China Production

Gary Grigsby's World At War gives you the chance to really run a world war. History is yours to write and things may turn out differently. The Western Allies may be conquered by Germany, or Japan may defeat China. With you at the controls, leading the fates of nations and alliances. Take command in this dynamic turn-based game and test strategies that long-past generals and world leaders could only dream of. Now anything is possible in this new strategic offering from Matrix Games and 2 by 3 Games.

Moderators: Joel Billings, JanSorensen

Post Reply
bharris222
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:16 pm

China Production

Post by bharris222 »

I am a newbie who just this weekend played my first game of WaW. I figured I would start as China to get a feel for things, and understood from the manual that factory points would be created every third turn until the Japanese occupied a non-coastal province. In order to get this production boost, I sat back and waited for Japan to do so, but kicked them out once they did, assuming that I would receive the boost from then on. I didn't, though, and was wondering whether Chinese factory points are only created every turn as long as Japan occupies an interior province, and not once they do. I was also wondering what the historical rationale is for such limited production? Did the Chinese not fully appreciate the Japanese threat until they reached the interior, and thus didn't keep their factories going full time until that time? If so, why would production decrease again once the Japanese were pushed back to the coast? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!
User avatar
Joel Billings
Posts: 33697
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Contact:

RE: China Production

Post by Joel Billings »

The assumption is that once the Japanese go inland, the Chinese would get their act together and make a more strenuous effort to defeat them (as opposed to having the Nationalists and Communists spend most of their time fighting each other). Originally we intended for the production effect once triggered to stay in place, but that's not how the programmer coded it. We have elected to leave it alone, the assumption being that once the Japense pressure was relieved, the Chinese would go back to fighting each other and waiting for the Americans to finish Japan. We felt this production rule was the best way to simulate the Chinese problem of having 2 forces (Nationalist and Communist) that were as hostile to each other as they were to the Japanese.
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
Harrybanana
Posts: 4098
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 12:07 am
Location: Canada

RE: China Production

Post by Harrybanana »

I agree to a point Joel. But the problem is that in just about every game I've played where the Japanese do go inland the Chinese never get to use that increased production. Turn 1 of invasion the Japanese conquer Changsa with overwhelming force (ie they use every infantry, artillery and plane they have, usually with teched up infanty). The Chinese don't get the increased production on the 1st turn of invasion. Turn 2 the Japanese capture Chungking and Lanchow and usually can still bomb Sinkiang to dust. Even if they don't bomb Sinkiang the Chinese are reduced to 1 production a turn and their army has usually been shattered. The only resaon China is not obliterated every single game is because the Axis often prefer to use the Japanese in Russia. It is certainly not because the Chinese have any hope of holding the Japanese off.

I would like to see the Chinese produce every single turn and put some othe limits on their cooperation. Could it be worked that until the Japanese invade the Chinese have to garrison their own territories (just as if they were hostile) or else run the risk of having resources, factories, or rail destroyed. Perhaps a successful revolt would turn the territory neutral. The garrisons could even consume supply, thus at least 1 point of production a turn would be consumed on this supply. They wouldn't get to produce 4 a turn for long anyway, as the Japanese would soon bomb their resources and factories to smithereeens.
Robert Harris
User avatar
aletoledo
Posts: 827
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 6:51 pm
Contact:

RE: China Production

Post by aletoledo »

I would like to see the Chinese produce every single turn and put some othe limits on their cooperation. Could it be worked that until the Japanese invade the Chinese have to garrison their own territories (just as if they were hostile) or else run the risk of having resources, factories, or rail destroyed. Perhaps a successful revolt would turn the territory neutral. The garrisons could even consume supply, thus at least 1 point of production a turn would be consumed on this supply. They wouldn't get to produce 4 a turn for long anyway, as the Japanese would soon bomb their resources and factories to smithereeens.
having the chinese produce every turn would be a nightmare for the japanese. I think making every other turn would be a bit more deterent to japan for inavding russia before china is 'taken care of' and would give china enough to defend itself.

an every turn production would absolutely kill the japanese, who already have it tough as it currently is in the global game. therefore bumping up china would make china a huge powerhouse after a few years if japan can't manage to stiffle them early. then the USA wouldn't ever have to attack japan, when china has 20+ infantry assaulting them already.
WanderingHead
Posts: 2134
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 8:12 am
Location: GMT-8

RE: China Production

Post by WanderingHead »

I agree with just about everything in this thread, which leads me to think that Chinese production should be /2 instead of /3 before Japan goes inland. At /3, China is not a threat if left alone. The simple change of increasing production slightly to every second turn would make a China a long term threat if left alone, which I think realistically represents why Japan kept fighting in China.
User avatar
Joel Billings
Posts: 33697
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Contact:

RE: China Production

Post by Joel Billings »

China was /2 in early development. We had to cut it to /3 because they were too much of a threat to Japan.
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
Forwarn45
Posts: 718
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 1:53 am

RE: China Production

Post by Forwarn45 »

I think the production constraints before Japan attacks inland are fine. If the concern is that China is too much of a pushover when Japan does attack, then one solution would be to give them increased free units either a la Russia (they get units in each territory on the turn of attack in addition to the free units for each territory attacked) or just increase the units that pop up in each of the territories attacked. For example, China could get three times population in militia, or one times population in regular infantry plus one times militia. A third alternative would be to beef up the Chinese infantry after the attack by giving them a free upgrade in tech quality.
Harrybanana
Posts: 4098
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 12:07 am
Location: Canada

RE: China Production

Post by Harrybanana »

I could live with your suggestions Forwarn. I don't mind that China lacks the ability to attack Japan as historically the US could not get the Chinese moving no matter what they did. But China is just too much of a pushover for Japan. I still think my idea of requiring China to garrison it's own provinces would work though. This would severely limit how many units they could use for offensives, use up supply/production and would force them to spread out their units where they would be easy targets for the Japanese bombers. I mean the 1st thing every Chinese player does is concentrate his forces in Changsa or Chungking. This would prevent him from doing that. If I was given the choice I would much prefer to have production every 2nd turn and not have this garrisoning requirement, then have production every turn but with the garrisoning requirement.
Robert Harris
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's World at War”