What would be the perfect WITP III?

[Zacktar]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: Zacktar

Start with the world at peace and simulate the pre-war period. The more aggressive Japan gets, the greater the chance that the Allies detect what's coming. Turn 1 surprise can be lost, or the Allies can even get the chance to give a full set of orders for turn 1.

I like this notion. On game turn one as the Allies, I simply embargo all trade with Japan (on the basis of whatever she's already done) and pass the "Three Ocean Navy" Bill ( to provide jobs in the shipyards). Japan collapses economically, and I save billions of bucks and thousands of lives by not having to fight the War in the Pacific! [:D]

Except that trying any of this will get you impeached and removed from office before the Emperor asks his cabinet why razor blades have gotten so expensive! [;)]

[Mike Scholl]

I like this notion. On game turn one as the Allies, I simply embargo all trade with Japan (on the basis of whatever she's already done) and pass the "Three Ocean Navy" Bill ( to provide jobs in the shipyards). Japan collapses economically, and I save billions of bucks and thousands of lives by not having to fight the War in the Pacific! [:D]

[/quote]
Except that trying any of this will get you impeached and removed from office before the Emperor asks his cabinet why razor blades have gotten so expensive! [;)]
[/quote]

Impeached for what? The "high crime and misdemeanor" of not supporting the Rape of Nanking and all the other various atrocities the Japanese Army committed during the "China Incident"? You must be living in the same "cloudcookooland" as the rest of the Japanese High Command.
[8|]

[oldman45]

I would have it so you could merge unit fragments into an existing combat unit. The best examples are the dutch/Burma units. Anybody can be a rifleman, so if you get fragments, just fold them in as rifle squads.

I would also change the way HQ's work. I think anything over the corp level would be only for supply and support. The ranges that they influence supply/reinforcement would be limited by zone of control. If you can get a supply ship in or fly in a transport then combat units are in range. Combat bonuses would come from corp HQ's and/or division leaders.

To give the Japanese a chance I would not make changes to the allied R&D or manufacturing with one exception. Allow the allied player the ability to convert more of the Cleveland CL's hulls to CVL's than they did historically.

The previous comments about UI changes would be nice. We really do have to play wearing a lot of hats but sometimes it feels like we are missing some [;)]

[Zacktar]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl
Impeached for what? The "high crime and misdemeanor" of not supporting the Rape of Nanking and all the other various atrocities the Japanese Army committed during the "China Incident"? You must be living in the same "cloudcookooland" as the rest of the Japanese High Command.
[8|]

Reckless deficit spending, cutting off trade that American businesses depend on and provoking a war that the American people want to stay out of, for starters. If we're going to extend play that far beyond the initial run-up to hostilities, it doesn't take a Gary Grigsby to see that there have to be costs and benefits to be balanced, after all.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Zacktar

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl
Impeached for what? The "high crime and misdemeanor" of not supporting the Rape of Nanking and all the other various atrocities the Japanese Army committed during the "China Incident"? You must be living in the same "cloudcookooland" as the rest of the Japanese High Command.
[8|]

Reckless deficit spending, cutting off trade that American businesses depend on and provoking a war that the American people want to stay out of, for starters. If we're going to extend play that far beyond the initial run-up to hostilities, it doesn't take a Gary Grigsby to see that there have to be costs and benefits to be balanced, after all.

[&:] Do you know anything about "The New Deal"? It's called "Keynesian Economics"..., and had been going strong since 1933. What do you think financed the WPA? The TVA? The Bolder Dam? Etcetera. etcetera...

And do you really think that Roosevelt couldn't have "managed" the news and editorials over Japanese atrocities in China well enough to make any American Company trading with Japan look like "baby-raping skunks" and "traitors to the American Ideal"?

True, as the Allied Player I would be making use of "hindsight"..., but isn't that exactly what you want the Japanese Player to be able to do? [8|]

[Zacktar]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

[&:] Do you know anything about "The New Deal"? It's called "Keynesian Economics"..., and had been going strong since 1933. What do you think financed the WPA? The TVA? The Bolder Dam? Etcetera. etcetera...

And do you really think that Roosevelt couldn't have "managed" the news and editorials over Japanese atrocities in China well enough to make any American Company trading with Japan look like "baby-raping skunks" and "traitors to the American Ideal"?

Then why, pray tell, didn't he? I think I made this abundantly clear in my last post in this thread, but I'll try to be clearer: If you provide an "I win" button that costs nothing to push, of course every player will push it and you won't have much of a game, will you? [8|]

What I want is for both sides to have options available to them before the war. These options would have advantages and disadvantages attached to them, just like operations during the war do. To be more specific, imagine a "November 1941" start. Kido Butai rides at anchor in Empire waters, Japanese Army forces are fighting in China or planning for their invasion targets. The Japanese player orders his troops around, sends KB off towards its target, and awaits results. The Allies don't get many options to start with, but if the Japanese player is highly aggressive (or somewhat unlucky) surprise is lost and the Allies can wake up to a lesser or greater extent. A little warning means that CAP is flying over Pearl Harbor and AA guns are all manned and ready. Greater warning could see the Pacific and Asiatic Fleets on a full war footing, with the Allied player free to send them out to sea before the attack hits.

