Land Combat

[Blackhorse]

Old signature resurrection. I recall when this game was released it was often lamented among now departed members that the land combat aspect never got quite the level of treatment that air and naval combat did.

As one of those now-departed members (and a very junior member of the AE development team) , I concur. A couple points in mitigation:

1. Methinks the land combat routine actually works well for the game. The amount of time it takes to reduce a prepared defense; casualties inflicted in battle and in retreats; the effort needed to make a successful amphibious invasion... these all have an appropriate 'historical feel' about them.
2. The original WitP is what really short-changed the land element. Among the leaders, over 2/3rds of the allied generals were fictional names; all the Australian MGs had one rating, all the Australian BGs had another rating, etc. etc. A lot of AE work went into cleaning up the leader, LCU, TO&E and weapons databases.
3. Because of time constraints, we couldn't coordinate all the individual efforts for consistency, and second-order effects. Fx, US 'HMG' squads represent both .30 cal water-cooled machine guns at game start; and the .50 cal M2 Browning for the rest of the war. Commonwealth forces, by contrast, have to upgrade various types of MGs and other devices during the war from limited pools, causing havoc with LCU TO&E upgrades unless the player micro-manages the pools. OTOH, the values given the weapon systems, compared to one another, have held up well over the years, with very few exceptions.

,,, As a Land Team member it did irk me, however, that we found the time to implement pilot training for *individual* aircraft pilots, but ran out of time before we could arrange for leaders to be KIA/gain experience /promoted to different HQs/etc. Similarly, because we ran out of time, the game came out before Political Points and the role of HQs could be properly tested and balanced (SEE: importance of leadership in Naval HQs, lack of).

... And I knew we would never have the time to scope out the nuance of land warfare in China (relatively well-equipped and well-motivated KMT units, vs. warlord troops with wide variations in equipment and morale, vs well-motivated, sometimes antagonistic CCP forces) or the colonies (Filipinos fighting alongside the Americans; Indonesians deserting en masse once the Japanese made substantial gains; a quarter or more of surrendered Indian troops joining the IJA). If anyone ever wants to upgrade AE in those areas, let me know. I'm happy to contribute.

[BBfanboy]

Thank you for the overview of the Land Combat efforts and results! Always good to get an idea of what developers were trying to achieve and the problems they faced. Makes me appreciate the way things turned out all the more!
The only thing that does bother me about land combat is the inability to set waypoints for marching. So often I want to send a unit "long way around" to avoid an open terrain hex or come at the enemy from a different direction (closing off hex sides). But without waypoints you end up going hex by hex, losing a lot of movment points with each hex stopped at. e.g. secondary road hexes take three days to cover 45 miles and the remaining 1 mile take the entire next turn where a waypoint would allow the journey to continue 14 miles. I often wonder whether the waypoint system used for sea travel could be adapted easily to the land combat model. I don't think it is in the works on the New Beta 1127 version.

[Trugrit]

Welcome back.

It is good to have you looking in again.

I agree that land combat works well in the game... at least for 90% of the game.
Then we come to China….complex situation.....history and game design.

I agree with what you have said.

I wonder if you have looked over the current B-Mod:
https://sites.google.com/view/bigbsshipyard/b-mod-ae
(Scenario 197 Grand Campaign)

I would be interested in your opinion of the mod from
the Read me design notes document.

B-Mod.jpg (16.81 KiB) Viewed 892 times

Major scenario changes to China….added Andy Mac’s new bases, garrison requirements,
Assault values, China three-tired army, supply, static-restricted units, stacking limits.

I’ve looked at it in some detail….the China changes along with the other changes made to
the game play and the units make it in my opinion the best historical mod ever made
For this game. In fact it may be too historical from the Japanese side.

As far as I know there is not an AAR done for this mod.
I would like to see one.

I have this wild idea that if the B-Mod could be rolled over into the new Beta
and modified for it…...there would be a much better historical mod available.

