Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Game Suggestions:

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: Game Suggestions: Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/28/2012 11:07:01 PM   


Posts: 1063
Joined: 12/14/2010
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
You read about it time and time again though.The T-34 and the KV-1 had a fearsome reputation for a very good reason, as did the German 88mm.In fact, if I recall correctly the 88 was the only weapon the Germans had during Barbarossa that could knock out the KV-1 at any sort of range.

(in reply to Tarhunnas)
Post #: 481
RE: Game Suggestions: - 6/2/2012 7:47:18 AM   

Posts: 3157
Joined: 1/27/2011
From: Hex X37, Y15
Status: offline
Please, It would really be nice if it were possible to go back and look at past turns in server games, not to play, but just to take screenshots for AARs or just look back and ponder the situation while waiting for the next turn.


Read my AAR:s ye mighty, and despair!

(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 482
RE: Game Suggestions: - 6/2/2012 9:43:05 AM   


Posts: 1146
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

(in reply to Tarhunnas)
Post #: 483
RE: Game Suggestions: - 6/2/2012 1:58:12 PM   

Posts: 613
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline
Perfectly right. I learn a lot from good AARs, but a lot of interesting info is seemingly gone forever, when people mistankingly forget to post/copy it immediatly.

(in reply to Tarhunnas)
Post #: 484
RE: Game Suggestions: Weather - 6/3/2012 3:31:33 AM   
Rufus T. Firefly

Posts: 42
Joined: 4/28/2012
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
Here's an idea in case you haven't followed my random or nonrandom weather poll.

Quite a few people have advanced the idea of having some intermediate forms of weather, so for instance, when you have a random mud turn in the middle of the summer it wouldn't bring operations to a screaching halt, just slow things down. Additional weather zones was also an interesting suggestions.

I imagine this is the sort of thing that will have to wait for WitE 2, but it seems like an idea worth giving serious consideration.


Rufus T. Firefly: Do you realize our army is facing disastrous defeat? What do you intend to do about it?
Chicolini: I've done it already. I've changed to the other side.
Firefly: What are you doing over here?
Chicolini: Well, the food is better

(in reply to Balou)
Post #: 485
RE: Game Suggestions: Weather - 6/6/2012 11:16:05 AM   


Posts: 21
Joined: 1/20/2011
Status: offline
First sorry for my English (I hope you understand).
It would be nice to click on enemy units and see the COMBAT UNIT DETAIL (manual 5.4.13),(as we do in friendly units) and that this information is affected by the fog of war. Something like the example:

(in reply to Rufus T. Firefly)
Post #: 486
Game Suggestions: what additional scenarios? - 6/12/2012 7:26:22 PM   


Posts: 629
Joined: 5/6/2011
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline
While many people on the forum focus on the opening stages of the war, it would be fun to have one scenario about the Vistula-Oder offensive in 45, possibly continuing to the Battle of Seelow Heights and the fall of Berlin. I do not think I have seen Berlin fall in any of the human vs human AARs, it would be great for those who like to play the Russians and as epic in scope as any other large offensive on the East Front.

More general question for the developers: any plans for additional smallish scenarios?

(in reply to Rom3l)
Post #: 487
RE: Game Suggestions: what additional scenarios? - 6/20/2012 3:35:55 PM   

Posts: 379
Joined: 1/14/2003
From: Oklahoma
Status: offline
There are too many artificial triggers in the game, forcing artificial decisions.

1. Make National Morale a push - pull system instead of by year. This could be done using both casualties and terrain loses/gains.

2. Combat system still needs work, Germans take too few casualties in the summer and too many in the winter. The 41 Blizzard is still primary artificial trigger to balance the game, not combat operations.

3. Weather should be more random, not all one type everywhere.


"Actions Speak Louder than Words"
"Give me liberty, or give me death"
"Pass the salt, please"

(in reply to governato)
Post #: 488
RE: Game Suggestions: what additional scenarios? - 6/21/2012 5:59:06 AM   


Posts: 57
Joined: 2/18/2010
Status: offline
1. I would like to be able to combine sapper battalions into regiments instead of having to disband the battalions & create new regiments from scratch.

2. As others have said, an intermediate weather type such as "light mud."

3. Combat seems overly favorable to the attacker.

4. Fix the production system so it is more important for the Soviet player to save his heavy industry from being overrun.

