Matrix Games Forums

New Fronts are opening up for Commander: The Great WarCharacters of World War 1Sign of for the Pike and Shot Beta!More Games are Coming to Steam! Deal of the Week: Combat Command Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great WarDeal of the Week Panzer CorpsNew Strategy Titles Join the Family
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: War in the West

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: War in the West Page: <<   < prev  6 7 8 [9] 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 5:51:35 AM   
gradenko_2000

 

Posts: 751
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline
It's likely that the time scale will be the same as WITE, since they're planning on merging the two in the nebulous future. The scale might be the same as well, unless they fudge it a bit by drawing some line of demarcation across Germany where one scale ends and the other begins.

Thinking of a merged WITE-WITW game reminds me of a certain boardgame where one side would control the Western Allies and the Germans facing East, while the other player would control the Russians and the Germans facing West. First to Berlin wins.

(in reply to Micke II)
Post #: 241
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 12:42:29 PM   
jaw

 

Posts: 976
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeffrey H.

Hrrm, well one thing I'm curious about with the coming WitW game is when does it start ? I mean does it begin with D Day or does it start with buildup and strategic air or does it begin after D Day?



War in the West begins with the Allied invasion of Sicily (July, 1943).

(in reply to Jeffrey H.)
Post #: 242
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 2:59:31 PM   
Micke II


Posts: 213
Joined: 9/15/2007
From: Paris France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw

War in the West begins with the Allied invasion of Sicily (July, 1943).


I hope we will have different choices as for example test Churchill's recommended road with the invasion of Greece instead.

(in reply to jaw)
Post #: 243
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 4:23:02 PM   
gradenko_2000

 

Posts: 751
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline
While I agree that it would be nice hypothetical scenario, I think it would also have been quite impractical/unfeasible. Churchill only wanted to invade through Greece because he was afraid of the Soviets laying their paws on the Balkans and turning the whole thing Communist. Otherwise, the rough terrain all around and the distance from both Germany and Italy would probably have tied down less troops and hampered the Axis regime much less than the actual Italian invasion.

Again, not trying to rain on your suggestion, just pointing out that the plan was probably more politically motivated than anything else.

(in reply to Micke II)
Post #: 244
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 5:10:43 PM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1402
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

A buyer of a game has every right to be disappointed in a product that they buy. Tastes vary, and different people are looking for different things. You have every right to express your disappointment with specifics with what you don't like. As long as people keep things civil, they are free to post, that's the point of the forum. There is always something that can be improved in any game, and no game is perfect. We don't claim WitE to be perfect, and no doubt it could be improved by constant attention from programmers and other development personnel. However, based on the feedback of many, and the many awards that WitE received and continues to receive, I feel we succeeded with WitE



Since we're always wanting to talk history, allow me to remind people who develop computer games that once upon a time, another company with a rock-solid past built what they felt (internally) was the best game in its class out there. It won many significant awards

And it did not listen to anyone from its consumer base that did not share its own opinion of what consumers liked, with the following results:
Within 9 months of release, it had lost half of its active consumer base, losing over 1.09 billion (US) dollars. (See link above)

I coined the term 'Sovie-o-phile' to identify a market segment and its consumer attitudes toward WitE. The Sovie-o-phile market segment appears to me to be the market segment that 2by3 most wishes to please with the WitE design. This symbiosis results (I assert) in group-think between designers/programmers and the "sovie-o-phile" market segment, with the latter forming a protective circle of bias and dismissal around critics from at a minimum, my market segment (people who believe design outcome produces a game that pits a highly optimized Soviet army against a historically tightly constrained Axis, resulting in predictable and dull outcomes when I play either side).

I became angry and at times have been uncivil because it has been my experience that the Sovie-o-phile community behaves as anti-bodies whose sole purpose is to reject divergent opinion, particularly criticisms of the game aimed at giving Germany more gameplay options, and better competitive footing for a 225-turn game.

Despite past praise of the title, and recommendations to newcomers to the community to purchase the product, my well-intended game critiques were greeted with hostility among the Sovie-o-philes (though never by 2by3 or Matrix personnel), and the reflexive dismissal of anything deemed pro-Axis (especially by authors other than me) required me to treat that segment of the audience as hostile, and to 'raise my voice' accordingly (it has been my experience that people who share my market segment attitude feel similarly bullied by the Sovie-o-philes, regardless of our tone and intent, and it's really disappointing to note the silence with which 2by3 personnel react to this reflexive dismissal and unkindness, if not to me, than to others more disciplined in tone than I).

