Should changing the aircraft upgrade path cost Political points?

[mikemike]

ORIGINAL: mlees

Do you think Tom Phillips would have operated Force Z against the landings in Kuantan without air cover if he had known the IJNAF could effectively attack his ships with planes based in Saigon?

Yes. He was promised RAF fighter support that never showed up. (They were busy with their own problems...)

Just nitpicking the one comment. [;)]

No problem. But he pressed on regardless when the fighter cover didn´t materialise, right?

However, if the nonhistorical anti-Japanese slant is so severe, why does AAR after AAR show the Japanese far exceeding their historical gains, and in less time? All of the Allied players there can't be such boobs...

It seems as if the "slant is in the eye of the beholder".

Has any of the Japanese players yet won the game? I mean, occupied and subdued all of India, Australia, China, and the USA?
Besides, this might point more to a problem in the game mechanics.

[mlees]

The Allies don´t need to, they get deluged with all the goodies they would ever want

That's your opinion. [:-] As an Allied player, I can tell you that I don't have enough long ranged stuff anytime I feel like it, at least up to the end of '43. All those A20/B26 units with a max range of 6 are still outranged by what the Japanese start with. P40/P47/F4U still have very short legs (max of 4). If I can take longer ranged stuff, you betcha I will.

(I haven't played into '44 yet, what with the patches/upgrades coming out every couple of months. Attaboys for those who make that possible, but I still restart the game by my choice.)

Japan was not much of a capitalist country, either; if necessary, the Tenno could have asked, as a personal favor, that Mitsubishi switch to building Franks and they would have jumped to it.

How do you know what Mr. Mitsubishi might have done? If it were so easy, wouldn't it have happened in real life? What, the military controlled cabinet was always out in the saki parlors, geisha houses, and steam baths instead of running the war? [8|]

If there was one el-supremo in charge, (like the player) than these inner poilitics could have been avoided by all of the nations of the time. Please don't try to use historical precedent to argue for unhistorical abilities. It doesn't pass the smell test. If you argue for the ability to control every facet of the game because, by god, you are the el-supremo, and you want to do things different the real life, than fine. That holds more water with me. [;)]

[mikemike]

It was either Captain Leach or Phillips´s Chief of Staff. I know that quote. This just means he didn´t believe the Japanese were able to shoot out his precious battleships from under his feet the way they eventually did. He would never have tried that stunt in the Med, with the Luftwaffe waiting for him.

[testarossa]

ORIGINAL: mikemike
Sounds like fun. (Warning - this statement is intended to be ironic)

Man, you are asking for troubles.[:D]

[mlees]

No problem. But he pressed on regardless when the fighter cover didn´t materialise, right?

Nope. When he was attacked, he was headed back to singapore.

Has any of the Japanese players yet won the game? I mean, occupied and subdued all of India, Australia, China, and the USA?
Besides, this might point more to a problem in the game mechanics

Again, I respectfully submit that you are confusing "winning the game" with "winning the war". Japan can "win the game" (probably not an autovictory) on points, but still have the Allies occupying Okinawa/Saipan/PI, etc.

Read the Wobbly vs PzB AAR. Japan is close to a 4-1 point spread as it is. If the tide turns, and Wobbly slowly takes back the Japanese conquests, he could still "lose" the game because of the massive point build up to overcome.

[testarossa]

ORIGINAL: mlees

That's your opinion. [:-] As an Allied player, I can tell you that I don't have enough long ranged stuff anytime I feel like it, at least up to the end of '43. All those A20/B26 units with a max range of 6 are still outranged by what the Japanese start with. P40/P47/F4U still have very short legs (max of 4). If I can take longer ranged stuff, you betcha I will.

I'm in 08/43. I have plenty of p38s and P40Ns. I dont use Boomerangs and other crappers as I saved all Dutch, Brits and Phil units.

[mikemike]

ORIGINAL: mlees

If there was one el-supremo in charge, (like the player) than these inner poilitics could have been avoided by all of the nations of the time. Please don't try to use historical precedent to argue for unhistorical abilities. It doesn't pass the smell test. If you argue for the ability to control every facet of the game because, by god, you are the el-supremo, and you want to do things different the real life, than fine. That holds more water with me. [;)]

This has all drifted off to side issues. My argument for voting "no" doesn´t seem to merit discussion. I´ll restate it , anyway. I don´t think the player (Japanese or not) should be penalized for using the most appropriate available equipment for his air units. This doesn´t have to mean he´ll switch to a superior type, but to something the game doesn´t want him to. Playing Pacwar, I would have liked to keep the B-26s with the tac bomber units, but the game switched them to B-25s on me, although their characteristics were inferior to those of the B-26. That sort of thing.

