Check out irrelevant's current thread on irksome ground movement. This makes it extremely hard to set up a land defense when attacking forces can warp around your units in one turn.
River defense is worthless and applies minor disruption to attacking units. What happen to the old style CRT results. Units attacking across a river are halved, or the defender is doubled?
No wonder Russia and China can be vaporized. If the Allies can survive it the same will happen to the Japanese later on.
Can an Allied Player Win the Game?
Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
RE: soviet union
China can't survive long term, probably even under the best generalship. Japan gets a big batch of Chinese theater reinforcements in 1942 and 1943. Probably a total of 12-15 divisions. China gets nothing.
After that I haven't checked. Japan probably gets a lot more China-based divisions in 1944 and 1945. It's not a realistic situation at all.
After that I haven't checked. Japan probably gets a lot more China-based divisions in 1944 and 1945. It's not a realistic situation at all.
________________________________________
I feal so dirty when I sink convoys with 4E bombers, makes porn feal wholsome. - Brady, Founding Member of the Japanese Fanboy Club
RE: soviet union
I've wondered about that also. Where is Chinese Army? How can they be outnumbered in their own country? Every citizen was a potential conscript.[&:]
RE: soviet union
Call me ever hopeful then. Even if I do eventually get pushed out of China, I'll be giving U2/Ltfighter/KBullard one helluva fight!
-F-
-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me
RE: soviet union
The Allied players are all doomed to get slapped around by us Japanese players for the 1st 2 years. After that it is anybody's game.
2 years of doom and gloom, 1 year of stalemate, then 2 years of doom and gloom for the other guy.
2 years of doom and gloom, 1 year of stalemate, then 2 years of doom and gloom for the other guy.
-
Ron Saueracker
- Posts: 10967
- Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
RE: soviet union
ORIGINAL: 2ndACR
The Allied players are all doomed to get slapped around by us Japanese players for the 1st 2 years. After that it is anybody's game.
2 years of doom and gloom, 1 year of stalemate, then 2 years of doom and gloom for the other guy.
Well, if Dana Delaney or Marisa Tomei were doing the slapping, I would not mind that much.
Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
RE: soviet union
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
ORIGINAL: 2ndACR
The Allied players are all doomed to get slapped around by us Japanese players for the 1st 2 years. After that it is anybody's game.
2 years of doom and gloom, 1 year of stalemate, then 2 years of doom and gloom for the other guy.
Well, if Dana Delaney or Marisa Tomei were doing the slapping, I would not mind that much.
Obviously a gentleman who has 'Exit to Eden' on DVD. [:'(]
This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.
"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy
Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.
"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy
Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.
RE: soviet union
I have been wondering why my turns are so slow coming back.[X(][:-]
-
Ron Saueracker
- Posts: 10967
- Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
RE: soviet union
ORIGINAL: dtravel
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
ORIGINAL: 2ndACR
The Allied players are all doomed to get slapped around by us Japanese players for the 1st 2 years. After that it is anybody's game.
2 years of doom and gloom, 1 year of stalemate, then 2 years of doom and gloom for the other guy.
Well, if Dana Delaney or Marisa Tomei were doing the slapping, I would not mind that much.
Obviously a gentleman who has 'Exit to Eden' on DVD. [:'(]
Who?Me? Naaaa, just a great memory.Hard to forget that woman in her business suit for the spanker on the go.[8D] Hummanahummanahummana!!!!!
Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
RE: soviet union
I´m puzzled about China in this game. In the real war the Japs had severe logistical problems and add to that big problems with chinese guerillas. They had to have large garrisons way behind the frontline (if there was one). There were no forces left to offensive operations, they even had to increase their force size from 600.000 to over 800.000 for their 1944 Ichi-Go offensive. On the other hand the chinese were practically incapable of mounting any offensive operations due to problems getting their warlords to cooperate and of course the abyssmal logistics. And finally the factories in China, the countrys heavy industry were practically non existent before 1937. When the japs invaded they started a massive effort to move its light industries to the interior provinces, some 750 factories were moved mostly by hand. Now I see that there is heavy industries in China, did both china and japan build industries after 1937? No, I think that if Chancha were indeed such a good city to take, as in the game, I´m sure the japs would have committed some troops to take this valuable city. I would like to see some limitations there so the war in China kind of bogs down.
RE: soviet union
The garrison requirement is meant to represent the partisans. Would be a little better if the bases would change hands if garrison requirement is not met for say 5 days in a row.
The bases will sustain damage, but if it is one of the bases without any industry/resources It can be maxed out in damage and I would not care. Now if that base were to change hands and FUBAR my supply lines, then I would make sure that garrison is met at all times.
As it is now, I can strip about 6-7 divisions worth of additional combat forces for offensive operations with out any real fear about my rear area.
The bases will sustain damage, but if it is one of the bases without any industry/resources It can be maxed out in damage and I would not care. Now if that base were to change hands and FUBAR my supply lines, then I would make sure that garrison is met at all times.
