Matrix Games Forums

A closer look at rockets in Space Program ManagerDeal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold Ask Buzz Aldrin!Pike & Shot gets Release Date and Twitch Session!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Will you keep playing after this patch?

 
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: Will you keep playing after this patch? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 1:40:43 AM   
RCH


Posts: 226
Joined: 1/19/2011
Status: offline
I have stated some strong opinions on this forum, but I will give the game its due. 

A lot of players (even Axis) really like playing this game. It has a lot of neat stuff in it.  It has been coded well and I have never had a problem with crashes.  It is greatly detailed if you like to get down and "see" what is happening at the ground level.  If you learn the game mechanics and follow some strategy on the forums you can be off and playing pretty quick.  My ultimate problem with it has been that it is not very historically believable.  Before I get attacked, that's my opinion the next guy may be fine with the things I really don't like.  I am going to keep my opinions to myself hereafter.  I do have a game going on with another player which of itself has been a lot of fun.  Even for me with my strong opinions of some of the game mechanics, I will give the game its due and admit that the human vs human game has a lot of interesting possibilities. I have done terrible, but I have learned.  For me though the unhistorical aspects win out in the long run. 

If your looking for a good and interesting game then this game maybe what you are looking for.  I will not put down this game.  If someone is interested then I will freely say that you can probably have a lot of fun with it.  Get good and play against another human that is the best challenge.

I do think the devs would really benefit if they took a step back and looked at the game and the forum.  I think they should look for an outside opinion.  I don't know what is possible though. 

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 31
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 2:36:16 AM   
Oloren

 

Posts: 48
Joined: 3/24/2007
Status: offline
This is easily the best wargame I've ever played and I've been playing since AH Gettysburg.  Played SPI WITE, WITW, WIE, CNA etc.  Yes, there are some balance issues, but I've never seen a company so dedicated to supporting their games.  Really very much appreciate the hard work that's gone into this.  Oh, hurry up and get me some reinforcements after April 1945 so I can repel Terje!

Oloren

(in reply to RCH)
Post #: 32
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 3:06:14 AM   
entwood

 

Posts: 93
Joined: 7/22/2010
Status: offline
It is a great GAME, within a framework of gritty and expansive detail as historical simulation. These are just a bit too separated.

1. Not sure why the game does not have optional rules, so players can better nerf this or nerf that, with a reasonable default.
2. Too much predictable hard-code, so many exact hexes away, exact percentages everywhere 1/2, 1/3. I just don't know what happened to random numbers, which should be almost everywhere.
3. Better Command and Control. If just should not always be possible to exploit, A chance yes, of course, but if the leader and HQ system were revamped the whole historical model could be improved very nicely. This is my one big wish.

I haven't played for awhile. I thought I would after another patch or so, some things still disturb, but I am glad I have the game and I'm sure I'll play some more.



< Message edited by entwood -- 2/5/2012 3:11:25 AM >

(in reply to Oloren)
Post #: 33
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 6:12:58 AM   
Farfarer

 

Posts: 670
Joined: 7/21/2004
Status: offline
As half my games are as an Axis player (I am a WITE Fanboy), I am disappointed that players are being punished for developing the skill to salvage an offensive core of forces during the blizzard and come out punching in the snow. We avidly read the AARs, the posts, the War Room, learned the Fort strategy, abandoned the Fort Strategy, learned the Rubber band strategy, then abandoned the rubber band strategy, then stuffed Mountain units full of Stugs and SU's and were labelled exploiters, then hit upon the "two hex a turn retreat with a well placed Ost Wall in the rear and send as many as you can spare to Prussia" strategy. This finally worked. (Piranha Brothers Monty Python sketch influence )

The players actually found a way to better perform a winter defence in very well modelled historical system. In fact in the forum, newb players ( I was/are, one) were admonished to get our sh*t togther and figure the Blizzard out and stop whining. Lo and behold, it worked. There was no cheat, no exploit, we dodged and weaved with a few guys so a few more could get their sh*t together in safety and rope a dope in spring.