[Tanaka]

Welcome back.

It is good to have you looking in again.

I agree that land combat works well in the game... at least for 90% of the game.
Then we come to China….complex situation.....history and game design.

I agree with what you have said.

I wonder if you have looked over the current B-Mod:
https://sites.google.com/view/bigbsshipyard/b-mod-ae
(Scenario 197 Grand Campaign)

I would be interested in your opinion of the mod from
the Read me design notes document.


B-Mod.jpg


Major scenario changes to China….added Andy Mac’s new bases, garrison requirements,
Assault values, China three-tired army, supply, static-restricted units, stacking limits.

I’ve looked at it in some detail….the China changes along with the other changes made to
the game play and the units make it in my opinion the best historical mod ever made
For this game. In fact it may be too historical from the Japanese side.

As far as I know there is not an AAR done for this mod.
I would like to see one.

I have this wild idea that if the B-Mod could be rolled over into the new Beta
and modified for it…...there would be a much better historical mod available.

Interesting. Never played that one. LST also made a lot of changes to China in his mod as well:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 8&t=309505

[Tanaka]

Old signature resurrection. I recall when this game was released it was often lamented among now departed members that the land combat aspect never got quite the level of treatment that air and naval combat did.

As one of those now-departed members (and a very junior member of the AE development team) , I concur. A couple points in mitigation:

1. Methinks the land combat routine actually works well for the game. The amount of time it takes to reduce a prepared defense; casualties inflicted in battle and in retreats; the effort needed to make a successful amphibious invasion... these all have an appropriate 'historical feel' about them.
2. The original WitP is what really short-changed the land element. Among the leaders, over 2/3rds of the allied generals were fictional names; all the Australian MGs had one rating, all the Australian BGs had another rating, etc. etc. A lot of AE work went into cleaning up the leader, LCU, TO&E and weapons databases.
3. Because of time constraints, we couldn't coordinate all the individual efforts for consistency, and second-order effects. Fx, US 'HMG' squads represent both .30 cal water-cooled machine guns at game start; and the .50 cal M2 Browning for the rest of the war. Commonwealth forces, by contrast, have to upgrade various types of MGs and other devices during the war from limited pools, causing havoc with LCU TO&E upgrades unless the player micro-manages the pools. OTOH, the values given the weapon systems, compared to one another, have held up well over the years, with very few exceptions.

,,, As a Land Team member it did irk me, however, that we found the time to implement pilot training for *individual* aircraft pilots, but ran out of time before we could arrange for leaders to be KIA/gain experience /promoted to different HQs/etc. Similarly, because we ran out of time, the game came out before Political Points and the role of HQs could be properly tested and balanced (SEE: importance of leadership in Naval HQs, lack of).

... And I knew we would never have the time to scope out the nuance of land warfare in China (relatively well-equipped and well-motivated KMT units, vs. warlord troops with wide variations in equipment and morale, vs well-motivated, sometimes antagonistic CCP forces) or the colonies (Filipinos fighting alongside the Americans; Indonesians deserting en masse once the Japanese made substantial gains; a quarter or more of surrendered Indian troops joining the IJA). If anyone ever wants to upgrade AE in those areas, let me know. I'm happy to contribute.

Nice read. All things considered you guys did a great job. Yes I think the most complaints I have seen are regarding China Burma theater and retreat losses overkill.

[Blackhorse]

I wonder if you have looked over the current B-Mod:
https://sites.google.com/view/bigbsshipyard/b-mod-ae
(Scenario 197 Grand Campaign)

I would be interested in your opinion of the mod from
the Read me design notes document.


B-Mod.jpg

...

I have this wild idea that if the B-Mod could be rolled over into the new Beta
and modified for it…...there would be a much better historical mod available.

Trugrit,

Thanks for bringing this to my attention... this is really impressive work. The changes to the Chinese OOB, with larger but largely static forces, more intrinsic supply, and the increased IJA garrison requirements ought to combine to make the play more realistically historical, and harder for either side to 'roll up' the other.

