Matrix Games Forums

Pah. I blame that on either a solar flare or the Dragons Triangle....[;)]

patrickl,


He will gain a ton of Vp when Manila falls, it has 92,000 defenders. After that who knows?

It's doable. From 21st of march 1943, a PBEM game.

Ouch how does any allied player lose 343 ships while only inflicting the loss of 56 ships in return?

I really don't believe that an quality experienced Japanese player can be stopped without the allied player taking huge gambles and getting lucky. By experienced I mean a player who has played several extended games from each side playing. And I am talking of a historical game where Japan does not exploit the first move.

The game favors the attacker in that it is very easy to move faster than was historically possible. So even a cautious japanese player can conquer the SRA by end of march and still have lots of time to hit PH, Numea, Austrailia, India.

The allied player does not get many carriers until after Jan 43 and so it is possible and likely for Japan to have overwhelming superiority for all of 42. Sure the allied player can mass his carriers and try for a Midway. But 9 times out of 10 the allies will get creamed and lose their whole force.

Now that I have played deep into 42 as the allied player in two games and know how constrained the allies are I just don't see how I could be stopped as Japan. Thats not a challage as I suppose I'll send a Japan turn one turn to JOHN III one of these days when my scheduale clears. But to me it looks to be a very unfair fight.

Of course this doesn't apply to anyone playing as Japan for the first or second time or who has never played from the allied side. Mutual inexperience favors the allies as Japan has a deadline.

Just my opinion.

I just don't see how I could be stopped as Japan

The Japanese Players Association await with great anticipation, the details of the magic unstoppable strategy !!!
[:D][:D][:D]

I didnt intend it as a challange or even as a claim that I am particularly good. Simply that a cautious experienced Japanese player is almost unstoppable.

If you avoid a Midway type battle and handle your carriers carefully you can go anywhere you want throughout 42.

I'm only claiming that the increased tempo the game allows favors the side with the initiative which is Japan until well into 43 unless the allies win a big carrier battle or Japan does something dumbb with his carriers.

But is there a way for Japanese to "almost" guarantee ... a 4:1 ... some of us say we doubt it ... you maybe saying you think there is !
If so we eagerly await our education !!

If the allies play safe and sound in 42 it's very hard to obtain a 4-1 imho. Japan would have to risk and gamble and if the allies are a bit lucky...puff...everything is gone.PH after march 42?? you'll be facing at least 5 divisions well dig in with tons of planes...even with the whole combined fleet and a huge armada it will be a damned tough job to accomplish.
Well...at least i do not see it so easy

Well, if there was no risk of Japan getting the 4:1 ratio, then the Allies could just wait and do nothing...both boring and unrealistic when taken in the context of the period. If there was a way to increase Japan's ability to reach this auto victory level while removing alot of the crappy mechanics and issues which speed this game off the Mach meter (thereby granting the advantage player a huge bonus) I'd be all for it. I love defending in 1942 as Allies...hell, I prefer to defend in most games. Great blowing carefully woven plans to shiite.[:D]

It was the loss of 2 fleet carriers in my AAR game that prevented me from achieving a 4-1 victory...
As you can see from Nomads numbers it's highly unlikely that I will achieve a 3-1 AV on 01.01.44.

If I was interested in victory points I would simply have evacuated most of the Solomons, New Britain and avoided
the losses in 1943, but I'm not [;)]

I play the game as a 'journey' and winning it on points (highly questionable if you aske me) would only end the
fun way to early!

I agree Gen.

It does take both sides to contribute to the Japanese 01/43 auto-victory.

I do think that the Japanese player has to be aggressive and thoughful in his approach BUT

If the Allied player sits in US/India/Australia I fail to see how the Japanese player can win.

I think it requires aggression on the Allied side to lead to losses and as such allows the Japanese player to expand, consume and gain auto-victory.

