Political Points System

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Pascal

In any case this begs the question. Why can't I try ahistorical moves? About the only real chance the Japanese player has in lengthening the war is to try ahistorical moves. This goes back also to my earlier suggestion of either more ON/OFF switches for these kinds of ahistorical moves or varying the daily receipt of PP's.

So use the "editor" to give yourself 10,000 PP's a turn and play in "Never-Never Land"
if that's what you want to do. The AAR's are full of "ahistoric" moves---the PP's just
keep them from being illogical and/or impossible moves given the constraints of the
situation.

[Pascal_slith]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl


So use the "editor" to give yourself 10,000 PP's a turn and play in "Never-Never Land"
if that's what you want to do. The AAR's are full of "ahistoric" moves---the PP's just
keep them from being illogical and/or impossible moves given the constraints of the
situation.

Now frankly that was dumb answer...

[madflava13]

Pascal,
Frankly I disagree with Mike on a lot of things, but that was not a "dumb" answer at all.
In addition, even though people here often clash on their ideas of what should be in the game and so forth, we generally keep it pretty civil here. Heated debate is ok, calling someone "dumb" is not...

Just my two cents though.

[mogami]

Hi, I have yet to be bothered by a lack of PP while playing either side.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Pascal


In any case this begs the question. Why can't I try ahistorical moves? About the only real chance the Japanese player has in lengthening the war is to try ahistorical moves. This goes back also to my earlier suggestion of either more ON/OFF switches for these kinds of ahistorical moves or varying the daily receipt of PP's.

You will be able to...but the PP system was designed with the "historical" grand campaign and smaller historical scenerios. The PP system is however, not an option that you can turn off so you would have to use the editor to create a shadow or "duplicate" scenerio of the one whose parameters you wish to change. You can give either or both sides a far greater pool of PP's that would in effect recreate the situation you had in Pacific War where deployment or more accurately, "re-deployment" was much more loose.

I have few doubts that once the game releases you will see a flurry of user-created scenerios that will allow players to test a phethera of "what if" scenerios.

[byron13]

ORIGINAL: Pascal

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl


So use the "editor" to give yourself 10,000 PP's a turn and play in "Never-Never Land"
if that's what you want to do. The AAR's are full of "ahistoric" moves---the PP's just
keep them from being illogical and/or impossible moves given the constraints of the
situation.

Now frankly that was dumb answer...

The answer may not have been inappropriate given the question. PPs don't prevent ahistorical moves; they may restrict how quickly you can make ahistorical moves. It prevents a player from, on a whim and with no notice to any subordinate commands, loading the 500,000 men of the First Army and the 1,000 planes of the First Air Force, shipping them from Alaska to Australia, and attaching them to an Australian headquarters.

Not only do the PPs take into account the "political" ramifications (between countries, services, and four-star personalities), but I like to think they also include aspects of coordination points - as the term is used in other games. Just because you have fifty ships in a harbor next to a base with 100,000 men doesn't mean you can load them up in one day and ship them west to another command. There is a lot of logistical coordination that has to take place, and I like to believe that the PPs represent logistical staff points. Your staff can only coordinate so much, and the PPs provide the limit. If you want to plan a truly large operation that will require significant relocation, you need to start planning (saving PPs) well in advance.

[Pascal_slith]

ORIGINAL: madflava13

Pascal,
Frankly I disagree with Mike on a lot of things, but that was not a "dumb" answer at all.
In addition, even though people here often clash on their ideas of what should be in the game and so forth, we generally keep it pretty civil here. Heated debate is ok, calling someone "dumb" is not...

Just my two cents though.

Well, I didn't find the use of "Never-Never" land to be a useful or civil answer. In any case, I said "dumb answer", not dumb person.

[Pascal_slith]

ORIGINAL: byron13


The answer may not have been inappropriate given the question. PPs don't prevent ahistorical moves; they may restrict how quickly you can make ahistorical moves. It prevents a player from, on a whim and with no notice to any subordinate commands, loading the 500,000 men of the First Army and the 1,000 planes of the First Air Force, shipping them from Alaska to Australia, and attaching them to an Australian headquarters.

Not only do the PPs take into account the "political" ramifications (between countries, services, and four-star personalities), but I like to think they also include aspects of coordination points - as the term is used in other games. Just because you have fifty ships in a harbor next to a base with 100,000 men doesn't mean you can load them up in one day and ship them west to another command. There is a lot of logistical coordination that has to take place, and I like to believe that the PPs represent logistical staff points. Your staff can only coordinate so much, and the PPs provide the limit. If you want to plan a truly large operation that will require significant relocation, you need to start planning (saving PPs) well in advance.

