A Plea For Allied Production

[Kaoru]

To begin with, hello! Yes, this is my first topic. This is an incredibly long post, and I'll recap at the bottom. Feel free to ignore it if you don't feel up to a lot of reading. Note that I'm not entiiirely sure where this should go, so if it belongs in another subforum, feel free to move the post or thread.

To give the slightest bit of background, I'm just a young player who stumbled onto this game, spent the last couple of weeks reading forum threads from this and the original WitP board - arguments about strategy, tactics, how-to guides, debates on expansionist vs. defensive strategy for Japan, the journeys of the Hibiki... so on, so forth. It all eventually got me over my sticker-shock for the game, and I made my purchase. I'm three days in and loving it, even though I'm only on my fifth turn. This game is insane, beautiful, and everything I ever dreamed of a wargame being.
Well, almost everything.

One thing that I've found rather disappointing is the Allied player's complete lack of control over production and industry. I've read the threads detailing why - and they make a lot of sense. It's true - the war in Europe took priority, in everything, leaving me all the more astonished that the brave men of the Commonwealth, the Chinese soldiers, and American soldiers and marines - to say nothing of the Filipinos, the Free French, et cetera - accomplished what they did: The defeat of an Empire whose history stretches back before they started writing things like that down.

But it was not merely strength of arms that saw the fall of the Empire of the Rising Sun, the liberation of the Pacific, and the beginnings of a new era (for better or for worse) - nor was it merely America's gradually-awakening industrial splendor that overwhelmed the Japanese under hundreds of thousands of tons of rifles, machineguns, ships, mortars and howitzers. Other Allied nations contributed, too - and their contributions, owing to the game's system, cannot be modeled.

Let me be frank: I am not asking that Production be enabled in the regular game, because there are very good reasons not to have it on by default, there. (Don't want to deal with a production system? Play Allied! I imagine that was a good selling-point of the game, for some people.) All I'm asking is that the option to turn it on in user-made scenarios, be enabled. I know that we're coming up on the release date of Patch 2, and so I don't expect this to make it into that patch (especially considering balancing issues to be resolved), but I would like to see this added to a provisional, far-in-the-future Patch 3. Mayhap even, by then, an official scenario supporting it - but that might just be a pipe-dream, considering how much work goes into these scenarios.

There are very good reasons to discount this request, entirely. The scale of the work involved is just one of them - I presume that, from day one, the Allies were intended to keep their current partial-production model, and the entire game has been modeled around that. There are elements in place - merchant shipyards and the like converting to repair shipyards, just to name one - that are touted as part of the 'balance' between the Allied and Japanese forces - and, indeed, the entire game is balanced around this paradigm, and around weakening and limiting the Allied player as much as possible, to give the Japanese player a chance.

That doesn't even go into the fact that it may turn out to be a tremendous deal of work (and programming, and coding, and testing, and bugfixing) for only a minority segment of the people who play the game - after all, those who want to play with Production don't seem to have a problem with playing Japan, as it stands, and I haven't seen many Allied fans who are up in arrears over the lack of production-control on that side - nor many who seem like they'd even want it, though I don't know if my own limited exposure is sufficient to reveal that.

But there are also compelling reasons to include it. It wasn't, as I stated earlier, American industry alone that fueled the Allied war-effort. Canadian industry played its part, as well - as pointed out here. (Canada At War: Canadian War Industry) To summarize: Canada contributed over 4,000 ships, over 800,000 military vehicles, and countless guns and supplies to itself and its allies during the war - not just to Britain and the United States, but, through the Canadian "Mutual Aid" program, to Australia, to New Zealand, to countries in need and Allied, across the globe.

The country's industrial capacity did not start with the ability to sustain or deliver this sort of production - it was built up during the war, built up in the same manner that Japanese production was, during the very war that War in the Pacific seeks to simulate. The growth of Canadian industry was unbelievably important for them, as a country, and its exclusion as such in the game is, thusly, unfortunate.

But, and I can already hear others saying this, Canada is not the focus of the war. While many ships and supplies from Canada's newly-built western shipyards likely reached the Allied war effort in the Pacific, only a tiny fraction of the country - and the least-industrialized part of it, to my understanding - is actually represented in this game. Canada by itself is not a compelling enough reason to make any drastic changes to the game, and I might just agree with that, myself.

