Anyone playing WITW or WITE-2?

[markshot]

For years as a pseudo member of Pather's develop team, I wouldn't touch TBS games ... I felt it was simply chess with hexes.

But I have to say I find these GG titles quite interesting.  I was looking for something large in scope.  Although I should have known better, HOI4 was hugely disappointing.

Anyone else playing these?

[landser]

No, but I play War in the East, and that's large in scope. See thread below

[Erwin]

Took a look at WITW but it seemed more like an air power game - requiring very complex sets of orders more than fun combat.  Maybe cos there were relatively few ground forces compared to East Front.  It was hard to "identify" with any units in the game.  

[markshot]

Embarrassingly, I created a similar topic here about a year ago when I bought WITE-2 (which was killed by an unsolicited argument on racism that I did instigate or involve with).  Actually, senescence is painless until you run across your own old thread. 

Like most complex games, it will grow upon as you get deeper into mechanics.  I am working my way from smaller to larger in WITW, and will pickup WITE-2 gain after the next major patch comes out with the first DLC.

The huge 4 year conflict and 3,000 mile map of WITE-2 is mind boggling (and this is not considering that you can enable player theater box control).  I wanted something broad in scope.  HOI4 might as well have been sci-fi.  The main programming considerations in PDS game development was reduce production costs and maximize hype and fan based milking.  GG's WITx may not be your cup of Tea or Joe, but it is clear a serious attempt was made at modeling and mechanics.  And the games are broad in scope; space and time.  Also, I find GG gives a well considered view of logistics that is more critical than the tip of the spear.  This is refreshing, since wargamers glorify the spear.

I think WITP-AE may be the broadest of the series.  But it is perhaps too broad for me.  Conceptually, it is quite different from the other titles.  Also, logistics is even further elevated and being naval based, it is far more a mental exercise where the battle space is a network than fronts.  Perhaps, if I was 20 years younger, I might give it a try.

[Combatintman]

On 9/7/2022 at 7:30 AM, markshot said:

I think WITP-AE may be the broadest of the series.  But it is perhaps too broad for me.  Conceptually, it is quite different from the other titles.  Also, logistics is even further elevated and being naval based, it is far more a mental exercise where the battle space is a network than fronts.  Perhaps, if I was 20 years younger, I might give it a try.

How long does it take to play then? 

[landser]

I'm sure that is rhetorical, but I'll answer anyway, at least based on WitE. My first grand campaign (as Germans) took three weeks playing a few hours every day. This was one month after purchase. I spent a week playing a few of the primer scenarios several times over to get it down to where I was dangerous. And then three weeks to play one year of the grand campaign before victory.

These Grigsby game have quite complex mechanics, as I'm sure would be assumed by most. The manuals are really good, but it takes a good deal of reading to learn how things work, especially logistics and supply. Anyone can just jump in and go, the game is essentially pushing counters around isn't it? But to play effectively there's some time required to learn the finer points, more than most games I reckon.

[Erwin]

FWIW the grand campaign in WITPAE can easily take years.  Am up to the end of 1943 after about 5 years playing 2 days/turn.  One needs to take breaks to avoid mental exhaustion as it's such a complex and deep game.

[markshot]

7 hours ago, landser said:

I'm sure that is rhetorical, but I'll answer anyway, at least based on WitE. My first grand campaign (as Germans) took three weeks playing a few hours every day. This was one month after purchase. I spent a week playing a few of the primer scenarios several times over to get it down to where I was dangerous. And then three weeks to play one year of the grand campaign before victory.

These Grigsby game have quite complex mechanics, as I'm sure would be assumed by most. The manuals are really good, but it takes a good deal of reading to learn how things work, especially logistics and supply. Anyone can just jump in and go, the game is essentially pushing counters around isn't it? But to play effectively there's some time required to learn the finer points, more than most games I reckon.

What was your impression of replay value on the campaigns in SP?  Thank you.

[landser]

9 hours ago, markshot said:

What was your impression of replay value on the campaigns in SP?  Thank you.

Better than some, it must be said. The AI in WitE take some criticism from the community but I found it pretty good.

It takes a few runs to see this, but the AI has variability in it. It doesn't follow a scripted pattern, allowing the player to work out the 'correct' moves like you're painting by numbers.  In one run the Russian may make a stand on the Dnepr say, but the next time he fades away to fall back to another line of defense. Or in one run the AI seemed to prioritize Leningrad at Moscow's expense, but in others the commitment to the Cradle of the Revolution was less robust.

What this means is the player must be able to think on the fly, and adjust to crisis and opportunity. No pattern to work out. And this is key to replayability, an opponent which is not predictable.

