Matrix Games Forums

let me put this out there for debate.

Sen 16, which is the most historical of the once available. However, in this game, the US fast carrier force is committed to the area when it was only here for a short period in the fall of 43. So, it is removed. The US is allowed the first CVL to arrive. All others are sent back to Pearl, with all Essex class CV's - the only exceptions being that US carrier strength is set to be at least 1 CV, 1 CVL, and any CVE's. (plus maybe HMS Victourious) Ships are allowed to remain in the game to replace losses if the last operational CV or CVL is sunk or at Pearl, thus representing the Saratoga TF that remained here.

yes, Japan pulled her carriers out also, but they were at Truk, and the airgroups sent in to be killed off mid 43 anyway. Allowing them to remain also gives a bit of balance against the over-rated F4u's. Besides, if all 4 starting us CV's are gone, so should most of Japan's CV force.

this is the best idea I can come up with.... anyone have a better one?

idea for balance

I think the majority thought on this forum is the Allied Bomber, both 2E & 4E is too powerful. At hitting ships and beating down the Japanese in general.

Reason why there is the house rules of no bombing below a certain altitude in a lot of games.

One could go throught the editor and edit down every Allied bomber groups maximum planes allowed in their squadrons by 50%...

As an example most of the B-17´s have ¨12¨ in their maximum space. change them to ¨6¨...

Do this with all their bombers groups, both 2E & 4E and you have cut down the Allied firepower in bombers by 50%...

I think this would work out well at getting the result I think your looking for.

I am not so sure about that IKE. Yes, the allied bombers are powerful, but I am not sure that is the main problem. Plus, the solution with the ships is something you can take care of without messing with the editor. However, if you want to balance airpower, you can use the same basic thoughts with Sen 19. Coral Sea and Midway happened, you just assume that Coral sea happened in April. The US sends back Lex and Yorktown, and has to send them back each time they arrive. Other than that, use the above restrictions. Japan starts by sending Shokaku back to Toyko once. Shoho, and the Midway Naguno force. The game would clearly have a different feel to it, and I am not sure how you would have to adjust the points to make sure the US still had to take enough bases. Besides, this one would be mostly for the fun of an even game, and I would probably suggest things be judged by how far the us got compaired to historical objectives.

some numbers...

in sen 16, the US will have 4 fleet carriers before 43, then 3 more CV's, 8 CVL (counting HMS Victorious as a CVL), # CVE's with planes, 3 without. Full senarios add 2 CV's.. Japan Sen 16 2 CV's, 2 Medium CV's, 3 CVL's, 1 CVE ( hosho) with planes, 2 without.

Breakdown for sen 17 and 19.........

       US        Japan
CV    2/4/3     2/2/0        Broken down at game start / by 12-42 / 1943  
CVM  0           2/2          Hiryu and Junyo class
CVL 0/0/8       1/3
CVE   3/3        1/2        Broken down as with and without planes.

this gives the US 20 operational carriers, plus 3 "spare decks" to Japans 13. Granted, many of the us CVL do not arrive until very late in the game.


   

as the japanese player most of the time, i do not find that there is a imbalance about the carriers of both sides. this part of the game is imho realistic. the japanese have better pilots and planes early in the game, but they lose them easier because of their fragile construction. also, the allied damage control parties are way better then their japanese counterparts.

about the allied 4E beeing too effective:

in my games, i found out, that you only have to damage some of them via heavy flak or rested fighter pilots. the OP-loses do the rest. so yes, they are very effective, but the allied player can not continue to attack with them when he loses 10-15 bombers per raid.

the idea for the thread is to try and find ways to balance things out, given the lack of a good editor.... Up until mid-43 the carrier numbers are not that bad, but after that, I feel things get out of hand... Again, just my opinion, and I encourage anyone reading the threat to put his or her two cents out there for ideas.
 
by the way bigbaba, did you get my email?
 

aye, i sent you just now my turn, borner. hope to have some quiet turns after all that action around PM. 

One of the best ways to help balance the game out is to ban Allied 4E bombers from naval attacks or to limit them with a minimum altitude of 15K feet if allowed this kind of attack.

To limit 4E bomber squadrons to 1/2 of their real size doesn't do the trick as there is now B-17 production and thus no replacements for much of the game.

Like one of my opponents always says if the Allied have to suffer the Japanese strength early isn't it fair the Japanese suffer later?  In actuality the Allied strength was an unstoppable steamroller and the game reproduces that.  To be able to blunt the Allied assault or to slow it down is an art form in UV.  It's damned difficult, but not totally impossible.

One of the best ways to help balance the game out is to ban Allied 4E bombers from naval attacks or to limit them with a minimum altitude of 15K feet if allowed this kind of attack.

Another way is to let him come in very low and form a very visible TF made up of only battleships with about 100 fighters over top of it. As his bombs bounce off the top armor he gets the stuff shot out of him.

