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: Im the only one disappointed?

 
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 West >> RE: Im the only one disappointed? Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/14/2014 10:37:45 AM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1394
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tevans6220

quote:

ORIGINAL: Baelfiin
Welp I wish I had some comfort for you. It seems like you are saying Hey I took Sicily despite losing most of my army! I win!! But it doesn't look like you are putting that victory in the context of the rest of the war where all of those guys that got thrown away for the "victory" in sicily were needed to fight in france and Germany etc.

The thing is I didn't lose most of my army. They were pretty beat up but no units actually were destroyed. I just had higher casualties than the Allies had historically. Apparently it was enough to give the Axis a points victory even though they lost the whole island. I see what you're saying about context and I did put my victory into context with the rest of the war. Even in a complete war scenario, I can replace my losses and the Axis can't. The Allies can afford a war of attrition. The only thing they would have to worry about are the political repercussions of sustaining high casualty rates. As I said, any American commander throwing away American lives would have been replaced.


'Just had higher casualties...'
So, capturing and holding ground is the only thing that is important? Have you even read accounts of WW2? You do know that by Aug/Sept 1944, the British army was disbanding units to provide replacements? That Hitler would have done a whole lot better if he had allowed a more flexible defence (trading land for troops)? Based on your remarks, I do not see how you can relate to any wargame that isn't an even, fair fight. I was going to cite a couple of RL even fights (at army level), but I am struggling. North Africa 1941 (post-Rommel's arrival) to Late 1942 might be viewed as fair/even. But in reality it was anything but. It might have looked as if it swung evenly to and fro, but it was Allied all the way. Rommel did well when other factors weakened the British (diversion to Greece etc, with only Tobruk as a real exception). Once he did well, the Allies just increased strength again. Logistically Germany never had a chance in the Eastern Med, unless they had taken Malta, and even then they would have just extended the war. Ultimately the Torch landings would have sorted whatever was happening in Egypt (or Syria or where ever they had got to by then)

Thus I think you are over simplifying things. WW2 was an economic war. The armies (and Airforces) were just the point of application. Once Hitler invaded USSR (a vaste sink into which the entire resources of the USA could probably have been sunk without decisive result), he was never going to win (even just against UK - that was quite nicely stalemating by 1942, thanks to Uncle Joe). The only variable was would it take more or less time, more or less casualties than history.

By some measures, Russia won the second world war - yes they suffered hugely, but look where they ended up by 1947-8. In control of all of eastern Europe and large areas of the rest of the world (influence in Vietnam, Korea, China etc). They had reached the height of their power and influence, and were much better positioned than at any time in their history. USA second, UK third, Axis last. Now, it is rather lucky for us all that the USA (and allies) then comprehensively won the cold war but thats a different topic...

WitW gives the chance to alter that (as Allies), or delay/alter it as Axis. The war could easily have gone on a couple of years longer. It could possibly have been shorter. The Allies really got Italy wrong, and defeating Kesselring rather than dancing to his tune is probably the best way. All of this makes for a good game in my book.

However if its not your boat, bad luck. However I do not think WitW is anything other than we were promised, and does not suffer (IMHO) from not covering 1940-1943)

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to tevans6220)
Post #: 121
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/14/2014 11:12:21 AM   
henri51


Posts: 1151
Joined: 1/16/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tevans6220

quote:

ORIGINAL: Baelfiin
Welp I wish I had some comfort for you. It seems like you are saying Hey I took Sicily despite losing most of my army! I win!! But it doesn't look like you are putting that victory in the context of the rest of the war where all of those guys that got thrown away for the "victory" in sicily were needed to fight in france and Germany etc.

The thing is I didn't lose most of my army. They were pretty beat up but no units actually were destroyed. I just had higher casualties than the Allies had historically. Apparently it was enough to give the Axis a points victory even though they lost the whole island. I see what you're saying about context and I did put my victory into context with the rest of the war. Even in a complete war scenario, I can replace my losses and the Axis can't. The Allies can afford a war of attrition. The only thing they would have to worry about are the political repercussions of sustaining high casualty rates. As I said, any American commander throwing away American lives would have been replaced.

OH? Some considered that Patton took too many casualties just to go faster than Monty, and he was not replaced until he slapped a shell-shocked soldier...

(in reply to tevans6220)
Post #: 122
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/14/2014 11:19:49 AM   
Banquet

 

Posts: 1184
Joined: 8/23/2002
From: England
Status: offline
If someone does't want to be on the defensive from turn 1 in WitW then play the Allies...

I think some people are only interested in playing Germany attacking. Obviously for those people WitW isn't going to satisfy them. Future versions with conflicts from earlier in the war may be more appealing, but they are really just the other way round - with the Allies on the defensive the whole time. As Warspite says, most of the war was pretty one sided.