Now that I have reached the realization that nothing significant is going to change in WitE without the expenditure of more money on additional 2by3 products (and particularly in the context of my $80 early adopter investment), I feel betrayed, and lied to.

The two purposes in continuing to make these posts as dispassionately as I can is to tell the Sovie-o-philes to check themselves, because they might just be driving away 2by3 business. Now, maybe they're fine with that, but I doubt Matrix is, and my particular consumer advocacy is solely aimed at keeping people from my market segment from buying future titles if they're this expensive and beta-ish at release, and if the bias-bullying reveals itself as strongly in future titles as it has in WitE.

But the more important reason is to tell 2by3 that I'm a consumer who tells you to your face, "I feel lied to." And I'm looking to see if you care about that, because if you don't, then my prior allegiance to your company is no longer appropriately placed in your company and your products. If you don't care, and WitW releases at a similar price point and the community expresses similar attempts to homogenize opinion, I will share my opinion of War in the East in forums and message boards where my opinions might be most helpful in keeping people in my market segment from walking into a place where they will feel lied to after purchase as well.

The way you have handled people from my market segment is wrong, and the way these Sovie-o-philes have been allowed to treat people from my market segment (with the exception of me myself, because I deserve what I've gotten, and gave what I felt was deserved back) approaches despicable.


(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 245
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 5:38:27 PM   
Kraftwerk

 

Posts: 390
Joined: 3/26/2010
Status: offline
All I want is the ability to cancel production of one item, and that freed up production goes to the other items still being built.

And cancelling would cancel the upgrade path as well.

Cancelling Panzer IIIf production would never allow the H model. But it would up slightly other production across the board. Same could be done of aircraft.


(in reply to Baron von Beer)
Post #: 246
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 5:40:01 PM   
LiquidSky


Posts: 874
Joined: 6/24/2008
Status: offline


Cancelling production for the Germans is easy...the allies do it for you! Once city at a time...

_____________________________

What's the sense of sending $2 million missiles to hit a $10 tent that's empty?

— President George W. Bush, Oval Office meeting, 13 September 2001.

(in reply to Kraftwerk)
Post #: 247
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 5:47:05 PM   
Tophat1812

 

Posts: 1595
Joined: 1/16/2006
Status: offline

Pardon heliodorus04 but those of us following this thread have over and over again gotten your point and your feelings about being lied to. Why do you continue to post this same point again and again and again? Stop beating the dead horse man! I enjoy to playing the Germans myself,though I am a novice compared to Pelton,but far from feeling betrayed i am getting a tremendous amount of playing time on this game. Also i at least am enjoying myself playing the game and i certainly don't think i fall into your Sovie-o-phile subgroup. Now do you consider this bias-bullying because i enjoy the game?

You keep saying "you feel lied to" and what are they going to do about that? Where others post suggestions about the destroyed units and automatic withdrawal issue in hopes of making the problem known and discussing various solutions for it.

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 248
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 6:07:54 PM   
gradenko_2000

 

Posts: 751
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline
Good lord heliodorus, it's not as though you bought Master of Orion 3, give it a rest. You sound worse than Pelton on one of his bad days.

(in reply to Tophat1812)
Post #: 249
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 6:08:17 PM   
Treale


Posts: 1254
Joined: 8/10/2003
From: Central Florida
Status: offline
Heliodorus04, no one is paying attention to you. If you don't like the game, stop playing it and take your act somewhere else! Somehow you think that you have the right to be rude and insult the Dev's because you think that they lied to you! Grow up man. It's only a game, and apparently not your cup of tea!!!!

_____________________________

Tony

(in reply to Tophat1812)
Post #: 250
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 6:17:01 PM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 651
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04
...and the way these Sovie-o-philes have been allowed to treat people from my market segment...


You mean equally biased axis fanboys!? I don't see any of these 'sovie-o-philes' bitching about axis fanboys and their lying redneck conspiracy whinny carebear flying pigs.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Axis players are consistently achieving greater than historical strengths in the game, and there are plenty of AARs showing Axis players doing better than historical. I fail to see how all that adds up to a soviet bias.

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 251
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 6:32:36 PM   
pompack


Posts: 2519
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gradenko_2000

Good lord heliodorus, it's not as though you bought Master of Orion 3, give it a rest. You sound worse than Pelton on one of his bad days.



