Some Conclusions

[herwin]

Well, now I think I understand the game engine better--where and why it diverges from reality.

I figured I'd be able to hold an Allied opponent until mid-1944 using real-world tactics and a conservative opening, but the tempo has really picked up in mid-1943--it's currently about 6x real-time, and my opponent should be into Okinama by the end of 1943.

The places the standard game engine goes badly off the rails are in the land combat engine (death stars, etc.), the morale system (morale goes down in malaria areas until it's around 10 by 1943), the base construction model (0->4 in a week!), bombardment (sea and air), sortie generation, and the air combat model (underrates pilot skill and overrates firepower). The resulting air campaign just looks totally weird to a professional OR specialist. There are issues with the naval model, but nothing really strange other than ASW.

[Anthropoid]

Is this stock WiTP Herwin?

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

Is this stock WiTP Herwin?

RHS, but the problems are with the engine, not with the scenarios. (RHS is just a set of scenarios that use the stock engine.) The engine seems to use Euler integration--which is vulnerable to overshooting--and most of the time doesn't even consider non-linearity. The result is that diminishing returns usually don't, with the engine over-rewarding quantity (death stars, nuclear bombardment, morale decreasing linearly with time, ueber-cap, ueber-AA, ASW). By mid-1943, when sufficient quantity finally reaches the theatre, the models go off the rails.

[tocaff]

It is after all a game.  If you were able to model real life then you would lose your variables and then why bother playing the game?
 
If malaria has a negative effect on LCUs then the logic is the LCU would suffer more over a longer period of time.  In the real world troops got rotated, do you use rotation in the game?

If 10 planes could beat up 2 planes then that logic will reward greater #s too.  Imagine having a CAP of 200 planes and seeing a raid of 20 planes not being clobbered by the CAP, but rather clobbering your TF. 

Without completely redoing the game this is what we've got.  I'm sure that AE will greatly improve things, but not all.  I'm also sure that the data that you use to draw your conclusions from would and could be argued with.  The game is as imperfect as the world it tries to recreate for us.

[Oldguard1970]

and yet... what a great game!
 
I worked on a game used by the Infantry School to test tactics.  We modeled reality as much as we could.  Of course, that made the game pretty much unplayable. (The teams on each side had to grind through the exercises.)
 
Herwin correctly and frequently notes places where WITP fails to match reality or history.   Somehow, however, WITP manages to capture masses of us as we play and play and play ,,, (and groan about no turns in the inbox which prevents our playing as much as we wish we could play.)  I am captured by the game because it is magic!  It generates the tension and "feel" of the war in the Pacific.  It is exciting.  Heck... it's fun! 
 
The OR specialists can design their testbeds.  I'll stick with the game.
 

[AirGriff]

The game certainly has its flaws, but I think if all the flaws Herwin mentioned were fixed it would probably cost thousands of dollars per game due to the immense amount of research and programming, require days to play a single turn and be about as dry as the Sahara desert.  In fact, it probably wouldn't even be considered a game.  It would be work!  Besides, "fixed" is in the eye of the beholder, and there are a LOT of beholders out here.  My philosophy is to take the flaws, accept them as "reality" in the alternate universe we call WitP and move on.  Not that you won't here me whine about those bloody torp carrying Betty's now and again [;)]

[stuman]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

Is this stock WiTP Herwin?

RHS, but the problems are with the engine, not with the scenarios. (RHS is just a set of scenarios that use the stock engine.) The engine seems to use Euler integration--which is vulnerable to overshooting--and most of the time doesn't even consider non-linearity. The result is that diminishing returns usually don't, with the engine over-rewarding quantity (death stars, nuclear bombardment, morale decreasing linearly with time, ueber-cap, ueber-AA, ASW). By mid-1943, when sufficient quantity finally reaches the theatre, the models go off the rails.

That makes some sense, but I am still not sure how much is due to the game engine, versus the simple fact of overwhelming odds.

As someone who is slowly learning to play the Japanese side I can already tell that my micromanaging will help a bit in some areas, but that winning in a traditional sense is very ,very hard.

[Feinder]

I think it mostly evens out.
 
