German Biased?

[DRG]

Smersh said:
There is clearly a "german bias" or german slant whatever you want to call it, (take a look at the scenario list).

What that "proves" is there are more German POV scenarios becasue the primary sceanrio designer early on was interested in that aspect of the conflict. As I said we could just as easily been accused of having a "USMC" bias or slant had CB been more interested in in the Pacific Theater of operations but he wasn't and here we are debating political correctness in a wargame.

Smersh said:
I think we have already addressed why this is the case, other people have answered this already.

But you just couldn't resist saying it again could you?

OK I get to say my little speech again then.

NOBODY set out to build up or put down or feature any one nation while the game was being developed. There was no master plan to promote the German cause in WW2 though scenario design. I did not reject the quality sceanrios offered to me simply because we had exceeded some kind of "quota" system to create a "balance" that would satisfy everyone at some point in the future. Yes, there are quite a few German POV scenarios and many of them take place on the Russian Front. Played from the other side there are now an almost equal number of Russian scenarios. Some will play well from the Russian side. Some do not and will be too easy to win as the Russians. The ones that "do not" make fine beginner scenarios when played from the Russian POV.

If I am offered quality scenarios for the game I will continue to accept them no matter if they are written from the Polish, Hungarian, Russian, Croatian, Japanese, Canadian or German POV. I will NOT accept scenarios that attempt to make a political point. The ones in the game now do not so although there may be more scenarios with a German POV added in the future that does not mean the game was designed to be biased towards the German cause.

Don

[Smersh]

wow, what is this hostility. I was not trying to create any problems or attack any designers or this game. and I very much appreciate the work you guys have done converting and enhancing the game. now...

maybe I should rephrase "german bais or slant" (since this seems to upset people) to say "a majority of the scenarios are german". we can agree to that, right? although this wouldn't have sounded good as a subject header.

my orginal point was commenting on the lack of nation diversity in the scenarios, ie. dominated by german scenarios. look at my first post:

Smersh said:

I would say conservatively that 60-75% the 330 something scenarios are to be played as the German Army. Then you have some American army, and Royal army scenarios, and a handful of Red army ones. This nearly ignores and de-emphasizes the other biggest players in the War.

What do you guys think of this?

some people said, it wasn't intentional, others said it was intentional because people "love" loving playing as german army, they have the big toys. etc. others said their easier to design for , and the designers where interested in the germany army etc. these were peoples responses to the high proportion of german scenarios

my last post was in response to troopie saying No, "it's biased toward nations that have a lot of info available in English". a good comment but which is clearly not the (only or major) reason.I already explaine why, there is no reason to repeat it. and I ended my post with its a good thing that their maybe a red army campign and a british campign possibly being developed (apparantly there is already a british one, already far along). is this not a good thing!?

for some reason, me being upset at the lack of coverage specifically little material on the red army a big player (objective, we can all agree to this statement) and a clearly popular nation in sp shown by the poll, to a lesser extent the british and (even) the USA and minor nation (repeating myself), is motiviated by political reasons, and I'm given a speech about points I already said I accepted.

in reponse the last part of your post DRG:

some scenarios do in fact have a (slight) german "bais" or whatever politically correct term you want to use. you seem to say that every scenario is completely objective and neutral. one scenario when speaking about hungary and romania leaving the war, call it a "defection", and another scenario (hypothetical) is a joint american/nazi germany offensive/counter-attack on the soviet union. now, a scenario where the usa and nazi germany "team up" together is cleary totally unbaised and not pro-german "cause" right?
and I say this with complete in hostility DRG. when I first started this thread, I never planned on getting to this point.

[czerpak]

While I dont think Don and Andy need any back up from anybody on this topic I cant resist to add my own opinion (mostly because I am well known scenario PBEM lover and honestly speaking I dont think anybody here PBEMed more stock scens than I did).

Firstly while playing human vs human MOST of ingame scens are playable for both sides. Out of around 100 scens I played H2H ONLY 20%, maybe 25%, were totally unbalanced. There are many scens which I was able to get beaten from both sides. If you guys think those scens usually favor first side, I will give you contact to handfull of players, who will beat you with ease, commanding so called weaker side. My point is, as Don noted, if you have 200 scens facing Ger against Sov, you dont have to be math genius to find out you have 200 scens facing Sov against Ger.
Now, I am aware of the fact that playing AI IS somewhat different. Thereare many scens where, for many reasons, AI just cant handle to play first side in the scenario. But it still leaves us handfull of scens where AI can be assigned any side.
Also, if you take time into account, recently made scenarios have much wider variety of nations involved.
One more thing I havent seen raised here (although I could missed it) - it is quite difficult to make French, Polish, Brittish, Russian etc historical scenario without Germans being involved, dont you agree ?
I am not german biased (although I agree with CB they did have coolest staff ), and I would love to see another 300, 500, 1000 new scenarios with the game teeling about less known asspects of the war, with minor nations, but hey, lets get realistic, it is not that likely to happen unless someone makes them.

Secondly, you may not known how open persons both Don and Andy are. They do listen what players say. But I wouldnt expect them to delete someone's hard work ( german POV scens) only becasue some people think it is too many of them. BTW there are independent sites where you can upload and download player made scenarios. Some excellent staff there. I dont think much time will pass untill winWW2 scens will be there for all of us to enjoy.

have fun
Czerpak

p.s. I just cant understand why people must carry this on AFTER they got reasonable explanations.

[Smersh]

yeah, I agree fully. I think we have had alot of reasonable exlplanations.

I want to add though

Its difficult to tell which scenarios can be played form other nations point of view, specifally when their designed to be played by one side, and many of them say "take x side if human". this is not jut for the sov point of view either.

and I don't think anyone thinks it realistic to have 300-1000 new scenarios about minor nations. when I started this I wasn't arguing that the game was missing lots of minor tiny battles. But you would expect some kursk scenarios/or campigns from the su pov, or campigns/scen. from the uk pov from north africa. these are big names, not minor lesser known ascpects.

and I and nobody expects anyone to delete any scenarios. even the ones I mentioned. I was just pointig out that they are there.

[wulfir]

Smersh said:
...and I don't think anyone thinks it realistic to have 300-1000 new scenarios about minor nations.

No...

...but it would be a challange. [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/Hammer.gif[/img]

[czerpak]

Ulf,
I am ready to test them if you take that challange...

[wulfir]

czerpak said:
Ulf,
I am ready to test them if you take that challange...

...tempting, tempting...

[Charles22]

Czerpak: Besides, not only did the Germans fight so many nations, but they often proved to be very worthy adversaries; a true test for every nation. Pit USA vs. Japan and Japan can't stop the tanks. It seems at least half of the more minor nations the Germans fought, had at least one unit that had decent or good anti-tank capabilities against the Germans, especially in the early years when the German stuff wasn't too well armored.

By the time Japan fights the US there's plenty of Shermans available to where the only thing that could stop them for the Japanese was being strapped to their backs. Japan is certainly interesting to fight if you have no armor, but a bore if you're going to do a long campaign against them and have at least a dozen medium tanks.

Italy vs Japan might not be too bad a campaign though.