Fantasy time in WaW

[Numdydar]

I have made comments about this in the past and things have gotten better, but there are some still major issues with the game, especially in multiplayer.

In a MP game, in Jan 1944, the Japanese invade Panama with, not 1 but 2, SP units? WTF!!!

Japan could not do this in 1941. Yet the game allows fantasies like this to occur. In order to make it a 'fun' game? I'm sorry but having something so absurd to occur is not fun for me. As far as I can tell Japan did not invade anywhere after 1942. In actuality, they could have invaded anywhere on the West US coast too which is even more absurd, if that is even possible.

So, I would suggest that starting in Jan '43, Japan cannot build any more AVLs and in Jan '44 no AVs. This would at least cut down on the nuttiest abuses that the game currently allows.

A better solution would be to actually have to build AVs/AVLS versus the instant creation of them whenever you want. But that would require major changes to the game systems and so I doubt that is going to happen

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

1) I've wondered about Panama Canal invasions. Big morale dip?
2) Where was the USN, sleep on the job?
3) If the Juntas can make Honda, Toyota & the submarine midget arrive on Gilligan's Island 20 years later sounds like AVL

[Numdydar]

The game does not reflect the cracking of the Japanese code by the US. Nor does it have the massive number of search planes the Allies had both in the Pacific and the Atlantic. Especially by 1944.

The Spying tech works well for the ground forces and for the Axis looking for Allied naval forces, but it should be 100x better for the Allies for Axis naval forces. It could scale based on year.

So no the Allied naval forces were not asleep because, based on the historical record, any invasion past '43 was impossible for Japan. Since it was impossible, there is no reason to defend against it.

I would never play like that even if the game says it is possible, so my playing MP is pretty much ruined since the game allows stupid, very unrealistic moves like that.

[ThunderLizard11]

I suggest a infantry division there. Is there a big NM hot?

[Numdydar]

There is no morale drop. Just prevents travel between US East and West coasts.

Yes a larger force than a Gar could be placed there but that misses the entire point is that it was IMPOSSABLE for Japan to do this at all. At ANY time.

[Chernobyl]

I don't want realistic levels of ULTRA/Magic in this game. A realistic version of WWII would be unwinnable for Axis. I want balance and "fair" fun.

[Numdydar]

Why are you are playing a WWII period game at all? Why not D&D or a SiFi game? Because that is where this game in now.

I have no issues with alt-history strategies, like Japan invading Australia/India, Spain/Turkey joining on either side, and Germany capturing Egypt, etc. as these things actually could have happened if the real war went a little differently.

But the point I am making is that it was PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for Japan to invade anywhere past Midway at ANY time (and even that was a stretch). Much less in 1944. How does not allowing something that could NEVER happen in the real war make the game less 'fun' for you?

I do not expect War in East levels of realism in an SC game. But I do expect at least a passing nod to things that are just not possible to do. At least the AI is programed not to do things like this so in that regard playing against the AI is a lot better than playing against a human. Sad to say.

[ThunderLizard11]

Why are you are playing a WWII period game at all? Why not D&D or a SiFi game? Because that is where this game in now.

I have no issues with alt-history strategies, like Japan invading Australia/India, Spain/Turkey joining on either side, and Germany capturing Egypt, etc. as these things actually could have happened if the real war went a little differently.

But the point I am making is that it was PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for Japan to invade anywhere past Midway at ANY time (and even that was a stretch). Much less in 1944. How does not allowing something that could NEVER happen in the real war make the game less 'fun' for you?

I do not expect War in East levels of realism in an SC game. But I do expect at least a passing nod to things that are just not possible to do. At least the AI is programed not to do things like this so in that regard playing against the AI is a lot better than playing against a human. Sad to say.

Just agree house rules on this then when you start a match. Viola! Problem Solved.

[Numdydar]

Totally agree. But there are times when that solution does not work.

