PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting

[Marcus_Antonius]

As Japanese isn't PDU off going to constrain your building strategy to the point you are merely choosing which historical groups to fill and which not to fill?
 
What's the point of the whole airframe/engine production hassel if all you are is filling game defined orders?
 
Its not one sided, and its not like the Japanese can equip groups into radically different types of planes than they actually used. Its some flexibility for both sides. You can downgrade groups to obsolete types and use them in training commands. That works nice.
 
Plenty of you guys seem to play scenario two. THAT is pro Japanese. In those games you seem to see China going down and the Japs in Fiji and stuff like that. I prefer scenario one. Its a more desperate game for the Japanese, and more interesting.

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: a_gonatas

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

EXACTLY! Which is why "PDU on" is totally pro-Japanese...

[Marcus_Antonius]

Ok Mike. I agree if by "totally Japanese" you actually mean something like "necessary to make the most of the Japanese production choice ability and also useful in giving both sides more flexibility in forming training groups etc...." [;)]

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: a_gonatas

Ok Mike. I agree if by "totally Japanese" you actually mean something like "necessary to make the most of the Japanese production choice ability and also useful in giving both sides more flexibility in forming training groups etc...." [;)]

Actually I mean "Allowing the Japanese Player to switch his production and air groups to nothing but the best A/C Japan ever designed, while forcing the Allied player to play with his historical A/C production."

We generally force the Allied player to live with his side's historical mistakes (like the Mk XIV torpedo), so why let the Japanese side out from under it's historic screw-ups? It's a one-sided option.

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: a_gonatas

Ok Mike. I agree if by "totally Japanese" you actually mean something like "necessary to make the most of the Japanese production choice ability and also useful in giving both sides more flexibility in forming training groups etc...." [;)]

Actually I mean "Allowing the Japanese Player to switch his production and air groups to nothing but the best A/C Japan ever designed, while forcing the Allied player to play with his historical A/C production."

We generally force the Allied player to live with his side's historical mistakes (like the Mk XIV torpedo), so why let the Japanese side out from under it's historic screw-ups? It's a one-sided option.

I have to agree with Mike here at least on principle. The threads in this forum regarding Japanese aircraft production usually start with things like "Turn off Nate production" and "Convert all GM3 factories to GM4", etc.

Well if the game treated aircraft production equally the counterpart Allied thread would read "Convert all P-39 factories to P-40E" and "Put as many factories into P-47 and P-51 research as you can". Point being if the Allies could transfrom their aircraft production the way the Japanese can, it would be a much different game.

That said, I used to get me hackles up (ask in the Geezer thread if you don't know what that means) about WITP/AE's Japanocentric tendencies. Now, I realize that these are games not simulations. Games should be fun. They would not be fun if the Japanese were forced to lose the war historicaly now would they? So I am willing to tolerate some liberties for the Japanese side but do have to draw a line somewhere.

[topeverest]

I see the question as perfunctory, because the players are allowed to play it on or off, and mods can be made to effect allied alternate production.

There is room for just about every taste, and that is excellent design work.

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: topeverest

I see the question as perfunctory, because the players are allowed to play it on or off, and mods can be made to effect allied alternate production.

There is room for just about every taste, and that is excellent design work.

[:D]RIGHT![:D] Just try and find a Japanese opponent for a "mod" that changes all Allied A/C production and research to nothing but a half dozen of their best types. [8|][8|]

At least "vettim89" gets it. It's a pro-Japanese option, pure and simple. I just ask that everyone recognize and admit it instead of trying to conjure up silly "historical" justifications for it.

[CaptDave]

A thought just occurred to me that in my mind, at least, partially justifies not giving the Allies the same level of flexibility that Japan gets.  We need to remember that the US, the UK, and Canada (and the others, except China, to a lesser extent, particularly where aircraft are concerned) were fighting two wars, one in the Pacific and one in Europe.  Since we don't get to simulate what's happening in the other half of the world, it makes sense to me to put some restraints in place.

I look forward to the day when home computers are powerful enough and inexpensive enough, and developers are crazy enough, to support a simulation of the war in all theaters!  Note: I'm not holding my breath.

[kaleun]

Playing as allies with PDU on allows me to shift my aircraft around. For instance, my B26 unit in Solomon is running out of repalcements, there are too few B26 in the pool, but there are plenty A20, Presto, I "upgrade" it to A 20 and have a functional unit again.

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: kaleun

Playing as allies with PDU on allows me to shift my aircraft around. For instance, my B26 unit in Solomon is running out of repalcements, there are too few B26 in the pool, but there are plenty A20, Presto, I "upgrade" it to A 20 and have a functional unit again.

Yeah, but the trade off is, all Japanese fighter groups on map will be zeroes and Tony's, so in the end you'll lose 10 times as many of your A 20s to all the extra fighter groups with uber planes in them as you normally would.

Allowing one side to tweak its airframe production to maximize its potential while constraining the other side to draconian limits is not a fair/neutral option. As Mike said, it is a heavily biased pro-Japanese option, and fair-minded players who request its use should realize this.

Jim

[bradfordkay]

ChezDaJez and I decided to play with PDU Off in our AE game, the only real change from our CHS setup.

As the allies, I at first found it difficult to handle the fact that I couldn't upgrade/downgrade at will in order to get my best planes forward. Then as the game progressed and I have learned to deal with the extremely reduced production rates (even compared to CHS v2), I have begun to believe that PDU is helping prevent me from carelessly wasting my aircraft. The allied player needs to carefully husband his best squadrons, because they won't be easily rebuilt as in WITP.

