Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

as most are so far inland they wont come on line for a while)

With latest Adrew's map it would be true. In my AI game, I was able to have almost all the Chinese Military on wetern coast of China.

I would vote for more static units with bigger fortifications. Static supply could be also increased in China. This would give Japan at least some slight chance to have a footstep on Chinese coast.

ORIGINAL: Helpless

[&:] Interesting , if you kick Japs out from Port Arthur, will Soviets be activated?

Only if total forces in Korea drop below 500 av. So really, you don't have to take it, just weaken the Japanese enough and the Red hords will pour over the Yalu [:D]

I do see a vacuum in Korea getting filled ... and if in the game that is by China - at least it gets the point across.

To improve situation in AI games several Japanese divisions could be placed in Korea from begining. From other side this fact is reducing threat on the Pacific, where US have 1 mighty division in PH [:D]...

I'm afraid without bigger gaming experience it would be hard to balance scenarios, house rules and etc. Luckily turns are much faster than in WITP. [:D]

Well, truth be told, balance is the last thing I want for this game. You want balance, play chess [:D] I'm going to move the 19th and 20th back to Korea.

However, again, I will rephrase what is said in the game's blurb: The AI simulates War Plan Orange, NOT wars in China. If you want to do sweeping moves into Korea, do that in PBEM. But the Japanese AI is deigned to fight a Pacific War, and maybe expand its bridgehead already in China. If you switch your main theater to China, it will not be a very fun AI game. It is left in there for PBEM games (i.e. players know to reinforce Korea), but the AI is designed for a naval Pacific war with the United States.

It is like WitP's AI, play it in a more or less historic manner (i.e. in this case US vs Japan, with some light Chinese wars) and it will be fine. But if you want to have major sweepng movements in Korea/China, go PBEM.

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

ORIGINAL: Helpless

[&:] Interesting , if you kick Japs out from Port Arthur, will Soviets be activated?

Only if total forces in Korea drop below 500 av. So really, you don't have to take it, just weaken the Japanese enough and the Red hords will pour over the Yalu [:D]

Alright, then the plan is to activate Soviets, kick them out and hide the IJA behind the river from coming Hordes of Chinese Kung-Fu Warlords. [:D]

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Well, truth be told, balance is the last thing I want for this game. You want balance, play chess [:D]

There is no balance in chess - white move first [:D]

So, far I'm getting what I want - a lot of fun. Thanks, Tankerace! [&o]

Hehe, glad you like it.

And yes, in Chess there is balance. Haven't you heard of Queen with Uzi in her purse slaying the entire enemy side move?[:D]

I really like these rules, and wish I had used them for my first PBEM game. Oh well.

I do have a couple of questions. The first is incredibly off topic but someone already referred to it; do any map mods from WITP work for WPO?

The second question; does Japan realistically have a chance to win the whole campaign without honor rules? I dont think so as they are heavily out numbered. Even using these house rules it is a stretch for Japan to win.

Thoughts?

ORIGINAL: BlackSunshine

I really like these rules, and wish I had used them for my first PBEM game. Oh well.

I do have a couple of questions. The first is incredibly off topic but someone already referred to it; do any map mods from WITP work for WPO?

The second question; does Japan realistically have a chance to win the whole campaign without honor rules? I dont think so as they are heavily out numbered. Even using these house rules it is a stretch for Japan to win.

Thoughts?

If you play "lunacy" game of WPO ( lunacy means no house rules ) then I would not rate Japan's chances as high at least in 1922 campaign. I think designer tried to create flexible scenario to allow players ability to go after different targets, Brits, Chinese, Dutch, US, but players will have to decide within that allowed flexability - exactly what they what to do in a given game. So maybe Japanese player says " I want to attack Brits and Dutch but not US ... or US but not Brits and Dutch. Or maybe China but only China ... then each of these need set of house rules to govern.

The first is incredibly off topic but someone already referred to it; do any map mods from WITP work for WPO?

All graphical map mods (ex. Subchaser's Map) for WITP should work in WPO as well, just some namings might be different, i.s. SF = Mare I., Manchuko=manchuria, etc. As for real map mode [8D], I'm affraid it requires scenario conversion. I hope someday to see Andrew's map for WPO.

q: Is there any chance for Japan to win?....

a: Yes, only here! The good news! Allies won't get A-bomb! We will never surrender! [:D]

Banzai!

Turn back to you[:D] It begins.

Just FYI, am working on China right now. So far, total strength is 30 "corps" which are equivelent to Divisions, 3 Divisions, and 4 or 5 Calvary units. So, I'll either delay or make static 15 of those Corps, and that will curtail the Chinese great advantage (though a Sino-Japanese war will still be a large obstacle).

In addition, I'm increasing the VPs for inland Chinese bases, as an incentive for going in there.

Sound good to you guys?


I hope this shows that I do believe in listening to you guys about your concerns and wishes.

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Just FYI, am working on China right now. So far, total strength is 30 "corps" which are equivelent to Divisions, 3 Divisions, and 4 or 5 Calvary units. So, I'll either delay or make static 15 of those Corps, and that will curtail the Chinese great advantage (though a Sino-Japanese war will still be a large obstacle).

In addition, I'm increasing the VPs for inland Chinese bases, as an incentive for going in there.

Sound good to you guys?


I hope this shows that I do believe in listening to you guys about your concerns and wishes.

T.

I think for your purposes WPO - Dreadnoughts in the Pacific ! Making much of Chinese Army static works great.

Treespider and I spent many hours researching CHinese OB for CHS/WITP and we came up with similar idea to represent warlords and difficulty of central coordination. Also if Japanese player selects "I wanna fight China and China only" option then he is really going to miss the "Dreadnoughts in the Pacific" component of the game and instead be fighting "War in China - Chinamen in China" [:D]. So this would discourage players from that course - though we/they are always free to "roll your own" scenario !

JW.

Yeah, I think I'll static them.

Create a "Warlord" static army weapon. It has no attack value, but a 9999 load cost. That way it isn't too kludgy, but doesn't give them any combat bonus.

Here is how it looks as of now. Only five Chinese infantry formations are mobile, all of the rest have these static warlord units. If the Warlord is killed, then the division may move. That said, the only way to not get a new one is to disable replacements for the unit, but doing so means no replacements at all. With replacements on, a new warlord my arise to control the division (i.e. a new warlord unit will be taken from the device pool).

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Here is how it looks as of now. Only five Chinese infantry formations are mobile, all of the rest have these static warlord units. If the Warlord is killed, then the division may move. That said, the only way to not get a new one is to disable replacements for the unit, but doing so means no replacements at all. With replacements on, a new warlord my arise to control the division (i.e. a new warlord unit will be taken from the device pool).

This is very creative, Tankerace! [:)]

What is the replacement rate of Warlords? [:D]

Another q, if corp is destroyed and then regenerated at Chuchking, is that migthy static guy would reappear with them?

The replacement rate isn't big, only 7 a month. Enough to frustrate moves, but not enough to totally cripple the Chinese.

They should regenerate with one, but since he isn't in their TOE, they may not.

Actually, I'm going to double the numbers. So the replacement is 14 a month, and total Warlord unit is 3. As it is with one, if the unit is divided into three, then only one would be static. With 3 Warlord units, dividing the unit will still make it static (though if one of the leaders gets killed, then it can be divided and one element used.

Wouldn't such possible massive unit division create various database problems (eg. leader bugs)?

No, units can be divided just fine. But then again, with 3 Warlord Units, it makes no since to divide them.

As WPO doesn't fill up near as many database slots as WitP, many potential problems (such as divided units) seem to be negated.