Having said that, it's early days. Maybe it is possible for Germany to win. Perhaps an expert German player could use the logistics system to surround and cut off major portions of an overly ambitious Allied invasion force, effectively winning the game, not on points, but in a more profound way!

Games like Command: Conquest in the Aegean give options to increase/decrease difficulty by affecting starting forces so perhaps an option for WitW scenarios would be to include certain 'what-ifs' such as Hitler's non insistence on 'no retreat' in Russia saving massive encirclements and freeing up more units to defend in the West.

< Message edited by Banquet -- 12/14/2014 12:30:18 PM >

(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 123
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/14/2014 11:23:17 AM   
Missouri_Rebel


Posts: 3082
Joined: 6/19/2006
From: Southern Missouri
Status: offline
,


< Message edited by Missouri_Rebel -- 12/14/2014 3:33:08 PM >


_____________________________

**Those who rob Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul
**A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have-Gerald Ford

(in reply to Qwixt)
Post #: 124
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/14/2014 12:47:54 PM   
sitito

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 1/2/2010
From: Spain
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zakblood

i still haven't got actively involved in the game and the discussions as yet, as i still don't own the game either, it's a Christmas present from my girlfriend so will have to wait a while longer, but my take on this thread and topic are as follows...

the price is good and fair... for the amount of time and effort that's gone into it and still is, and will be for the next 4 to 5 years at least, with patches and fixes and upgrades etc...

you can't put a price on support, not at any cost!

while the game on release may not be perfect for every ones taste, it's not full of bugs etc either, for me it's still maybe a tad too hard for the beginner like me as i still haven't managed to finish one battle in WITE so i know this won't be a part time game either, so may just sit there on my drive for a few months or year maybe or so, which is no problem either for me or my games, as time can always be found later for good stuff, and by then a few more issues may have been ironed out, changed or updated etc... or a patch or 2 down the road, after some more tweaking, as these games always need the tweaks and lets be honest the developers always tinker a lot anyway so i'm just glad it's at least been released as they do tend to keep adding and altering bits etc as they are all gamers as well, and are never truly happy with anything released either and are alwasy thinking of doing more stuff, which is the main reason we all like there games


so lets keep up the fight, with the right people, in game and not on the forums and say merry Christmas to all involved and a big thank you and hope you all have a happy new year, as you all deserve it...


Which is the objective base to say that the price is fair? Someone pointed this to me before and he was right. Why not 800$ for a 3 years of hard work? Why? itís very subjective. And u donít even have the game. First try the product, then divide the cost for the hours of fun and enjoyment. Thatís how i rate the worth of a product. Wite was cheap using this parameter. Very cheap. A bargain. Witw is too high. And I donít really need to force me to play this hours and hours as I wrongly said before. No. With one week i know exactly my feelings playing this game. The sensation of boredom will remain. As a german and as the allies. Again we are in the subjective realm. For me itís a desing and timeframe issue. And i know its hard for the guys who had work with passion in this game to read these things. I know and im not smiling saying it. Im not coming here to say like a child ďuuu donít like donít like uuuí Nooooo. When they announce witw I thought that the whole scale was a mistake and was wrong for the kind of game they were planning. Maybe when War in Europe is ready, in global is a superb product..dont know, maybe. But at the end, in my opinion, I was correct for this concrete game. Itís a good western front 43-45 simulation game, with a lot of improvements such as logistics (a 10 out of 10) and air warfare, deep and plenty of new stuff and tweaks, and bugs aside, a really fine workÖ (have to say that the ia turns runs quite slowly in my pc) but lacks something crucial for me: enjoyment and fun, which wite had in tons. No matter the complexity of the games, all can be reduced to a matter of pleasure and enjoyment. And if im taking my FREE time to come here and tell the devs this its because I love their previous jobs and I donít want they think that everyone is in love with the new baby and they are on the right path. No. For me no. The scale also donít suits fine for France í40 (a campaing of 6 turns?), Yugoslavia (2 turns?), Greece, Poland and of course for North Africa. No way. With the same Wite scale will become boring campaings. Its not a matter of being a german fanboy and when the blitzkrieg arrives everything is going to be fine. No. itís a scale desing matter. Western and eastern fronts are completely different. But hey if everyone is happy with the game, have fun. Im back to other things also in the eternal search of wargaming fun. Lots of products in the market. its not a big drama. And If the devs are sure of their ideas and with the progress of war in Europe I wish them good luck. I hope they hit a home run. Sincerely. Im very thankful for the endless hours of satisfaction they have provide me in the last decade. Probably more than my wife has .... Honey, if u are reading this, obviously i was kidding...