(in reply to Zemke_4)
Post #: 489
RE: Game Suggestions: Grand Campaign - 6/27/2012 3:28:12 AM   


Posts: 889
Joined: 10/9/2008
From: Washington USA
Status: offline
Think of a grand campaign that would start in 1939 to 1946 where the player controls the enitre German armed forces. If someone has already posted this, please disregard.

(in reply to SBD)
Post #: 490
RE: Game Suggestions: Grand Campaign - 7/16/2012 3:46:27 AM   


Posts: 852
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: Cairns, Australia
Status: offline
Just finished my first campaign and at the end of all previous of Gary's grand campaign games they would go into a mode where you could completely view both sides (production units, replacements, etc) which I always licked to check. to my disappointment when WitE ended it went straight to the game menu screen. It would be great to have this complete view mode available when a game has been completed. sorry if this has been mentioned before.

(in reply to Footslogger)
Post #: 491
RE: Game Suggestions: Grand Campaign - 7/17/2012 1:11:16 PM   


Posts: 788
Joined: 10/5/2009
Status: offline
Sorry if these suggestions are redundant, but haven't time to review all prior posts. Please consider my best thoughts so far. (BTW, I play against AI only; I'm not yet ready for PBEM games!)

1. Provide a "compare results" feature that would provide net differences between 2 saved results (assuming comparable files.) Show net differences in forces, losses, territory, game points for one side or the other. BTW, there could be game points assigned for territory controlled, as this was an objective of some value for each side.

2. Provide ability to direct AFV (& special battalions) assignments much like aircraft can be directed. Direct a change and see it happen after some reasonable time while affected SUs are tied up.

3. At start I find Support Unit (SU) assignments to be quite unusual and certainly not realistic. Typically there's a corps in 9th Army that has evrything and some corps that have nothing. Spend a lot of admin points to reassign. Takes away game play time.

4. Would like to find and reassign a lot of the German super artillery pieces (>210mm) to critical areas and see what they can do against fortified and heavily reinforced enemy. But it takes time to search them out and realign their assignments.

5. Of course, anything done for Germans should have appropriate features done for Soviet Union.

6. Must say that SU means support unit but also means Soviet Union to me. Find myself tripping over the term most times I encounter it. What to do?

7. Would like more freedom to merge units. Right now, most attempted merges fail. BTW, seems to take 2 or 3 clicks to find out that attempted merge is not possible. Can this be known at first click?

(in reply to jamesm)
Post #: 492
RE: Game Suggestions: Grand Campaign - 7/18/2012 8:34:56 PM   


Posts: 3083
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline
It isnt as much as suggestion for WiTE but possibly WiTW and a possible WiTE 2. i like the idea that moral, affects the MP required to enter enemy hexes as a concept.
I was thinking that it could be a concept that could be expanded. In some senses as it is now it pays off having depeleted mot/pz unit. Its actually easier to get it insupply/fuel cuz of less vehicles/men in it. In effect upping its MP as it gets smaller, via airdropped fuel/supply, compared to a larger unit. Some recent example of a div consisting of basicly 100 men, a few motorcycles and a few 222s.
Non the less it has the same abilities to move deep once a defensive line is broken by other units of converting hexes via ZoCs capturing 500.000 man cities assuming no unit is in it, even a 40k city might slow such a unit enough to make it wanting to avoid it completely. Also breaking rails and so on. At the same time having more MP in effect to do it cuz its smaller size.
So i was thinking that maybe ToE %,(or below certain ToE thresholds), CV value of how ever one can think of it could have an impact on ability to enter enemy hexes like moral does now. Another way could be reducing MPs in same situasion as the divs has near no integrity( or capping MP to certain ToE thresholds). Or treating it as a in game reg/bde as of now with that penalties that follows with that. Reflecting that players might not care, but commanders in RL would have to a larger extend.
Could possibly also be used in curtailing very low str divisions of both sides in blocking effects/zoc hex swapping effects.

Kind regards,


< Message edited by Walloc -- 7/18/2012 9:10:18 PM >

(in reply to rrbill)
Post #: 493
RE: Game Suggestions: Grand Campaign - 8/16/2012 2:58:27 PM   


Posts: 1063
Joined: 12/14/2010
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
I'd like to see the defensive properties of towns reflected in the game.My suggestion would be CV x 125% for one level towns, x 150% for level two, x 175% for level three and x 200% for level four.So for example a level two town situated in a light woods hex would be x 250%.
I'd also like to see some sort of supply bonus for HQs and combat units that are in towns and cities.I don't understand the supply rules so not certain how, or even if, this could be achieved.

