Why did you choose mild winter in your games

Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.

The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).

Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21

Post Reply
User avatar
MrBlizzard
Posts: 636
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:34 pm
Location: Italy

Why did you choose mild winter in your games

Post by MrBlizzard »

I noticed that "mild winter" option is selected in most of games (at least those with AAR).

I'm curious to know why other players seem to prefer this option.

I've always played with "hard winter" with both germans and soviets cause it seems to me more real.
Blizzard
Stelteck
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 5:07 pm

RE: Why did you choose mild winter in your games

Post by Stelteck »

[joke] Because german players love easy win !!! [/joke] :iamsorry:

I can provide you a serious answer of my opinion about it, but take into account that i'am not very experienced in the game although i have it for a long time. So maybe my opinion is completely wrong.

I think there are 2 major points, relative to Game History and Gameplay.

- For the first, i think that the game was originaly very unbalanced against germany. I remember a multi game as soviet i played with release previous 1.08 some years ago. I was literaly swimming in replacements. My manpower pool for example was really, really big as soon as 1941. I remembered my divisions growing from zero to 10K in one turn and all others nice things for soviet union.
So at first, it was a very good idea to give germany all possible advantages because the soviet side was very very strong.

Then, as mild winter become the standard of "normal game", feedback were collected and balances adjustments were performed in patch after patch with this option in mind.

Today the balance is far far better but even today, the game is probably balanced around this option.

- For the second point, you have to consider that real winter is very, very harsh and to survive it, germany need to know very well the rules & mitigation, etc... With real winter, germany have a real chance to be completely crushed during the first winter.
We then have to consider the consequence of a weak germany in 1942.
A weak germany in 1942 is terrible because germany cannot attack, but the soviet union is still quite weak, with few elements (like corps) available to attack.
So weak germany in 1942 is a very boring year 1942 with static fronts and few movements, noone do anything, and it makes a not very funny year & game. Of course, it was not the case with good german players.

Maybe with the better balance of today, players (and developpers) could have a new look to the real winter option.

I hope that for WITE2 there will be only one winter and that the game will be balanced around it.

It is a very interesting question and i hope the "old ones" of this forum will have the time to provide their opinion about it.
Brakes are for cowards !!
User avatar
821Bobo
Posts: 2401
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Slovakia

RE: Why did you choose mild winter in your games

Post by 821Bobo »

To survive full Blizzard you have to run otherwise you will be overrun by the Soviets. In mild blizzard Germans can fight but 1:1 = 2:1 is needed for Soviets as Germans are stronger.
User avatar
sillyflower
Posts: 3509
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Back in Blighty

RE: Why did you choose mild winter in your games

Post by sillyflower »

Not sure I agree with Bobo on this one. If you are playing a good German, he should do way better than historically in '41 under current version. 1:1 to 2:1 won't help much in '41 because the withdraw/counterattack rule means that Russian attacks are much less effective if they succeed, and far more costly if they fail. Even Pelton, who always played as G but would only play with a load of pro-G house rules wrote somewhere that full fat winter was now a fairer option under .09.

For 2 average or inexperienced players, or R player is better than the G, I would think that mild winter is probably better.

I should add that I have only played 2 winters under .09 both were mild. In the game against BrianG, the mild winter meant that I got stronger rather than weaker during the winter and was able to start my '42 O at the beginning of Feb, and I was doing a lot of attacking in Jan too. In my other game, my less experienced opponent would have suffered too much under a full blizzard for it to have been worth playing on.
web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4445
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Why did you choose mild winter in your games

Post by Michael T »

I always used hard winter, as both sides. Mild is for kittens [:D]
User avatar
sillyflower
Posts: 3509
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Back in Blighty

RE: Why did you choose mild winter in your games

Post by sillyflower »

We have 3 kittens
web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?
User avatar
Disgruntled Veteran
Posts: 615
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:09 pm

RE: Why did you choose mild winter in your games

Post by Disgruntled Veteran »

For what its worth, my last game vs Bozo was mild with Soviet bonus. I had a fully intact army that was pounded to dust with Soviet bonus. Not pockets, just plowed through almost everywhere. Average morale was low 60's many infantry in the 50's. Could I have played better? Sure. This was also 1 game out of hundreds and Bozo is a good player so take it for what its worth.
User avatar
821Bobo
Posts: 2401
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Slovakia

RE: Why did you choose mild winter in your games

Post by 821Bobo »

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

Not sure I agree with Bobo on this one. If you are playing a good German, he should do way better than historically in '41 under current version. 1:1 to 2:1 won't help much in '41 because the withdraw/counterattack rule means that Russian attacks are much less effective if they succeed, and far more costly if they fail. Even Pelton, who always played as G but would only play with a load of pro-G house rules wrote somewhere that full fat winter was now a fairer option under .09.

For 2 average or inexperienced players, or R player is better than the G, I would think that mild winter is probably better.

I should add that I have only played 2 winters under .09 both were mild. In the game against BrianG, the mild winter meant that I got stronger rather than weaker during the winter and was able to start my '42 O at the beginning of Feb, and I was doing a lot of attacking in Jan too. In my other game, my less experienced opponent would have suffered too much under a full blizzard for it to have been worth playing on.

Compare the Blizzard offensive in Stef's AAR and yours. Bonus will certainly help a lot during winter.
In full Blizzard Soviets can just hasty attack everything in sight. The situation is even worse than in summer for red's.
Currently I started new game, me playing Soviets with no bonus and full Blizzard(opponent's choice). I am pretty confident that in Blizzard I will overrun him without any problems. I wanted to start ARR but he didn't like the idea.
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series”