When Should the Game Start?
Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
I also think a 1937 start would be interesting. But if it's to be combined with great flexibility in production I think there should be a consistent US/UK/Commonwealth/NEI trend towards perceiving increased threat and being better prepared (including the possibility of increased production, increased research, and better defenses) by the time 1941 rolls around.
IMO *any* alternate start scenario should come with varied deployments, OOBs and designs on the Allied side, so that you'd not have problems with the perfect knowledge syndrome. Heck, I think even the historical start date ought to allow both players some variation in their on-map setups.
You're not going to get 8 Shokakus for two Yamatos. Sho and Zui were initially CB hulls. More likely, given the dearth of shipways, the metal saved and all that, you'd get four Hiryus. Where'd you'd find the planes to fit them out is anyone's guess.
IMO *any* alternate start scenario should come with varied deployments, OOBs and designs on the Allied side, so that you'd not have problems with the perfect knowledge syndrome. Heck, I think even the historical start date ought to allow both players some variation in their on-map setups.
You're not going to get 8 Shokakus for two Yamatos. Sho and Zui were initially CB hulls. More likely, given the dearth of shipways, the metal saved and all that, you'd get four Hiryus. Where'd you'd find the planes to fit them out is anyone's guess.
Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.
Didn't we have this conversation already?
Didn't we have this conversation already?
I think there should be the possibility of an alternate peace scenario between Japan and China. If Japan and China had agreed to a peace with Japan leaving the occupied zones (except of course those captured from the Brits and Manchuria) then that would free up additional land and air units. This possibility was always a fear of the Allied high command and they went to great lengths to keep Chiag happy and in the war.
SF3C B. B. New USS North Carolina BB-55 - Permission is granted to go ashore for the last shore leave. (1926-2003)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Spooky
The WITP Editor should get at least the same features than the UV editor so we should be able to easily replace in the OOB the 2 x Yamato by 4 x Hiryu Class CV.
-I agree with you
The question is if the Editor will let us simulate an accelerated R&D with for instance a quickler introduction for the Tojo ?
-The old War in Russia has a feature like this. It makes possible
-to allocate factories to research certain specific equipment,
-so it will be able to be built early, but the assigned factories
-won´t build anything while they are assigned to research.
-It wouldn´t be difficult to implement this feature in WiTP.
The WITP Editor should get at least the same features than the UV editor so we should be able to easily replace in the OOB the 2 x Yamato by 4 x Hiryu Class CV.
-I agree with you
The question is if the Editor will let us simulate an accelerated R&D with for instance a quickler introduction for the Tojo ?
-The old War in Russia has a feature like this. It makes possible
-to allocate factories to research certain specific equipment,
-so it will be able to be built early, but the assigned factories
-won´t build anything while they are assigned to research.
-It wouldn´t be difficult to implement this feature in WiTP.
-That´s a good idea, all of those possibilities of neutral countriesOriginally posted by showboat1
I think there should be the possibility of an alternate peace scenario between Japan and China. If Japan and China had agreed to a peace with Japan leaving the occupied zones (except of course those captured from the Brits and Manchuria) then that would free up additional land and air units. This possibility was always a fear of the Allied high command and they went to great lengths to keep Chiag happy and in the war.
-should be implemented in the editor, but....to keep the fog of
-war there could be an event editor (like that from TOAW)
-allowing neutral countries to enter the game in certain
-circumstances, so, for instance, China could join the war
-if her leadership thinks Japan is losing and Manchuria could
-be reoccupied (however, I think players should have no
-control over diplomacy, just react to that events)
While I have yet to get the game (plan to this week), I have been checking out this forum for any tips that might be useful and came across this thread.
One thing...important thing...you are all overlooking is the United States. It seems everyone is focused on Japan. If the start date was to be moved up, wouldn't the US player be able to do things different before 12-7-41 just like the Japaneese player? I'd imagine the U.S. player being much more aggressive in defending it's territory (i.e. more troops/planes etc to Guam, Phil, subs around Japan, entire fleet NOT at Pearl....). How hard would it NOW be for Japan to expand into the Pacific. Sure, China could be taken, but how much more?