[Role play on]
"Mein Fuhrer, we have taken everything of value from Leningrad to Rostov. The entire fall harvest of western Russia has gone to the Reich , as well as every scrap of seed for the spring. Every Russian is about to starve starting now. There is not a typewriter tape, a cow or horse between Memel and Moscow. If our Armies stay in Russia, we will suffer the same fate as Napoleon, only worse, for we estimate 1,000,000 casualties. Our trucks and tanks are not ready for winter in Russia, and will become unserviceable in the millions. The fuel needed to keep them running will mean crippling shortages - and anger - in the civilian population of the Reich. We achieved oustanding success, but not a Russian surrender. We are not prepared and this Russian winter will cripple the Wehrmacht - shoot me if you will, but hear the truth.

We must pull back to Poland and save millions in men and materiel. Stalin will be forced to feed his people or watch them die. He will be forced to find spring seed for the farms, and cause it to be planted. Much is made of his ruthlessness, but this he can't avoid. He needs these people to generate soldiers and workers. Much of this seed and farm equipment will have to come from Lend Lease - using up space for war materiel.
Next June, after the Bolsheviks have conveniently sewn the crops, and rebuilt the cities, we sweep in again and capture the harvest again. If Stalin does not do any of this, there will be a desert wasteland for operations next year not imagined in these latitudes by even Rommel. We will sweep to India.

Mein Fuhrer, there is no strategic reason whatsoever to remain in Russia this winter - not even the land and cities are of value - it is a complete liability.
Next spring, after we repeat the success of 1941 again, Stalin will not have reserves of men, food and materiel - indeed the second loss of even the Ukraine wheat crop will be devastating.

[Role play off]

and that's why you shouldn't frack with the rules when players make better strategic decisions. They have hindsight and try to change history - that's why we play :)

(in reply to entwood)
Post #: 34
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 9:04:12 AM   
Tazak

 

Posts: 491
Joined: 9/3/2011
Status: offline
There is another side to this, do the soviet players really want a game that holds no surprises for them, they already know the forces they have to fight, they already know that come 1943 they can return the favour of b*tch-slapping their op. Do you really want a scripted game where the Axis players are forced when to attack and when not too outside of what is already built into the game.

I am a single player person who might venture into H2H at some point, but I know when I play the soviet side I want to keep a eye on the battlegrounds not the calander for signs of a Axis offensive.

I will carry on playing but if the Axis are shoehorned into any more it will damage the fun I have from this game playing either sid, I would also suggest that the Dev's look at other options for limiting Axis spring offensives, taking other suggestions - hit the rail cap and or rail modifier, increase Axis trucks destroyed ratio during the blizzard. Anything would be better than putting in rules that the Axis side can only attack during June to Nov.

(in reply to Farfarer)
Post #: 35
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 10:51:32 AM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3065
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
I'm not playing for some time. This has been a hard decision to take, also RL has forced my hand.

I totally agree with MechFO. As he pointed out in the Locked thread, I see the changes as covering up for flaws in the logistics and tactical combat modeling. No changes in the GC victory conditions and the reluctance to address the concerns regarding lack of any operationally meaningful reaction ability to non-phasing player units' makes me sad.

I'm also tired of the Axis/Soviet fanboy thingie: 2by3 is just pouring gasoline on that by not tackling the bull by the horns.

Cheers,

BG.

(in reply to Tazak)
Post #: 36
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 12:19:06 PM   
Emir Agic


Posts: 326
Joined: 3/29/2004
From: Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Status: offline
I have not been playing now as I'm in period where real life work overload prevents me for playing monster games like WitE. Although, I regularly check forum to read AARs or to see how things will unfold with new patches.

However, right now, I also agree more with Klaydon and MechFO. Making and changing rule after rule and imposing artificial constraints, as forced CV reduction, to basically correct what is wrong with logistic, combat and C2 model is not something that I like.

(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 37
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 12:42:21 PM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3065
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
Not to mention that bit of tweaking Rifle Bdes so they have Morale level similar to that of early Guards. The Rifle Bdes the Red Army deployed in the Autumn 1941 - Spring 1942 have more to do with the need to mobilize fresh forces quickly than anything else.

That's pouring gasoline on the Axis/Soviet fanboy flame wars. It will indeed provide the Soviet player with a too easy to exploit mechanism to ensure one can have a too high quality Red Army in 1942 (what happens when you merge two 50 Morale Rifle Bdes? You get a 50 Morale Rifle Division. It will probably lose that edge as soon as it "sees the elephant". But that only will happen when they lose).

