Why hasn't WEGO dominated?

[MrsWargamer]

I'm just going to say it, RTS is about as phoney as the day is long.
No, I'm not saying Turn based is any sort of magical realism in comparison.

And if you are always pausing to give orders, why have it RTS, to begin with? If you want complete control, you might as well stick with turns.

I want WEGO to become MORE the norm ideally. Immune to 'gamey' much more so. You have to make your decisions, and then deal with them as the time span advances with no option to rapidly click and change your mind constantly.

I can't think of a single great game that couldn't do WEGO. But it was just never designed for it.

Steel Panthers is a massive favourite, but it has idiotic gamey moves. And I've played the popular RTS titles, and they are click fests at best, and total crocks at worst.
I think Strategic Command in WEGO would be insanely addictive. It's great now, but it could be even better. I think Panzer Corps would be phenomenal in WEGO, but with turns it's just complicated chess.

[Panzerpimp]

I'm just going to say it, RTS is about as phoney as the day is long.

I agree absolutely.

No, I'm not saying Turn based is any sort of magical realism in comparison.

There is no "realism" in turn based, RTS or any other type of game. A game is a game.

Immune to 'gamey' much more so.

Is it? All games are "gamey" in a sense. We always have a choice to use some exploit or ignore it.

I can't think of a single great game that couldn't do WEGO

I don't want to play Panzer corps with WEGO. Maybe it's just a habit, but what is the point of WEGO in PzC 1?

Steel Panthers is a massive favourite, but it has idiotic gamey moves.

Steel Panthers was a bugfest when I played it. Maybe now it can be improved with WEGO, don't know...

I think Strategic Command in WEGO would be insanely addictive. It's great now, but it could be even better.

I only remember the first one. It was simplistic, but quite addictive as turn-based.

but with turns it's just complicated chess.

And that's why I like it. The rules are simple, but the game is deep.

[MrsWargamer]

Interesting replies, no arguments really to your insights.

Realism though, life is a game to a point and yet it is still very real. I guess it comes down to how much game and how much realism is desired. Chess depicts nothing more than a challenge.

In warGames, no one dies, there's no smell of death, no fear of ever present danger, no destruction. Thankfully. So it comes down to 'how close did it depict the history?' The trickiest part of wargaming is to recreate the absolutely STUUUUpid decisions that were actually made as if they were rational? The intelligence, and counter intel that happened. We knew they were coming at Midway, but many men still died in futile strikes on the Japanese carriers, and then blind luck had the US dive bombers nail 3 carriers and then later a 4th, for the loss of a carrier that was lucky to even make it to the battle. It's hard to recreate history.

[sIg3b]

I think Combat Mission 1 BB and AK were good examples of what you have in mind. Rather good simulations and quite challenging; a bit cumbersome to play though with all the necessary micromanagement.

[HobbesACW]

I enjoy both but a good turn based game has that sweet moment of anticipation when you press the button to fire the shot / roll the dice that WEGO lacks. It might not be as realistic a mechanism but for me it is slightly more fun.

[MikeAP]

I think WEGO is a great concept that is used poorly in video games - most developers don't understand how military decision making is done within a chain of subordinate commands and their depiction is usually highly unrealistic and very un-fun to me.

The two games that come to mind are Flashpoint Campaigns and Combat Mission - I dislike those games because they are both intense and ridiculous in micro-management - highly unrealistic - thats not how fighting works.

In FC, you are ordering platoons around the map - in some scenarios you are managing an entire regiment of platoons (30+). Not only is it highly unrealistic (in real life, those platoons, companies, and battalions have leaders that will use knowledge, experience, wisdom, and initiative to achieve their objectives) but it is also really not fun to me. I don't want to micromanage 30 chits across a massive front - especially in a game like Flashpoint Campaigns where I have orders limitations per turn.

In combat mission, you are micromanaging small teams, crews, and Squads. Same as above - I don't want to be bothered telling Johnny machine gunner to change his field of fire when covering the left flank.

The whole purpose of WEGO is to give the player time to make an assessment and then adjust - It's not fun when I have dozens and dozens of units to 'adjust'

I have served in, and led military organizations at the platoon, company, battalion, and brigade - at no point have I ever had to give orders to more than 7 subordinate commands. Those subordinates have subordinates and so on...

[sol_invictus]

I think the old V4V and WaW series are still the best WEGO wargames on the market. They are also abandobware so free to download. I am currently playing an email game of World at War: Operation Crusader. The way that Decisive Compaigns handles moves in a turn-based manner is the best of the TB game systems and somewhat adds a WEGO feel. This will especially be true for the upcoming Ardennes game.

I think one of the reasons that it has not caught on is that designing an AI for such games must be a nightmare. But that is just a guess.

[MikeAP]

I think one of the reasons that it has not caught on is that designing an AI for such games must be a nightmare. But that is just a guess.

I agree. I'm sure it's very difficult.

Flashpoint Campaigns AI employs no noticable or coherent tactics. It is just large blobs of units moving towards victory hexes.

There's not much behind the Combat Mission AI either. Every "move" that the AI makes is only because it is scripted to go to certain area on the map (zones) within the mission editor.

[matrine]

great post.