In that, I that Japan can push harder and farther and longer than they could historically (ie, most of 1942).  However, as Herwin has observed, the door not only closes, but swings back and smacks Japan in the face in 1943.
 
I think as Japan, you have to play more agressively than historical, in order to compensate for the butt-kicking you're going to get starting about summer of 1943.
 
-F-

[Feinder]

I'll also add, in my PBEM game vs. Bilbow, thing's are about a historical give-and-take par.

Allies own Burma (not Malaya). Historically, Burma wasn't liberated until later '44.
Japan owns all of Northern Oz (obviously never happened).

In SwPac and SoPac, I'm about 4 months ahead of the historical time-table.

China is a stalemate.

Over-all, geographically speaking, we're not that far out of a decent time-line.

-F-

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: stuman

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

Is this stock WiTP Herwin?

RHS, but the problems are with the engine, not with the scenarios. (RHS is just a set of scenarios that use the stock engine.) The engine seems to use Euler integration--which is vulnerable to overshooting--and most of the time doesn't even consider non-linearity. The result is that diminishing returns usually don't, with the engine over-rewarding quantity (death stars, nuclear bombardment, morale decreasing linearly with time, ueber-cap, ueber-AA, ASW). By mid-1943, when sufficient quantity finally reaches the theatre, the models go off the rails.

That makes some sense, but I am still not sure how much is due to the game engine, versus the simple fact of overwhelming odds.

As someone who is slowly learning to play the Japanese side I can already tell that my micromanaging will help a bit in some areas, but that winning in a traditional sense is very ,very hard.

My opponent and I are arguing about this. The operational problem in the Pacific once the Allied offensive got going was maintaining a high tempo of advance. Historically, there were no strategic objectives in the Pacific, and the only reason to hold a location was to use an airbase there. My opponent has demonstrated the ability to build an airbase about six times faster than reality. That combined with the sheer number of beach sites that can be developed implies that the island-hopping campaign can move about six times faster than it did in reality.

[stuman]

Good morning by the way.

" My opponent and I are arguing about this. The operational problem in the Pacific once the Allied offensive got going was maintaining a high tempo of advance. Historically, there were no strategic objectives in the Pacific, and the only reason to hold a location was to use an airbase there. My opponent has demonstrated the ability to build an airbase about six times faster than reality. That combined with the sheer number of beach sites that can be developed implies that the island-hopping campaign can move about six times faster than it did in reality. "

This fact; air power is all important - bases are all important for the exercise of airpower - the allies can build bases faster than rabbits can breed ( I know I sure do when playing the allies ) - means that once critical mass is reached in terms of " stuff ", the allies seem to be able to move very fast across the Pacific. Unless the Japanese have taken 2, maybe even 3 of the very forward areas including India/Pearl/N. OZ/Alaskan Island chain. And maybe even taken out several of the US carriers early game as well. Really means that a passive Japanese player is going to lose a bit fatser than not.

Just my 2 pennies worth of dubious game wisdom.

[Barb]

...land combat engine (death stars, etc.), the morale system (morale goes down in malaria areas until it's around 10 by 1943), the base construction model (0->4 in a week!), bombardment (sea and air), sortie generation, and the air combat model (underrates pilot skill and overrates firepower)...

Well, i have easy tips for you:
1. land death stars: limit yourselves with corps for one objective (4 divisions + some support) max. No death stars now [:)]
2. morale system: rotate units in and out. (Example Bougainville campaign: started with 3rd USMC, then Americal came in, 93rd were sent in to relieve 3rd USMC, australian 3rd and another australian division were there to the end)
3. base construction model: use historical amounts of engineer units. No sending 4 C.B.s to Guadalcanal, send just one.
4a. bombardment-air: Well dont generate 200 heavy bombers sorties. Historically SWPAC got 3 heavy bomb groups in 1943-1944 and half of their planes were on naval search.
4b. bombardment-naval: Dont use too powerfull TFs. For invasion bombardments use rule of thumb: 1DD for attacking bn, 1CL for attacking Rgt, 1 CA for attacking Div (so for a Div it will be 9DDs, 3CLs, 1CA +/-)
5. sortie generation: dont stack too many units in the same base
6. air combat model: Lower the number of planes in the air will result in somewhat better air combat. (Say 4CV/CVLs per hex)

It is not a reality, it is a game. Nor reality or games are perfecet. Both need some help from us [:D]

[AirGriff]

Well said, Barb. Many of the flaws in the game can be "fixed" with house rules. My opponent and I have quite a few in depth house rules, and some get renegotiated every now and then as conditions change or previously unthought of issues arise.