Just a thought.
One thing...important thing...you are all overlooking is the United States. It seems everyone is focused on Japan. If the start date was to be moved up, wouldn't the US player be able to do things different before 12-7-41 just like the Japaneese player? I'd imagine the U.S. player being much more aggressive in defending it's territory (i.e. more troops/planes etc to Guam, Phil, subs around Japan, entire fleet NOT at Pearl....). How hard would it NOW be for Japan to expand into the Pacific. Sure, China could be taken, but how much more?
Just a thought.
Yes, I've seen this issue raised on a couple of other threads, namely the optional production threads. Allowing Japan several years to change the course of history in China would bound to have some cause-and-effect type chain reactions. They would be difficult to model since they would involve political decisions subject to public sentiment, elections, etc., and not the relatively pure motivations of winning an all-out war.
Surely, anyone playing the Japanese in 1937 would be wanting to obtain more decisive and earlier results in either China or somewhere else. Earlier and more decisive successes would have drawn more attention from the Western powers, and they would have reacted in ways that would be hard to determine. Embargoes may have been imposed earlier, the European powers would have reinforced their colonies (especially pre-September '39), and the U.S. probably would've have started gearing up for war sooner. At a minimum, and as you point out, the U.S. would have reinforced its possessions. In game terms, the U.S. player would also probably permanently disperse the Pacific Fleet, making it invulnerable to a PH attack (unless the computer forces the player to keep the fleet at PH at all times).
The difficulty in programming all of the possible variations to make a pre-1941 game even remotely realistic may be the main reason a pre-1941 option is not provided. And, rest assured that regardless of how it was handled, there would be whiners that would disagree with Matrix's modeling of completely hypothetical events ("Of course England would have declared war on Japan if Japan invaded the Indies." "Would not." "Would too." "Would not. . ."). So, much as I would like to see it, I don't think we will see a fully interactive pre-war period allowing the various players the same freedom of action that they have after the war starts.
However, I could see a limited pre-war period for the Japanese to reposition its forces for attack while locking the Allied forces in position (or automatically reposition them according to historical timetables). That would at least allow the Japanese to optimize the positioning of his forces for the strategy he has decided to follow.
Since part of the reason for starting early is to influence production earlier (thus allowing the player to enjoy the fruits of his production decisions on long-lead time items like ships earlier in the game), I could also see a pre-war period that would allow players to do nothing more than reallocate pre-war production to what the player wants. It would not boost production, but simply allow the player to shift production points into what he wants. Thus, you could stop production of a battleship in 1939 and shift production into two carriers that would be ready at the beginning of the war or a fleet of airplanes. It still assumes the same geopolitical situation in 1941, which may be a stretch. The historical crowd would scream, but it is an option. Even this is probably beyond the interest of the Matrix design staff unless it is an extension of an optional production system that they would already be designing into the game.
In short, I think the practical realities are that we will not see a fully interactive pre-war period of several years. More likely are (i) a very short pre-war period of perhaps a month to allow one or more players to reposition forces, (ii) what-if scenarios that assume an alternative past (e.g., a scenario starting in June 1941 on the assumption that Japan conquered China or a September 1939 scenario assuming that Japan declared war in conjunction with Germany), or (iii) some kind of ability to change production pre-war but forcing the December 1941 starting positions to be largely historical. I think anything more than that would be too difficult to program, and the game would change to a game of politics, thus detracting from the purpose of the game. This isn't my desire, but I believe it is practical reality.
Surely, anyone playing the Japanese in 1937 would be wanting to obtain more decisive and earlier results in either China or somewhere else. Earlier and more decisive successes would have drawn more attention from the Western powers, and they would have reacted in ways that would be hard to determine. Embargoes may have been imposed earlier, the European powers would have reinforced their colonies (especially pre-September '39), and the U.S. probably would've have started gearing up for war sooner. At a minimum, and as you point out, the U.S. would have reinforced its possessions. In game terms, the U.S. player would also probably permanently disperse the Pacific Fleet, making it invulnerable to a PH attack (unless the computer forces the player to keep the fleet at PH at all times).
