43rd Infantry Division

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

mjk428
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 3:29 am
Location: Western USA

43rd Infantry Division

Post by mjk428 »

It took years but I finally managed to play a game into Sept '42. My reward is I get to pay 2000+ PPs to activate a division that historically was in the South Pacific in Oct '42. .I already had to scrounge points together to activate Americal, 40th & 41st - which meant delaying their arrival vs. their actual timetable.

The Japs attacked the US. It didn't require great political capital to convince the US to send troops the Pacific to kick their ass. If I wanted to send Canadian Mounties to Tulagi that should cost me. Sending divisions that were actually dedicated to the task should be free.

Has anybody ever investigated this to see if it's even possible to put all the historical Allied units & leaders in play in a timely manner?
spence
Posts: 5418
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 6:56 am
Location: Vancouver, Washington

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by spence »

You're crying into the wrong bucket of beer.

If it was the Japanese 43rd Division that required PP to pay for a redeployment from eastern Mongolia to the South Pacific you might find a sympathetic audience.

The Zaibatsu will change every machine tool in their factories at the merest hint that you are unsatisfied with the performance of their product with absolutely no repercussions. Just like any feudal society.

User avatar
treespider
Posts: 5781
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:34 am
Location: Edgewater, MD

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by treespider »

ORIGINAL: mjk428

It took years but I finally managed to play a game into Sept '42. My reward is I get to pay 2000+ PPs to activate a division that historically was in the South Pacific in Oct '42. .I already had to scrounge points together to activate Americal, 40th & 41st - which meant delaying their arrival vs. their actual timetable.

The Japs attacked the US. It didn't require great political capital to convince the US to send troops the Pacific to kick their ass. If I wanted to send Canadian Mounties to Tulagi that should cost me. Sending divisions that were actually dedicated to the task should be free.

Has anybody ever investigated this to see if it's even possible to put all the historical Allied units & leaders in play in a timely manner?


50pp per day ...

...Let's say you just finished August 1942 since you said its September 1942...

...that is roughly 266 days...

...266 * 50 = 13,300...

...so if the Americal, 40 & 41st each cost 2000 as well, that's another 6000 points...

...13,300 - 6000 = 7,300 ...

...but you said you didn't have the 2000 available for the 43rd...

...so what happened to the 7,300 points or the other 3 divisions worth of stuff you freed up?


Alternatively you can always open the editor and mod a scenario and give yourself 10,000pp per day so its not an issue.



Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910
mjk428
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 3:29 am
Location: Western USA

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by mjk428 »

ORIGINAL: treespider

50pp per day ...

...Let's say you just finished August 1942 since you said its September 1942...

...that is roughly 266 days...

...266 * 50 = 13,300...

...so if the Americal, 40 & 41st each cost 2000 as well, that's another 6000 points...

...13,300 - 6000 = 7,300 ...

...but you said you didn't have the 2000 available for the 43rd...

...so what happened to the 7,300 points or the other 3 divisions worth of stuff you freed up?


Alternatively you can always open the editor and mod a scenario and give yourself 10,000pp per day so its not an issue.


There's a save game editor? Great!!!! Because otherwise it took me a year and a half of real life just to get to Sept '42. Not wanting to restart.

FYI:

Gary Grigsby's Pacific War: 43rd ID arrives in 9/42 attached to South Pacific HQ

Gary Grigsby's War in the Pacific: 43rd ID arrives in 9/42 attached to the South Pacific HQ

Historically:

The 43d Infantry Division was inducted into federal service on Feb. 21, 1941. The National Guard unit was primarily made up from infantry regiments of the 172nd. Vermont, the 103d maine, and the 169th Connecticut. The 118th Combat Engineers from Rhode Island made up the fourth New England state in the 43d.

Other units from amoung these four states were the 118th Medical, HQ Division (Headquarters), the 103d; the 152nd; the 192nd, and the 169th Field Artillery Battalions.

The division first trained at Camp Blanding, Florida. It was supposed to be only a one-year stint, but Dec. 7, 1941 changed all of that. The 43d was now in for the duration of the war. After completing advanced training in Mississippi, and large scale maneuvers in Louisiana and the Carolinas, the 43d shipped out of Fort Ord, California in October of 1942. It took the transport ships almost three weeks to reach New Zealand.

Stationed first in New Zealand, the 43d Division island hopped its way up the Pacific chain. Operations were conducted on many islands, some well known, others never before heard of.

Guadalcanal; the Russell Islands; New Georgia, where the 43d took heavy casualties taking Munda airfield. The Drinimour River in New Guines, Luzon and Manila in the Philippines. The 43d was slated to be one of the first Invasion forces on Japan proper. It was thought by many that the division could well be decimated. Japan surrenderd instead, and the 43d went to Japan as an occupation force.

