Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Gary Grigsby's strategic level wargame covering the entire War in the Pacific from 1941 to 1945 or beyond.

Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
ChezDaJez
Posts: 3293
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:08 am
Location: Chehalis, WA

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by ChezDaJez »

IMHO certain IJN operational capabilities are considerably better than real life or USN capabilities are considerably under-rated (worse than IRL):

1) "All torpedoes all the time" - Bettys, Nells and their descendants are all very experienced and always use torpedos when attacking shipping. Been through this in multiple threads but basically these aircraft used torpedoes only sometimes. The likely reasons being that not all aircrew were adequately trained and adequate stocks of aerial torpedoes AND torpedo maintenance personnel were not available everywhere (all level 4 airbases).

1A) Kates use torpedoes all the time too. IRL torpedo attacks seem to have been the province of the "real" KB (Akagi, Kaga, Shokaku, Zuikaku, Hiryu, Soryu). Only those ships appear to have had the training in making this type of attack AND the personnel to maintain the torpedoes. The "mini-KB" composed of CVL's and CVEs is pure fiction. Certainly at the beginning of the war the aircrew, the torpedo maintenance personnel and the ships themselves were definite second-stringers. AND the availability of torpedoes in the magazines of all carriers (IJN, US, and RN) is overstated.

2) Japanese Battleships are allowed far too much flexibility with regards to bombardment missions. At the beginning of the war Japan had no HE ammunition for 14+". Not until late 42 did they have a limited supply (of shells originally conceived as AA ammo). They never really developed a NGFS doctrine and corresponding trained personnel to coordinate NGFS with ground operations.

3) Japanese fleet defense doctrine is completely misrepresented. Radar or not their CAP never received adequate direction and coordination. At the beginning of the war their flak defense was utterly uncoordinated with a ring defense of capital ships evolving only late in the war (when they were beginning to run out of capital ships). IJN FLEET DEFENSE IS REPRESENTED EXACTLY IN THE SAME MANNER AS USN FLEET DEFENSE WHEREAS IT WAS IRL BASED ON A TOTALLY DIFFERENT SET OF ASSUMPTIONS AND CAPABILITIES.

4) THE JAPANESE MERCHANT MARINE IS OVER-REPRESENTED. THE IJN PLAYER SHOULD BE CHECKING ON WHETHER EACH AND EVERY MERCHIE IS DOING SOMETHING USEFUL EVERY SINGLE TURN. As it stands now Mogami lays up 2-3 million tons of shipping in some safe harbor at the beginning of the game cause he can't really find anything for it to do (and I guess cause he sorta shares the view that there may be a bit too much).

5) Jap CD units are over-rated. The only CD unit that ever did anything notable was the Defense Battallion on Wake at the beginning of the war (a US unit). And that was mainly because the IJN tried to take Wake "on the cheap". Besides that one incident, one might conclude the big (Heavy) CD units in a few major ports also accomplished their mission since nobody ever tried to take them on. As far as the Japanese CD units are concerned, they accomplished next to nothing against the invasions that challenged them - they were suppressed by the USN bombardments (the bombardments might not have knocked out the guns but they pretty much kept them from firing on the invasion forces). The alternative to Jap CDs being over-rated would be that USN bombardments are under-rated (same capabilities as IJN in spite of a much more advanced and developed doctrine).

Please let me reply to each of your points. It concerns me that you make no mention of these problems as they relate to the allied position. Why? Each problem you listed has an allied counterpart.

(1) All units, allied or Japanese, that use torpedoes have this problem. I could complain that Swordfish, T-IVAs, Beauforts, Avengers and Devastators can also make unlimited torpedo attacks at any time. Why aren’t we including them also? I have lost many a ship during the first weeks of war to Swordfish and T-IVAs. I wonder how many torpedoes did the Dutch really have available? And what about the Dutch submarines? Surely they didn’t have huge torpedo stocks.

Regardless, I have said on many occasions that I would love to see torpedo production and carrier torpedo stowage modeled. So basically I agree with you that torpedoes are a problem but it is a problem that applies to BOTH sides.

(2) I have never heard of any early war shortage of Japanese common shells which is what they called their HE shells for 14-16 inch guns. I would like to see the source that came from. Japan did use her BBs for the initial bombardment during the Khota Bharu landings until Japan pulled the BBs to intercept the POW and Repulse.

