Matrix Games Forums

Some would consider a late '45/early '46 a victory for Japan. But I understand your point, Pax, and will keep it in mind. I'd really love to see the '46 toys that we hardly ever get to use.

This is a great discussion guys. Want to complement everyone for their serious thinking and commentary. I've taken some notes off of this thread for future game play.

ORIGINAL: Anachro

Some would consider a late '45/early '46 a victory for Japan. But I understand your point, Pax, and will keep it in mind. I'd really love to see the '46 toys that we hardly ever get to use.

For the IJ player, the MOST difficult thing is to NOT overbuild the 1st and 2nd gen aircraft in 42/43. It is a hard thing to balance, you want to keep your momentum and keep it away from the Allies, but you cannot mortgage your future. HI/Supply have to be saved in 42/43 in order to make it to '46.

So, yes you build AC in 42/43, but think of it this way: the economy is finite. You can only build X number of aircraft the entire game (more or less true, depending upon your area of conquest). So do you want 25K Oscar, 25K Tojo, or 25K Frank? I'd like to say it is more complicated than that, but it really isn't. When you decide what you want to build, build only factories to support that, don't over build your factories, or better to say over build only as you absolutely have to. EX: you are going to have to build more Ha-35 engine factories to support your '42 fighter builds than you will use the rest of the game. Try not to build more than you absolutely need is the trick. Easier said than done ...[8D]

Easier said than done ...

Ain't that the truth. Gives me fits.[:(]

Second that...

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: Revthought

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

When I say historical, I mean in theme only. The Allied production numbers do not match reality exactly. And believe me when I say (other more experienced people can chime in here to), it is absolutely possible for a Japanese player to outproduce the United States in aircraft.

Not supplies or manpower, obviously (hell Allied supplies are infinite), but in aircraft yes. This sometimes has very strange results. Just look at most late war AARs. [:D]

All that said, there is a fine line between simulation and fun! I am not advocating for any changes to the game as it exists, just that the aircraft purchase system was a good idea and that if I were making WiTPAE2 I would have more Allied control over the economy be an option (just like historical R&D and PDUs).

Even then, I realize that to achieve fun for both sides you need to give the Japanese player some advantages, even in 1944+. If you don't no one would want to play Japan past 1943, and even if someone were willing to do so, it would be spectacularly boring and one sided.

Most of those AAR's the IJ economy implodes ... they have 25K aircraft, but no supply. That means no aircraft sortie, LCU's fight at 5% strength ...

I've said this many times in the past ... If I am allied player, and I see the IJ producing 1500 Tojo's/month, I know I have won. Yes, it will take until late '45, but I already know the economy will implode.

"Most".... is it really most, or just a few? Citations needed. Not that I don't think supply isn't the choke point rather than HI.

Also, pretty sure no supply effect on LCU is 25%.

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna




"Most".... is it really most, or just a few? Citations needed.

Go ahead. Find AAR's where IJ 'wins'. It is a short list. Then of those few, how many did the allied player resign after Jan 45 is an even shorter list.

I exclude AV with PDU ON as VP's don't really work if PDU ON is chosen.

ORIGINAL: rustysi

I would have more Allied control over the economy be an option

The problem I have with this is that you now need to have some way to simulate the European war. In WitP-AE Japans' whole deal is in front of you. For the Allies that's just not the case and you would need some form of ramifications WRT the ETO.

You're right. I obviously have not sat down and really thought about how I would model this: nobody is making WiTPAE2 and, even if they were, they certainly haven't asked (paid) me to work on it! [:D]That being said, I do not think this is an insolvable problem. WiTW attempts to handle the Eastern front for the Axis, for example... though I don't actually think they do a good job. Political points come to mind, as with the mods containing the aircraft purchase system, however I think there is probably a more elegant model possible. Even if it is fixing Allied production, with a small delay, to a ratio of Japanese production.

I am sure I could do it, but that would be work! PS. Having worked in the video game industry in previous incarnations of my life, nobody is going to come up with a truly balanced set of mechanics for a complicated game like WiTPAE while chatting about it on the forums. It would require serious thought, implementation, and hundreds (thousands) of hours of QA.

I still don't see how Japan could out produce the U.S., although in game it may be possible.

Japan will still end up with a supply and fuel problem eventually (nowhere near as bad as historical Japan), careful massaging of the Japanese economy can result in Japan outproducing the Allies in aircraft. And, referring back to the original post in the thread, it's possible to leapfrog into some late war aircraft as early and October/November 1942 for a Japanese player.

Does the U.S. get historical numbers of A/C?