[Platoonist]

I certainly would have to agree with you, Numdydar. Most Japanese warships simply weren't built with long-range endurance in mind. Their destroyers in particular were rather "short-legged." Which is why the Pearl Harbor carrier strike ended up being the Imperial Japanese Navy's first on-the-job exercise in mid-ocean refueling. Just that mid-Pacific operation alone strained Japan's logistical resources to the limit and it continued to be something the Japanese struggled with. Given the relatively compact nature of their empire, they didn't have to build ships that could operate world-wide like the British. They used that tonnage instead to slap on more torpedo batteries with onboard reloads.

There were some large Japanese transports and former liners that might have been able to make a one-way kamikaze journey to Panama, but they likely would have had no escorting warships. As for getting there undetected in a slow moving transport given the heavy canal traffic transiting the Gulf of Panama? Odds are not good.

Since logistical and search mechanics would be hard to fix, one possible solution to deter a gamey tactic like this would be to replace the lowly garrison unit in Panama with one or maybe even two coastal gun units (like the Germans get) on either side of the canal. Given its importance to the US, Panama had the most extensive coastal artillery defenses in the Western Hemisphere, with most of the guns being of battleship caliber at least. Most major US West Coast cities also had extensive coastal artillery defenses in place.

Panama coastal artillery.jpg (130.68 KiB) Viewed 1385 times

[ThunderLizard11]

How about adding radar towers?

[Platoonist]

A better solution would be to actually have to build AVs/AVLS versus the instant creation of them whenever you want. But that would require major changes to the game systems and so I doubt that is going to happen

I do like this idea. Even the Allies for all their industrial capacity suffered from shortages of landing craft and suitable transports. Which is why the invasion of southern France had to wait weeks after D-Day was finished and amphibious landings planned for Burma got put off until the war was almost over.

[wirkey]

I was part of a team developing a map for an open source round-based game.
There was a "rule" that we were supposed to follow:
-playability comes first
-balance second
-historic accuracy is nice to have but less important

If you switch the ranking, but especially for a ww2 map the balance will most likely swing to one side.

[Numdydar]

I was part of a team developing a map for an open source round-based game.
There was a "rule" that we were supposed to follow:
-playability comes first
-balance second
-historic accuracy is nice to have but less important

If you switch the ranking, but especially for a ww2 map the balance will most likely swing to one side.

But if you allow things in the game that were impossible to occur in RL in the cause for playability, then you should not be designing a WWII game using that rule set.

As I said before I have no issues with alt-history/historically plausible differences from the historical record. Anything past that puts the game into a SiFi realm. If you do that why not put lasers on tanks/planes and use blaster rifles. I'm sure that would increase the 'playability for a lot of people

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

USS Nimitz goes back, sweet movie.
Need a Mod.

[archmache]

Why are you are playing a WWII period game at all? Why not D&D or a SiFi game? Because that is where this game in now.

I have no issues with alt-history strategies, like Japan invading Australia/India, Spain/Turkey joining on either side, and Germany capturing Egypt, etc. as these things actually could have happened if the real war went a little differently.

But the point I am making is that it was PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for Japan to invade anywhere past Midway at ANY time (and even that was a stretch). Much less in 1944. How does not allowing something that could NEVER happen in the real war make the game less 'fun' for you?

I do not expect War in East levels of realism in an SC game. But I do expect at least a passing nod to things that are just not possible to do. At least the AI is programed not to do things like this so in that regard playing against the AI is a lot better than playing against a human. Sad to say.

The game starts in 1939 - so if Japan prepares for it then they could I guess. The game isn't going to be historically accurate bc Japanese carriers probably won't be sunk early in the war. This game is designed for balance and flavor not realism. House rules will fix it.

[Numdydar]

You still miss the point. No matter how much Japan 'prepared' for an invasion of anything past Midway, even if they started in 1936, they could not have done it. Period.

And house rules will not fix the issues when you are involved in tournament play.

[Klydon]

You still miss the point. No matter how much Japan 'prepared' for an invasion of anything past Midway, even if they started in 1936, they could not have done it. Period.

And house rules will not fix the issues when you are involved in tournament play.

So this is a pretty bold statement to say that even with say 5 years of prep, that a operation could not be carried out against the Panama Canal. I would like to see what facts you are using to say that it could not be done in such an absolute way.

