WitE 2

[Joel Billings]

We are planning on adding a few more Road to... scenarios in 41. That's probably all that will make it into the game at release. We chose the Stalingrad to Berlin campaign over the Fall Blau 42 for release. Of course we hope to have expansions with additional scenarios after release.

[mrhuggles]

But thanks to scenario creation tools we can do a bunch of the work ourselves [:D]

[Skydream2016]

Is there plan to connect especially german morale not only with year but with general situation ? For example if germans holds in start of 1942 Leningrad, Rostov and Moscow no morale drop or lower drop to the time when soviets can reatake some of these cities .. It also can help to justify Hitler "no retreat" stategy during war which cost them a lot..
Also can be useful to add some impact of casulties.

[Simon Edmonds]

I had an idea that came to me with regards WitE 2. It would involve creating a 1943 scenario based on the Germans withdrawing from Stalingrad in reaction to the Soviet offensive. It would need the play testers to play out a German withdrawal from Stalingrad 10 or 20 times to get an historical idea of how many German divisions would survive and in what condition they would be. That information could then be used to create a hypothetical order of battle. I think it would be fascinating to see how it would have gone if Hitler hadn't thrown twenty or so divisions under the bus.

[Capitaine]

ORIGINAL: Simon Edmonds

I think it would be fascinating to see how it would have gone if Hitler hadn't thrown twenty or so divisions under the bus.

How certain are you that Hitler did anything of the kind?

[RedLancer]

ORIGINAL: Simon Edmonds

I had an idea that came to me with regards WitE 2. It would involve creating a 1943 scenario based on the Germans withdrawing from Stalingrad in reaction to the Soviet offensive. It would need the play testers to play out a German withdrawal from Stalingrad 10 or 20 times to get an historical idea of how many German divisions would survive and in what condition they would be. That information could then be used to create a hypothetical order of battle. I think it would be fascinating to see how it would have gone if Hitler hadn't thrown twenty or so divisions under the bus.

We've been discussing this is testing recently as we have RAR and StoB now playable. With the much improved WitE2 logistics model actually getting a decent number of Divisions out of the pocket is not a given without committing many more Forces to the area than historically.

[Zemke]

WitE2 should be tested using historical facts as the base line. For example, in Operation Barbarossa, both sides should be played as close to historical as possible, and see if the results match history. Then you will know you are on the right track. Even if historical the game is unbalanced after lifting historical limitations, this can be fixed by using a "suggested" settings for an "even" game, as WitE1 has +1 this or that, or increased AP or whatever. Settings like this can be used to fix a balance issue, but I think most here want a game that is as close to history as possible.

What stopped the Germans from reaching Moscow was logistics and fierce resistance. Units with 30% of their Riflemen left, (an amazing feat) pushed to the very gates of Moscow before getting stopped and pushed back. I hope the new logistics model can reflect this. After the mud and snow, and super cold conditions, Germany's ability to move supplies was shot because the trucks were gone or could not move. Most were NOT designed for the harsh conditions of the East, much less all terrain military vehicles. Most were looted from the countries they had conquered prior to the invasion of Russia. Also, just because the rail net has been converted, does not mean it is 100% capacity. Many units were maybe 20 or 30 miles from a rail line and got very little supplies because the only thing to move it was panje carts. I don't know about you, but a panje cart may be able to carry enough small arms ammo, but try moving 150mm artillery ammo. Again, the German rail system never could cope with the demands of the east, not enough Steam Engines, not enough rolling stock, and not enough trucks to move the supplies from the railhead to the units.

The Supply Build up system in the current game sort of reflects a way to prioritize the use of limited trucks, but it does not feel right either. It is too good it seems. There should be a better way to model the truck and rail restraints the Germans were operating under.

In WitE it is one point to convert Baltic state rail to European gage, why? Why would it be easier to convert and is there historical evidence to back that up? Just because it was once European gage, how does that make it easier to convert back? Fixing this would have the effect of making Leningrad a harder and longer proposition. Fixing this would also make the Panzer Ball express that comes out of Velikie Luki a thing of the past. The Baltic rail conversion cost is one of the unbalancing factors in the current game IMO, and not historically correct either, but I cannot prove that currently.

[OberGeneral]

Zemke take a look at this:

https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-d ... Barbarossa

Answers some of your questons.

[821Bobo]

In WitE it is one point to convert Baltic state rail to European gage, why? Why would it be easier to convert and is there historical evidence to back that up? Just because it was once European gage, how does that make it easier to convert back? Fixing this would have the effect of making Leningrad a harder and longer proposition. Fixing this would also make the Panzer Ball express that comes out of Velikie Luki a thing of the past. The Baltic rail conversion cost is one of the unbalancing factors in the current game IMO, and not historically correct either, but I cannot prove that currently.

Because there was nothing to convert. Baltic states were occupied by Soviet Union, but before occupation they have been using standard European gauge. Soviets did not convert it before the start of Barbarossa.