I am afraid I have to disagree that this is even remotely like Pelton. Pelton is a bit () over the top and sometimes gets carried away with his own sarcasm but at heart he is passionate about the game. Even at his most extreme Pelton is always striving (admittedly a bit counter-productively at times) to improve it.

(in reply to gradenko_2000)
Post #: 252
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 7:13:04 PM   
Jeffrey H.


Posts: 2855
Joined: 4/13/2007
From: San Diego, Ca.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeffrey H.

Hrrm, well one thing I'm curious about with the coming WitW game is when does it start ? I mean does it begin with D Day or does it start with buildup and strategic air or does it begin after D Day?



War in the West begins with the Allied invasion of Sicily (July, 1943).


Ahh ok, sounds interesting. I guess that leaves North Africa for another day. Sounds like an interesting way to start things off.




_____________________________

"Games lubricate the body and the mind" Ben Franklin.

(in reply to jaw)
Post #: 253
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 8:04:53 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 32881
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline
Let's keep this civil and not make this personal please. We do not view our customers through the filter of "Axis Fanboys" or "Soviet Fanboys". We welcome all historical and factual criticism, as long as it has a constructive goal. We welcome any constructive criticism really.

Heliodorus, I do not understand despite your posts how you feel that _we_ lied to you or betrayed you, through the act of you purchasing this game. That's quite a leap from saying that you might have made some different design choices to feeling lied to. We consulted a wide variety of historical sources during the research phase of War in the East and we always consider historical accuracy when making design decisions. Our goal is the most historically accurate wargame possible, within the bounds of what most wargamers can reasonably play.

I didn't entirely understand your earlier point about this being a simulation and not a game either. It is clearly a game, but a very realistic game. A simulation is an entirely different creature.

I guess I'm not entirely clear on what was the lie that you are upset about, how we actually betrayed you and what exactly you would change in the game if you were the designer that fits within the reasonable scope of post-release support and development. Very ambitious changes are never on the table post-release, but ongoing support and fixes and balance tweaks are. Our goal with this entire series is extremely ambitious though and the "big" wish list items most have expressed are part of that, but it's way too early to go into more details.

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development


For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Jeffrey H.)
Post #: 254
RE: War in the West - 3/2/2012 8:43:21 PM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 2108
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline


I've played many East Front games. Board and computer. And this one just puts them all to shame. And just to watch the two sides evolve through out the course of the game. Never have I seen it in such detail.

< Message edited by Aurelian -- 3/2/2012 8:49:42 PM >

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 255
RE: War in the West - 3/3/2012 2:46:07 AM   
warrenup

 

Posts: 49
Joined: 7/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian



I've played many East Front games. Board and computer. And this one just puts them all to shame. And just to watch the two sides evolve through out the course of the game. Never have I seen it in such detail.



Quite an endorsement. Guderian's Blizkrieg II was just reprinted at $160 per copy. Case Blue - if you can find it - will cost you $250+. Even if you
have the bucks - with two cats around, well.......

I keep thinking about buying this game - but then I remember I might get two turns in today in WITP-AE and might only be weeks away from seeing
Autumn 1942 after I'm afraid to tell you how long. The WITW is a gem I didn't even know about until now.

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 256
RE: War in the West - 3/3/2012 3:32:40 AM   
vicberg

 

Posts: 682
Joined: 4/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

I coined the term 'Sovie-o-phile' to identify a market segment and its consumer attitudes toward WitE. The Sovie-o-phile market segment appears to me to be the market segment that 2by3 most wishes to please with the WitE design. This symbiosis results (I assert) in group-think between designers/programmers and the "sovie-o-phile" market segment, with the latter forming a protective circle of bias and dismissal around critics from at a minimum, my market segment (people who believe design outcome produces a game that pits a highly optimized Soviet army against a historically tightly constrained Axis, resulting in predictable and dull outcomes when I play either side).


I think Sovie-o-phile is the wrong way to categorize this. It's not about Soviet Fanboy or German Fanboy. There are a lot of people who believe that a game such as this should follow history. I've seen the same arguments in WITPAE. The EXACT same arguments, countless times. Japan should have no chance. Germany should have no chance. These people, IMO, don't seem to realize that every good game has the chance for both sides to win, whether historical or not. It's a game and it needs to be fun for both.

