The WA as two players.

[SeaMonkey]

Well I haven't played PBEM yet, so I was kind of wondering, could the WA be split into two players.......Commonwealth and USA.

It seems to me that the USA player would have to cooperate, perhaps giving NE and SE USA to CW and let them run the European theatre, maybe add the Midwest. USA player handles the Pacific and Japan.

Can you save the game in the midst of the WA turn and send it to your fellow WA player?

Now once you switch to production, again you would have to save and send or at least invoke some prearranged allocations for each WA player.

Well is it viable? Or is it too complicated.

[Scott_WAR]

balance issues.

especially tech. As improtant as tech is, if you seperate the 2, then the UK will not be able do research and buy supplies and units enough to keep up with germany. The current strategy of having the USA do all the research while frozen, while the UK builds units to fight with wont work at all if you seperate the 2. With tech being the main focus of the game, the UK will be overun by Germany in no time since they will not be able to keep up with German tech.

[MadMirko]

I think tech & research in GGAW do represent technological as well as doctrinal advances. as that magic number that results is just an abstraction of many things. You can make a tank hit better by improving its optics, but by improving the gunner training as well.

You might be right that technology does not play as big a part in a war as most people think, but WW2 offers lots of examples where superior doctrine is the key factor.

[Scott_WAR]

Superior doctrine should be reflected in the decisions of the players. Where to attack, how hard, when.... not an arbitrary tech value. This is really starting to sound like an RPG where a stat that can be built up, in this case tech, is the entire basis of the game. This is a WARgame, not a techgame. Well, it supposed to be anyway.

[von_Schmidt]

ORIGINAL: Scott_WAR

Superior doctrine should be reflected in the decisions of the players. Where to attack, how hard, when.... not an arbitrary tech value. This is really starting to sound like an RPG where a stat that can be built up, in this case tech, is the entire basis of the game. This is a WARgame, not a techgame. Well, it supposed to be anyway.

On this level, doctrine is part of the battle in a given area- possibly apart from combined arms. And yes, part of the tech level of the units.

Your reference to 'superior doctrine' I would define as 'strategy'.

Maybe the balance is somewhat tilted to tech (v numbers); however, superior numbers and strategy *can* offset superior tech in specific unit.
Example: if your Tanks are 2 levels superior but I have the numbers, I might be able to conquer area's around our Tank concentration and then force a retreat of your superstack by 2:1 superiority in numbers - leading to surrender.

I feel your pain re the sub example in the other thread though - that's nasty.
However, that *should* mean the Axis are weak in other areas (Russia, land tech etc).
Leading to a weaker than historical WA but opportunities for the Soviets.

Due to the limited number of turns the game is quite like chess: unforgiving if you are behind in position or strenght. A few bad moves or lag in tech can mean your are out, although you still command sizeable forces...

-von Schmidt

[Agema]

Tech is part of zillions of strategy games. Nearly all RTSs, Master of Orion, Civ, Europa Universalis... Having better tanks in GGWAW isn't that much more punishing then having only infantry to stop tanks (or worse!) in Civ because you're behind in tech.

I think the game is well balanced. If you're comprehensively out-teched, you know you've got to work to do. But then, look at the casualty rates of Uboats compared to shipping in the North Atlantic, and you see how far behind the Allies were at some points in the war. As a player, grit your teeth for a few seasons until you can sort the problem out. Look at the east front, and over the course of the war, someone somewhere else said losses were 4:1 in favour of the Germans (that's including later on when there was more parity!) Yet the USSR still produced enough troops to survive. Due to Germany's populaton constraints, if the WA are sucking a few units away each turn around the Med, or bombing Europe, or just the odd Uboat, it's tough for Germany to keep up with even relatively small losses in the USSR.

[Scott_WAR]

USSR was able to survive because they had superior numbers even though they had inferior tech and training. That is missing from the game, and that is the problem. Superior numbers can beat superior tech. NOT in this game though. Thats my point. Either having superior numbers needs to be factored into combat as its own seperate modifier, or tech needs to be brought down to semi- realistic proportions. Meaning that a tech level advantage of 2 levels wont win you a battle where the numbers are very heavily against you.

[t3mplarKn1ght]

Superior numbers do affect combat. If you are outnumbered, your units will get attacked more than once. A unit that was previously attacked will have a -1 evasion, making it easier to hit.

But this is limited to -1. I keep thinking that -1 per previous attack might be better. This would allow you to overcome extreme tech deficits by swarming a unit with overwhelming force. This might be unbalancing though, making tech worthless...

[Scott_WAR]

Well, tech SHOULD NOT overcome vastly overwhelming numbers..... thats the whole point. SO trying to get super tech tanks, but only having 10 of them against your enemies 100 lower teched tanks, wont work. But right now it WILL work. If germany's tank tech is higher enough than the USSR, the USSR cant break through them, even if they outnumber them 10 to 1. Utterly unrealistic.

[Agema]

Yeah, I think a sort of cumulative evasion penalty *could* be a good idea in that sense.

On the other hand, if the USSR can simply pack enough troops in despite the casualties, push back the Germans, the loss of territory, those resources and factories is painful enough. However, in general terms I think it's a requirement of the players to simply not fall behind too far in tech in important areas. If you're throwing 7-7 tanks at 9-9 tanks, you've not sorted your research out properly (well, unless you've researched infantry or artillery to 8-8 or instead, in which case 7-7 tanks are forgiveable.)