Japan also produced common shells under license from Britain for her British built (or designed) battleships. AFAIK, only Yamato and Musashi had a temporary shortage of common shells when they were first commissioned. Common shells were produced secondary to the AP shells for these ships as their intended mission was to engage the US fleet. The Shiki type shells used for AA defense weren’t developed until after the war began.

(3) I would agree for the most part. However it wasn’t until late 42 that the lessons learned in the Marshalls, at Coral Sea and at Midway had any appreciable impact on US fleet defense. US fighter direction and AA fire were shown to be wholly inadequate during the Marshall Island raid in Feb 42 and again at Coral Sea. While fleet AA fire had improved by the time of Midway, fighter direction had not appreciably done so. The biggest problem being the single communications network used for both ship-air and air-air control. Excited pilots literally jammed the transmissions of fighter directors. In effect there were occasions where fighter controllers were unable to direct their charges, a position the Japanese were often in.

Its interesting that you fail to mention the US uber-CAP. As Andy’s and PzB’s AAR clearly demonstrates, every attempt by the Japanese to attack US carriers after mid-43 results in a Mariana’s Turkey Shoot. US fleet defense was very good in 1944 but it wasn’t impregnable. I can not think of a single engagement where at least some Japanese aircraft didn’t penetrate the CAP. Yet this is an every day occurrence in WitP. That fact is, as many others have mentioned on many, many occasions, the air-air combat routines are simply too bloody. And this is where the root of the problem is. It is what causes Japanese players to have to continuously train, to ramp up production in excess of historical levels. If they didn’t, the game would be over by the time Hellcats arrived on carriers. The Japanese simply wouldn’t have an air force left.

(4) As is the US merchant fleet also over-represented by about 20 percent. Considering that a huge portion of the US merchant fleet was assigned to delivering Lend-Lease supplies, it seems to me that they become available a little too quickly. One of the major problems the US had was in finding enough shipping to send supplies to the front. There were no 200,000+ unit supply convoys enroute Australia in late December 41 like many allied players can generate. However, I have no problem reducing the size of the Japanese merchant fleet by 30-40%. I can’t use them all anyways and the US merchies just gives me more VPs.

But let’s also look at AOs and tankers. I would like to see a routine that limits at sea refueling to AOs only. The US had 11 AOs in the Pacific at the beginning of the war, only 4 of which were capable of refueling ships at sea. In effect, the rest of the US fleet AOs were nothing more than tankers. The Japanese had 24 tankers that had been converted to AOs before the war. Unfortunately the game labels all of them as tankers. The only Japanese AOs listed in the game were those that were purpose built as AOs. All of the AOs that accompanied KB to Pearl Harbor were converted from tankers and were capable of refueling at sea.

(5) All CD units in the game are overrated. As you stated, the CD at Wake was the only CD to actually repel an invasion. But the primary problem isn’t with the CDs themselves. Its with the fact that the game basically requires that APs run themselves up on to the beach to unload. The required landing craft are abstracted so the APs themselves become the targets. I would like to see landing craft added to APs as an expendable device.

I would also submit that Japanese CDs were effective when opposing landings and not one US naval bombardment was effective in destroying coastal defenses. Look at Tarawa and Peleliu. Massive casualties were incurred during the landings. The bombardments at Iwo Jima and Okinawa did absolutely nothing to soften the defenses as the enemy refused to contest the beaches, choosing instead to fight from the hills.

As long as I am at it, let me go on to another WitP inaccuracy.. That is the pilot pools. Andy is absolutely right that it makes no sense to receive only 60 trained USN pilots a month. The USN was churning out hundreds per month at this stage in the war. Indeed, the US began to cut back on pilot training by mid 1944 because there weren’t enough units to take them all. USN pilot pools should receive at least 120 per month and USMC pools should receive at least 90 per month. The USAAF pools appear to be correct as the vast majority of its trained pilots were earmarked for Europe.

In addition to the USN pools, I feel that the IJN and IJA pools are grossly understated, far more so than the US pools. The IJN receives 10 pilots per month for the entire duration of the war and the IJA receives 20. These numbers are not bad for the pre-1943 period but they seriously reduce the RL levels later.

