Matrix Games Forums

Next turn is away.

I can't be bothered to ask for a redo. I mentioned to Bart that I may post on the tech forum about the units being reset to zero movement, but I don't think anything can be done about it. It clearly is the fact that the Chinese unit entered the hex prior to me leaving it. There are movement issues galore in this game and it's simply wrong that a unit so small is allowed to impede the movement of a force this large. I mentioned I thought it was a little gamey, but am leaving it at that.

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Next turn is away.

I can't be bothered to ask for a redo. I mentioned to Bart that I may post on the tech forum about the units being reset to zero movement, but I don't think anything can be done about it. It clearly is the fact that the Chinese unit entered the hex prior to me leaving it. There are movement issues galore in this game and it's simply wrong that a unit so small is allowed to impede the movement of a force this large. I mentioned I thought it was a little gamey, but am leaving it at that.

Between opponents there has to be some clear understanding of restrictions, unless a previous agreement is in place to use no HRs. So if you think this kind of movement is gamey there are in my view two options:

1. Go on and add it to your arsenal of tactics.

2. Refuse to use the tactic and negotiate with your opponent to stop using it as well because it goes against what you think is valid in this game.

If you choose to do neither of these then I think the door opens for lots of misunderstandings and bitterness which is just no fun. And this is supposed to be fun for both parties, right?

ORIGINAL: obvert

Between opponents there has to be some clear understanding of restrictions, unless a previous agreement is in place to use no HRs. So if you think this kind of movement is gamey there are in my view two options:

1. Go on and add it to your arsenal of tactics.

2. Refuse to use the tactic and negotiate with your opponent to stop using it as well because it goes against what you think is valid in this game.

If you choose to do neither of these then I think the door opens for lots of misunderstandings and bitterness which is just no fun. And this is supposed to be fun for both parties, right?

100% agree with obvert and his suggestions. I would generally choose #2.

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Next turn is away.

I can't be bothered to ask for a redo. I mentioned to Bart that I may post on the tech forum about the units being reset to zero movement, but I don't think anything can be done about it. It clearly is the fact that the Chinese unit entered the hex prior to me leaving it. There are movement issues galore in this game and it's simply wrong that a unit so small is allowed to impede the movement of a force this large. I mentioned I thought it was a little gamey, but am leaving it at that.

Between opponents there has to be some clear understanding of restrictions, unless a previous agreement is in place to use no HRs. So if you think this kind of movement is gamey there are in my view two options:

1. Go on and add it to your arsenal of tactics.

2. Refuse to use the tactic and negotiate with your opponent to stop using it as well because it goes against what you think is valid in this game.

If you choose to do neither of these then I think the door opens for lots of misunderstandings and bitterness which is just no fun. And this is supposed to be fun for both parties, right?

Completely agree obvert. I think the fact I mentioned to Bart it was gamey in my opinion will be enough. I haven't heard back from him yet, but he mentioned in response to my first e-mail that posting to the tech forum because of the lost movement would be fine. He thought I shouldn't lose my movement either, but I think it's moot. The Chinese unit entering the hex prior to me being able to leave it is the problem, that reset my movement to zero. The same thing would have happened had he sent a full sized Corps. I guess the issue remains the fact it's an expendable unit and if used in this way it creates an incredibly favourable situation out of all proportion to the size or combat capability of the unit.

I'm moving on with the game. I don't want to worry about posting saves or redoing the turn and causing a delay. I won't risk a possible change in results from the last turn either, I got a favourable bombardment against Lunga and I won't chance that being wiped out by a redo.

If Bart agrees it was gamey and will either risk a larger unit next time, or simply refrain from doing it again, that will satisfy me.

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Next turn is away.

I can't be bothered to ask for a redo. I mentioned to Bart that I may post on the tech forum about the units being reset to zero movement, but I don't think anything can be done about it. It clearly is the fact that the Chinese unit entered the hex prior to me leaving it. There are movement issues galore in this game and it's simply wrong that a unit so small is allowed to impede the movement of a force this large. I mentioned I thought it was a little gamey, but am leaving it at that.