But what about Australia?

As covered by the this site (Australian War Memorial, specifically the Civil section) and the sub-section here, (Australian War Memorial: Home Front) Australia also pulled together and vastly increased their industrial muscle and output during the war. Australia alone contributed over 3,300 planes, hundreds of military vehicles - including tanks! - tens of thousands of artillery-pieces, machine-guns, and anti-aircraft weapons, and hundreds of thousands of rifles, for their own troops, especially. Admittedly, unlike Canada, many of these craft were reserved for Australian or Commonwealth use, but that's still a substantial chunk of industry, and a great deal of industrial growth, that this game makes impossible.

My final talking-point is India. I hardly need to tell you that India's industrial growth helped fuel, clothe, and supply the Allied war effort in the Pacific - the increasing process of military Indianization is already modeled in the ever-greater replacement of British regulars with Indian troops, to my understanding. The entire subcontinent is there for the player to toy with, and there is no doubt in my mind that the expansion of industry and economic might that occurred in India during World War II helped to make it one of the world's leading industrial powers in the decades that followed.

The purely-historical reinforcement and replacement system of the game does, admittedly, cover a great deal of the black-and-white effects of these increasing national outputs - and with the difficulty Japan has in directly threatening Australia, the continental United States, and the whole of the Indian subcontinent, full Allied production may just be another nail in Japan's coffin - something that's unnecessary and will only contribute to headaches for an Allied player. But, I don't think so.

By sticking with only enabling it for modified scenarios, or, wonder of wonders, creating a special full Allied Production scenario, the balance of the game is preserved for those who like a limited Allied production schema - and for those who just don't want to mess with a complex production system in the first place!

And, at the same time, the system is freed up to deliver to those of us who do want that additional headache, that additional struggle, exactly what we're begging for. Enabling full Allied Production as an option for modders extends our options, extends the challenge of the game, and for those who are already turning to 'Ironman' scenarios to get a little more 'oomph' out of the AI's capitalization of its resources, affords an opportunity to try a game that will truly test our resolve.

Or, for those of us who like the idea of buffing Japan up so as to have to fight harder, it gives us an opportunity to actually match them - whereas right now, the limited nature of Allied production functions as a chain on how strong one can make the Japanese side before victory becomes next to impossible, with the set, limited forces at our command.

I don't know exactly what role you, the developers, see the player taking in this game - but for my part I tend to see us in a role as the Chief of the Navy or some similarly-powerful position, similar to the player's role in "Pacific Theater of Operations" and its sequel, games for the Super Nintendo that I grew up on. Such an individual would, doubtless, be able to influence and direct production for this theater, to a larger extent than merely building airplanes with a set and unchangable number of factories. But, whatever role you see us in, I'd still say there are plenty of reasons to let us have free reign of the Allied production pipeline.

Yes, in the beginning, Japan will find it hard to stop initial Allied production, but as the system expands across the board, it will need resources just as much as the Japanese system does - India, Australia, even Canada and the Continental U.S. are not endlessly self-sufficient in regards to resources and oil, in this game, from what I've seen. It will require Allied effort to keep going, if he wants to keep expanding. It wouldn't, in my eyes, be 'just another Allied advantage', in a game that - according to some - is already weighted with quite a few. If anything, when enabled, it'd help level the playing field, making it necessary for the Allies to do more than twiddle their thumbs to get the forces to fight Japan.

To summarize: The geopolitical realities of industry in the various Allied nations mean that there are compelling real-world examples of industrial growth in the Pacific during World War II, and this cannot currently be modeled in Admiral's Edition or War In The Pacific. To help portray these, to increase the range of options available to gamers and players and modders, alike, to help contribute to the creation of challenging and interesting games and scenarios in Admiral's Edition, I am suggesting that the enablement of full control of Allied Production be added as a scenario option, or realism option, for modders to use or for gamers to enable.

I am not suggesting that it be enabled by default in any scenario, owing to the headaches it can cause for people who don't want it. I am considering a custom-made, official 'Full Allied Production' scenario as a wishlist-item - nice to think about, but probably not something that will happen. I also realize that "Allied" production is a great deal more complex than Japanese production - whose resources can you use? What do all these factories build? Can an Australian factory be forced to build an American fighter, or vice-versa? I don't know how many of these concerns, and countless others, will have to be addressed by the team if they even so much as give me the time of day, but I'm sure it'd be a considerable investment to make Allied Production a 'go'.