Now without even using any sources concerning Japanese flight training, just consider that Japan produced over 55,900 aircraft of all types between 1 January 1943 and 15 August 1945. Approximately 36000 of these were bombers and fighters, 7000 were trainers and the rest were patrol, recon, and supply types. So with Japan producing 7000 trainers, in a little over 2.5 years, just who were going to fly these bright, shiny, new aircraft? Okay, I digressed but it is an interesting point.

Anyways, the IJNAF graduated 391 pilots in 1942. Over 900 graduated in 1943 and another 2000+ graduated in 1944. The ones that graduated in the latter half of 1944 had had their training programs drastically cut short due to a lack of fuel and instructors.

I am unable to find accurate numbers for the 1945 IJNAF graduates or for the entire IJAAF war program. I do have one source that says Japan trained over 6000 IJAAF pilots during the entire course of the war but it doesn’t break it down by month nor does it give a clue as to quality.

I believe the fix for this would be to provide Japan with 50 trained IJNAF and 100 trained IJAAF pilots per month after 1942.

BTW, Spence. I'm not trying to pick on you. You just happened to mention some of my own pet peeves about the game.

Chez
Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98
Andy Mac
Posts: 12577
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 8:08 pm
Location: Alexandria, Scotland

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by Andy Mac »

I love this game and I dont find either side to be over powered. (I do think the USN is underpowered in 2 specific ways but I have made my point on this)
 
Chez re your point on pilot training I could be wrong but dont all reinforcemnt gps arrive with trained pilots as well.
 
In reality I am getting about 120 USN pilots a month because of new groups arriving with trained pilots I still think this is low and the default 30xp for pilots in excess of this unreasonable but I am getting more than the 60 replacements into the pool.
 
I have not played as the Japanese so I dont know how many reinforcement gps they recieve but when calculating trained pilots recieved against historic totals you need to calcualte to total recieved and compare that to historic.
 
My understanding (and again I could be wrong) is that actually the Japanese should recieve NO pilots with any reinforcment groups and should be forced to train all pilots up to trained status via the training mission i.e. the pilots they do recieve free were put in as a crutch for the AI.
 
Fundamentally US pilot training is supposed to be off map while Japanese training is on map.
 
If I am correct it was the intent of the devs that all Japanese pilot training should be done on map via the training command.
 
Now obviously given the bloody nature of air combat and the slow rate of training this is sub optimal but that is my understanding of the intent.
Andy Mac
Posts: 12577
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 8:08 pm
Location: Alexandria, Scotland

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by Andy Mac »

Isnt there a very easy answer to this.

Create 20 IJN training schools as 100 plane groups (call them Claudes !!!)
Create 20 IJAAF training schools as 100 plane groups (say Nates)

Restrict them to only be able to use the "Training Command" so no bombing CAP or any other type of mission not even search set them at start to have zero planes and zero pilots.

With the new disband to pool ability at Tokyo per the latest patch the Japanese can run as many or as few classes as they want or as there supply can take when they hit an acceptable xp level the Japanese disband the school to the pool and they have 100 trained pilots to use it may take 3 months to get a trained pilot but if the Japanese are willing to pay the supply cost so be it.

As long as these schools have NO other possible mission than training I would be happy with that.

i.e. give the Japanese the tools to perform the on map training that the game thinks they need.

This has given me an idea as to how to overcome my USN navy pilot shortage.....[:D][:D]

Andy
User avatar
pauk
Posts: 4156
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Zagreb,Croatia

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by pauk »

hi Sneer, do you really think that would solve problems?

In the game, possibly yes... but than we would have thread "Aren't Jap pilots too powerful" or something like that, arguing that Jap pilots get too much experience by training mission. Of course, it isn't the same with Allies - we all know that they withdraw veterans from the frontlines and set them as instructors, which is not a case with their Japanese counterparts....

Furthermore, i'm almost sure that even that would be somehow fixed than our guys would start another thread "aren't Jap pilots gaining too much exp in the combat model" with arguments like there wasn't possible in RL because their diet was based on rice only, and their allied counterparts had more balanced food with carbohydrates, proteins and all required vitamines therefore they were smarter and capable to learn faster.

