Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: mlees

The US industrial might was HUGE. Historically, the majority of the production went to Europe, and as lend lease to other allies.

If the Japanese had landed on Australia, I would like to think the US would have diverted ETO bound stuff to the PTO. I feel that it is reasonably safe to say they would have done that had the Japanese landed on the US west coast.

Just how much the US player should get in equipment and manpower allocated to the PTO, based on how well the Japanese player does in a particular game, is speculation at it's most enjoyable (and more suited to "World in Flames"), but not fun for the IJN player. Keeping it at the historical levels is well enough, as it does not penalise the Japanese player for doing well.

The numbers I put down weren't total ... they were just for the Pacific. Even though 70% was supposed to go to Europe and only 30% to the Pacific, as far as the Navy went 70-80% of the US Navy was in the Pacific until VJ-Day.

The US scared the living crap out of the British who wanted the US to sit on our hands and do nothing in the Pacific until they defeated Germany and then, according to a proposed British plan go after Japan and finally invade Japan by 1948. The US didn't and did the one thing that military experts shy away from: fighting a two front war.

If you want "historical" then you have to deal with the fact that the US industrial base outclassed Japan from day one. During the course of the war the US built more SUBMARINES alone than the Japanese did in ships of all classes.

To be "historical" the only options for the Japanese are to strike out and build a defensive perimeter and then dig in for the inevitable onslaughts and just buy time. That's the only option the Japanese had after Pearl Harbor - the irony was that if they had attacked the British and Dutch and left the US out it's very unlikely Roosevelt would have had the public opinion to be able to get the US involved.

ORIGINAL: dereck

IF this game was 100% historic there would be no way the Japanese would even come close to being able to win.

Well there is winning, and there is winning. Could the Japs win the war? I dont think there is anyone then or now that belives that. Could you do better than the Japs did historically? Sure. Thats what I judge "winning" by. If you hold out past 15 Aug 45, you win.

If this game had been better-designed, it would have had the possibility of both sending units under your control to Europe with a gain in victory points, and also taking units for yourself that historically went to Europe for a loss of victory points. Of course, the victory points would need to be time-adjusted, for example you'd get much more victory points sending 2nd Marines to Europe in 1942 than in 1944.

I believe something like this can be done with CHS, if players wouldn't mind keeping track of victory point score changes manually. A few divisions and air units that historically went to Europe could be put in the "United States" base, and the player would lose victory points for those that he uses. Likewise, if he moves a division already under his control to the "United States" he would gain victory points. The same can be done with ships in the Panama Canal zone.
The Japanese player should be informed about the victory point changes, maybe a month or two after it happens. He would be "informed" by seeing the change in the way the war in Europe progresses.

To make things interesting, the Japanese player should be given the option to send subs to Germany in order to gain victory points. Because there is no equivalent of "United States" or Panama Canal for the Japs, he would need to scuttle those subs (no option to bring them back from Europe) and inform the Allies a month or two later about his increased victory point score (it's assumed that historically the Allies are "informed" by experiencing greater shipping losses in the Atlantic).

_____________________________


Click here for "Hell No, We Won't Go" video.

How many accounts do you have slaughter? This is like the fourth one I've seen....

If this game had been better-designed

Heh, that never gets old. The game does far more than any of the genre, but still more must be done, right? And because the game doesn't take Europe into account, its poorly designed. What exactly would WitP (or any game, for that matter) have to do to not be poorly designed?

ORIGINAL: Tankerace
How many accounts do you have slaughter? This is like the fourth one I've seen....

I have quite a few, they've all been banned because Matrix does not like the political leanings of my avatar and profile. If Matrix had an even-handed policy of banning all political content I would understand, but I think it's unfair to target specific politics for banning while allowing other politics (such as EUBanana's blatantly political avatar and profile). Fortunately I have access to variable IP so I can unban myself whenever I want [:'(]

Heh, that never gets old. The game does far more than any of the genre, but still more must be done, right? And because the game doesn't take Europe into account, its poorly designed. What exactly would WitP (or any game, for that matter) have to do to not be poorly designed?

So it's not possible for a well-designed game to be better-designed? Or maybe any reference to WiTP as a non-perfect game rattles your fanboyism?

