2025 Wish List

[Zovs]

In no particular order.

1. Make all the CG/monster scenarios available/completed.
2. Railroad conversion rules similar to RGW, or as in board wargames GDW's Fire in the East or SPIs War in the East.
3. HQ command range (one idea is units subordinate to corps HQs be within 5-8 hexes to be in command, and for Corps HQ to be within their Army HQs (15-20 hexes), and for Army HQs be within range of their Army Group HQs (25-40 hexes?) and for those ARmy Group HQ's to be in range of their Highest HQ (OKH/OKW, SHAFE, or General government).
4. HQ support, the idea is each HQ could have attachments like artillery, engineer, and AA and can send this support to its subordinate units.
5. Leaders, have some impact on the game, need a leader rating system and they can influence things like initiative, or provide bonus to the units they are assigned to.
6. Political system, thinking of SPIs War in Europe type of thing.
7. Production system, thinking of SPIs War in Europe type of thing.
8. Support units that are assignable to divisions, as an attachment. Each division can have a set number of these based on the Nations doctrine. Thinking of things like Engineer battalion or regiment, or assault gun battalions.
9. Add missing scenarios (Italian Greek War of 1940, Finnish Russian War of 1939-1940, Spanish Civil War 1935-1937)

That is some first impressions/thoughts I have at the moment.

[Agent Smith]

Hi Ron,
Could you please add the Combat Phase Move to the Locked Operations -> Ground operations -> panel.
It would save a couple of mouse clicks per unit.
Thank you.
A.

[Schwerpunkt Valencia]

Hi Ron,

I have compiled all previous suggestions into one list:

1. Make all the CG/monster scenarios available/completed.
2. Railroad conversion rules similar to RGW, or as in board wargames GDW's Fire in the East or SPIs War in the East.
3. HQ command range (one idea is units subordinate to corps HQs be within 5-8 hexes to be in command, and for Corps HQ to be within their Army HQs (15-20 hexes), and for Army HQs be within range of their Army Group HQs (25-40 hexes?) and for those ARmy Group HQ's to be in range of their Highest HQ (OKH/OKW, SHAFE, or General government).
4. HQ support, the idea is each HQ could have attachments like artillery, engineer, and AA and can send this support to its subordinate units.
5. Leaders, have some impact on the game, need a leader rating system and they can influence things like initiative, or provide bonus to the units they are assigned to.
6. Political system, thinking of SPIs War in Europe type of thing.
7. Production system, thinking of SPIs War in Europe type of thing.
8. Support units that are assignable to divisions, as an attachment. Each division can have a set number of these based on the Nations doctrine. Thinking of things like Engineer battalion or regiment, or assault gun battalions.
9. Add missing scenarios (Italian Greek War of 1940, Finnish Russian War of 1939-1940, Spanish Civil War 1935-1937)
10. Add Combat Phase Move to the Locked Operations > Ground operations -> panel.
11. Add Interdiction air operation similar to AGW. It is of some importance for 1944-45 West scenarios and also at the Soviet front.

Thanks in advance.

[Frenetico]

In no particular order.

1. Make all the CG/monster scenarios available/completed.
2. Railroad conversion rules similar to RGW, or as in board wargames GDW's Fire in the East or SPIs War in the East.
3. HQ command range (one idea is units subordinate to corps HQs be within 5-8 hexes to be in command, and for Corps HQ to be within their Army HQs (15-20 hexes), and for Army HQs be within range of their Army Group HQs (25-40 hexes?) and for those ARmy Group HQ's to be in range of their Highest HQ (OKH/OKW, SHAFE, or General government).
4. HQ support, the idea is each HQ could have attachments like artillery, engineer, and AA and can send this support to its subordinate units.
5. Leaders, have some impact on the game, need a leader rating system and they can influence things like initiative, or provide bonus to the units they are assigned to.
6. Political system, thinking of SPIs War in Europe type of thing.
7. Production system, thinking of SPIs War in Europe type of thing.
8. Support units that are assignable to divisions, as an attachment. Each division can have a set number of these based on the Nations doctrine. Thinking of things like Engineer battalion or regiment, or assault gun battalions.
9. Add missing scenarios (Italian Greek War of 1940, Finnish Russian War of 1939-1940, Spanish Civil War 1935-1937)

That is some first impressions/thoughts I have at the moment.

Spanish Civil War was from 1936 to 1939

[Franciscus]

Let me add some comments I have already discussed with Ron by email:

- the air and naval ops are a bit tedious. I would love an option to delegate them to the AI (at least partially; we could plan the most important missions and leave the rest to the AI)
- the reserves allocation also are very tedious. I would love also to have the option to allocate them to the AI, (at least patially also, for example after reinforcing a major attack or line of defense). There is an option to allocate reserves automatically but I think it only works from corps to units.

I presume the AI does this for her units, so it might be doable?


Cheers and a happy New Year.

[Zovs]

Let me add some comments I have already discussed with Ron by email:

- the air and naval ops are a bit tedious. I would love an option to delegate them to the AI (at least partially; we could plan the most important missions and leave the rest to the AI)
- the reserves allocation also are very tedious. I would love also to have the option to allocate them to the AI, (at least patially also, for example after reinforcing a major attack or line of defense). There is an option to allocate reserves automatically but I think it only works from corps to units.

I presume the AI does this for her units, so it might be doable?


Cheers and a happy New Year.

I am not so sure I want the AI making decisions for me with regards to air and naval ops nor reserve allocations.