In another example that impressed me.... it was spring of '42 and the mud was waning and I was looking to strike a blow in the Voronezh region to relieve pressure on my forces defending the lower Don in front of Rostov to the south. He's what I wrote in the AAR

Quote

By massing at the extreme ends of the line the enemy was ripe for exploitation in the center. With the alternating mud/clear turns ticking by, I wanted to hatch a plan to disrupt the enemy's preparations, reduce his strength and free some of the pressure near Rostov. And the whole thing had to come off in a single turn, before the mud returned the next. The three panzer corps of Guderian's 2nd Panzer were arrayed around the city of Voronezh, which was the anchor for our whole south-central part of the line. Opposite these positions the enemy was thin. Partly this may be due to having few cities of value directly behind this section of the front. And the enemy arrayed here was infantry only, all armor and cav being to the south as mentioned. So the plan was devised to strike here with all three panzer corps. This would tear open 300 miles of front on both sides of Voronezh. The aim here was to eliminate the infantry divisions guarding the line, capture the city of Tambov, and to draw off the Red armor to the south. The enemy would have to react or risk a wide open breach to the north of his concentration, meaning that mass would in turn be vulnerable to envelopment itself. So a successful attack would reduce the enemy infantry strength, take another city and lessen the pressure on Army Group A near Rostov.

On May 21st (turn 49) this attack was launched. Nehring's XXXXVII Panzer Corps plunged through a gap blown in the line to the north of Voronezh and hooked right. Vietinghoff;s XXXXVI Panzer Corps to the south of the city did the same and hooked to the left. Hube's XXXX Panzer Corps at the city then broke through and fanned out in both directions, meeting the other two panzer units and trapping 25 enemy infantry divisions in a 'figure 8' pocket. Hube's XXXX Panzer Corps is the one that arrived as replacements in the fall. Three replacement Panzer Divisions were all assigned to Hube, who was handpicked for the post,, and with three panzer divisions it is the most powerful of all the panzer corps in our army. Others have at most two, stiffened by motorized divisions. But XXXX corps is pure armor.

From this encirclement another 200,000+ march in to captivity. On his turn, the Russian reacted with vigor. Strong tank forces slammed in to the right flank of our penetration (as expected), but stiffened by a panzer corps from 1st Panzer these attacks were repulsed and the pocket would hold. He would also paper over the entire penetration. Still vulnerable to strong pushes, but impressive to me how the AI reacted to this attack. In many games this would have remained a 300-mile wide breach, but in this game the enemy reacted and closed the door.

When that operation was complete, we had ripped open a breach of hundreds of miles in the Russian line. In many games I play I think that would have been irrepairable for the AI. But in this game the AI had papered over the rupture by the next turn. I was impressed.

So yeah, I'd rate the replayability high due to the unpredictability and variability in the AI. The game constantly ask questions of the player and tests his ability to react and exploit to an ever-changing and incalculable AI.

[markshot]

Thanks for your thoughts.

I didn't want to invest substantial time to feel "been there; done that".

 

[rocketman]

I now have about 150h of WITE2 having previously played some WITE and WITW - and I must say it is a fantastic game. It now sits comfortably next to CM-games as a "game for life". The jump from WITE to WITE2 is bigger than one might first expect, especially from just looking at screenshots. Many of the new systems (like logistics) and the new GUI adds a lot. It is a time sink though, but I like the idea of living with a long time campaign and am in no hurry to complete it. If you like micromangement it is a dream. And it is the best looking hex and counter game out there IMHO.

[landser]

18 hours ago, Erwin said:

FWIW the grand campaign in WITPAE can easily take years. 

Truth. I don't know if anyone here is in to sub or naval sims, but over at the subsim.com boards there's an AAR of a two-player match up in War in the Pacific. It has been going on forever and a day. An epic undertaking. My post above about three weeks is true, but that campaign was over in June of 1942.

My Russian runs take longer of course because the victory conditions are harder to reach since as the Russian you'll spend the first year retreating, the second year consolidating and perhaps making modest gains, and the third year on your own Bagration. I typically finish those in 1943, and that takes considerably longer. And not just for those reasons, but because the Russian player simply has more to do, such as building new units and evacuating industry.

The time and decisions involved in just transporting newly built units to the front line by rail is like a game in itself.

I said before, or in the other thread, that any semi-serious wargamer should play these games, but now that we're discussing it I'll just say serious wargamer. There is much to do

[markshot]

@Landser,

I was into subs from AOD/DOS to Dangerous Waters with LWAMI and RA mods.  Did you know that BFC was the original publisher for DW?

AOD/DOS is still one of the best ever done, but I am considering UBoat.

The WWII sims are a very unique genre that combines the stealth of the hunt and then the harrowing disengagement with your lives.  I don't know any other such games.

My problem with subs is that I am old, and don't have the patience for patrolling for 2 RL weeks, and coming up empty.  But then, I did not like SHCE's environment where patrol zones were teaming with Japanese merchants and war ships.  There was no difference between campaign and instant action.

Anyone try Uboat?  How does it compare to AOD (atmosphere; suspense) and SH3/GWX?

---

@Rocketman,

Do you think the latest beta 41 has achieved balance particularly with the CPP scaling which seemed to create too much friction to make a break through possible?  Thanks.  I am waiting until 2by3 settle on the long term game mechanics before jumping all in.

[rocketman]

@markshot : I haven’t downloaded that beta version yet. I usually wait to update for a while in case the patch causes some problems. Will update soon and let you know what I think. Note I only play vs AI so far.