And that concludes my argument on this issue.

[mlees]

I was focusing on the statement "They (the Allies) get deluged with all the goodies they would ever want!" That is an opinion. If you had your choice, wouldn't you change out those Boomerangs for even P40B's?

When I play the Allies, I like to advance under LBA cover. Hard to do with all that stuff that is range 6 or less. That's when the carriers are used. But the Japanese have Betties and Nells with those long legs. They don't have to send the cv's if they don't want to. Usually. Speaking in generalities, here.

[testarossa]

[

ORIGINAL: mlees
If you had your choice, wouldn't you change out those Boomerangs for even P40B's?

You bet I would [:D]. Don't think Jap player would've liked this very much. I'm kicking his butt without additional squadrons of P40B, while he is struggling to retool his factories, and supply his offensive operations. I just load 300000 supplies and escort this 50 Aks convoy to Noumea. That’s it; South pacific is supplied for next three months. Than I do the same run from Karachi to Darwin. Supply problem is solved for Aussies too. Need fuel? Here we go, 300000 fuel convoy. Need more? No problem.

I’ve played both Japan and US, and found that playing Japan is much more stressful affair. If you make mistake as allies nothing bad really happens except loss of PP. As Japan every decision is like walking through the minefield, every mistake is almost fatal. In my first game against AI I overreacted on factory upgrades and ended up without supplies in Feb 1942. Decided to attack PH 3 times and lost many experienced pilots (took me some time to recover) so KB wasn’t that formidable in DEI, and it took much more time to concur it. Every move has consequences, so while fighting in Malaysia, I had to plan which units will land on which base in DEI month before actual operation. And so on.

It is hard to find Jap PBEM opponent now. I don’t know who would want to play as Japan if Allies will have option to upgrade all their air units to best aircraft available. Of course some monsters players will be more than willing to play as Japan, for the sake of the challenge, but they cant play with all players who want to be Allies, right?

[mlees]

I’ve played both Japan and US, and found that playing Japan is much more stressful affair. If you make mistake as allies nothing bad really happens except loss of PP. As Japan every decision is like walking through the minefield, every mistake is almost fatal. In my first game against AI I overreacted on factory upgrades and ended up without supplies in Feb 1942. Decided to attack PH 3 times and lost many experienced pilots (took me some time to recover) so KB wasn’t that formidable in DEI, and it took much more time to concur it. Every move has consequences, so while fighting in Malaysia, I had to plan which units will land on which base in DEI month before actual operation. And so on.

While it is true that the allied player does not have the production headaches, I disagree about the "mistakes" part. The Allied player must manage the land combat in Malaya very well in order to slow down the Japanese. Without Slowing the IJA in the Phillipines and Malaya, Burma and the DEI falls faster, because the Allied player doesn't have the time or resources to defend them. If Burma/DEI fall too fast, than an agreesive Japanese player can attack India/OZ. Look at Wobby's AAR. He's darn near the 4-1 VP Auto-Loss, and it's mid '42 in that AAR. I doubt, if the tide turns, he could realisticly overcome that kind of defecit. But, I think he will have fun trying...[:)]

It's my opinion that each player must run a near perfect game at different stages: the Allied player must do so first, to get the game to last, with the victory point score in a certain range, until mid '43. Then, as the tide of reinforcements come in, the IJ player must play a perfect game to husband their forces to defend their ever shrinking empire with trying to keep the losses in their favor.

Both must be a master of defence when the other has overwhelming superiority. When the games ends (if it ever does...[;)]), Japan is in ashes, but the player who did better on defence, limiting the other player's point gains, will have the win. Since few have gone that far (or are not talking), it's hard to say what the point spread should be for each stage of the game. If it's the beginning of '43, and the IJ player has twice as many points as the Allied player does, will the Allied player have enough time to regain the lead? Yup. If Japan has 2.5-1? Probably. 3-1? Dunno. Possibly not. Too many variables.

[testarossa]

ORIGINAL: mlees
3-1? Dunno. Possibly not. Too many variables.

Althoug I agree will all of your points, I still think that every game is different even with same opponent. If Allies dont ful around (Ron's bunker strategy) Japan doesn't have a lot of chances in racking up VPs.