That being said, I'm starting to change my tune concerning Germany in WITE. It's possible to destroy enough of the Red Army in 41 and 42, as well as capture enough Manpower areas, to be able to win in 44/45 as Germany. The game is getting more balanced. Pelton is a perfect case in point. It requires an experienced German player to the degree of Pelton and the many, many games he's played. At this point, he knows the ins and outs of the game and Germany to a degree that, I would bet, no one else does.

Is that a problem? Yes. There won't be many players who stick with the game like Pelton does. Therefore, there won't be many German players. I look at the AARs and the Opponents wanted and it just isn't to the level of WITPAE. It should be much greater. It's newer. Definately more exciting turn to turn. But it doesn't have the same draw. Why? Because it isn't balanced yet from a game perspective, nothing to do with history. WITE requires an expert German player. WITPAE is much more balanced and doesn't require an expert Japanese player, in spite of the many complaints of Allied "Fanboys". Allies generally want a cake walk over from 43 on, which is historical. The "game" keeps Japan into it through 44 and 45, providing no catastrophes.

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 257
RE: War in the West - 3/3/2012 6:28:42 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 2108
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: warrenup


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian



I've played many East Front games. Board and computer. And this one just puts them all to shame. And just to watch the two sides evolve through out the course of the game. Never have I seen it in such detail.



Quite an endorsement. Guderian's Blizkrieg II was just reprinted at $160 per copy. Case Blue - if you can find it - will cost you $250+. Even if you
have the bucks - with two cats around, well.......

I keep thinking about buying this game - but then I remember I might get two turns in today in WITP-AE and might only be weeks away from seeing
Autumn 1942 after I'm afraid to tell you how long. The WITW is a gem I didn't even know about until now.


That's cheap. DG's War in the Pacific is $420. And $40 more for the extension. WiTP-AE is a freaking bargain. And it won't get dusty sitting on the table.

Look at Empires in Arms. I was offered $150 for mine. (Still have it.) Matrix's version is soooo much cheaper.

Lately I've been buying the SPW series. Thankfully, they have modules for ADC2 so I can play them without having furry pest....er pets/clumsy people, (like me at times.), or a sudden gust of wind upset things.

WiTE is well worth the money. I wasn't happy about the price, but got it anyway. You can read in books about how both sides evolved during the war, but to actually *see* it........ Like WiTP, the cost/enjoyment factor is measured in pennies in the long run

< Message edited by Aurelian -- 3/3/2012 6:36:18 AM >

(in reply to warrenup)
Post #: 258
RE: War in the West - 3/3/2012 7:27:50 AM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 266
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline
Trey, to take the WITP example, it really all comes down to whether treating the 2 Yorktowns as one ship, by a game purporting to cover the Pacific War in WWII on an operational level, is a feature or a bug. If you think it's a feature, we'll have to agree to disagree and you need read no further.


quote:

ORIGINAL: el hefe

There are a lot more factors at work behind the scenes than a simple extra missing division out there. Many of those points have been pointed out here already. Yes, the 345th Infantry began forming in late November 1942 and was later renamed to the 29th Panzergrenadier Division. I don't think anyone knows how much of that division was actually on-hand in terms of personnel and equipment when the 29th Motorized was destroyed in late Feb/early March 1943 which was just three months after the 345th started forming. It looks like only a Panzergrenadier Battalion and a Stug battery from the 345th were deemed combat ready enough to be sent East by early January but those plans were canceled. You additionally have the issues of the Germans de-motorizing at least two motorized divisions in the summer of 1943 since there were obvious transportation constraints. How would that affect an extra Panzergrenadier division? Would it have been de-motorized as well? Dunno. Do we really want to run this down the rabbit hole in an alternative universe?


The rabbit hole of an alternative universe starts at turn 1 and this particular rabbit hole is unavoidable due to the way the production/unit creation processes are set up in game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: el hefe
Historically, there were numerous divisions that were destroyed and were not reconstituted at all by the Germans in any theater. In WitE, the player doesn't have to worry about this since all units destroyed (except for the ones on the withdrawal schedule) are automatically reconstituted and usable by the player. Obviously, there were equipment and personnel bottlenecks in which decisions were made not to reconstitute these units. Do we really want to incorporate additional rules and draw away additional time and resources away from WitW development to look into these obscure issues? If we did, it would probably result in more German units not being reconstituted.