______________________________

Heh.... if you had seen my rants last June when WitP came out, you would see Im not at all a fanboy. Perhaps I did judge you too harshly, but it does get old with many posters who a new feature they asked for gets added, and without so much as a thank you its "Oh, well can you look into this now?" That and all the constant barraging of WitP. Ill be the first to admit its not perfect. (I believe I once referred to it as a piece of work that was barely stable and definately rushed.....) of course, that was many moons ago.

I am a huge fan of WITP and of CHS I think its great. This thread was not trying to bash anyone.

As I said I have not actually played a game yet so I am to some extent talking out of my arse at the moment.

My view as I said above is that I cannot see the allies being able to keep squadrons up to strength given the reductions in aircraft numbers.

Certainly the P39 will need to be used as a front line fighter probably the P43 as well to have any chance.

A few initial thoughts of tricks I am going to attempt to use as early as possible to spread the pain accross the aircraft production.

1. Withdraw most West Coast Fighter Units into one sqn which should leave that squn overstrength then upgrade it to put as many air frames into my pool as possible. (not sure if this will work but it should)
2. Send all Canadian Kittyhawk Sqns to the front to attempt to use the kittyhawk pool.
3. No training I cannot afford the ops losses.
4. Try to get 24 P26's from somewhere to allow me to downgrade some allied sqns and then upgrade to P39D's or P400's
5. Switch some Wirraways/ P40 Sqns for RAF Hurricanes and Spitfires again to spread the draws on my pools depending on which way the Japanese choose to attack.

My fear is that having to do these kind of activities will really encourage the Sir Robin approach.

If I know I cannot protect airbases or ports even form an initial attack why would I hang around to get my head kicked in !!!!!!

I am even considering dismounting my USN Wildcat Sqns off of my CV's and send all CV's to West Coast Ports for whole of 42 as I cannot protect a forward base !!!!

Now this is almost certainly an over reaction so I will watch and see how the game develops. It should be interesting !!!!!!

Andy

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

I am a huge fan of WITP and of CHS I think its great. This thread was not trying to bash anyone.

As I said I have not actually played a game yet so I am to some extent talking out of my arse at the moment.

My view as I said above is that I cannot see the allies being able to keep squadrons up to strength given the reductions in aircraft numbers.

Certainly the P39 will need to be used as a front line fighter probably the P43 as well to have any chance.

A few initial thoughts of tricks I am going to attempt to use as early as possible to spread the pain accross the aircraft production.

1. Withdraw most West Coast Fighter Units into one sqn which should leave that squn overstrength then upgrade it to put as many air frames into my pool as possible. (not sure if this will work but it should)
2. Send all Canadian Kittyhawk Sqns to the front to attempt to use the kittyhawk pool.
3. No training I cannot afford the ops losses.
4. Try to get 24 P26's from somewhere to allow me to downgrade some allied sqns and then upgrade to P39D's or P400's
5. Switch some Wirraways/ P40 Sqns for RAF Hurricanes and Spitfires again to spread the draws on my pools depending on which way the Japanese choose to attack.

My fear is that having to do these kind of activities will really encourage the Sir Robin approach.

If I know I cannot protect airbases or ports even form an initial attack why would I hang around to get my head kicked in !!!!!!

I am even considering dismounting my USN Wildcat Sqns off of my CV's and send all CV's to West Coast Ports for whole of 42 as I cannot protect a forward base !!!!

Now this is almost certainly an over reaction so I will watch and see how the game develops. It should be interesting !!!!!!

Andy

You've hit the nail on the head Andy - the key to the Game is air power and without it you can do nothing. Take away more airpower from the Allies only, and you end up with a game where PBEM will be less interesting than playing the AI.

Dave Baranyi

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


Well, this has been an interesting thread. After all those rants about having favored the allies and screwed the Japanese it's very refreshing to see some allied teeth-gnashing. If everybody thinks their side got hurt, I'd say we did a very good job.

I'd also like to point out that there are a number of modified scenarios out there with different viewpoints and emphasis. Everyone can pick the one that suits them best.