Try strategic bombing - 1300 points in one week. I've managed to fly 150-200 B24 from Aparri (?) (Philippines, NE corner) to Nagasaki starting June 1943. In August I've got autovictory 52000-13000 or something.

[mlees]

I am not familiar with Ron's strategy, so I can't speak to it's strengths and weaknesses. I assume that someone out there will be able to devise a counter to it.

Where's Aparri? The Marianas? Well, all I can say is that I am assuming that, with a proper defense strategy, Japan should be able to prevent the Allied player from basing bombers within 10 hexes of the home islands until '44. [;)] I am not sure what happened in your game there, and I am definately NOT claiming to be a good player (but I suspect they exist). I think I have the thrust of the game down, just not the gazillion operational details.

Maybe, then, lets speculate on this: If the game requires too much of a perfect play by both players (because without perfect (or equally balanced bad) play the overwhelming force just buries the opposition), then with players generally being of different talents or skill level, one side or the other will be crushed, no matter how much we tinker with the OOB. (Which is what changing the upgrade paths of aircraft kinda is, tinkering.) How do we fix that? By making it so that mistakes don't hurt as much? Than good play is not as rewarding materially and/or emotionally. Penalizing one side or the other's OOB (by removing units, giving units, or allowing one side or the other to do things the other can't) is interesting for "what if" reasons, but if I stink as an Allied player, and someone at Matrix decides that the Americans are too strong and don't need any of the ships that arrived after June of '44 and delete them from the OOB (extreme example, I know), how does this help my game experience?

Lot's of Japanese players insist that Japan can't possibly survive the onslaught of '44, and this or that is unfair to the IJ players out there. (Allied side does this too, just not as much IMO. [:'(]) Well, guess what. Lot's of Allied players insist that the initial Japanese advantage(s) is/are unstoppable, too.

I like tinkering to see what happens when "x" is changed, but it's going to be a long, hard, and flame filled road for you if you want to find a truly perfectly balanced game here, just because of the one thing that the developers can't control: the players!

[testarossa]

OK. I see your point. How about make two diffrent buttons. Something like Jap upgrade path on/off. Allied upgrade path on/off. So later down the road we will be able to balance the game.

Edit: In short Ron falls back to the most easily defended bases and plays on defensive, not risking CVs and Surf TFs in some stupid forays till 1943.

I dont remember who (2Acr?) called it "bunker" stratgey - Allied player sits literally in the bunker during Jap rampage in 1942[:D]

[Ron Saueracker]

Incorrect. I defend what is defendable at the time. I don't sit back and wait until 1943 to fight, I just fall back to defendable positions and make the Jap player slog though everything. If an opportunity presents itself to commit CVs to a defensive or even a limited offensive operation, it will happen. What else is possible in this situation?

[2ndACR]

Ron fights for everything. He just does not come out and play in the early game. As in the 1st 6 months. Or he has not in any of our games yet.

He will not commit surface forces within my air cover, he will not commit his BB's/CV's anywhere that I may have a CV lurking.

I want him to come play with me on my terms, on my ground.[:D]

[testarossa]

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Ron fights for everything. He just does not come out and play in the early game. As in the 1st 6 months. Or he has not in any of our games yet.

He will not commit surface forces within my air cover, he will not commit his BB's/CV's anywhere that I may have a CV lurking.

I want him to come play with me on my terms, on my ground.[:D]

That's what I meant. Perfect Allied strategy until 1943.[:D] Although who knows Ron's strategy better than Ron? And I play 'bunker' strategy too. I would even say I admire it.[:'(]

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Ron fights for everything. He just does not come out and play in the early game. As in the 1st 6 months. Or he has not in any of our games yet.

He will not commit surface forces within my air cover, he will not commit his BB's/CV's anywhere that I may have a CV lurking.

I want him to come play with me on my terms, on my ground.[:D]

Well, that would be called an offensive.[:)] Gotta have superiority to think about this.

[mlees]

So, the dreaded "bunker" strategy means never coming out from under LBA cover? What's the problem with that? Sounds ideal to me. [:)] The challenge is knowing when "making him pay for that base he wants" becomes "get the heck out of Dodge with all my body parts intact". I assume. I guess. I think...

2ndACR: There must be a way to convince Ron that he needs to come out and play. I have faith either you or Mogami can figure that out.

[2ndACR]

I have not found the magic bait yet. I even took a little tour around Suva with my Baby KB to entice him out of hiding.

I never said it was not good strategy for the Allies. I just want to kill his CV's, but on my terms.

[Mynok]

Have you tried Natalie Portman yet?