That's why I've taken the time to go through all this, though. I know it's just a game - that the whole thing is just a game, it's not incredibly serious business, but still - I think it's worth the effort. I think it's worth the headaches. I think it's worth the investment. And, after all, isn't that what a game like War in the Pacific is all about? Isn't it a game that looks you square in the eye, and says: "I am difficult, I am complicated, I will be your worst nightmare as you try to learn all of my intricacies, plan for them, and implement them. I will keep you up at night worrying, I will steal time that may be more wisely invested elsewhere, but I am worth it"?

It is to me. Here's hoping that Allied Production is, to you.
~Kaoru, probably the first APFB (Allied Production Fanboy)

[DuckofTindalos]

Welcome to the wacky world of AE, Kaoru. Well-argued post, but like you said, not going to happen for AE.

[Kaoru]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Welcome to the wacky world of AE, Kaoru. Well-argued post, but like you said, not going to happen for AE.

If it's not gonna happen, I suppose, it's not gonna happen. But keep it in mind if you find yourself with some spare time (Not likely, I know! [:D]) after Patch 2 hits and while you're plotting out Patch 3. Or for that far-off beast, War In The Pacific 2. (Assuming sales from AE have been sufficient to justify that!) Of course, I can't promise not to sneakily push for it, any chance I get. [;)]
~Kaoru

[DuckofTindalos]

Plenty of good-intentioned people have pushed for this, but remember that for this to go into a patch would require lots and lots and lots of coding and testing. An Allied production model would have to be built from the ground up.

[Kaoru]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Plenty of good-intentioned people have pushed for this, but remember that for this to go into a patch would require lots and lots and lots of coding and testing. An Allied production model would have to be built from the ground up.

Exactly. I recognize, and mentioned above, that it'd be a monumental undertaking - the whole game is balanced around 'The Japanese have control of their production, the Allies do not'. I've done a bit of coding and programming myself, and lots of game-modification (including some large-scale stuff that approached commercial proportions.)

The coding alone, with having to shoehorn into the engine a brand-new production model, would be staggering, and the need for testing (and balancing!) could make anyone who knows what it's like to sit down for a few hours every day and go through the same scenario or process, catching bugs each time, adjusting, and diving back in, week after week, cringe. It's not as easy as flipping a switch, and, bammo! Allies can control production! No, it'd like-as-not be at least a couple months of work, on a priority list that's already going to be chock-full of other things. I do see that.

I just feel like it'd be worth the investiture, and my argument above is designed to reflect that. You can take it or leave it, and my feelings won't be hurt. I'm little more than another voice in the crowd - I'm not, after all, volunteering my time towards coding the monster, and I doubt you'd accept me, if I did. But I figure that letting you know there's yet another long-winded fellow willing to push for the eventual inclusion of a full Allied Production schema, hopefully, helps to eventually get the issue seriously considered - especially in light of the whole "for every one post made, ten people who think the same lurk and say nothing."
~Kaoru

[Rob Brennan UK]

I just feel like it'd be worth the investiture, and my argument above is designed to reflect that. You can take it or leave it, and my feelings won't be hurt. I'm little more than another voice in the crowd - I'm not, after all, volunteering my time towards coding the monster, and I doubt you'd accept me, if I did. But I figure that letting you know there's yet another long-winded fellow willing to push for the eventual inclusion of a full Allied Production schema, hopefully, helps to eventually get the issue seriously considered - especially in light of the whole "for every one post made, ten people who think the same lurk and say nothing."
~Kaoru

A very eloquent and well argued voice though. Seen enough rants here in the past to recognise that at least. Can't say i agree 100% with you and if i'm honest any allied production system could and would be abused by the more 'gamey' players to the detriment of PBEM-philes. so many allied planes are to put it mildly "Sub Par" , even a small adjustment for only on map commonwealth and some limited West coast facilities would heavily sway play balance. Who wouldn't stop wirrways being made ? prety much anything is better than those early war. and wirraway 2 .. never would see the light of day, along with USA bombers being funnelled into the one with the best stats.

for me I get a sense of both frustration and satisfaction from allied production. you use what you get and if thats less than stellar a/c and you still manage to hurt Japan with it , makes a warm fuzzy feeling [:D].

