Consumption of Suplys for Base Building: Nobody built like the Allies did, espichaly the US, this is well represented in the game, perhaps to well, but that is another subject, what I find interesting is that to build a base the game treats all alike. Thier should be nationality distinctions hear as well. Thier is a big diferance between what the Allies would nead base wise to suport their forces and what the Japanese would. A big diferance in materials neaded ,the weight of them , and the Fuel neaded to build these basses. More Raw materials were neaded by the Allies than the Japanese to efect a base building prodject, yet in game their the same. Again the Allies get an unfair advantage hear in parity. Also when a Bases is captured from the Japanese it should imo be droped at least one size to reflect the lesser nature of Japanese neads compared to the allies.
Actually, this is a mixed bag. The game does more or less allow the Japanese to need smaller air bases - since it has lighter max loads on its planes - and that defines the base required. What it takes material wise to make - say - Lunga - is the same for both. [US Marines finished the airfield using the peculiar 12 inch gage rail line to move materials - no engines - man powered. They laughed and called it the "toonerville trolly." But they USED it - because it was a lot better than not using it.]
The real difference would be easy to program: Japan took a lot longer to build things - mainly due to a lack of vehicles. Perhaps that is the key: if Japanese engineers with vehicles do the job - it is same same. If not - not. And USMC had true pioneers - in the Korean coolie Japanese sense - and that is same same too.
S4) Early War Allied Suply: Early on in the pacific war for the Allies suply was a bit of a problem, all maner of item, from fighter planes to profolactics were not in great suply, the tean pregancy rate in New Zeland Skyrocketd in early 42 puting a huge burdon on Allied Transports in their atempt to move desperatly neaded maternatly materials to their from the West coast. All punning aside the Allies cup runith over a tad in this area of the game, their is NO suply problem for the Alies early on, their is enough local suply at all the many allied bases to run things just fine and after the first ships arive even as far out as New Zeland and Nouma their set for the rest of the war, with a ton of materail. This large right from the start Allied suply bonious gives the allies to much of an edge, it alows them to be far to agreasive early on. IMO suply for the allies should be scaled up, the west coast and Indian ports should start off low and ramp up to present levals by the end of 42.
Correct. I am attempting to fix this. Please try any RHS scenario and comment how to make it better. It appears the measures attempted are not too severe - and we can tighten up still more.
All the planes Japan have in 1943 are shot down by F4U's that year anyway. Honestly i dont know either way it makes no diferance, all the Allied planes from the F4U on totaly domanate the Japanese planes, so it is kinda pointless.
It should not be so. Try RHS. It may not be so.
I hear from CHS players that the Ki-102 was pretty awesome. I think you will find some other planes a problem too. I am not sure you will be able to tell - but late in the war you might be intercepted by rocket fighters (only it won't look like air air combat). Actually, the planes that matter are not so exotic - A7M2 - A6M8 - J7W1 - Ki-83 and Ki-100. I hear they have not worked out well in past games. That may be different now. Or not. We need to get some battles to find out?
Interesting thread....
If I am correct, this game was designed to in some way replicate the events and activities of a historical event in the worlds' somewhat recent past.
The term "re-spawning" is innacurate when used as a complaint of "Allied bias", because whether those ships emerged with names of sunk ships or not, they were bound to emerge, as they already had been given prior names.
They were not just "replacements", but were financially appropriated for, on the order sheets, or even in the slipways during 1942. Some of them were re-named AFTER being launched.
(See the huge number of merchant-type "respawns".....)
The lack of Japanese planes by 1943 is somewhat irrelevent, if you can use actual history as a guideline, because according to probably EVERY account, written by actual Japanese pilots/participants of that war (who survived), the Bushido code made the use of parachutes "unmanly", and so pilots who might have survived, chose to ride their pepperred crates to oblivion.
(WITP therefore should NEVER allow messages of Japanese pilots "surviving bail-outs" before sometime in 1944, when the High Command finally ordered the pilots to use 'chutes.)
Several threads have mentioned the "Allied- bias" that "the Japanese in the game have no means to win the game".
True enough.. That follows historical precedent.
The Japanese never had the ability to win that war (if it were to be a long-term war of attrition and production.)