< Message edited by timmyab -- 8/16/2012 3:02:40 PM >

(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 494
RE: Game Suggestions: Grand Campaign - 8/27/2012 6:14:41 PM   
Paul McNeely


Posts: 619
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Germany
Status: offline
Last time I played after 8 hours of so of a turn, I went to save. At this point I got a run-time-failure message. Would it be possible to introduce saving automatically during the player turn? Say a temp, and overwritten file saved every user set time interval (every 10 min, ever 30 min or something like that).

I also determined that I can only play this game during holidays since the "just another army group's movement more" is bad for issues like sleep during a regular work week. But I can't think of anything that would deal with that issue!

(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 495
RE: Game Suggestions: A Critical Concern - 9/11/2012 2:35:38 AM   


Posts: 27
Joined: 6/10/2010
Status: offline
First kudos to WIE a brilliant game........however one glaring oversight and one significant ommission, The latter is bearable the former is a significant enjoyment detraction from the game.

Firstly I am an old GDW/GRD Europa grognard so have slaved over maps lager than most peoples houses for decades. WIE was the obvious heir apparent to the Fire In the East/ Scorched Earth genre.
Overall I applaud the detail in the game well done.
Now the major objection....Finland!
Now I understand the production schedule arguement, but than the exapnsion was Don to Danube, what about Finland?
My oponnent and I just played till 1942 and the Finnish front was so ahistorical it more likely resembled the Somme than any respect for the flanking tactics of the Finnish army.
The absence of Murmansk is critical as is the absence of the whole Karelian Front and the German mountain army.
In Europa the Soviet player was often faced with a choice varying from concentric allocation of resources to shut down Finland (at the cost to other fronts) or play it historically, however any threat that appeared to Murmansk had to be immediately dealt with regardless of what was happening elsewhere.
WIE by contrast by ommitting the Karelian and arctic fronts reduces the Finnish participation to something resembling WWI western Europe.

This severly detract from an otherwise great game. It seriously needs to be addressed in any second edition or expansion.

The second whilst not so serious and more resembling a wish list(but a very needy one) is the need for a more appropriate naval system, i.e actual naval units. Whilst not absolutely critical there is no doubt it is mostly desired by all and sundry. Europa went through a simila evolutionary process as a result of player demand, I imagine the WIE community would feel similarly. The naval issue you can play with.

But Finland fellas come on lets get serious its needs to be fixed.

thanks for listening

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 496
RE: Game Suggestions - 9/11/2012 12:15:52 PM   


Posts: 788
Joined: 10/5/2009
Status: offline
Certainly some interesting scope issues have been posted, but my current thoughts & this post address the micro-level, as follows:

Map appearances are not consistant when toggling the hex shading feature. If different options were chosen for "show allowed movement" and "show allowed path" you get a very different response to the map display when the cursor is droppeed on the map.

The AI reported Soviet losses at turn end do not add up to the actual permanent troop loss. Might want some variance over time, but turn-by-turn should have realistic estimates. Seeing Soviet losses <1000 but total goes up by a realistic number doesn't make sense. (Maybe something else is intended.)

There is a lot of information reported about the opponent, but it isn't all that easy to collect and assess. Could use an "Intelligence Assessment" screen that brings it all together as if senior staff had prepared for commanders. Do it differently at various levels, from corps up to national command, 4 levels. Should include mis-assessments as well as accurate assessments.

Manual needs work, still puzzling out how to assign specific air units to specific bases and how to use the commanders' report.

Haven't solved using Editor, but not tried very hard.

(in reply to captain1)
Post #: 497
RE: Game Suggestions: A Critical Concern - 9/11/2012 4:52:09 PM   
Joel Billings

Posts: 22713
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: online
The map we've produced while working on War in the West includes all of Finland, so when WitE 2.0 is done in the future, it should be fully covered. We also hope to have a full naval system in WitE 2.0 as we plan on designing a naval system for WitW 40 and 41-43 and then transporting it to WitE. This is less certain depending on the timing of all of the games, but that's the hope.