[Kaoru]

ORIGINAL: Rob Brennan UK

-snip-

A very eloquent and well argued voice though. Seen enough rants here in the past to recognise that at least. Can't say i agree 100% with you and if i'm honest any allied production system could and would be abused by the more 'gamey' players to the detriment of PBEM-philes. so many allied planes are to put it mildly "Sub Par" , even a small adjustment for only on map commonwealth and some limited West coast facilities would heavily sway play balance. Who wouldn't stop wirrways being made ? prety much anything is better than those early war. and wirraway 2 .. never would see the light of day, along with USA bombers being funnelled into the one with the best stats.

for me I get a sense of both frustration and satisfaction from allied production. you use what you get and if thats less than stellar a/c and you still manage to hurt Japan with it , makes a warm fuzzy feeling [:D].

I can definitely see the appeal of that. And, you're absolutely right - any system introduced is definitely going to be wide, wide, wide open to exploitation by those seeking to game it - (We call 'em 'mix/maxers', where I'm from, for minimizing their weaknesses and maximizing their gains). Even if it's just changing it so the Allies can control their air production, it'd be a system wide, wide open to abuse.

But then, isn't the Japanese production system the same way? It's not as if the Allies would be the only ones able to throw their best stuff out of the factories. I mentioned in the larger post, above, the idea that a part of the system could include 'national' restrictions - so that you didn't have factories in Australia churning out B17s and better from day one, instead of Wirraways. That'd help to reduce the gaminess factor of Aussie and Indian factories making ahistoric (and very unbalancing) numbers of certain planes, at least until they were available to those nations in some numbers. 'Course, that's just an idea.

Even if there were no such restrictions, though - well, when it comes to PBEMs, you folks already seem to have a dedicated and widely-followed 'house rule' system set up, where both players take one another on their honor to do or not do certain things. I don't actually know how widely that's adhered to, but if it's respected to some degree, then most 'gaminess' of that sort wouldn't be a much larger problem than anything else already is, if restricted by house rules.

On the other hand, though, being in the early years with the Allies, as I am right now, I can definitely see what you're saying about 'using what you get' and using it well. I decided to make a stand in Singapore, so I've got a few battered bunches of Buffalo flying CAP over it and a few other key points. I can't deny that I give out a little cheer, every time one of those lil' tubs takes down a Zero, Nate, or Betty.
~Kaoru

[stuman]

Thanks for putting the time into writing that post. Glad to have you onboard !

[Oldguard1970]

Welcome, Kaoru.
 
As an AFB, I can agree with Rob.  Allied production is a LIMITATION on the allied player.  Japanese production provides OPTIONS to the Japanese player.  That is needed.  Japan will lose the war (if not the game) in due course.  The game is more fun when the Japanese player gets to squirm and wiggle and take what additional small advantages that the game offers. 
 
I want my Japanese opponent to keep having fun and to keep hitting me from my blind side. I want to keep having to figure out how to clobber him while dodging his attacks.  Once the game becomes a "done deal", the fun thins out.

[rogueusmc]

ORIGINAL: Kaoru

...I'm just a young player who stumbled onto this game, spent the last couple of weeks reading forum threads from this and the original WitP board - arguments about strategy, tactics, how-to guides, debates on expansionist vs. defensive strategy for Japan, the journeys of the Hibiki...

It is refreshing to have a 'young player' take such an intelligent approach to things like this...it gives me hope for the current generation...how young is young?

And welcome aboard

Semper Fi,
Lee

[Kaoru]

ORIGINAL: stuman

Thanks for putting the time into writing that post. Glad to have you onboard !

Any opportunity to write for a cause one believes in, is a good opportunity, so far as I'm concerned. There's a whole lot worth reading on these boards, already - I can only hope my initial post falls under that umbrella. Glad to be here, though!

ORIGINAL: OldGuard1970

Welcome, Kaoru.

As an AFB, I can agree with Rob. Allied production is a LIMITATION on the allied player. Japanese production provides OPTIONS to the Japanese player. That is needed. Japan will lose the war (if not the game) in due course. The game is more fun when the Japanese player gets to squirm and wiggle and take what additional small advantages that the game offers.

I want my Japanese opponent to keep having fun and to keep hitting me from my blind side. I want to keep having to figure out how to clobber him while dodging his attacks. Once the game becomes a "done deal", the fun thins out.

