From: Alien spacecraft
The issue of "gameyness" is pretty big to me as I don't like the idea of doing things, even though allowed by the game engine, that would not have been feasible or reasonable in real life. Most issues of gamey tactics center around the Japanese player using the * TFs and paratroopers to exploit weaknesses in the Allied defenses. These weaknesses would not have necessarily been known by the Japanese at the start of the war, but in the game, we are gifted with absolute knowledge of the oppossing side's initial deployment. As a result, many players institue house rules to limit such exploitation.
However, to my knowledge, there has been little discussion of the potential gamey tactics the Allied player may use as a result of his knowledge of the Japanese initial deployment. For example, the Allied player knows that the Japanese start with a TF loaded up with troops prepped for Miri. As a result, he can anticipate the probable invasion of Miri taking place on or about Dec 10 and send Force Z (or the more-feared Boise) to intercept. This is just one of many potential cases. My point is, the Allied player can almost perfectly predict where the Japanese will land in the first few days based on his knowledge of the Japanese LCUs prepped for specific objectives. To counter this, all the Japanese player can do is change objectives (and waste those valuable prep points), delay invasions and/or land unprepped troops on alternate objectives.
Any thoughts? House rule suggestions?
Best way to get around issues like this is to pick your opponents carefully to ensure that the "kind" of game you want to play is in sync. Some players prefer no holds barred type games where there are few to no house rules whilst others want a game that makes them feel more like they are playing closer to history. It's a thorny topic and good communication and flexability after game start (if an issue comes up) is essential.
Ultimatley the game is indeed a game and there's no way to prevent some tactics that while perfectly valid can be seen as benefiting from hindsight if not gamey. Since Japan starts the game on the offensive, and because well.....its JAPAN.....much of the attention on gameyness and hindsight gets focused on the Player one side but if anything, Player 2 has the better benefit as they can afford to make mistakes.....player one can't. Its the price we pay for virtual complete and instant control...the staple and hallmark of Grigsby style Operational games. The contrast to real life military ops has been made particularily stark to me in recent days as i'm reading the latest Battle of Britian book, which actually is more a book about the Allies war against Germany up too and including the Battle of Britian. Its supposed to be an air book but goes into great detail on the Blitzkreig into France and really helps explain why an army as massive and potentially powerful as France's seemed to do virtually NOTHING even during the most critical and vulnerable moments of Gremany's armored offensive. Were this battle to play out using WitP AE or stock..........such paralysis that was caused by poor communiations, top heavy chains of command and lack of intel would be non-existant and the Germans would never reach the channel....at least not without alot more delays and bloody losses.
Multi day turns help reduce this Hand of God type command ability. I recommend 2 days as the optimal balance. If you REALLY want a challenge do 3 day turns. Most frown severely at 3 days, but I played a 3day campaign back in Stock days......it was difficult but it WAS dooable and i never had a WitP game go faster (in real time terms) Within several weeks myself and my opponent were in the third quarter of 1942. As most players know.....most Grand Campaign games, due to size and scope, rarely get past 1942 before someone resigns. 1943 is more rare.......44 still more. VERY FEW have actually completed a full PBEM grand campaign from start to finish (1941-45) You can probably count them on one hand (1 finger per pair of players)
< Message edited by Nikademus -- 6/3/2011 4:25:43 PM >