I would counter that Japanese also eat fish which have quite a lot phosphor which is good for brain....[:'(].. so Japanese are smarter![:D]

Sorry on joke, but i'm getting sick about that onesided threads. Since the game begins lots of such threads had started:

Zero is overpowered
Zero bonus
IJN/IJA pilots too high exp at the start of the game

these three are top of my head, i'm sure i could remember few more about overpowered Jap planes and pilots only....

These guys doesn't understand what you wrote "after mid 42 allies decide how we Japanese player play - it is often not purely our choice as most of sorties flown are of defensive nature", and will never understand...

Even Mogami doesn't want to hear some things - when we disscused about A2A combat (i won't repeat his and my propositions, i'm just tired of that) i tried my best and put some ideas for tweaking - both sides. But interestingly, he didn't bother to answer that (and this is not only his habit).

They all puting historical argumentations, but when i ask them how far you gone as Japan in your games? Did you reach 1945? - without combat training program! - they just ignore my questions. So much about their consistency...

that is why i just don't bother to keep disscusion seriously anymore. And I'm pretty sure that spence will post his arguments in some other post although Chez explained him whats wrong in his post [:)]

Someone could be pissed off with my post, but i don't care. I didn't offend anyone and it is their problem if they recognised themself in my post. Fortunatly there is majority of nice AFBs here so this majority wont influence on possible one side changes.

I simply refuse such changes - i've paid 70 bucks same as they did.


Image
User avatar
pauk
Posts: 4156
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Zagreb,Croatia

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by pauk »

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Isnt there a very easy answer to this.

Create 20 IJN training schools as 100 plane groups (call them Claudes !!!)
Create 20 IJAAF training schools as 100 plane groups (say Nates)

Restrict them to only be able to use the "Training Command" so no bombing CAP or any other type of mission not even search set them at start to have zero planes and zero pilots.

With the new disband to pool ability at Tokyo per the latest patch the Japanese can run as many or as few classes as they want or as there supply can take when they hit an acceptable xp level the Japanese disband the school to the pool and they have 100 trained pilots to use it may take 3 months to get a trained pilot but if the Japanese are willing to pay the supply cost so be it.

As long as these schools have NO other possible mission than training I would be happy with that.

i.e. give the Japanese the tools to perform the on map training that the game thinks they need.

This has given me an idea as to how to overcome my USN navy pilot shortage.....[:D][:D]

Andy

not a bad idea. I would speed up training little more. IIRC it takes almost a year to train recruits to the 50xp level - which is too long, both for the RL and especially for the game.
Image
AmiralLaurent
Posts: 3351
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 8:53 pm
Location: Near Paris, France

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by AmiralLaurent »

One thing that is disliked in WITP is the ground-training method (that may be used by both sides, even if it more useful for Japan), that is totally unrealistic.

Flying combat missions should bring experience, OK, but bombing passive enemy targets should bring less experience than training, where at least one can verify if its bomb has hit or not, and experienced pilots may monitor the bombing/strafing/flying and so on.

IMOO, a pilot should do an experience check (ie D100, if it over its actual experience score, it wins one point) in the following cases :
_ 5% each time he land after a mission
_ 50% each time he flies a training mission
_ 10% each time he bombs a target
_ 25% each time AA fire is experienced
_ each time he is involved in an air battle (and fired or is fired on)
This is cumulative. A crew flying a bombing mission and facing AA and enemy aircraft will do 4 checks (at 5, 10, 25 and 100%)

So example a 30% pilot is on training for one month and flies (weather permitting) 30 times. The above system will give him an average 16.5 checks (1.5 for flying and 15 for training) that will bring him an extra point 6 or 7 times on ten depending of the time of the month and is current level, so he will gain roughly 16.5 * 0.65 = 10-11 points in one month.

Same with a pilot at 80%. He also has 16.5 checks but will only win 1-2 points.

Another unrealistic thing is the illimited number of pilots at 20-30% that Japan has.
User avatar
pauk
Posts: 4156
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Zagreb,Croatia

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by pauk »

we are agree on that issue. However, i don't want to see any changes to ground combat training before the whole A2A is revised. There are many things need to be looked:

- 4E effiency against naval target
- figthers unlimited ammo in the game
- possible coordinated strikes of 200, 300 4E bombers on one target
- very easy maintaince for 4E bombers
- same VP for fighters and 2E or 4E bombers
- training bombers with supply mission over the 59xp

this is just some of them caming from top of my head. As i stated, only changing ground training missions would lead to another unbalance, and ground attack training is only chance for Japan to have a decent force with which he can HOPE it will delay Allies (and limit them to the historical tempo).

