PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting

[vettim89]

Having always played with PDU on, I was wondering if anyone plays with PDU off. Would love to hear some comments by anyone who does as far as how it affects the game play. Does it affect the Japanese player more than the Allied? How do you feel about playing with PDU off vs on as far as affecting game play? What are the cases to be made for PDU on vs PDU off?

[mike scholl 1]

I've always played with it off.  Seems to me to be a very pro-Japanese modification to play.  If faced with a potential opponent who wanted to play with it on, I'd ask for something pro-Allied in return..., like working US torpedoes.

[topeverest]

Since the first time I played, I always play with it on and dont ask for anything extra for the allies. To me it is natural that the player should have a wider choice of upgrade options. Besides, both me and my opponent felt it unnecisarily restrictive for our play tastes. My view is that pilot skill and experience is more important than airframe type.

[PaxMondo]

Always on.  Agree with Andy, not sure it really matters much in the long run.  BUT, in terms of fun, yeah, PDU ON adds a lot of fun.

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: topeverest

Since the first time I played, I always play with it on and dont ask for anything extra for the allies. To me it is natural that the player should have a wider choice of upgrade options.

I might buy this..., but only the Japanese side can alter it's A/C production. That makes PDU very pro-Japanese.

[PMCN]

I play with it off.  I don't think it is something I should have any influence over, so to me it is much more realistic than being able to change the planes a group is flying at will.  It is also one less thing I have to worry about from turn to turn.

[Athius]

I like to (mirco)manage the production and the economy, and I really like the extra flexibility that PDU on gives me, so I leave it on most times.

[Marcus_Antonius]

I can't agree. The historical planes types in the different groups were determined in the war based on what the historical Japanese were building/had available. If the game is giving the Japanese player the responsibility of determining the right balance of aircraft types, it seems silly to constrain him/her by having to fill the squadrons in the exact same way the historical Japanese chose to.

As far as giving tha allies reliable torps from the start...game over in 1942 [;)]

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely

I play with it off.  I don't think it is something I should have any influence over, so to me it is much more realistic than being able to change the planes a group is flying at will.  It is also one less thing I have to worry about from turn to turn.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

I've always played with it off.  Seems to me to be a very pro-Japanese modification to play.  If faced with a potential opponent who wanted to play with it on, I'd ask for something pro-Allied in return..., like working US torpedoes.

in a PBEM this would end the war one year earlier at least IMO as you would have probably whiped out the enemy merchant marine in early 44 if you start sinking merchants in the hundreds in 42 already.

[PMCN]

I understand what you are saying but I don't think it is a good idea in a historical simulation to allow players to control production. It always ends up with a change from a historical simulation to a game of "Blue Force" versus "Red Force." Not to mention min-maxing and other such joys.

If that is your cup of tea, fill your boot. For me I want a simulation of the historic setting. I don't think that results in a lock step with what happened historically either. I find that the worst straw man argument in existence.

But again this is my view on it, I doubt very much it is widely held and I understand the reason people prefer something where they can "twiddle" more. From time to time I feel the call of the dark side even.

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: a_gonatas

I can't agree. The historical planes types in the different groups were determined in the war based on what the historical Japanese were building/had available. If the game is giving the Japanese player the responsibility of determining the right balance of aircraft types, it seems silly to constrain him/her by having to fill the squadrons in the exact same way the historical Japanese chose to.
[;)]

But of course it's perfectly fine to "constrain" the Allies to historical limits. Sorry, I don't buy it. PDU is a pro-Japanese change in the game.

[SqzMyLemon]

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely

I understand what you are saying but I don't think it is a good idea in a historical simulation to allow players to control production. It always ends up with a change from a historical simulation to a game of "Blue Force" versus "Red Force." Not to mention min-maxing and other such joys.

If that is your cup of tea, fill your boot. For me I want a simulation of the historic setting. I don't think that results in a lock step with what happened historically either. I find that the worst straw man argument in existence.

But again this is my view on it, I doubt very much it is widely held and I understand the reason people prefer something where they can "twiddle" more. From time to time I feel the call of the dark side even.