Between opponents there has to be some clear understanding of restrictions, unless a previous agreement is in place to use no HRs. So if you think this kind of movement is gamey there are in my view two options:

1. Go on and add it to your arsenal of tactics.

2. Refuse to use the tactic and negotiate with your opponent to stop using it as well because it goes against what you think is valid in this game.

If you choose to do neither of these then I think the door opens for lots of misunderstandings and bitterness which is just no fun. And this is supposed to be fun for both parties, right?

Completely agree obvert. I think the fact I mentioned to Bart it was gamey in my opinion will be enough. I haven't heard back from him yet, but he mentioned in response to my first e-mail that posting to the tech forum because of the lost movement would be fine. He thought I shouldn't lose my movement either, but I think it's moot. The Chinese unit entering the hex prior to me being able to leave it is the problem, that reset my movement to zero. The same thing would have happened had he sent a full sized Corps. I guess the issue remains the fact it's an expendable unit and if used in this way it creates an incredibly favourable situation out of all proportion to the size or combat capability of the unit.

I'm moving on with the game. I don't want to worry about posting saves or redoing the turn and causing a delay. I won't risk a possible change in results from the last turn either, I got a favourable bombardment against Lunga and I won't chance that being wiped out by a redo.

If Bart agrees it was gamey and will either risk a larger unit next time, or simply refrain from doing it again, that will satisfy me.

Exactly. Clarification is really all you need.

Just got an e-mail from Bart and he explained what happened at Tuyun. I'm good with the explanation. A little worrying is the fact Bart is extremely frustrated with how China has gone and feels the theatre is unplayable. So much so that he won't rule out other questionable tactics to try and allow his forces to get to Kunming and roadblock any attempt at my linking my forces in China up with those in Burma.

I understand his frustration and just urged him to reconsider using anything gamey, as I don't think his position in China is untenable. I think using a viable blocking force is an acceptable tactic, it should just be more than a few guns.

So, no need for a redo in my opinion, we've discussed things and I think we'll work it out and move forward. We've had our issues this match and considering communicating by e-mail is not always ideal, we've done pretty good. Just waiting on more from Bart regarding this issue, or just the next turn.

Note: I'm not one to normally discuss communications between myself and Bart, a few times yes, but with the problems lately I think it is good to be sharing with others the pitfalls that we've been encountering. The important thing is communication and most issues can be resolved in a few e-mails. It's not easy carrying on a PBEM for this length of time with all the things that can go wrong, or each others expectations of gameplay. Sometimes you just have to work at it a little more. It's still one of the more rewarding gameplay options available, next to setting up a boardgame or playing hotseat.

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Next turn is away.

I can't be bothered to ask for a redo. I mentioned to Bart that I may post on the tech forum about the units being reset to zero movement, but I don't think anything can be done about it. It clearly is the fact that the Chinese unit entered the hex prior to me leaving it. There are movement issues galore in this game and it's simply wrong that a unit so small is allowed to impede the movement of a force this large. I mentioned I thought it was a little gamey, but am leaving it at that.

Between opponents there has to be some clear understanding of restrictions, unless a previous agreement is in place to use no HRs. So if you think this kind of movement is gamey there are in my view two options:

1. Go on and add it to your arsenal of tactics.

2. Refuse to use the tactic and negotiate with your opponent to stop using it as well because it goes against what you think is valid in this game.

If you choose to do neither of these then I think the door opens for lots of misunderstandings and bitterness which is just no fun. And this is supposed to be fun for both parties, right?

Completely agree obvert. I think the fact I mentioned to Bart it was gamey in my opinion will be enough. I haven't heard back from him yet, but he mentioned in response to my first e-mail that posting to the tech forum because of the lost movement would be fine. He thought I shouldn't lose my movement either, but I think it's moot. The Chinese unit entering the hex prior to me being able to leave it is the problem, that reset my movement to zero. The same thing would have happened had he sent a full sized Corps. I guess the issue remains the fact it's an expendable unit and if used in this way it creates an incredibly favourable situation out of all proportion to the size or combat capability of the unit.