For thier actions in the Philippines, the 43d was awarded a Presidentail Unit Citation. The 43d Division was nicknamed the "Winged Victory" Division after Gen. Leonard F. Wing took over command in 1943. Gen. Wing was the only National Guard officer to command an active duty division in World War II.

http://www.43d-research.com/43d_Pacific_History.html

Doesn't matter if I've got 10k points stocked up for a rainy day. There's simply no historical reason for this unit to arrive attached to West Coast command in 9/42.
User avatar
Fallschirmjager
Posts: 3555
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:46 am
Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by Fallschirmjager »

I am an Allied Fan Boy. But I like the system. If you read about America right after the war, it really did take political capital to get resources freed up to be deployed into the Pacific.
The Army and Army Air Force had a Europe first policy in place and they stuck to it. The Navy had to fight tooth and nail to get air forces and the army to commit anything.
In the opening months of 1942 a deal was struck with Australia and NZ that if they would keep their forces in the Middle East that America would provide for their defense.
The Navy fought for the idea since it would make the Army have to provide the manpower. The British liked the idea since worldwide shipping tonnage was stretched to a breaking point.
The Army and the Australian and New Zealand home fronts wanted experienced ANZAC troops returned but ultimately agreed with the idea.

I think the PP system mostly works. I can sacrifice in some areas and am forced into the inter-service 'war' that really did exist at the time.

If anyone remembers the old SNES game PTO 2. Every month you had a meeting between heads of service and you used a deck of cards system where you could fight with the civilian government and the army for production and allotments of fuel, supplies and recruitment.
That was a great system to highlight the battle that went on between the armed services over limited resources.
Alfred
Posts: 6683
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:56 am

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by Alfred »

ORIGINAL: mjk428

It took years but I finally managed to play a game into Sept '42. My reward is I get to pay 2000+ PPs to activate a division that historically was in the South Pacific in Oct '42. .I already had to scrounge points together to activate Americal, 40th & 41st - which meant delaying their arrival vs. their actual timetable.

The Japs attacked the US. It didn't require great political capital to convince the US to send troops the Pacific to kick their ass. If I wanted to send Canadian Mounties to Tulagi that should cost me. Sending divisions that were actually dedicated to the task should be free.

Has anybody ever investigated this to see if it's even possible to put all the historical Allied units & leaders in play in a timely manner?

I have highlighted the bit in the OP which is a gratuitous kick, verging on an insult, to the devs.

Back in September 2009 the OP raised at length this very same issue of Allied units arriving restricted even though historically those units had been sent overseas. Andy Mac very clearly responded that it was a very conscious decision made by him, after looking at many saves from player games, to make them restricted to reflect the historical difficulties the Allies had in finding units to send overseas. In the absence of his decision, it was just too easy for players to send many more units overseas than had been the historical case.

As an answer was provided to the OP 35 months ago, it is quite uncalled for to suggest that the devs had not considered this issue.

Next we have the following thread which does not date from 2009.

tm.asp?m=3090217&mpage=1&key=restricted?

Read post #18 from Blackhorse. Again it addresses the issue and explains the cut off date used by the devs. Doesn't appear to me that the devs failed to investigate the issue. Quite the contrary, their actions were taken very much to achieve an overall historical outcome. Note in particular Blackhorse's observation, borne out by treespider in the current thread, that there are sufficient PPs available to unrestrict and send overseas all the divisions which historically were sent overseas. Only if PPs are spent on actions which did not occur historically, such as changing leaders of Chinese LCUs or moving air units out of the Phillippines or replacing the Allied leadership in Malaya, to mention only a few things, would a player run short of accumulating the necessary PPs to unrestrict the relevant historical units.

The devs consistently state that players who disagree with their decisions, are free to use the editor to change things to the player's liking. Just because a player does not like the decisions made by the devs, it is not productive to beat the devs over the head with claims that they failed to consider issues when it is clear that they did.

Alfred

Edit: For those interested in the 2009 thread I referred to above, here it is.

tm.asp?m=2241404&mpage=1&key=americal&#2245344
mjk428
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 3:29 am
Location: Western USA

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by mjk428 »

ORIGINAL: Alfred
I have highlighted the bit in the OP which is a gratuitous kick, verging on an insult, to the devs.

[>:]
User avatar
Dan Nichols
Posts: 863
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 11:32 pm

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by Dan Nichols »

I 100% agree with Alfred, TreeSpider, and Fallschirmjager. See my AAR The Willing Admiral. I used about 750-800 PPs to replace leaders of many of the Malaya troops, ship commanders and some air unit commanders. I have knowingly delayed at least one regiment for 15-16 days. I think it was worth it.
I think that the two obligations you have are to be good at what you do and then to pass on your knowledge to a younger person
User avatar
zuluhour
Posts: 5244
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:16 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by zuluhour »

Don't talk to me about political points!!!

ps What would you expect from a TWIT.
User avatar
StK
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 8:52 pm
Location: Upper Austria

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by StK »

