Matrix Games Forums

To End All Wars: Mountain InfantryPandora: Eclipse of Nashira Announced! Deal of the Week: Command Ops goes half price!New Fronts are opening up for Commander: The Great WarCharacters of World War 1Sign of for the Pike and Shot Beta!More Games are Coming to Steam! Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great War
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Has anyone won playing IJ?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Classic (Free) Games] >> Pacific War: The Matrix Edition >> RE: Has anyone won playing IJ? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Has anyone won playing IJ? - 12/16/2011 7:06:28 AM   
bradk

 

Posts: 279
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MXB2001

I suppose the point imbalance is not so bad in the short scenarios? I always had the habit of wanting to play the long campaigns (WIR too) but never finished them. My interest is really only in the 1939-1942 period so I've decided only to play short early war scenarios from now on.

I've been running CP vs CP games of the SSI v 1.1 x22 on another computer and it seems the points are pretty balanced there. Draw without help and decisive victory with help so far.



First Turn Points

IJ Control 36940, Allies Control 52840, Total Control 89780 - Matrix
IJ Control 16500, Allies Control 19950, Total Control 36450 - SSI
IJ Control 16300, Allies Control 19820, Total Control 36120 - PWB

IJ Production 5295, Allied Production 17575, Total Production 22870 - Matrix
IJ Production 5420, Allied Production 12880, Total Produciton 18300 - SSI
IJ Production 4710, Allied Production 10940, Total Production 15650 - PWB

IJ Total 42235, Allied Total 70415, Game Total 112650 - Matrix
IJ Total 21920, Allied Total 32830, Game Total 54750 - SSI
IJ Total 21010, Allied Total 30760, Game Total 51770 - PWB


Typical Production, August 1943

IJ 6440, Allied 22630 - Matrix
IJ 6630, Allied 16310 - SSI
IJ 5594, Allied 13675 - PWB

The value of kill points is greatly depreciated in Matrix due to increase produciton and control. That's one of the reasons its necessary to take most of map to win as IJ in Matrix. Holding the Pacific and destroying the USN and RN isn't enough. Also Martix doesn't give IJ the kill multiplier until 1946. SSI give is in 1944.

PWB is a game of two scnearios I made with substantial input from three PBEM opponents. Basics are 1) use of Matrix aircraft, ship, LCU, and leader database with only slight modifications, 2) return of production and control points to close to SSI values, 3) edited exe so kill multiplier applies Jan 1944. It is for PBEM only, and I see you're apparently interested only in AI games. Howver, if you'd like a copy, send me a PM with your e mail address.

(in reply to MXB2001)
Post #: 31
RE: Has anyone won playing IJ? - 12/16/2011 7:27:25 PM   
MXB2001

 

Posts: 54
Joined: 12/12/2011
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bradk


quote:

ORIGINAL: MXB2001

I suppose the point imbalance is not so bad in the short scenarios? I always had the habit of wanting to play the long campaigns (WIR too) but never finished them. My interest is really only in the 1939-1942 period so I've decided only to play short early war scenarios from now on.

I've been running CP vs CP games of the SSI v 1.1 x22 on another computer and it seems the points are pretty balanced there. Draw without help and decisive victory with help so far.



First Turn Points

IJ Control 36940, Allies Control 52840, Total Control 89780 - Matrix
IJ Control 16500, Allies Control 19950, Total Control 36450 - SSI
IJ Control 16300, Allies Control 19820, Total Control 36120 - PWB

IJ Production 5295, Allied Production 17575, Total Production 22870 - Matrix
IJ Production 5420, Allied Production 12880, Total Produciton 18300 - SSI
IJ Production 4710, Allied Production 10940, Total Production 15650 - PWB

IJ Total 42235, Allied Total 70415, Game Total 112650 - Matrix
IJ Total 21920, Allied Total 32830, Game Total 54750 - SSI
IJ Total 21010, Allied Total 30760, Game Total 51770 - PWB


Typical Production, August 1943

IJ 6440, Allied 22630 - Matrix
IJ 6630, Allied 16310 - SSI
IJ 5594, Allied 13675 - PWB

The value of kill points is greatly depreciated in Matrix due to increase produciton and control. That's one of the reasons its necessary to take most of map to win as IJ in Matrix. Holding the Pacific and destroying the USN and RN isn't enough. Also Martix doesn't give IJ the kill multiplier until 1946. SSI give is in 1944.

