PDU Off vs. PDU On

[Canoerebel]

Gents,

My current game with Chez has PDU off. My two previous PBEM were with PDU on. All three games were Scenario 2.

Thus far, I really like the feel of PDU off, which seriously limits upgrade paths. Both sides are still fighting with very early war models. For instance, the allies are using Buffaloes and Mohawks. PDU off also seems to seriously reign in the "Star Wars" effect that I saw in my first two games, in which Japan was able to put second- and third-generation aircraft on the front in 1942 in numbers that (IMO) were just so ridiculous that it detracted from the game's WWII feel.

So, I love the non-Star Wars feel of PDU off. But here's what I don't know. Is PDU off a neutral chocie, or does it favor one side over the other? (If it is unbalanced, I suspect it would be in favor of the Allies, since it reigns in that whole IJ Star Wars thing).

Just wondering what you gents think. I like PDU off, but is it "one sided" enough to affect game balance?

[mike scholl 1]

PDU On favors the Japanese, as they are the only side that can adjust their production to maximize it's benefits.

[mc3744]

Hi Canoerbel [:)]

Isn't the early coming of huge numbers of Jap planes due to the ability of Japan to speed up R&D and to increase production capacity?
I'm sure PDU plays a part too, but I was under the impression that it was secondary to the above reasons.

As an Allied player I can say that in the early months, up until spring '42, PDU is very important in managing the overall air force.
Without it I don't think that I would be able to put up any form of air defense anywhere at least unitl the second half of '42.

With PDU ON, by spring'42 India/Burma already has a decent air power. Australia too.
Not yet offensive, but surely defensive.

Just my two cents [:)]

[mc3744]

Wait! PDU is the ability to chose the upgrade path, isn't it?

[Treetop64]

Good question.

I play Allied vs. AI and have always enabled PDU.  It enables me to gradually move all the obsolete and/or out-of production planes to the 4th and 11th Air Forces while actively engaged (or imminently actively engaged) air units get the latest or most numerically available stuff.  It's very early in the war, though, so that means so far I can really only use P-39Ds and P-40Es, and just a few B-17Es until the B-24Ds start showing up for the Army, and just a few F4F-3s and the first batches of serially produced SBD-3s for the Navy. Eventually I can start moving a lot of nice Hurricanes, Bleheims, Lysanders, and Wellingtons to Burma or Eastern India, too.

Enabling PDU also sort of "forces" you to keep a closer eye on what hardware you currently have and how it's used, and what new hardware will be appearing and when.  That enables you to better organize and allocate the resources you have now.

[Cribtop]

PDU On definitely favors the Japanese. Many groups are stuck with Nate, Ida, and other awesome aircraft without it.

Combine a smart player who can adjust production and R&D with PDU On and you see the "hordes of Tojos" effect. This then interacts with the limited numbers of Allied air frames (limited mostly by the fact that they fought the real life Japanese air force and found these numbers adequate rather than any inherent limit in the Allied war machine) to produce a situation where the JFB is actually able to win an aerial war of attrition, at least until the very late war.

I wish there was a middle ground between "Hordes of Idas" and "Hordes of Tojos, Franks, and Georges," but I'm not sure there is. I think the real question is "could the Japanese economy, assuming a Japanese Albert Speer with full control from the late 30s, have produced airframes in the numbers we see in AE with PDU On?" I have my doubts, but I suspect the Japanese could have done better than what we see with PDU Off. For example, even if we concede that Tony, Frank, George, etc had enormous technical difficulties in production and in the field, surely Japan could've shut off Nates in favor of Oscar Ic, yes?

Long winded answer there. Short winded is the current situation with PDU On may over-favor Japan; PDU Off probably over-favors the Allies. Most players opt for PDU On as helping out Japan makes for a more competitive game, but as you point out Dan, it's a competitive Star Wars game on some level.

[Miller]

PDU On is unrealisitc but the Jap player does not have a hope in hell playing PDU off.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Miller

PDU On is unrealisitc but the Jap player does not have a hope in hell playing PDU off.

+1

[ny59giants]

PDU On is unrealisitc but the Jap player does not have a hope in hell playing PDU off.

+2

[Canoerebel]

I'm not sure about that.  If I were playing Nemo (or any of a number of other talented IJ players), and I agreed to Scenario Two in return for PDU off, I don't think he would hesitate to accept the challenge.  With the extra ground units and destroyers, the Japanese can effectively slow the Allied advance.  With PDU off, there's no Star Wars with the Japanese flying umpteen thousand Tojos in August 1942 against an RAF that has no replacements at all.
 
So, what say you guys. With the trade offs, would Scenario Two, PDU Off, be a fair challenge between experienced players?

[n01487477]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I'm not sure about that.  If I were playing Nemo (or any of a number of other talented IJ players), and I agreed to Scenario Two in return for PDU off, I don't think he would hesitate to accept the challenge.  With the extra ground units and destroyers, the Japanese can effectively slow the Allied advance.  With PDU off, there's no Star Wars with the Japanese flying umpteen thousand Tojos in August 1942 against an RAF that has no replacements at all.

So, what say you guys. With the trade offs, would Scenario Two, PDU Off, be a fair challenge between experienced players?

Scenario 2 is no cakewalk economically. The added need for HI regarding extra pilot training (which IMO should be reduced in this scen), the larger shipbuild and other requirements make it more challenging for Res and fuel as well as HI. So unless the player understands the economics side fairly well - I'd say no.

