Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/20/2019 4:51:42 PM   
LLT0407

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 11/20/2019
From: Chicago Ill
Status: offline
One thing I have never agreed with is ANY USA in the burma/malaya/dei especially at the beginning of the war or running and hiding after Pearl Harbor.. the United States would have NEVER done that... This is gaming the game..

I commend all the players that do not do that!!
Post #: 1
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/20/2019 5:26:29 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 3890
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline
Preach it, brother!

(in reply to LLT0407)
Post #: 2
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/20/2019 5:41:21 PM   
USSAmerica


Posts: 17527
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Status: online


_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me


Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 3
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/20/2019 6:05:34 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2052
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: USSAmerica



Maybe USA won't run, but USSAmerica certainly will

(in reply to USSAmerica)
Post #: 4
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/20/2019 6:35:50 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7075
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: LLT0407

One thing I have never agreed with is ANY USA in the burma/malaya/dei especially at the beginning of the war or running and hiding after Pearl Harbor.. the United States would have NEVER done that... This is gaming the game..

I commend all the players that do not do that!!



Obviously doesn't understand that it's a GAME not an attempt to recreate history.

If it was an attempt to recreate history, the Japanese side would NOT have been beefed up to make it more viable as a side to play in a GAME.

This beefing up allows for Japan to expand way beyond historical limits in places like India and Australia and completely conquer China.

All of this is what leads Allied side players to deploy American units to Burma and retreat in the face of overwhelming superiority to preserve as much force as possible.

Making accusations against Allied side players of 'gaming the game' because they are reacting to the capabilities of the overpowered Japanese side shows how little you understand the Game.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to LLT0407)
Post #: 5
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/20/2019 6:40:56 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 3890
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline
In the WIiTP:AE calendar , the Ichi-Go operation starts on 7 December 1941.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 6
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/20/2019 6:51:01 PM   
BillBrown


Posts: 2300
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: LLT0407

One thing I have never agreed with is ANY USA in the burma/malaya/dei especially at the beginning of the war or running and hiding after Pearl Harbor.. the United States would have NEVER done that... This is gaming the game..

I commend all the players that do not do that!!



Obviously doesn't understand that it's a GAME not an attempt to recreate history.

If it was an attempt to recreate history, the Japanese side would NOT have been beefed up to make it more viable as a side to play in a GAME.

This beefing up allows for Japan to expand way beyond historical limits in places like India and Australia and completely conquer China.

All of this is what leads Allied side players to deploy American units to Burma and retreat in the face of overwhelming superiority to preserve as much force as possible.

Making accusations against Allied side players of 'gaming the game' because they are reacting to the capabilities of the overpowered Japanese side shows how little you understand the Game.


This is certainly one of the things that Hans and I agree on. If a Japanese player wants the Allies to do what they did in the real war, then Japan needs to do the same, like lose 4 CVs at Midway.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 7
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/20/2019 6:54:20 PM   
joliverlay

 

Posts: 615
Joined: 1/28/2003
Status: offline
Please recall that the pilot losses for Japan at Pearl Harbor and Coral Sea exceeded their new pilot training output for more than a year. IF I recall the original game had historical pilot replacements for Japan, and that was quickly changed because so few would actually play the game as Japan if it was historical. So it is unfair (BS?) to characterize any Allied response to ahistorical Japanese pilot and aircraft replacements as being gamey or wrong. If you want the Allied to live with the historical constraints, the Japanese player should do so as well, and it has been pretty much decided almost no one would play the Japanese side in such a game. The Japanese position in the game as done is so totally beyond historical, a comparison between the actual US response in history a completely different game situation is an applies and oranges comparison. Had Japan had much more military capability than they actually did, it is quite possible the US would have responded quite differently than it did in any number of ways, including not being nearly as surprised at Pearl Harbor or Clark Field.

(in reply to LLT0407)
Post #: 8
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/20/2019 6:58:06 PM   
LLT0407

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 11/20/2019
From: Chicago Ill
Status: offline
first of all do not say I do not know the game... This is an observation..

