasonably play.

I didn't entirely understand your earlier point about this being a simulation and not a game either. It is clearly a game, but a very realistic game. A simulation is an entirely different creature.

I guess I'm not entirely clear on what was the lie that you are upset about, how we actually betrayed you and what exactly you would change in the game if you were the designer that fits within the reasonable scope of post-release support and development. Very ambitious changes are never on the table post-release, but ongoing support and fixes and balance tweaks are. Our goal with this entire series is extremely ambitious though and the "big" wish list items most have expressed are part of that, but it's way too early to go into more details.

Regards,

- Erik

[Aurelian]

I've played many East Front games. Board and computer. And this one just puts them all to shame. And just to watch the two sides evolve through out the course of the game. Never have I seen it in such detail.

[philabos]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian



I've played many East Front games. Board and computer. And this one just puts them all to shame. And just to watch the two sides evolve through out the course of the game. Never have I seen it in such detail.

Quite an endorsement. Guderian's Blizkrieg II was just reprinted at $160 per copy. Case Blue - if you can find it - will cost you $250+. Even if you
have the bucks - with two cats around, well.......[:)]

I keep thinking about buying this game - but then I remember I might get two turns in today in WITP-AE and might only be weeks away from seeing
Autumn 1942 after I'm afraid to tell you how long. The WITW is a gem I didn't even know about until now.

[vicberg]

I coined the term 'Sovie-o-phile' to identify a market segment and its consumer attitudes toward WitE. The Sovie-o-phile market segment appears to me to be the market segment that 2by3 most wishes to please with the WitE design. This symbiosis results (I assert) in group-think between designers/programmers and the "sovie-o-phile" market segment, with the latter forming a protective circle of bias and dismissal around critics from at a minimum, my market segment (people who believe design outcome produces a game that pits a highly optimized Soviet army against a historically tightly constrained Axis, resulting in predictable and dull outcomes when I play either side).

I think Sovie-o-phile is the wrong way to categorize this. It's not about Soviet Fanboy or German Fanboy. There are a lot of people who believe that a game such as this should follow history. I've seen the same arguments in WITPAE. The EXACT same arguments, countless times. Japan should have no chance. Germany should have no chance. These people, IMO, don't seem to realize that every good game has the chance for both sides to win, whether historical or not. It's a game and it needs to be fun for both.

That being said, I'm starting to change my tune concerning Germany in WITE. It's possible to destroy enough of the Red Army in 41 and 42, as well as capture enough Manpower areas, to be able to win in 44/45 as Germany. The game is getting more balanced. Pelton is a perfect case in point. It requires an experienced German player to the degree of Pelton and the many, many games he's played. At this point, he knows the ins and outs of the game and Germany to a degree that, I would bet, no one else does.

Is that a problem? Yes. There won't be many players who stick with the game like Pelton does. Therefore, there won't be many German players. I look at the AARs and the Opponents wanted and it just isn't to the level of WITPAE. It should be much greater. It's newer. Definately more exciting turn to turn. But it doesn't have the same draw. Why? Because it isn't balanced yet from a game perspective, nothing to do with history. WITE requires an expert German player. WITPAE is much more balanced and doesn't require an expert Japanese player, in spite of the many complaints of Allied "Fanboys". Allies generally want a cake walk over from 43 on, which is historical. The "game" keeps Japan into it through 44 and 45, providing no catastrophes.

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: warrenup

ORIGINAL: Aurelian



I've played many East Front games. Board and computer. And this one just puts them all to shame. And just to watch the two sides evolve through out the course of the game. Never have I seen it in such detail.

Quite an endorsement. Guderian's Blizkrieg II was just reprinted at $160 per copy. Case Blue - if you can find it - will cost you $250+. Even if you
have the bucks - with two cats around, well.......[:)]

I keep thinking about buying this game - but then I remember I might get two turns in today in WITP-AE and might only be weeks away from seeing
Autumn 1942 after I'm afraid to tell you how long. The WITW is a gem I didn't even know about until now.

That's cheap. DG's War in the Pacific is $420. And $40 more for the extension. WiTP-AE is a freaking bargain. And it won't get dusty sitting on the table.