Don !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There never was any merit to the claims of "allied fanboy bias"...It was just a couple of fellas who wanted more Japanese options and did not not know how to ask for them without blatantly asking for a "sci-fi" button.............
The CHS folks have done wonderful historic research...................
I check using Janes,, Ian Allen, etc..................[8D]
(BTW, you fellas did include a huge amount of stuff for both sides as requested on these threads, and I know you tried to appeease all, (except for my C54's !!)(LMAO).....

Take away more airpower from the Allies only, and you end up with a game where PBEM will be less interesting than playing the AI.

Does anyone have the time (which I currently lack), and the interest, to make an actual analysis of the numbers of Allied aircraft produced in CHS compared to the official scenario 15, and the actual numbers of aircraft sent to the theatre during the war?

ORIGINAL: Slaghtermeyer

ORIGINAL: Tankerace
How many accounts do you have slaughter? This is like the fourth one I've seen....

I have quite a few, they've all been banned because Matrix does not like the political leanings of my avatar and profile. If Matrix had an even-handed policy of banning all political content I would understand, but I think it's unfair to target specific politics for banning while allowing other politics (such as EUBanana's blatantly political avatar and profile). Fortunately I have access to variable IP so I can unban myself whenever I want [:'(]

This is not a publicly-owned forum..Membership is required to enter,(and stay), and admitting you have been banned several times is NOT a good thing..
You have been told you are not welcome.
For whatever reason, you are not welcome.
This is what "banning" means.
You were required to read the rules of the forum before you joined, and promised to abide by them.
You have failed, (by your own admission.)
This seems to show a lack of integrity and honor on your part, (along with any other faults you may have.)

We have done well without your participation.
Go in peace.............
[:-]

______________________________

Its not over the whole war Andrew its really the first 10 months thats important.

As I said I have not yet started my 1st PBEM so I may be exaggerating until I test it I wont know.

In addition I suspect that if Japanese production (not the upgrade path ....production) was fixed then it wouldnt be an issue as both sides would be hamstrung. (But that would be borinjg and frustrating for Japanese side)

As I said I am not disputing the historical accuracy of allied plane allocation to Pacific I think you have all done a great job !!!

It is the ability of the Japanese to increase production and research in the game which ensure's they have reserve airframes where the allies won't have that may cause a one sided battle.

Or where the allies do have the frames (surplus Hurricanes/ Kittyhawks/ F4F's and P39D's) they cannot allocate them to in action fighter sqns because even under PDU's they dont have that level of flexibility.

I cannot do that calculation from my office as I dont have WITP but I will have a look tonight but off of the top of my head.

10 Lancers
10 P38F's
40 P40's
2 P40B's
50 Hurricane IIb's
30 Hurribombers
50 P39D's
40 Wiraways
40 Kittyhawks
70 F4F's

per month plenty of individual airframes but the really competative aircraft cannot be deployed in numbers which is fine but for the USAAF even the uncompetative ones cannot deploy forward as 24 are required to upgrade a sqn. i.e. to upgrade an at start sqn to Lancers or P38F's will take 3 or 4 months because of the need to to wait for 24 frames before you can upgrade or downgrade !!!

a. I personally think the answer would have been quite simple give some even 1 for each type RAAF Fighter (wiraway or other) Sqns the option to upgrade to P400's or Hurricanes or even Kittyhawks to use those pools and give flexibility.

b. Have an at start pool of say 24 or 48 P36, P26 and P36A (to allow USAAF Gps to switch out and upgrade west coast or other sqns to allow some flexibility in USAAF pool forming)

i.e. sqns working up on the West Coast handing over Warhawks for older frames to allow PH Sqns to be brought up to strength.

Giving the USAAF 72 - 144 more obselete replacement aircraft will not hurt balance but may give the allies the flexibility to cope with some Japanese production issues.

i.e. to allow the allies to consolidate the good types into two or three competative squadrons

The really big niggle is over the P38G down from 80 a month to 45 but I suspect from everything I have read that you have that one bang on and the allies will just need to wait that little bit longer to be competative out to range 9 ;P

Anyway I have not played the game yet and I like the variety it will bring to Air to Air I just would like some flexibility to actually use those types i have in my inventory.

(I am not advocating changing F4F at all despite the extreme annoyance of my stock games when I have zero P40's or P38's and over 400 F4F's in pool!!!!!!)

As I said I will wait and see !!!