I am playing 2 games with both settings as Japan. My AAR is with PDU off and another game is with PDU on. I have to admit I like the flexibility of PDU on to improve my overall air ability in the game. With PDU off in the AAR I'm very limited in the number of units I can actually upgrade to better models, and many of my squadrons can't change to newer models till mid-43 and in many cases that is going from a Sonia I to a Sonia Ib [:D]. I have so many Nate, Sonia and Ann units that I just can't mount far reaching invasions with adequate air support. That being said I like the challenge of trying to actually use what I have been given to the best of my ability.

You can look at things two ways. PDU off allows you to see if you can do better in the game compared to what actually happened historically, but it is limiting in what you can do as Japan in my opinion. PDU on allows you to markedly improve Japan's chances of putting up a sustained fight throughtout the game. I like both, but if I wanted to just play a simulation in which I have no chance of actually winning the war, or doing things differently to see what might have happened, then why bother ever playing Japan? As I mentioned, I like both...so it all comes down to what playing style people prefer, but if this was purely a simulation of historical events, I wouldn't be playing this game.

[CapAndGown]

With PDU off, there is really no reason for the player to have control over airplane production. Indeed, playing with PDU off would make the job of managing the economy much, much harder. Anyone thinking that playing with PDU off would make their life easier as Japan would quickly discover that the opposite would be the case.

[SqzMyLemon]

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

With PDU off, there is really no reason for the player to have control over airplane production. Indeed, playing with PDU off would make the job of managing the economy much, much harder. Anyone thinking that playing with PDU off would make their life easier as Japan would quickly discover that the opposite would be the case.

I totally agree cag. I find I have to be very careful mucking around with factories and such. WIth PDU off you pretty much have to produce everything and if you get a little too carefree it will affect things later. I'm actually working on how soon I can run the Japanese economy into the gorund my first time around. [:D]

[AcePylut]

What drives me nuts is players that play Scenario 2 with Jap PDU on, then make comments like "japs never produced 1000 Tojo's a month - this game is borked"

[USS Henrico]

I never used PDU on playing the AI, partly as a handicap and partly because there seemed to be horror stories from the original game about using it.

Playing as the Allies in PBEM, I've found PDU on useful to maximize the use of airframes in the early going, just by occasional use. I manually upgraded the Dutch fighter squadrons to P-40s: those would have been wasted otherwise, because there seemed to be no upgrades scheduled. I also gave an AVG squadron P-400s after realizing there was only one rear area squadron using them and 70 planes in the pool. The Chinese got a squadron equipped from the thirty odd leftover fighters after the three AVG squadrons upgraded, which also would have wasted otherwise. None of these are exactly war winners, but useful for keeping your Japanese opponent at least a little honest.

PDU on probably helps the Japanese more, but it is not totally one sided.

[bbbf]

I am playing as Allies, and I feel PDU off does not benefit me at all.

With PDU on, I could juggle my planes a whole lot better.

With PDU off, you don't get to downgrade to free up valuable airframes.

[Fletcher]

I am playing like japanese with PDU Off. I agree with Mike that PDU ON is very pro-japanese.
Regards
Ramón

[jimh009]

I initially had PDU off as the Allied player, but ran into problems with several plane squadrons being "stuck" in a endless loop - their upgrade path was circular (old planes upgrading to modern planes but then "upgrading back" to older planes then going back to the original modern plane). So I had to turn PDU off to break this cycle.

By and large, both for historical use and simplicity, I do tend to follow the general upgrade path. But on occasion the flexibility is nice - and needed.

[Marcus_Antonius]

The allies are getting the historical numbers of each type already. They can't change their building strategy much if at all?

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: a_gonatas

I can't agree. The historical planes types in the different groups were determined in the war based on what the historical Japanese were building/had available. If the game is giving the Japanese player the responsibility of determining the right balance of aircraft types, it seems silly to constrain him/her by having to fill the squadrons in the exact same way the historical Japanese chose to.
[;)]

But of course it's perfectly fine to "constrain" the Allies to historical limits. Sorry, I don't buy it. PDU is a pro-Japanese change in the game.