Improvement suggestion for patch or update: make stuff more worthwile and more scare

[Alpha77]

What do you mean, Alpha?

a) How much stuff the Allied side has on stockpile is insane (I mean supplies and fuel mostly), make it more rare and not have 3 Mio. supplies at SF and 2 Mio liter fuel at LA already in mid 42. Perhaps in 45 yup.

b) Make smaller ships more worthwile, higher VP count. Also AKLs, but mostly AM, SC, other small specialized vessels. It seems the game only counts material to build small craft but does not account for the crews.. ie. a minesweeper needs also a trained crew to operate good in its task. And this crew is worth more than the material to build the ship imho. Double the VPs for these craft. Than also players might think twice to send them out in harms way or even as sacrifices or bait.

c) Make cargo shipping more worthwhile, rare and less capable. I know in one of the mods this was already done. Means less capacity and perhaps also range. Many ormost of these ships were perhaps also employed for civilian matters stills and not in the war effort - so just distract 20-30% of numbers the players get, esp. on the Allied side. In mid 42 there is already so much shipping you do not really care about them. But the families of the crews might care....

d) Also slow down building a bit or make engs a bit more rare. As Allies I have maxed out airfields at Suva, Luganville in mid 42. As IJ at Rabaul, Soerabaya in late summer. It is imho too early to have such massive facilities so early.

Thanks for considering...i have 3-4 more points but these were already named longer ago in the forum. Perhaps I write them later but above seem to be the most pressing issues.

A small EDIT, as for 1. June 42, the numbers are even much higher than I wrote above, it is more close to 8 Mio supplies and 4 mio fuel at the WC plus 1,2 mio supplies at Sidney and 0,5 Mio at Capetown and 1,5 Mio+ sup+fuel in India [X(] This is stock scen2, when I checked SF this turn, I thought (hoped) my eyes would deceive me by 1 digit, but in fact it is MIO not hundred-thousand...

[witpqs]

Most of that stuff is against the main goal of the basic game engine + scenarios, which is to provide historical capabilities. That's why Victory Points are used to decide who won "the game"; "the war" is just very rarely won by Japan in AE.

Mod scenarios can and do get into other ways to do things. Some explore what if's that the modder considers plausible alternate histories, but some just get into making AE's "the war" more competitive. You can even try your own mod or work with experienced modders.

The VP changes suggested would have very large consequences and likely skew the whole victory proposition. But House Rules for you and your opponent or at least personal rules for your own play could take care of the small ship issue quite nicely. I think a number of players do that.

The building rate is similarly difficult. When players concentrate resources (like engineers) more than was done at a particular place in history they can do more than was done in history. Players don't have to follow history.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Most of that stuff is against the main goal of the basic game engine + scenarios, which is to provide historical capabilities.

exactly. The devs went to great lengths to create the actual capability as it existed. Some of the very best historical research done to date by a highly motivated and brilliant group of individuals.
Where there was doubt, they almost always gave the IJ an easter egg. Still, it is a highly accurate picture of what assets each side had at their disposal, and historically, what they did and could have done.

For modders, it is a paradise. For gamers, nirvana. For physicians specializing in repetitive motion injuries, well, we'll leave that alone. [;)]

All of your ideas above are perfect for your mod. Me? I have included none in my mod, and disagree with most of them. BUT, that is my mod and yous is your mod and ALL of that is good.

Enjoy!!!

Kudos to Henderson team.

[&o] [&o][&o]

[adarbrauner]

I don't see points a, b and c as baseless;

I like in particular the suggestion to confer greater importance and consideration to ships crews.

In the game, guns personnel etc is modeled (good), but ships crews not, nor the possibility to rescue survivors among ship crew.

I'd like very much the idea that ship crews are drown from manpower (and I'd like to see it extendede also to air crews..), land troops alike, also for purposes of victory points (casualties).

That should deter so many players, Allied in particular, from expending so liberally of their human assetts and troops

[witpqs]

I'm not suggesting they are baseless, rather that they would have unwanted side effects.

[Grfin Zeppelin]

All I want are the Susies Japan should have

I also ponder often why the Rita isnt in the game.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: adarbrauner

I don't see points a, b and c as baseless;

I like in particular the suggestion to confer greater importance and consideration to ships crews.

In the game, guns personnel etc is modeled (good), but ships crews not, nor the possibility to rescue survivors among ship crew.

I'd like very much the idea that ship crews are drown from manpower (and I'd like to see it extendede also to air crews..), land troops alike, also for purposes of victory points (casualties).

That should deter so many players, Allied in particular, from expending so liberally of their human assetts and troops

A is already accurate. If you want less to make the game more challenging; that is referred to as a "Mod".
B is already modeled accurately. Again, if you wish to change, that is called a "Mod".
C is already modeled accurately. Again, if you wish to change, that is called a "Mod". Now DaBabes cuts into the capacity as their team argues that efficiencies weren't fully realized. That mod is out there and fully researched. As they were (mostly) part of Henderson originally, you have to place a certain credence to their logic. They don't dispute the accuracy, but rather the efficiency assumption. It is a valid argument, and has a solid basis. Now, I choose not to use it, but that is because my argument is that they could have been more efficient.

Now regarding cargo capacities in the war for IJ, they did suffer quite a bit more than most players, but that was as much their doing until '44 as anything the allies did. They did not have a master plan, ships tended to flock to certain areas, other areas were bereft, and in general not well organized. Now to be fair, one person today with a spreadsheet can do what a dozen guys in 1941 would have taken a week to do. So, I am not condemning them out of hand for being inept. however, with better management, they could have done FAR better. That's me and my mod.