In theme they do. I highly doubt that the actual "numbers" are historical. The problem really isn't so much this as it is the Allies aircraft production is fixed both in number and type. So, as the Allied player, if you need to respond to the Japanese player by producing more fighters at the expense of say, dive bombers, which you don't need as many of as the "historical" Allies, you cannot.

You are getting X number of aircraft of each type, and that's it.

Besides as has been said here many times, a lot of what is given to Japan is to entice someone like me to play that side. I really have no desire to play a side that I know is going to get slaughtered if my opponent sticks it through to the end and is any good. When I do get to PBEM I fully expect to be the boxer up against the ropes getting pummeled at some point in the game.

Like I said, I agree! To make this an enjoyable game the Japanese player needs some advantage, even late war, or the game would be very one sided and boring 1943+. So I am not advocating for a pure simulation. Merely an optional--if I were "making" a new version of this game, it would be an option like PDU or realistic R&D--way for interested players to enhance the simulation aspects of the game, while still giving the Japanese player an advantage over historical Japan.

And if you look at the aircraft purchase model available in some of the mods and people's responses to it, I think you'll find that this isn't "breaking the game" in favor of the Allies and/or making the game unfun for Japan. To me this is demonstrable proof of the concept that some historical rebalancing can be done without ruining the game.

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna




"Most".... is it really most, or just a few? Citations needed.

Go ahead. Find AAR's where IJ 'wins'. It is a short list. Then of those few, how many did the allied player resign after Jan 45 is an even shorter list.

I exclude AV with PDU ON as VP's don't really work if PDU ON is chosen.

You said most economies implode, not "Japan loses." I submit that "most economies implode" or flame out early (prior to 1945) is a forum narrative cooked up and propagated as gospel without any real evidence. On the contrary, the AARs I read or have read, show that most Japanese economies do not implode or flame out prior to the endgame.


VPs and PDU On are indirectly related at best. VPs are still VPs and players are still free to make VP-driven decisions, no matter what planes you're using.

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

VPs and PDU On are indirectly related at best. VPs are still VPs and players are still free to make VP-driven decisions, no matter what planes you're using.

I support this view. It's not useful to the game culture to propagate that PDU On breaks the VP system.

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

VPs and PDU On are indirectly related at best. VPs are still VPs and players are still free to make VP-driven decisions, no matter what planes you're using.

I support this view. It's not useful to the game culture to propagate that PDU On breaks the VP system.

This doesn't really bother me either way. I never play in a game that recognizes AV, I don't look at VP ever, and I don't ever use VP to determine a winner. For me the experience of this game is much more akin to the experience of pen and paper RPG. It's about the re-fighting a war that is a foregone conclusion, and we can either do things better, worse, or just different than the people who actually fought it.

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Most of those AAR's the IJ economy implodes ... they have 25K aircraft, but no supply. That means no aircraft sortie, LCU's fight at 5% strength ...

I've said this many times in the past ... If I am allied player, and I see the IJ producing 1500 Tojo's/month, I know I have won. Yes, it will take until late '45, but I already know the economy will implode.

m the "War Option 1941 mo

I was pretty upfront, I think, when I said that Japan seems to have supply and fuel problems--eventually. Those problems are, importantly I think, not nearly as bad as the historical IJ. Though perhaps this is overstated? I am not really in a position to speak about that definitively.

I am also not saying, nor did I mean to imply, that there were tons of Japanese players "winning" the war. Winning the air war in terms of kill ratios of Allied fighters, strike aircraft, and 4Es far above what would have elicited a strong reaction from the Allies? A reaction that is impossible for the Allied player to replicate? Yes. Of course it's happening.

If it wasn't happening, there would have been absolutely no reason to add the aircraft for PP system. Right?

That's what I'm referring to when I mention the late war AARs.

ORIGINAL: Revthought

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Most of those AAR's the IJ economy implodes ... they have 25K aircraft, but no supply. That means no aircraft sortie, LCU's fight at 5% strength ...

I've said this many times in the past ... If I am allied player, and I see the IJ producing 1500 Tojo's/month, I know I have won. Yes, it will take until late '45, but I already know the economy will implode.

m the "War Option 1941 mo

I was pretty upfront, I think, when I said that Japan seems to have supply and fuel problems--eventually. Those problems are, importantly I think, not nearly as bad as the historical IJ. Though perhaps this is overstated? I am not really in a position to speak about that definitively.

I am also not saying, nor did I mean to imply, that there were tons of Japanese players "winning" the war. Winning the air war in terms of kill ratios of Allied fighters, strike aircraft, and 4Es far above what would have elicited a strong reaction from the Allies? A reaction that is impossible for the Allied player to replicate? Yes. Of course it's happening.