I both see where you're coming from, and agree - barring some of the wild extremes that've occurred in various AARs, there is not (and should not be) any way for Japan to pull a military victory out over the Allies. Production is one of many tools in a good Japanese player's arsenal to try and stave their defeat off as long as possible. And, given the vast amounts of war material that eventually become available to the Allies even through the current reinforcement/replacement system, there's no overriding need at present to correct any vast imbalance - the Allies overwhelm the Japanese just fine without production-control. The current system works, and yet provides a worthwhile and definite limitation as it stands.

But as for full control...It would be a limitation, if the Allies in-game had to actually find and provide the resources for even a part of the astonishing output they eventually reach. Even assuming that the Continental U.S. could take care of itself (but most of that would be, I'd say, off-map production, and probably still be fine under the current system, if push came to shove) - there's still the matter of all the other countries, there's the matter of figuring out how to work the system, so on, so forth. It probably wouldn't run itself like it currently does, and so it'd provide a leash of sorts around an Allied player's neck.

And, given that my suggestion is just to offer that as a choice, would it really be so bad? If we as gamers play Allied and choose to limit ourselves, or play Japanese and choose to limit the Allies, well, isn't that basically what the game's about? Both sides are "limited", in a sense, and the Allies are given intentionally-harsh limitations, to keep the game fun and interesting for both sides. All I'm suggesting is to give the player the chance to reconfigure those limitations - not remove them. In a game like this, I can hardly see 'more options' as being a bad thing - with the caveat that, obviously, this particular 'option' could very well end up being more trouble than it's worth - loathe as I am to admit that. [:D]

ORIGINAL: rogueusmc

ORIGINAL: Kaoru
-snip-

It is refreshing to have a 'young player' take such an intelligent approach to things like this...it gives me hope for the current generation...how young is young?

And welcome aboard
Semper Fi,
Lee

Happy to be of service, sir - I actually just turned 20, so I suppose I don't get to call myself young young. Considering some of the stories I've read (of players, and patrons of this board, and of games and AARs) I'm honored to be here. The community is really one of the largest reasons I took the dive and decided to wrack my brain over this game.
~Kaoru

[JWE]

Extremely well and cogently expressed Kaoru. Unfortunately, it won’t happen, for a number of reasons, but do not be discouraged; this is just the kind of discourse we want.

Simplest, and biggest, reason is there’s a gazillion lines of code for the Japanese economy. Adding another side to the equation would result in another gazillion lines of code. That’s a couple years – not goodnik.

Other reason is game-concept. Japan required a rather large import % of her necessary industrial resources: chrome, manganese, tin, cobalt, oil, rice, feed grain, machine tools, asphalt, lime, concrete sands, etc.. Once exports to Japan were cut off by the Allies, Japan “required” conquest to feed her machine. Thus the Japanese economic model.

The Allies, on the other hand, had each and every one of those items, in such a plethora that many mines were maintained just as they were, even under the pressure of total, global, war. The Allied cornucopia of resource basis, was so vast (even unorganized as it was in ’41 and ’42) that it makes little sense to specify it.

The best we can do is accept the cornucopia and allow it to extrude those nuggets that indeed, it did. Lots and lots of alternatives, but dude, Japan was a small, mountainous, resource poor, technologically sparse, nation with a large, gnarly, population, while the Allies had many more people in a vast, resource rich, technologically superior, strategically central location.

Gotta have some way to let the small dog bite higher than the knee. Japanese production is actually a way for an intelligent player to do some real good poopy.

No. Considered opinion is Allied production is not a good idea. Better to play with data. Sorry, but there it is.

[pad152]

Japanese player doesn't even have full control of production, just helps manages it! There is no real ship production just scheduling of ship arrival. Changing factories for aircraft types is a risky business, one too many changes and your economy will crash in 6 months.

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: JWE

Extremely well and cogently expressed Kaoru. Unfortunately, it won’t happen, for a number of reasons, but do not be discouraged; this is just the kind of discourse we want.

Simplest, and biggest, reason is there’s a gazillion lines of code for the Japanese economy. Adding another side to the equation would result in another gazillion lines of code. That’s a couple years – not goodnik.

