The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Canoerebel »

I don't think the mod or the House Rules materially affect the air war. I think I'd be facing the same situation under most scenarios and without house rules. With regard to house rules, John would have to spread out his fighters more to cover strategic targets, but that wouldn't take much and he'd still be able to bring the house against the Allies, and the Allied pools would be just as dry.

There are many permutations to this, but geez, gents, is tweaking the pools this unreasonable?
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
viberpol
Posts: 858
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:16 pm
Location: Global village, Poland, EU

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by viberpol »

ORIGINAL: String
I think the problem here, Canoerebel, is that you are playing a JFB scenario. It's not that Allied pools are low but rather that Japanese pools are too high. For a historic force ratio, scenario 1 with PDU ON is pretty much required.

Maybe you hit it on the head String... [&:]

I had a short episode playing against John the RA with John taking the Allied side and me playing Japan
and in effect he abandoned the game as early as in March '42... [:D]
Sooo... you must be doing great job here Canoerebel! Keep it going. [:)]
Przy lackim orle, przy koniu Kiejstuta Archanioł Rusi na proporcach błysł
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Canoerebel »

1/2/42

Sabang: More sweeps, though the number of Tojos involved was considerably less. The Allies get the best of the battles on the day, though losses aren't particularly high for either side. Fatigue and morale numbers still excellent for the Allies, but disabled aircraft have reduced capacity to roughly 40% of what I had just two days ago. So the Allies will bring in three carrier F4F squadrons. This is mainly a desperate effort to buy a day or two for the aviation support to get the fighters up and working again. (By the way, the P-38Gs haven't been touched in the battles; the P-40K is robust and can give as good as it gets, but that's not going to be enough with the pools now down to just seven aircraft. Holy cow!) At this rate, the Allies may only have three or four days left before hard decisions must be made.

Sumatra: The Japanese take Nias, leaving Sinabang as the only base on the west side. The Japanese also land a fast transport invasion at Trinkat, but I think the Allied garrison is big enough to hold. Four IJA divisions are in the woods SW of Medan, facing one heavily reinforced USA division with a second two days away. It's jungle-rough terrain, so I think it's going to hold.

Assam: Japanese bombers have shut down Akyab airfield, which I've had to leave undefneded in favor of defending Sabang and Colombo (the later is my major triage unit and is exposed to enemy carrier raids; besides, it only has short-legged fighters that can't make the hop to Sabang). John won't accomplish anything lasting up here. This campaign depends on the outcome at Sabang. If the Allies hold, the Japanese are finished in Burma. If the Allies fold, Japan can make lots of noise in Burma, but aren't a threat to the major bases.

Elsewhere: Some things going on, but paling in comparison, so nuff said for now.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
There are many permutations to this, but geez, gents, is tweaking the pools this unreasonable?

The problem is that your 'tweaking the pools' for a supported scenario is someone else's "wrecking a perfectly good stock scenario to suit one player's wants".

That's what the editor is for, Dan. If you want that, by all means edit the database / replacements to suit whatever it is you're striving for. Then pre-arrange with a prospective partner that accepts this action. That's the way out. Politicking and rallying for a change to stock scenario 1 or 2 for your singular satisfaction is a non-starter.
Image
Xargun
Posts: 4396
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 11:34 pm
Location: Near Columbus, Ohio
Contact:

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Xargun »

I am a known JFB - never played a single game as the allies in my entire WitP (and PacWar) life - but what sort of tweaking of pools would you suggest?

User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Canoerebel »

String's point is that for historical force balance, Scenario 1 with PDU Off (he said "On," but I think he meant off?) is the only way to go. The problem is, of course, the Scenario 1 leaves Japan at a historical and competitive disadvantage. That's okay for some folks, but many (including me) prefer giving Japan lots of advantages to make the game more competitive and exciting. (I have a long record of pursuing matchups that would maximize this competition, so why some people in here are now accusing me of crying foul or whining, I do not know).