Regards,

Steven

it is not needed - I have rather passive and cautius opponent who is going to loose war in autovictory terms
Moses is right - nothing can stop experienced Japan player unless he makes serious mistake

ORIGINAL: Sneer

it is not needed - I have rather passive and cautius opponent who is going to loose war in autovictory terms
Moses is right - nothing can stop experienced Japan player unless he makes serious mistake

I have a Japanese opponent who (thankfully!) figured this out too late. He is playing me as Japan, but it was his first PBEM game. As the Allies in another game, he got whacked pretty hard at the begining of the game and started fooling around with the numbers, and figured on a strategy that unless the IJN player makes a serious mistake is pretty much unbeatable. I haven't seen a hole in his calculations, and i suspect he is going to try it out the next chance he gets. I won't reveal this strategy as i want to see how it plays out (although, i think even if the Allies are aware of it, it may do them no good.)

ORIGINAL: Speedy

I agree Gen.

It does take both sides to contribute to the Japanese 01/43 auto-victory.

I do think that the Japanese player has to be aggressive and thoughful in his approach BUT

If the Allied player sits in US/India/Australia I fail to see how the Japanese player can win.

I think it requires aggression on the Allied side to lead to losses and as such allows the Japanese player to expand, consume and gain auto-victory.

Regards,

Steven

Japan has to come and get it, basically. The first few months are all Japan even in the game because whatever advantage of hindsight the Allied player gains is nullified by the Japanese players access to same. But as the Allies continue to get reinforcements, the dispositions have had time to change so it's all up in the air again. Japan has to force the Allies into a situation where Allied forces are risked, as a Midway, to defend strategic territory which, if left undefended, may instigate the 4"1 AV.

Too bad it is all based so simply on VP though. Something else needs to be added to games to alleviate the benefits of hindsight etc. There should almost be a strategic initiative value which equates/impacts the VP total. Sit on ones butt and do nothing causes VP for lost territory to increase and startegic intiative suffers further...on and on...thereby forcing the "Sir Robin" types into the fray.

I think any good Allied player can 'help' any Jap player make serious mistakes [;)]
You make it sound way too easy...

ORIGINAL: PzB

I think any good Allied player can 'help' any Jap player make serious mistakes [;)]
You make it sound way too easy...

I've never been thumped as Allies in this game. As a matter of fact, the few PBEM games I've played basically resulted in the Japanese stalling in the DEI...much of DEI still Allied into the summer of 42. I don't see the big issue where Japan is unbeatable. (helps when ones only palyed a half dozen PBEMs, eh?[8D])

I don't think its guarenteed. The allies can always get a lucky carrier battle and Japan can always make a very bad mistake. But a cautious Japanese player is very difficult to hurt. If he just stays within his air cover except for a couple very well supported ops he can take the SRA with negligible losses by end of March. Then he has nine months to take PH, Numea, India or Austrailia.

Again I'm not claiming any great ability. In my games as Japan I never got far enough before new patches to know if I would have gotten auto-victory. But after playing several games as the allied player things look much easier for Japan.

Specifically I know that the allies just do not have enough land based fighters. I am always desperately short everywhere. Allied carriers just don't stand up at all to Japan's early on. At least every engagement I enter into I end up on the short end. The allies have very few planes that can hurt the BB's.

All I'm saying is that it looks quite grim for the allies. At least to me.

I suspect that Moses is onto something, and I think (hope actually) that Mogami has figured the same thing out and is trying it in the Lunacy games.

It is possible that my counter strategy will work and Mog will not get his 4 to 1, we will know in a year or two.

One idea might be for players to "bid" for VP ratio ( VP ratio being Japan VP to Allied VP by 1 Jan 43 ) ... the highest bidder plays Japanese. So if one player bids 3:1 ( by 1 Jan 43 ) and the other bids 3.5:1 ... then the 3.5:1 player gets to play the Japanese needing 3.5:1 or better ratio by 1 Jan 43 to win, otherwise, the Allies ( probably/hopefully ) win - eventually.

I for one am not sure I care to play for VP win. But if I did the above system might help mitigate players of differening abilities as long as both are experienced. An inexperienced player might not be able to bid knowledgably. Also the bidding system might help even out specific player combinations. So if X and Y play and Y always wins then bidding should help even things out.

Note that this system requires that both players be willing to play either side - so that might not work for some combinations.