Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by Shark7 »

The whole opponents argument is based on the fact that who-ever plays the Japanese side goes in with the full knowledge that in the end they have a 99% chance of losing no matter how well they play. That is why it is hard to find a Japanese opponent...most people play games to WIN, not to 'see if I can do better than RL.' I have a feeling your average Joe player is going to play Allies most of the time because they want to win the game. It is simple human nature.

Personally I always play as Japan because I love a challenge...and surviving to 8-45 as Japan in this game is a massive challenge. [8D]
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 3905
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by bigred »

ORIGINAL: crsutton

ORIGINAL: ADB123

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

The OP is right, at least for Scenario Two with production on.  The Allies may be limited to what was historically available, but Japan certainly isn't.  It's a whacky world where the Allies are always short on aircraft.  If that's limited to Scenario Two, then those of us who choose Scenario Two don't exactly have a basis to complain.  But if that's the same thing in Scenario One, then it probably needs tweaking so that one side doesn't have unlimited aircraft and the other very limited.

There's nothing to stop the Japanese player from producing huge numbers of AC in Scenario 1, other than the usual constraints on Fuel, Resources, Supply, Oil and so on. It's easy to mess up badly and end up with fewer planes than the Allies (as I found out in my first Japanese pbem). But for someone who pays proper attention to Japanese Production it ought to be possible to darken the skies over most of the Pacific with Japanese planes by the end of 1942.

That said, it is also possible in the same time period to build up a sizeable reserve of many Allied planes (except for US bombers) if one doesn't attempt hopeless battles of attrition in 1942.

Perhaps in scen #1 but I doubt it. In scen #2 you can forget it. I have been killing Viperpol's aircraft at a 3-2 clip since day one and still have virtually no planes of any type in my pools. 1/44 (Well, I do have a comfortable supply of whiraways..[8|]) It depends on the type of opponent. An aggressive Japanese player can push you until you have to fight and drain your pools. Look at Greyjoys AAR vs Rader where Rader has admitted that he is willing to lose any number of replaceable Japanese aircraft in order to suck Greyjoy's pools down. And, it is working. I have to admit that it is a bit out of whack. The biggest issue is not the numbers but that the Allies get very little recourse when a crisis occurs and you need help. I would gladly turn off the Atom bomb program (saving a cool two billion dollars and millions of man hours) so that I could build another 100 P38s per month in 1943.

The problem is giving the Japanese player total control of production and PDUs. I wish there is was a middle ground where there was some control but not total. Perhaps high PP costs for halting production on certain ships like the super BBs or the Shinano. Or PPs costs for advancing research or ignoring certain types of planes.
RED Highlight....I suspect FatR is using this tactic against me also.
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
User avatar
Mynok
Posts: 12108
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2002 12:12 am
Contact:

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by Mynok »


PDU off eliminates Japan's production control advantage. They can still do better than history (which is fine for gaming fun) but not as much as in the other scenarios LoBaron mentioned.
"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown
User avatar
ilovestrategy
Posts: 3611
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 8:41 pm
Location: San Diego
Contact:

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by ilovestrategy »

Balance problems have been an issue with every kind of player vs. player computer game since the invention of the modem.
After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!
Image
mike scholl 1
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:20 pm

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by mike scholl 1 »

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

To those responding to my posts, thank you ever so much for demonstrating your inability to grasp the concept of equity.
" comprehending reality for what it is!"

The reality was that the "War in the Pacific" was NEVER "equal". Japan started with the advantages of surprise, good preparation, and the refusal of her opponants to take her abilities seriously. Then the Allies countered with a massive mobilization of their incredably superior military and economic capabilities and eventually crushed her.
aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by aztez »

Few points... First it is harsh to say that EVERY japanese player will quit before 1944's or such.

Definately NOT the case. I can name few of them erstad, katsuragi (aka Warspite) and FDRLincoln (I wonder where he is nowdays).

It is all about personalities and communication simple as that. The game can be fun and rewarding to both sides.

I'am about to start my first japanese game too and for bad or worse will stick it out until the end. That is the promise I made to my opponent.

Also, FatR states that japanese cannot win the war. Well, maybe in terms of territory but in terms of points that is definately doable.

To say that allied will crush japanese easily is bullocks. Maybe if you get lucky few times nailing enemy fleets early but if not than whole diffrent ball game.

Especially vs experienced opponent. I'am enjoying the challenge and once the games I got ongoing end will definately want an rematch againts those players I'am playing againts.

As for the allied production. I do feel some modifications should be allowed maybe via PP but nothing dramatic is needed.


User avatar
USSAmerica
Posts: 19198
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 4:32 am
Location: Graham, NC, USA
Contact:

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by USSAmerica »

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

To those responding to my posts, thank you ever so much for demonstrating your inability to grasp the concept of equity.