The problem is that the more competive scenarios (2 and RA, for instance) give Japan much more to work with while leaving the Allied aircraft pools historical. We all know that the game is always played at a higher rate than historical, which makes the pool imbalance problematic. Also, since Japan tends to set the pace in 1941 and '42, the further exacerbates the imbalance.

The best option may be for the Allies is to fight carefully and to give ground. In effect, that creates an imbalance for the Japanese in '42 and (I think) an imbalance for the Allies in '44 and '45. We've done alot to address the latter, but little to address the former.

I think it's good to have a game where the Allies can search for opportunities to strike in '42, especially if Japan is negligent and unprepared. But I think there nees to be a tweak of the aircraft pools to address this imbalance and make the game reasonably competitive from an air standpoing in '42. I'm not a modder; I've never opened an editor; I'm simply stating a proposition. I wish the community wasn't so offended and hostile.

This is something I've run across much more frequently lately. I've had one player take my good-natured comment that I wanted to make you guys "honorary southerners" and say he couldn't accept because it carries a connotation of racism. I've been accused of creating soaking TFs. I've been accused of gamey play. These comments have really weighed on me of late.

"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
I'm not a modder; I've never opened an editor; I'm simply stating a proposition. I wish the community wasn't so offended and hostile.

Dan, I'm not trying to be hostile, and I'm certainly not offended. Your proposition has been heard and, in my opinion, your proposed remedy rejected. I don't mean to be perfunctory or rude, it's just that what you're asking for has a remedy (the editor), which you seem to be rejecting out of hand because you haven't used it before.

The game comes with infinite flexibility and iterations. It's up to the players to identify (preferably before a gamestart) what they want, get 'buy in' from their prospective opponents and go with it. If you (or others) want a specific aspect of the game enhanced for 'stock' scenarios, make your own modification. I'm sure John could help with it too, as he's quite comfortable with the editor.

So here's a thought: Have you asked John for some additional fighter pools? He could easily add those into the editor for you. If it were me in your shoes, I'd at least ask. You may be surprised. [8D]
Image
pws1225
Posts: 1166
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:39 pm
Location: Tate's Hell, Florida

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by pws1225 »

No worries Dan. Those of us who have followed your AARs over the years know your style of play and respect you for that. A player doesn't get the kind of following you have by taking cheap shots at exploiting the game engine. You may have opinions about game tweeks that others don't agree with, but so be it. But I'll add that any tweeks that can be made to make the entire war more like late-42 and '43, then love to see them.

User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
I'm not a modder; I've never opened an editor; I'm simply stating a proposition. I wish the community wasn't so offended and hostile.

Dan, I'm not trying to be hostile, and I'm certainly not offended. Your proposition has been heard and, in my opinion, your proposed remedy rejected. I don't mean to be perfunctory or rude, it's just that what you're asking for has a remedy (the editor), which you seem to be rejecting out of hand because you haven't used it before.

The game comes with infinite flexibility and iterations. It's up to the players to identify (preferably before a gamestart) what they want, get 'buy in' from their prospective opponents and go with it. If you (or others) want a specific aspect of the game enhanced for 'stock' scenarios, make your own modification. I'm sure John could help with it too, as he's quite comfortable with the editor.

So here's a thought: Have you asked John for some additional fighter pools? He could easily add those into the editor for you. If it were me in your shoes, I'd at least ask. You may be surprised. [8D]
+1

That was my point a page or two back about such changes belonging in a mod not in a historical baseline scenario. You are already playing such a mod - RA is based on Babes, which is a historical scenario, but RA makes 'what if' changes from there. There is nothing hostile in suggesting that what you propose belongs in a 'what if' scenario and not in a historical scenario.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Canoerebel »

I think I need a break from the forum; I think I need a break from the game.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by JocMeister »

I have another angle on the problem.