All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to captain1)
Post #: 498
RE: Game Suggestions:Finland - 9/12/2012 12:52:33 AM   


Posts: 27
Joined: 6/10/2010
Status: offline
Praise to the Gods...and production crew.
Now I don't have to shelve WIE in search of a new definitive East front game (or dig out my old Fire In The East/Scorched Earth boards LOL)
Well will hold you to that Joel regards Finland
Seriously it is such a major fault. Like someone painting the Mona Lisa but forgeting to paint one of the eyes.i.e a flawed masterpiece.
Anyway am happy it is in the next edition/expansion, it really needed to be, if it was to be considered a serious East Front game.

As for the naval changes, well they 'have' to be better than the non-existant situation now. I am sure all are excited to see what you come up with.

So whilst the momentum is rolling do we have a prouction date for WITE2 ?

(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 499
RE: Game Suggestions:Finland - 9/12/2012 2:36:43 AM   
Joel Billings

Posts: 22713
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: online


All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to captain1)
Post #: 500
RE: Game Suggestions: A Critical Concern - 9/12/2012 12:49:15 PM   


Posts: 978
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline
I have also played FIRE IN THE EAST and I recall the Soviet player could shut down the whole Finnish front with a handful of reinforcement divisions. Given the size of the Red Army I seriously doubt the omission of the northern portions of the Finnish front as any measurable impact on the game. Going all the way to the artic coast would have added an enormous area of useless space to model an insignificant section of the front.

To use your analogy, we omitted the chair Mona Lisa was sitting on not her eyes.

(in reply to captain1)
Post #: 501
RE: Game Suggestions: A Critical Concern - 9/14/2012 12:21:06 AM   


Posts: 657
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline


ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

The map we've produced while working on War in the West includes all of Finland, so when WitE 2.0 is done in the future, it should be fully covered.

The Karelian front wasn't a major issue for me, but nice to hear that it will eventually be added. A nice little bit of chrome

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 502
RE: Game Suggestions:Finland - 9/14/2012 4:15:43 AM   


Posts: 27
Joined: 6/10/2010
Status: offline

Alas I am likely to off this mortal coil by that date

< Message edited by captain1 -- 9/14/2012 4:36:16 AM >

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 503
RE: Game Suggestions: A Critical Concern - 9/14/2012 4:35:56 AM   


Posts: 27
Joined: 6/10/2010
Status: offline

Going all the way to the arctic coast would have added an enormous area of useless space to model an insignificant section of the front.

Well, the fact remains that both belligerents "did" commit signifciant resources to the Karelian, Murmansk and arctic campaigns. Be that Dietl mountain command, Russian arctic units, Kreigmarine operations, etc.
It was a major factor in Axis support for Finnish particpation (they certainly didn't help out went the Soviets first invaded Finland).
I have personally travelled the lone rail line to Murmansk and you can easily see what a tenuous supply conduit it was.
In short it was all about Lend Lease.
Now if you remove those vital fronts, you might as well chop off Finland and have Lend Lease as an uninteruptable supply of abstract equipment points.
In short you would just have another east front game picking anhd choosing what it wants to include, not a "definitive" east Front game.

Now even if you removed Mona Lisa's chair has it occurred that having nothing to support her she would fall over backwards and the resulting portrait would probably have been censored (or at least appeared in a different gallery than the Louvre).

Finland/ Karelia & Murmansk are obviously critical to any serious east front game. The issue is how to successfully include them.
This appears to have been done by the production team, so all is well in the world.

Europas expansions btw went all the way to the Urals! Now there I grant you, you "may" have a case of non critical maps, but Murmansk? might as well leave off the Ploesti Oil fields and why even bother to have speficic equipment producing factories on the map.

(in reply to jaw)
Post #: 504
RE: Game Suggestions: A Critical Concern - 9/14/2012 9:03:09 AM   

Posts: 22817
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

The WitE v2.0 will contain everything... rest assured... for current WitE we chose not to include the extreme north because of huge space and relatively scarcity of historical action there (i.e. large space - not so many action - relatively small number of units used)...

Leo "Apollo11"


Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to captain1)
Post #: 505
RE: Game Suggestions: A Critical Concern - 9/14/2012 1:02:50 PM   


Posts: 978
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline
Most of the lend lease to the Soviets came either through Iran or the Pacific. The loss of Murmansk would have been an inconvenience to the Soviets but hardly a game changer.

I'm not saying that it wouldn't have been nice to have everything in the game but at what point do you draw the line? Given that the design of this game started in 2005 when computers had slower processors and less RAM, compromises had to be made and elimination of the far north saved resources better used elsewhere.

