WITW: The Game of Exploits?

[DTomato]

Some of us stopped playing War in the East because the game seemed to devolve into nothing more than a bunch of exploits like the Lvov Pocket.

Now the same thing is happening in WITW. The Germans grab all the forces they can from the East Front box, while the Allies use strategic bombing alone to win the game. Massed fleets of British night fighters rule the night skies over the Reich, while the Germans lay down impenetrable curtains of naval interdiction. The Germans keep entire panzer armies on rails, while the Allies move every division from England to the Med.

I don't blame guys like Pelton. There is always somebody who breaks a game just for the "fun" of breaking it. But things have become so bad that my first thought when I play isn't strategy or tactics, but which game-breaking gimmick is my opponent going to use against me, and which gimmick am I going to use against him?

I'm not quite sure what to about it. I'm not on counting on the designers to fix the exploits, and house rules will take a while to develop. But as it is, the more I play WITW as it stands now, the less fun it seems.

DT

[RedLancer]

I have posted this before but it's worth saying it again not least because my prediction had merit:
 
Those who take the time to read Clausewitz will know that he describes warfare as a chameleon which adapts whilst retaining its fundamental elements of violence, friction, uncertainty etc.

A computer war game (in today's world) cannot adapt as an independent entity and therefore repeated playing of the game can exploit issues to advantage thereby avoiding the natural evolution of warfare that exists. WitE was a ground breaking development and I know from my observation of these forums that very skilful individuals have pushed the game engine to the limit in its current iteration even with the patches that have been consistently delivered.

In terms of realism I would concede that the intellectual power of those individuals has exploited issues in the code beyond that intended but having done so the discussion has focused not on their ahistoric actions but rather the inability of the game to prevent such actions. The normal feedback loop of the nature of warfare does not exist in computer code. That doesn't diminish WitE in any respect. It demonstrates the power of the human mind and shows that the next step is needed for no better reason than to challenge the human mind once more. I have no doubt that the successor to WitE will be exploited in its turn when it is published but I'm sure we will enjoy doing it as that's the point after all.

[Smirfy]

In the first instance sitting about on trains is easy to fix just make any air strike on those units catastrophically damaging. in the second instance which will take a bit more work is balance rail capacity better. The strategic air offensive would always be pretty hard to get perfect but few of the exploits are immediate like the Panzers on rails or Lwow pocket. Not a fan of Axis naval interdiction nor of movements from either side which defy logistics again that will take time to balance.

I have to ask what are you looking from the game?

[Seminole]

Some of us stopped playing War in the East because the game seemed to devolve into nothing more than a bunch of exploits like the Lvov Pocket.

Now the same thing is happening in WITW. The Germans grab all the forces they can from the East Front box, while the Allies use strategic bombing alone to win the game.

I hadn't seen someone win on strategic bombing alone. Is there an AAR for that?
With respect to the EF box, it can already be turned off. I haven't seen a game played out to know what the knock on effects are of robbing the East.
One thing I do as the Germans if the East Front box is on is transfer out the Mtn units (that were usually serving partisan duty). The game engine makes those guys invaluable in Italy relative to their infantry strength on the East Front.

Massed fleets of British night fighters rule the night skies over the Reich, while the Germans lay down impenetrable curtains of naval interdiction.

I think there is some learning curve associated with air power that folks are still working out. I can say as the Germans I've seen WA project naval interdiction to support a landing around Pisa (contested by most of the German Ju88s and He111s with fighter escort) without even Corsica and Sardinia!
I think people are still figuring out the best groupings and directive settings, and AARs have been light on detail in this area (most AARs seem to be 'look what I did', not 'look how I did it').

The Germans keep entire panzer armies on rails, while the Allies move every division from England to the Med.

Troops on rails aren't counted in garrison aggregates, and such troops are also more vulnerable if hit in a ground attack. Because I want them digging or giving me garrison value I haven't done this. What other trade offs should be considered for putting an army on rail cars?
I don't mind the Allies being able to shift their forces. I don't see anything to make me think they couldn't have, and I don't want to hamstring exploration of genuine alternate strategies that are a large point of this game.

[Smirfy]

Units on rail cars should only be able to get off/on at rail yards subject to damaged capacity and as I said if they are bombed on rail cars that should be devastating.