Andy

Matrix does not like the political leanings of my avatar and profile

Just for the record - neither do I. This is a gaming forum, keep the propaganda out please.

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

Take away more airpower from the Allies only, and you end up with a game where PBEM will be less interesting than playing the AI.

Does anyone have the time (which I currently lack), and the interest, to make an actual analysis of the numbers of Allied aircraft produced in CHS compared to the official scenario 15, and the actual numbers of aircraft sent to the theatre during the war?

I am working on trying to figure out the numbers of P-38 a/c sent to the WITP theaters. It is time consuming, expensive (although my library of WW2 books is getting bigger[:'(]), and somewhat frustrating as so far, i have not found a way to get at the numbers except by inference.

For instance: what IS the WITP sphere - is it just CIB/PTO/Aleutians? What about West Coast? What about Panama? Lots of units were stationed on the West Coast for the first 7 months of the war that were never included in the game (i.e. - just about every P-38 unit in existance was rushed to the West Coast after Dec 7, not to mention large number of bombers and other types of fighters.)

So, do you include those units in the game? Most of them **eventually** went to Europe. The only way i can see to model this is to have some sort of withdrawal system - but the coding doesn't support that.

The whole thing is fascinating and frustrating at the same time. By looking into this stuff, i can see how the whole game design process is making decisions that are going to have someone ranting and raving later on.

BTW - from my preliminary data, cutting P-38s production by half seems excessive, but i have no final numbers yet.

such as EUBanana's blatantly political avatar and profile

Please tell me you're joking.

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

such as EUBanana's blatantly political avatar and profile

Please tell me you're joking.

Hey, I'm famous! [:D]

ORIGINAL: m10bob

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


Well, this has been an interesting thread. After all those rants about having favored the allies and screwed the Japanese it's very refreshing to see some allied teeth-gnashing. If everybody thinks their side got hurt, I'd say we did a very good job.

I'd also like to point out that there are a number of modified scenarios out there with different viewpoints and emphasis. Everyone can pick the one that suits them best.

Don !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There never was any merit to the claims of "allied fanboy bias"...It was just a couple of fellas who wanted more Japanese options and did not not know how to ask for them without blatantly asking for a "sci-fi" button.............
The CHS folks have done wonderful historic research...................
I check using Janes,, Ian Allen, etc..................[8D]
(BTW, you fellas did include a huge amount of stuff for both sides as requested on these threads, and I know you tried to appeease all, (except for my C54's !!)(LMAO).....

P.S. I am also a huge fan I love the new India command and all the OOB stuff done there and I really love the Prince Robert (I just finished the 1st half of the offical RCN History so to see that Armed Merchant Cruiser in the OOB made my day not to mention all the Flower class Corvettes !!!!)

Andy

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

such as EUBanana's blatantly political avatar and profile

Please tell me you're joking.

Hey, I'm famous! [:D]

Infamous? [;)]

ORIGINAL: Speedy

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

ORIGINAL: irrelevant



Please tell me you're joking.

Hey, I'm famous! [:D]

Infamous? [;)]

If starving, he would be "INFAMINE" ??

The idea behind CHS it to try to make the OOBs and TO&Es accurate. It is true that most of the effort so far in CHS has been directed at the Allies, but I think that is because that is where the interest (and expertise) of the contributors tends to lie.

Starting on Turn 1 whatever accuracy the Japanese OOB possesses goes out the window though simply through the Japanese ability to juggle production and advance the development of more advanced a/c. Wasteful production such as SHINANO or obsolete a/c can be cancelled without the slightest repercussion. Yet IRL it wasn't.
Though I am not knowledgeable enough to cite specific references, IMHO it was the ZAIBATSU (think that's the word): heads of the industrial conglomerates in Japan that manipulated the economic efforts of Imperial Japan. Their well being, rather than military efficiency, was their principal concern. Japan was a still a somewhat feudal society. The military (Samurai) derived their support from the various feudal lords who happened to be the leaders of industry. And thus so and so's shipyard got to build 'the supercarrier' that ate up enough steel and other resources to build 5 carriers, so and so's factory kept churning out Nates long after the plane was totally obsolete.
Without realistic limits on the Japanese Player's strategic options CHS is unlikely to provide anything other than another version of "FANTASY GENERAL".