< Message edited by sitito -- 12/14/2014 2:58:00 PM >

(in reply to zakblood)
Post #: 125
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/14/2014 1:28:47 PM   
zakblood


Posts: 22403
Joined: 10/4/2012
Status: offline
all games can be boring if you can't get into them, it's how much you put in that counts, i never got into WITE, as the learning curve and my time was an issue, i didn't put the time in to learn it, so never really got to love it, but that's not the developers fault but my own, so don't blame them, yes they could have spent more time holding my hand, or making it easier, but as loads play it and didn't have that trouble i just guessed it was me who was useless at it, and tbh it was a fair comment, as i'm useless at most game but like to use the editors and mod stuff, playing anything when your not very good is always a poor challenge so i live with it...

WITW is different as i have spoken to the development team most of the way through it, and from day one they have made it to be easier for the new players and also have improved on the WITE platform, so fo me it was always going to be a purchase, if i play it now or not, thats' my choice and my girlfriends money as she is buying it for me as a present as that's what i have asked for, with the book as well so boxed...

if you don't like it, don't play it, it's a free world and we all are entitled to our own opinions, either way they are said and printed, but as game like this are very deep, you just need to give it more time, as that's what it's like with me and WITE, that game isn't faulty, it's me never putting in enough time to learn it or do it justice, i think i know what i'm doing when really i don't, even at my age, which btw is almost 50 now

so hope you give it a few more tries and give it the time it needs, then and only then if you still finding it boring don't play it... for me that would be like total war rome 2, looked great but ended up a great disappointment so has now been taken off, where as WITE is always on my pc, and i have upgraded and had a few since i first bought it, many years ago, but hardly ever play it, just load the odd patch and try for an hour or so every year or so...

anyway fingers crossed and hope you good luck

(in reply to sitito)
Post #: 126
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/14/2014 1:33:12 PM   
Baelfiin


Posts: 2718
Joined: 6/7/2006
Status: offline
Zak im sure 50 is the new 40

_____________________________

"We are going to attack all night, and attack tomorrow morning..... If we are not victorious, let no one come back alive!" -- Patton
WITE-Beta
WITW-Alpha
The Logistics Phase is like Black Magic and Voodoo all rolled into one.

(in reply to zakblood)
Post #: 127
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/14/2014 1:48:38 PM   
sitito

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 1/2/2010
From: Spain
Status: offline
Really hope u like it Zak
And yes, RTW2 was an epic failure.Feeling the same here...


< Message edited by sitito -- 12/14/2014 2:49:15 PM >

(in reply to Baelfiin)
Post #: 128
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/14/2014 1:49:02 PM   
zakblood


Posts: 22403
Joined: 10/4/2012
Status: offline
well 47 this year tbh but already retired so nearly 50, so middle aged, too much time and plenty of gaming still left to do


(in reply to Baelfiin)
Post #: 129
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/14/2014 8:06:00 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1394
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sitito
Which is the objective base to say that the price is fair? Someone pointed this to me before and he was right. Why not 800$ for a 3 years of hard work? Why? itís very subjective. And u donít even have the game. First try the product, then divide the cost for the hours of fun and enjoyment. Thatís how i rate the worth of a product. Wite was cheap using this parameter. Very cheap. A bargain. Witw is too high. And I donít really need to force me to play this hours and hours as I wrongly said before. No. With one week i know exactly my feelings playing this game. The sensation of boredom will remain. As a german and as the allies. Again we are in the subjective realm. For me itís a desing and timeframe issue. And i know its hard for the guys who had work with passion in this game to read these things. I know and im not smiling saying it. Im not coming here to say like a child ďuuu donít like donít like uuuí Nooooo. When they announce witw I thought that the whole scale was a mistake and was wrong for the kind of game they were planning. Maybe when War in Europe is ready, in global is a superb product..dont know, maybe. But at the end, in my opinion, I was correct for this concrete game. Itís a good western front 43-45 simulation game, with a lot of improvements such as logistics (a 10 out of 10) and air warfare, deep and plenty of new stuff and tweaks, and bugs aside, a really fine workÖ (have to say that the ia turns runs quite slowly in my pc) but lacks something crucial for me: enjoyment and fun, which wite had in tons. No matter the complexity of the games, all can be reduced to a matter of pleasure and enjoyment. And if im taking my FREE time to come here and tell the devs this its because I love their previous jobs and I donít want they think that everyone is in love with the new baby and they are on the right path. No. For me no. The scale also donít suits fine for France í40 (a campaing of 6 turns?), Yugoslavia (2 turns?), Greece, Poland and of course for North Africa. No way. With the same Wite scale will become boring campaings. Its not a matter of being a german fanboy and when the blitzkrieg arrives everything is going to be fine. No. itís a scale desing matter. Western and eastern fronts are completely different. But hey if everyone is happy with the game, have fun. Im back to other things also in the eternal search of wargaming fun. Lots of products in the market. its not a big drama. And If the devs are sure of their ideas and with the progress of war in Europe I wish them good luck. I hope they hit a home run. Sincerely. Im very thankful for the endless hours of satisfaction they have provide me in the last decade. Probably more than my wife has .... Honey, if u are reading this, obviously i was kidding...