In the end, I think it evens out. The Germans debatefully lose a handful of divisions but the German player's destroyed in-game units aren't subject to being outright disbanded which happened often. I think that is a plus for the German player. Also, the German player benefits from many "free" reinforcements that have not been subjected to production.


The Germans didn't really rebuild destroyed divisions, instead they gave a newly forming one the name of a destroyed unit. The Germans formed, or were in some stage of forming, nearly 500 Infantry/Volksgrenadier/Motorized Divisions. At the same time, the production share of the West is by any measure vastly overinflated until the summer of 44.

Not having most of those 500 odd divisions show up in game in their historic waves and then get fleshed out by "realistic" East front production is a valid design choice. I agree that's a "wash" with the current reinforcement/rebuilding mechanic.

However, taking the historic "rebuilt" unit history and using it to determine the in game "original" unit history doesn't make sense. The in game result of this practice is that every single historically destroyed/rebuilt division is also lost in game, either by an artificial withdrawal or by a missing reinforcement. Exactly how can this be an intended result?

Now for the period from 44 onward, I can see the situation getting fluid to the point that a certain abstraction is unavoidable, but before that, the units involved are fairly few, easy to trace and not hard to correctly represent. Why not do so?

I can't comprehend the amount of resistance that exists to even minor fixes. I get the point that there's not going to be any major changes, but this is a fairly minor common sense OOB fix, needing maybe an hour or so to check the relevant unit histories and another hour to update the game data.

(in reply to el hefe)
Post #: 259
RE: War in the West - 3/3/2012 8:18:43 AM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6146
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO
I can't comprehend the amount of resistance that exists to even minor fixes. I get the point that there's not going to be any major changes, but this is a fairly minor common sense OOB fix, needing maybe an hour or so to check the relevant unit histories and another hour to update the game data.

The solution then, is obvious. Spend a couple of hours to make the simple changes you want, and then play your own version. You may send my usual consulting fee by registered mail...

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 260
RE: War in the West - 3/3/2012 10:37:41 AM   
glvaca

 

Posts: 1109
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

A buyer of a game has every right to be disappointed in a product that they buy. Tastes vary, and different people are looking for different things. You have every right to express your disappointment with specifics with what you don't like. As long as people keep things civil, they are free to post, that's the point of the forum. There is always something that can be improved in any game, and no game is perfect. We don't claim WitE to be perfect, and no doubt it could be improved by constant attention from programmers and other development personnel. However, based on the feedback of many, and the many awards that WitE received and continues to receive, I feel we succeeded with WitE



Since we're always wanting to talk history, allow me to remind people who develop computer games that once upon a time, another company with a rock-solid past built what they felt (internally) was the best game in its class out there. It won many significant awards

And it did not listen to anyone from its consumer base that did not share its own opinion of what consumers liked, with the following results:
Within 9 months of release, it had lost half of its active consumer base, losing over 1.09 billion (US) dollars. (See link above)

I coined the term 'Sovie-o-phile' to identify a market segment and its consumer attitudes toward WitE. The Sovie-o-phile market segment appears to me to be the market segment that 2by3 most wishes to please with the WitE design. This symbiosis results (I assert) in group-think between designers/programmers and the "sovie-o-phile" market segment, with the latter forming a protective circle of bias and dismissal around critics from at a minimum, my market segment (people who believe design outcome produces a game that pits a highly optimized Soviet army against a historically tightly constrained Axis, resulting in predictable and dull outcomes when I play either side).

I became angry and at times have been uncivil because it has been my experience that the Sovie-o-phile community behaves as anti-bodies whose sole purpose is to reject divergent opinion, particularly criticisms of the game aimed at giving Germany more gameplay options, and better competitive footing for a 225-turn game.

Despite past praise of the title, and recommendations to newcomers to the community to purchase the product, my well-intended game critiques were greeted with hostility among the Sovie-o-philes (though never by 2by3 or Matrix personnel), and the reflexive dismissal of anything deemed pro-Axis (especially by authors other than me) required me to treat that segment of the audience as hostile, and to 'raise my voice' accordingly (it has been my experience that people who share my market segment attitude feel similarly bullied by the Sovie-o-philes, regardless of our tone and intent, and it's really disappointing to note the silence with which 2by3 personnel react to this reflexive dismissal and unkindness, if not to me, than to others more disciplined in tone than I).

