Does WITW Favor the Germans?

[DTomato]

I've played the Germans in the beta, and I've played the Allies and Germans in the full release. I've come to the conclusion that I think some of us suspect but won't say aloud: WITW favors the Germans.

Do you know the biggest lesson of WITW? It's that the successful Allied invasions were miracles. Not the application of immense resources that overcame a skillful but thinly spread opponent, but absolutely miraculous amphibious assaults in Italy and France that only succeeded because the Germans did not concentrate the entire Luftwaffe bomber force to interdict the sea lanes...or that the Germans didn't bring over all their mountain divisions and half their panzer divisions from the Eastern Front...or that they didn't rail an entire panzer army and the necessary supplies to the invasion site in two weeks.

All of this may be true; Salerno was a near-defeat that took the counterattacking panzers to the water's edge. But the fact is that not once did the Germans repulse a major Allied landing, which in WITW is a result that's 50-50 at best. No one likes rules that keep them from implementing a brilliant strategy. But if you don't hamstring the Soviets in June 1941, WITE becomes ahistorical. If the Germans can freely mass their aircraft and tanks against an Allied landing, that's not historical either. And you end up with Allied players having to resort to bogus strategies like invading a small slice of Holland to build airfields. If that had been Eisenhower's plan for liberating Europe, he would have been replaced in a heartbeat.

So I'll propose a few solutions:

* The naval-air interdiction mission is a fascinating system that's broken. Pelton destroyed my landings with it, and I just did the same to another experienced player. The Germans can muster close to a thousand bombers, concentrate them on the numerous airfields in Italy and France, and totally seal off the beachheads. Losses aren't a problem; the Luftwaffe gets nearly a hundred bombers a turn, and they only need to fly intensively for a few turns while the beachhead is destroyed or contained. The other problem is that the beachheads can easily be isolated by interdiction. One solution is to increase shipping and supply losses, but make it fairly hard to totally isolate the beachheads.

* As some of us warned back in the beta, the East Front box is a problem. In '43, the Germans can take all the mountain divisions, several panzer divisions and heavy tank battalions, and Luftwaffe fighters and bombers (a huge plus for naval-air interdiction) without jeopardizing their Eastern situation. The Allies have enough problems without Grossdeutschland leading the counterattack on the beaches.

* One reason the Germans never destroyed a landing was because they were afraid the Allies would land elsewhere. That uncertainty is somewhat modeled by the garrison rules, but only somewhat. The Germans know that the Allies have six amphibious TFs, so they calculate how much capacity the Allies have used and how long it will take to recycle before the next invasion. Modeling Hitler's paranoia and indecision like personally restricting the panzers on D-Day, or Allied deception operations like Fortitude, is tough. But without them, the game becomes ahistorically tough for the Allies.

* As some have pointed out, the VP penalty for Allied casualties is crazy. In WITW, attrition actually favors the Germans.

If the rest of you have solutions, let's hear them. But right now, much as I love playing the Allies, it's a losing proposition.

Michael

[JocMeister]

Amen brother! [&o]

The devs need to admit to themselves the game suffer from some fundamental problems and deal with them. Otherwise this game will soon be forgotten and with that any hopes of generating any decent sales for the followup Western Front games planned in this series. If this one ends up with a bad reputation no one is going to buy next one...

I agree with all your points although I know too little of the effects of the EF box to have an opinion on that.

Interdiction needs to be fixed. Its so abstract people don´t even know what is happening where. I lost 4 Troop ships and 18 Cargo ships last turn. I don´t even know where? Or to what? Its a poor design and I realize its probably just thrown in there as a placeholder until the naval module is done. But the current system is almost an insult.

The VP system is probably the worst one I have ever came in to contact with. I cannot for the life of me come up with a single positive thing to say about it.

I badly want to the love this game but I simply cannot. I know this isn´t the most constructive criticism but I´ve already given that in numerous other places here on the forum.

[Seminole]

amphibious assaults in Italy and France that only succeeded because the Germans did not concentrate the entire Luftwaffe bomber force to interdict the sea lanes...

I don't know how you keep players from focusing their air force to the relevant theater, and I have hard time blaming a German player for not just leaving a Ju 88 squadron uselessly stationed in Denmark. I'm sure that was the historical location of that squadron at the time, but it serves no purpose in the game. It begs to be made relevant.

The naval interdiction capability of the He 111s and Ju 88s seem extraordinary in the little I've played (as both sides).

This is just a single Ju 88 squadron running unopposed naval interdiction. Loadout is 28x50kg bombs, twice a day (24 planes) for a week against a single hex (size 0).





fun fact: putting the mine loadout on a Wellington results in lower naval interdiction values than loading 7x500lbs bombs.

[Seminole]

The VP system is probably the worst one I have ever came in to contact with. I cannot for the life of me come up with a single positive thing to say about it.

Have you played anything but the 43-45 campaign?
The VP system is different in the various scenarios.

