Will there be a War in the Pacific 3 someday?

[Rogue187]

I'm sure its been discussed, but after War in the Pacific, then the Admirals Edition, do you think there will ever be a third version of the game? Something that can take advantage of new technology, AI, and add user improvements that dont rely on third party software?

[wdolson]

Don't hold your breath.

[Rogue187]

Too bad.

[geofflambert]

You sound like someone who hasn't had his ass kicked badly enough. I sympathize. I never want my ass kicked that badly.

[BillBrown]

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

You sound like someone who hasn't had his ass kicked badly enough. I sympathize. I never want my ass kicked that badly.

Kirk kicked it pretty good. [:D]

[Yaab]

ORIGINAL: Rogue187

I'm sure its been discussed, but after War in the Pacific, then the Admirals Edition, do you think there will ever be a third version of the game? Something that can take advantage of new technology, AI, and add user improvements that dont rely on third party software?

No.

There will be HoI13 instead.

[adarbrauner]

ORIGINAL: Yaab

ORIGINAL: Rogue187

I'm sure its been discussed, but after War in the Pacific, then the Admirals Edition, do you think there will ever be a third version of the game? Something that can take advantage of new technology, AI, and add user improvements that dont rely on third party software?

No.

There will be HoI13 instead.

This was stinging

[adarbrauner]

[Rising-Sun]

ORIGINAL: Yaab

ORIGINAL: Rogue187

I'm sure its been discussed, but after War in the Pacific, then the Admirals Edition, do you think there will ever be a third version of the game? Something that can take advantage of new technology, AI, and add user improvements that dont rely on third party software?

No.

There will be HoI13 instead.

13? I know there a Hearts of Iron 3 out there. Been working on a mod can I called it "War in the Pacific" heh. Anyway been working on this project for months and coming around slowly.

[RichardAckermann]

ORIGINAL: Rogue187

I'm sure its been discussed, but after War in the Pacific, then the Admirals Edition, do you think there will ever be a third version of the game? Something that can take advantage of new technology, AI, and add user improvements that dont rely on third party software?

If you're waiting for a commercial product, I wouldn't place my bet on that. But homebrew games of that kind might be possible.

Just for fun, I am working on my own WITP AE 1 1/2 covering the entire globe on a 540 x 218 hex map.
Still featuring the most suicidal AI of all WW 2 games ever. Not to mention the weird way the AI places it's airgroups.
If you can wait for another 5 to 10 years, however, it might be playable.

[spence]

Nope. Too many IJ Fanboys want the IJ to actually win the war. They're all in love with the poor slobs who got to try to blow themselves up with some US warship. As if that was a winning strategy. The real answer for the IJ was to try for the same strategic answer as the North Vietnamese in 1972: that is make the US response to their 1941 attack at Pearl Harbor too expensive to bear.

IRL the IJ Player had lost too much of its initial advantage by the end of 1942 to have much hope of victory. But since this is a game perhaps they could win a VP victory by some time around then. For some reason the IJ Fanboys all seem to want to be able to win the war. A real political victory and scenario that ended about mid-1943 or so based on VPs would make so much more sense.

[Dili]

That is not how a Samurai thinks!

[Zorch]

War in the Pacific 3 could never live up to expectations.

[RichardAckermann]

ORIGINAL: spence

Nope. Too many IJ Fanboys want the IJ to actually win the war. They're all in love with the poor slobs who got to try to blow themselves up with some US warship. As if that was a winning strategy. The real answer for the IJ was to try for the same strategic answer as the North Vietnamese in 1972: that is make the US response to their 1941 attack at Pearl Harbor too expensive to bear.

IRL the IJ Player had lost too much of its initial advantage by the end of 1942 to have much hope of victory. But since this is a game perhaps they could win a VP victory by some time around then. For some reason the IJ Fanboys all seem to want to be able to win the war. A real political victory and scenario that ended about mid-1943 or so based on VPs would make so much more sense.

If the game is confined to the pacific, I agree. In a game spanning the globe, however, a more successfull germany/italy may provide enough distraction for the JFBs to prepare better for the then weaker US attacks. And if germany would break the soviets and/or england, then even the US might have a problem handling the war. Thats why I have built an engine covering the entire globe. Without variable outside events, the pacific is a railroad to doom for japan.

Political victory is usually not a thing achieved on the short run, as japan planned for. If I remember right, it took decades for vietnam to make the war too costly for the US. Japan is simply walked over by US war gear, and does not have that time. In that fight, AFBs are Squirrels and JFBs are nuts.

