Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Admiral Scott

If we have all the historical senarios we need, why cant we have one fun scenario that isnt historical but makes the game less lopsided?
A scenario where it would be fun to play either side and was fair for both sides.
Each side would have an equal chance of winning.
Playing the big campaign must be fun for the Jap player, but how fun is it later in the war when The allies are overwhelming him with greater numbers of everything?
Many players quit PBEM games as soon as they start losing and know its hopless.

I have no problem with someone making fictional scenarios.
In fact, I would love to play this game with random fictional maps and both sides have equal strength right from the start. Kind of like playing Space Strategy games, like Galactic Civilizations.
We always will have many historical scenarios that are accurate, which I love, but it wont hurt to have something not so historical as long as both sides have equal chances of winning.

Exactly correct SIR!!!!!!
This is why over 70% of us bought WITP..We want a game that was designed around historical event, but (so far), a little over 20% of those voting in this thread want to alter the basic guts of EVERYBODIES game!!!!!!
Creating mods with *balance* is anybodies perogative, but challenging the other 70% of us by altering OUR game is not acceptable!
Certain aspects of the game have been changed with either no historical credential, or precedent, to appease the commerciality (acceptance) of the "balance" group.
The designer has it hard enough trying to get it right for the grognards of the medium, let alone the slings and arrows of the revisionists.
Its' getting to the point where the wargame community may need to start putting disclaimers on the game ads, something like:" This package contains a representation of an actual historic event, and you are warned to not purchase it unless you seek historical-correctness, to some extent".
This warning might even include "alternative choices" for players who are just seeking a good 'ol fashioned game of "Checkies" or "Chutes and Ladders", Risk, Video Village, etc......
BTW, I am NOT looking down on anybody who plays those games, I played RISK while active duty, U.S.Army Ranger, and I have NEVER claimed being a Paratrooper, nor a Ranger, was "normal"..
Just wanted to clear that up now..
'Nuff said.

Gosh! Suddenly I don't feel like such a crank any more....[;)]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl
Micromanagement would not have solved the problem. The problem was essentially that there was no effective solution to the problem other than to have come to the battle with a completely different operational plan and several more CVs.

and

To sum it all up, you seem to feel, as Demosthenes, that it was all over by 8AM, and there was nothing at all that the IJN could have done to effect the outcome, in any meaningful way?

No it was not over and yes there was something. Shattered Sword clearly states that an attack carried out by ONLY the Vals (ie divebombers) was feasible, BUT not only that. Nagumo has done it before in April, while sinking Dorsetshire. When it was all to late the IJN have made this desperate step, see Hiryu's separate attacks. Should have Nagumo listened to Yamaguchi's request to attack things could have gone completely different.

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

Hi, Except in WITP an airphase is 8 hours and KB could always launch all it's AC in 8 hours. In fact at a place like Midway in June 42 it could have launched and recovered and armed all it's aircraft several times in 8 hours. (And still have PM airphase)

Hi

I do not think that assessment, that Kido Butai could launch and recover all its airraft several times in 8 hours, is remotely correct. Even if Kido Butai did not have to cycle any CAP whatsoever, for example in a training exercise, you're looking at about 1.5-2 hours to arm and spot a 60 plane strike, and another 2-3 hours to land, rearm, and respot the strike. The Japanese did not do flight-deck arming so every plane that lands has to cycle down to the hangar decks for rearming and maintenance. Apart from the Zekes, all the a.c had to be carted from below decks to flight deck one plane per elevator at a time.

So maybe a given CV could cycle its complete 60 plane complement 2.3 times in 8 hours. Much less if it has to cycle CAP as well. You'd have one exhausted pool of service personnel by the end of that second launch and your op loss rate would climb during the second launch and soar if you made an effort to work in a third complete cycle of the CVs a.c.

If the game is allowing Japanese CVs to launch their entire complement in one coordinated package or conduct more than 2 launch cycles per 8 hour phase then you have perhaps identified one of the key reasons why WitP combat is so bloody bloody and why airstrikes are so unrealistically large.

Hi, Mike no I was pointing out WITP only allows one strike per phase when in fact Cv (both USN and IJN ) could luanch more then one depending on range. If the target is a ground target WITP only allows a single strike PER DAY.
In WITP no "second strike" can ever be launched against a port/airfield/ground unit by any air group. (this is a player requested feature)(If you played WITP you would know this)

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

However in WITP I have had Japanese strikes all piecrmeal and USN strikes of the massive type. (usally my Japanese are piecemenal and opponents USN are well delivered and my USN strikes are screwed up while opponents Japanese are massive....the game hates me.)

You must have the same version of the game I have.... Mine also seems to think that my fingers touching the mouse is automatically grounds to proceed to the far end of the probablity table and jump up and down on the law of averages.

Brad's corollary (sp?) to Murphy's Law: When one's game hangs on the results of a die roll, one will not like the outcome.