I'm moving on with the game. I don't want to worry about posting saves or redoing the turn and causing a delay. I won't risk a possible change in results from the last turn either, I got a favourable bombardment against Lunga and I won't chance that being wiped out by a redo.

If Bart agrees it was gamey and will either risk a larger unit next time, or simply refrain from doing it again, that will satisfy me.

This is not new and has been discussed before in the forum. My opponent and I had the same experience as have many others. It is a slick trick but not a cheat because either side can do it. The move is not out of line if the unit used is a reasonable one-such as an armor car unit or small infantry unit. However any sort of support unit or non-combat unit is questionable. Come up with a reasonable solution with your opponent and then move on. If he does not want to change the rules then live with it and do the same to him when the opportunity arises.

There are just too many ways to end a long campaign in a huff...so a reasonable proposal is worth it. You are right it that all sorts of conflicts can arise in a long game. It is sort of like a marriage. Keep the lines of communication open and things will sort out.

No word from Bart yet, but I'm sure everything will be fine. I appreciate everyone's views and comments and am looking forward to getting back to the game.

As to the game, it's nice to know Bart is worried about me swamping Burma. That may explain the lack of movement to date. If the Chinese do effectively block me from reaching Paoshan, I can still set up a sustantial MLR and begin withdrawing units to the Pacific. My priority remains blocking any attempt to open a direct supply route to Chinese forces from Burma as long as possible, but my position can easily go bad once the Allies start moving again.

SigInt last turn finally indicated "heavy volume of radio traffic" at both Noumea and Pago Pago. Submarines in the area haven't picked anything up. I still think Tarawa will be the next target, but most likely will not commit KB. I don't have much LBA support in the Marshall's and won't risk giving the Allies any tactical advantages, especially after KB's poor showing at Lunga. Defending against further lodgements in the Solomons or New Guinea is a more important mission for KB. Of course, with the CV Taiho arriving soon and the addition of 20 DD's to Combined Fleet I may feel differently. [8D]

I'm slowly building up Milne Bay. Level two forts and I'm debating whether to commit an infantry regiment or a division to it's defence. The intent is to force a greater Allied commitment in taking the base if it is a target.

Allied submarines are heavily patrolling around Buna. I think it is an effort to interdict my reinforcing of Milne Bay. I've moved a crack ASW skilled Sentai of Sally's to Buna to counter the submarines. I've also increased the number of ASW TF's in the area.

I'm quite happy with my efforts to shore up defences in the Solomons and New Guinea. The lack of enemy 4E bombing is making my life easier than it should be. Base expansions are going ahead and PP's are accumulating. Already a few units now under Southern Army command are moving towards Hong Kong for deployment to the DEI and Pacific.

Obvert, you mentioned about Air HQ's. I'll post a screenshot of the DEI in a few weeks once I get things sorted out there showing my thoughts on how I'm going to defend the region. I'm pretty short of LBA in the area with the majority currently deployed to the Solomons. I'll begin addressing this issue too.

Next turn is in the inbox. Not much from Bart about whether he'll apply a similiar tactic in the future, so I'll just see how things go. I don't think it will be an issue, so I'm moving forward.

It will be good to start posting game updates again and less drama then of late.

I'm going to try and push back the seven gun unit rather than wipe it out. If I can get it to retreat I have 99% of my troops set to pursuit. Here's hoping it works and I make up some lost time.

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Obvert, you mentioned about Air HQ's. I'll post a screenshot of the DEI in a few weeks once I get things sorted out there showing my thoughts on how I'm going to defend the region. I'm pretty short of LBA in the area with the majority currently deployed to the Solomons. I'll begin addressing this issue too.

Great. Looking forward to seeing it.

Well, it's not like I have enough on my plate as it is, but I'm adding a new challenge for myself. People following along know of my bet to finish five model kits by July 11th of this year. I was surfing the local IPMS website and see that the Western Regional Finals Model Contest is set for June 2, in my home city of Edmonton.