This was the prediction of Yamamoto, (who knew Americans in particular, as friends.)
He warned the Japanese high command of this, and then proceeded to follow his orders nonetheless.
The Japanese beheaded Allied POW's, and mistreated or killed their civilian and military prisoners, because they truly never feared retribution.
Every account I have ever read, (written from the Japanese perspective) indicates the Japanese public were systematically lied to about their losses, and even the survivors of the Midway campaign were sequestered from the general public for years, lest people start putting "2 and 2 together" to realize the scope of the defeat, (which the public had been told was a victory!.)
Somewhat in defense of the AI which seems to have been programmed to make certain initial moves, with rather sketchy follow-up, (in the original vanilla version), also seems to have historical precedent!
Once the Japanese occupied Guadalcanal and met with resistance, they HAD NO PLAN to quickly defent that island, or supply it, let alone defend it, because (again) by then they simply did not expect the Allies to "still be in it"!
Proof of this is the local command continuously asking for more ships, and the High Command continuously sending units piecemeal, and with no real effort of planned follow-up.
The use of destroyers to re-supply LCU's was an expedient, and not normal procedure.
What if the High Command had stationed battleships and CV's down there when first requested?
Yamamoto himself predicted before Pearl Harbor this would not be a possibility, because at the beginning of the war, he knew they only had enough bunker fuel for the Navy to last two years.
(It might have been less that 2 full years, but this figure was NOT accounting for a protracted naval campaign in the Solomons where the war on attrition finally started to have a telling effect on the Japanese Navy, (even though their fighting abilities were peerless).
Troops were starving to death in the jungles south and west of Henderson Field because not only had there been no prior plan to feed them, there had been no suspicion the Allies would move so quick to counter them, IF AT ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Allied bias?. Of course, not a game decision, but rather a historic reality.
Grotius- Thier is a subtle bias in everything that has to do with the Pacific war, largely imo the result of the propaganda war that raged hear in the states during the war, and steming from a time when a lot of Americans beelaved what the goverment and the media told them. It was pased down to their kids and those kids designed this game.
There is some truth to this. There were things people were not told - and soldiers had a hard time being believed about them. Alaska was not admitted to be a war front! When men went home, no one believed they had been fighting on US soil! Japanese-Americans in PTO were usually dressed as POWs, and given MP escorts - and many people do not believe there were Japanese soldiers serving in that theater to this day!
Stories out of Burma, Borneo and New Guinea are barbaric - and I refer to ALLIED behaviors - but except for Military History magazine - which takes the attitude "it was OK anyway" - you won't read much about it.
The term "re-spawning" is innacurate when used as a complaint of "Allied bias", because whether those ships emerged with names of sunk ships or not, they were bound to emerge, as they already had been given prior names.
The problem is, if you don't lose carriers, you don't get the "respawned" ones! I fixed this. But now, what you get, is the ORIGINAL names ONLY - which can be confusing - if they were actually used on different hulls! But players said they wanted "all their Essexes" - so they get them. [I say - "if you need them all you are not a very good player"]
Interesting thread....
If I am correct, this game was designed to in some way replicate the events and activities of a historical event in the worlds' somewhat recent past.
The term "re-spawning" is innacurate when used as a complaint of "Allied bias", because whether those ships emerged with names of sunk ships or not, they were bound to emerge, as they already had been given prior names.
They were not just "replacements", but were financially appropriated for, on the order sheets, or even in the slipways during 1942. Some of them were re-named AFTER being launched.
(See the huge number of merchant-type "respawns".....)
The lack of Japanese planes by 1943 is somewhat irrelevent, if you can use actual history as a guideline, because according to probably EVERY account, written by actual Japanese pilots/participants of that war (who survived), the Bushido code made the use of parachutes "unmanly", and so pilots who might have survived, chose to ride their pepperred crates to oblivion.
(WITP therefore should NEVER allow messages of Japanese pilots "surviving bail-outs" before sometime in 1944, when the High Command finally ordered the pilots to use 'chutes.)
Several threads have mentioned the "Allied- bias" that "the Japanese in the game have no means to win the game".