"my inability to choose good opponents".........is facilitated by the game's structure which encourages the proliferation of bad opponents. Try extracting your head from your nether reagion and comprehending reality for what it is!

[8|]

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Image
Artwork by The Amazing Dixie
User avatar
AW1Steve
Posts: 14518
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:32 am
Location: Mordor Illlinois

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by AW1Steve »

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

To those responding to my posts, thank you ever so much for demonstrating your inability to grasp the concept of equity.


"my inability to choose good opponents".........is facilitated by the game's structure which encourages the proliferation of bad opponents. Try extracting your head from your nether reagion and comprehending reality for what it is!


Hans there is no such thing in the game, as in life, as equality. (Equity is a financial term and probably not correct here). The Axis have an overwhelming advantage in the begining , the Allies in the end. The mark of a good player is what he does when the odds are against him. It's a character thing , not a number thing. The designers try to make this as accurrate as they can , adjust where wrong, while balancing playability. In the end, it's the players, not the game that make the diference.

I would take it as a personal favor if everyone would restrain themselves from personal attacks. (This is not directed just at you Hans, but everone. Again, it's about people, not electrons). [:)]
User avatar
AW1Steve
Posts: 14518
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:32 am
Location: Mordor Illlinois

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by AW1Steve »

ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy

Balance problems have been an issue with every kind of player vs. player computer game since the invention of the modem.
[&o][&o][&o]
User avatar
AW1Steve
Posts: 14518
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:32 am
Location: Mordor Illlinois

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by AW1Steve »

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1
ORIGINAL: HansBolter

To those responding to my posts, thank you ever so much for demonstrating your inability to grasp the concept of equity.
" comprehending reality for what it is!"

The reality was that the "War in the Pacific" was NEVER "equal". Japan started with the advantages of surprise, good preparation, and the refusal of her opponants to take her abilities seriously. Then the Allies countered with a massive mobilization of their incredably superior military and economic capabilities and eventually crushed her.
Seriously , I agree 100%. There's just no smiley for "I'm with him". Only kidding about the "stupid" part Mike. [:D]
User avatar
Nikademus
Posts: 22517
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Alien spacecraft

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by Nikademus »

ORIGINAL: Shark7

The whole opponents argument is based on the fact that who-ever plays the Japanese side goes in with the full knowledge that in the end they have a 99% chance of losing no matter how well they play. That is why it is hard to find a Japanese opponent...most people play games to WIN, not to 'see if I can do better than RL.' I have a feeling your average Joe player is going to play Allies most of the time because they want to win the game. It is simple human nature.

Personally I always play as Japan because I love a challenge...and surviving to 8-45 as Japan in this game is a massive challenge. [8D]

Its also a given that a game as huge as this will see the bulk of PBEM games end well before the final turn. Bombing the Reich and other "mega" games including the monster board games have similar issues. Situations change, people's schedules change, some lose interest...and yes, some do quit when things don't go their way.....thats human nature. As Shark pointed out....most people play games to win. Thats why there are far more Allied players looking for Japan opponents than the other way around.
Alpha77
Posts: 2149
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2010 7:38 am

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by Alpha77 »

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

I believe some of the imbalance in regards to Allied players over Jap players lays in the complexion of the game more than anything else.


Well no miracle, at least for me. Guess Japan is even MORE time consuming than the allied side (cause of the issue discussed here, they need to manage their industry+production). Not that Japan is seen on the losing side, that should not distract players. Proof: Many US+GB players play the "evil" and losing side Germany in other games. [:D]


But I don´t understand the issue really cause if you want a more historic feel play scen 1. If you want a stronger Jap play scen 2 [&:]
mike scholl 1
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:20 pm

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by mike scholl 1 »

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1
The reality was that the "War in the Pacific" was NEVER "equal". Japan started with the advantages of surprise, good preparation, and the refusal of her opponants to take her abilities seriously. Then the Allies countered with a massive mobilization of their incredably superior military and economic capabilities and eventually crushed her.
Seriously , I agree 100%. There's just no smiley for "I'm with him". Only kidding about the "stupid" part Mike. [:D]


No offense taken. I just wish more players would realize the reality of history. You can make a game about the "War in the Pacific", but you cannot make it an equal struggle and still have it be about the War in the Pacific.
User avatar
Blackhorse
Posts: 1415
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Eastern US

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by Blackhorse »

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

I believe some of the imbalance in regards to Allied players over Jap players lays in the complexion of the game more than anything else.


Well no miracle, at least for me. Guess Japan is even MORE time consuming than the allied side (cause of the issue discussed here, they need to manage their industry+production). Not that Japan is seen on the losing side, that should not distract players. Proof: Many US+GB players play the "evil" and losing side Germany in other games. [:D]


But I don´t understand the issue really cause if you want a more historic feel play scen 1. If you want a stronger Jap play scen 2 [&:]

I don't have any beef with the Japan-on-steriods variants like Scenario #2, or Reluctant Admiral. 'Cause if I did have a beef, I'd write my own scenario, and I haven't, so I don't.