Personally, I don't mind that the pace of the game goes faster than historical. I'm not sure many players would last through '42 if that were the case. Heck, I bet only 1 in 4 pbem's make it to '43 as it is.

[stuman]

AirGriff makes a good point. Against the AI a fast moving game is nice. And the various house rules folks have come up with can take care of some of the above mentioned issues.

[AirGriff]

Wait!  I have a great idea.  We should create a war game for the NEXT war, and the participants in that war must adhere strictly to the game engine and mechanics.  It would resolve a LOT of future arguments.  Oh, that's right.  They've been trying to do that since Roman times.  Blast.

[Erik Rutins]

Is this your first experience with WITP, herwin? Also, as far as the increased tempo you're seeing - one of the things that AE seems to have accomplished as far as I can tell is to bring the later war tempo back to a more historical pace.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: AirGriff

The game certainly has its flaws, but I think if all the flaws Herwin mentioned were fixed it would probably cost thousands of dollars per game due to the immense amount of research and programming, require days to play a single turn and be about as dry as the Sahara desert.  In fact, it probably wouldn't even be considered a game.  It would be work!  Besides, "fixed" is in the eye of the beholder, and there are a LOT of beholders out here.  My philosophy is to take the flaws, accept them as "reality" in the alternate universe we call WitP and move on.  Not that you won't here me whine about those bloody torp carrying Betty's now and again [;)]

I doubt that seeing fewer totally off results (like very early on and to much more effect and even more off from 44 on) would require days to play a single turn. Why would reasonable results require days to do a turn? [&:]

[AirGriff]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: AirGriff

The game certainly has its flaws, but I think if all the flaws Herwin mentioned were fixed it would probably cost thousands of dollars per game due to the immense amount of research and programming, require days to play a single turn and be about as dry as the Sahara desert.  In fact, it probably wouldn't even be considered a game.  It would be work!  Besides, "fixed" is in the eye of the beholder, and there are a LOT of beholders out here.  My philosophy is to take the flaws, accept them as "reality" in the alternate universe we call WitP and move on.  Not that you won't here me whine about those bloody torp carrying Betty's now and again [;)]

I doubt that seeing fewer totally off results (like very early on and to much more effect and even more off from 44 on) would require days to play a single turn. Why would reasonable results require days to do a turn? [&:]

Oh, if they can firm it up, which I think is happening with AE quite nicely, then great, but I suspect if you were to make a perfectly accurate depiction of the war at the command level of WitP, then you would need a staff and a LOT of hours to do what most players do in an hour or two in the current game. I'm certainly not suggesting we shouldn't hope for improvements. I'm just saying it's a pretty enjoyable game as it is.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Is this your first experience with WITP, herwin? Also, as far as the increased tempo you're seeing - one of the things that AE seems to have accomplished as far as I can tell is to bring the later war tempo back to a more historical pace.

Hi, Erik,

This is the first time I've reached mid-1943 in a PBEM. My opponent is being very careful at this point as I still have an intact KB. He just landed on Manus, and raised the air base from 0 to 4 in a week--whoosh! We're playing a set of variant limited war rules that require him to set up a SLOC with air superiority all the way to Okinawa (or nearby) by mid-1944 to win. That's six major landings or so. Based on what happened with Manus, I think he can do it in six months.

[tocaff]

Many people keep complaining about how fast the Allies can build an airbase.  My ex father in law was a CB and I remember him telling us about how they would land on an island that still wasn't secure and within days LBA was operating where there had been nothing.  Of course this kind of field wasn't for the big boys to fly from, but.........