ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock
Is it possible to ever win this game as the Japanese?
It used to be possible because of the Kill Point Multiplier. But in the latest version, the KPM doesn't start until 1945, and doesn't reach the 2.0 X level until 1946. A very poor decision, IMHO.
There are two problems with winning as IJ. One is the kill points multiplier as you observe. The other is devalued kill points. Matrix increased control and production for both sides which resulted in depreciating the value of kill points to near zero. Even with the original SSI 1944 kill multiplier, its near impossible for IJ to win with Matrix. I posted asking if anyone had ever won as IJ. No positive responses except by someone who just for grins made allied forces about as effective as a 16th century Army and Navy and took the whole map.
I don't understand the reasons. Blatant example. There was never a shortage of US Army tac bombers in SSI. Yet Matrix production through turn 150 is 250% of SSI. Why?
Consider the following.
IJ, Control And Production, Matrix 42.235, SSI 21,920
Allies, Control And Production, Matrix 70,415, SSI 32,840.
Total first turn Control and Production, Matrix 112,650, SSI 54,750
All these extra control and production points overwhelm kill points to the point their value is functionally zero.
This is why my revised scenario has values close to SSI, in addition to a kill multiplier that applies Jan 1944.
I am amazed the Matrix version is popular without a very important factor being present, that being a reasonable doubt as to the outcome. Is it really reasonable that by Jan 1944, IJ can take the whole map except for a few Australian bases, the US West Coast, destroy the RN, the original USN, and most of the 1943 USN replacements and NOT win? Yet that's what happens with Matrix. Actual game available to prove it.
You can find a statement in the original game documentation that Grigsby said he believed it was not possible for IJ to win (historically) but he gave IJ a chance to make for a BETTER GAME.
< Message edited by bradk -- 10/13/2011 5:42:43 PM >