I have never entered a model contest, so this is a new and exciting challenge. I of course build for my own pleasure, but it will be interesting to see what others think of my work. I'm going to be in big time model mode for the 2 1/2 months. I'd like to enter as many kits as I can finish in time. The contest is open to all subject areas and skill levels. I'll post some pictures of progress or completed kits periodically for those interested. Wish me luck!

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon
I'm going to try and push back the seven gun unit rather than wipe it out. If I can get it to retreat I have 99% of my troops set to pursuit. Here's hoping it works and I make up some lost time.

Sounds like a good counter- 1 exploit for another. (Because being able to move 1 hex through heavy jungle terrain (for example) in 1 turn by having units set to pursue is about as silly as dropping a unit into an enemy advancing to set their movement to zero).

In this case if it works it's justified based on your opponents actions- but it's use is continued is it not the opposite side of the tactic you were lamenting?

ORIGINAL: Itdepends

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon
I'm going to try and push back the seven gun unit rather than wipe it out. If I can get it to retreat I have 99% of my troops set to pursuit. Here's hoping it works and I make up some lost time.

Sounds like a good counter- 1 exploit for another. (Because being able to move 1 hex through heavy jungle terrain (for example) in 1 turn by having units set to pursue is about as silly as dropping a unit into an enemy advancing to set their movement to zero).

In this case if it works it's justified based on your opponents actions- but it's use is continued is it not the opposite side of the tactic you were lamenting?

Well, not exactly. This is it seems a compromise feature of the game to simulate continued pursuit from a rout of defending troops. If they move to the next hex immediately (also fairly improbable) then to make this more fair we are given the possibility to hold some units in reserve to pursue that teleporting unit with an extra movement allowance. Makes sense to me and is not the same as using a 7 gun artillery unit as a holding force against a massive army.

ORIGINAL: Itdepends

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon
I'm going to try and push back the seven gun unit rather than wipe it out. If I can get it to retreat I have 99% of my troops set to pursuit. Here's hoping it works and I make up some lost time.

Sounds like a good counter- 1 exploit for another. (Because being able to move 1 hex through heavy jungle terrain (for example) in 1 turn by having units set to pursue is about as silly as dropping a unit into an enemy advancing to set their movement to zero).

In this case if it works it's justified based on your opponents actions- but it's use is continued is it not the opposite side of the tactic you were lamenting?

That's actually a good point you raise. I don't see it as gamey though. I don't know how familiar you are with most board wargames, but they often had what was called an 'overun' rule. That if the force you were attacking with was so overwhelming and the combat odds so favourable that a combat almost didn't happen at all. The defending unit was wiped out and your forces moved as if that unit was never there, or you were given a bonus move. I see the pursuit setting in this game as the same thing, and I think this is what it was meant to represent. I may be wrong, but that is my interpretation.

Another thing is only armour units will travel the entire hex, which makes sense given their movement rates. Infantry and artillery units will still take at least another day to make the move, so I don't think that is really an exploit. It does take advantage of a far superior force blowing through a weak unit with minimum delay, which is totally realistic. This also isn't a jungle hex, it has both a major road and railway so it should facilitate fast movement.

That's why I took exception to a 7 gun unit wiping out 30 miles of completed movement and essentially halting a force of 150k worth of troops. No way that should be allowed to happen in this situation.

Glad you posted, but in my opinion I think it's a valid move and well within the realm of reality.

I've had infantry units set to pursue move into the next hex to follow a retreating unit through rough desert (which would normally have taken a week or two to march through). The pursue function goes beyond overrun because whatever is set to pursue ends up in the same hex as the defender which was retreated. Of course the defender couldn't have retreated that fast either. Under the right circumstances you could use pursue to continually leapfrog up a jungle path. If the unit you were pursuing was sufficiently weak- by attacking with one unit and leaving the rest to pursue. The downside is you leave a breadcrumb trail of units behind you as you go (the ones that did the attacking).

Anyway- as you say- this is a road hex so it's a non issue - and at the end of the day it's only your and your opponents opinion that matter.