But then I'd probably never commit to a PBEM with PDU OFF anyway - it's just not as fun without the WHAT IF factor for me. Even if PDU OFF is easier to be efficient.

[Alfred]

PDU ON does not favour Japan.
PDU OFF does not favour the Allies.

PDU ON assists the stronger human player to demonstrate his superior skill.
PDU OFF assists the weaker human player to reduce the gap in player skills.

Alfred

[Puhis]

I'm scenario 1 type JFB, and I like it PDU off. Maybe I am a masochist? [;)]

Seriously, I think game is very good with PDU off. I does seem to reduce number of airplanes on air, which is good thing. Sure many Japan's bomber units can only use Sonias, but those are my training squadrons. Same with Nates. I'm sure allies have similar restrictions. Maybe biggest restriction is with 2E army bombers, most of the units can't use better Helens, it's Sally all the way. Also late war carriers arrive with A6M5b Zeros, and it's quite possible to get the carriers before that fighter model. So you might have new carriers without replacement fighters...

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: Alfred
PDU ON does not favour Japan.
PDU OFF does not favour the Allies.

PDU ON assists the stronger human player to demonstrate his superior skill.
PDU OFF assists the weaker human player to reduce the gap in player skills.

Alfred

Then PDU off will be perfect for me if I ever end up playing Nemo.

[Numdydar]

I actually think PDU On favors the Allies as this allows them to build several squadrons with advanced types that they could not do with PDU off. However, as a Japan player (not necessarily a JFB) PDU Off is a real pita after playing with PDU on as it really messes with the production model. You really need to actually produce everything, lol, in order to have enough planes in the pool to keep all the crap flying with PDU Off. This also means there is not much reason to increase production of airframes much as the squardrons are restricted as what they can use.

Other than that, I do agree that PDU off do bring a very differnt experience to the game as you are really forced to use all the plane types rather than concentrating on just a few. This make the squadrons where you actually have Tojos and Zeros even more important. This is not the case with PDU On as any squadron can be a Tojo or Zero if the player wants.

So I would always recommend playing at least one game with PDU Off, perferably against the AI [:D] just to have a better understanding of all the differnent aspects of the plane types that no one would ever build with PDU On. After this you will have a much better grasp of the importance of the few airframes that Japan made that were worth a damn [:)]

[1275psi]

I am playing scene 1, pdu off as japan (2 games)

even taking greater area than IRL, sinking all 6 allied pre war CVs, hardly losing a ship, and entering 43 still thinking offensive ops ...........I cannot win game.
4 times allied point score..................!!!!!!!! You have got to be kidding me

Good thing i don't play to win the game, but to enjoy the journey. PDU off, scene one is the real life feel the pain deal as japan.
As a historical grand simulation, i am getting a very good feel for the realities japan faced, and more enjoyment!

For example, all those CVEs, nice little mini KB!........Nope, not enough airgroups available (GROUPS, not planes) to man em. So, they do what happened in real life -cart army planes to the fronts

I really like PDU off
(even in 44, when the pain is unbeleivable!)

[bbbf]

The pain has only just started!!

PDU off stretches you more - you have to manage your squadrons more closely.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

PDU ON does not favour Japan.
PDU OFF does not favour the Allies.

PDU ON assists the stronger human player to demonstrate his superior skill.
PDU OFF assists the weaker human player to reduce the gap in player skills.

Alfred

I see what you are saying here and agree with you on some level. On other levels, not so sure. BUt, I'm not going to focus on that. Instead, I'll just cut to the chase: What does it do to the game result? The outcome that I see from the various AAR's and my playing is:

PDU ON = greater chance that the allied offensive doesn't start until mid '44

PDU ON gives is a better chance for a longer game where the allies will have fewer chances to recover from mistakes. Meaning, since their offensive starts later, just due to endgame time limit, they simply can't afford too many miss steps. I think it puts a bit more pressure on the allies, more like the IJ offensive in '42. The IJ just has to come up with a couple of ways to put the allied offensive timing off and voile' you are into '46 with the allies just now knocking on the HI door.

So historical? Heck no, huge departure. More exiting game? I think so, from both player's perspectives.

Can PDU OFF achieve the same extension of the allied offensive? Sure. Herb's game is proof. But for every game like Herb/Cantona you have 100 like Stoneage or CF where the allied offensive starts in '42. Nothing wrong with that, just a shorter game.

So, want a shorter game: PDU OFF. You might be done in 1 year. Want a game to go 2 - 3 years (or more)? PDU ON.

[mike scholl 1]

I'd go for "PDU On" in a PBEM game when playing the Allies---and ask for "No Withdrawals" in return. But not for the reason you might think. I simply find having to check constantly to see if something I want to use might need to be withdrawn before I'm finished with it to be a big P-I-T-A! And would cheerfully give a "bennie" to my Japanese opponant just to avoid having to mess with it.

[mc3744]

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

I'd go for "PDU On" in a PBEM game when playing the Allies---and ask for "No Withdrawals" in return. But not for the reason you might think. I simply find having to check constantly to see if something I want to use might need to be withdrawn before I'm finished with it to be a big P-I-T-A! And would cheerfully give a "bennie" to my Japanese opponant just to avoid having to mess with it.

Good point. I'll keep it in mind for my next game [:)]