As it is now, I can strip about 6-7 divisions worth of additional combat forces for offensive operations with out any real fear about my rear area.
RE: soviet union
They have made a very good simulation of many things in this game like different radars, the location of machineguns on bombers or individual stats of pilots. It seems that individual stats on pilots, or whatever detail, is more important than to better reflect the war in a country of 400 million or so. on the other hand, in a players perspective it would be quite boring to have a more historical handling of the war in China as basically nothing happened but a little more balance would be nice.
RE: soviet union
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
ORIGINAL: dtravel
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
Well, if Dana Delaney or Marisa Tomei were doing the slapping, I would not mind that much.
Obviously a gentleman who has 'Exit to Eden' on DVD. [:'(]
Who?Me? Naaaa, just a great memory.Hard to forget that woman in her business suit for the spanker on the go.[8D] Hummanahummanahummana!!!!!
Personally, its Ms Delaney describing how she gave herself away as a birthday present.
This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.
"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy
Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.
"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy
Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.
RE: soviet union
I would agree that China (and much of land combat, including Burma) has taken a 2nd seat to the CV, LBA, and fleet aspect of the game.
But in fairness, consider the fact that WitP was born of UV, which also specialized in CV, LBA, and fleet type actions. Land combat was even more abstract (and criticized) than it is now, they have added quite bit (postive) to the land combat part of the game. I do think it needs work, but in fairness, it's come a long way.
Also consider were the documentation lies. Armor thickness, ship deployments, air squadron lists, all that stuff that WitP excels at, is largely available, esp for the US side. Documentation on the Japanese is more sparse, and there have been several adjustments to the game regarding them. Same for the UK/Oz forces. And that's -with- the copious documentation for fleets and LBA.
When you move into the CBI theater, where documentation is not as readily available (esp China theater), it becomes that much harder to apply what little information you have, and turn it into a something that conforms to the game engine. So yes, while it sound dramatic to say, "How can a theater that involved nearly a 800 million men be so 'neglected' in a game that is otherwise very well done?" It's easy. There isn't the documentation.
And frankly, I doubt anyone considered the fact players would put so much empahsis on it. To the Allies (but certainly not the Chinese), China was simply a backwater to tie down Japanese land forces. The US didn't want those Japanese units deployed to the Central/South Pacific, and the British didn't want them deployed to India/Burma. So they both helped China by sending supplies. But they weren't helping China because they actually cared about the liberation of Chinese cities, they just didn't want to be fighting those same Japanese ground formations. All that being said (to empahsize that China was a backwater to the Allies), again, you would think that since China was a backwater historically, that it would be one in game, and there certainly hasn't been much in the way of board-game representation of the war in China. However, in WitP, this is obvsiouly not so.
I know that the second scenario I loaded up was the Russian one (the first was scen 15, you -HAVE- to load it up, to watch PH get clobbered, and then salivate at all the sh_t you have to work with!). But I thot, "Wow, I've never even seen a scenario that dealth with the Muchuko campain (short as it was). Cool!" So in that respect, similar to China, players were/are drawn to it's novelty.
I think another part of the problem is the attention that China is recieving on these boards. Most players wouldn't give a rat's ass about China, would simply turn AI on for China, and forget about it (it is a royal pain to manaage, esp as Allies). But because of all the bru-ha-ha on the boards, players can see that they can make significant gains in China, that suddenly, folks give a crap.
But in fairness, consider the fact that WitP was born of UV, which also specialized in CV, LBA, and fleet type actions. Land combat was even more abstract (and criticized) than it is now, they have added quite bit (postive) to the land combat part of the game. I do think it needs work, but in fairness, it's come a long way.
Also consider were the documentation lies. Armor thickness, ship deployments, air squadron lists, all that stuff that WitP excels at, is largely available, esp for the US side. Documentation on the Japanese is more sparse, and there have been several adjustments to the game regarding them. Same for the UK/Oz forces. And that's -with- the copious documentation for fleets and LBA.
When you move into the CBI theater, where documentation is not as readily available (esp China theater), it becomes that much harder to apply what little information you have, and turn it into a something that conforms to the game engine. So yes, while it sound dramatic to say, "How can a theater that involved nearly a 800 million men be so 'neglected' in a game that is otherwise very well done?" It's easy. There isn't the documentation.
And frankly, I doubt anyone considered the fact players would put so much empahsis on it. To the Allies (but certainly not the Chinese), China was simply a backwater to tie down Japanese land forces. The US didn't want those Japanese units deployed to the Central/South Pacific, and the British didn't want them deployed to India/Burma. So they both helped China by sending supplies. But they weren't helping China because they actually cared about the liberation of Chinese cities, they just didn't want to be fighting those same Japanese ground formations. All that being said (to empahsize that China was a backwater to the Allies), again, you would think that since China was a backwater historically, that it would be one in game, and there certainly hasn't been much in the way of board-game representation of the war in China. However, in WitP, this is obvsiouly not so.