I don't know about the Japanese side of it, but Chez has mentioned facing some difficulties (many squadrons which will not take the better aircraft being the main one). 

[Marcus_Antonius]

PDU off seems to get blasted by some as an evil Japanese advantage.

Thats a bit over the side for me. The idea that a group does not get equipped at all because you don't have the exact right type of equipment available is silly.

And its just as silly whether you are Allied or Japanese.

[Sredni]

I can't stand not being able to pick and choose what to refit my air units with at will as the allies. Even if it does favor the japanese I still want to play with pdu on.

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: Sredni

I can't stand not being able to pick and choose what to refit my air units with at will as the allies. Even if it does favor the Japanese I still want to play with pdu on.

Nobody is saying you can't..., just warning you that you are giving your opponent a much larger advantage than you are getting yourself. You buy a game to play and have fun with..., so please feel free to play it in whatever manner suits you best. My suggestion was only that while you're "giving away the farm", you might want to ask for something in return. [8D]

[Marcus_Antonius]

Mike: This is a huge sprawling game that demands an incredible commitment in time by both sides in a PBEM. Sure, if you want to handicap it like a horse race you can say something favors one side more than another so you may be giving up mor than you are getting (technically). But who thinks that way? And if you want to think that way there are less demanding games for cutthroat HTH play.
 
I want my opponent to be happy, because I want him to be interested enough in the game to get the moves back quickly. Why would anyone want to be frustrated by the technical requirements of 100% matching the prescribed equipment types to the units when your historical counterpart would change the TO & E of a unit to match what was available as the situation suited?
 
There is no joy in working for the game system, let the game system work for you. The "historical" requirement is that the game gives you the right tools. It should not tell you exactly how you should use them.

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: a_gonatas
The "historical" requirement is that the game gives you the right tools.

Which is exactly what "PDU on" doesn't do for the Japanese side! It allows them access to "tools" they never had. As I said, play any way you want. Just realize what you are doing when you do so.

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: a_gonatas
The "historical" requirement is that the game gives you the right tools.

Which is exactly what "PDU on" doesn't do for the Japanese side! It allows them access to "tools" they never had. As I said, play any way you want. Just realize what you are doing when you do so.

Wishing their was a middle ground: PDU on as far as assigning aircraft to air groups to give all players some flexibility but off as far as production goes.

As Mike pointed out "PDU on" does not mean the same thing for both sides. For the Allies it means that say you can downgrade a VMF in San Diego from F4F to F2a so that a VMF in the Solomons can fill out properly f you can change a late war USAAF sqaudron from P-40N to P-47D even though the RL unit got P-38J's (just examples). For the Japanese it means that kind of switching PLUS complete control of the production system. So as soon as Ki44's become available, all the Japanese Ki-43 factories become Ki44 factoreis even though in RL Ki-43 models were produced until 1944. I just wish there was a setting where PDU could be on without meaning the JFB's get only the best aircraft.

[Marcus_Antonius]

Not sure about giving the sides "tools they never had."
 
If you can't control the TO & Es of the airgroups to a greater extent, then why bother giving the Japanese the production choices the game forces on them?
 
For my money it makes no sense to give the Japanese player the responsibility to call all the production shots while limiting the opportunities to deploy the choices he/she makes.
 
For the allied side you do not have the same choices and it is never going to be as big a deal, but if I want to keep obsolete types around a bit longer or otherwise make use of my inventory in different ways, why not? I don't think you are really serving the historical appeal of the game by keeping the straightjackets buttoned up to the top.

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: a_gonatas

Not sure about giving the sides "tools they never had."

If you can't control the TO & Es of the airgroups to a greater extent, then why bother giving the Japanese the production choices the game forces on them?

For my money it makes no sense to give the Japanese player the responsibility to call all the production shots while limiting the opportunities to deploy the choices he/she makes.

For the allied side you do not have the same choices and it is never going to be as big a deal, but if I want to keep obsolete types around a bit longer or otherwise make use of my inventory in different ways, why not? I don't think you are really serving the historical appeal of the game by keeping the straightjackets buttoned up to the top.

I appreciate your point of view here. While PDU on does make for a more interesting game, I have to say that it produces a distorted game at best. Just form an historical perspective in late 1942 the IJAF was in a bitter struggle with the USAAF/RAAF for control of the skies over PNG. The battles involved mostly P-39 and P-40E with a few P-38 late for the Allies vs Ki-43, A6M2/3, and a few Ki-44 late for the Japanese. The battle was a slug fest eventually won by the Allies but the issue was in doubt for some time. With PDU on in AE this battle becomes the same Allied aircraft mix vs all Ki-44 on the Japanese side. A good Japanese player should be able to win that battle easily.

I have a problem with that but I fully understand that others do not. I think it is more of what kind of game that you want to play.

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: a_gonatas

If you can't control the TO & Es of the airgroups to a greater extent, then why bother giving the Japanese the production choices the game forces on them?
Absolutely right! Giving only the Japanese side control of it's production never should have happened...., but I figure the designers wanted to give another "bonus" to the Japanese side.

For my money it makes no sense to give the Japanese player the responsibility to call all the production shots while limiting the opportunities to deploy the choices he/she makes. Correct again! It makes no sense..., it's just a sop to JFB's

The truth is that a lot of players SAY they want to play the Japanese when what they mean is they want to play some version of Japan "on steroids". And AE provides the "Super Japan" option for those who want to go that way. For those who want a more historical game, PDU on is not a good choice.