The difficulty in programming all of the possible variations to make a pre-1941 game even remotely realistic may be the main reason a pre-1941 option is not provided. And, rest assured that regardless of how it was handled, there would be whiners that would disagree with Matrix's modeling of completely hypothetical events ("Of course England would have declared war on Japan if Japan invaded the Indies." "Would not." "Would too." "Would not. . ."). So, much as I would like to see it, I don't think we will see a fully interactive pre-war period allowing the various players the same freedom of action that they have after the war starts.
However, I could see a limited pre-war period for the Japanese to reposition its forces for attack while locking the Allied forces in position (or automatically reposition them according to historical timetables). That would at least allow the Japanese to optimize the positioning of his forces for the strategy he has decided to follow.
Since part of the reason for starting early is to influence production earlier (thus allowing the player to enjoy the fruits of his production decisions on long-lead time items like ships earlier in the game), I could also see a pre-war period that would allow players to do nothing more than reallocate pre-war production to what the player wants. It would not boost production, but simply allow the player to shift production points into what he wants. Thus, you could stop production of a battleship in 1939 and shift production into two carriers that would be ready at the beginning of the war or a fleet of airplanes. It still assumes the same geopolitical situation in 1941, which may be a stretch. The historical crowd would scream, but it is an option. Even this is probably beyond the interest of the Matrix design staff unless it is an extension of an optional production system that they would already be designing into the game.
In short, I think the practical realities are that we will not see a fully interactive pre-war period of several years. More likely are (i) a very short pre-war period of perhaps a month to allow one or more players to reposition forces, (ii) what-if scenarios that assume an alternative past (e.g., a scenario starting in June 1941 on the assumption that Japan conquered China or a September 1939 scenario assuming that Japan declared war in conjunction with Germany), or (iii) some kind of ability to change production pre-war but forcing the December 1941 starting positions to be largely historical. I think anything more than that would be too difficult to program, and the game would change to a game of politics, thus detracting from the purpose of the game. This isn't my desire, but I believe it is practical reality.
-
Supervisor
- Posts: 5160
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 12:00 am
-
Ron Saueracker
- Posts: 10967
- Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Prior to Dec 7/41
Don't start that here. Let's make sure Matrix and 2BY3 do well with UV/WITP engine, Then get them to think about a 19th/20th Century geopolitical game.
Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
Party pooper. We were just hoping that the WitP could start in 1918 with the end of WWI. That way, everyone, including the Germans, could jockey for position in the Pacific. If you hadn't cut us off so rudely, I was going to suggest that there be an option for head to head players to negotiate their own naval limitations treaties outlawing all carriers. That way, America would be forced to develop jets by 1935 and, by 1941, would have B-52s and maybe even . . . even, like maybe Polaris missiles. Plus, if you started that early, America, China, and Japan could invade the Soviet Union and put an end to communism. Then Japan and the U.S. can join forces to divide the Pacific. In retaliation, the Soviets attack Pearl Harbor, and the U.S. is forced to send its forces to the defense of Japan against the Soviets and the Europeans. :rolleyes:
Ron, do I remember that you were going to beta test this thing? Don't remember why I'm thinking that, but I have a vague notion that that is the case. If so, any idea when you're going to get plugged in?
I was going to suggest that there be an option for head to head players to negotiate their own naval limitations treaties outlawing all carriers. That way, America would be forced to develop jets by 1935 and, by 1941, would have B-52s and maybe even . . . even, like maybe Polaris missiles. Plus, if you started that early, America, China, and Japan could invade the Soviet Union and put an end to communism. Then Japan and the U.S. can join forces to divide the Pacific. In retaliation, the Soviets attack Pearl Harbor, and the U.S. is forced to send its forces to the defense of Japan against the Soviets and the Europeans. :rolleyes: Ron, do I remember that you were going to beta test this thing? Don't remember why I'm thinking that, but I have a vague notion that that is the case. If so, any idea when you're going to get plugged in?