True enough.. That follows historical precedent.
The Japanese never had the ability to win that war (if it were to be a long-term war of attrition and production.)
This was the prediction of Yamamoto, (who knew Americans in particular, as friends.)
He warned the Japanese high command of this, and then proceeded to follow his orders nonetheless.
The Japanese beheaded Allied POW's, and mistreated or killed their civilian and military prisoners, because they truly never feared retribution.
Every account I have ever read, (written from the Japanese perspective) indicates the Japanese public were systematically lied to about their losses, and even the survivors of the Midway campaign were sequestered from the general public for years, lest people start putting "2 and 2 together" to realize the scope of the defeat, (which the public had been told was a victory!.)
Somewhat in defense of the AI which seems to have been programmed to make certain initial moves, with rather sketchy follow-up, (in the original vanilla version), also seems to have historical precedent!
Once the Japanese occupied Guadalcanal and met with resistance, they HAD NO PLAN to quickly defent that island, or supply it, let alone defend it, because (again) by then they simply did not expect the Allies to "still be in it"!
Proof of this is the local command continuously asking for more ships, and the High Command continuously sending units piecemeal, and with no real effort of planned follow-up.
The use of destroyers to re-supply LCU's was an expedient, and not normal procedure.
What if the High Command had stationed battleships and CV's down there when first requested?
Yamamoto himself predicted before Pearl Harbor this would not be a possibility, because at the beginning of the war, he knew they only had enough bunker fuel for the Navy to last two years.
(It might have been less that 2 full years, but this figure was NOT accounting for a protracted naval campaign in the Solomons where the war on attrition finally started to have a telling effect on the Japanese Navy, (even though their fighting abilities were peerless).
Troops were starving to death in the jungles south and west of Henderson Field because not only had there been no prior plan to feed them, there had been no suspicion the Allies would move so quick to counter them, IF AT ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Allied bias?. Of course, not a game decision, but rather a historic reality.
The term "re-spawning" is innacurate when used as a complaint of "Allied bias", because whether those ships emerged with names of sunk ships or not, they were bound to emerge, as they already had been given prior names.
They were not just "replacements", but were financially appropriated for, on the order sheets, or even in the slipways during 1942. Some of them were re-named AFTER being launched.
Exactly, so making their inclusion dependent on the loss of prewar carriers and cruisers, and eliminating entirely the lesser combatants with name duplications, is just plain off the mark and definitely pro Japanese.
Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
The term "re-spawning" is innacurate when used as a complaint of "Allied bias", because whether those ships emerged with names of sunk ships or not, they were bound to emerge, as they already had been given prior names.
The problem is, if you don't lose carriers, you don't get the "respawned" ones! I fixed this. But now, what you get, is the ORIGINAL names ONLY - which can be confusing - if they were actually used on different hulls! But players said they wanted "all their Essexes" - so they get them. [I say - "if you need them all you are not a very good player"]
CHS was originally conceived as a non respawn version. It just has not happenned yet as there have and continue to be so many changes to CHS we may as well wait for the dust to settle before adding a non respawn.
Ideally, now that Joe and Don are manning the guns, perhaps a version with the respawn code removed is possible. Any non respawn version currently means that the players have constantly ensure that the regenerated ships stay in a mothball fleet.
Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
The term "re-spawning" is innacurate when used as a complaint of "Allied bias", because whether those ships emerged with names of sunk ships or not, they were bound to emerge, as they already had been given prior names.
The problem is, if you don't lose carriers, you don't get the "respawned" ones! I fixed this. But now, what you get, is the ORIGINAL names ONLY - which can be confusing - if they were actually used on different hulls! But players said they wanted "all their Essexes" - so they get them. [I say - "if you need them all you are not a very good player"]
On those newer "respawned ships", how about just naming them CV19, etc..
Adding this detail info on the U.S.S. Essex, to maybe head off the false notion that U.S. carriers were created to replace wartime losses.
In fact, see these dates and note the class was "paid for" and in construction well before Pearl Harbor!
Awarded: 1940
Keel laid: April 28, 1941
Launched: July 31, 1942
Commissioned: December 31, 1942
Decommissioned: June 30, 1969
Builder: Newport News Shipbuilding, Newport News, Va.
