Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: vettim89

In truth the problem is really the Land Combat System (BEEP!: thread hijack warning). From the historical info we have the poorly trained. equipped, and often led Commonwealth, Phillipine, RA US, and Dutch troops could not stand up to the Japanese Army that had been fighting in China for the better part of a decade. The RL Allies folded before the oncoming Japanese.This is not to say that there weren't cases where the Allies put up stout defense, just that from a strategic point of view, it was an untenable situation.

The Allies failed to turn back any Japanese advance until August/September 1942 when the Australians repelled the Milne Bay invasion. That was followed by numerous battles on GC eventually leading to vicory. IMO troop quality and experience plus supplies finally came up enough at this point where the Allied armies could and did first resist and then defeat the Japanese.

So if "Sir Robin" means withdrawing unit fragments by sub and other means than ok its a bit gamey. But if "Sir Robin" is really the JFB screaming "Stand still so I can hit you", the RL Allies didn't/couldn't, why should your AFB opponents? If the latter is true then IMHO, the Japanese player needs to invade areas where the Allies have no choice but fight: Oz, India, HI, WCUSA (LOL)

To me what makes this game great is exploring the What If's. If the invasion of Oz/India is the ultimate Japanes What If, isn't the implementation of Sir RObin in whatever form really just another What If? How many of you JFB want to take me up in a game where you agree to not invade Oz, India, HI, New Zealand, New Caledonia, Samoa, or Alaska Proper if I agree to not Sir Robin?

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: Big B

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Well, the Japs will get ahead of their time table, obviously, but my main problem with this is that it's SO unhistorical and gamey. This could only happen in The Twilight Zone.

But Mr T, stop and consider, which is "gamier" in the historical sense of the word...

1) Not withdrawing a garrison - so that the enemy has to destroy it, and in the process - "hopefully" damage an installation.
or
2) Evacuating a garrison in good order before the arrival of an overwhelming force - but before leaving - destroying everything of use to the enemy?

Unfortunately, WitP does not allow you to choose optin #2 - you must damage those facilities yourself with your own forces, after the enemy gains them.

But Option #1 is truly Gamey in the historical sense...
"Let's see, rather than pull back to regroup and make a stand or save what I can, I will simply use my men as human demolition charges - since, in this game, that is one quick way I may be able damage facilities...rather than bombing them to smithereens when the enemy occupies them - but that would have to wait until I get enough bombers"

I guess the debate is endless...

We don't disagree that it would be nice to do proper scorched earth, but that's not available.

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

What's gamey about the "Brave Sir Robinson" is that the it often involves withdrawing PI or Dutch units from their homeland to defend some foriegn country. Beyond this I have not particular problem with the strategy.

ORIGINAL: Big B

Well, to paraphrase what vettim89 nicely said above -

WWII happened how it happened. If you wish to agree, that under no circumstances - you will move one inch beyond the limit of historical Japanese expansion/nor build one more unit than Japan historically did - then I will agree to not save/move any unit that was historically destroyed in that time and place.

However, WitP is a fluid game - and such guarantees cannot/should not be made...otherwise we can all just watch a documentary and drink a beer.[;)]

B

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

What's gamey about the "Brave Sir Robinson" is that the it often involves withdrawing PI or Dutch units from their homeland to defend some foriegn country. Beyond this I have not particular problem with the strategy.

ORIGINAL: Big B

Well, to paraphrase what vettim89 nicely said above -

WWII happened how it happened. If you wish to agree, that under no circumstances - you will move one inch beyond the limit of historical Japanese expansion/nor build one more unit than Japan historically did - then I will agree to not save/move any unit that was historically destroyed in that time and place.

However, WitP is a fluid game - and such guarantees cannot/should not be made...otherwise we can all just watch a documentary and drink a beer.[;)]

B

had out-of-country pop to reconstitute from

ORIGINAL: Rainer

had out-of-country pop to reconstitute from

Can you express this in a form more understandable for non-English speakers, please?
Thanks.

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: Rainer

had out-of-country pop to reconstitute from

Can you express this in a form more understandable for non-English speakers, please?
Thanks.

Sounds like maybe he drank an English beer!
[:D]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

i will point out that by leaving your troops in place to be reduced piecemeal, you are giving the Japanese player several thousand points, which means you will have to recoup that times 1.75 or 2 or 3 in order to get a win*... and by having the troops available, it makes it easier later in the game...

i personally don't do a "full-fledged" Sir Robin, but i do make it a priority to get out non-combat type units (Base Forces, HQ, etc.) i will point out the Allies generally made attempts to do the same, except in real life, the "Base Force" units were attached to air units for the most part. When evacuating, air units made every attempt to get out their mechanics, etc. when they left from what i've read.

*EDIT - depending on when you are trying to get a win... or it might make it that much easier for the Japanese to get an autovictory by giving them a few thousand extra points.

ORIGINAL: Mistmatz

Not to hijack the thread but somehow when it comes to Sir Robin and maybe evacuations in general there are usually some who think saving fragments is gamey.

I don't consider saving fragments for later rebuild gamey at all as there is a big amount of replacements required. I assume in most mods the infantry squads of the various nations are the limiting factor for rebuilding. Therefore there is for example no use in evacuating fragments of all Phillipine divisions for rebuild as you will (rightfully) never get enough phillipine squads to rebuild them within the duration of the game.

Quite contrary, if the amount of fighting power (squads) a player receives is well defined in a mod the player needs a method to use those. As there is no way to add new units for the player to spent his replacement troops on it's IMO perfectly alright to use the skelotons of the destroyed ones. Of course it's problematic that experience is not set back to a lower value when troops are replaced but this is a general problem that for instance also exists with the chinese respawning LCUs.

Opinions?