I just think it is ridiculous.. at least I know the buddy I know that played from online games and when I played the allies vs him I agreed to have no usa in india before 44.. and of course you would not just be stupid with your cv's

I know 2 guys that played against scot donovan was aggressive and he lost some cv's near rabaul and dei..
I will remember him saying on on the aar something like it is early 42 but it feels like 44 lol..

and I have played the allies.. you do not need to bring usa over to india..suck it up



< Message edited by LLT0407 -- 11/20/2019 7:00:04 PM >

(in reply to BillBrown)
Post #: 9
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/20/2019 7:41:52 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2052
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
So many "would have NEVER done that" to track... Like coordinating IJA and IJN, Chinese communists and Kuomintang, changing Japanese naval doctrine wrt escorts and sub usage, training Japanese ASW and fighter pilots from the get go, plane R&D without all the mishaps, no garrisons on Chinese road hexes. And the list goes on...

Play the game like you like, don't tell others to play the particular way. This is for PBEM terms negotiations

(in reply to LLT0407)
Post #: 10
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/20/2019 8:02:27 PM   
RogerJNeilson


Posts: 1194
Joined: 4/12/2012
From: Bedlington, Northumberland, UK
Status: offline
Fee foe fi fum, do I smell a Troll somewhere?

Roger

_____________________________

An unplanned dynasty: Roger Neilson, Roger Neilson 11, Roger Neilson 3 previous posts 898+1515 + 1126 = 3539.....Currently in 1945 of my sole surviving PBEM which has been running since the game came out.

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 11
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/20/2019 8:22:11 PM   
obvert


Posts: 13279
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
@OP

Who ... cares?

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to RogerJNeilson)
Post #: 12
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/20/2019 11:45:15 PM   
LLT0407

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 11/20/2019
From: Chicago Ill
Status: offline
you are actually right about that.. one of my main house rules with US in India

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 13
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 12:03:59 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 5173
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

you are actually right about that.. one of my main house rules with US in India



Well I did check to see if you'd want to try the Big B Mod where you'll also be blessed with 4 years of real stalemate in China and American torpedoes that lose some of their impotence considerably earlier than "the vanilla game" allows. Apparently not

(in reply to LLT0407)
Post #: 14
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 2:27:49 AM   
dasboot1960


Posts: 328
Joined: 8/2/2009
From: St Augustine, Florida
Status: offline
So here I am, a less experienced player, but very familiar with history. I see all this talk of house rules, and I must ask. Does one side benefit more with NO house rules? I accept as a given that that the IJ forces in Manchuria shouldn't be able to waltz off in to China without paying admin costs. I'm just getting to restart as IJ in a game where opponent found a restart more viable than continuation. (his first game, hats off, Kelly!). I have asked him to allow PDU on this time, but also have imposed 'no IJ bombing of China industry till 1944'. I did bomb last time, but I didn't gang it up, and really have no idea of the overall effect outside of realizing the Chinese must have no hope of repairing any of that damage early on.

So given the general house rules I see around, are they driven by game balance or some desire for a more 'historical' play through? Who thinks what?


_____________________________

Down like a CLOWN!

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 15
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 5:10:51 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 1900
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Sydney
Status: offline
Just as a matter of interest, Mr Francillon says total build numbers of the significant IJN ship-board strike aircraft were (prototypes, training models and trials aircraft omitted where identified):

D3A Val - 1486
B5N Kate - 1146 (This figure includes the pre-war -1 models that had been replaced by -2 before 7 December 41)

D4Y Judy - 2033 (Includes some completed as night fighters)
B6N Jill - 1264

B7A2 Grace - 104 - and only flown by two Kokutais.

When I finished my recent ironman 3 campaign the IJN had in pools, plus "used so far" (so whatever arrived for free would need to be added, less any pre-war losses)

Vals - 504 (because the Judy and arrives on time and replaces it)

Kates - 376 (and only about 80 used, because the Jill arrives on time)

Judys - 9125 (and about 200 night fighter types)

Jills - 2759

Graces - 6351

Does a human player running the IJ economy well produce those sort of numbers (in the order of a 300% improvement over historical)?

Those numbers are in April 1947 with everything west of Tokyo occupied by the "UN", and bombing probably minimised IJ airframe production in about September 46.


_____________________________

"You may find that having is not so nearly pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
- Cdr Spock


Ian R

(in reply to dasboot1960)
Post #: 16
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 5:43:09 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8989
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
"If I were King …"

The ability for the player to control the IJ economy allows you to play the "king" role. It is great fun. IRL, the IJ was incredibly inefficient for a large number of reasons and the player can sweep all that aside. Without this little "treasure trove" there simply wouldn't be a game.