This is why over 70% of us bought WITP..We want a game that was designed around historical event, but (so far), a little over 20% of those voting in this thread want to alter the basic guts of EVERYBODIES game!!!!!!

No, actually those 20% of us, want the ability to alter games we're involved with. This should be some sort of toggle. It is a game afterall. If I wanted to play purely historically, then I'm trash as the Japanese player. It IS a game afterall and to keep it remotely historical, I'm trash anyways. Might give us Nips some fun in the process ....

ORIGINAL: scout1

This is why over 70% of us bought WITP..We want a game that was designed around historical event, but (so far), a little over 20% of those voting in this thread want to alter the basic guts of EVERYBODIES game!!!!!!

No, actually those 20% of us, want the ability to alter games we're involved with. This should be some sort of toggle. It is a game afterall. If I wanted to play purely historically, then I'm trash as the Japanese player. It IS a game afterall and to keep it remotely historical, I'm trash anyways. Might give us Nips some fun in the process ....

THAT'S WHAT THE EDITOR IF FOR!!! Even if you don't feel you can use it, there are enough "balance" Fan-Boys around to crank out plenty of "super Jap" scenarios. Have all the FUN
you want..., just don't screw up the game for everybody else!

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: scout1

This is why over 70% of us bought WITP..We want a game that was designed around historical event, but (so far), a little over 20% of those voting in this thread want to alter the basic guts of EVERYBODIES game!!!!!!

No, actually those 20% of us, want the ability to alter games we're involved with. This should be some sort of toggle. It is a game afterall. If I wanted to play purely historically, then I'm trash as the Japanese player. It IS a game afterall and to keep it remotely historical, I'm trash anyways. Might give us Nips some fun in the process ....

THAT'S WHAT THE EDITOR IF FOR!!! Even if you don't feel you can use it, there are enough "balance" Fan-Boys around to crank out plenty of "super Jap" scenarios. Have all the FUN
you want..., just don't screw up the game for everybody else!

THAT'S WHAT THE EDITOR IF FOR!!! Even if you don't feel you can use it, there are enough "balance" Fan-Boys around to crank out plenty of "super Jap" scenarios. Have all the FUN
you want..., just don't screw up the game for everybody else!

Actually dont see it that way. Not trying to be a pain and not pushing for massive changes. Just don't see the hard and fast rule where the game absolutely must end as quickly given the "historical" constraints. Also, don't think EVERYBODY needs to follow this. Need a toggle or two. Yes, the editor is a big help and may be all that is needed.
Not trying to set the game even as chess......

@Mogami

Hi, peace man I stand corrected. But at NO range was Kido Butai (the real one, not the game one) going to pull off more than 2 full strikes in 8 hours. Their plane handling methods and ship designs insured that.

@ Ursa

Shattered Sword clearly states that an attack carried out by ONLY the Vals (ie divebombers) was feasible, BUT not only that. Nagumo has done it before in April, while sinking Dorsetshire. When it was all to late the IJN have made this desperate step, see Hiryu's separate attacks. Should have Nagumo listened to Yamaguchi's request to attack things could have gone completely different.

Yes, Shattered Sword states that it was feasible, but an attack using ONLY the Vals, rather than Vals and a good complement of escorts, was likely to fail. Hiryu's first attack bomber waves were badly cut up by American F4Fs and the diver bombers in that initial strike only survived because Hiryu was able to send a modest A6M escort along the way. As it was, the A6M escort was shot up along with the dive bombers, but enough of the latter survived long enough to gain their initial hits on Yorktown. That she was damaged and her speed impaired greatly improved the odds for Hiryu's second (small) strike that was composed largely of Kates.

Yes, they launched a small strike against the UK CAs in the Indian Ocean but that too required about 2 hours to launch. Moreover, one's confidence about having a strike deliver its ordnance to target is much greater if the target has no CAP, as the British cruisers did not have. That is, I think one can feel pretty safe launching an unescorted (no fighters) attack against a target that has no combat air patrol. Clearly, launching an unescorted strike against an American CV had very little prospect of success. Rabaul launched a 17 or 18 Betty strike against an American CV in February 1942 with the result that all but one of the Betties were shot down and none of them scored hits. And a Betty was a far more survivable aircraft (better speed, better defensive armament) than either a Kate or a Val.

And to spot or launch a Val Only strike would still have required KB to take a break in cycling CAP. Risky throughout most of the morning, and only sensible in hindsight (because, looking back on it, we can see the short lull in the battle that would not have been obvious to Nagumo at the time).

Nagumo acted on the best intel and observation reports he had available at the time, which weren't very good. Had he leaped at the wild hunch that Yamaguchi's advise was good it still would not have materially changed the battle, because he'd have much less CAP operating when the US torpedo bombers arrived and he'd still only be able to attack one American CV. So the battle could not have gone "completely different." It could only have netted Yorktown sooner in the battle and quite likely at the cost of losing some of his CVs sooner in the battle (to torpedo bombers)... in turn implying that he loses yet more ships than he historically did because the American SBDs would not have used their ordnance against sinking CVs.