-
Ron Saueracker
- Posts: 10967
- Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
I'm working on the Naval OOBs for WITP. I'm just a history geek.
Knock on wood, though.
That Naval limitation idea sounds interesting. Really pee someone off so they declare war in 1920s. I'd be interested in WITP 1920/30s style, but with a tactical naval engine. Big friggin' Jutland style Plan Orange game.
:)
Knock on wood, though.That Naval limitation idea sounds interesting. Really pee someone off so they declare war in 1920s. I'd be interested in WITP 1920/30s style, but with a tactical naval engine. Big friggin' Jutland style Plan Orange game.
:)Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
Japan's entire purpose for going to war with the US & Great Britain was to secure oil / resources needed to "finish" the so called "China Incident" their aggressive invasion of China in July 1937. They had 4 & 1/2 years to win a victory in China with NO outside interference, but FAILED and everyone wants to "change the course of the war in China". Here's an idea - do not invade China.Originally posted by showboat1
I think there should be the possibility of an alternate peace scenario between Japan and China. If Japan and China had agreed to a peace with Japan leaving the occupied zones (except of course those captured from the Brits and Manchuria) then that would free up additional land and air units. This possibility was always a fear of the Allied high command and they went to great lengths to keep Chiag happy and in the war.
Sugiyama told the Hirohito that it would take one month to overtake China. HA! When he later told Hirohito that the Pacific ops would take a similar time- Hirohito remarked "Oh really, you said the war in China would be over on 1 month, now it is 4 years later and still going on"
Japan making a peace with China? Go back up 2 paragrqphs and read it again. Even after getting their a$$ handed to them by the US on a regular basis since June 1942, the only thoughts in Japan was "if we can settle the 'China Incident'..." Peace or withdrawl in China was not even considered. Japan had their chance to withdraw from the occupied Chinese territory before the pacific war began, but they refused.
Still playing PacWar (but no so much anymore)...
I'm green with jealousy. :p (That's me being green). Let me know if I can help. Where are you, by the way? I don't have much personally anymore, but I've got several university libraries nearby that usually have some amazing stuff printed by the government. Or I could go online. Pensacola and Ft. Rucker are pretty close, and I think they'd have good resources for naval and army aviation OOBs.Originally posted by Ron Saueracker
I'm working on the Naval OOBs for WITP. I'm just a history geek.
Don't EVEN go there!Originally posted by Ron Saueracker
That Naval limitation idea sounds interesting. Really pee someone off so they declare war in 1920s. I'd be interested in WITP 1920/30s style, but with a tactical naval engine. Big friggin' Jutland style Plan Orange game.
Look at "The American Magic" by Ronald Lewin. The US infuriated the Japanese during and after the 1922 (?) Washington Naval Conference & Treaty, by using intel that informed the US that even though the Japanese would "protest" the limits of 10-10-6 that in the end they would agree to the 10-10-6 ratio. The US representative, knowing this, informed the other attendees that the US was quite capable of outbuilding everyone else combined and would gladly do so if the proposed ratio was not accepted. ( I wonder if congress would ever approve such building in the 20's - the USN never even built up to its limits in Cruisers and Battleships until the very late 30's.) This didn't make the British any happier either, but is really torqued off the Japanese, when later on, they purchased some "information" from Robert Yardley who later published a book containing the info that he "sold" to Japan. Really made a mess of things for the intel community and earned the US a neverending hatred from Japan. If further built on the hatred that was present since 1848.Originally posted by byron13
I'm green with jealousy. :p (That's me being green). Let me know if I can help. Where are you, by the way? I don't have much personally anymore, but I've got several university libraries nearby that usually have some amazing stuff printed by the government. Or I could go online. Pensacola and Ft. Rucker are pretty close, and I think they'd have good resources for naval and army aviation OOBs.
Don't EVEN go there!
Still playing PacWar (but no so much anymore)...