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

ORIGINAL: Itdepends

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon
I'm going to try and push back the seven gun unit rather than wipe it out. If I can get it to retreat I have 99% of my troops set to pursuit. Here's hoping it works and I make up some lost time.

Sounds like a good counter- 1 exploit for another. (Because being able to move 1 hex through heavy jungle terrain (for example) in 1 turn by having units set to pursue is about as silly as dropping a unit into an enemy advancing to set their movement to zero).

In this case if it works it's justified based on your opponents actions- but it's use is continued is it not the opposite side of the tactic you were lamenting?

That's actually a good point you raise. I don't see it as gamey though. I don't know how familiar you are with most board wargames, but they often had what was called an 'overun' rule. That if the force you were attacking with was so overwhelming and the combat odds so favourable that a combat almost didn't happen at all. The defending unit was wiped out and your forces moved as if that unit was never there, or you were given a bonus move. I see the pursuit setting in this game as the same thing, and I think this is what it was meant to represent. I may be wrong, but that is my interpretation.

Another thing is only armour units will travel the entire hex, which makes sense given their movement rates. Infantry and artillery units will still take at least another day to make the move, so I don't think that is really an exploit. It does take advantage of a far superior force blowing through a weak unit with minimum delay, which is totally realistic. This also isn't a jungle hex, it has both a major road and railway so it should facilitate fast movement.

That's why I took exception to a 7 gun unit wiping out 30 miles of completed movement and essentially halting a force of 150k worth of troops. No way that should be allowed to happen in this situation.

Glad you posted, but in my opinion I think it's a valid move and well within the realm of reality.

Certainly I think you have a point. At least War in the East had the concept of only Armor having ZOC's. Infantry lacking a ZOC simply caused an overrun if odds were 8-1 or better. Thus in the case you cite, 7 guns would be simply pushed away. Computers provide additional seemless bookeeping for game desgners not really feasible or not really fun for a boardgamer. For example, in a boardgame an overrun is usually some simple bookkepping rule, like 1 or 2 movement points no matter the opposition or odds. A computer game enables rules like the higher the odds the less movement points used.

The most lame thing you point out is the thought of resetting the position within / or back hex. This is a paradigm for a boardgame, [I am just 1mp short from crossing a river ..so I stop] but a computer game allows the center of the unit(s) to track distance from the center of a hex. Such bookkeeping would be impossible in a boadgame, but easliy accomplished in a computer game. Yet when a move is cancelled everything is teleported to the center of the hex ..[8|]

Oh well ...I have to remember .. its only a game ..[;)]

ORIGINAL: Itdepends

I've had infantry units set to pursue move into the next hex to follow a retreating unit through rough desert (which would normally have taken a week or two to march through). The pursue function goes beyond overrun because whatever is set to pursue ends up in the same hex as the defender which was retreated. Of course the defender couldn't have retreated that fast either. Under the right circumstances you could use pursue to continually leapfrog up a jungle path. If the unit you were pursuing was sufficiently weak- by attacking with one unit and leaving the rest to pursue. The downside is you leave a breadcrumb trail of units behind you as you go (the ones that did the attacking).

Anyway- as you say- this is a road hex so it's a non issue - and at the end of the day it's only your and your opponents opinion that matter.

Just thought I'd provide this information after running the turn. The attack was successful, I used a small unit to force the Chinese LCU to retreat and the rest of my units pursued. The armour units all reached Tuyun as expected, and it makes sense considering it was a major road. The infantry units all advanced 23 miles in combat mode and the artillery moved 17 miles in combat mode. In my opinion, this seems totally realistic and is definitely not exploiting the game engine. It will still take an additional day for the bulk of my forces to arrive at Tuyun and only if I set them to move mode. I can sleep easy knowing I'm not exploiting anything. [8D]

I can't comment on the effects of pursue in a non-road hex, as I've never tried a pursue attack under those conditions. That I remember at least. I appreciate the information and if I run into the issues you point out, then I'll look at using pursuit differently if I'm in rough terrain.