But if I did have a beef, it would be that the plussed-up Japan scenarios all give Japan lots of additional goodies from the get-go, precisely when they don't actually need them to keep the allies on the run.

I'd be interested, as an allied player, to play a plausible scenario when Japan's shiny new reinforcements roll in in late '42 and '43, allowing a longer stretch of "balanced" play. But I'm not interested enough to actually research and design it myself.
[;)]
WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1240
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by rader »

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse

I don't have any beef with the Japan-on-steriods variants like Scenario #2, or Reluctant Admiral. 'Cause if I did have a beef, I'd write my own scenario, and I haven't, so I don't.

But if I did have a beef, it would be that the plussed-up Japan scenarios all give Japan lots of additional goodies from the get-go, precisely when they don't actually need them to keep the allies on the run.

I'd be interested, as an allied player, to play a plausible scenario when Japan's shiny new reinforcements roll in in late '42 and '43, allowing a longer stretch of "balanced" play. But I'm not interested enough to actually research and design it myself.
[;)]

I think you're right about this. I'm planning to make a scenario when I get around to it, and it would be a scenario 2 variant but with Japan's LCUs coming in later, like in late 1943 to early 1944. Also want to give them the other Yamatos in case anyone is crazy enough to build them... plus some fun Alaska type BCs and more CAs to build. Of course, it's fantasy land, but that's sort of the point [:'(]
User avatar
LoBaron
Posts: 4775
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by LoBaron »

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1
The reality was that the "War in the Pacific" was NEVER "equal". Japan started with the advantages of surprise, good preparation, and the refusal of her opponants to take her abilities seriously. Then the Allies countered with a massive mobilization of their incredably superior military and economic capabilities and eventually crushed her.
Seriously , I agree 100%. There's just no smiley for "I'm with him". Only kidding about the "stupid" part Mike. [:D]


No offense taken. I just wish more players would realize the reality of history. You can make a game about the "War in the Pacific", but you cannot make it an equal struggle and still have it be about the War in the Pacific.

Well, you can, but then it could lead to serious confusions about what you are actually playing, which further leads to the creation of this thread. [:D]
Image
mike scholl 1
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:20 pm

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by mike scholl 1 »

ORIGINAL: LoBaron
ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve



Seriously , I agree 100%. There's just no smiley for "I'm with him". Only kidding about the "stupid" part Mike. [:D]


No offense taken. I just wish more players would realize the reality of history. You can make a game about the "War in the Pacific", but you cannot make it an equal struggle and still have it be about the War in the Pacific.

Well, you can,

NOT REALLY.., "Lo". The second you make it "equal", it's ceased to be the War in the Pacific and become some badly designed joke... You can CALL a pile of horse droppings "mercedes"---but that doesn't make it a car. [:D]
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by PaxMondo »

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: LoBaron
ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1





No offense taken. I just wish more players would realize the reality of history. You can make a game about the "War in the Pacific", but you cannot make it an equal struggle and still have it be about the War in the Pacific.

Well, you can,

NOT REALLY.., "Lo". The second you make it "equal", it's ceased to be the War in the Pacific and become some badly designed joke... You can CALL a pile of horse droppings "mercedes"---but that doesn't make it a car. [:D]
Mike, just wanted to say that while sometimes in the past I have not agreed with you, this is specific instance where I agree with you 100%. In particular your first statement above. Good assessment and accurate by my perspective. Thanks.
Pax
mike scholl 1
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:20 pm

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by mike scholl 1 »

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
Mike, just wanted to say that while sometimes in the past I have not agreed with you, this is specific instance where I agree with you 100%. In particular your first statement above. Good assessment and accurate by my perspective. Thanks.


PAX. Men of good will (and good sense) are not required to agree all the time..., just to respect and consider one another's positions. Personally, I think I'm always right..., but I'm smart enough to know I might be mistaken.
User avatar
LoBaron
Posts: 4775
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

RE: Unable to fight--NO Aircraft......

Post by LoBaron »

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: LoBaron



Well, you can,

NOT REALLY.., "Lo". The second you make it "equal", it's ceased to be the War in the Pacific and become some badly designed joke... You can CALL a pile of horse droppings "mercedes"---but that doesn't make it a car. [:D]
Mike, just wanted to say that while sometimes in the past I have not agreed with you, this is specific instance where I agree with you 100%. In particular your first statement above. Good assessment and accurate by my perspective. Thanks.

Well, while a modified scenario might give one or the other individual the opportunity to outperform himself
with exceptionally bold comparisions, its still utilizes the diplomatic status and the geographical position enabling you
to call it War in the Pacific.

And Mike, I have always been under the impression that a mercedes at least resembles a...oh ok, lets skip that, I don´t know what you are driving... [:D]
Image
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”