Can an Allied Player Win the Game?

[Platoonist]

Actually waiting on Pacific Fighters might not be a bad thing. Seeing Battleship Row at Pearl Harbor packed with a fleet of KGV class BBs is a bit odd. Plus the Kido Butai strike group you fly with seems to consist of only nine planes. The game sure looks good but mission-wise and ship-wise it has a half-finished work in progress feel to it. There are some planes I'd like to see added to it as well such as the F8F Bearcat. Hopefully they will rectify these problems in upcoming patches or add-ons.

[Tankerace]

I'd love to fly a Bearcat.

The only plane that I don't care if it makes it in is the Helldiver. I crashed the VB Helldiver for CFS2 more times than I can count. Give me a good old Flying Barge (SBD-3) anytime.

BTW Platoonist, your new sig cracks me up! [:D]

[Platoonist]

Thanks...I think I am gonna name her 'Kate'. [:D]

Oh well...if WITP proves to be too much of a dissappointment there is always Silent Hunter 3 and subs galore in February....(crosses fingers).

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

Thanks...I think I am gonna name her 'Kate'. [:D]

Oh well...if WITP proves to be too much of a dissappointment there is always Silent Hunter 3 and subs galore in February....(crosses fingers).

Yeah, but it took Neil Stevens and the gaming community to get SH2 and DC to work. Pretty sad job by the companies but a glorious effort by the fans to get the games they paid good money for and were totally jerked around. I think I'm gonna invest some time and effort with those guys again and bring my SH2 and DC up to their standards. I have not touched them for three years I was so pissed off.

I refuse to buy SH3. I am not paying for a game which is basically the game I thought I'd purchased in SH2. Screw them. I'll get it off the user groups or something.

I've seen this crap too often and I'm getting a reminder here with WITP that even the little guys can act like the big boys.

[Halsey]

I would just like to say. Yes, the Allies can win this game. It's not a question of opponents. Instead it's a matter of playing the game mechanics that this game has. Historical or not.[;)]

[ADavidB]

ORIGINAL: Halsey

I would just like to say. Yes, the Allies can win this game. It's not a question of opponents. Instead it's a matter of playing the game mechanics that this game has. Historical or not.[;)]

Let's hope that we eventually get a version of the game that will run long enough for someone to be able to find out if you are right....

Dave Baranyi

[worr]

ORIGINAL: Hoplosternum

I have not played that much either. Yet the advice I am seeing for the allies is to be very cautious. I don't think we will agree here but to me Coral Sea, the Doolittle raid and Midway (all before KB was weakened significantly) all occurred.

Not sure how we are supposed to disagree on the above. Is this just exaggeration for effect?

Maybe the better bet is to play the other side and see if the advice (as you have come to hear it) is warranted.

If you truly want to simply refight specific historical scenarios in the Solomon’s campaign, UV might be your better choice. I still play it myself. Witp gives a historical beginning point. But it is only a snap shot in time. Diversions from history are guaranteed, especially with human players, and by most players are indeed welcome. Personally, I'd rather change history (especially as the IJN) than watch an interactive movie.

BTW...have you even played as the allies in a PBEM into 1943? How did it go?


I am though very interested to hear about your successes in China. I would love to see some more strategies on how to defend there. To me it appears that the Japanese can easily concentrate and kill off large portions of the Chinese army. But I would love to be proved wrong.

Like I said, I think the land combat is lacking something....yet another variable. Maybe weather. Maybe rail repair. Maybe a stacking limit. Maybe a VP reduction in Chinese cities. All these sound agreeable to me.

Singapore, PIs, and Burma all go as I would expect. But China is the great surprise to me. But that doesn't mean it is a suspension of reality. It was a decision not a defeat on the part of the IJA not to pursue China. I just never realized the potential. But you must commit to the battle. And that means calling off other offensives to do so.

I've played as the allies, and have held China. But I did this having a greater respect for my own weakness there. Against other players as the IJA I've made substantial gains in it. One player already in June 42 is down to the four main cities....though he still holds Burma. Rangoon is mine. But he is a first time player. So not sure how much store to put by that experience.

I have another game into May 42 and it is another story in China. This player simply pulled out of Burma once I assembled a committed force. I've taken only a few cities in China and supply is now an issue. I just started scenario 26 (Lemurs 4.0) but against a very good UV player who had beaten me before. Yes, I enjoy this game. And you'd have to beat me senseless to get me to stop.

I would also like to hear any decent strategies on how to counter the IJN. All that seems to be put up is - don't fight till mid 43 or hit them where they ain't.

Other threads have been done on that....I might say much depends upon what the IJN does. So it is hard to put down on paper.