[Seminole]

ORIGINAL: Smirfy
Units on rail cars should only be able to get off/on at rail yards subject to damaged capacity and as I said if they are bombed on rail cars that should be devastating.

I thought it already does the former, at least to some degree:

14.2.5. Rail Transport SMP Costs
Entrain: The cost to entrain a unit is a minimum of 75 SMP. This cost can increase if railyard capacity has to be drawn from other hexes, with the further the distance the greater the increase in load cost (14.2.3). The cost to entrain a unit will be displayed in the general information and City/Airfield Box (5.1.5) in the third oval (Rail Load MP: xx) when a unit is selected in rail mode (F2).

Detrain: The SMP cost to detrain in a hex with a railyard is equal to 75 minus any remaining railyard capacity in that railyard. For example, a unit detraining in a hex with a level 2 railyard with 10k ton capacity left would translate to 75-10 or a 65 SMP unload cost. There is a minimum 30 SMP cost to detrain. The cost to detrain in a city or urban hex without a railyard is 80 SMP. The cost to detrain in any other hex without a railyard, including hexes with towns, is 100 SMP. The cost to move 1 hex by rail is 1 SMP plus any rail usage SMP penalty, so the maximum cost to move through a hex would be 7 SMP (14.2.4).

14.2.6. Impact of Air Power on Strategic Rail Transport
Players can use ground attack and strategic bombing to attack railyards and lower overall railyard capacity. In addition, the further a unit has to go to find sufficient railyard capacity to use rail transport, the more SMP it takes to entrain, so bombing railyards can reduce overall capacity and increase the SMP cost of entraining units in specific areas. Air interdiction can be used to maximize the rail usage SMP penalty on specific areas of the rail network.

Can the devs clarify if the 14.2.6 rule affects entraining and detraining? My assumption is both, but the latter isn't actually specified in the rule.

[marion61]

I can honestly think of only one bad exploit atm, and that's the prep point bug.

I have several house rules that help. If the WA want to invade outside the Med. before '44, the EF box is off. If the EF box is on he can invade anywhere he wants.

If your comparing the turn 2 invasion of the toe of Italy to the Lwov Pocket, that's apples and oranges. Cutting off an entire army, vs. just a Korps is one large disparity. The second one is that landing there, in range of fighter and naval cover, how is that an exploit in any way? If you use the axis air well, then you could have made it more difficult for them to land, or even stay on there. There's an entire panzer korps sitting around there.

NOSB may have figured out how to maximize his vp's from bombing, but that's not an exploit either. He's not exploiting the rules by what he's doing, and there's a counter to his method. I've tore him up the past two turns and I'm playing EF box off.

If it's not working, try something else, and if that doesn't work, try that...etc.

I say let them sit on rail cars. Every one of those high cv units aren't contributing to garrisons so no -vp's generated. I call that a pretty good trade. And those units on rails having to travel thru up to 10 hexes of railway interdiction will get the crap shot out of them getting to the beaches, not to mention they won't get off a good attack.

I understand your frustrated, but there's always a way to counter most everything. An exploit you can't counter because it's a cheat. These other things are just different tactics that players are trying out, and there's nothing wrong with free thinking.

[DTomato]

Thanks, John. As you know, Clausewitz also spoke of as the trinity of the people, army and government. It's the same with games. Players, designers and the game itself form a trinity.

So, for example, you're right that players will always find exploits. My post was more directed at them than the developers. But the game design has something to do with it, too. It's natural for Allied players to want to put all their night fighters on bomber escort. Were the game properly coded, either the effects of the escorts would be minimal (not shooting down 101 German night fighters in a single night) or that kind of massed formation wouldn't be possible (many NFs retained for British home defense). So it's not just a question of blaming the players for being gamey.


My concern is that WITW is more vulnerable to exploits than WITE. Even with the Lvov Pocket, WITE is a huge land warfare game with plenty of give and take on both sides. In WITW, it seems like it only takes a couple of crushed -- or breakthrough -- amphib landings to have a major effect on the game. So the effect of gimmicks is magnified.