Your idea isn't bad, however, i do think that would be easier to do reasonable tweaks with things i already mentioned above and:

- limiting all planes gaining max 59xp unless it arent combat missions (A2A, ground, naval, even a naval search at the frontlines)
- limiting gaining exp with ground attack for fighters to certain level (could be 65, 70, 75)
- disabling overstacking AFs
Image
AmiralLaurent
Posts: 3351
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 8:53 pm
Location: Near Paris, France

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by AmiralLaurent »

A way to bring back the game to realistic level will be to forget the rule of the 250 AS points supporting an infinite number of AC... and the introduction of a deckload concept limiting what an unit or a CV may launch at one time, enabling only part of the AC to be sent in the same wave (and only part of the defending fighters to oppose the raid).

But I agree with Pauk that such changes are to be pondered with playability and tested. Right now WITP is totally unrealistic and far more bloody than RL, but is playable and most of us enjoy it.

To go back to Pzb vs Andy, yes it is a strange situation to see Andy running out of Hellcats, but the whole game is suffering from the "edge map" effect and so it is not a surprise it is strange now. Still a month after turning back off Mariannas, Andy was still able to crush the KB off Jolo. And in all these battles, Japan losses are as far as I know more than twice higher than the Allied ones, so Japan is still losing the war, even if it is not losing all battles.
User avatar
Feinder
Posts: 7177
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:33 pm
Location: Land o' Lakes, FL

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by Feinder »

Ultimately, this thread becomes one group of fan-boys shouting down the other.
 
If evidence is an impartial voice, then look at the AARs to answer to the question.
 
-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

Image
User avatar
RevRick
Posts: 2615
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Thomasville, GA

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by RevRick »

ORIGINAL: RUPD3658

ORIGINAL: flipperwasirish

ORIGINAL: RUPD3658

I don't know about all this training of Japanese pilots. I don't bomb bypassed bases or even train pilots at all. They go straight to the front and are weeded out in Darwinian fashon. I doubt I could spare the supplies to keep extra squadrons training.

"Sir, excuse me General Rupd. Everybody reported to sick bay today. It seems the men would all like to request a transfer from your unit. They respect you but think you are too old school. They want to live, love and above all live some more...

Flipper

Have them report to the parade grounds outside of sick bay. I am sure that once a few of them have their "Illness" treated by a 5.5mm round to the head the rest will be cured.

Their lives do not matter. Only the fate of the Empire does. [:-]

Ah, the Stalingrad approach to desertion prevention.
"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer
User avatar
Tom Hunter
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:57 am

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by Tom Hunter »

Just stopped by and thought I would throw in my 2 cents[:D]

For those who are new I used to play Allies, I ripped the Japanese apart in a few games, but eventually stopped playing because of the many problems I found with the game engine took the pleasure out of the game for me.

I will second everything Chez said, and I don't find the Japanese to be too strong. Even against Mogami I was still inflicting very heavy casualties by mid 42, and many of the concerns expressed by those who feel Japan is too powerful were never going to happen in our game.

Jim Burn's point about Japanese front line fighter production is somewhat close to the truth, but if the Allies play right the Japanese will still have huge problems starting in 1943.

I found a lot of problems with the game and game engine, but I don't feel that an overpowered Japan is one of them.
aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by aztez »

Nice to see you Tom!
 
I kind of miss reading about your agressive style of play and strategy. Any chance you will be someday starting a new game or is done for good?
User avatar
RUPD3658
Posts: 6921
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 2:25 am
Location: East Brunswick, NJ

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by RUPD3658 »

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits"- Darwin Awards 2003

"No plan survives contact with the enemy." - Field Marshall Helmuth von Moltke
[img]https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/upfi ... EDB99F.jpg[/img]
User avatar
pauk
Posts: 4156
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Zagreb,Croatia

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by pauk »

I'm with aztez!