Your problem is that you read (presumably) the description of the game, bought it, and then started a thread saying you were disappointed by the game, and cited having won the training scenario (except you didn't), then called the game boring.

Your reason for it being boring? Wrong scale for the Western Front. You then (having wanted the chance to attack as Germany) correctly pointed out that even France, the Balkans, and so on will be too short in this system so a 1940 expansion wont help.

Why am I thinking of someone who has bought a Porsche 911, and then complains about a lack of boot (trunk) space and high running costs; "I can get to the supermarket much more cheaply and carry the shopping much better in a Toyota"

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to sitito)
Post #: 130
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/14/2014 8:20:55 PM   
Bamilus


Posts: 477
Joined: 4/30/2010
From: The Old Northwest
Status: offline
Just butting in to say I am thoroughly NOT disappointed. I bought WITE on release but was always intimidated by the game. The set-up of the WITW manual, tutorial videos, and player's guide are a huge step up from WITE (although WITE still has a great manual and is a great game!). Honestly, the manual/player's guide should be a benchmark for future wargames. Brilliantly done and very professional. Also thoroughly enjoying the game. Cheers to everyone who helped develop, produce, and test this game.

_____________________________

Paradox Interactive Forum Refugee

(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 131
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/15/2014 7:07:54 AM   
sitito

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 1/2/2010
From: Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite


quote:

ORIGINAL: sitito
Which is the objective base to say that the price is fair? Someone pointed this to me before and he was right. Why not 800$ for a 3 years of hard work? Why? itís very subjective. And u donít even have the game. First try the product, then divide the cost for the hours of fun and enjoyment. Thatís how i rate the worth of a product. Wite was cheap using this parameter. Very cheap. A bargain. Witw is too high. And I donít really need to force me to play this hours and hours as I wrongly said before. No. With one week i know exactly my feelings playing this game. The sensation of boredom will remain. As a german and as the allies. Again we are in the subjective realm. For me itís a desing and timeframe issue. And i know its hard for the guys who had work with passion in this game to read these things. I know and im not smiling saying it. Im not coming here to say like a child ďuuu donít like donít like uuuí Nooooo. When they announce witw I thought that the whole scale was a mistake and was wrong for the kind of game they were planning. Maybe when War in Europe is ready, in global is a superb product..dont know, maybe. But at the end, in my opinion, I was correct for this concrete game. Itís a good western front 43-45 simulation game, with a lot of improvements such as logistics (a 10 out of 10) and air warfare, deep and plenty of new stuff and tweaks, and bugs aside, a really fine workÖ (have to say that the ia turns runs quite slowly in my pc) but lacks something crucial for me: enjoyment and fun, which wite had in tons. No matter the complexity of the games, all can be reduced to a matter of pleasure and enjoyment. And if im taking my FREE time to come here and tell the devs this its because I love their previous jobs and I donít want they think that everyone is in love with the new baby and they are on the right path. No. For me no. The scale also donít suits fine for France í40 (a campaing of 6 turns?), Yugoslavia (2 turns?), Greece, Poland and of course for North Africa. No way. With the same Wite scale will become boring campaings. Its not a matter of being a german fanboy and when the blitzkrieg arrives everything is going to be fine. No. itís a scale desing matter. Western and eastern fronts are completely different. But hey if everyone is happy with the game, have fun. Im back to other things also in the eternal search of wargaming fun. Lots of products in the market. its not a big drama. And If the devs are sure of their ideas and with the progress of war in Europe I wish them good luck. I hope they hit a home run. Sincerely. Im very thankful for the endless hours of satisfaction they have provide me in the last decade. Probably more than my wife has .... Honey, if u are reading this, obviously i was kidding...


Your problem is that you read (presumably) the description of the game, bought it, and then started a thread saying you were disappointed by the game, and cited having won the training scenario (except you didn't), then called the game boring.

Your reason for it being boring? Wrong scale for the Western Front. You then (having wanted the chance to attack as Germany) correctly pointed out that even France, the Balkans, and so on will be too short in this system so a 1940 expansion wont help.

Why am I thinking of someone who has bought a Porsche 911, and then complains about a lack of boot (trunk) space and high running costs; "I can get to the supermarket much more cheaply and carry the shopping much better in a Toyota"


Aha...yes yes yes yes you're right Sherlock. What a great reading comprehension. Very very very smart. Well done!

(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 132
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/15/2014 7:17:42 AM   
jnpoint


Posts: 528
Joined: 8/9/2007
From: Holstebro, Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bamilus

Just butting in to say I am thoroughly NOT disappointed. I bought WITE on release but was always intimidated by the game. The set-up of the WITW manual, tutorial videos, and player's guide are a huge step up from WITE (although WITE still has a great manual and is a great game!). Honestly, the manual/player's guide should be a benchmark for future wargames. Brilliantly done and very professional. Also thoroughly enjoying the game. Cheers to everyone who helped develop, produce, and test this game.