Propulsion system: 8 boilers
Propellers: four
Aircraft elevators: three
Arresting gear cables: four
Catapults: two
Length: 876 feet (267 meters)
Flight Deck Width: 191.9 feet (58.5 meters)
Beam: 101 feet (30.8 meters)
Draft: 30.8 feet (9.4 meters)
Displacement: approx. 40,600 tons full load
Speed: 33 knots
Planes: 80-100 planes
Crew: approx. 3448
Seeing as it is the ship/unit ID number that is important in this database and most others, why not make all unit names editable? How hard would that be? Problem solved and so would some of the UI unfriendliness we currently endure. Can't see too many people renaming ships "Blowitoutyerarse" or something.
This is why I think it was more than just a naming issue. I think GG is the Brady Bunch Japanese Fanboy idol. Anyone care to dispute my post about the coincidence surrounding hard coded features benefitting Japan.
Trying to live up to Platoonist's great sig he made for me. Not that I need to try I suppose....[:D]
Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
ORIGINAL: juliet7bravo
Piolet training...personally, I think this is one of the areas in which the "Grand High Poobah" of the Japanese military should be able to impact to a LIMITED degree if he so desired.
The FIRST task of a WitP 2 would be outlining the players role and determining what he can influence from within the realistic limits of that role.
I wouldn't have a problem with this type of "what if" if it was accurately represented. Give the Japanese a more healthy level of trained pilots..., but remember to remove a goodly number of those "veteran pilots" they start the game with (they are now "instructors"). And if you are going to be training carrier pilots, remember to remove a carrier from the OB to "training duties". And correct the already screwed up aircraft production numbers even more to reflect the production of additional "trainers". You don't get something for nothing.
IIRC, the Japanese did not use their more experienced pilots as instructors. More often, it was relatively new pilots out of school who were chosen as instructors. Does anyone have more knowledge of this - I'm not sure I remember where I read it (maybe Bergerud?).
Which is why the first thing you must do for the possible WitP II is to figure out how much control we want to give ourselves.
Of course this is completely subjective but I prefer an unrealistically high amount of control (within some reason). I prefer to control production from many levels and even making a training program from pilot pools and making aces instructors by your choice, it would be quite nice. However this would require even more micro-management, not that I mind that but we must have AI helpers etc for supply management and other tedious things that can be overridden at times for particular needs or future plans.
The more I see you guys argue, it seems as if it stems from the "The war happened this way and no other way." people fighting with the "What if I changed the entire industrial/training programs Japan had." people. I wouldn't have the player ignore the fact that certain ships were under construction at the start of the war, however I would like to see those ships scrapable (into resources) and completely new (and non-historic) vessels being ordered...not new classes, you'd get ppl designing Japanese CAs or CLs armed with MANY 3.9"/60 mounts for AA, which would be rather gamey. Though, at the same time, I can't but help like the idea of designing my own ships...[:D]
EDIT: I mention the "What if." Japanese fanboys only becuase while giving the same amount of control to the Allies would be fine, it seems to be overkill to me. Because as we all know it probably doesn't matter what Japan used with their entire industry. Even if you magically take the Yamato's and replace them with 4 CV's it still would only make the war a little longer. In all fairness you must have it for both sides if it were to be contemplated and implemented.
While your adding new ship designs etc, you may as well refit ships at any time you want...which then makes the game a complete (fantasy in the Pacific) as some have liked to coin it. Which to me has both good and bad aspects.
Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.
"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture
IIRC, the Japanese did not use their more experienced pilots as instructors. More often, it was relatively new pilots out of school who were chosen as instructors. Does anyone have more knowledge of this - I'm not sure I remember where I read it (maybe Bergerud?).
Severely wounded Japanese pilots were placed in training squadrons.
They weren't fit for combat duty, so they became instructors.[;)]
I went to bed- were indifferent time ZOnes and Now I am cafanating....Then their is the upcomming second morning medatative perioud, and well now:
Piolet's- This has been discused at lenght before an honestly I am not shure I realy want to got their agin, at lest not now, and clearly much that was posed by me and others fell on deth ears then and since many of those ears are her now..well you see what I mean whats the point.[:)]
...........