Hindsight favors the allies more than the IJ I believe. All the IJ gets from hindsight that he can't possibly survive the deluge of 45 without huge early successes but IRL the IJ already knew that. What kept the war going until '45 was two fold: the allied primary goal of Europe, and then the unknown of IJ forces. Nimitz wasn't positive that the IJ could NOT replace the Midway losses: players know that as absolute fact. Hindsight removes this unknown and its a big deal in the game.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 17
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 10:00:55 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 5659
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dasboot1960

... Does one side benefit more with NO house rules? ...


Yes, the better player.

Alfred

(in reply to dasboot1960)
Post #: 18
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 10:06:37 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 5659
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

... What kept the war going until '45 was two fold: the allied primary goal of Europe, and then the unknown of IJ forces. Nimitz wasn't positive that the IJ could NOT replace the Midway losses: players know that as absolute fact. Hindsight removes this unknown and its a big deal in the game.


The third factor is the Allied political concern for domestic public opinion which forced methodical operations aimed t minimising Allied casualties. A consideration which many players comp0letely disregard.

Alfred

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 19
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 11:36:32 AM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7075
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: online
What about the hindsight of the Japanese player KNOWING how weak the Allies are everywhere and how possible it is to succeed with an invasion of Australia and or New Zealand, something the IJA would never have agreed to?

What about the hindsight of the Japanese player KNOWING the Allies have no fighters in Australia allowing for an early strategic bombing campaign to run up victory points?

What about the 'having nothing to do with hindsight' knowledge of the Japanese player that the game structure allows for China to be completely conquered with the right concentration of force?

All I am saying here is that the 'hindsight' door swings both ways and familiarity with what the game structure does and doesn't allow counts for just as much, if not more than hindsight.

The GAME simply has far too many variables for it to ever be capable of recreating history.

< Message edited by HansBolter -- 11/21/2019 11:38:25 AM >


_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 20
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 1:26:58 PM   
Macclan5


Posts: 959
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LLT0407

One thing I have never agreed with is ANY USA in the burma/malaya/dei especially at the beginning of the war or running and hiding after Pearl Harbor.. the United States would have NEVER done that... This is gaming the game..

I commend all the players that do not do that!!



Inflammatory post.

Read history. Look up Claire Lee Chennault - where he operated - what his career was.

I do not think this is worthy of debate

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to LLT0407)
Post #: 21
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 1:29:01 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 3890
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

I have seen things you people wouldn't believe. Sherman tanks manufactured in Calcutta slums. Botanko Heavy Arty Regiment traversing the Kokoda Track. Glittering B-29s pounding enemy trenches at 100 feet. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 22
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 1:41:59 PM   
Buckrock

 

Posts: 494
Joined: 3/16/2012
From: Not all there
Status: offline
Yaab, I think the game is making you Batty.

_____________________________

This was the only sig line I could think of.

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 23
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 2:18:46 PM   
Kursk1943


Posts: 315
Joined: 3/15/2014
From: Bavaria in Southern Germany
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab


I have seen things you people wouldn't believe. Sherman tanks manufactured in Calcutta slums. Botanko Heavy Arty Regiment traversing the Kokoda Track. Glittering B-29s pounding enemy trenches at 100 feet. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.


Sounds like the famous last words of Rutger Hauer in "Blade Runner".

< Message edited by Kursk1943 -- 11/21/2019 2:19:19 PM >

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 24
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 3:20:44 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 13851
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: online
If you are the Allied player you are nuts if you don't send engineers to the IO. Besides them, much of your infantry will be sitting on it's hands doing nothing because you won't have the infrastructure available to land them somewhere useful and support them. Finally, you need to send some USAAF there and at some point USN air (to operate off of UK carriers. Domestic resistance will melt away when you start having victories and make some aces. My rule is no USMC (land or air) in the IO. If I'm going to put in the trouble to play this game I am NOT going to make the same mistakes as were made historically. Anything else is BS. Same for the Japanese side. I will determine what is possible and plan from there. If you want to jo to the ugliest chick you can think of go right ahead. I'll go with Sophia Loren.

(in reply to Kursk1943)
Post #: 25
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 3:42:27 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24195
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab


I have seen things you people wouldn't believe. Sherman tanks manufactured in Calcutta slums. Botanko Heavy Arty Regiment traversing the Kokoda Track. Glittering B-29s pounding enemy trenches at 100 feet. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.