I´m not sure the best way to solve the problem with allied pools is to increase them. I think it might be better to crank down the Japanese ability to train competent pilots instead. That would create a "speedbump" in 42-43. If the Japanese players would have to husband their pilot force a bit that might do away with some of the problem. I´m certainly not suggestion going back to historical levels but I think its too easy for the Japanese to train pilots.

Right now you have to opposition sides. One with extremely limited airframe capacity and enough pilots to fill them. The other side has almost unlimited airframes and also the ability to fill them with lots to spare. This leads to a situation where the Japanese can hurl themselves against the allies with complete disregard for losses. THAT is the problem. There is nothing holding back the Japanese air force in 42 and 43. Of course that is going to create a lopsided situation. Add into this the ability to streamline production into a few very powerful fighters (Tojo/George/Frank) and that even further tips the balance.

Making it harder for Japan to train pilots and to force them to husband them to not run out would go a long way. But as with everything finding that exact balance is probably near impossible.

There is a built in function to make the air war less lopsided though. Its called PDU OFF. I think it would go a long way to solve many of the problems with the air war. And I honestly think it would be more enjoying for both sides. Sadly many (most?) Japanese players (understandably) is extremely reluctant to give away the massive boost PDU ON gives them. I know of only one game going with PDU OFF. I follow that with keen interest.

EDIT:
Hang in there CR. I almost quit my game two times. I didn´t and now I´m very glad I kept going.
Image
User avatar
Encircled
Posts: 2097
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:50 pm
Location: Northern England

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Encircled »

I don't want to cause a row, or offend anyone (especially CR, whose AAR's are up there with the best) but Bullwinkle has nailed it for me with the comment about the "No strategic bombing" house rule.

I appreciate that CR thinks it wouldn't have that much effect, but I don't think that would be the case.

He'd have to protect every oil centre in range. He couldn't afford not to. That would slow down his build up, force him to spread his assets a lot more than he has to do at the moment.

With my limited experience of WITP:AE, CR looks to have pulled off a masterful stroke but can't do anything with it apart from be targeted by whatever John can throw at him.

That would be a lot less with the need to defend his oil centres.

The other view is that RA is so unbalanced in JFB favour that it isn't worth attacking till mid 43. You would hope that isn't the case.
User avatar
Crackaces
Posts: 3858
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 3:39 pm

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Crackaces »

ORIGINAL: Encircled

I don't want to cause a row, or offend anyone (especially CR, whose AAR's are up there with the best) but Bullwinkle has nailed it for me with the comment about the "No strategic bombing" house rule.

I appreciate that CR thinks it wouldn't have that much effect, but I don't think that would be the case.

He'd have to protect every oil centre in range. He couldn't afford not to. That would slow down his build up, force him to spread his assets a lot more than he has to do at the moment.

With my limited experience of WITP:AE, CR looks to have pulled off a masterful stroke but can't do anything with it apart from be targeted by whatever John can throw at him.

That would be a lot less with the need to defend his oil centres.

The other view is that RA is so unbalanced in JFB favour that it isn't worth attacking till mid 43. You would hope that isn't the case.

This problem was something I explored in my AAR, which I was lambasted with a rant that the PTO is way way different than the ETO. The problem from my perspective is that many situations never historically encountered with the PTO are not only quite possible -- they are dictated for an IJ victory. Thus applying concepts of a historical basis to these "what if" situations is ludicrous in my opinion. For example, would Australia sit by and not build roads toward the northern regions if a serious IJ attack consumed the north? Well it did not happen historically because the IJ were pretty much stopped at Port Moresby. However, I feel pretty confident that the Aussies and US would make some effort at "Red Ball Express" to supply the Northern regions if the IJ suddenly turned the war from a colonial dispute into a Hitleraques like bid for world domination. However, I do realize this is a religious argument.