If it wasn't happening, there would have been absolutely no reason to add the aircraft for PP system. Right?

That's what I'm referring to when I mention the late war AARs.

If Japan had a harder time getting oil from the DEI than they actually do, it would probably be closer to historical. But players of the game recognize that subs are a threat and organize their forces accordingly (the oft-cited example is much more airborne ASW effort than historical), and the USN torpedo dud rate is a little too harsh compared to history. Therefore, Japan is able to more safely pull more liquids from the SRA and therefore make more stuff (including supply).


Oh, also - my opponent in my current Allied game has supersized every squadron he can. He's not winning the air war. My pools, while they've been tight at times, are fine. You just have to combat your opponent, not history. If you try to do historical things against an opponent who is throwing 300 planes at you in a single raid, possibly multiple times per turn, as never really happened historically... well, you get complaints about Japan being able to just outproduce the Allies forever and ever without the Allies being able to do anything about it.

I look at it like free VPs, because it kind of is - as long as I fight it correctly. If I don't, my losses will not be worthwhile and my incorrect methods of countering it will be counterproductive to the victory effort (as in achieving less than a 2:1 kill ratio).

Just reading about Japanese R&D makes my head hurt. I started up an AI game as Japan last week, tried to figure out the production system, and gave up. I'm more of a simulation guy but as long as players agree on an approach it's all good.

ORIGINAL: John B.

Just reading about Japanese R&D makes my head hurt. I started up an AI game as Japan last week, tried to figure out the production system, and gave up. I'm more of a simulation guy but as long as players agree on an approach it's all good.

I understand, but it is a challenge that I enjoy. Don't get me wrong if it weren't for the forum and everything that has been posted by the good people here it would have been nearly impossible for me to get a handle on the beast. At least it would have taken me about 5 more years.[:D]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


VPs and PDU On are indirectly related at best. VPs are still VPs and players are still free to make VP-driven decisions, no matter what planes you're using.

Players can always do as they wish.

Base VP's are set based upon historical expectations. Units VP's are based upon historical loss data. PDU ON creates a great variance against history.

I exclude AV's as in my opinion VP's are skewed. Others are free to choose.

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna



You said most economies implode, not "Japan loses." I submit that "most economies implode" or flame out early (prior to 1945) is a forum narrative cooked up and propagated as gospel without any real evidence. On the contrary, the AARs I read or have read, show that most Japanese economies do not implode or flame out prior to the endgame.

Your reading and mine do not correlate. Simple.

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

...You just have to combat your opponent, not history. If you try to do historical things against an opponent who is throwing 300 planes at you in a single raid, possibly multiple times per turn, as never really happened historically...

Exactly. Stated better than I did.

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna



You said most economies implode, not "Japan loses." I submit that "most economies implode" or flame out early (prior to 1945) is a forum narrative cooked up and propagated as gospel without any real evidence. On the contrary, the AARs I read or have read, show that most Japanese economies do not implode or flame out prior to the endgame.

Your reading and mine do not correlate. Simple.

So, examples?

I mean, Lowpe took over an awful situation and didn't run out of supplies. Obvert did once (I think). We had a report of a newer player who ran 2-day turns running out of supplies the other week.

I'm not going to run out of supplies. My complete game opponent didn't run out of supplies. I am not sure if my other opponent is going to run out of supplies. I don't think nygiants is blowing up his economy. Not to mention all the other concluded or disappeared AARs. So where are all the imploded economies?

I never said you have to run out of supplies. You're not building 2500 Factories of Tojo as so many players used to. You're also not fighting meaningless battles throughout '42/'43, which is also far too common.

The economy is fixed. You will only get so many tons of supply, so many units of HI the entire game. The devs scaled those numbers against usage so that the IJ has to be careful, they cannot be wasteful. Can the player do better than history? Yes, a lot better largely due to hindsight.

I'm sure you've run sandbox tests. You know how much supply an ID can use in combat. You also know that the max IJ supply production is somewhere near 35K/day. You've done the math. You get more than x number of ID's in combat, you burn more supply than you can build ... not counting all the other supply uses. When the SOV activates, you go above that number by design (I believe as the devs were a pretty sharp bunch).

So, to last until '46 you have to have not only a large stockpile, BUT you also have to be in a good position to NOT require too many units in daily combat AND you need to be able to preserve your stockpiles against allied air attacks. None of this is rocket science and it is all within historical context. These are exactly the three threat axis that the IJ did face. The devs got it really right.

Players are getting better because they have seen the outcomes if they don't. Yes, several recent AAR's clearly have the IJ players watching their build rates. Building more than history, yes. Overbuilding? Yet to be seen, but hopefully not.