POW Camps.

Gary Grigsby's strategic level wargame covering the entire War in the Pacific from 1941 to 1945 or beyond.

Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

Post Reply
Major Tom
Posts: 522
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Canada

POW Camps.

Post by Major Tom »

I think that there should be default POW camps placed at certain bases.

Singapore
Clark Field
Somewhere in Borneo
Somewhere in Thailand
etc...

These should be known locations to the Allies, and, should be considered as highly important Victory Point areas. This will 'force' the Allied player to go for the Philippines and Borneo instead of just going for the Marianas, Iwo Jima and then bomb Japan into submission. The political bomb of allowing POW's to remain in captivity when there is the ability to rescue them should be tremendous.

Jeremy
Vincent Prochelo
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Cimmeria
Contact:

Post by Vincent Prochelo »

Originally posted by Major Tom:
I think that there should be default POW camps placed at certain bases.
<snipped the rest>

I agree with this completely..... great idea.

-V
"It is as it is."

-Edward III
User avatar
moore4807
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Punta Gorda FL

Post by moore4807 »

I agree the POW camps should be a factor- however they should be random and changing as Port Bases get powerful enough or far enough behind the Japanese lines. This could make it an intelligence issue too. (find/raid/capture the POW bases before such and such a time in order to gain victory points)Just a thought
Jim
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

Post by mogami »

Hey why not Japan needs workers for the great Rangoon Bankok railway. And their research experiments. I do not think the allies gave to much thought to rescuing POW's during the war (Except for Patton trying to get his son-in-law)

------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Major Tom
Posts: 522
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Canada

Post by Major Tom »

All that these would be worth are morale benefits. There has to be some reason why a player would want to liberate the Philippines instead of going straight to Japan from the Marianas.
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

Post by mogami »

Hi the US went "back" because Doug said he would. To reflect this in game if US keeps Doug in Command they have to go "back" or suffer victory point loss

------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Dave S
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2000 9:00 am
Location: Paso Robles Ca USA

Post by Dave S »

If one would have to go to the Philipines or suffer VPs,then the player should be able to leave him there in the first place with Wainwright.
the worst
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

Post by mogami »

You can leave him there LOL. I have put Gen Short in command of SW Pacific a few times and he wins the war too. I think Doug should have been shot rather then recieved MH. I also don't think the player (ethier side) should be forced into stratic moves by game design. The purpose is for player to make these choices. PI is worth victory points if allied player can win without them thats his business. Oh and by the way most US pow's were shipped out of PI to Japan. US aircraft and subs sank several maru's full of them (one had 1800 another 1500)

------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!

[This message has been edited by Mogami (edited November 13, 2000).]
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Post Reply

Return to “War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945”