Thank you, this is a useful description of PP's.

[byron13]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
The PP system is however, not an option that you can turn off so you would have to use the editor to create a shadow or "duplicate" scenerio of the one whose parameters you wish to change.

Omigosh! [X(] I hadn't realized PPs were not an option. I just looked at the option screens in the Mogami v. Frag thread, and you're right. It's not an option! That's too bad. It really should be. A player should be able to try some whacky stuff without having to go into the editor.

But the PPs are a very good idea. I like 'em - provided they've been calculated right.

C'mon guys. Declare the beta testing finished and release the darned game. I'm dyin' here.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: madflava13

Pascal,
Frankly I disagree with Mike on a lot of things, but that was not a "dumb" answer at all.
In addition, even though people here often clash on their ideas of what should be in the game and so forth, we generally keep it pretty civil here. Heated debate is ok, calling someone "dumb" is not...

Just my two cents though.

MADFLAVA. Thank you for that. Disagreements are part of life, and healthy discussion
of them what this forum is made for. PASCAL was apparently upset by the phrase I used
to describe a setting totally without constraints on player choices---Never-Never Land. It
seems to have prevented him from reading the rest of my post.

[Mr.Frag]

Omigosh! I hadn't realized PPs were not an option.

No one twisting your arm making you spend them.

Sometimes I wonder whether we need to program the players instead of the game [:D]

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Sometimes I wonder whether we need to program the players instead of the game [:D]

Talk about a product that would be YEARS IN THE MAKING. And Gary thought software
programming was a chore. The real problem would be to "open the minds" to get at
the programming. Good thought..., but probably another of those "not practical in a
real world scenario" notions.

[Mr.Frag]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Sometimes I wonder whether we need to program the players instead of the game [:D]

Talk about a product that would be YEARS IN THE MAKING. And Gary thought software
programming was a chore. The real problem would be to "open the minds" to get at
the programming. Good thought..., but probably another of those "not practical in a
real world scenario" notions.

You never know Mike, it might be easier to fix the players then the gaming engine [;)]

[byron13]

I've already been programmed by my job so that I'm already an automoton. Reprogramming me would be dangerous.

While I would probably never play the game with loopy options, you never know. I may decide to see what happens when you load the Chinese army on U.S. ships and invade Japan - or move the Japanese army out of China and invade Australia just for kicks. I'm guessing I wouldn't have enough PPs to do something silly like this.

I'm all in favor of having the game be as flexible as possible. For the grognards: options to make the game as much a simulation as possible. For the others: options that allow for whimsy. But, given the choice between PPs and no PPs, I'm 100% behind PPs. That was one of the weaknesses of PacWar. "Sir, recon just discovered that Pango Pango is not defended." "Fine, colonel. Load up the First and Second Marine divisions and invade tomorrow."

[Bulldog61]

ORIGINAL: Pascal

ORIGINAL: Nikademus


The PP's as has been mentioned, are a simple but effective system to prevent players from conducting unrestricted ahistorical deployments, mostly based on "hindsight" (i.e. I know i cant win in the SRA so i do a M*A*S*H style bugout on turn 2)

they were never meant to try to simulate advanced geo-political tides during wartime

In any case this begs the question. Why can't I try ahistorical moves? About the only real chance the Japanese player has in lengthening the war is to try ahistorical moves. This goes back also to my earlier suggestion of either more ON/OFF switches for these kinds of ahistorical moves or varying the daily receipt of PP's.

You can only within limits and then there is a tradeoff. Of course you can always use the editor to develop your fantasy scenario.

[Mr.Frag]

I may decide to see what happens when you load the Chinese army on U.S. ships and invade Japan - or move the Japanese army out of China and invade Australia just for kicks.

By the time you have shipping close enough to pick up Chinese troops and land them in Japan, you will have enough PP to do whatever you want [:D]

You will also find that there is really little point in loading Chinese troops as they are pretty useless. I think a US Marine corps group can probably take on 4-5 Chinese divisions at once and still not spill their beer!

As far as pulling Japanese troops out of China, you can, but that also means you will loose all the industry in China as the pesants rebel and destroy everything.

There are other factors at play other then the PP that affect what you can do.

[Mower]

Thanks