[:D]

Really neat to pull this trick with them sitting at a major port such as Rabaul. 4E´s lose every time. Yamato class is really exceptional at this as it has so many AA guns but the other Japanese BB´s work well too.

Coincidently I've been experimenting w/16, Yamamotto's Prophecy, vs. the AI -- yes, the AI -- and as the Allies I was surprised how well the AI did into late 42.

Historic, Ships @ 100% and subs ops "on".

Now I'm playing as IJ vs. AI Allies and it's an interesting game late into '42; waiting for the Allied steamroller to kick-in some time next year, but til then I'm riding high..

playing against the AI stinks imho- not that the AI is very bad...its better then in most of the other strategy games. but as the IJN player, you can sink all his liftig capacity and then there is nothing he can do.

in some games, i started as the japanese player, sunk nearly all allied AP  and fortified the solomon and NG area and then, at the end of 1942 i changed the sides and tried to win as the allied. it wasnt realy that bad and fun to win with reduced lifting capacity.

ORIGINAL: bigbaba

... but as the IJN player, you can sink all his liftig capacity and then there is nothing he can do.

in some games, i started as the japanese player, sunk nearly all allied AP  and fortified the solomon and NG area and then, at the end of 1942 i changed the sides and tried to win as the allied. it wasnt realy that bad and fun to win with reduced lifting capacity.

Well, I'm going to (eventually) find out what the Allied AI will do w/a reduced lift capacity; it sacrificed many ships to defend PM, and there are now so many Allied engineers and troops there that the IJA will NEVER be able to take it, and I've taken PM when playing against seasoned human players!

It should be interesting to see what happens as I consoldiate my other positions and soon head South to Lungaville; will the AI build itself back up to strentgh and eventually make it's counter-move toward Lunga?

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Coincidently I've been experimenting w/16, Yamamotto's Prophecy, vs. the AI -- yes, the AI -- and as the Allies I was surprised how well the AI did into late 42.

Same here, except I'm experiencing the exact polar opposite. I'm up to Jan '43 and so far the ship's loss screen has 6 full pages of Japanese APs sunk.

Not that different as early '43 was a turning point for the IJ AI; it only did well until late '42, but when Lightnings began to appear over PM, the air war -- and everything else -- turned and the AI took the worst of it til the end of the game.

playing against the AI stinks imho- not that the AI is very bad...its better then in most of the other strategy games. but as the IJN player, you can sink all his liftig capacity and then there is nothing he can do.

in some games, i started as the japanese player, sunk nearly all allied AP and fortified the solomon and NG area and then, at the end of 1942 i changed the sides and tried to win as the allied. it wasnt realy that bad and fun to win with reduced lifting capacity.

That´s what is really bad about the A.I.

It´s overall strategy setup is not bad as far as what it tries to do but it has no ability to think when something is going wrong.

For example it always send a fleet to Gili-Gili as the Allies and one can just stand off with the carriers and sink half the Allied fleet.

It just keeps sending ships over and over to be blown out of the water.

ORIGINAL: Ike99

... For example it always send a fleet to Gili-Gili as the Allies and one can just stand off with the carriers and sink half the Allied fleet.

It just keeps sending ships over and over to be blown out of the water.

It's Oct '42 and the Allied AI has yet to do this in my game, but it has sacrificed many APs/AKs to successfully hold PM; most of its capital ships losses were from action in and around Lunga, but it's too early for it to try an amphib invasion, assuming it even has the resources.

However, they should be in the pipeline.

ORIGINAL: Ike99

It´s overall strategy setup is not bad as far as what it tries to do but it has no ability to think when something is going wrong.

For example it always send a fleet to Gili-Gili as the Allies and one can just stand off with the carriers and sink half the Allied fleet.

I note that your example of the Allies and GG is mirrored with the Japanese and anyplace on New Georgia.
For some reason the Japanese AI feels it must establish a base there, even if (as in my case) the allies hold Munda and Vella with over 200 strike A/C.

I get the feeling the AI works off a script and will persists in carrying it out regardless of the tactical situation.

ORIGINAL: Kingfisher

... I get the feeling the AI works off a script and will persists in carrying it out regardless of the tactical situation.

That's true of most UV scenarios, which is why the AI in the shorter ones seems smarter than in the longer scenarios, but isn't taking Gilli Gilli necessary for an IJ auto victory? I always thought that was the rationale for taking this objective, although taking GG also opens the door for effective IJN bombardment runs of PM.

the AI is not terrible, but it sure kills off Jap AP's quickly

ORIGINAL: borner

the AI is not terrible, but it sure kills off Jap AP's quickly

I'm not so sure of that Borner. The last game I played against the AI as the Japanese I forgot to reset the default side selection when starting it up one night and accidentally loaded it up as the Allies. I discovered that Luganville had ZERO supplies in mid July. The AI had been doing nothing to send supply to it's own bases for the entire game. It also does nothing to build up new bases as most players do. As the Japanese it won't build any basese in the Solomons besides the ones it starts with. In short, the AI has no imagination.