[thedoctorking]

That's a very interesting article. My landlord in France in the 1980's was a veteran of the German Rollbahn rail repair troops on the Eastern Front (as a slave laborer). He said many of these things - the Russian rail net was very primitive and huge amounts of work needed to be done to get normal trains over it.

[Generalfeldmarschall_Rommell]

Hello![:)]

Some ideas for Wide2:

-Have generals at the division level.
-Incorporate decorations to both units and generals.
-Generals with abilities (urban struggle, mountaineer, destroyer of strengths etc).
-The German player can decide what is manufactured in the industries.
-to Be Able to incorporate other fronts (Norway, France etc) units in exchange for AP.

[Zemke]

ORIGINAL: 821Bobo

In WitE it is one point to convert Baltic state rail to European gage, why? Why would it be easier to convert and is there historical evidence to back that up? Just because it was once European gage, how does that make it easier to convert back? Fixing this would have the effect of making Leningrad a harder and longer proposition. Fixing this would also make the Panzer Ball express that comes out of Velikie Luki a thing of the past. The Baltic rail conversion cost is one of the unbalancing factors in the current game IMO, and not historically correct either, but I cannot prove that currently.

Because there was nothing to convert. Baltic states were occupied by Soviet Union, but before occupation they have been using standard European gauge. Soviets did not convert it before the start of Barbarossa.

They did convert parts of it according to the article link posted.

[Zemke]

http://www.allworldwars.com/Comments-on ... -Bork.html

Here is another interesting article.

[dgk196]

Hello...

Are there any plans to release a combined version of WiTE and WiTW?

Dennis

[thedoctorking]

ORIGINAL: dgk196

Hello...

Are there any plans to release a combined version of WiTE and WiTW?

Dennis

Starting in September 1939, please?

[MattFL]

ORIGINAL: Generalfeldmarschall_Rommell

Hello![:)]

Some ideas for Wide2:

-Have generals at the division level.
-Incorporate decorations to both units and generals.
-Generals with abilities (urban struggle, mountaineer, destroyer of strengths etc).
-The German player can decide what is manufactured in the industries.
-to Be Able to incorporate other fronts (Norway, France etc) units in exchange for AP.

-to Be Able to incorporate other fronts (Norway, France etc) units in exchange for AP.

-Have generals at the division level. - Masochism in the extreme. No thanks!
-Incorporate decorations to both units and generals. - this would be cool if only to create more attachment to certain units.
-Generals with abilities (urban struggle, mountaineer, destroyer of strengths etc). - i personally think inf/mech and the current ratings are enough. Besides it would be difficult to impossible to determine this. A good general is a good general regardless of terrain i think.
-The German player can decide what is manufactured in the industries. - I can only imagine the results of this once turned loose on GHC players. The balance implications would be massive as people gamed out ways to win the game with their factories. Allowing limited creation of German SU's could be interesting.
-Interesting thought on taking more units from other fronts. Though i think it should be in exchange for VP's, not AP.

[821Bobo]

Generals at the division level will add nothing to the game playability. And tremendous research would be needed especially for the Soviet side.
Decorations the same, it will add nothing to the game playability. If unit is performing good its morale/experience is high and so is the CV. I don't see any need for stars/crosses or medals in unit tab.
WitE is operational game not economic simulations. Even I personally like the economic part of WitP:AE it gives some unrealistic options to Japan.

I am not sure what you mean with other fronts. In WitW you have control of units from East Front(you can shuffle units between the theaters) if you want. In WitE2 you can do the same. As have been already mentioned there are theater boxes for other fronts. eg. Far East for Soviets or Afrika for Germans.

[56ajax]

I think Other Fronts will be covered by Theatre Boxes...

[sixten992]

In reality the Soviets attacked the German armored spearheads sometimes in 1941. The point of doing this was not only to wear them down but also to slow them down. In WitE 1, as far as I know, you are not really slowed down by being attacked. Being attacked and defending should steal your time about as much as attacking. It makes sense from a realistic standpoint and also gives the Soviets an incentive to attack the Germans in 1941 (before the blizzard), which they actually did. The Soviets would then have to make a choice between slowing the Germans down more actively, which can make sense some times, or saving the manpower/materiel for another day.

A suggestion for WitE 2 would be to reduce the movement points (for the coming turn) of the attacked units in relationship to the type and magnitude of the attack in question. If, for example, a German panzer divison of 15,000 men are attacked in a deliberate attack by 3 rifle divisions with 30,000 men the panzer division would lose 10 % for the attack being deliberate, multiplied by the ratio of defending/attacking troops. In this example the panzer division would loose (10 % muliplied by 30,000/15,000) 20 % of it is movement points. If, by normal WitE 1 standards the division would have say 43 movement point when the turn starts, it would now only have 34 movement points left. A more exact and better approximation of the different percentages involved in this calculation can of course be obtained by doing some historical research.

A rule like this or something similar would also possibly make the game more realistic from a strategic perspective since the eastward advance of a (good) German player in WitE 1 almost always does better than historical.

[SparkleyTits]

That's an interesting suggestion but I worry it would be abused more easily by the Axis as the side who goes first and is inherently the aggresor compared to the Soviets being the defender that go second