The Rifle Bde in the Red Army was either a "special purpose" unit or a training cadre. As the situation deteriorated so badly after the Smolensk and Kiev battles, the STAVKA had no other option than field the training cadre organizations directly. Not because it was a more efficient or flexible unit...

< Message edited by Bletchley_Geek -- 2/5/2012 12:43:53 PM >

(in reply to Emir Agic)
Post #: 38
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 12:59:46 PM   
76mm


Posts: 2133
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Moscow
Status: offline
And I'm still trying to get my head around the fact that Sov CP caps went from GROWING from 1941-1943 to SHRINKING in the same period.

According to Flavius, this is meant to reflect the fact that Sov armies got smaller during the course of the war. I have no independent info on this, but assuming that this is true, it would suggest to me that the "real" CP cap was always lower, and the Sovs only realized it over time (ie, Sov C&C got better during the war, but only because the Sovs gradually recognized the limitations of their C&C and so made their armies smaller as a result).

The current mechanism seems completely backwards--in the current patch, Sov C&C is actually better (represented by a higher CP cap) in 1941 than in 1943. It seems to me that a better solution would have been to have the CP cap lower in 1941 than in 1943, but have the Sovs start the war with all of their HQs massively overloaded. The Sov players could gradually fix the problem by unloading HQs and waiting for the CP cap to gradually increase.

< Message edited by 76mm -- 2/5/2012 1:01:50 PM >

(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 39
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 4:17:50 PM   
Marquo


Posts: 1350
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline
Stop playing = Stop breathing

"The March madness shouldn't be possible even with well preserved armored divisions as the supply situation was tenuous at best."

I am just past "March Madness" in 2 PBEM games; one as the Axis and one as the Soviet. IMHO, there are 2 necessary conditions for March madness:

1) A overly exuberant Soviet player, lusting for revenge, who pushes his army to the absolute end of the supply tether as the the Axis retreats back into a much better supply situation.
2) An cautious Axis player who removes his panzer units from the the frontline to relative safety, and patiently waits like a spider while the Soviet advances deeper into the web.

I am uncomfortable with any permutation of rules/code which encourages recklessly aggressive behavior, and punishes conservative, safe behavior. IMHO, the supply/logistical rules need to be carefully modulated to reward/punish such behaviors.

Keep playing? Hell yes!

< Message edited by Marquo -- 2/5/2012 4:19:35 PM >

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 40
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 4:35:25 PM   
gradenko_2000

 

Posts: 821
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline
I agree with 76mm on the CP change. It seems backward for the command limits to actually decrease as time goes on just to replicate IRL late-war C&C. Or at least, it seems awkward for your limit to start off high, then become smaller even as your army supposedly gets better.

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 41
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 4:49:06 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6395
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
76mm, that's only part of it.

For the tank armies they never should have been allowed to get so big to begin with. This one really is a no brainer. 3 corps was the standard. They simply didn't run around with 6+ mobile corps.

The combined arms thing, well, that one is trickier. Generally speaking late war combined arm armies tended to have 3-4 corps (not always rifle, sometimes including a mobile corps) and various odds and ends. But there were many exceptions. It was felt that the command model should aim at the average here. The "shrinkage" is in part due to the distortions caused by the shift from divisions to corps. The command costs associated with these are not linear, bear in mind. Corps are more efficient in terms of command load than 3 divisions. So that gets you some of the perceived shrinkage.

The developers also didn't like the fact that very large Soviet armies meant that with fewer armies running around, Soviet leadership was too high and they could largely run the Red Army without having to resort to bad leaders. Me, I think this is piffle. You will of course concentrate your best leaders in that portion of the front that matters (almost certainly in the Ukraine), even under this system, but there you go. The junkier leaders will simply go to the quiet parts of the front. Even with this system I think there's enough 5 point guys out there to man all the armies and avoid having to use the absolute stinkers. And the average leadership drop here isn't that big, given that Soviet leadership wasn't that amazing to begin with.

Mostly, and to be cynical for a moment, the combined arms change is kind of a new AP tax on the Sovs.


< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 2/5/2012 5:14:33 PM >


_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to gradenko_2000)
Post #: 42
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 5:57:52 PM   
Farfarer

 

Posts: 670
Joined: 7/21/2004
Status: offline
I haven't built an new HQ in 1943 before, but they now seem to arrive with a dozen SU's of random and of varied usefulness.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 43
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 7:49:46 PM   
Harrybanana

 

Posts: 764
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
I'll keep playing; but it will create big problems for me. I just completed the first February 42 turn as the Russians in a close pbem game. Not only are almost all my at the Front Armies loaded at 24, I just this turn (before reading about this patch) disbanded 3 of my STAVKA Army HQs thinking I needed their manpower more than I needed them. I only have about 100 APs in the kitty so I won't have anywhere near enough to build more Army HQs, assign decent Leaders to these Army HQs and transfer units out of the overloaded Armies to the new Armies. Not to mention that I have to use some APs to build new units (I merged a lot of brigades into divisions to keep my Blizzard Offensive going) and still save some to build Tank Corps come April.

On the other hand, at least his March Snow Offensive will be blunted somewhat by the patch.

(in reply to Farfarer)
Post #: 44
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 7:53:22 PM   
Apollo11


Posts: 22595
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

I'll keep playing; but it will create big problems for me. I just completed the first February 42 turn as the Russians in a close pbem game. Not only are almost all my at the Front Armies loaded at 24, I just this turn (before reading about this patch) disbanded 3 of my STAVKA Army HQs thinking I needed their manpower more than I needed them. I only have about 100 APs in the kitty so I won't have anywhere near enough to build more Army HQs, assign decent Leaders to these Army HQs and transfer units out of the overloaded Armies to the new Armies. Not to mention that I have to use some APs to build new units (I merged a lot of brigades into divisions to keep my Blizzard Offensive going) and still save some to build Tank Corps come April.

On the other hand, at least his March Snow Offensive will be blunted somewhat by the patch.


Guys, I think that is is quite feasible and possible to have old EXE (with old rules) together with new EXE (with new rules) at the same time!


How to do that?


Simple!


Just copy the previous WitE v1.05.53 "WarInTheEast.exe" to "WarInTheEast-53.exe" (or whatever you like) and then install the latest WitE v1.05.59!

This way you will have two EXEs in your WitE folder and you can use old EXE for games in progress (the new data settings are not applicable to existing old games anyway) and new EXE for new games!



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 Harrybanana)
Post #: 45
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 8:21:52 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 2391
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Sure I will keep playing. But the bias towards the Soviets may see me play only Russia in the future if the bias continues. If Germany is battered down so much that there is no chance of winning in 1941/42 then why bother invading in the first place?

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 46
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 8:31:53 PM   
Marquo


Posts: 1350
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline
Michael,

I think you will find a way. OTOH, you were winning way too easy

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 47
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 8:42:54 PM   
Apollo11


Posts: 22595
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T
<SNIP>

...there is no chance of winning in 1941/42 then why bother invading in the first place?


Guys, as we all were told you many times, Gary Grigsby wargames were always trying to be as realistic and as historic as possible - they were never "Historic Science Fiction"!


Thus the idea of winning as total victory in 1941/1942 for Germans is not realistic against capable adversary - just as historic Germans in WWII didn't actually had a chance of winning in the Eastern Front (no modern historian supports that idea - that was simply not possible)!!!

The winning in WitE is to be better than history!

The same principle applies to UV ("Uncommon Valor"), WitP ("War in the Pacific") and WitP-AE ("War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition) - Japan didn't have historic chance of winning - Japanese player in those game doesn't have chance of winning as total victory as well...


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 Michael T)
Post #: 48
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 9:11:01 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 2391
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
quote:

Thus the idea of winning as total victory in 1941/1942 for Germans is not realistic against capable adversary - just as historic Germans in WWII didn't actually had a chance of winning in the Eastern Front (no modern historian supports that idea - that was simply not possible)!!!


This is rubbish and a view I don't subscribe to. If 2By3 really think that Germany had no chance of winning the war against Russia they should be upfront about it and clearly state that is a design intention. Then people who think otherwise can avoid their products.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 49
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 9:18:14 PM   
Apollo11


Posts: 22595
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

quote:

Thus the idea of winning as total victory in 1941/1942 for Germans is not realistic against capable adversary - just as historic Germans in WWII didn't actually had a chance of winning in the Eastern Front (no modern historian supports that idea - that was simply not possible)!!!


This is rubbish and a view I don't subscribe to. If 2By3 really think that Germany had no chance of winning the war against Russia they should be upfront about it and clearly state that is a design intention. Then people who think otherwise can avoid their products.