We are missing you and your games....

and still recalled your thread about wierd naval combat routines....[:)]
Image
User avatar
Oliver Heindorf
Posts: 1911
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 2:49 am
Location: Hamburg/Deutschland

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by Oliver Heindorf »

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Ultimately, this thread becomes one group of fan-boys shouting down the other.

If evidence is an impartial voice, then look at the AARs to answer to the question.

-F-

evidence ? what for evidence ?

[:D]

guys, install bf2, run a few rounds and you know who will win [:D]
User avatar
Feinder
Posts: 7177
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:33 pm
Location: Land o' Lakes, FL

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by Feinder »

Just send some more of those tasty morsels labled CVE my way Oli. My kamikaze pilots are looking for something to bang their head against...

:^)

-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

Image
User avatar
mlees
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 6:14 am
Location: San Diego

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by mlees »

Some genre of computer games have created the mind set wherein the player thinks that victory is only acheived when the enemy is completely wiped off the map. Those players then bring this mindset into WiTP, and find the way the war unfolds to be frustrating.

As I see it, the Japanese have the initiative at the start, and make impressive gains. Then, at some point, a stalemate developes, and a slow Allied build up commences. (This period adds to the tension of the Japanese player, because they dread the oncoming phase.) After the Allies have stockpiled enough stuff, they batter their way back towards Japan, with the intention of bringing the Home Islands under air assault.

So: Japan sets the tone in '41-'42, '43 stalemate, '44-'45 Allied ascendency.

A lot of players who favor playing the Japanese have expressed frustration at how they get stomped in '44, no matter how well they do in '42.

Conversely, the Allied camp feels that they should be able to steamroll the Japanese in late '43 and '44. (Yet it seems to be far tougher than "it should be".)

Neither player is very happy when the other is in the drivers seat.

It also seems that very few games have made it into mid '45. Most Japanese players quit the game before then.

My longwinded point: The lack of total domination makes victory seem just out of reach (when your ascendant), and eventually impossible to achieve (after playing several games and not reaching that total victory goal). This causes a lot of players to want to "tweak" the system, looking for that emotionally satisfying game.
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by mogami »

Hi, My main problem with people who think the "Japan conquers the map" games are plausable.
Populations in 1941


Japan  71,600,000
USA 133,700,000
China 500,000,000

Japans early advantage is all of her manpower starts in Pacific while it takes USA a few years to transport theirs. However it does show that Japan is going to be outnumbered in excess of 9 to 1 before adding in any of the other combatants she will face.

The most favorable ratios exist in the first 6 months. (That is why apan started the war. Knowing by 1943 the ratios would make any sort of success impossible)

I know it hurts. But Japanese players must try to achive a favorable defensive postion by mid/late 1942 and then fight to protect it. If you want to conquer the map play the Allies.
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
AmiralLaurent
Posts: 3351
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 8:53 pm
Location: Near Paris, France

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by AmiralLaurent »

Agree with mlees. As a simulation, WITP is IMOO a failure, but as a game it is balanced enough (if you don't use the worst exploits that we all know). If the Allied in 1942 lost 3 AC for every Jap AC he is shooting down, he is losing on the battlefield but winning on the scoreboard. And same for 1944, the Japanese player goal should be to resist as long as possible (the only way to win will be to disgust the Allied opponent).

As I said before, I'm not sure PzB won in points term the last battles he was engaged into against Andy. My own opinion is that the lack of any front activity on the mainland has delayed the shift of the balance by one year so PzB is still able to bite, but the Allied become stronger and the Japanese weaker.

User avatar
mlees
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 6:14 am
Location: San Diego

RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

Post by mlees »

I wish for a game that models the war, as it was, or as it could have been.

I realise that there are going to be consessions made, in regards to having a hyperaccurate model versus playability and CPU demands.

As such, WiTP is the most ambitious I've seen in a long time. And one of the most successful in the attempt. IMO. I can't think of another title that has the same level of detail available to the players.

Is Japan too powerful? I don't think so. It's more powerful in the game than it was IRL, IMO, but not unstoppable. The Allied player just needs to be on his best game in the beginning. (Less room for error.) The Japanese player will need to play much more carefully (than he was in '41 and '42) after the tide has turned.
Post Reply

Return to “War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945”