I wonder if there has been an opportunity for much play-testing, to see if there are any unexpected side-effects. Fx, the game's reliance on 'bases' works well for islands in the Pacific, but less well on continental land masses. A large stack of LCUs might draw supplies from a hex with no base and thrive, but shrivel up on an adjacent small base because of the supply limitations in-game. With the added bases, and the static units, will we find forces permanently unsupplied?

Absent any such hiccups, I'd like to A-list he B-mod.

... and as a personal note, I am delighted to see the inclusion of the 150mm mortar in the Chinese OOB. My late father-in-law was a teenage infantry private in the KMT army in 1942, fighting in southeastern China when he and about 100 other soldiers in his Army were selected to go to an artillery officer-training school in Xi'an (Sian). They marched to school -- 1,800 miles in 3 months . He graduated in early 1945 and was given command of a 150mm mortar unit.

[Yaab]

Yep, both Bottlenecks and RHS mods really expanded China in terms of bases/LCUs. Too bad RHS is not playable right now.

[Trugrit]

I wonder if there has been an opportunity for much play-testing

Blackhorse,

I guess only Brian would know about any play-testing done to date.
There is not an AI script written for this one; so PBEM only.

You are a very good script writer...that would not be the best way to evaluate
This scenario. But….If you want to take that on I won’t stand in your way.

With the new artwork it would be best to go with a separate game install.
Also, seems that this would require more experienced players to set it up
and then fully evaluate it in PBEM.

Especially, you would really need a very good and experienced Japanese player
to put this one to the test. That takes time. Very experienced Japanese players are hard
to find because they are most likely locked into their own games.

Interesting about your late father-in-law….it is a small and sometimes strange world.

[MBF]

fwiw - I'm playing the Big B mod as Allies vs the AI into May 42 and it is working well from my pov - China is rather quiet with some battles along the front but nothing big and China "feels" good - ymmv

[Blackhorse]

Two further thoughts on the B-Mod:

(1) As a matter of personal preference, instead of making the Chinese warlord corps 'static-restricted'. one might achieve the same goal by putting two or three 'Chinese Garrison' squads (device 1318 in stock) in each warlord LCU -- but, importantly, not in the TO&E. Thus if the Japanese attack and do enough damage to destroy the garrison squads, the corps becomes 'unrooted' and can move/deploy in the aftermath of being attacked.

(2) I'm concerned about how the "US ARMY INVASION REACTION" works in the B-Mod. From the Readme, the following LCUs start the game on-map: "US II Armored Corps HQ, US II Corps HQ, US IV Corps HQ, US VII Corps HQ, US VIII Corps HQ, US 1st Armored Div (Hvy),US 2nd Armored Div (Hvy), US 3rd Armored Div (Hvy), US 1st Infantry Div, US 2nd Infantry Div, US 4th Infantry Div, US 5th Infantry Div, US 6th Infantry Div, US 8th Infantry Div, US 9th Infantry Div, US 34th Infantry Div, US 36th Infantry Div, and US 45th Infantry Div....all of these units are NOT included in the stock OOB for 1941."

There is a possible duplication in-game. In stock, locations 7951-59 are reserved for West Coast Invasion Reinforcements. These include the II Armored Corps HQ, II Corps HQ, 2nd Armored Division, and the 4th, 8th and 36th Infantry Divisions, mentioned above. [Also a provisional tank brigade, as armor brigades from elsewhere in the country were ceaselessly rotated in and out of present-day Ft. Irwin to do gunnery and large-unit maneuver training]. Unless these units are removed in the B-Mod there will be two of each, if the IJA invades.