[Aurorus]

ORIGINAL: spence

Nope. Too many IJ Fanboys want the IJ to actually win the war. They're all in love with the poor slobs who got to try to blow themselves up with some US warship. As if that was a winning strategy. The real answer for the IJ was to try for the same strategic answer as the North Vietnamese in 1972: that is make the US response to their 1941 attack at Pearl Harbor too expensive to bear.

IRL the IJ Player had lost too much of its initial advantage by the end of 1942 to have much hope of victory. But since this is a game perhaps they could win a VP victory by some time around then. For some reason the IJ Fanboys all seem to want to be able to win the war. A real political victory and scenario that ended about mid-1943 or so based on VPs would make so much more sense.

I am not what point you are trying to make and I am not sure what you mean about JFB "all seem to want to be able to win the war." All JFBs think that Japan should be able to conquer the U.S. mainland every game? There is a VP system that allows for Japanese victory in the current game. Would the game be more realistic and the game community more to your liking if all the Japanese players, including the AI, would surrender at the end of 1942?

[InfiniteMonkey]

ORIGINAL: spence

Nope. Too many IJ Fanboys want the IJ to actually win the war. They're all in love with the poor slobs who got to try to blow themselves up with some US warship. As if that was a winning strategy. The real answer for the IJ was to try for the same strategic answer as the North Vietnamese in 1972: that is make the US response to their 1941 attack at Pearl Harbor too expensive to bear.

IRL the IJ Player had lost too much of its initial advantage by the end of 1942 to have much hope of victory. But since this is a game perhaps they could win a VP victory by some time around then. For some reason the IJ Fanboys all seem to want to be able to win the war. A real political victory and scenario that ended about mid-1943 or so based on VPs would make so much more sense.

The same could be said of AFB's, or worse. I doubt very many Japanese players think they will survive longer than Japan did historically. The truth is, Japan had more things that it could have improved upon that would have lengthened the war. Note I say lengthened, not won. Better (more secure) communications, better management of aircraft production, less NIH on engine/plane R&D, better IJA/IJN cooperation, better ASW and convoy practices, better pilot training, less victory disease are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Yet, just as you bemoan the JFB that seems to want to "win the war", I bemoan the AFB that categorically denies that Japan could have done anything differently and extended the war beyond 1945. Most JFB's would consider it a huge victory to last past August 15, 1945.

[MakeeLearn]

Yes, it will be quick and over before most people even know it started.

[spence]

Aside from all the perks that the Japanese automatically get such as (in the "Historical" Scenario):

1) sinking or damaging double or thereabouts the number of ships which their PH raid actually inflicted
2) hanging Force Z out to dry
3) damaging Singapore (starts with the damage) with the same bombers that attack Force Z
4) giving the IJA enough supply to immediately launch one or more offensives in China in spite of the fact that it was stalemated and had been for 3 years (frankly there ought to be more a bigger difference between motorized supply such as the US enjoyed and the horse/mule drawn supply train of the IJA)
5) giving the IJN enough fuel to sortie all its BBs repeatedly when in reality sortie them once expended a whole years worth of fuel (speaking of BBs - other than the 4 Kongos the rest of the battlefleet was pretty much a joke throughout the Japanese Navy and its record in combat pretty much justifies that)
6) doubling of the IJNs ability to launch an airstrike from its aircraft carriers - doctrine AND carrier construction limited IJN carriers from launching all of their strike a/c in a single raid - two smaller raids are easier to fight off than one huge raid)
7) giving the IJN 1944 style USN fleet defense from the start when they didn't adopt the ring defense until 1944 and never developed a CIC/Fighter Direction Center at all.
8) the knowledge that most Allied submarines will be all but impotent until at Jan 1943
9) the removal of the SBD4 from the Allied OB (approx 900 airframes between Oct 42 and April 43 (there were essentially no SBDs in the Atlantic Fleet until Oct 1942 when Torch was launched) - since the SBD4 was all identical to the SBD3 the actual a/c is not important, rather the difference is in the overall replacement rate from the beginning of the war.

After all it's only a game. All that would be OK with me as well as allowing the Japanese Player to do whatever is desired within the constraints of production correcting operational deficiencies except that the Allied Player (which was far more adaptable to change than the hidebound IJA/IJN Supreme Command) is stuck making no adjustments whatever to the changed Japanese operational doctrine/tactics.

[RichardAckermann]

There are a number of ahistorical AFB advantages the JFB complain about, too. I lack the overview to judge if they are in imbalance, but - and excuse the stupid question - what exactly about that is the your point against a WITP AE 3 ? Worries about JFBs to put on too much pressure to gain further imbalance in their favor?

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: Dili

That is not how a Samurai thinks!

Damned STRAIGHT!

BANZAI!