+1 especially the tutorial videos and the player's guide have help me too. Never got into WitE, but here I feel I understand the basics better, thanks to those guides.

(in reply to Bamilus)
Post #: 133
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/15/2014 8:14:04 PM   
RobearGWJ

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 7/10/2010
Status: offline
I have to agree. The game is much more accessible than WitE was, and that helps greatly, since the key to understanding what's going on is the information presented. I'm loving it.

(in reply to jnpoint)
Post #: 134
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/15/2014 11:31:48 PM   
tevans6220

 

Posts: 223
Joined: 9/3/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite
'Just had higher casualties...'
So, capturing and holding ground is the only thing that is important? Have you even read accounts of WW2? You do know that by Aug/Sept 1944, the British army was disbanding units to provide replacements? That Hitler would have done a whole lot better if he had allowed a more flexible defence (trading land for troops)? Based on your remarks, I do not see how you can relate to any wargame that isn't an even, fair fight. I was going to cite a couple of RL even fights (at army level), but I am struggling. North Africa 1941 (post-Rommel's arrival) to Late 1942 might be viewed as fair/even. But in reality it was anything but. It might have looked as if it swung evenly to and fro, but it was Allied all the way. Rommel did well when other factors weakened the British (diversion to Greece etc, with only Tobruk as a real exception). Once he did well, the Allies just increased strength again. Logistically Germany never had a chance in the Eastern Med, unless they had taken Malta, and even then they would have just extended the war. Ultimately the Torch landings would have sorted whatever was happening in Egypt (or Syria or where ever they had got to by then)

Thus I think you are over simplifying things. WW2 was an economic war. The armies (and Airforces) were just the point of application. Once Hitler invaded USSR (a vaste sink into which the entire resources of the USA could probably have been sunk without decisive result), he was never going to win (even just against UK - that was quite nicely stalemating by 1942, thanks to Uncle Joe). The only variable was would it take more or less time, more or less casualties than history.

By some measures, Russia won the second world war - yes they suffered hugely, but look where they ended up by 1947-8. In control of all of eastern Europe and large areas of the rest of the world (influence in Vietnam, Korea, China etc). They had reached the height of their power and influence, and were much better positioned than at any time in their history. USA second, UK third, Axis last. Now, it is rather lucky for us all that the USA (and allies) then comprehensively won the cold war but thats a different topic...

WitW gives the chance to alter that (as Allies), or delay/alter it as Axis. The war could easily have gone on a couple of years longer. It could possibly have been shorter. The Allies really got Italy wrong, and defeating Kesselring rather than dancing to his tune is probably the best way. All of this makes for a good game in my book.

However if its not your boat, bad luck. However I do not think WitW is anything other than we were promised, and does not suffer (IMHO) from not covering 1940-1943)

Don't get me wrong. I like the game. I just don't like the time period represented by the scenarios. Europe in 43 to 45 was all about the Axis responding to Allied attacks. Some people might find that fun and interesting but I don't. I would rather play scenarios where both sides have a legitimate chance to win or both sides have a chance to attack and defend. WiTE and WiTP does that for me when playing the full campaign and even some of the shorter scenarios. As the Axis in those games I can throw weight around for awhile before the Allies get their act together. With WiTW the only viable Axis strategy is to hold ground as long as possible and make it very costly for the Allies. You really can't trade space for time. There's no room to manuver. There's a limited amount of strategic options during this time period. The same can be said of the 1944 scenarios found in WiTE and WiTP. I guess I could try playing the Allies but I'm not sure how interesting that would be either. I could either be the one getting the crap kicked out of me all game long or the one doing the kicking. Neither choice seems that interesting.
It's not the theater. It's the time period. I find the France 1940 and Norway campaigns very interesting. North Africa is interesting too. Many options for both sides. 43 to 45 seems a little too one sided. The Axis can shift units around and even counterattack but it's only a temporary thing.

I disagree with your conclusions that North Africa was always going to go the Allied way. Given the right set of circumstances North Africa could have went differently and Torch may have never happened. Norway, France and even Russia and the Pacific could have all been different. That's the whole point of wargaming. To investigate those different circumstances and alternate outcomes. For me a big problem with this time period and these scenarios is that there aren't a lot of possible alternate outcomes to investigate. Once the Allies gain a foothold somewhere in Europe it's pretty much over. What happens if the Axis player throws the invasions of France and Italy back into the sea? They just try again somewhere else. Would that really have happened historically? Like I said, I really like this game but the Axis player doesn't have a whole lot of strategic options. That's what I'm looking for when I play wargames. If I want history, I can read a book. I'm after what could have happened and what might have been.