Other reason is game-concept. Japan required a rather large import % of her necessary industrial resources: chrome, manganese, tin, cobalt, oil, rice, feed grain, machine tools, asphalt, lime, concrete sands, etc.. Once exports to Japan were cut off by the Allies, Japan “required” conquest to feed her machine. Thus the Japanese economic model.

The Allies, on the other hand, had each and every one of those items, in such a plethora that many mines were maintained just as they were, even under the pressure of total, global, war. The Allied cornucopia of resource basis, was so vast (even unorganized as it was in ’41 and ’42) that it makes little sense to specify it.

The best we can do is accept the cornucopia and allow it to extrude those nuggets that indeed, it did. Lots and lots of alternatives, but dude, Japan was a small, mountainous, resource poor, technologically sparse, nation with a large, gnarly, population, while the Allies had many more people in a vast, resource rich, technologically superior, strategically central location.

Gotta have some way to let the small dog bite higher than the knee. Japanese production is actually a way for an intelligent player to do some real good poopy.

No. Considered opinion is Allied production is not a good idea. Better to play with data. Sorry, but there it is.

BTW Kaoru, JWE us on the Dev Team. Be innovative and see what you can do with the Editor. we could all benefit.

[Kaoru]

ORIGINAL: JWE

Extremely well and cogently expressed Kaoru. Unfortunately, it won’t happen, for a number of reasons, but do not be discouraged; this is just the kind of discourse we want.

Simplest, and biggest, reason is there’s a gazillion lines of code for the Japanese economy. Adding another side to the equation would result in another gazillion lines of code. That’s a couple years – not goodnik.

Other reason is game-concept. Japan required a rather large import % of her necessary industrial resources: chrome, manganese, tin, cobalt, oil, rice, feed grain, machine tools, asphalt, lime, concrete sands, etc.. Once exports to Japan were cut off by the Allies, Japan “required” conquest to feed her machine. Thus the Japanese economic model.

The Allies, on the other hand, had each and every one of those items, in such a plethora that many mines were maintained just as they were, even under the pressure of total, global, war. The Allied cornucopia of resource basis, was so vast (even unorganized as it was in ’41 and ’42) that it makes little sense to specify it.

The best we can do is accept the cornucopia and allow it to extrude those nuggets that indeed, it did. Lots and lots of alternatives, but dude, Japan was a small, mountainous, resource poor, technologically sparse, nation with a large, gnarly, population, while the Allies had many more people in a vast, resource rich, technologically superior, strategically central location.

Gotta have some way to let the small dog bite higher than the knee. Japanese production is actually a way for an intelligent player to do some real good poopy.

No. Considered opinion is Allied production is not a good idea. Better to play with data. Sorry, but there it is.

Thank you very much for your compliments, and don't worry. I don't allow setbacks to discourage me - a setback is just the universe's way of telling me to work harder! [;)] As for discourse...

You bring up a lot of excellent points, any one of which, alone, would easily torpedo an argument for forced Allied Production in the main game. Proper control of the full Allied war industry (or even a significant part of it) could easily see Japan left helpless, much more rapidly and thoroughly than she already is. In the game and in the real world, Japan was the underdog, and there's no pleasure, excitement or enjoyment to be had from grinding the underdog, underfoot.

It is, in absolute terms, much more important to see that Japan has a fighting chance to hurt and wound the Allies, and remains competitive throughout the game, than it is to accurately and specifically model both the Allied industrial growth throughout the war, and the options that it presented to them. Opportunities are Japan's forte in War in the Pacific, and the Allies are - as has been stated before - left to do the best they can, with what they've got, whether that's a couple of leaky dinghys or a vast Two-Ocean Fleet.

Of course, I'm not so sure about your claimants regarding the Allies' status, as a whole. In terms of sheer numbers, sure, there were definitely a larger population on the Allied side, with more resources, more technology, more resources, and a better strategic footing, but wasn't a lot of that centred around (after the Fall of France) Britain and the United States - whose production facilities are already mostly out of the game's geographic scope?

Regarding equality between Japan and the other Allies... The resources certainly weren't, and nations such as India and China could certainly be called resource-rich. But neither of them had anywhere near Japan's level of technology, even given the vast population disparity between these countries and Japan.