@mjk428: I'm sorry but your argument doesn't make sense. You spent 7300 pps to send land units, air units and commanders where they historically shouldn't have been and complain that after doing all that you can't send another unit somewhere because historically it should have been there? So you like the system when it works for you, but when you finally hit the limit of the system it's the systems fault?
Image
Changing ones point of view isn't easy, but it provides one with a different view on the subject.
User avatar
LoBaron
Posts: 4775
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by LoBaron »

Sounds a lot like not planning ahead and complaining about the consequences. Wrong game, maybe? [;)]

And there are historical as well as gameplay reasons to restrict a majority of units to WC commands, usually those reasons lie within PBEM country.
Image
mjk428
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 3:29 am
Location: Western USA

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by mjk428 »

ORIGINAL: LoBaron



And there are historical as well as gameplay reasons to restrict a majority of units to WC commands, usually those reasons lie within PBEM country.

No doubt this is just another sacrifice to the "play balance" Gods.
User avatar
LoBaron
Posts: 4775
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by LoBaron »

ORIGINAL: mjk428

ORIGINAL: LoBaron



And there are historical as well as gameplay reasons to restrict a majority of units to WC commands, usually those reasons lie within PBEM country.

No doubt this is just another sacrifice to the "play balance" Gods.

No doubt at all. [;)]

Now let me see, I am sure it is one of those extremely difficult situations.
Should a dev satisfy mjk428´s personal preference of how a game should play like, or should he ensure that the game is playable in multiplayer - for both sides.

I am just veeery slightly leaning towards PBEM playability...
Image
User avatar
tocaff
Posts: 4765
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 9:30 pm
Location: USA now in Brasil

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by tocaff »

There's no need for either side here to get upset with one another. If we think back it's this type of questioning that led to WITP growing into AE. We won't all agree , but we should have tolerance.
Todd

I never thought that doing an AAR would be so time consuming and difficult.
www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2080768
User avatar
TheLoneGunman_MatrixForum
Posts: 312
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:01 pm

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by TheLoneGunman_MatrixForum »

The OP is right about one thing, it didn't require great political capital to send troops to all of those islands in the South Pacific.

But hardly anyone ever does that, more likely you'd just send the 43rd ID to India. [:-]
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by Shark7 »

I think you do not fully understand the amount of true fear felt by the US after Pearl Harbor. There was a tangible fear that a Japanese invasion fleet would show up somewhere on the West Coast...it was to the point that National Guards units were mobilized and old, obsolescent aircraft were hastily formed into new fighter squadrons. It makes sense that a fully combat ready division would be retained well into the war, simply based on fear of invasion.

Just to get an idea of how bad it was, google the Battle of Los Angeles, where AAA units fired on something (unidentified) for over an hour fearing it was some type of Japanese aircraft.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
Bearcat2
Posts: 578
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:53 pm

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by Bearcat2 »


The 43rd was a NG unit. [ from New England?]
I am not argueing about the game mechanics; but the West Coast hysteria did not last that long, the major reason the 43rd was not shipped overseas was because it needed to be trained and equipped. It also lost a number of NCO's/officers who left to be the cadre of new units immediately after PH.
At the time of PH, they were training in Florida, didn't ship out for the west coast until aug 42, after they completed training.
"After eight years as President I have only two regrets: that I have not shot Henry Clay or hanged John C. Calhoun."--1837
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6395
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by JeffroK »

ORIGINAL: Termite2


The 43rd was a NG unit. [ from New England?]
I am not argueing about the game mechanics; but the West Coast hysteria did not last that long, the major reason the 43rd was not shipped overseas was because it needed to be trained and equipped. It also lost a number of NCO's/officers who left to be the cadre of new units immediately after PH.
At the time of PH, they were training in Florida, didn't ship out for the west coast until aug 42, after they completed training.

The USA mobilization was a bit of a mess, getting men and equipment into those units marked as a priority saw the others continually drained of troops. In additon, the quality of the NG units was extremely variable and oftenm needed extra time to "retrain" Officers and Men.

If you want a different approach, give the AFB access to every single US Army unit but the same number of PP to buy them out!

You would still be buying British, Indian, Australian & New Zealand to patch up gaps in the line.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
btbw
Posts: 379
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 7:23 am

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by btbw »

Easy way to solve problem is rewrite OOB so such LCU like 43ID arrive linked to isolated corps hq. Restricted but with 1/4 cost of pp when move inside same command HQ but not restricted corps hq.
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: 43rd Infantry Division

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: btbw

Easy way to solve problem is rewrite OOB so such LCU like 43ID arrive linked to isolated corps hq. Restricted but with 1/4 cost of pp when move inside same command HQ but not restricted corps hq.


no need for this. The original poster used thousands of pps to move out stuff and then complains he can't move out what was moved out in real life. His whole argument is a fail. There are easily enough pp around so you can do what was done historically (you can do even more), so there's no need to complain at all and in his special case it's not to understand at all as he had enough replies earlier (nearly 3 years ago [8|]) as Alfred pointed out.
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”