|
RE: Gary Grigsby's War in the East
I picked it up, been playing WITE for a few days, figured I'd add in my opinion as an HPS vet.
Pros:
-- Really, really, REALLY like it. Don't yet know if I love it, if only because I'm afraid that a monster game like this will inevitably break at some point, i.e. the engine may handle the initial turns really well but good luck trying to get historical/realistic results 30/60/150 turns into a campaign. But the first impression is VERY favorable.
-- Excellent manual. Typos and grammar problems here and there, the organization is a little awkward (kinda meanders), but overall, all the info is there in one place. And the Matrix board has been first-rate in quick help, the playtesters clearly love the game and have been happy to help all the noob questions.
-- Easy to jump into. I never played WITP, was always scared off by the horror stories, but WITE is easy to get into, its bark is far worse than its bite. If you're an old TOAW hand like me, it's similar enough in many respects to not be too intimidated. The devil is, of course, in the details-- Lord knows what sort of calculations are going on under the hood here. But for an operational/strategic wargame, it "feels" right, and that's what we're looking for, right?
-- IT WORKS. Had to capitalize that :). Unlike releases by so many other studios (*cough* Paradox *cough*), WITE works out of the box. A few quirks here and there, but no crashes, no crazy results, nothing appears broken even after a week of playing it. In the 2010 software industry, that's simply gobsmacking, a real credit to the development team and the playtesters. Matrix and co. have already released two versions of a beta 1.01 patch (with both bug fixes AND new features), they're clearly going to support this one.
-- The interface. It's clumsy in a couple of spots (leader management is clunky), wish it was a tad more forgiving in others, but overall, it must be said that this is one of the finest interfaces I've ever seen in a strategic wargame. The UI is clean, the map is gorgeous, the counters attractive. Like a nice ol' SPI wargame crisply new out of the box. I don't know how intuitive it would be to a brand-new wargamer, but for a veteran grognard, it's a dream come true-- a wargame that appreciates that great graphics are *useful* graphics, not just some design afterthought to be recycled over a decade's worth of titles (ahem).
-- The game. It's fun, and challenging. I'm sure the AI will eventually fail to stop me, but so far it's been more than enough. I've only played the short scenarios, only as an Axis player, but they've all been fun to play. I admit, in new operational/strategic games I normally jump right into the big campaigns-- tutorials are for the weak!-- but in this one, I've actually enjoyed playing the shorter scenarios, not only to learn the system, but also to try to win them. You must admire a wargame that manages to make a three turn (!) scenario to capture Minsk as rewarding as a all-out campaign game.
-- The modeling. There's a LOT of detail under the hood. It's the Koger model on crack, adding up *individual weapons, men and supplies* and creating combat values from that. Interestingly enough, it seems to work (there are a lot of intuitive modifiers that make the values more than basic arithmetic).
Terrain is significant-- rivers are great defensive barriers, cities are tough nuts to crack. Weather matters (mud and snow are brutal for both sides, but especially for the Axis in '41).
The HQ command and control model is one of the best I've seen; takes a little getting used to, but it's all color coded. The need to expend admin points to make changes in your command structure, form new units, etc. prevent you from doing everything you want in a turn, especially in the big campaign game (not so limiting in the smaller scenarios). Support units like arty, Stugs, pioneers, etc. are controlled either by combat units or at higher headquarters (and thus dispensed according to the vagaries of battle). Supply likewise depends on both HQs and the rail network-- keep repairing those rails!-- in both an easy to manage yet vital manner (unlike with many games at either the strategic or operational levels, supply is neither an afterthought *nor* an exercise in micromanagement hell).
-- National differences. The Axis and the Soviets aren't mirror images of each other, there are differences in equipment, command structures, etc. Some of this is under the hood, but there are quite a few historical restrictions.
Cons: Not a whole heck of a lot so far, but some things to consider.
-- The air model. Air power for the most part operates in the background-- which I like-- but there are some things to it that don't appear to work right, at least not yet. It doesn't detract from the game, just not as flexible as it should be (I expect we'll get a modified air model sooner rather than later).
-- It's not a sandbox game. Personally, I find this more of a pro-- if you want a sandbox, go play HOI. This is a simulation of the war on the Eastern Front, and so you have to play within the general outlines of that war: the Axis is starved for supplies, equipment and manpower; the Soviet command structure takes years to improve and develop war-winning offensive power; Axis Allies have their unique restrictions, etc. The biggest restriction is in production-- it's all hard-wired for the Axis, and mostly so for the Soviets (you can control the evacuation of factories to the east, but those factories produce the same type of units whenever active).
-- PBEM. I'm actually more focused on the AI-- time concerns and cowardly opponents makes PBEM more of a hassle for me than it's worth. The PBEM is server-based, definitely a good thing (meaning, no opportunities for cheating, you can save games online and pick them up later, no waiting for turns to be emailed, etc.).
Alas, why I put it in the "con" column is simply that this game is a monster. Depending on your desire to micromanage things, you can turn around a full campaign turn in 30-45 minutes, sometimes less. That means an entire 200+ turn PBEM campaign will take roughly 250 hours total. Can't imagine many folks are going to chomp at the bit for that kind of time sink.
-- The price. It's not cheap. For some, it'll be a concern. BUT, when compared to other studio products, you get something that works out of the box (or download) and that doesn't require three years of patching to WAD. That's worth a premium these days.
Besides, it's obvious that Grigsby and team put their heart and soul into this one, it's the result of literally years of effort. That brand of dedication deserves to be rewarded, IMO.
Anyway, great game, enough to make any grognard happy.
|
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
){kind=link}