Nations that did approach Japan a bit closer - Australia, and Canada - in technology, didn't have anywhere near Japan's 1940s population of 73 million or so. Australia had perhaps 7 million people, Canada, 11 million or so - a vastly-smaller work-and-warforce than Japan could muster. New Zealand had neither industry nor population on any sort of level capable of competing with Japan. It was from America and Britain that the bulk of the technology and industry that crushed the Empire of Japan came - but they were not the only contributors.

I can't argue with you on game-concept - like you said, and like I've said, the whole game is very literally built around Japan needing to go on crusade, so to speak, to get the fuel for the fires of her factories. But it seems to me that there's a problem, in that most people who play Allied simply accept that Japan is essentially unstoppable in '41 and '42, and advocated as complete a withdrawl as possible, giving up everything to the Japanese player without a fight.

Considering that, in the current game-model, they stand to lose nothing by this - the prevailing opinion seeming to be 'Japan can only expand so far, let her pick her limits and then chip away at them until '43 and '44 roll around' - it makes perfect game-sense to do this. This sort of decision smacks wrong to me, though - at least, in a general sense, of it being the best and smartest option available to an Allied player.

After all, who in the Allies knew that wartime production would eventually ramp up to the extent that they could bury Japan? Who in the Allies knew that vast numbers of American soldiers would eventually come riding in to save the day - especially of those embattled forces in Malaya, in Singapore, in Hong Kong, New Guinea, and Australia - to name a few? Would they really have bet all their tomorrows on some far-off hope that, in a few years' time, they could stroll back in and take everything?

I don't think so - and if the Allies, in game-terms, had a stake in what they were defending, I don't think so many players would do so, either. It's just one idea, of course, in a much larger system - one idea that, even if implemented, I'd suggest be left as an option, not a requirement, for gamers and modders to toy around with as they chose.

And, of course, in the early-war period, wouldn't the Allies already be industrially handicapped, as they struggled to put everything in order? It wouldn't be until late in the war that the full brunt of it was available to the player - the same as, currently speaking, it's not until late in the war that the full complement of forces historically-fielded are at the player's command. In the interim, though, I think it'd be very fun to have more control over the actions of the smaller Allies - over India, and Australia, and China, so on and so forth.

That brings us to your much larger point: The time, effort and code-investiture into building such a system. Believe me when I say: I realize what I am asking for, what everyone who's ever pushed for Allied production is asking for: The devotion of hundreds, if not thousands - or more - of man-hours, the work of some great span of time pooled solely on the creation of a system that would supplement an already-working paradigm. Yes, it's a lot to ask, and that's why I'm not talking about this in terms of weeks, of months, or even in terms of this year (or, on the prospect of it waiting until WitP II, in terms of next year, either).

I'm talking, and thinking, way long-term. I mean, right now, let's face it: The whole programming team, in the run-up to the release of Patch 2, is so sick of looking at AE code that they're probably wishing they never had to see it again. There's a tremendous deal of stress on everyone down there, with zero hour approaching for Patch 2 hitting the waves, and any consideration of adding even more complexity, even in the future, is likely to meet with sour looks and thoughts - for good reason, considering the colossal amount of effort that's already gone into improving and adding to AE.

But, two or three months down the road, all I ask is that those in charge of making such decisions look back here, and at the issue, and at the idea, and cart it out again to be discussed - and perhaps that the discussion here continue, as well. Look at it from a few different angles. Properly-presented, it could be yet another compelling, complex aspect of this already-superb game.

Of course, in the end, if the data is all that I'm given for the Allied side, I might pout, a little, but I'll not be too nonplussed. There's far too much to this game for me to get upset over not being able to precisely dictate just which of my planes are bearing down, in crushing numbers, on Japan. [;)]
~Kaoru

P.S.:

ORIGINAL: pad152
Japanese player doesn't even have full control of production, just helps manages it! There is no real ship production just scheduling of ship arrival. Changing factories for aircraft types is a risky business, one too many changes and your economy will crash in 6 months.

Absolutely! And while I'll admit, being the player, I am, I'd probably also suggest that being able to determine for ourselves, as Japan, what ships we want to produce in some areas (Geez, Kaoru, more 'suggestions'? I know, I know! I'll never be satisfied...[:'(]), I'd also say the additional elements of challenge, risk, and danger associated with taking the liberties you've laid out with Allied production, would add to the fun factor of the game. Especially if it was just an alternative, and not the only way! [:D]

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
BTW Kaoru, JWE us on the Dev Team. Be innovative and see what you can do with the Editor. we could all benefit.