(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 135
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 5:28:47 AM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3050
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline
Well you could play Germany for the Allies to capture Berlin That is different historically. Plus there are many other strategic options that are in the game that you can do differently as either side.

Can the Germans 'win' at this point, no. But you can do better than the historical record.

But no matter what game you play, the Allies always have the 'I win' button in the A-Bomb. Only in HoI can you start early enough to really have an impact on things. Otherwise as soon as the Germans crossed the Polish border in '39, they lost the war. Just no one knew it yet

So unless a game has some way to keep the US sidelined (and supplying goods to Japan) no matter what you do in a game, you will lose as the Axis.

So even in games that start in '39 all you are still doing is trying to do better than history. So I'm not sure why you are complaining about this one when it is doing the same thing. Other than not letting the Axis run even more amok than what they did historically.

< Message edited by Numdydar -- 12/16/2014 6:30:06 AM >

(in reply to tevans6220)
Post #: 136
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 7:00:04 AM   
tevans6220

 

Posts: 223
Joined: 9/3/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Well you could play Germany for the Allies to capture Berlin That is different historically. Plus there are many other strategic options that are in the game that you can do differently as either side.

Can the Germans 'win' at this point, no. But you can do better than the historical record.

But no matter what game you play, the Allies always have the 'I win' button in the A-Bomb. Only in HoI can you start early enough to really have an impact on things. Otherwise as soon as the Germans crossed the Polish border in '39, they lost the war. Just no one knew it yet

So unless a game has some way to keep the US sidelined (and supplying goods to Japan) no matter what you do in a game, you will lose as the Axis.

So even in games that start in '39 all you are still doing is trying to do better than history. So I'm not sure why you are complaining about this one when it is doing the same thing. Other than not letting the Axis run even more amok than what they did historically.

I don't see myself as complaining. I just don't like this time period (1943-45). I don't think there's many strategic options available to the Axis. The Allies have the initiative and all the Axis can do is respond. So you either play as the Axis and get kicked around or play as the Allies and do the kicking. Shifting units around in response to Allied moves isn't my idea of strategy. The Axis can't really launch a strategic bombing campaign. They can't launch any major invasions such as a Sea Lion. All they can do is react to Allied bombings and invasions. It's what they did historically.

When I play a war game, I don't play it to recreate history. I can read a book for the history. I want to explore the possibilities of what might have happened. What if Overlord had failed or the Allies got pushed out of Italy? What if the French had been better prepared in 1940 or Stalin had attacked first? With WiTE and WiTP you can explore some of those what ifs but I don't think it's possible with WiTW. I think this game, more or less, pigeonholes you into fighting the war the same way it was actually fought. Especially as the Axis. The Allies can change things up a bit but the Axis is always on the defensive. It's like an NFL football game where one team never gets to touch the ball or play on offense.

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 137
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 7:20:03 AM   
LiquidSky


Posts: 2798
Joined: 6/24/2008
Status: offline


1939: Germans have the initiative and Allies can only respond.
1940: Germans have the initiative and Allies can only respond. Any signs of French initiative will be met with cries of "ahistorical" until beaten down with a nerf bat.
1941: Germans think they have the initative...but Allies are allowed to make stupid mistakes to give them that illusion.
1942: Nothing to see here, move along.
1943: War in the West.

Not sure exactly at what point in the war you have allies = axis. I think what we have here is a classic example of initiative envy.

It's war. You do what you can with what you have.

_____________________________

ďMy logisticians are a humorless lot Ö they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay.Ē Ė Alexander the Great

(in reply to tevans6220)
Post #: 138
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 9:14:21 AM   
Skacee

 

Posts: 60
Joined: 11/25/2009
Status: offline
Hello all,
I have to say, that I played this game till 3 am morning as a Germans - the West Wall scenario, because it was so much fun and Allies got their Stalingrad (Arnhem) debacle.

After it I am not so negative about predetermination to lose as a German - at the end 44 they still could hurt significantly Allies.

The Allies launched quite succesfull Market Garden operation and reached Amsterdam on the way. But it cost them whole mobile group of 3-4 corps, because the got surounded and slowly destroyed by "weak nad boring to play" divisions via determined bold counterattack.

I dont have the impression that as a German I have to sit a go back to German at all.
At the end the kicking side was Germans. What I like was the maneuvring and tactical play which was not possible in real history due the leaders. Definitelly not boring, nor dissapointing with a lot of possibilites.



(in reply to LiquidSky)
Post #: 139
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 2:32:49 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 34398
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skacee
Hello all,
I have to say, that I played this game till 3 am morning as a Germans - the West Wall scenario, because it was so much fun and Allies got their Stalingrad (Arnhem) debacle.

After it I am not so negative about predetermination to lose as a German - at the end 44 they still could hurt significantly Allies.

