Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: herwin

I play the game to learn why things happened historically. Let me list a few of the things I've learned.

1. I always thought battle was (approximately) scale-free. That is, if you triple the forces involved, you triple the spatial scale, and you triple the time scale. The game teaches me there are no limits on the forces you can deploy in a 40-mile hex and everything happens in a day (or sometimes a week).
2. I always thought organisation for combat was right-sizing your forces so they could do their tasks efficiently and at an acceptable cost. The game teaches me that mass is everything and detaching forces to handle secondary tasks is inefficient.
3. I always thought strategy was about logistics. The game teaches me logistics are only important tactically.
4. I always understood the 14th Army was given the minimum of resources needed to hold the Burmese border. Meanwhile I'm preparing a massive blitzkrieg for the winter of 1942-43.
5. I always understood key terrain was about communications and was rarely an obstacle. The game teaches me the opposite, particularly in China.
6. I always understood the Japanese Army in southern and central China was an infantry force concerned with occupying key communications and lacking the force to hold the countryside. In the game, I watch Japanese panzer armies moving through the countryside and massive offensive forces concentrated in single mountain hexes against massive stacks of Chinese infantry.

There's more--this is just the beginning...

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Oh boy! This is going to be fun.

1. Lieutenant Quinton McHale actually served with distinction.

2. Unlike previously thought, the Japanese made superb things, and lots of them. (no really, lots!)

3. There really was an excellent road network in northern OZ. With lots of gas stations and quickie marts for hungry travelers.

4. Those little radioless, one man turret, Japanese tanketts simply kicked ass.

5. The Allies won the war with four engine bombers. Nothing else mattered.

6. If not the above then the Japanese won the war by producing 250,000 Frank fighters.

7. Capt. Sam Dealy of the USS Harder was a poltroon who's only real achievement was to return from every war patrol with a seriously damaged sub.

8. It turns out that the Brits were right and Burma was important.

9. Your men might be starving to death but they are still more than willing to go out and fill those bomb holes in the runway.

10. The Boise did not win the war. (but came pretty darn close).

11. The big gun club was right.

It is the best game ever and is sucking my life away....

ORIGINAL: herwin

I play the game to learn why things happened historically. Let me list a few of the things I've learned.

1. I always thought battle was (approximately) scale-free. That is, if you triple the forces involved, you triple the spatial scale, and you triple the time scale. The game teaches me there are no limits on the forces you can deploy in a 40-mile hex and everything happens in a day (or sometimes a week).
2. I always thought organisation for combat was right-sizing your forces so they could do their tasks efficiently and at an acceptable cost. The game teaches me that mass is everything and detaching forces to handle secondary tasks is inefficient.
3. I always thought strategy was about logistics. The game teaches me logistics are only important tactically.
4. I always understood the 14th Army was given the minimum of resources needed to hold the Burmese border. Meanwhile I'm preparing a massive blitzkrieg for the winter of 1942-43.
5. I always understood key terrain was about communications and was rarely an obstacle. The game teaches me the opposite, particularly in China.
6. I always understood the Japanese Army in southern and central China was an infantry force concerned with occupying key communications and lacking the force to hold the countryside. In the game, I watch Japanese panzer armies moving through the countryside and massive offensive forces concentrated in single mountain hexes against massive stacks of Chinese infantry.

There's more--this is just the beginning...

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

Never enter a land war in Asia or challenge a Sicilian in a matter of life or death![:D]

ORIGINAL: herwin

I play the game to learn why things happened historically. Let me list a few of the things I've learned.

1. I always thought battle was (approximately) scale-free. That is, if you triple the forces involved, you triple the spatial scale, and you triple the time scale. The game teaches me there are no limits on the forces you can deploy in a 40-mile hex and everything happens in a day (or sometimes a week).
2. I always thought organisation for combat was right-sizing your forces so they could do their tasks efficiently and at an acceptable cost. The game teaches me that mass is everything and detaching forces to handle secondary tasks is inefficient.
3. I always thought strategy was about logistics. The game teaches me logistics are only important tactically.
4. I always understood the 14th Army was given the minimum of resources needed to hold the Burmese border. Meanwhile I'm preparing a massive blitzkrieg for the winter of 1942-43.
5. I always understood key terrain was about communications and was rarely an obstacle. The game teaches me the opposite, particularly in China.
6. I always understood the Japanese Army in southern and central China was an infantry force concerned with occupying key communications and lacking the force to hold the countryside. In the game, I watch Japanese panzer armies moving through the countryside and massive offensive forces concentrated in single mountain hexes against massive stacks of Chinese infantry.

There's more--this is just the beginning...

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Herwin, your historical 'lessons' do not match my own. My game experiences are much more historically satisfying than yours sound. Pity.

ORIGINAL: rockmedic109

I am glad that there is no difference between beans, bandages, .30 cal ammo, and Cabinet, metal, file, Model 6755-002.

But it is interesting to try and figure out how a pilot can have to bail out of a plane in the middle of Canada from some kind of ops loss and be captured......

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

- B17s on bombing run require a pilot, noone else.

- The Japanese had unloading magicians which disapeared suddently in spring 1942.

- A commander with 96 aggression out of 100 does not kill his crew and eat the corpses on shakedown cruise.

ORIGINAL: 1275psi

ORIGINAL: rockmedic109

I am glad that there is no difference between beans, bandages, .30 cal ammo, and Cabinet, metal, file, Model 6755-002.

But it is interesting to try and figure out how a pilot can have to bail out of a plane in the middle of Canada from some kind of ops loss and be captured......

Pity the game does not say what happens to him then

The red necks eat him.................

ORIGINAL: rockmedic109

I am glad that there is no difference between beans, bandages, .30 cal ammo, and Cabinet, metal, file, Model 6755-002.

But it is interesting to try and figure out how a pilot can have to bail out of a plane in the middle of Canada from some kind of ops loss and be captured......

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

ORIGINAL: rockmedic109

I am glad that there is no difference between beans, bandages, .30 cal ammo, and Cabinet, metal, file, Model 6755-002.

But it is interesting to try and figure out how a pilot can have to bail out of a plane in the middle of Canada from some kind of ops loss and be captured......

With the majority of the Canadian men serving overseas while fighting for the British Empire, this pilot had the misfortune(?) of landing on the grounds of a Young Ladies Finishing School. If he is smart he will happily settle down to perform his new duties. If not...