Anyone who says "don't fight till mid 43" is giving you an exaggeration at best. Do fight. Keep his offensive honest. But don't think for a moment you have a shot at an invasion until you get some wind in your sails. You have a critical supply issue in 1941. If you send your CVs out to sea they'll run out of fuel. It will take you about 6 months just to get your conveyor belt to Aussie land all set up with fuel and supply points, recon out posts, and defensive fortresses, assembled on that outer ring.

Also pay attention to the coordinated attack rule for the USN. It means something in 1942.

I would say play the game for yourself and don't always listen to what others say. If not PBEM, then play the allied side through to 1943 against the AI. I think some players just burn out on a game...especially beta testers who know it all too well. Others just don’t like loosing. I'm having a great time. But then again I enjoy a historical game that allows you to make new decisions even mistakes that affect the outcome. And yes, I do loose!

Til then Hoplosternum take care!

Worr, out

[Feinder]

I'm wondering if players that lost China, were mindful of the supplies.

That's one of the things that I think might have been overlooked (and is frequently).

1. You -NEED- bases at 2x supply levels, so you can spew out those 300(!) squads a month. That's 10 squads a DAY. That's a LOT of f_cking squads waiting to be tapped.

2. Guys that are starving, don't do anything well! Keep them all your bases "in the pink" as best you can! Red supplies means you're not "healing" your squads, and getting a defensive penalty.

3. One of the highest priorties I have in my games, is to set up a air-tran chain from India asap. Use the C47 in SoPac. Use the 2 RDAF sqdns. Get them to India asap, and then use them to cart supplies in. Use them drop to your bases under attack. All thos SB2s (or whatever the Chinese LBs are), set them to tranport and drop supplies (they won't hit anything with bombs anyways with exp of 40). Besides they -do- get exp for supply missions! And get those 3x C-47 sqdns in WestCoast crated up, and into China asap.

YOU NEED SUPPLIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Now, that being said, I screwed around in China for about 2 weeks, so in my game vs. LtFighter/Kbullard (who definately came on strong), I was a little behind the 8-ball.

(* Glares at LtFighter, don't think I haven't noticed that you've gone from 55k to 130k guys attacking Ichang! I just means you're weaker elsewhere! Actually, make that 128k, that last Banzai charge didn't work *grin*)

But I think the situation is stabalizing. Have lots of supplies flowing in now, starting to see my squad replacement pool drop (excellent!), and the line is holding (altho was a nail-biter for a while). Certainly not out of the woods yet, and it is in fact a helluva lot more of an interesting battle than I expected (I figured China to be a backwater, boy was I wrong! Great fun!).

Anyways, so my question is, for those who lost China, did you pay attention to the (dire) supply situation? No supplies means that DEFINATELY Japan is gonna destroy you piecemail. You're not getting replacements, and you're at a defensive penaty if you're low on supplies. Not trying to sound consdescending. But supply is cruical in China (for both sides I suppose). But when you consider you have available 300 squads a month (esentially a whole division), were you successfully tapping that pool also?

And for U2/KBullard/LtFighter, if you just read anything that you might consider part of my strategy, please to ignore it. I've taken away everyone's chop-sticks, and am enjoying watching my guys starve to death. Who really wants a whole Div in replacements every month anways?

I don't even know if all that I've done will work, the jury is still certainly out. I don't claim to have the answer, but I certainly wouldn't say I'm being rolled in China. So I'm just trying to see, for those where China caved, if something got missed (like supply).

-F-

[worr]

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Anyways, so my question is, for those who lost China, did you pay attention to the (dire) supply situation? No supplies means that DEFINATELY Japan is gonna destroy you piecemail. You're not getting replacements, and you're at a defensive penaty if you're low on supplies. Not trying to sound consdescending. But supply is cruical in China (for both sides I suppose). But when you consider you have available 300 squads a month (esentially a whole division), were you successfully tapping that pool also?

Excellent point. Thanks Feinder.

Worr, out

[BlackVoid]

Japan made huge strategical mistakes all over the place.

- Surprise attack on the US and not catching any CVs (or any moder ship)
- Coral sea - attack without sufficient force, allowing the US to achieve force parity
- Midway - US CV force practically intact, yet they divide their forces and not commit the full force of KB (for a thought-to-be decisive battle!)
- Guadalcanal - totally underestimating the size of the US forces then committing to half-hearted piecemeal attacks. This meant they fought the decisive battle on the offensive over enemy territory. Totally contradicting their initial stratgegy.
- Refusing to employ convoy system.
- Stubborn reluctance to set depth charges to deeper.
- Archaic political and command structure in the Army and Navy.
- Employing an admiral to head KB who does not understand well enough that airpower is king (Nagumo).