The Allies launched quite succesfull Market Garden operation and reached Amsterdam on the way. But it cost them whole mobile group of 3-4 corps, because the got surounded and slowly destroyed by "weak nad boring to play" divisions via determined bold counterattack.

I dont have the impression that as a German I have to sit a go back to German at all.
At the end the kicking side was Germans. What I like was the maneuvring and tactical play which was not possible in real history due the leaders. Definitelly not boring, nor dissapointing with a lot of possibilites.


Thanks Skacee, that's pretty much exactly how I feel after playing WITW a lot during the pre-release period and post-release. Hopefully folks who are not seeing this yet will eventually come around with some more experience with the game. There are a lot of strategic and operational choices for both sides.

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 Skacee)
Post #: 140
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 4:58:15 PM   
GrumpyMel

 

Posts: 864
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline
New to the series and I'm enjoying it so far myself too. I think it's going to be alot more fun once I really start to get the hang of how everything comes together. I think that's going to take a bit of time though. There are alot of factors to manage and even figuring out how they work individualy doesn't mean you've figured out how they all piece together. Right now I feel a bit like a National Guard General who's just been thrown into a shooting war against guys that have been fighting for years.... but it's still fun.

Playing as the Allies against the A.I., I certainly don't feel too pigeon hold, you have alot of different places to choose from where you will come ashore and when and with what sort of force and how. Even if you know the Axis will eventualy lose, no matter what, there is a big difference between marching into Berlin at the head of an Army or reading about the Russians doing it in the paper while sitting on some gods foresaken beachead somewhere while figuring out how to write 2 million letters home to the parents of guys who won't be coming back.

I do wish the Balkans were in though, so one could explore what Churchill wanted to do...or that it started a bit earlier so that you could play around in North Africa a bit but it's still a blast.... at least from the Allied side.... from the Axis side, I imagine it would be more fun playing against another human rather then the A.I.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 141
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 5:08:39 PM   
tevans6220

 

Posts: 223
Joined: 9/3/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky



1939: Germans have the initiative and Allies can only respond.
1940: Germans have the initiative and Allies can only respond. Any signs of French initiative will be met with cries of "ahistorical" until beaten down with a nerf bat.
1941: Germans think they have the initative...but Allies are allowed to make stupid mistakes to give them that illusion.
1942: Nothing to see here, move along.
1943: War in the West.

Not sure exactly at what point in the war you have allies = axis. I think what we have here is a classic example of initiative envy.

It's war. You do what you can with what you have.

So I guess you make the exact same moves that were made historically when you play. The minute you make your first move the game becomes ahistorical if you do just one thing different. The Germans did have the initiative and the Allies did respond. But under the right set of circumstances the Allies could have actually won. What if the Allies attacked while Germany was still in Poland? What if the Allies were better prepared in France in 1940? What if the Allies hadn't made "stupid mistakes" in 1941? Those are the types of things that I play war games to explore. I don't see those same type of what ifs being able to be explored in WiTW. I see an Allied side, loaded for bear, constantly on the attack and an Axis side on the defensive hanging on for dear life. There's nothing to really explore. There's no "Can you save Germany and turn the tide of the war" moment. The Axis can't invade or bomb strategically. The best you can do is shift units around, counterattack and hope to inflict "better than historical" casualties" to gain a points win. It's gaming the system and you still lose the war. It doesn't mean that WiTW is a bad game or that I hate it. I'm playing the hell out of it. I just don't think there's enough to keep me interested during this time period.


(in reply to LiquidSky)
Post #: 142
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 6:34:16 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41980
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tevans6220


quote:

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky



1939: Germans have the initiative and Allies can only respond.
1940: Germans have the initiative and Allies can only respond. Any signs of French initiative will be met with cries of "ahistorical" until beaten down with a nerf bat.
1941: Germans think they have the initative...but Allies are allowed to make stupid mistakes to give them that illusion.
1942: Nothing to see here, move along.
1943: War in the West.

Not sure exactly at what point in the war you have allies = axis. I think what we have here is a classic example of initiative envy.

It's war. You do what you can with what you have.

So I guess you make the exact same moves that were made historically when you play. The minute you make your first move the game becomes ahistorical if you do just one thing different. The Germans did have the initiative and the Allies did respond. But under the right set of circumstances the Allies could have actually won. What if the Allies attacked while Germany was still in Poland? What if the Allies were better prepared in France in 1940? What if the Allies hadn't made "stupid mistakes" in 1941? Those are the types of things that I play war games to explore. I don't see those same type of what ifs being able to be explored in WiTW. I see an Allied side, loaded for bear, constantly on the attack and an Axis side on the defensive hanging on for dear life. There's nothing to really explore. There's no "Can you save Germany and turn the tide of the war" moment. The Axis can't invade or bomb strategically. The best you can do is shift units around, counterattack and hope to inflict "better than historical" casualties" to gain a points win. It's gaming the system and you still lose the war. It doesn't mean that WiTW is a bad game or that I hate it. I'm playing the hell out of it. I just don't think there's enough to keep me interested during this time period.


warspite1

Sounds like you would love MWIF. Ever played tevans6220?