DT

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

I have posted this before but it's worth saying it again not least because my prediction had merit:

Those who take the time to read Clausewitz will know that he describes warfare as a chameleon which adapts whilst retaining its fundamental elements of violence, friction, uncertainty etc.

A computer war game (in today's world) cannot adapt as an independent entity and therefore repeated playing of the game can exploit issues to advantage thereby avoiding the natural evolution of warfare that exists. WitE was a ground breaking development and I know from my observation of these forums that very skilful individuals have pushed the game engine to the limit in its current iteration even with the patches that have been consistently delivered.

In terms of realism I would concede that the intellectual power of those individuals has exploited issues in the code beyond that intended but having done so the discussion has focused not on their ahistoric actions but rather the inability of the game to prevent such actions. The normal feedback loop of the nature of warfare does not exist in computer code. That doesn't diminish WitE in any respect. It demonstrates the power of the human mind and shows that the next step is needed for no better reason than to challenge the human mind once more. I have no doubt that the successor to WitE will be exploited in its turn when it is published but I'm sure we will enjoy doing it as that's the point after all.

[DTomato]

Yes, but the problem is that the counter to these "different tactics" is as bizarre and ahistorical as the original exploit. I'm not a stickler for gaming and accuracy, but there should be some reasonable correspondence between game and history. I don't think a system that rewards mass formations of British night fighter escorts, or allows the Allies to win or draw the game through strategic bombing alone, is appropriate.

DT

ORIGINAL: meklore61

I can honestly think of only one bad exploit atm, and that's the prep point bug.

I have several house rules that help. If the WA want to invade outside the Med. before '44, the EF box is off. If the EF box is on he can invade anywhere he wants.

If your comparing the turn 2 invasion of the toe of Italy to the Lwov Pocket, that's apples and oranges. Cutting off an entire army, vs. just a Korps is one large disparity. The second one is that landing there, in range of fighter and naval cover, how is that an exploit in any way? If you use the axis air well, then you could have made it more difficult for them to land, or even stay on there. There's an entire panzer korps sitting around there.

NOSB may have figured out how to maximize his vp's from bombing, but that's not an exploit either. He's not exploiting the rules by what he's doing, and there's a counter to his method. I've tore him up the past two turns and I'm playing EF box off.

If it's not working, try something else, and if that doesn't work, try that...etc.

I say let them sit on rail cars. Every one of those high cv units aren't contributing to garrisons so no -vp's generated. I call that a pretty good trade. And those units on rails having to travel thru up to 10 hexes of railway interdiction will get the crap shot out of them getting to the beaches, not to mention they won't get off a good attack.

I understand your frustrated, but there's always a way to counter most everything. An exploit you can't counter because it's a cheat. These other things are just different tactics that players are trying out, and there's nothing wrong with free thinking.

[marion61]

I agree that the strategic bombing is a bit out of whack, but I think that's more from the residual damage you get from turn to turn that causes the high vp's for SBP's. Maybe the damage should only count the turn you do it, and not wind down as it's repaired. And if the allied night fighters are too effective, then they will tone them down, I hope.[;)]

You know as the axis player you can have 3-400planes in the air on an intercept also. So it works for both sides.

I would also hope your not saying that I exploited to make you resign in our game, because I would take offense.

ex·ploit
/ˈekˌsploit/
verb

make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource).
synonyms: utilize, harness, use, make use of, turn/put to good use; More

noun

a bold or daring feat.
synonyms: feat, deed, act, adventure, stunt, escapade, achievement; More
a software tool designed to take advantage of a flaw in a computer system, typically for malicious purposes such as installing malware.

[ultradave]

I'm currently playing 2 PBEM games. In the first (AAR is "ultradave vs scout1 turn 50 (ish) ), I'm the WA and Scott is the Germans. He's made great use of raiding the Russian front to stalemate my attacks in the west (so far ). The other game (AAR - scout1 vs ultradave ) we stopped and recently restarted. I am Germany in that one. I had brought units from Russia but only to the point where I kept just ahead of what the minimum level listed was. So while I had significant forces in Italy, it was nothing like what I'm facing in the other game.

