On the same day..

Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.

The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).

Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21

User avatar
mmarquo
Posts: 1376
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2000 8:00 am

RE: On the same day..

Post by mmarquo »

Every game has warts; the ability to move quicker on the PC and to find a large stable of online opponents, and then post and share impressions in public may give a false impression about how "broken" a game like WITE is. In fact, every board game I have ever played has quirks and often much worse. WITE is awesome; even the most vocal and insulting whiners keep at it which is testimony as to how good it really is.

Happy Birthday, WITE.

Marquo [:)]
Chaplain Lovejoy
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon May 28, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Cincinnati

RE: On the same day..

Post by Chaplain Lovejoy »

ORIGINAL: Ketza

Part of me really misses the old days of FITE spread out with all those counters and 2 teams of 6 guys playing marathon 12-16 hour days over a weekend just to play 5 or 6 turns.

Stale donuts and bad coffee plus little sleep led to some very tense times and bad moves!
Ah, what life was like before marriage!
Maximeba
Posts: 174
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 10:15 pm
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA

RE: On the same day..

Post by Maximeba »

Part of me really misses the old days of FITE spread out with all those counters and 2 teams of 6 guys playing marathon 12-16 hour days over a weekend just to play 5 or 6 turns.


I still have that game. Dave and myself use to travel to Columbus, Ohio for a gaming convention just to play the game against other opponents. For a long time I thought Dave and myself where the only wackos to play that game. Boy! Was I surprised when I saw how many people enjoyed playing that game. I do miss the conventions and the comrades I made. I wonder how the guru (Rich Valey) is doing.


Wes
Allies Forever
User avatar
BletchleyGeek
Posts: 4458
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia

RE: On the same day..

Post by BletchleyGeek »

As Marquo said, with warts and all, this is THE best ever done on the Eastern Front at this scale. The greatest injustice - from my personal standpoint - is that I really think WITE shines brighter in the scenarios than in the GC, and scenarios aren't half as popular as they could or should be (and this observation is based on counting the number of AAR's covering scenarios vs. Grand Campaigns).

In any case, I'll be having an IPA for 2by3.
User avatar
Joel Billings
Posts: 31330
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Contact:

RE: On the same day..

Post by Joel Billings »

Interesting stat - The breakdown of games started on the server in the past month is as follows:

59% 1941-45 Alternate Campaign
22% 1941-45 Standard Camapign
16% Scenario
3% Other Campaign

Although I appreciate why the interest will always be greater in the long campaign, I think that some of the medium sized scenarios like Drama on the Danube and Decision in the Ukraine can be more exciting (certainly faster to play).
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4443
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: On the same day..

Post by Michael T »

I recall all the negativity from some when a few of us suggested the alt campaign. Nice to see it has been vindicated. Thanks again to Joel and crew for the moded scenario. Could we get some Auto VP for early Russian wins sometime [:D]
Maximeba
Posts: 174
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 10:15 pm
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA

RE: On the same day..

Post by Maximeba »

What is the difference between the alternate and the standard game?
Wes
Allies Forever
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4443
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: On the same day..

Post by Michael T »

The game ends in July 45 rather than October 45 and the German Auto Win VP requirement was reduced from 290 to 260.
User avatar
Flaviusx
Posts: 7727
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:55 pm
Location: Southern California

RE: On the same day..

Post by Flaviusx »

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I recall all the negativity from some when a few of us suggested the alt campaign. Nice to see it has been vindicated. Thanks again to Joel and crew for the moded scenario. Could we get some Auto VP for early Russian wins sometime [:D]

It's obviously popular, but also wrongheaded. Those of us who do not believe a Soviet surrender would happen in these conditions haven't changed our minds. I continue to believe the alternate victory conditions have a built in asymmetry since the Soviet has no sudden death victory conditions except the old fashioned way of marching all the way to Berlin (which is correct) while the Axis gets a shortcut (which is not.)

As a practical matter very few games have changed in terms of their outcome due to the alt scenario VPs. The main effect of the alternate scenario has been to urge maybe a few Soviet players to resign games that would have gone on to a German victory anyways under the standard rule set. Axis player incentives remain the same in either case.

The one positive change of the alt scenario was to cut short the campaign to July of 45. It shouldn't ever have gone on so far as September as it becomes a pure fantasy game by that point.

I am not so sure that a sudden death VP for the Soviets is a good idea, either, btw. Rather, what I would do is to require the same existing conditions to apply for game end on the Soviet, but adjust the final outcome victory level in favor of the Soviet if the Axis decides to turtle early. That way, they need to do more than hold Berlin to even get a draw by July of 45. That would instead be a minor Soviet win.

Generally, I prefer these kinds of adjustments to the final tally over a premature ending in a campaign scenario setting.





WitE Alpha Tester
User avatar
BletchleyGeek
Posts: 4458
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia

RE: On the same day..

Post by BletchleyGeek »

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
ORIGINAL: Michael T

I recall all the negativity from some when a few of us suggested the alt campaign. Nice to see it has been vindicated. Thanks again to Joel and crew for the moded scenario. Could we get some Auto VP for early Russian wins sometime [:D]

It's obviously popular, but also wrongheaded. Those of us who do not believe a Soviet surrender would happen in these conditions haven't changed our minds. I continue to believe the alternate victory conditions have a built in asymmetry since the Soviet has no sudden death victory conditions except the old fashioned way of marching all the way to Berlin (which is correct) while the Axis gets a shortcut (which is not.)

I used to share your position on this matter Flavio, but now I've come to grips with it. Rather than considering it to portray the surrender of the Soviet Union, I consider it to portray the event of the whole of the STAVKA given a one-way ride to Lubyanka [:D]
ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
As a practical matter very few games have changed in terms of their outcome due to the alt scenario VPs. The main effect of the alternate scenario has been to urge maybe a few Soviet players to resign games that would have gone on to a German victory anyways under the standard rule set. Axis player incentives remain the same in either case.

The one positive change of the alt scenario was to cut short the campaign to July of 45. It shouldn't ever have gone on so far as September as it becomes a pure fantasy game by that point.

Yet I have to agree with you on the particular point I highlighted, but I'll add something more: there's is no change in the incentives for either side. I think WitE scenarios are much more interesting mostly because of the much richer Victory Condition system in place for scenarios, which do really create reasons for players to feel compelled to do things in certain ways, which I deem - subjectively, of course - more historical and interesting.
swkuh
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 9:10 pm

RE: On the same day..

Post by swkuh »

Think VPs are OK and useful for scorekeeping; different win conditions in the alt41 campaign are just another issue that can be dealt with, so...

Are the VPs for a city wired into the combat resolution algorithms? If either side fights "harder" for high VP sites, then the VPs mean a lot more than "score keeping." I think VPs have no affect on combat. Of course, player invests forts, garrisons, and line-of-supply protections where wanted; this is real.
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series”