I guess my ending here is pretty simple: change aren't in the cards really <period>. But, when they were to get them you needed to provide solid evidence. EX: Myoko Maru was not available in Jan 1942 because her owner had taken her back into private service, and then provide the evidence to support this. Otherwise, the body of research done by the Henderson team states Myoko Maru was available to the IJN/IJA for requirements of the war.

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

For modders, it is a paradise. For gamers, nirvana. For physicians specializing in repetitive motion injuries, well, we'll leave that alone. [;)]

That made me spit out... my coffee...

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

For modders, it is a paradise. For gamers, nirvana. For physicians specializing in repetitive motion injuries, well, we'll leave that alone. [;)]

That made me spit out... my coffee...

I get lucky once in a great while ...[:D]

{apologies to your keyboard}

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

All I want are the Susies Japan should have

Well, the devs chose to NOT include aircraft in training groups that are not represented in game. The Susies were by that time very much just training aircraft ... I have oft wished to see them as well though ...

[MakeeLearn]

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

All I want are the Susies Japan should have

I also ponder often why the Rita isnt in the game.

Right or Wong Suzie???

[Yaab]

Alpha 77, your a) is directly linked to c).

Basically, Allies have tons of supply - that is fine. Yet, this supply is universal, so India supply can be used to flesh out US units, Dutch supply to flesh out Indian units etc. - you get the drift. This reduces the need for merchant shipping. So, while in RL Allied merchant shipping was busy, yours is not. Thus, the reduced VPs make sense in b) - merchant ships are not really that precious if you can create Shermans directly in the Calcutta slums. Still, you are right about crews - I would like to see something like ship crew squads in the game, similar to naval or aviation support squads. Losses to a ship crew should translate into the ship's less efficient performance ina all situations. Right now we get lots of damage to the ship systems, but the crew is always ghosting the deck at its full (empty) strength.

[LargeSlowTarget]

a) is not accurate. Not counting the loss of industries to enemy action or resource / fuel shortages, the amount of supplies generated per day is the same in 1941 as in 1945. I'm sure we all agree that IRL the generation of military supplies increase manyfold in the Allied camp - so the "static" supply generation in the game cannot be accurate.

In the game, the scenario designers took a baseline for the supply generation which allows to support all the units in the late war Allied OOB with ample amounts of supplies. So, the game may accurately reflect a late 1944 / early 1945 level of supply generation - but this level of supply generation is applied from the beginning in Dec 7th 1941, when the OOB obviously is much smaller and supply-intensive battles in attack mode / bombing campaigns do not happen. That's why the Allies start accumulating huge stockpiles of supplies and fuel pretty fast in 1942.

It is a scenario design decision for stock scenarios. Since the game ships with an editor, it is not a biggie IMO. Some modders (including myself) have disabled a sizeable part of the Allied supply-generating industries at the beginning of the war. So, initial supply-generation is much lower but - with repairs - it will rise over time. Whether the figures are "accurate" is open to debate, but the results are surely closer to reality than the huge stockpiles accumulating early in stock games.

[LargeSlowTarget]

Some things to add that come to mind which help explain some of the issues the OP has mentioned.

1. Ships do not use supplies in the game except for ammo - apparently the crews do not need to eat, dress, get medical attention etc. IRL the supply requirements to support task forces operating away from continental bases must be considerable. A small TF of one CV, two CA and six DDs ships carries about 5500 - 6000 hungry sailors - that's brigade strength for LCUs.

2. In the game, once built, ports, airbases and forts have no maintenance requirements from "wear and tear" and degradation by the elements (damage can only occur by enemy action) - hence no supply usage and no need for a (albeit reduced) construction force to remain in place for upkeep. IRL supplies and forces would be needed to maintain and repair the infrastructure. IMO, in the game the inherent engineering capabilities of most base forces and their supply requirements seem to be too modest to reflect the scope of maintenance work necessary.

3. I think accumulating sys damage for ships has been "nerfed" too much. In my experience, if operating at mission or cruise speed, even ships in CS convoys operating for months rarely accumulate sys damage high enough (i.e. "orange" > above 9 points) that would force me to "ground" a ship for repairs for more than a few days. I think IRL ships required more maintenance and periodic overhauls than we see in the game. Furthermore, all ships in the game start the war in pristine condition, with zero sys and engine damage. In short, ship availability is higher in the game than IRL.

[Grfin Zeppelin]

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

All I want are the Susies Japan should have

I also ponder often why the Rita isnt in the game.

Right or Wong Suzie???

Not what I had in mind but better than nothing.

[MakeeLearn]

The man who code-named the Japanese aircraft was Captain Frank T. McCoy. He used mostly "hillbilly" names that he had heard while growing up in Tennessee. Some were named after people he knew, Betty was a nurse.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn


The man who code-named the Japanese aircraft was Captain Frank T. McCoy. He used mostly "hillbilly" names that he had heard while growing up in Tennessee. Some were named after people he knew, Betty was a nurse.

Zeke fits then.

[Canoerebel]

What about the Dolly? It carried two bombs able to burst the strongest seams and stays.

[MakeeLearn]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

What about the Dolly? It carried two bombs able to burst the strongest seams and stays.

Called a Dolly... because it can "pickup" anything.




P.S. The above picture is from "The World of Suzy Wong", for those that may not have seen the movie and have gotten the pun.

[crsutton]

None of your suggestions are out of line. But this is a mature game that has already gone through a total rebuild and many patches. You are not going to see a whole lot of changes in content in a ten year old products. Just not that many people still working on it. You will have to do your own mod.