Weapon R&R and production

[Mike Scholl]

It would be an interesting adation, not to mention slave labor....Bridge on the river Kui(sp?) come to mind........

RR Construction might be a worthwhile addition to the game---but I think
it can probably do without "slave labor" and "relocation" and some of the
more "forgetable" inhumanity's inflicted during the course of the war. It
is a GAME after all.

[pad152]

You Know, if you add rail construction, when have to add road contruction
If Gary and company only add have the stuff requested in this forum the, game should be ready sometime before 2010, but still I want float plane & carrier subs

[Brady]

Yes Mike it is a game after all, it is hard though at least for me to not think of that image ingrained in me from seeing Alec Gunies and William Holden toiling away on the River Kui. If howeaver rail construction was added I suspect some mechanism would nead be implemented to represent the labor force requiered and used to that end in places like SE Asia, wheather it be "RR-Enginer Units" that become available at certain areas at certain times or special labor forces or a some other lable/mechinmism.

It's not like were asking for Chemical weapons or Neuclar Bomb's::)

[Mr.Frag]

Rail while being an interesting addition adds something completely new to the mix that needs a bunch of counter assets invented.

Currently, movement of goods overland is completely abstracted. You don't need trucks or trains for things to move. As long as there is an overland path, it will go.

Adding Rail construction means a counter is required, that of rail destruction (either bombing, or special forces, etc).

Now, one thinks down this path and the first question raised is "why can't I take out all rail/road/bridges anywhere?"

So we now have to add every choak point to the mix. Every place where there is a bridge or a rail house etc.

Now, to add these additional 20,000 targets we find they really don't make any difference because the roads don't have trucks and the rails don't have trains.

Ok, in goes those production factories and repair yards. Woops, now we need to divert oil into gasoline production and add those factories.

Now someone will come along and say he's mad because his F4F can't strafe the train. So we add scheduling of trains to the model so us Axis Fanboys can run our rail empire at night so they can't strafe the trains

It never ends ...

[Brady]

What if it was simplified, Suply interdiction as a mishion, planes set to this would be asumed to be on a anti Rail/road mishion, RR-Engeners in the area would be their to fix the results ect. I see what you mean it clould be made quiet complex, but I think the effect could be had and made somewhat simple in the making/effect.

[Mr.Frag]

Simplification causes conflict. Just look at the F4F vs A6M war raging for the past couple of years.

You also have to factor in value. Did Japan historically suffer production problems due to their inability to move goods over rail & road? If so, what percentage did the effect cause?

If they added railways that could be built to decrease the need for shipping, it would be such a key target for the Allies that it would be knocked out pretty much 100% of the time.

Now that we know logically the Allies would keep it supressed, it kind of removes the need to have it when you think about it since it would rarely if ever be functional.

At that point, it becomes a time sink, something that simply eats up your time for no actual net results.

[pad152]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If they added railways that could be built to decrease the need for shipping, it would be such a key target for the Allies that it would be knocked out pretty much 100% of the time.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hey the USAAF needs additional targets to bomb after the Japanses run out of ships

[Brady]

Quiet a large part of the empire (depending on the time frame) would not be readly reached by air interdiction, in these areas, rail transport could be very helpfull and perhaps worth the expendature. Even in Europe whear the Rail net was their for the striking it took a while before any apricable impact was made on the rail net work, choke points were repaired after being hit, ect, as you say it is a very complicated thing or rather could be, just in the brief dischushion we have entered into hear many points and counter points have come readly to mind.

[mogami]

Hi, There are Railroads. You just can build new ones. You can't attack existing ones. (even the Burma RR was kept running right up to the end even with the bridges being destoyed from time to time. (Dispite the "Bridge on the River Kwai" The Japanese knew how to build bridges.)

[Mike Scholl]

Hi, There are Railroads. You just can build new ones. You can't attack existing ones. (even the Burma RR was kept running right up to the end even with the bridges being destoyed from time to time. (Dispite the "Bridge on the River Kwai" The Japanese knew how to build bridges.)

The ONLY reason I said that "RR Construction MIGHT be a good idea" was that
the Burma Railroad didn't exist when the war began. Without "finishing" it, the
Japanese SHOULD have great difficulty supporting the Army they eventually
built up in Burma. Shipping in the Bay of Bengal is going to start getting pretty
vulnerable by 1943, and a completed Burma RR removes the need for much of
it. Otherwise, the Allies can (if the supply rules aren't a total joke) pretty much
force the Japs out of Burma by mangling their convoys to Rangoon. If building
a Rail connection was a relatively expensive and time consuming project that
required a number of engineering assets, it's unlikely to become a problem of
large proportions. Maybe MATRIX could represent it as an "unfinished link" on
the map, and if the Japanese player parked "X" number of engineers and "X"
munber of supply points on it for 8-12 months it would become a "railroad"
hex.

Maybe it's not worth the trouble. Though as much or more than anything else,
the WitP was a LOGISTICAL struggle for both sides---and if logistics are simpli-
fied to the point of not being a big factor in strategic planning, a lot of the
"flavor" will be lost.