Without Murmansk, WitE is not perfect but the omission does not make the game flawed.

(in reply to captain1)
Post #: 506
RE: Game Suggestions: A Critical Concern - 9/15/2012 8:26:43 PM   


Posts: 3542
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline
The big advantage of Murmansk was that it was a major year around port and close to the front so that equipment being shipped to there was able to ship to the front units quickly. The Iran and Pacific routes took MUCH longer to get the equipment to where it could be used by the fighting units.

(in reply to jaw)
Post #: 507
RE: Game Suggestions: A Critical Concern - 9/15/2012 9:44:33 PM   


Posts: 978
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline
In the real world, yes the Murmansk route is faster but in game terms that would'nt matter since equipment shows up immediately whether it's rolling straight out of a factory in Leningrad with the paint still wet or coming from Detroit. If you open the can of beans about how long it takes something to get to the front we have a lot more problems than whether Murmansk is on the map or not.

(in reply to carlkay58)
Post #: 508
RE: Game Suggestions: A Critical Concern - 9/16/2012 1:19:33 PM   


Posts: 3542
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline
The big downside (historically) of Murmansk was having to convoy past Axis held Norway - the convoys were very vulnerable and had many losses - some of them disasterous. This is what prompted the majority of the deliveries through the 'safer' routes of Iran and the Pacific.

(in reply to jaw)
Post #: 509
RE: Game Suggestions: A Critical Concern - 9/17/2012 2:34:32 AM   


Posts: 27
Joined: 6/10/2010
Status: offline
23% of Lend Lease arrived via Murmansk. Despite one particular Kriegsmarine interdiction the stats show 97% of sipments to Murmansk arrived.
Most of this material found deployment immediately primarily in the Leningrad Front, with some also to Moscow and aother fronts.
27% of Lend Leas came via the very long Persian route which wasn't opened until mid 1942. The majority of this material was employed on the Caucasian Front.
50% of Lend Lease came via the Pacific Route, however this had major drawbacks. Besides being so far away, the Japan-USSR neutraliy treaty meant that only non-war material could come via this route and it had to be transported by Soviet ships. This route wasn't opened unti AUG1941.

So in summary approx a quarter of badly needed war material arrived at the critical time and at the critical locations dircetly from Murmansk. Especially 1941/42 Murmansk was essentially it, hardly insignificant!

Added to this that critical lifeline was dependent on a single rail line running the length of Axis allied Finland.
Further more the historical reality is both sides "did" commit signficant resources to those fronts for that very reason.
Now no-one is debating that in compariason to the major eastern fronts the military allocations were less. Of course they were, but then so was every other European front in comparison to the "main" Russian Fronts. To a great degree that is an irrelevant viewpoint.
A "definitive" game is one that covers all aspects of the chosen simulation. GDW recognised this with Europa and included Finland without the bat of an eyelid (and Archangelsk for that matter). The Urals expansion was optional (or chrome if you prefer). There is little doubt Fire In the East/Scorced Earth/The Urals were the difinitive east front boardgames and rightful heirs to Drang Nach Osten.
In the computer world WIE is perportly the heir of those cardboard predecessors in terms of being "definitive", and I for one wholly support that as it is an excellent production, except for the above mentioned caveats.
Jedkos (later AHs) "Russian Campaign" chopped off Finland in almost the same place as WIE but then no-one would consider "Russian Campaign" a series "definitive simulation. Gary Grisby has a reputation for producing games to satisfy grognards and be historically accurate. WIE without Karelia/Murmansk obviously cannot fit in that category.
When I first purchased the game the first thing I did was scroll over the map, the absence of Murmansk stood out like a sore thumb and I immediately regretted the purchase. This was somewhat alleviated by the rest of the game being up to Gary Grisby's usual standard :-)

Now grognards are a resaonable lot (we have been around to see many editions, companies, productions over the years), and to this end we accept the production teams rationale for not including the arctic in the original game.
Now given we have assurances that the ommission is to be corrected in the next edition, we all just have to wait and see before purchasing.
But it just seems a shame on such an otherwise worthy successor to the East Front crown.

Whilst we wait it may be time to jump across to Gary Grisby's WITP and play that. (please tell me Australia is on the map ;-)

< Message edited by captain1 -- 9/17/2012 2:37:48 AM >

(in reply to carlkay58)
Post #: 510
Page:   <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Game Suggestions: Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   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