You know you can set the allocation of reserves via the OOB report?



See the bottom text.

[Zovs]

So from my previous post, I left clicked on the 18th Army and then on the CP I click on show the OOB which brings me here:



Now I an allocate reserves in this report first from the 38th Corps and then from 18th Army to 38th Corps and to the second division which looks like so:



For me this saves a lot of time and no need to have the AI allocate that for me.

[pzgndr]

For the beneift of the group, I'll share an email I sent to Ron in 2016, 9 years ago. I was playing scenario 42, East Front Blitzkrieg 1941.

   I've gotten to Turn 8 in scenario #42 over the past week, playing as Axis with FOW and TEM -1 options.  It's August 10 and I've secured the line Leningrad-Orsha-Kiev-Odessa. Some rear areas in the Lvov-Romania corridor are still in flux, mostly because of combat limits and not enough combats to attack/destroy Russian stragglers.  AUTOSAVE file attached if you're interested.  I could continue to press forward, but I'll stop here and write up my comments while things are fresh in mind.  Some are bug reports, some are issues and some are concerns, for your consideration when you get around to it.  In no particular order other than when I made notes:

1. German 14 Inf Div is mislabeled as 44.
2. Still seeing issues with some eligible combat phase moves not working when unit is stacked with ineligible units.
3. Air resupply seems better now, not resupplying the RR network.
4. CO ops seems to have one unit each turn performing multiple unit moves.  No op listed, just lots of different NewXY positions.  An example pic for Turn 1 is attached, but I saw this again with other units during the game.
5. Noted that units taking replacements cannot move/attack, good; however, they can combat phase move?
6. Still losing HQs stacked with ground combat units; recommend ground combat units take any losses first before non-combat units.
7. Still seeing some issues with move-to-exploit stack moves stopping in hexes with other units and not retaing the E1 move designator; this allows the unit(s) to continue move-to-exploit for 3 moves, for total of 4 moves.
8. Town at 282,208 has no city points?  Should be a zero.
9. Consecutive Attacks is shown in unit details, but there is not documentation in the manual about what the limits are.  Per turn, or number of turns, or total?  And what is the effect?  I had some wild runs during the first few turns with panzer corps and never saw a unit restricted.
10. I could not rebuild either the Romanian Mtn Corps HQ (unit 157) or Finnish 4 Corps HQ (unit 326), with multiple attempts over several turns.  I could rebuild German units and HQs.
11. There are some issues with the Dnestr River (pic attached).  I noted the Russian 218 Mech was in supply when it should not have been, and noted there is no bridge at 282,208 where there should be one but there is a crossing at 278,205 where there should not be one.
12. AI seems better at cutting supply behind lines, at least it's making good use of stragglers.
13. Noted that Axis combats went from 100 to 25 on Turn 3, back to 100 on Turn 4, and then back down to 25.  I understand you are trying to simulate reduced supply in lieu of RR conversions, but I don't agree this is the right fix.  I was still able to make attacks well forward, at the expense of mopping-up attacks in the rear. But that's ahistorical and unrealistic.  There needs to be some other way to model RR conversion.  I've suggested some way to use city points to delay the conversion at these RR hubs.  Small cities (2-3?) could impose a 1-turn delay and large cities (4+?) could impose a 2-turn delay; this would do a better job of putting lead elements OOS and taking supply losses.  As it is, I was able to push forward much better than I recall doing in RGW.
14. I continue to dislike the air war, particularly the unlimited spotting you've given the AI and its uncanny ability to perform tactical bombing deep in my rear areas after I've set my fighters on S&D ops.  There were several turns I was taking multiple ground losses and there were no air combats.  I did start to get better around Turn 5 inflicting 11 air losses and on Turn 7 inflicting 19 air losses.  I would rather this be more realistic and if the AI did not have unlimited spotting then its air ops would all be closer to its spotting ground units and players could counter that better.  As it is, the AI gets this one advantage to inflict losses in rear areas.  In some fairness I did not use many replacement points in this short game, and it didn't slow me down much.  BUT, if my lead elements had more supply losses due to RR conversion AND more strength losses due to tactical bombings, it would have been a much more realistic game.
15. Finland managed to attack and take Leningrad on Turn 7, at least one hex.  Maybe consider phasing in the start dates of some Finnish units to make the first several turns more challenging, and/or dig in the Russians.  Players could use a house rule to restrict Finland but maybe better to just restrict their options regardless.
16. There is something weird about the date/time stamps for game saves.  The WWEcurrent files and my AUTOSAVE file seem to maintain original date/time but overwrite the contents fine, rather than update the files with current computer date/time?
17. Noted that stack moves using strategic RR move only counts as 1 each?  IE 4 units moving 4 only counted 4 and not 16.
18. In my frustration with trying to attack/destroy Russian stragglers, I noted they take supply losses but don't seem to die.  A suggestion would be if losses exceed DF then additional OOS losses could be strength losses, then units would be eliminated eventually.  Alternatively, reconsider if high odds attacks like 5-1 or 6-1 or something not count against the combats limit for the turn.  But again, ideally, if there was a higher combats limit like 50 instead of 25 and lead elements had RR conversion delays to deal with, then that would be more realistic overall.

I'm not sure sure if Ron resolved some of these items or not. Many are simple bugs. But certainly, items #13 and #14 warrant attention and remain unresolved after all these years. I continue to be patient, but it sure would be nice to see some gameplay issues prioritized with each update. Other players can confirm or deny my feedback from 2016.