Pacific Theather

[canuckgamer]

Is the plan still to add the Pacific theater? If yes would it be sometime this year? Thanks.

[AlvaroSousa]

That game is already being worked on between patches and bugs. It adds several different feature and builds on the base engine.

[Profender]

Looking forward to the pacific!

[tigercub]

the navy's will need much more work as i am sure you understand Alvaro!

Tigercub

[AlvaroSousa]

ORIGINAL: tigercub

the navy's will need much more work as i am sure you understand Alvaro!

Tigercub

Explain

[PanzerMike]

Individual ships? Different kinds of Carrier planes that do not regenerate automatically? Varying Carrier plane capacity (CV, CVL)? More kinds of ships (patrol boats, frigates, corvettes, etc)? Maybe improved FOW?

[AlvaroSousa]

That would make it Pacific War and that game has been done.

There will be CVLs in the game for sure. I am thinking about patrol craft but it would be an abstract like AA. I have to see if it fits the model and doesn't break the game.

[tigercub]

I think the land battle in warplan it what made it a successful game but for the Pacific War version Naval is far more important to players and Carrier battles foremost on the list of things that needs a bit more attention perhaps adding ship leaders as well.

to the next version

[FirstPappy]

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

That would make it Pacific War and that game has been done.

+1 Amen to that. WITP-AE is fine if you are under 30 years old and have time to finish the game to the end (with 3-day turns of course). You can have all your PT Boats and barges you want too. People approaching 70, like myself, would just like to play one complete Pacific War (41 to 45) game to the end before I go. [;)]

[PanzerMike]

Ow, I agree totally. I am a big admirer of monster games, but not a player of monster games. Those games take longer to play than the war itself...

That's why I like Warplan. Despite the size and scope it remains playable (albeit with a bit of a learning curve, but that is to be expected). So abstracting things (like patrol boats for example) is fine by me. Playability first!

And making it all too complicated usually means the AI (which already always struggles in games like this) can't handle it anymore.

Keep it lean and mean.

[MorningDew]

I agree, but that said, there is an opportunity to improve things like interceptions (i.e. perhaps not just at end of move, but during move...handled by AI when put in fleet mode) and invasions (been discussed in depth). In a war being fought on large bodies of water, these types of improvements seem important.

[Profender]

Well I agree that sea battles are important. But definitely land battles are key to actually own a island and progress in expanding the empire. Getting land units to those islands will be hard (hopefully) and then the terrain they fought on, I hope battles are not over in a turn or two against American forces. Looking forward to see how that is all balanced out in this game.

[Profender]

ORIGINAL: PanzerMike

Ow, I agree totally. I am a big admirer of monster games, but not a player of monster games. Those games take longer to play than the war itself...

That's why I like Warplan. Despite the size and scope it remains playable (albeit with a bit of a learning curve, but that is to be expected). So abstracting things (like patrol boats for example) is fine by me. Playability first!

And making it all too complicated usually means the AI (which already always struggles in games like this) can't handle it anymore.

Keep it lean and mean.

Something smack in the middel between WITP-AE and Warplan would be a dream for me. Have the monster size with a easier way of actually playing.

[kennonlightfoot]

WITP is the definitive game for the Pacific theater but totally unplayable except against the AI which has a lot of problems. Because of how far fleets cam move in a single day you can't really even increase the turn to 3 day without undoing what the game is trying to simulate. It's land combat leaves much to be desired.

WarPlan will need more complex handling of carrier groups. The current version doesn't have to account for a CV vs CV battle for control of the surrounding ocean and islands. It will be interesting to see how Alvaro handles this.

But it would be nice to if WarPlan can be adapted to do WiP. Strategic Command's handling is a little to abstract. And, I hate having separate fleets for each ship type. Leads to some really strange fleet battles.

[canuckgamer]

Profender, I am currently half way through reading The Conquering Tide by Ian Toll and previously his first book in the trilogy, Pacific Crucible. The navies and airforces, both carrier and land based were the key to taking islands more so than land forces. Whoever controlled the sea and air meant they could bring in supplies while cutting off the supply to the enemy. The Japanese lost more men to starvation and disease then combat on Guadalcanal.
Using their island hopping strategy, the Americans by passed Japanese strongpoints like Rabaul where their forces wilted away, again because supplies could not get through.
So naval and air forces and their operation should be a key element of the design of a Pacific theater addition to War Plan. The option to combine the two theaters in to one game is also something I would like to see. Maybe features like transferring units between the two theaters using entry/exit hexes on each map. This could allow a different scale for the Pacific.

[Profender]

I never downplayed Navy or airforce and especially on a historical level.

No this is game talk where I simply meant taking control over a island you need grunts. Having taken a land provides you with (depending on the island) airbases and ports extending the range of both Navy and airforce.
Lot of Pacific games focus solely on the seas. While I'm sure you have read in your book. The land battles where hard and with heavy losses. And I hope that part we can also see a bit in this game

[Meteor2]

Has Alvaro considered the possibility, that a hex (lets say 30 Miles) is occupied by two opponents?
The blue OR red situation for one hex is not representing the truth, maybe.
Why not have two opposing forces in one hex and the decision can be achived within several turns.
When regimental / brigade sized units are involved that seems more realistic.

[Meteor2]

And, again: The FOW and recon mechanic should be quite different than in the ETO.

[PanzerMike]

Alvaro already said that invasions in a hex occupied by an enemy unit will be possible. He regretted not doing that in ETO as well, because coding the beaches have him a headache.

[AlvaroSousa]

I said I regret it but it will be a feature of WP2