Now that I have reached the realization that nothing significant is going to change in WitE without the expenditure of more money on additional 2by3 products (and particularly in the context of my $80 early adopter investment), I feel betrayed, and lied to.

The two purposes in continuing to make these posts as dispassionately as I can is to tell the Sovie-o-philes to check themselves, because they might just be driving away 2by3 business. Now, maybe they're fine with that, but I doubt Matrix is, and my particular consumer advocacy is solely aimed at keeping people from my market segment from buying future titles if they're this expensive and beta-ish at release, and if the bias-bullying reveals itself as strongly in future titles as it has in WitE.

But the more important reason is to tell 2by3 that I'm a consumer who tells you to your face, "I feel lied to." And I'm looking to see if you care about that, because if you don't, then my prior allegiance to your company is no longer appropriately placed in your company and your products. If you don't care, and WitW releases at a similar price point and the community expresses similar attempts to homogenize opinion, I will share my opinion of War in the East in forums and message boards where my opinions might be most helpful in keeping people in my market segment from walking into a place where they will feel lied to after purchase as well.

The way you have handled people from my market segment is wrong, and the way these Sovie-o-philes have been allowed to treat people from my market segment (with the exception of me myself, because I deserve what I've gotten, and gave what I felt was deserved back) approaches despicable.




Helio,

With this reply I don't want to refute or support your position as explained above and on many other occasions.

I do have one question for you; have you ever played the Soviets against a top notch German opponent?
My understanding from your previous postings you have not. And here lies the problem with your position. While you may have had a strong case in 1.04, in the current version, and I can attest from personal experience, 1941 isn't a cake walk for the Soviet and you can very easily if not outright lose, be so heavily damaged you're not really going to have a pick-nick to Berlin.

Perhaps you should explore the possibility that the game _HAS_ changed to the better the last couple of months and that the Devs _HAVE_ listened to the suggestions and problems reported and made a better game.

Is it perfect: NO. Would I like to see more and other things: YES.
But it's very playable and against equally skilled opponents can be very, very, VERY addictive and a whole lot of fun.

Regards



(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 261
RE: War in the West - 3/3/2012 2:10:37 PM   
el hefe


Posts: 3105
Joined: 10/28/2002
Status: offline
You are treating this 345th Infantry Division as if it was a totally manned and equipped division at the time that the 29th was destroyed in January 1943 even though the division just began forming on 24 November 1942. Also, elements of this new formation were intended to be shipped East in early January 1943 but only one panzergrenadier battalion and a StuG battery were prepared. That suggests that only a very small portion of this unit was equipped and ready for combat action within a month of the 29th being destroyed. Personally, I see the Yorktown analogy as flawed as it seems you are treating a combat vessel to one that is still not even half built in the ship yard.

If indeed the 345th was completely manned and equipped (or even a majority of it) by the time the 29th was destroyed in January 1943, then I would be more receptive to making these changes. I have not been able to find evidence of this and the deployment information of this unit does not suggest that it was anywhere near being combat ready at that time.

Trey



quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

Trey, to take the WITP example, it really all comes down to whether treating the 2 Yorktowns as one ship, by a game purporting to cover the Pacific War in WWII on an operational level, is a feature or a bug. If you think it's a feature, we'll have to agree to disagree and you need read no further.


quote:

ORIGINAL: el hefe

There are a lot more factors at work behind the scenes than a simple extra missing division out there. Many of those points have been pointed out here already. Yes, the 345th Infantry began forming in late November 1942 and was later renamed to the 29th Panzergrenadier Division. I don't think anyone knows how much of that division was actually on-hand in terms of personnel and equipment when the 29th Motorized was destroyed in late Feb/early March 1943 which was just three months after the 345th started forming. It looks like only a Panzergrenadier Battalion and a Stug battery from the 345th were deemed combat ready enough to be sent East by early January but those plans were canceled. You additionally have the issues of the Germans de-motorizing at least two motorized divisions in the summer of 1943 since there were obvious transportation constraints. How would that affect an extra Panzergrenadier division? Would it have been de-motorized as well? Dunno. Do we really want to run this down the rabbit hole in an alternative universe?


