Gamey Question

[Icedawg]

I noticed that you can change the command of the 2nd Air Division from Kwangtung to Southern for a very low cost in PP's (50ish if I recall). By doing so, you can thus free up a large number of squadrons for use in other theaters.

My question is, do you guys find this to be gamey? I'm leaning toward saying that it is gamey, but I really want to do it as it is a very cheap way of getting those air units into the action.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Icedawg

I noticed that you can change the command of the 2nd Air Division from Kwangtung to Southern for a very low cost in PP's (50ish if I recall). By doing so, you can thus free up a large number of squadrons for use in other theaters.

My question is, do you guys find this to be gamey? I'm leaning toward saying that it is gamey, but I really want to do it as it is a very cheap way of getting those air units into the action.

I don't know that formation specifically, but isn't the whole PP system "gamey" to a great extent? And if a parent commmand, when released by whatever PP payment the devs designed in, is thus released, wouldn't all of its subordinate commands also go with the parent unit's CO? Senior officers tend to be protective of their rice bowls, in any army.

[Mark Leonard]

I play a house rule where you have to pay for all sub units individually. It's gamey to pay a small fee for a the Western US HQ for example and have all of the units be free roaming in my opinion. 

[Mike Solli]

I think it's gamey if the parent HQ is restricted. 

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I think it's gamey if the parent HQ is restricted. 

Doesn't/shouldn't that depemd on the amout of PPs demanded for the parent's release? Perhaps the OP's beef is with the 50ish cost, not the mechanic of the thing.

[Mike Solli]

I simply don't think an entire restricted command should be able to be made non-restricted just for the cost of the HQ, regardless of the cost of that HQ.  I think all of the units should be purchased separately.

[SuluSea]

I play a house rule where you have to pay for all sub units individually. It's gamey to pay a small fee for a the Western US HQ for example and have all of the units be free roaming in my opinion. 

 
Exactly!!! Any manipulating of the PP system other than intended by the developers is gamey IMO.

[VSWG]

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I simply don't think an entire restricted command should be able to be made non-restricted just for the cost of the HQ, regardless of the cost of that HQ.  I think all of the units should be purchased separately.

I agree.

[Icedawg]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I think it's gamey if the parent HQ is restricted. 

Doesn't/shouldn't that depemd on the amout of PPs demanded for the parent's release? Perhaps the OP's beef is with the 50ish cost, not the mechanic of the thing.

Yes, my beef was with the low cost of the change of the HQ. Paying for the individual units one at a time seems to be way too high of a cost, but changing the HQ's command should be a bit more than 50 (maybe 150 or so).

[DuckofTindalos]

I follow a simple rule in these cases: If you have to ask yourself if something is gamey, it probably is.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I simply don't think an entire restricted command should be able to be made non-restricted just for the cost of the HQ, regardless of the cost of that HQ.  I think all of the units should be purchased separately.

We can disagree. I see the decision to make the parent unrestricted as one by the unseen political leadership (ie the player wearing his Tojo/Emperor hat) who is fully aware that a senior command is going to need to take its subordinate commands along to REMAIN a senior command. The political decision to release the senior commander to go and rampage is the tough, expensive decision; there's no unility in time and political capital being artificially consumed releasing the 22nd Bakers & Candlestick Makers Battallion to accompany him to his new duties.

Make the parent unit's release-cost hurt, and give him his followers to be, well, followers.

[Canoerebel]

Definately gamey. Discuss with your opponent to just make sure both sides agree to be able to utilize the feature if it's going to be used at all. If he doesn't mind you using it for Kwangtung units, you then don't mind him using it to free up several dozen Allied aircraft squadrons on the West Coast?

[Rob Brennan UK]

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I simply don't think an entire restricted command should be able to be made non-restricted just for the cost of the HQ, regardless of the cost of that HQ.  I think all of the units should be purchased separately.

+1 from me , it's in our house rules too. and can massivley affect the game and also makes PP's 'worthless' in any meaningful way.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: VSWG

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I simply don't think an entire restricted command should be able to be made non-restricted just for the cost of the HQ, regardless of the cost of that HQ.  I think all of the units should be purchased separately.

I agree.

+1. Full PP payment as intended. No efforts to skirt the rule with the 'discount' workaround are the HRs I abide by.

[Cap Mandrake]

ORIGINAL: CV38

I play a house rule where you have to pay for all sub units individually. It's gamey to pay a small fee for a the Western US HQ for example and have all of the units be free roaming in my opinion. 

Holy crap! What a great idea! I had no idea you could do that. Thanks for the tip.

[Q-Ball]

It's definitely Gamey. You should have to pay "Retail" for every unit.

In my game vs. Dan, I did pay for 2nd Air Div because I wanted the actual HQ unit, but I am paying to change each Air Unit on top of that, because it's clearly gamey.

Air Units are not that expensive anyway. Most are 60-80 PPs, which is only a turn's worth. Pay.

This ESPECIALLY goes for land units; you can massively exploit land units if you really want to. Don't. As Japan, you can buy almost any division with 30 days worth of PPs (1800); just wait and buy.

In my game vs. Dan I have earned and spent well over 10,000 PPs, which goes a long way in the end.

[RUDOLF]

Designers sayed at one point that it was WAD.

[VSWG]

ORIGINAL: RUDOLF

Designers sayed at one point that it was WAD.

Do you have a link?

[War History]

Elf has said that it was intended to work this way a few patches back. This of course doesn't mean that you have to agree and can't make house rules. But for those of you that bow to anything the devs do or say, then you should get off this "gamey" bandwagon right now because according to him, it is working as designed. Of course my personal opinion is very little of the air works the way it should to be truly "historical". Since the Japanese army maintained 20 to 25% of their force in Manchuria I personally feel there should be an air garrison limit in addition to the ground limit, but again, that's personal opinion.

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: RUDOLF

Designers sayed at one point that it was WAD.

Not what Andy Mac said in a very detailed post a couple of months ago. This particular exploit (the discount PP cost) was part of a much larger reworking of the HQ structure which was never completed. They decided that fewer problems would ensue if they did not undo the discount PP exploit.

People can form their own views about whether they should avail themselves of this exploit, but they misrepresent the devs every time they repeat the WAD claim.

Alfred