The US Army (and Navy for that matter) certainly was taking an invasion of Hawaii seriously and were expecting it after the Pearl Harbor raid. The US West Coast was thrown into a panic expecting Japanese landings as well. If the military of the time took it seriously (and beefed up the canal defenses). Per Wiki in 1939, the Canal defense zone had around a garrison of 13,500. At the height of the war, there were 65,000 solders alone and airfields had been expanded to take heavier aircraft. Ships patrolled the approaches to the canal on both sides.

Rules going in to prevent something like this should be carefully considered or it becomes a slippery slope. Was a Japanese air raid on the west coast out of the question? Where do you stop and where does it reach the point that you are going more for a replay of history rather than allowing the players a "what if" strategy, even if some of the what if's are a long reach.

[Numdydar]

Let's look at DDay. 2 Corps, 1 US and 1 British invaded. And look at what that took to go across about a 15 mile gap.

Now you are suggesting that Japan who had a major shortage of many things, including oil, could cross about 8.5K distance to deliver any sizeable force to Panama?

Also, Japan had very few dedicated APDs (LAVs in game terms). Could they have built more? Sure, but at the cost of other ships they needed more. Then the fleet that would have had to protect/support the invasion, along with oilers, etc. The US would have seen this massive fleet coming from a mile away and would have pulled out all the stops to sink everything they could find. Meanwhile back home, the British would have had a field day with very few warships around to stop them. No DEI oil for you Japan.

One thing that many people do not realize is that while Japan was a blue water navy it was NOT a global blue water navy, just a regional one. They lacked both the naval capacity and the need to do that. To invade Panama (or anywhere past Midway, including HI) would have required a drastic change in Japan's strategic goals. Which could never happen because of they had to get oil from somewhere otherwise their navy would just be stuck in port instead.

One last thing. Japan was involved in a war with China from '36 on. That took resources, including oil, to fight.

So I would not consider my statement to be 'bold; at all. Read some books about pre=war Japan and you will be shocked to see how bad off they really were. They had no business going to war with anyone, much less the US.

They actually gamed it out before they attacked and every time they lost horribly. So why did they attack anyway? Because the leadership believed that the wargame did not accurately reflect the Japanese warrior code and the European/US 'softness' for sacrifice. Turns out they were wrong on both counts.

[Tanaka]

Let's look at DDay. 2 Corps, 1 US and 1 British invaded. And look at what that took to go across about a 15 mile gap.

Now you are suggesting that Japan who had a major shortage of many things, including oil, could cross about 8.5K distance to deliver any sizeable force to Panama?

Also, Japan had very few dedicated APDs (LAVs in game terms). Could they have built more? Sure, but at the cost of other ships they needed more. Then the fleet that would have had to protect/support the invasion, along with oilers, etc. The US would have seen this massive fleet coming from a mile away and would have pulled out all the stops to sink everything they could find. Meanwhile back home, the British would have had a field day with very few warships around to stop them. No DEI oil for you Japan.

One thing that many people do not realize is that while Japan was a blue water navy it was NOT a global blue water navy, just a regional one. They lacked both the naval capacity and the need to do that. To invade Panama (or anywhere past Midway, including HI) would have required a drastic change in Japan's strategic goals. Which could never happen because of they had to get oil from somewhere otherwise their navy would just be stuck in port instead.

One last thing. Japan was involved in a war with China from '36 on. That took resources, including oil, to fight.

So I would not consider my statement to be 'bold; at all. Read some books about pre=war Japan and you will be shocked to see how bad off they really were. They had no business going to war with anyone, much less the US.

They actually gamed it out before they attacked and every time they lost horribly. So why did they attack anyway? Because the leadership believed that the wargame did not accurately reflect the Japanese warrior code and the European/US 'softness' for sacrifice. Turns out they were wrong on both counts.

Many have agreed and I do as well that the range of AVL's in this game is too far but I believe the Dev argument for it has always been for the AI. Otherwise the AI could or would not ever invade anything. Such as the US long distance invasions of N. Africa and France. So unfortunately it seems we have to live with the unrealistic ranges it seems...