We restarted that one because I defeated his mainland Italy invasion in two turns and it was launched very late as it was. In the restart I'm playing Germany with the East Front turned OFF, so we'll see what that does to the game. Right now we are in Turn 7 and he's takes about 2/3 of Sicily, with me blocking Messina. That won't last much longer I'm sure. We'll keep playing this one and finish it I'm sure. We both learned a lot from the first time around. Not having the East Front box should make it a different experience.

We'll get some AAR reports with pictures up soon.

[AWGreif]

I fear it's my night raid that caused the huge NF losses to the Germans.
In fact it's my first game as WA against a human and, knowing from "the other side" the effectiveness of German NF, I thought reasonable to assign some more WA NFs to night escorting duties.
I was most surprised seeing over 100 German NF killed, in fact it seems to me clearly excessive.

[carlkay58]

There are counters to every Allied or Axis move.

1) Redirect turn 1 Sicily invasion - but the new invasion cannot go in turn 1 and has to wait until turn 2. If I were the Axis and not all of the Sicily invasions went home I would get instantly paranoid and start figuring out where those amphibs are (still in the MTO? transferred to the ETO?) and planning accordingly. Look at Pelton's latest games. Someone used the Prep Point "exploit" and invaded Brittany early. But this time Pelton was ready because he was smart enough not to start stripping all of the garrison zones in northern Europe because there might be an Allied invasion up there. Which put him in the historical Axis position and makes the game better. He is also using his Recon to find the ports those Amphibs are based in so he can narrow down the Allied possibilities in his planning.

2) Put all those NFs into the RAF Bomber Command and use them as escorts? Then send night bombers and hit the Allied airfields in Britain. This has been done in at least one AAR and other Axis tactics include using night bombing vs Allied ports supporting invasion areas. The Allies had better keep NFs around to defend their ports and airfields as interception is only done by air groups without ADs.

3) I honestly don't think there is a single person out there who has mastered either the Axis or Allied strategic air war. Let alone the corresponding tactical air war. That is going to take a while and there is still tweaking going on that affects both sides.

The WitE L'vov pocket problem is solved by the minimum of one turn delay on changing the historical landing sites. Thus the Axis has at least a turn to change their disposition and locations so the Allies do not have perfect intelligence or a consistent method to get a leg up immediately. The only Allied advantage is knowing that they can do some real damage to UBoat factories on turn 1 if they do it right before the Axis can re-prioritize and relocate their air groups.

[NotOneStepBack]

I think the answer is to adjust and adapt rather than complain. The devs will make balance adjustments as necessary.

[JocMeister]

I have to admit I´m pretty curious why stuff like this wasn´t picked up during the BETA tests? We have seen a lot of problems with the game since release which many are discovered by the BETA testers themselves. To me it seems like a lot of this could and should have been discovered before release if the testers had been given enough time. Some problems were instantly obvious like naval interdiction problems, ship losses and the bugs with the Italian ports. How can things like that has passed though to final release? Smells like the usual "rushed release" which sadly is common today among all developers.

But when you charge almost 100 Euro for a game that is simply not acceptable.

PS. I don´t mean to cast even a sliver of a shadow on the BETA testers. They have been more communicative and helpful here on the forum then any devs or Matrix representatives. They are also the ones uncovering most of the problems which clearly indicates the BETA testing was cut way too short.

[Helpless]

Beta testing is very tough work and requires lots of commitment, especially after release when it slows down quite a bit. Basically every beta testers who is on board right now is golden. And with games like WITW it could take decades to make it polished. Nevertheless, I'd like to say my big thanks to beta guys, because game is much more clean than it could be, but since we adding new features new bugs are inevitable.

Case with NF is good example. First, it is reported with version .24 which not even public beta. So theoretically report shouldn't be here. Second, initial analysis shows that it was introduced after release (in one of beta patches) and doesn't replicate itself all the time. I hope it should be fixed in version just released to testers.

[barkhorn45]

And some of those 3-400 are Rumanian and Bulgarian fighters based at Ploesti.sounds like the ai is capable of exploitation also!

ORIGINAL: meklore61

I agree that the strategic bombing is a bit out of whack, but I think that's more from the residual damage you get from turn to turn that causes the high vp's for SBP's. Maybe the damage should only count the turn you do it, and not wind down as it's repaired. And if the allied night fighters are too effective, then they will tone them down, I hope.[;)]

You know as the axis player you can have 3-400planes in the air on an intercept also. So it works for both sides.

