el cid again
This report is made in the context of many test games, including one in which I am forced by technical necessity to examine the details of both sides every (game) day.
It is surprising, but I find I have gone from a harsh critic of the entire concept
to somewhere between toleration and a fan. WHEN the number of points available is appropriately set, AND WHEN players actually use them as they should, the kinds of constraints they impose on player choices are realistic and even fun.
Disclaimer: PP are probably poorly named. One suggestion which I like is to consider them to be "Staff Planning Points." I think that better describes the intended concept.
For context, I will give some values:
Stock Scenario 1 gives both sides 50 pp per day; Japan starts with 500; the Allies start with 100.
Strictly Historical RHS Scenarios give Japan 1000 per day, and just like every day, it starts with 1000. The Allies get 1500 per day, but they only start with 500. That is because the Allies have many more units and officers needing pp; but they start the game at less than wartime readiness.
Japan Enhanced RHS Scenarios give Japan 1500 per day, but it gets a one time bonus to start at 2000. The Allies remain at 1500 per day and 500 to start.
Over time, in response to player feedback and problems indicated by testing,
we have tried values as low as 300 per day, and as high as 3000. It was always clear that the stock values of 50 per day more or less render realistic play impossible. With such values, it is impossible to wait long enough to actually rationalize commands when anything important needs to be changed. It is barely possible to assign appropriate commanders. On the other hand, too many points appear to be able to crash a game! As well, too many points mean players are never constrained in how many units can change commands; everything you want to do is always instant and painless.
I am surprised to report that IF you consistently use political points to "rationalize commands" such that units in fact attacking with a given headquarters actually report to it, and if you also replace commanders when appropriate, you never have more than two days of points in inventory as Japan nor four days as the Allies (in the rare case you didn't use any). As well, on most days, you have only a handful left at the end of the day as Japan, and perhaps a few hundred as the Allies. Both of these comments apply if you NEVER let the Russians use any. If the Russians use any, it tends to limit your options as the Allies. I am not sure that is ideal, but it is tolerable for a day or so.
More surprising still, IF you use pp for both unit command and to insure good leaders in ALL the units in EVERY attack, your forces are more effective. In particular when in terrain difficult to achieve odds in (major urban hexes, mountains, jungle, etc).
I now believe the concept of pp was well formed. The principle problem in implementation was that not enough were made available. For that reason, players tend to ignore them.
< Message edited by el cid again -- 9/22/2016 11:38:49 PM >