ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
ORIGINAL: ColinWright
You tend to see wargames and scenarios as somehow necessarily reflecting reality. Witness your use of 'War in the Pacific' to 'prove' that the Japanese could have conquered Hawaii. So when you see some scenario where various categories of equipment aren't getting used, you see it as unreasonable that you can't make use of it.
I have no idea what that has to do with this issue, but, since you've raised it, note that it wasn't just "War in the Pacific", it was primarily "Pacific War", but also every wargame on that subject ever made, including one of your own playtests. And I seem to recall you swearing up and down that there were no ports or airfields on the neighboring islands, only to be proved dead wrong - and Pacific War vindicated - in the end.
Now
that happens to be a complete fabrication.
Wargames are secondary sources, like most books.
I explained the distinction to you carefully at the time. There's no reason to believe you would read it now either, so I won't bother.
Back to the issue at hand. I'm finishing up a playtest of "France 1944 D-Day" as we speak. For the longest time, there have been shortages of M4/75s, while M4/76s languish in the pools. It's absurd to suggest that the Allies wouldn't have swapped out the M4/75s with M4/76s. You don't need any designer intervention to know that. I suggest we treat players as adults, since about 99% of the scenarios will never be updated.
Now there is a good example of when swap-outs would be reasonable, and indeed, they should be possible
if the designer has enabled them. However, most swap-outs would tend to be unreasonable, unrealistic, and (since the original designer is no longer at hand) uncontrollable.
You are presenting an argument for designer-enabled swap-outs. You're not presenting an argument for anything else.