Any player who can learn from history will not commit to the same mistakes and this is why you will not see much action from the US in 42. I do not think that hiding in SF/PH is the good strategy, the allies can risk to fight KB in home waters (PH, NZ, AUS, maybe Noumea). Any japanese CVs that are heavily damages are gone, but heavily damaged allied ones can be saved.

There are also things that cannot be modelled:
- Political considerations (offensives, risks, etc). Impossible to model well.
- Players can start a strategy that would be extremely risky in real life, although it may have worked in real life as well. (USSR, China, INDIA, NZ, AUS)
- morale of leaders and the soldiers cannot be modelled (totally impossible to model realistically, what we have as morale is too mathematical, in real life things are not so simple)
- weapon capabilities are no longer in doubt after reading history and a few AARs

The game is not perfect of course, but I think it is good enough to simulate the Pacific War given that all the participants are robots.

[guke]

ORIGINAL: worr
If you truly want to simply refight specific historical scenarios in the Solomon’s campaign, UV might be your better choice. I still play it myself. Witp gives a historical beginning point. But it is only a snap shot in time. Diversions from history are guaranteed, especially with human players, and by most players are indeed welcome. Personally, I'd rather change history (especially as the IJN) than watch an interactive movie.

Exactly.
Considering the course of history 1920-1945 it looks to me as if the Allies made their most of their mistakes before
Dec. 7 '41 and the Japanese made their's afterwards. Therefore it is not surprising that the Japanese in WitP usually do better than the historical ones IMO.

[Tankerace]

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

Thanks...I think I am gonna name her 'Kate'. [:D]

Oh well...if WITP proves to be too much of a dissappointment there is always Silent Hunter 3 and subs galore in February....(crosses fingers).

You know, because of WitP I can never date a girl named Kate, Betty, Val (Who the Hell is named Val these days), Sally, or Nell. Oh well.

I'll Buy SH3, mainly because I am a subsim fanatic. I'm looking forward to it and Dangerous Waters.

God, I cannot wait to finally have a crew inside my boat. Do you know how hard it was to push a T-I torpedo into the tube by myself in SH2? [:D]

[Feinder]

You know, because of WitP I can never date a girl named Kate, Betty, Val (Who the Hell is named Val these days), Sally, or Nell. Oh well.

Why wouldn't you?! You know they go down alot...[:D]

Did I say that? That was uncouth. Shhhhh.

-F-

[Tankerace]

ORIGINAL: Feinder

You know, because of WitP I can never date a girl named Kate, Betty, Val (Who the Hell is named Val these days), Sally, or Nell. Oh well.

Why wouldn't you?! You know they go down alot...[:D]

Did I say that? That was uncouth. Shhhhh.

-F-

You know, I never thought of that. So, I guess I should date a girl named Betty, and be a Wildcat with her? [:D]

I crack me up.

[testarossa]

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Some of the problems in WITP are so damning to a game, that I have resorted to playing Fallout 2 to relieve my frustrations.

Try Vampire Bloodlines. As good as it can be with RPG.

[ltfightr]

Feinder Have you run the replay yet? if so send me the combat txt. I am stuck at work and really want it.

[Feinder]

Sorry, was a work also, just got home.

Your(?) KB sank 2 more of Knavey's hospital ships. [:(]

Your attack at Ichang failed again. [:-]

And my stringbags put two torps into Ise. [:D]

-F-

[RUPD3658]

You know, because of WitP I can never date a girl named Kate, Betty, Val (Who the Hell is named Val these days), Sally, or Nell. Oh well.

Do you know the story of how the Betty got it's code name? HC had a special on a while ago and it said that the guy who came up with the code names named it after a nurse he had met since the observation blisters on the side reminded him of her best features.

As for Vals (Valerie) I have known (In the biblical sense) a few. It is a common Eastern European name. Also dated a Peggy, a Mert (Maria), a Tina, a Helen, and a Kate (Catherine). Fortunatly my wife (Pam) does not have a plane named after her that I know of.

As a male I am not good a remebering women's names when I meet them (Or looking them in the eye or even noticing that they HAVE eyes for that matter) so having a Jap plane's name that I can associate with them helps me remember. As long as I call her Betty and not G4 level bomber I am OK. [:D]

[Tankerace]

Now that you mention it, I did have a crush on a girl named Valerie... Maybe if I said "My lovely Type 99 Carrier attack plane, will you go out with me?"

I am alonely man.... [:D]

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Now that you mention it, I did have a crush on a girl named Valerie... Maybe if I said "My lovely Type 99 Carrier attack plane, will you go out with me?"

I am alonely man.... [:D]

I wonder if Japanese men who are history buffs sometimes mistakenly refer to women as "fork tailed devil" or "whispering death"?[8D]