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

The most lame thing you point out is the thought of resetting the position within / or back hex. This is a paradigm for a boardgame, [I am just 1mp short from crossing a river ..so I stop] but a computer game allows the center of the unit(s) to track distance from the center of a hex. Such bookkeeping would be impossible in a boadgame, but easliy accomplished in a computer game. Yet when a move is cancelled everything is teleported to the center of the hex ..[8|]

Oh well ...I have to remember .. its only a game ..[;)]

There's a few issues I have with movement and they seem to rear their ugly heads at the worst times. I'm not going to go into bashing the movement routines here, but there are definitely problems. One that is turning out to be a big deal for me is the reliance on the AI on overiding a players orders to move a unit along the best supply path. This often turns a one hex movement into a two hex movement and usually in a direction a player does not want to take, and other times the unit will simply not enter a hex from the direction a player wants at times. This drives me crazy, and is one of the things I least like about the game. As you say, I too have to remember it's a game and it works how it works.

Brief Feb. 4/43 update.

As mentioned above the operation against the small blocking force was a success. My armour units have reached Tuyun and the bulk of the infantry and artillery will arrive next turn if all goes according to plan. I have the 3rd Tank Division and three armoured regiments now at Tuyun opposed by 2 Chinese LCU's. I'm not sure if I should risk an attack prior to infantry arriving. I have no idea on the fort levels, or the AV of the defenders, and I don't want to trash my armour units needlessly. I will probably wait for my follow up troops to arrive. I essentially got a day back from this maneuver, so nothing earth shattering.

Other than bombing in China not much else happened. I tried to interdict an enemy Subchaser TF near Ndeni, but no luck getting an interdiction. I ended up two hexes away from Ndeni with a few DD's and expected to get pummeled from Allied LBA. There were only fighters based there.

Lunga's airbase damage is down to 34%, so I'll have to decide on another bombardment here soon or devote more bombers to shutting the airbase down. I'm trying to not leave much shipping within range of Lunga in case my timing is off and the Allies hit me with a LBA naval strike. A surprise basing of bombers at the airbase while still damaged is definitely a possibility.

I spotted an Allied troop transport TF heading towards Pago Pago by submarine. The SS I-30 launched torpedoes at the escort (of course) and true to form they all missed. My subs just suck and miss enemy surface ships 99% of the time.

Nothing much else to report other than continual Allied bombardments at Bhamo. Only the Allies are taking losses so not sure what the purpose is other than bombardment recon perhaps.

Pace of the game has slowed after the flurry of turns during the Lunga invasion. I need to get my timing down better as Bart is unable to do turn Wednesday's and Friday's. I worked on a model last night and that means we won't run a turn until Thursday. We currently seem to only be getting about 3-4 turns done a week.

Next turn is away.

I'm withdrawing the two DD's near Ndeni back to Munda. I'm moving another naval bombardment TF to Munda and will hit Lunga the next day. I'm withdrawing the CV's from Rabaul to Manus and then...elsewhere. It's time to go dark with KB once again.

I'm starting to build up the area around Ternate for the defence of Ambon. Timor will see a large influx of troops, including the 48th Division currently posted at Makassar. An Allied lodgement in Timor threatens the loss of Balikpapan as a source of fuel/oil and that just can't happen at this stage of the war. I'm going to try and layer my defence in the DEI as much as possible.

The defensive priority remains getting more LCU combat power into the Pacific and complete key base expansions as quickly as possible. There will be a need to sort out air dispositions in the DEI soon.

One thing I've wondered about. With the CV Taiho four days away from completion, what happens with her airgroups that are listed as containing Jill's and Judy's? These planes are not in production yet, so I wonder if I will be able to equip them with A6M3a's, Kate's and Val's under PDU off. Does anyone know offhand how that works? If not, I'll find out in four more days.

Economically, the priority remains oil and the lack of it in the Home Islands. With the need to get fuel to Truk and the Solomons, my tanker transport operations have been somewhat disrupted, so I need to reorganize. I'm getting close to a number of airframes advancing their research soon, and should start seeing more airframes moving forward on a regular basis with R&D repairs almost 100% complete.