Look at Empires in Arms. I was offered $150 for mine. (Still have it.) Matrix's version is soooo much cheaper.

Lately I've been buying the SPW series. Thankfully, they have modules for ADC2 so I can play them without having furry pest....er pets/clumsy people, (like me at times.), or a sudden gust of wind upset things.

WiTE is well worth the money. I wasn't happy about the price, but got it anyway. You can read in books about how both sides evolved during the war, but to actually *see* it........ Like WiTP, the cost/enjoyment factor is measured in pennies in the long run

[MechFO]

Trey, to take the WITP example, it really all comes down to whether treating the 2 Yorktowns as one ship, by a game purporting to cover the Pacific War in WWII on an operational level, is a feature or a bug. If you think it's a feature, we'll have to agree to disagree and you need read no further.

ORIGINAL: el hefe

There are a lot more factors at work behind the scenes than a simple extra missing division out there. Many of those points have been pointed out here already. Yes, the 345th Infantry began forming in late November 1942 and was later renamed to the 29th Panzergrenadier Division. I don't think anyone knows how much of that division was actually on-hand in terms of personnel and equipment when the 29th Motorized was destroyed in late Feb/early March 1943 which was just three months after the 345th started forming. It looks like only a Panzergrenadier Battalion and a Stug battery from the 345th were deemed combat ready enough to be sent East by early January but those plans were canceled. You additionally have the issues of the Germans de-motorizing at least two motorized divisions in the summer of 1943 since there were obvious transportation constraints. How would that affect an extra Panzergrenadier division? Would it have been de-motorized as well? Dunno. Do we really want to run this down the rabbit hole in an alternative universe?

The rabbit hole of an alternative universe starts at turn 1 and this particular rabbit hole is unavoidable due to the way the production/unit creation processes are set up in game.

ORIGINAL: el hefe
Historically, there were numerous divisions that were destroyed and were not reconstituted at all by the Germans in any theater. In WitE, the player doesn't have to worry about this since all units destroyed (except for the ones on the withdrawal schedule) are automatically reconstituted and usable by the player. Obviously, there were equipment and personnel bottlenecks in which decisions were made not to reconstitute these units. Do we really want to incorporate additional rules and draw away additional time and resources away from WitW development to look into these obscure issues? If we did, it would probably result in more German units not being reconstituted.

In the end, I think it evens out. The Germans debatefully lose a handful of divisions but the German player's destroyed in-game units aren't subject to being outright disbanded which happened often. I think that is a plus for the German player. Also, the German player benefits from many "free" reinforcements that have not been subjected to production.

The Germans didn't really rebuild destroyed divisions, instead they gave a newly forming one the name of a destroyed unit. The Germans formed, or were in some stage of forming, nearly 500 Infantry/Volksgrenadier/Motorized Divisions. At the same time, the production share of the West is by any measure vastly overinflated until the summer of 44.

Not having most of those 500 odd divisions show up in game in their historic waves and then get fleshed out by "realistic" East front production is a valid design choice. I agree that's a "wash" with the current reinforcement/rebuilding mechanic.

However, taking the historic "rebuilt" unit history and using it to determine the in game "original" unit history doesn't make sense. The in game result of this practice is that every single historically destroyed/rebuilt division is also lost in game, either by an artificial withdrawal or by a missing reinforcement. Exactly how can this be an intended result?

Now for the period from 44 onward, I can see the situation getting fluid to the point that a certain abstraction is unavoidable, but before that, the units involved are fairly few, easy to trace and not hard to correctly represent. Why not do so?

I can't comprehend the amount of resistance that exists to even minor fixes. I get the point that there's not going to be any major changes, but this is a fairly minor common sense OOB fix, needing maybe an hour or so to check the relevant unit histories and another hour to update the game data.

[JAMiAM]

ORIGINAL: MechFO
I can't comprehend the amount of resistance that exists to even minor fixes. I get the point that there's not going to be any major changes, but this is a fairly minor common sense OOB fix, needing maybe an hour or so to check the relevant unit histories and another hour to update the game data.

The solution then, is obvious. Spend a couple of hours to make the simple changes you want, and then play your own version. You may send my usual consulting fee by registered mail...[;)]