[Bradley7735]

I would like WITP III to make it so a 4 ship Surface TF does not consistently whip the crap out of a well structured 15 ship surface TF with decent exp ships and excellent leaders. I'm tired of facing 1 BB, 2 CA and 1 DD only to see 1/2 of my ships take a stroll through the tulips and have the other 1/2 of my ships take damage/sink due to facing a much weaker force and not return the damage/sink option to the wimpy 4 ship TF.

Oh, but Japan has superior exp in all forms of naval warfare in 42. BS... Yamato is just as new as So Dak, Wash and NC. Yet Yamato can get penetrating hits each round on 2 BB and 2 CA, and not get hit in return, except by 5" rounds.

[:@] just venting. I guess I'll stop trying to have surface fights as the allies.

[Kull]

ORIGINAL: fbs

But, if you could have a WITP-style, brand new game designed from the ground upon your ideas, which ideas would they be? That is, if your dream WITP game could be built (it certainly can't), what would you incorporate to it?

The purpose of this thread is just to have fun with blue-sky ideas, so a cookie will go out for the most interesting (albeit realistic) idea coming out there.

A "virtual staff" would be the real time saver. Think of it as a limited, task-focused AI - not designed to carry an entire nation through the war, but one that's capable of looking at a task and providing useful recommendations on how to achieve it. For example, lets start small:

Suppose I want to set up a series of convoys that will carry fuel and supplies from the West Coast to Australia. I begin by clicking on the destination hex and then click on one or more hexes that contain the assets which my "staff" is free to use in it's calculations. Default would be unallocated units, but you can define other options at your staff interface. So the staff asks how much supply/fuel I'd like to transport from San Diego and LA, and I plug in a value. The staff plots out a suggested route as a line on the map and I can "click-and-pull" it into waypoints. Perhaps I can make the convoys repeatable or one time and maybe specify their frequency or limit the number of ships and or escorts. At some point I say "go" and the staff quickly calculates out a few options, one of which I select, and it's on to the next task.

That's a fairly simple example, but the key idea is to provide a single goal and a relativly small number of resource points, and then let the "staff" do the dirty work of assembling the task forces and maintaining them. Even big invasions aren't necessarily that hard, so long as you break it down into discrete activities. I want to invade Japanese controlled Rabaul in mid-42, so the first step is to determine the invasion "launch point" and use the staff to assemble all the required assets there. Step two would be to use the staff to set up all the various invasion related TFs and send them on their way.

Even things like CAP. Set some rough parameters, click the bases where you want it, select those containg the units that can provide it, and let the staff determine the units and altitudes, and all the rest. Your job as CinC is to set goals and then approve or deny the staff's recommendations - maybe even put up an "aggression" slider to alter the types and/or content of the recommendations.

What makes AI "hard" is the number of individual data points to be calculated. When you limit the number of variables, suddenly a "Virtual Staff" becomes a possibility. Maybe not WitP 3 even. Maybe WitP 2.

[Mike Scholl]

Zacktar.  The following is called "sarcasm"...

"I like this notion. On game turn one as the Allies, I simply embargo all trade with Japan (on the basis of whatever she's already done) and pass the "Three Ocean Navy" Bill ( to provide jobs in the shipyards). Japan collapses economically, and I save billions of bucks and thousands of lives by not having to fight the War in the Pacific! ".

And even in your last post, you still sound like you don't get it.  [8|]   If you were only talking about a month or so of pre-war manuevering (as you claim in your last post), then nothing I said above should matter.  The embargoes were already in place, and the Two Ocean Naval Bill and it's later suplement were already ordered and under construction.  So all that stuff about "impeachment" and "deficit spending" and "provoking a war" is meaningless unless you were talking years and not months of leadtime.

And if you were talking about "years", then you have to face the prospect that both sides will have "hindsight"...., and be able to use it.   Or were you only going to allow this "freedom" to the Japanese?  [8D] 

[Sonny II]

ORIGINAL: scott1964

Real Life, to be able to transport us back in time. [:'(]

Players would still complain that it is unrealistic!

[Jaws_slith]

It would be,
AE as it is,
Goolge Earth detail,
Aircombat could be solved with the new IL-2 engine,
Naval combat could be solved with the PT boats/ Silend Service V enginge
And Land combat could be solved with the details and tactics like Brothers in Arms Hells Highway[:D]