The Readme says, "All of the above units are in their place of the country that they occupied in Dec 1941." Historically, these units were not stationed on the West Coast. Assuming that they all on the "Eastern US" base, a good House Rule could be that they cannot move west unless IJA forces land on the West Coast. This HR would prevent the Allied player from using over a dozen historically unavailable extra divisions to preemptively garrison the West Coast; but does still allow for an overwhelming response in the event of a landing; insuring that any Japanese invasion will be a short-lived 'raid'

... again, these are nit-picking comments. The mod seems excellent.

[Blackhorse]

The B-Mod West Coast Invasion discussion reminds me of a glitch that I am responsible for in stock.

The US 2nd Armored Division, the keystone of the US West Coast Invasion reinforcements, will unfortunately arrive almost tankless because I mucked up the devices and the TOE upgrade. To fix, in stock:

1. for LCU 7953 [2nd Armored Div], change the TOE upgrade from '2353' to '0'
2. for LCU 7953, change WPN 11 from '1177' to '1176' [M3 Stuart]
3. for device 1179 [M3 Lee] change Available date from '4201' to '4112'

Voila! "Hell on Wheels" will now dole out armored hellfire onto any misguided invaders.

[Trugrit]

Two further thoughts on the B-Mod:

(1) As a matter of personal preference, instead of making the Chinese warlord corps 'static-restricted'. one might achieve the same goal by putting two or three 'Chinese Garrison' squads (device 1318 in stock) in each warlord LCU -- but, importantly, not in the TO&E. Thus if the Japanese attack and do enough damage to destroy the garrison squads, the corps becomes 'unrooted' and can move/deploy in the aftermath of being attacked.

(2) I'm concerned about how the "US ARMY INVASION REACTION" works in the B-Mod. From the Readme, the following LCUs start the game on-map: "US II Armored Corps HQ, US II Corps HQ, US IV Corps HQ, US VII Corps HQ, US VIII Corps HQ, US 1st Armored Div (Hvy),US 2nd Armored Div (Hvy), US 3rd Armored Div (Hvy), US 1st Infantry Div, US 2nd Infantry Div, US 4th Infantry Div, US 5th Infantry Div, US 6th Infantry Div, US 8th Infantry Div, US 9th Infantry Div, US 34th Infantry Div, US 36th Infantry Div, and US 45th Infantry Div....all of these units are NOT included in the stock OOB for 1941."

There is a possible duplication in-game. In stock, locations 7951-59 are reserved for West Coast Invasion Reinforcements. These include the II Armored Corps HQ, II Corps HQ, 2nd Armored Division, and the 4th, 8th and 36th Infantry Divisions, mentioned above. [Also a provisional tank brigade, as armor brigades from elsewhere in the country were ceaselessly rotated in and out of present-day Ft. Irwin to do gunnery and large-unit maneuver training]. Unless these units are removed in the B-Mod there will be two of each, if the IJA invades.

The Readme says, "All of the above units are in their place of the country that they occupied in Dec 1941." Historically, these units were not stationed on the West Coast. Assuming that they all on the "Eastern US" base, a good House Rule could be that they cannot move west unless IJA forces land on the West Coast. This HR would prevent the Allied player from using over a dozen historically unavailable extra divisions to preemptively garrison the West Coast; but does still allow for an overwhelming response in the event of a landing; insuring that any Japanese invasion will be a short-lived 'raid'

... again, these are nit-picking comments. The mod seems excellent.

Thanks,

My personal preference is that the garrison units stick as designed.
Your preference for the static units should be easy to change.
Either way it looks to me like it would work.

I don’t see any duplication in the west coast invasion units.
Those units are included in the stock OOB as well; they are
just not active in 1941.

There are not any ghost units in the game. Every unit that is active at start
or might appear in the scenario later is present in the editor from the start.
Some just wait for a trigger or player option to activate them.

The B-mod just moves them out of the trigger slots and into different slots
And makes most of them active in 1941. Most in Eastern US; a few
I think are reinforcements.

It looks alright from my end.

K

East Coast.jpg (216.31 KiB) Viewed 469 times