[Smirfy]

The problem with the abstract naval model is its no lose for the Axis there is just the arbitary go to jail you just landed on the transport <insert number here> sunk square. You just lost 100 aircraft operationally patrolling that turn for no purpose. That German Panzer Grenadier Divsion surrounded in Taranto showing 50% port damage was miraculously allowed to load onto ships all its men and equipment under 1000 guns of the 8th Army and total air supremacy and sail past 2 naval taskforces to safety for the loss of what exactly?

Then there is the tactical air model that is designed round the month long Normandy campign and nothing else. Ground support causes more damage to yourself than the opposition.

[Helpless]

This is just a single Ju 88 squadron running unopposed naval interdiction. Loadout is 28x50kg bombs, twice a day (24 planes) for a week against a single hex (size 0).

Is this 1.00.21?

[marion61]

I posted a similar bug on the beta forum Pavel about strange german naval interdiction. .23 beta, and it's an AI game so I have saves.

[carlkay58]

A few comments from someone who also got tossed back into the sea by Pelton in our game:

1. The Allies spent the whole war worried that the next invasion would fail. This meant they went for overkill before they would commit. They were super-cautious and made sure they had air superiority over the entire invasion area. WitW feeds into this paranoia very well and models the Allied problems and concerns.

2. The Axis historically were always afraid of the 'Hail Mary' invasion. This is relieved in the game when you know where all of the Allied naval units are. So how do the Allies bring 'the fear' into the game? By always keeping some naval units in reserve - at least two but probably three. This means the Axis is always having to worry that there may be an invasion coming. Based from North Africa ports or western British ports the naval units will not be found by Axis recon very easily and both places have large ports that enable fast invasion prep. The same applies to the Allied airborne units - don't keep them where the Axis can easily spot them - or better yet - let them see them massing at airbases in the rear . . .

3. Naval Interdiction is being changed. Getting above a 6 is hard to do now (I am play testing version 23 at the moment), which means that the Axis and Allies will not be fighting to put up 9s just to keep the sea neutral. (I personally think the JU88s are over rated in this regard.)

4. VPs will be adjusted as more games finish and more results come in. This is always the hardest thing to tune in the game. These things take time and a large database of games, players, and strategies before they can get into place.

5. The EF Box will probably be adjusted in the future. Although the initial results showed that the Axis were losing too many replacements to the EF when it was used, the latest is showing that the effect of drawing two or so armies worth of troops from the EF during 43 is having little or no effect - while historically the Axis were having enough problems in 43 holding back the Soviets with what they had let alone what losing two armies would have done. Once again, these tweaks and changes can only come after some time and results.

[Q-Ball]

I haven't seen the full LW treatment in 1.0021, but certainly in earlier versions, LW Naval Interdiction was FIERCE. In my game vs. Smokingdave, it took max preparation and effort to keep the beaches open, including basing 1000s of planes on expanded airbases on Corsica/Sardinia, and flying 100s of planes from England to assist. It took 2000 planes on Naval Interdiction in a mutli-layered 6-hex box just to keep supplies flowing through contested waters. Nasty! We'll see what it looks like in a new invasion

Otherwise, I am playing 2 games, both sides, and WA isn't doing badly. One think Meklore is doing to me is greasing 300 tanks per turn via rocket-equipped planes. I actually had him stopped in the initial France landing nicely, destroying 2 Allied Para Divisions, but Allied Jabos are killing my units. I wonder if others are using Allied FBs in this way, on UNIT mission. It's bad!

As far as EF Box, I agree it's a balance issue. I would recommend a dual HR: Allies must invade in Med in 1943, and EF Box is OFF. I think that's a good compromise on both sides.

[DTomato]

ORIGINAL: carlkay58

1. The Allies spent the whole war worried that the next invasion would fail. This meant they went for overkill before they would commit. They were super-cautious and made sure they had air superiority over the entire invasion area. WitW feeds into this paranoia very well and models the Allied problems and concerns.

Correct, except how do you achieve that overkill when the Germans can mass 700+ bombers against your beachhead and get 100+ bombers each turn from the factories?

2. The Axis historically were always afraid of the 'Hail Mary' invasion. This is relieved in the game when you know where all of the Allied naval units are. So how do the Allies bring 'the fear' into the game? By always keeping some naval units in reserve - at least two but probably three. This means the Axis is always having to worry that there may be an invasion coming. Based from North Africa ports or western British ports the naval units will not be found by Axis recon very easily and both places have large ports that enable fast invasion prep. The same applies to the Allied airborne units - don't keep them where the Axis can easily spot them - or better yet - let them see them massing at airbases in the rear . . .

Have you tried holding three of your six amphib TFs in reserve? Have you tried invading with just three TFs when your opponent is throwing eight panzer and parachute divisions against your beachhead? Perhaps the problem is that WITW might be underestimating Alled amphib capability. But right now, landing in Italy without 4+ TFs is suicide against a determined German counterattack.


3. Naval Interdiction is being changed. Getting above a 6 is hard to do now (I am play testing version 23 at the moment), which means that the Axis and Allies will not be fighting to put up 9s just to keep the sea neutral. (I personally think the JU88s are over rated in this regard.)

This will help, but perhaps a better solution to have garrison requirements for the Luftwaffe? Historically, they would have left bombers in Denmark, Norway and France.