You are, of course, entitled to your own view - but your own view should never negate other people's view (including the view all prominent historians share)...


The fact is that Germany lost the WWII the very second they attacked Soviet Union!

Same fact is that Japan lost the WWII the very second they attacked Pearl Harbor!


Initial victories mean nothing in the long run... in the long run both Germany and Japan simply didn't have a chance...

Soviet Union was not France - it was huge country with determined and large population and big industry...


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 Michael T)
Post #: 50
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 10:11:00 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1890
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

Apollo11


The fact is that Germany lost the WWII the very second they attacked Soviet Union!



Wow.

Are You serious? Just asking, to make sure it isn't joke.

< Message edited by Kamil -- 2/5/2012 10:12:13 PM >

(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 51
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 10:12:01 PM   
Harrybanana

 

Posts: 764
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

quote:

Thus the idea of winning as total victory in 1941/1942 for Germans is not realistic against capable adversary - just as historic Germans in WWII didn't actually had a chance of winning in the Eastern Front (no modern historian supports that idea - that was simply not possible)!!!


This is rubbish and a view I don't subscribe to. If 2By3 really think that Germany had no chance of winning the war against Russia they should be upfront about it and clearly state that is a design intention. Then people who think otherwise can avoid their products.


Michael, I personally don't think that the Germans had no chance to win the War against Russia and I don't think that the Germans in WITE have no chance to win the War either. But I do think that historically the Germans "outplayed" the Russians, particularly in the first 18 months of the War. Simply put the Russians made far more mistakes than the Germans, but they still won the War! Do you agree or disagree with this statement?

If you disagree than obviously we will just have to agree to disagree. But if you agree, than I submit that it is logical that if an historically accurate game (in terms of force sizes, combat model, logistics, weather, etc) is made of the War in Russia and this game is played by two equal opponents that the Russian Player is probably going to win the War (and probably the game) almost every time.

Put another way, if there is a hell and in that hell the Russian and German forces are made to refight the entire War in Russia over and over again but with complete memories of what happened in the real war and the previous umpteen times they have refought it and the freedom to act as they think best (which is basically what we are doing with this game) who do you think is going to win the War probably 99 times out of a 100.

But don't despair, because not all players are created equal; and from what I have read on the AARs I'm sure you have won and will continue to win far more games than you will lose. Of course, the Germans can win the game and still lose the War.



< Message edited by Harrybanana -- 2/5/2012 10:14:28 PM >

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 52
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 10:17:32 PM   
Encircled


Posts: 1033
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline
Its not rubbish

As soon as they opened a "second front", they had had it.

Ok, a lot easier to see with hindsight, but still true.

(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 53
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 10:37:52 PM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 2233
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
I have to agree with Apollo 11.

When Germany went into Russia, they had to win. In one campaign season.

But they could not.

They woefully underestimated the Red Army. (....we figured on 200 divisions. We've counted 360. ........ we destroy a dozen divisions, a dozen more show up..... Hadler.)

Their logistics were not the greatest. (Hmmm, do we send food and ammo, or winter clothing?)

Unlike in Western Europe, the Soviets had lots of room to retreat. (Trade space for time.) And the front didn't get smaller as the Axis advanced, it got wider.

Their economy certainly wasn't acting like it was in a war. (1942, 30 million tons of steel produced, only 8 million for military use.) http://www.feldgrau.com/econo.html

< Message edited by Aurelian -- 2/5/2012 10:40:35 PM >

(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 54
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 10:45:44 PM   
Apollo11


Posts: 22595
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kamil

quote:

Apollo11

The fact is that Germany lost the WWII the very second they attacked Soviet Union!


Wow.

Are You serious? Just asking, to make sure it isn't joke.


Of course I am serious - every modern respected historian agrees with this fact as well!

There was no chance for Germany to win in the Eastern Front in one quick campaign (and that was all Germany was capable of at that time)!!!

The Soviet Union was not France - it was huge huge country with large and determined population and big industry - the Soviets traded space for time and even if they lost Leningrad and/or Moscow in 1941 they would have never surrendered...


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 Kamil)
Post #: 55
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 10:53:58 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1890
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kamil


quote:

Apollo11

The fact is that Germany lost the WWII the very second they attacked Soviet Union!