Mmhm! I don't have all of the devs pegged from reading forums, but I've seen enough to know that JWE's one of the few and proud who helped to bring us all AE. Thanks for the heads-up, though! And, believe me, I'll be diving into the Editor just as soon as I wrap my head around the retail game. Heck, I've modded, edited and changed games before in Hex and ASM, when no other options were available - giving me an actual editor to play with only speeds up the process!

[rogueusmc]

Considering that, in the current game-model, they stand to lose nothing by this - the prevailing opinion seeming to be 'Japan can only expand so far, let her pick her limits and then chip away at them until '43 and '44 roll around' - it makes perfect game-sense to do this. This sort of decision smacks wrong to me, though - at least, in a general sense, of it being the best and smartest option available to an Allied player.

This was, basically, the case though...Marshals, Gilberts, Mariannas, Solomons...they were all a buffer zone between the US and the SRA. The Japanese knew this going in (I just don't think they knew the extent of it)

[DivePac88]

Hi Kaoru, and welcome to the beautiful game.

You have basically boiled the grand campaign (and history) down to the 'brass tacks'. Japan needs to take a line that it can realistically hold, before the US industry gears up for total war.

[Kaoru]

ORIGINAL: rogueusmc

ORIGINAL: Kaoru
-snip-

This was, basically, the case though...Marshals, Gilberts, Mariannas, Solomons...they were all a buffer zone between the US and the SRA. The Japanese knew this going in (I just don't think they knew the extent of it)

The small islands, the atolls, certainly - but what about the Dutch East Indies? What about Malaya, and China, and Burma? What about the Philippines? These tend to be abandoned (or, in the case of China, ignored) just as rapidly as the island buffer-zones.

One could certainly make a case for the historical abandonment of China (Don't get me started, there - sheesh!), but I doubt very much that it was the intention of the developers (who can feel free to chime in and tell me I'm wrong) or of prevailing historical minds in the Netherlands, the UK and the US (who are deceased, and cannot), that these areas were just 'buffer-space' between the Allies and the Empire. Letting the player treat them that way and suffer nothing for it, in that light, and others, sort of seems off to me!

ORIGINAL: DivePac88

Hi Kaoru, and welcome to the beautiful game.

You have basically boiled the grand campaign (and history) down to the 'brass tacks'. Japan needs to take a line that it can realistically hold, before the US industry gears up for total war.

Thank you! Of course, the discussion of what 'a line it can realistically hold' constitutes is one for another topic, but, yeah. That certainly sounds about right to me!
Of course, holding that line in the face of US aggression is another matter, entirely...

[Mike Scholl]

KAORU certainly speaks to the dreamer in all gamers..., the part that always thinks if I could just change this or that I could do better.  The problem arises in the research and programming aspects.  Modeling just the military aspects of the War in the Pacific is an awesome task with thousands of variables to be researched and integrated.  The current game, even with all it's improvements, still falls short in a number of these areas (the ground combat system anyone?), and could benefit from years more work.

What "production system" does exist in the game is very unsophisticated and exists primarily to give the Japanese side some wriggle room.  To truly bring it up to the standards of some of the game's other programming is a daunting task..., with factors including resource availability and allocation, manpower (skilled and unskilled) availability and allocation, plant remodeling and construction, design sophistication and management expertise, transportation availability and allocation, machine tools production, industrial engineering as well as scientific research, etc., all to be analized and implemented.  And I fear that if it ever was the result would be to allow the Allies (with the benefit of hindsight) to be even more overwhelming than they already were.

[ChezDaJez]

What "production system" does exist in the game is very unsophisticated and exists primarily to give the Japanese side some wriggle room. To truly bring it up to the standards of some of the game's other programming is a daunting task..., with factors including resource availability and allocation, manpower (skilled and unskilled) availability and allocation, plant remodeling and construction, design sophistication and management expertise, transportation availability and allocation, machine tools production, industrial engineering as well as scientific research, etc., all to be analized and implemented. And I fear that if it ever was the result would be to allow the Allies (with the benefit of hindsight) to be even more overwhelming than they already were.

Well said. And I think that if it were ever implemented, no one would ever be able to find a Japanese player willing to take it on!

Welcome to the game, Kaoru!

Chez