From my perspective I agree with this post that The HR about strategic bombing really adds to this problem. Fundamentally the IJ are enabled to concentrate all their air power at the tip of the spear so to speak. Historically, just to say once Doolittle did his thing on the Home Islands the IJ were in a pickle devoting resources to defend strategic targets and offensive operations. In this situation, the IJ have zero worries except a focus to reduce the airframe pools to zero.

What this does in my opinion is encourage a roper dope Allied strategy. Simply dodge and weave and use a force in being that the IJ have to worry about and then wait for 1944 to play blitzkrieg against the clock.
"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

String's point is that for historical force balance, Scenario 1 with PDU Off (he said "On," but I think he meant off?) is the only way to go. The problem is, of course, the Scenario 1 leaves Japan at a historical and competitive disadvantage. That's okay for some folks, but many (including me) prefer giving Japan lots of advantages to make the game more competitive and exciting. (I have a long record of pursuing matchups that would maximize this competition, so why some people in here are now accusing me of crying foul or whining, I do not know).

The problem is that the more competive scenarios (2 and RA, for instance) give Japan much more to work with while leaving the Allied aircraft pools historical. We all know that the game is always played at a higher rate than historical, which makes the pool imbalance problematic. Also, since Japan tends to set the pace in 1941 and '42, the further exacerbates the imbalance.

The best option may be for the Allies is to fight carefully and to give ground. In effect, that creates an imbalance for the Japanese in '42 and (I think) an imbalance for the Allies in '44 and '45. We've done alot to address the latter, but little to address the former.

I think it's good to have a game where the Allies can search for opportunities to strike in '42, especially if Japan is negligent and unprepared. But I think there nees to be a tweak of the aircraft pools to address this imbalance and make the game reasonably competitive from an air standpoing in '42. I'm not a modder; I've never opened an editor; I'm simply stating a proposition. I wish the community wasn't so offended and hostile.

This is something I've run across much more frequently lately. I've had one player take my good-natured comment that I wanted to make you guys "honorary southerners" and say he couldn't accept because it carries a connotation of racism. I've been accused of creating soaking TFs. I've been accused of gamey play. These comments have really weighed on me of late.

I hope you realize we're all just offering thoughts and no one is seriously hostile or offended. They simply have lots of ideas and opinions and because you've created a great venue to discuss them, they're putting them out there.

In the beginning of this game at some point I suggested you look deeply into the differences between the sides before agreeing to certain HRs and before planning your strategic goals. It has A LOT of stuff for the Japanese and not much for the Allies.

The issue though is that in agreeing to these big improvements for Japan you'e also stated basically the kind of game you want to play, which is a Japanese force that is as you say more competitive. If you know it's more competitive and you know the limitations of the Allied side, then your move on Sumatra is fundamentally flawed at this time in game (without the ability to bomb oil at least).

I suspect that in this scenario you can't do it when you've done it. The IJ has too many good airframes, too many ships to carry them and this is too close to their center of power, so they don't even have the historical long LOC achieved when the Allies went for the Solomons.

I would love to see a game similar to what Jocke is proposing. We've spoken about this at some length. A game where the Japanese are limited to PDU off, where each side is limited in some way in pilot training (I threw out only 45 exp and 60 skill for fighters. Some TB pilots would have to have more).

You want big crazy battles and tense moments. You've got it!! You created it when Japan didn't do it by going for India or OZ. Now you have to be creative and see how to fight off the beast you've awakened. I'm excited to see how it goes.

Good luck Dan! [:)]


"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by obvert »

double
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
paullus99
Posts: 1671
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2002 10:00 am

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by paullus99 »

I agree - I think we're all just offering up our opinions - and I'm sure it can get pretty intense at times too.

Going back and looking at RA - this is John's "JFB - Wet Dream" scenario....it gives the Japanese pretty much everything they need to match the Allies toe for toe throughout the entire war, with a huge imbalance that lasts at least until the middle of 1943.

Given how the US (especially) would react to a much stronger Japanese force - you'd expect that aircraft production would be the least of the allied problems (there was no reason the US could not have expanded its production to an almost obscene level fairly quickly - if there was a reason).