The rabbit hole of an alternative universe starts at turn 1 and this particular rabbit hole is unavoidable due to the way the production/unit creation processes are set up in game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: el hefe
Historically, there were numerous divisions that were destroyed and were not reconstituted at all by the Germans in any theater. In WitE, the player doesn't have to worry about this since all units destroyed (except for the ones on the withdrawal schedule) are automatically reconstituted and usable by the player. Obviously, there were equipment and personnel bottlenecks in which decisions were made not to reconstitute these units. Do we really want to incorporate additional rules and draw away additional time and resources away from WitW development to look into these obscure issues? If we did, it would probably result in more German units not being reconstituted.

In the end, I think it evens out. The Germans debatefully lose a handful of divisions but the German player's destroyed in-game units aren't subject to being outright disbanded which happened often. I think that is a plus for the German player. Also, the German player benefits from many "free" reinforcements that have not been subjected to production.


The Germans didn't really rebuild destroyed divisions, instead they gave a newly forming one the name of a destroyed unit. The Germans formed, or were in some stage of forming, nearly 500 Infantry/Volksgrenadier/Motorized Divisions. At the same time, the production share of the West is by any measure vastly overinflated until the summer of 44.

Not having most of those 500 odd divisions show up in game in their historic waves and then get fleshed out by "realistic" East front production is a valid design choice. I agree that's a "wash" with the current reinforcement/rebuilding mechanic.

However, taking the historic "rebuilt" unit history and using it to determine the in game "original" unit history doesn't make sense. The in game result of this practice is that every single historically destroyed/rebuilt division is also lost in game, either by an artificial withdrawal or by a missing reinforcement. Exactly how can this be an intended result?

Now for the period from 44 onward, I can see the situation getting fluid to the point that a certain abstraction is unavoidable, but before that, the units involved are fairly few, easy to trace and not hard to correctly represent. Why not do so?

I can't comprehend the amount of resistance that exists to even minor fixes. I get the point that there's not going to be any major changes, but this is a fairly minor common sense OOB fix, needing maybe an hour or so to check the relevant unit histories and another hour to update the game data.



_____________________________

"You want mercy!? I'm chaotic neutral!"

WiTE Scenario Designer
WitW Scenario/Data Team Lead
Sabre 21's perpetual arch-nemisis

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 262
RE: War in the West - 3/3/2012 9:32:08 PM   
Hertston


Posts: 3465
Joined: 8/17/2002
From: Cornwall, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

And it did not listen to anyone from its consumer base that did not share its own opinion of what consumers liked, with the following results:
Within 9 months of release, it had lost half of its active consumer base, losing over 1.09 billion (US) dollars.


".. the following results?" C'mon. The game met the same fate as every other recent wannabe 'competitor' to WoW, regardless of whatever listening skills their developers may or may not have had. It's just become apparent (virtually) nobody else can survive on that sales/subscription model given WoW's total market dominance, however good the product.



(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 263
RE: War in the West - 3/3/2012 10:19:16 PM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 2108
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
Comparing a MMO to a niche product like WiTE........

Why not compare the budget for Madden 2012 to WiTW.

(in reply to Hertston)
Post #: 264
RE: War in the West - 3/25/2012 8:20:32 PM   
J Boomer


Posts: 262
Joined: 11/5/2004
From: Edmonton Alberta
Status: offline
I am curious on how war in the west is comming along? Any updates?

_____________________________

Jordan S. Bujtas
Deas Gu Cath


(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 265
RE: War in the West - 3/26/2012 7:43:55 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 21041
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline
We don't have much to report other than progress continues. One interesting addition is that a unit OB can be classified as Multi-Role, allowing it to be used either as an on map combat unit or as a support unit. These units can also be set to split into three parts when in "support" mode or remain as one unit when in support mode. British Tank Brigades and American Cavalry Groups are examples of Multi-Role units. Likely in WitE 2.0, Soviet Tank Brigades will be Multi-Role units. These units can change back and forth between support mode and on map mode during a scenario.

_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to J Boomer)
Post #: 266
RE: War in the West - 3/26/2012 8:03:29 AM   
laska2k4


Posts: 508
Joined: 11/18/2005
From: Italy
Status: offline
good news, I hope there will be a discount to WITE and DTD owners

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 267
RE: War in the West - 3/26/2012 12:13:43 PM   
smittyohio2

 

Posts: 28
Joined: 10/23/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hertston

quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

And it did not listen to anyone from its consumer base that did not share its own opinion of what consumers liked, with the following results:
Within 9 months of release, it had lost half of its active consumer base, losing over 1.09 billion (US) dollars.