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to tevans6220)
Post #: 143
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 7:33:46 PM   
Smirfy

 

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline

The timescale and groundscale really dont help the game. Fair enough it has grown on me somewhat, but a couple of bad features have been carried over from WiTE which are beginning to grate.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 144
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 7:34:11 PM   
Grotius


Posts: 5754
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline
Sure, it'd be great to have a game like this that covers the whole war in Europe, but as the devs have said, that's going to take time. In the meantime, why not enjoy what we've got?

As Erik says, there are lots of strategic and operational possibilities in WITW. The big enchilada is D-Day: where to invade as the Allies, how and where to defend as the Germans. My second-ever wargame, Avalon Hill's "D-Day," began with this fateful decision. That game's scale was even more zoomed-out than WITW -- Normandy was just 3 hexes wide or so. I still felt like I never exhausted that game's strategic possibilities, even with its flaws. And it's not like the Germans have no decisions, in that game or in WITW: defend on the beaches, or try to contain?

And of course there are other interesting strategic decisions here. For the Allies: Where do you land (if at all) after Sicily? When do you take Sardinia and Corsica? Will you eventually land in the south of France? What will be the focus of your strategic bombing campaign? For the Germans: how do you balance your forces among the various theaters? For that matter, how do you handle the Eastern Front? Where should you concentrate your flak and fighters? Germany is quite interesting. I like playing defense; I'm better at D than O.

And, finally, there's the operational/tactical stuff. I am better at these decisions than strategic ones, and I tend to enjoy them a lot. Which airfields to assign to which aircraft? Which corps should take the lead in a particular attack? How to use the armor? Should I paradrop? All these things have me pretty hooked.



_____________________________


(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 145
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 7:40:30 PM   
FroBodine


Posts: 856
Joined: 5/5/2007
From: Brentwood, California (not the OJ one)
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zakblood

well 47 this year tbh but already retired so nearly 50, so middle aged, too much time and plenty of gaming still left to do




You are a very fortunate man to be retired at 47. I am 49 myself and I can't see retirement anywhere on the horizon.

Enjoy your gaming time. I am envious.

< Message edited by jglazier -- 12/16/2014 8:44:23 PM >

(in reply to zakblood)
Post #: 146
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 7:47:16 PM   
Banquet

 

Posts: 1184
Joined: 8/23/2002
From: England
Status: offline
I don't see the 'what-if's' in WitW any less interesting than the 'what-if's' from earlier in the war. I really don't think Germany could have been stopped in 39-40 regardless of what was done differently. They were (on the ground) a class above those they opposed. Changes needed to stop them would have had to be set in place years before the start of the war. I agree,though, it is interesting to play those 'what-if's' so long as the game is set up to play them without unbalancing the game, which it often does unfortunately.

There are plenty of 'what-if's' in WitW, including - what if Germany had launched a full counter attack against Normandy instead of holding back, thinking it was a decoy invasion. What if they had poured more units into Italy in 1943. What if they had pulled more units out of the Eastern Front. What if Bulge had been planned earlier, or differently, and gone better.

At the end of the day, a some people just aren't interested in the time frame and theatre and that's fine. I've never had much interest in American Civil War, so tend to avoid games simulating those battles. But I wouldn't buy one and then go on the forum saying how uninteresting it was. This game simulates a certain time frame of a theatre of the war. If you're not interested in it, then don't buy it. I for one am, and am glad we didn't have to wait another 3-4 years to get a whole war campaign that would have been equally one sided through early/late years.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 147
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 8:01:55 PM   
zakblood


Posts: 22403
Joined: 10/4/2012
Status: offline
i'm disappointed as i still haven't got it yet

(in reply to Banquet)
Post #: 148
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 9:14:21 PM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 4016
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: zakblood

i'm disappointed as i still haven't got it yet


I know that feeling....

_____________________________


(in reply to zakblood)
Post #: 149
RE: Im the only one disappointed? - 12/16/2014 10:06:27 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3050
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline
One thing this game does that many do not is it gives the Allies and the Germans late war 'toys' right at the start. No X days/weeks/months playing the '39 - 42' period (or '41-42 period in WitP) over and over again and having the opposing side bail because some risky plan did not go well As many WitP players know happens with Japanese opponents. And I am sure it happens in HoI 3 and Strategic Command, etc. quite often.

In this game, the stage is set. So a German player in a PBEM games has no illusions about what will happen. So I would suspect that there will be a LOT more player games that last to the end. For that alone makes this a great game

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the West >> RE: Im the only one disappointed? Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   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

0.188