_____________________________


(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 26
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/21/2019 4:54:47 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 5867
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
quote:

The ability for the player to control the IJ economy allows you to play the "king" role. It is great fun. IRL, the IJ was incredibly inefficient for a large number of reasons and the player can sweep all that aside. Without this little "treasure trove" there simply wouldn't be a game.


Nicely said Pax. Its the only reason to play Japan.

I'd like to add that there are certain things that may make it even more difficult for a Allied player. First off, it he/she is the weaker player. Second, if playing a mod or scenario that favors Japan. Last but not least is a non-historical start. That's correct, and how I look at it. Its not so much what Japan can or can't destroy with a non-historical start, it that she gains a much better position to begin the war with the 'magic move'. So with that said I intend my games (if ever I do get to PBEM) to be Scen1 historical start. JMHO. YMMV.

As for whether someone plays a game where they run at start (a Sir Robbin) or stands and fight, I couldn't care less. Both have pluses and minuses.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 27
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/22/2019 6:17:15 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 1873
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline
Yaab: Good one, my friend. Trying not to LOL in an open office environment.

And, like everyone else so far, let me state that the original premise of this thread is way off base. This is a game and I'll send my forces where I want. That said, if your PBEM opponent agrees to such restrictions, then have fun.

Cheers,
CB

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 28
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/22/2019 1:53:47 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12711
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Just as a matter of interest, Mr Francillon says total build numbers of the significant IJN ship-board strike aircraft were (prototypes, training models and trials aircraft omitted where identified):

D3A Val - 1486
B5N Kate - 1146 (This figure includes the pre-war -1 models that had been replaced by -2 before 7 December 41)

D4Y Judy - 2033 (Includes some completed as night fighters)
B6N Jill - 1264

B7A2 Grace - 104 - and only flown by two Kokutais.

When I finished my recent ironman 3 campaign the IJN had in pools, plus "used so far" (so whatever arrived for free would need to be added, less any pre-war losses)

Vals - 504 (because the Judy and arrives on time and replaces it)

Kates - 376 (and only about 80 used, because the Jill arrives on time)

Judys - 9125 (and about 200 night fighter types)

Jills - 2759

Graces - 6351

Does a human player running the IJ economy well produce those sort of numbers (in the order of a 300% improvement over historical)?

Those numbers are in April 1947 with everything west of Tokyo occupied by the "UN", and bombing probably minimised IJ airframe production in about September 46.



whenever I've played the IJ into late years (PBEM) my total output of aircraft was smaller than real life output. Difference is of course what I was building but total number of aircraft never came close to real life numbers. What gives pumping out tens of tousands of aircraft when your pilot pool is already empty in 42 if you use those pool pilots in training units. If you get some 1500 Navy pilots a year, why building 5000 IJN aircraft/year. It's all about the pilots as the Japanese. When the pool is empty, it's empty. 15,000 Judies and Graces would need the pilot output of 10 years in a war/game that lasts 4 or 5 at best. I'm just leaving ground losses and surviving pilots aside.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 11/22/2019 1:55:45 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 29
RE: USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS - 11/22/2019 3:43:34 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1708
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
Pretty funny using AI production numbers in a "phantasy" mod... don´t ya know the AI makes planes from thin air? Also while we are at Blade Runner can not someone make a SF mod ? There the Japanese could have real "death stars" and tie fighters as well some obsolete stuff like nuclear attack subs and Leo 2A6 tanks

However IIRC when I opened the Japanese side in a past AI game vs. them I found 10000 or so fighters in their pool (most of them not the latest)..

One of the bigger problems with the game I mean historic scen1 is still the overabundance of (merchant, cargo) shipping even for the Allies (in 42 and up to end of 1943 this was not the case in real life for the Allies - they also could not build such massive bases like in the game in this time frame, later yes, cause they lacked supplies. Gosh! Can this be true Allies lacked shipping and supplies, unheard of in the game). Here is meant mostly "special" supplies like aircraft spare parts etc. not food, infantry ammo, water and fuel. I read about this a while ago, IIRC from official US source.

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 11/22/2019 4:03:26 PM >

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> USA hides or Runs to India.. what BS Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
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

0.199