I believe Nemo had worked on a scenario where the allies received a number of on-map factories that could be built up to provide additional capacity - as long as they moved the supplies that were necessary.

At the end of the day, I believe (and this is just my opinion - so don't burn me at the stake) that this scenario was designed specifically to give John the satisfaction of absolutely destroying the Allies anytime he wanted to....
Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7457
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by HansBolter »

ORIGINAL: paullus99

I agree - I think we're all just offering up our opinions - and I'm sure it can get pretty intense at times too.

Going back and looking at RA - this is John's "JFB - Wet Dream" scenario....it gives the Japanese pretty much everything they need to match the Allies toe for toe throughout the entire war, with a huge imbalance that lasts at least until the middle of 1943.

Given how the US (especially) would react to a much stronger Japanese force - you'd expect that aircraft production would be the least of the allied problems (there was no reason the US could not have expanded its production to an almost obscene level fairly quickly - if there was a reason).

I believe Nemo had worked on a scenario where the allies received a number of on-map factories that could be built up to provide additional capacity - as long as they moved the supplies that were necessary.

At the end of the day, I believe (and this is just my opinion - so don't burn me at the stake) that this scenario was designed specifically to give John the satisfaction of absolutely destroying the Allies anytime he wanted to....


Which would seem to make the moral of the story "beware JFBs peddling self made Wet Dream scenarios...especially ones they won't play the Allied side in beyond March '42!"
Hans

Flicker
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:19 am
Location: Rocket City USA

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Flicker »

Canoerebel = "...my good-natured comment that I wanted to make you guys "honorary southerners" and say he couldn't accept because it carries a connotation of racism."

I saw that, bless his heart he just doesn't know any better.

I enjoy reading your AARs and watching your game play, but I don't know how you do it. The game is time-consuming and writing entertaining AARs takes effort. Sad to see your morale so low. I was hoping for an invasion of the Phillipines or Hokkaido or something to buck up morale...

User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Right now you have to opposition sides. One with extremely limited airframe capacity and enough pilots to fill them. The other side has almost unlimited airframes and also the ability to fill them with lots to spare. This leads to a situation where the Japanese can hurl themselves against the allies with complete disregard for losses. THAT is the problem. There is nothing holding back the Japanese air force in 42 and 43. Of course that is going to create a lopsided situation. Add into this the ability to streamline production into a few very powerful fighters (Tojo/George/Frank) and that even further tips the balance.

I know I sound like a broken record (young guys: look it up), but there is something holding Japan back if only it were observed: VPs. Play the design; it's in there. If CR has destroyed a vast number more aircraft as he says he's "winning" to an extent already if the design is respected.

Looks like this AAR is about to go dark, but perhaps this point can be a final take-away.
The Moose
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9902
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by ny59giants »

Posted this in John's AAR. Here is what the latest version of RA (6.0x) shows for early war American fighters. Can you compare them Dan and/or let me know what version this PBEM is so I can load it??
Pulling up RA 6.0x that isn't the final version, but should be correct for American fighters for early war ('42 to early '43). I would need to know what version this PBEM is to load it.

P-38E...5/42 - 5/42...24/mo (Replacements)
P-38F...8/42 - 9/42...40/mo (Production)
P-38G...10/42 - 5/43..20/mo (Prod) means 60/mo
P-38H...6/43 - 11/43..20/mo (Prod) means 80/mo
P-38J...12/43 - 5/44..20/mo (Prod) means 100/mo
P-38L...6/44 - end....30/mo (Prod) means 130/mo

This is an increase from stock.

P-40E...12/41 - 10/42...45/mo
P-40K...9/42 - 7/43 ....65/mo

F4F-4 Wildcat...3/42 - 4/43...45/mo

Either there is a mix up in the mod that has no P-38s being produced or by accident the production was turned off.
[center]Image[/center]
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”