5. The EF Box will probably be adjusted in the future. Although the initial results showed that the Axis were losing too many replacements to the EF when it was used, the latest is showing that the effect of drawing two or so armies worth of troops from the EF during 43 is having little or no effect - while historically the Axis were having enough problems in 43 holding back the Soviets with what they had let alone what losing two armies would have done. Once again, these tweaks and changes can only come after some time and results.

If the Germans shouldn't be able to draw much from the EF Box without causing a collapse, then why have the EF Box at all? The more I think about it, the more harm than good the concept does.

[LiquidSky]

In my game with Pelton, I retrained all the Hurricane squadrons into bombers. They would turn a 10=30 Panzer div into a 0=0 with 3 days of bombing. And they Typhoons would gut another one.

[Smirfy]

The German railway network was a basketcase in game they have too much capacity.

[Smirfy]

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky



In my game with Pelton, I retrained all the Hurricane squadrons into bombers. They would turn a 10=30 Panzer div into a 0=0 with 3 days of bombing. And they Typhoons would gut another one.

So put your bomber trained FB's on unit attack?

[Flaviusx]

At this stage, I would say WITW allows for certain gimmicks by the Germans and also certain gimmicks by the Allies and it is anybody's guess as to which gimmicks are better.

But I note that Liquidsky figured out Pelton's gimmicks and handed his head on a platter.

Q-ball's proposed House Rule seems to me about right.

[whoofe]

vs AI on normal, I have built up +130 VPs on the eve of invading France. i dont think the VP system is broken, but it may be susceptible to jerking around by skilled players, there is no doubt some balance issues that can still be addressed

[decourcy2]

I have said this before, but my problem with VP's is garrison VP's. Eisenhower "Well Brooke, we might as well surrender... while we fought in Italy the Germans kept their garrison zones extra guarded and we lost 200 VP's. We can't get past those garrison VP's.

Why does over garrisoning have anything to do with the Allies winning or losing? If you tell me it is a balance thing, i say bullshit.
A. Germans don't need help.
B. I am playing a historical game not a sandbox. I hope.

Next, the German generals are vastly overrated. I have just finished reading two books on the Normandy campaign, one a bit biography style, one more technical. I read these because i had just played a 4 player Battle for Normandy board game with some friends. I was the British. Lots of fun, insanely huge map.
Anyway, what i came across reading these is that historians do not view the German generals in the west in a positive light. Yet, in this game you can randomly click on the German general list, get some dude you have never heard of, and he will probably still be better than any Allied generals except Patton, Bradley and Montgomery. I have started the downgrading of the insane German general stats in my mod, but this needs some formal support as well.

I am going to give a history lesson that maybe many of you already know but maybe some don't. After the war the ETHINTs started. European theater interrogations, which largely led into Nuremburg. America already wanted to rearm Germany as an ally against the Soviet Union so we did everything we could to propagandize that Hitler was evil but the German people were just deluded and not really complicit. Also that Hitler was insane.

So the German generals found that they could pull a Sepp Dietrich and say 'Sieg Heil! I will say until i die that Hitler was the best thing that ever happened to Germany!' Ack! Splorch!.

Or they could choose to say 'Oh, yeah, that Hitler guy was nutso, all our defeats were due to him because German generals are perfect, we would never make those bonehead mistakes he did. And you know i totally supported von Stauffenburg, gee, too bad he missed. I totally am on your side. Democracy rules!'

The ones who said the second thing largely went on to become the officers of the new West German army.
I still run into otherwise educated people that blame not stopping before winter in front of Moscow in '41 on Hitler even though every historian knows it was von Bock and Halder that ordered and later Kluge who made those decisions.

So it is very easy to fall into the trap of overrating the German generals.

[NotOneStepBack]

Typhoons and hurricanes are one of the few ways to stop axis armor.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

.. but Allied Jabos are killing my units. I wonder if others are using Allied FBs in this way, on UNIT mission. It's bad!

agree with this, lots of typhoons with rockets on unit interdiction and bye bye nasty unit standing in your way. Shifted a nasty Pzr brigade in good terrain vs smokindave this way. Still think overall the 'interdiction' mission does more good but if you have a clear target, just set up a massive set of raids on one hex.

I've sort of given up on the VP system and am just enjoying the game. I take the current VP structure as reflecting stuff out of my control and I'll do things because I think they are the best choice, not because they generate VPs.

I think its too early to say about balance. Its clear that you really need to work on a major naval landing for it to have any chance. Whether it is still too difficult after that, its too early to say. It doesn't help that Pelton AARs are dominating the evidence base - he is so committed to finding all sorts of cheese and rules abuse that those are not necessarily indicative of how most people play. Also, as in WiTE, his approach is vulnerable to someone coming up with an even cheesier response ... and so on. Sigh [;)]

[Smirfy]

Well I just destroyed 9 tanks on Unit attack and lost 51 fighter bombers to flak, like I said you do more damage to *yourself* than the enemy.

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

As far as EF Box, I agree it's a balance issue. I would recommend a dual HR: Allies must invade in Med in 1943, and EF Box is OFF. I think that's a good compromise on both sides.

So I invade with *one* Amphib, and send the other 5 to England....