P-39/p400- I think becuase it realy realy realy sucked, and is easy to prove that it realy sucked.
Zero Bonious- I dont care for it either, but this is largely a reflection of how the model planes in WiTP they dont model them as they were techanicaly, and modify their in game preformance based on the variables they have in game they do this:
If you want to creat a plane vs plane model you nead to not imo use real world combat results to arive at a base line, you should use preformance stats and curves, exct. A-la flight sim's. The game already has variables for Fatigue,leadership and experance, and moral. If you again base the comparative preformance expications on a situation whear the Japanese were streached to the limit in all reasionable areas one might look to compare them, and then aply that to the whole, your going to creat in this instance a Pro Allied model, because the comparasion is Pro Allied.
So, they had to do the Zero Bonious to fix what they buggered from the get go.
Japanese strike coodination bonus- I thought this was becuase of all the training they did A-la PH strike by way of an example, that given the larger number CV's that were simply better at it for having worked in larger formations so many times.
Lack of Allied CAP advantage- Ya but dont they realy have one? I mean they get the radar bonious, the Japanese dont have Radar at their bases early on, the Allied planes almost always fair far better on cap sorties than the Japanese escort fighters entering their base, so is not their realy a Bonious anyway?
Unlimited aerial launched torps- This is a Double edged sword, as an example the largest loss of Shiping in my game with Mogami, was from beauforts operating out of PM aganst japanese ships around Lae, I sank like 50 or AP/AK their with Beaufort torps. Also if you limit this You would have to do something about those dam Allied 4E uber ship killers.
Respawn- I dont know why they dont the ships, honestly I cant see it making any diferance, as noted above if you nead therse ships you suck bad as aplayer or were realy unlucky.
The Bigest Hard coded Isues that efect a Pro Allied Slant are the 'Big Bomb" bonious for Allied bombers, and the AVG. The Former Alows the Allies to be far more deadly than any of the Betty's Nell's could hope to be, largely because the Allied 4E's Bombers are just as deadly and dont get lost at horendious atration rate's on their Anti Shiping Strikes, and thus can do it turn and turn and turn after turn. The later alows 70 some od POS P-40b's to domanate all of SE asia and China for the entire war.
.............
el cid-Suply/base building, that Narow gauge railway was a standard equipment pice aloted to many Japanese construction units and was typicaly suplied with a engine. The specialised Japanese enginear units (Airfield/Road/Rail/Bridging) Had Construction vehiclas asigned to them, Rollers, reader's, Cat's, and yes truck's. And of Course their were the Famious Worker Units which are totaly absent from WiTP for God Knows what reasion.
Thier are many variables to the suply and enginear isue, clearly the US used a Huge amount of material and suplys compared to the Japanese in the construction of bases, the Japense would use more local materials to efect the cosrtuction of their basees and they would use a lot of labor. If a Worker Batalion was not available the parent engenear unit would use the nearset army unit to fulfill the task at hand.
I am not sugesting on the whole that the Japanese should build as fast as aan Allied Enginear unit, but all Japanese Enginear units were not created equil and imo the Specialaised ones in game should get some Vehicals.
..............
Ki-100, why I wounder do so many folks feal this plane is so hot?
........................
SCW Beta Support Team
Beta Team Member for:
WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE
Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
P-39/p400- I think becuase it realy realy realy sucked, and is easy to prove that it realy sucked
Not exactly. Their performance fell of quickly above 11,000 feet, but at low levels where the Allisons weren't handicapped, the mid-engined design gave them excellent manueverability and good performance. Just look at the list of Russian Aces who gained all or most of their victories in P-39's. As a bomber interceptor they were a flop, but in lower level operations they did just fine..., even against Zeros.
If you look at specific performance under certain conditions, then remember that a P-47 could outmanuever a Zero above 25,000 feet Does that mean the Zero "sucked"? Of course not..., it was designed for maximum performance at medium altitudes where most carrier-typoe A/C generally operated. But against high altitude attacks by US 4-engined "heavies" they failed just as surely as the P-39's had against Japanese bombers at medium altitudes.