I know that the second scenario I loaded up was the Russian one (the first was scen 15, you -HAVE- to load it up, to watch PH get clobbered, and then salivate at all the sh_t you have to work with!). But I thot, "Wow, I've never even seen a scenario that dealth with the Muchuko campain (short as it was). Cool!" So in that respect, similar to China, players were/are drawn to it's novelty.
I think another part of the problem is the attention that China is recieving on these boards. Most players wouldn't give a rat's ass about China, would simply turn AI on for China, and forget about it (it is a royal pain to manaage, esp as Allies). But because of all the bru-ha-ha on the boards, players can see that they can make significant gains in China, that suddenly, folks give a crap.
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me
RE: soviet union
Can somebody change VP of Chinese cities . I think that is main reason why japan player attack china . Chunking 3600VP , I didn't know that this city was major objective of WW2 in pacific .
RE: soviet union
I totally agree with those who dont care about the war in China but I do care about those Jap divisions that get freed up when China is gone, they can be a game killer. Well Matrix is in good company when it comes to making games were the Chinese get their asses kicked. I remember the Pacific war board game where the japs just rolled over the whole country (India too) whithin two months or so.One good thing with board games though are that it is simple to add rules as you dont have to be a programmer..[;)]
RE: soviet union
China was the reason Japan attacked the US. If FDR hadn't retaliated with economic sanctions against them they more than likely wouldn't have attacked the US. We backed them into a corner, and they came out swinging!
After all, they were our buddy's in WWI. They didn't like having seperate rules applied to them and not the Western powers. They wanted to be a colonial power like everyone else.
As a second note.
Major issues in this game need to be addressed.
PP expenditure to activate all units. Preparation times should be strictly adhered to for units before deployment.
Right now all we have are house rules. This can be just like a boardgame. After all this is what it is. Only no cardboard and paper.
After all, they were our buddy's in WWI. They didn't like having seperate rules applied to them and not the Western powers. They wanted to be a colonial power like everyone else.
As a second note.
Major issues in this game need to be addressed.
PP expenditure to activate all units. Preparation times should be strictly adhered to for units before deployment.
Right now all we have are house rules. This can be just like a boardgame. After all this is what it is. Only no cardboard and paper.
RE: soviet union
ORIGINAL: Halsey
China was the reason Japan attacked the US. If FDR hadn't retaliated with economic sanctions against them they more than likely wouldn't have attacked the US. We backed them into a corner, and they came out swinging!
After all, they were our buddy's in WWI. They didn't like having seperate rules applied to them and not the Western powers. They wanted to be a colonial power like everyone else.
As a second note.
Major issues in this game need to be addressed.
PP expenditure to activate all units. Preparation times should be strictly adhered to for units before deployment.
Right now all we have are house rules. This can be just like a boardgame. After all this is what it is. Only no cardboard and paper.
Actually Halsey it WASN'T China. You fell into the same mistake both Japan and the US diplomats did back in 1941. It was Manchuria (or Manchuoko). The U.S. didn't care if Japan stayed in Manchuria but wanted the Japanese out of the China area (look at the WiTP map and you can see both China and Manchuria). But the Japanese related OUR China to mean Manchuria too. The irony in all this is that IF we had been more descriptive the Japanese would have been willing to have left China and stay in Manchuria. But at the time, neither side was looking favorably on each other and if there was a possibility to look at what the other side said wrong, well, neither side missed that opportunity.
Also my opinion about the PP points ... keep your house rules: I like it as it is.
PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
RE: soviet union
I strongly disagree preparation wise. Preparation points are not realistic at all. If you are preparing for an amphib invasion, does it matter where it happens? No it does not.
It also adds even more micromanagement to a game that has too much micromanagement already. I would be happy to see a preparation on/off switch in the realism option.
It also adds even more micromanagement to a game that has too much micromanagement already. I would be happy to see a preparation on/off switch in the realism option.
RE: soviet union
I think what Halsey meant was having to expend PP points to use units already assigned to your commands. I strongly disagree with that. If you've already paid the PP points to switch them from a restricted HQ to an unrestricted OR to switch them between HQs they should be yours to do with as you want.
As far as preparation points for a unit's next objective. If someone decided they want to invade someplace without preparing for it that should be their decision. After all they will pay the penalties for not being prepared and such. You're trying to add limitations which just simply be put into a game. The game is fun now but pretty soon with all the limitations and micromanaging people want you'll have to have a damn staff just to make a turn and the fun portion of this game will be changed to work.
As far as preparation points for a unit's next objective. If someone decided they want to invade someplace without preparing for it that should be their decision. After all they will pay the penalties for not being prepared and such. You're trying to add limitations which just simply be put into a game. The game is fun now but pretty soon with all the limitations and micromanaging people want you'll have to have a damn staff just to make a turn and the fun portion of this game will be changed to work.
PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)