".. the following results?" C'mon. The game met the same fate as every other recent wannabe 'competitor' to WoW, regardless of whatever listening skills their developers may or may not have had. It's just become apparent (virtually) nobody else can survive on that sales/subscription model given WoW's total market dominance, however good the product.



He also completely got it wrong in linking Warhammer's failure to the 1.09 billion dollar loss... Warhammer, as bad as it was, still made money. The parent company (EA) lost money due to many other problems. How can a game that cost less than $100 million to make (significantly less) cause a billion dollar loss?

< Message edited by smittyohio2 -- 3/26/2012 12:14:06 PM >

(in reply to Hertston)
Post #: 268
RE: War in the West - 3/26/2012 11:59:16 PM   
J Boomer


Posts: 262
Joined: 11/5/2004
From: Edmonton Alberta
Status: offline
Thanks for the update Joel, I know I have alot of waiting to go, however I am very much looking forward to this game.

_____________________________

Jordan S. Bujtas
Deas Gu Cath


(in reply to smittyohio2)
Post #: 269
RE: War in the West - 3/27/2012 4:35:51 AM   
CheerfullyInsane

 

Posts: 198
Joined: 12/5/2010
From: Birkerod, Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vicberg

I think Sovie-o-phile is the wrong way to categorize this. It's not about Soviet Fanboy or German Fanboy. There are a lot of people who believe that a game such as this should follow history. I've seen the same arguments in WITPAE. The EXACT same arguments, countless times. Japan should have no chance. Germany should have no chance. These people, IMO, don't seem to realize that every good game has the chance for both sides to win, whether historical or not. It's a game and it needs to be fun for both.

That being said, I'm starting to change my tune concerning Germany in WITE. It's possible to destroy enough of the Red Army in 41 and 42, as well as capture enough Manpower areas, to be able to win in 44/45 as Germany. The game is getting more balanced. Pelton is a perfect case in point. It requires an experienced German player to the degree of Pelton and the many, many games he's played. At this point, he knows the ins and outs of the game and Germany to a degree that, I would bet, no one else does.

Is that a problem? Yes. There won't be many players who stick with the game like Pelton does. Therefore, there won't be many German players. I look at the AARs and the Opponents wanted and it just isn't to the level of WITPAE. It should be much greater. It's newer. Definately more exciting turn to turn. But it doesn't have the same draw. Why? Because it isn't balanced yet from a game perspective, nothing to do with history. WITE requires an expert German player. WITPAE is much more balanced and doesn't require an expert Japanese player, in spite of the many complaints of Allied "Fanboys". Allies generally want a cake walk over from 43 on, which is historical. The "game" keeps Japan into it through 44 and 45, providing no catastrophes.


You'll always have the Historic vs. Game argument, no matter what the game is.
I'm willing to bet that there were chess-players in ancient Persia discussing whether rooks should be able to move at all, and the wisdom of having pawns promoted to queens (the gender-change not withstanding)

Comparing WitE to WITP:AE, while tempting, is a little unfair. WITP:AE has gone through numerous evolutions, patches and what have you. Far as I know (never played it) it took something like 6-8 years for WITP:AE to get to its current state. WitE has been out for a year and a half.
Far as I can tell, WitE is starting to go through the same process, figuring out what works and what doesn't, then using the lessons in the next iteration (WitW in this case).
I'm sure that when that comes out, they'll find something else to improve, and that'll get folded into WitW ´39, and so on and so forth. So in another 6-8 years we'll have a fully-working War in Europe, with all the kinks ironed out. Which is fine by me.
It would admittedly be nice to have the perfect product in the first attempt.....World peace would also be nice.

As for why WIPT:AE has a more active following than WitE, I think it's more a case of the conflict in question.
I'm no marketing-analyst, but my gut-feeling is that the Pacific has a greater following than the Eastern Front across the board.
But looking at the Opponents Wanted, I find it interesting that they're about equal German/Russian ads.
So it's not as if there's a dearth of German players, despite the fact that it's definitely the harder side to play.

_____________________________

"Something is always wrong, Baldrick. The fact that I'm not a millionaire aristocrat with the sexual capacity of a rutting rhino is a constant niggle"
- Edmund Blackadder

(in reply to vicberg)
Post #: 270
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 8 [9] 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: War in the West Page: <<   < prev  6 7 8 [9] 10   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.119