Clearly, launching an unescorted strike against an American CV had very little prospect of success. Rabaul launched a 17 or 18 Betty strike against an American CV in February 1942 with the result that all but one of the Betties were shot down and none of them scored hits. And a Betty was a far more survivable aircraft (better speed, better defensive armament) than either a Kate or a Val.

Has anyone ever seen a result like this in the Game?

(Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha... etcetera...)

If 18 Bettys find a US CV in 1942 it's going to be "bye-bye" US CV...

And even in 1943...

Cheers -

Dave Baranyi

Absolutely, and why not? Historically, they established a record of sinking... besides Prince of Wales and Repulse of course, ah..............? ah............?? ah..........??? oh yeah...Chicago and ah......? ah............., ah................, ah........................

The littany just goes on and on as we all must know by now.

Hi, Unescorted Betty do not do well against (or for) me. One of my favorite tricks is to move a USN CV TF 12 hexes from Japanese base and slaughter Betty/Nell.

March 1942.

Day Air attack on TF at 62,96

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 4
G4M1 Betty x 20

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 15

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 2 destroyed, 14 damaged


Allied Ships
CV Yorktown, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
CA Indianapolis, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CL Detroit

Aircraft Attacking:
1 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet





The Yorktown sank a day or two later. I'd say minimally escorted Bettys do quite well. I can't believe they'd do much worse with no escorts at all.

ORIGINAL: dtravel

March 1942.

Day Air attack on TF at 62,96

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 4
G4M1 Betty x 20

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 15

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 2 destroyed, 14 damaged


Allied Ships
CV Yorktown, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
CA Indianapolis, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CL Detroit

Aircraft Attacking:
1 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet


The Yorktown sank a day or two later. I'd say minimally escorted Bettys do quite well. I can't believe they'd do much worse with no escorts at all.

Realistically MOGAMI is probably right , but game-wise this is about the result I expect to see if I take an Allied CV within Betty range. The game remembers POW and Repulse, but forgets that Kelly Turner's Transports totally frustraited a similar attack off Lunga while the CAP and flak "buzzsawed" the attacking Bettys. The GM4 was a unique and capable weapons system, but it was horribly vulnerable if the defender was reasonably prepared. Both results are feasible..., but I think the game has the probabilities reversed.

ORIGINAL: scout1

THAT'S WHAT THE EDITOR IF FOR!!! Even if you don't feel you can use it, there are enough "balance" Fan-Boys around to crank out plenty of "super Jap" scenarios. Have all the FUN
you want..., just don't screw up the game for everybody else!

Actually dont see it that way. Not trying to be a pain and not pushing for massive changes. Just don't see the hard and fast rule where the game absolutely must end as quickly given the "historical" constraints. Also, don't think EVERYBODY needs to follow this. Need a toggle or two. Yes, the editor is a big help and may be all that is needed.
Not trying to set the game even as chess......

You could say that the opposite way he said it too. If the allies want uber-allies, or more uber-allies, they're free to adjust it just don't screw tha game up for everybody else (wow, that was a really difficult feat to think up)!

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Unescorted Betty do not do well against (or for) me. One of my favorite tricks is to move a USN CV TF 12 hexes from Japanese base and slaughter Betty/Nell.

While that sounds like a good "the Betties aren't overpowered" sort of argument, isn't it true that the Betties should never fly in such an instance because of the fighter cover? Or is that just with bases that the bombers turn back because of fighters?

Hi, In DT's example the Betty were unescorted. (4xA6M2 versus 15xF4f fails the escort requirments)
However the escort check is only check and high morale units will often still fly without escorts.

ORIGINAL: mdiehl
Yes, Shattered Sword states that it was feasible, but an attack using ONLY the Vals, rather than Vals and a good complement of escorts, was likely to fail. Hiryu's first attack bomber waves were badly cut up by American F4Fs and the diver bombers in that initial strike only survived because Hiryu was able to send a modest A6M escort along the way. As it was, the A6M escort was shot up along with the dive bombers, but enough of the latter survived long enough to gain their initial hits on Yorktown. That she was damaged and her speed impaired greatly improved the odds for Hiryu's second (small) strike that was composed largely of Kates.

By only Vals I meant without kates, NOT without escorts.

And a Betty was a far more survivable aircraft (better speed, better defensive armament) than either a Kate or a Val.

Why is that? It was bigger, yes but tougher? No carrier plane earned the name ronson. IMHO a Val definitely and a Kate probably was more difficult to shoot down than a large two engined gasoline barrel flying straigh ahed to launch torpedos.

I would agree as well. If i wanted a "market game" I would have bought it.[;)]

ORIGINAL: langley

In my eyes it has to be History every time!

However this is a game and it never hurts to have a better Balance.

MJT