I would also hope your not saying that I exploited to make you resign in our game, because I would take offense.

ex·ploit
/ˈekˌsploit/
verb

make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource).
synonyms: utilize, harness, use, make use of, turn/put to good use; More

noun

a bold or daring feat.
synonyms: feat, deed, act, adventure, stunt, escapade, achievement; More
a software tool designed to take advantage of a flaw in a computer system, typically for malicious purposes such as installing malware.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: DicedT

Some of us stopped playing War in the East because the game seemed to devolve into nothing more than a bunch of exploits like the Lvov Pocket.

Now the same thing is happening in WITW. The Germans grab all the forces they can from the East Front box, while the Allies use strategic bombing alone to win the game. Massed fleets of British night fighters rule the night skies over the Reich, while the Germans lay down impenetrable curtains of naval interdiction. The Germans keep entire panzer armies on rails, while the Allies move every division from England to the Med.

I don't blame guys like Pelton. There is always somebody who breaks a game just for the "fun" of breaking it. But things have become so bad that my first thought when I play isn't strategy or tactics, but which game-breaking gimmick is my opponent going to use against me, and which gimmick am I going to use against him?

I'm not quite sure what to about it. I'm not on counting on the designers to fix the exploits, and house rules will take a while to develop. But as it is, the more I play WITW as it stands now, the less fun it seems.

DT

I have had more then one thread on this in the past.

1. If I exploit something I tell everyone. NO ONE has posted more AAR's then me telling everyone 2by3 included about what should be fixed. And as you know for several years I was ignored.
2. WitE and WitP had ( HAD ) many exploits but over time they have been removed. There are simply no exploits none now. I cant fully speak for WitP but I can for WitE 1.08.02 THERE ARE NO EXPLOITS the game like WitP is finished done.
So btching about it is simply btching based personal opinion. Yes it took 2 years to get it right but it is perfect. 2by3 unlike other companys keep working at a game for years after release to get it 99% right.
3. WitW does have a few exploits still, but it is nearly unexploitable at this point. People just simply are not playing the air game or ground game or logistics game right because they have little idea about what they are doing.

Guys like me are the ones that drive devs to get it right. I unlike most am open about the exploits and post/inform the devs about what needs to be fixed.

[Seminole]

WitW does have a few exploits still, but it is nearly unexploitable at this point.

I'll be onboard with this comment when they fix the air supply bug. Right now it undoes much that the sophisticated logistics engine tries to accomplish.

People just simply are not playing the air game or ground game or logistics game right because they have little idea about what they are doing.

Definitely second this. I think the WA learning curve is steeper too (which is not a comment on overall game balance), and since they are charged with being on the offensive there are going to be early disappointments.

[DTomato]

Pelton, you have a lot of nerve to tell people that they don't know to play the Allies, when you have NEVER played the Allies against a German opponent. Just like in WITE, you play the Germans over...and over...and over. It's almost creepy.

Maybe the Allied players are incompetent crybabies. So why don't you play the Allies, and I'll take the Germans, and then you can show us how it's done? In fact, I'm sure there are a dozen WITW players who would love to play against you if you took the Allies.

How about it?

DT

ORIGINAL: Pelton

I have had more then one thread on this in the past.

1. If I exploit something I tell everyone. NO ONE has posted more AAR's then me telling everyone 2by3 included about what should be fixed. And as you know for several years I was ignored.
2. WitE and WitP had ( HAD ) many exploits but over time they have been removed. There are simply no exploits none now. I cant fully speak for WitP but I can for WitE 1.08.02 THERE ARE NO EXPLOITS the game like WitP is finished done.
So btching about it is simply btching based personal opinion. Yes it took 2 years to get it right but it is perfect. 2by3 unlike other companys keep working at a game for years after release to get it 99% right.
3. WitW does have a few exploits still, but it is nearly unexploitable at this point. People just simply are not playing the air game or ground game or logistics game right because they have little idea about what they are doing.

Guys like me are the ones that drive devs to get it right. I unlike most am open about the exploits and post/inform the devs about what needs to be fixed.



[/quote]