PWB is a game of two scnearios I made with substantial input from three PBEM opponents. Basics are 1) use of Matrix aircraft, ship, LCU, and leader database with only slight modifications, 2) return of production and control points to close to SSI values, 3) edited exe so kill multiplier applies Jan 1944. It is for PBEM only, and I see you're apparently interested only in AI games. Howver, if you'd like a copy, send me a PM with your e mail address.


Whoa, control points are double in Matrix! I've read some of your other posts here too. I wonder why they didn't compensate by also changing kill points. Oversight? Or intended to be more historical? Historically kill points mattered a lot to the US. I could even see multiplying Jap kill points at start of game as being accurate. Or perhaps 41 x1, 42 x2, 43 x3 etc. :) Most of the Dutch and Brit losses (they were less sensitive) would be in '41. Oh well, just musing.

Thanks for the offer. You are right, I've only played PBM a few times and that was in the 90's. If I get hooked and feel the desire to try PBM again I'll take you up on the files.

(in reply to bradk)
Post #: 32
RE: Has anyone won playing IJ? - 12/17/2011 5:33:35 AM   
bradk

 

Posts: 279
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MXB2001

Whoa, control points are double in Matrix! I've read some of your other posts here too. I wonder why they didn't compensate by also changing kill points.


I wonder why control points were changed at all. There isn't any problem with the values used in SSI.


quote:

ORIGINAL: MXB2001

Oversight? Or intended to be more historical? Historically kill points mattered a lot to the US. I could even see multiplying Jap kill points at start of game as being accurate. Or perhaps 41 x1, 42 x2, 43 x3 etc. :) Most of the Dutch and Brit losses (they were less sensitive) would be in '41. Oh well, just musing.



They went the other way, delaying the kill multiplier until 1946. American sensitivity to losses was commented on in the SSI manual as the reason for the 1944 kill multiplier.


(in reply to MXB2001)
Post #: 33
RE: Has anyone won playing IJ? - 12/17/2011 3:19:16 PM   
bradk

 

Posts: 279
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline
Note on control points.  Calculation for base is

(airfield + port + oil + resource) x 10.  If the base is a major city in Japan or the US, its x 100.

Most of the control point increase comes from oil and resource.  For IJ, oil and resource affect both control points and production.  Oil and resource are required to run heavy industry.  Heavy industry production affects current production, factory expansion, and whether new factories will activate on the turn scheduled.

For Allies, oil and resource affect only control points.  No effect on production.  This is why oil and resource pools are not shown on the Allied pools screen.

In a PBEM game, the Allied player can adopt an oil and resource denial strategy, and effect it in two ways:  Capture the oil and resource bases, or reduce the abilty to transport them by targeting MCS and TK ships.  These strategies are not available in a game against IJ AI.

(in reply to bradk)
Post #: 34
RE: Has anyone won playing IJ? - 12/17/2011 6:10:47 PM   
MXB2001

 

Posts: 54
Joined: 12/12/2011
From: Canada
Status: offline
Well my opinion has always been that PW didn't need any changes. War in Russia did (was seriously broken). Still this v 3.2 has given me incentive to play again after a long interval so it's good. :)

(in reply to bradk)
Post #: 35
RE: Has anyone won playing IJ? - 12/18/2011 12:59:53 AM   
bradk

 

Posts: 279
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MXB2001

Well my opinion has always been that PW didn't need any changes. War in Russia did (was seriously broken). Still this v 3.2 has given me incentive to play again after a long interval so it's good. :)


I think the Matrix changes to the ship, weapon, and aircraft performance greatly benefit the game. If I were still interested in AI play, I'd play SSI v x22 with the obcs edited to include most of the Matrix obc changes.

The vcr feature is fantastic for PBEM games. I realize that isn't a factor for you.

However, its obvious I think the produciton and control increases, and change of the kill multiplier, are inappropriate.

(in reply to MXB2001)
Post #: 36
RE: Has anyone won playing IJ? - 12/18/2011 11:58:21 PM   
MXB2001

 

Posts: 54
Joined: 12/12/2011
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bradk

The vcr feature is fantastic for PBEM games. I realize that isn't a factor for you.