Wow.

Are You serious? Just asking, to make sure it isn't joke.


Apollo11


Of course I am serious - every modern respected historian agrees with this fact as well!

There was no chance for Germany to win in the Eastern Front in one quick campaign (and that was all Germany was capable of at that time)!!!

The Soviet Union was not France - it was huge huge country with large and determined population and big industry - the Soviets traded space for time and even if they lost Leningrad and/or Moscow in 1941 they would have never surrendered...


I disagree, but it is not right thread for this discussion.

< Message edited by Kamil -- 2/5/2012 10:58:03 PM >

(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 56
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/5/2012 11:01:18 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 2391
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
You guys should try telling a few vet's that Germany had no chance of winning the war.

I am not going to get hung up about it. I don't have the time or interest to debate such narrow minded views. But a game that only offers one side a reasonable chance of winning seems wrong to my thinking.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 57
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/6/2012 12:21:24 AM   
Harrybanana

 

Posts: 764
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

You guys should try telling a few vet's that Germany had no chance of winning the war.

I am not going to get hung up about it. I don't have the time or interest to debate such narrow minded views. But a game that only offers one side a reasonable chance of winning seems wrong to my thinking.


Which Vets are you talking about? My father was a Vet (RCAF Bomber Command), my father-in-law was a vet (RCN) and I have spoken with many other Vets over the years (including a trip of a lifetime I took with some vets to Normandy in 2004). During the early years of the War many were worried about losing the War, but by early 43 they knew they had the Germans licked. Except for some I talked to that fought the 12thSS in Normandy, they all had nothing but respect for the Germans as soldiers. But I really don't think the views of these Vets, while very interesting, has anything to do with the issue at hand.

In any event, I hope you are not lumping me in with the "guys" with the "narrow minded views". I personally believe that so long as the Germans didn't make any major mistakes and the Russians did the Germans had a good chance to win the War in Russia. I believe this is true of the real war and should be the case with the game. The problem, of course, is that historically the Germans did start making mistakes and the Soviets started making fewer. Where I believe we disagree is that in my opinion if the Germans do not "outplay" the Russians they should have very little if any chance of winning the war; but they should still have a chance to win the game. My opinion is based on the premise that historically the Germans did outplay the Russians and still lost the War. So how is it that you believe that they can win the War if they do not even outplay the Russians by as much as they did historically? In mismatched games where the German player is superior to his Russian opponent the German player will probably often win both the War and the game (as you and Pelton have proved many times). In games with equal players the German should, in my opinion, very seldom if at all win the War, but should still win 1/2 the games.

I agree with you that a game that does not offer one side a reasonable chance of winning is wrong. Indeed I would go further and say that a game that does not offer both an equal chance of winning is wrong. But are you talking about winning the War or winning the game? I don't think enough games have been played through to the end yet to determine if one side or the other is going to win more often. If it turns out that one side does win more often than something should be done to balance the game. I suspect we will disagree as to what that something shoudl be.

< Message edited by Harrybanana -- 2/6/2012 12:26:23 AM >

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 58
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/6/2012 12:47:25 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 2391
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Harry I don't think your narrow minded.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 59
RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? - 2/6/2012 1:07:27 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 2391
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
I think both sides should have an equal chance of winning the game. That is not the case right now. Russia is clearly the side to play if you simply want to win a game.

I like to be challenged. Playing Russia in WITE is no challenge in so much as ultimately winning the game. I would like to be challenged no matter which side I play.

As far as the war goes. Yes I agree the most likely outcome was Russia winning especially once the US got going in 1943. But I beleive, from what I have read over the past 40 years and from what I have heard first hand from interviews done with the protagonists that Germany had a chance (the size of which is debateable) of defeating Russia in 1941/42 outright. How are we to know what may have occured had Moscow been taken or a succesful Fall Blau? My mind is open to any number of what if scenario's. Apparently the Soviets were interested in a negoiated peace as late as early 1943.

Why is it that people can accept (in game terms) that France should be able hold out in 1940 but not that Russia could lose in 41/42? It seems they are quite prepared to accept some what if's but not others. Will the France WITW game be designed around the premis that France cannot win because historically it did not happen?

If the game(s) are to be limited to strictly historical outcomes what is the point in playing them at all?





_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Will you keep playing after this patch? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   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

0.125