Game question.

Strategic Command WWII: War in the Pacific is a turn-based strategy game. It offers a comprehensive experience of the Pacific Theater, challenging you to achieve victory in one of history's greatest conflicts.
Post Reply
stormbringer3
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 2:58 pm
Location: Staunton, Va.

Game question.

Post by stormbringer3 »

I trying to decide if I should buy this game. I've been playing WaW on and off for the last few years. My least favorite part of that game is the amphibious invasions etc. Is it possible in this game for Japan to focus on China and India and have a chance to win? I would mostly only go for the Philippines and the DEI as far as invasions.
Thanks for any opinions.
User avatar
Platoonist
Posts: 3042
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 4:53 am
Location: Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems

Re: Game question.

Post by Platoonist »

If Japan is going to concentrate on China or India, they have to make the knock-out blow relatively quick. Once the US juggernaut gets going, you'll need some of those forces sent east to fend off the trans-Pacific push. It's not uncommon as Japan to find yourself facing US ground and air forces in India too at some point. A lot of Japanese amphibious forces are already at sea at the beginning of the game, so it's just a matter of where in range to land, but the Dutch East Indies are a must eventually as that is the treasure-house where most of the MPPs and more profitable convoys originate at. Being caught in a vice as the game goes on Japan is definitely the more challenging side to play. Certainly, more challenging if your opponent is a human player.

It might seem strange for what were sparsely populated backwater islands at the start of the war, but since both New Britain and Guadalcanal are the origin points of MPP convoys it behooves Japan from an economic standpoint to capture them.

One major change from World at War is the long-range amphibious transport type (AVL) has been deleted from the game. Amphibious invasions have to be done in shorter and better-planned hops. In addition, naval units now have significantly increased zones of control and retreat from combat more often over longer distances.
Image
User avatar
OldCrowBalthazor
Posts: 2766
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 12:42 am
Location: Republic of Cascadia

Re: Game question.

Post by OldCrowBalthazor »

In my opinion, even if the Japanese elect an 'All in China' strategy, that Guadalcanal, Rabual and possibly Port Moresby get taken ASAP.
Of course Malaya, Philippines, and Dutch East Indies, but Japan needs that Pacific Island perimeter. If not, the Allies will be in Japan's front yard ready to knock on the door much more quickly.
Against the AI in an SP game you may be able to delay an Allied advance through the South Pacific, and depending on the AI settings, keep them at bay for awhile.
In an MP match, no pressure from Japan towards the Allies in the South Seas will almost guarantee a catastrophe.
My YouTube Channel: Balthazor's Strategic Arcana
https://www.youtube.com/c/BalthazorsStrategicArcana
SC-War in the Pacific Beta Tester
SC-ACW Beta Tester
1904 Imperial Sunrise Tester
SC-WW1 Empires in Turmoil DLC Tester
Tester of various SC Mods
MoongazerSlitherineSSL
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2024 9:01 am

Re: Game question.

Post by MoongazerSlitherineSSL »

China is pretty much a pushover for Japan even without big investment into that theater, the only question is how fast they would fall. Usually Japan can easily focus on China+one more Major (India or Australia). However, taking Rabaul and Guadalcanal is mandatory to establishing a defensive perimeter. Otherwise US can just hop straight into Phillipines.
stormbringer3
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 2:58 pm
Location: Staunton, Va.

Re: Game question.

Post by stormbringer3 »

Thanks for the replies. I see that the AVL is gone. Does that make the setup and amphibious assault target decisions easier than WaW?
User avatar
Platoonist
Posts: 3042
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 4:53 am
Location: Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems

Re: Game question.

Post by Platoonist »

stormbringer3 wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2024 3:04 pm Thanks for the replies. I see that the AVL is gone. Does that make the setup and amphibious assault target decisions easier than WaW?
It means you have to plan ahead more if anything. You couldn't invade say, New Guinea or Borneo in one go from a launch point in Japan like in World at War. In this game such a force would barely clear Okinawa. So, spending a few more MPPs to get a convenient hyper-jump is out. The hex/time scale in this game is different than W@W so range dissimilarities between the two games are hard to judge. However, there is only a ten-hex range for amphib forces at the start of the 1941 campaign, so you need to pick an embark point close to your intended target or be prepared to escort them if expecting opposition on a multi-turn trip. What hasn't changed is that amphibious forces still need that one hex offshore embark turn before they can fully move and still have the annoying habit of picking that offshore hex for you.
Image
stormbringer3
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 2:58 pm
Location: Staunton, Va.

Re: Game question.

Post by stormbringer3 »

After thinking about it for a couple of days, I decided to buy the game.
Post Reply

Return to “Strategic Command WWII: War in the Pacific”