Haha! It would have been in 1997! I was playing a couple of PBEM games then. I recall having to write down some of the combat results and then type them into the email.

< Message edited by MXB2001 -- 12/19/2011 12:00:34 AM >

(in reply to bradk)
Post #: 37
RE: Has anyone won playing IJ? - 12/20/2011 5:44:11 PM   
MXB2001

 

Posts: 54
Joined: 12/12/2011
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

quote:

Now, its argued that historically the Allies never would have quit no matter how hard it was, but is that really the historical evidence? UK never would have quit as long as Churchill was PM, but the Conservatives lost the May (?) 1945 election and Churchill was out after Germany was defeated but before IJ was defeated. Less than a decade later, the US decided three years in Korea was enough.


Let me haul out my soapbox once more: the only, repeat only, way for the Japanese to pull out a marginal victory was *not* to do the Pearl Harbor raid. Instead, they should have invaded only the DEI at first. This would have triggered a declaration of war from Great Britain and the United States, but with much less popular support. The amazing feats of production the U.S. achieved would not have been politically possible, and the U.S. at least would have been more willing to settle for a negotiated peace.

I continue to be amazed that no one seems to include this scenario in Pacific wargames.


Yamamoto was a brilliant admiral but poor politician. He didn't think that stinging the bear would backfire the way it did. It would have required a keen understanding of the American mentality though and even though he did study in the US I doubt he came to understand them at that level.

And yeah, that would be an awesome scenario! Quarter US production (to account also for th fact that likely the emphasis would have been a Europe first strategy) and fewer units (drawn off to Europe). Nightmare for the Germans though. But that's off board ;)

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 38
RE: Has anyone won playing IJ? - 6/25/2013 12:05:22 PM   
Ranger-75


Posts: 610
Joined: 6/29/2001
From: Giant sand box
Status: offline
Old thread but some items require addressing:

I see the axis fanboys are alive and well. You Still do not understand the strategic limitations that confronted Japan and the likely US reaction had the Japanese dared to try and invade either Hawaii any part of the US west coast.

Germany first would have been completely reversed, and most of the remaining US Atlantic fleet outside of convoy escorts would have immediately been sent to the Pacific, including the Ranger and the early production CVEs. Ship production would speed have been even more You also do not realize or don't know (or don't care) that over 90% of the US shipyard capacity and ALL of the warship capacity was on the east coast or the Gulf of Mexico and 100% immune from Japanese attack. Less than 25% of the aircraft production was on the west coast, most of which was well inland.

When I see talk of invading Canton or Johnston, etc. in Jan 42, and talk of invading India while bypassing the DEI, these actions are "gaming" the game.

Japan did not go to war to capture the Hawaiian Islands, or even India. They went to war over oil and resources in Indonesia and Malaysia, etc. The US was drawn in because of the Philippines and its ability to interdict the supply routes. An inability to see the real US resolve and some ineptitude at the start guaranteed the US's implacable hatred towards Japan from that moment on.

Capt Harlock stated it pretty succinctly, Yamamoto failed to see what a surprise -accurately termed sneak- attack would do to the entire US nation. Similarly Great Britain, while much less able had no less of a resolve to avenge the early disasters in HK & Malaysia. It took them 2 & 1/2 years but they finally assembled an Eastern Fleet with 9 CVs / CVLs with over 700 aircraft which, by itself, vastly outnumbered the entire IJN carrier fleet at the time.

mxb201, US Production would not have been "quartered". What you do not realize (or again choose not to care about) is that the buildup against Germany was nearly all the the US could manage as it was, the entire Pacific campaign was conducted with what was essentially leftovers.

I don't get any enjoyment out of gaming a game to win. What I try to do, is do better each time, and try to improve on the historical result while keeping within the strategic limitations that one side or the other were subject to.

So if you want to max help yourself, and invade islands that were never part of the strategic reason why japan went to war, not to mention operations thatr were logistically impossible for the japanese to undertake let alone support, just so you can win, have fun at it. Just don't expect any professionals in my ranks to be impressed.




< Message edited by Ranger-75 -- 6/26/2013 9:18:56 AM >


_____________________________

Still playing PacWar (but no so much anymore)...

(in reply to MXB2001)
Post #: 39
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Classic (Free) Games] >> Pacific War: The Matrix Edition >> RE: Has anyone won playing IJ? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.074