Japanese Auto Victory--Anyone?

[Q-Ball]

I am wondering if anyone has come close to Japanese Auto Victory in a PBEM.

It was very difficult to acheive in WITP. In AE it seems just about impossible; taking all of Australian MIGHT be enough, but that's very difficult.

As far as VPs matter, I personally think AE is almost impossible for the Japanese player to win; played all the way through the Allies will win nearly every time. Am I right, or does anyone think differently?

[stldiver]

I did it vs Scott a few months ago.

The Spam and Saki thread page 3, It ended at the end of 42.

I should really go back and update the ships sunk file.

It took going into India to achieve, although I fail at Suva.

[Q-Ball]

I stand corrected, forgot about that one. Nice job, though I think your opponent made more than a few tactical errors; and you had a great Pearl Harbor strike.

Anyone else? I suspect that only a handful will end that way

[stldiver]

To win as Japan, your opponent has to make tactical mistakes as well as you have to capitalize on them. Although I think there is more then one way to Autovictory in PBEM.

Japan is only allowed one or two mistakes and its over while the allied player is allowed numerous.

I believe in the premis of your thread that Japanese Autovictory will be few and far between. Its a tougher road then in Witp.

That being said this was the first time I played Japan and really enjoyed the rising sun, its a more difficult side to play long term, but definatly gives you the invinciable feeling early, unlike the allied side reverse syndrone of tuck tail and pull back waiting for an opening.

All in all I constantly thank the AE team for many hours of enjoyment.

[EUBanana]

My opponent has 10k points from trashed ground units - while a fair few are colonial types and Americans, the majority of them are Chinese. Its been total butchery in China, due to supply being in the pits after all the resources were bombed out.

Assuming resource bombing in China is allowed, that seems to be points in the bag pretty much for Japan.

[traskott]

I have finished yesterday a PBEM on which the japanese player aimed to Australia for 4:1. At 6/42 we were 32.000 vs 9000. Brisbane in japanese hands. Non historical begining.

Doable? May be. Very close, undoubtely.

[AcePylut]

Ha, I'm in a PBEM and my opponent has landed in Oz in Jan '42.  Took Cooktown, assaulted Cairns (but I have troops defending Cairns.  He will have to reinforce to take it), then took that base a few hexes north of Brizzy and Marybourough (sp?).  We'll see what happens.

[Q-Ball]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

My opponent has 10k points from trashed ground units - while a fair few are colonial types and Americans, the majority of them are Chinese. Its been total butchery in China, due to supply being in the pits after all the resources were bombed out.

Assuming resource bombing in China is allowed, that seems to be points in the bag pretty much for Japan.

Japanese don't score any point for strat bombing in China; only India and OZ (and US West coast too; good luck with that one!)

[Q-Ball]

ORIGINAL: stldiver

To win as Japan, your opponent has to make tactical mistakes as well as you have to capitalize on them. Although I think there is more then one way to Autovictory in PBEM.

Japan is only allowed one or two mistakes and its over while the allied player is allowed numerous.

I believe in the premis of your thread that Japanese Autovictory will be few and far between. Its a tougher road then in Witp.

I didn't want to say, but leafing through your AAR, your opponent made several tactical mistakes, including allowing troops to get surrounded, and committing naval assets piecemeal, both of which allowed you to rack up points, and also pave the way in India. In your opponent's defense, you had a terrific Pearl Harbor attack, which put him behind in terms of surface ships.

The only way to score the points is to invade India or Australia. And I think the Allies can make a couple elementary precautions to stop that, namely:

1. Don't commit troops forward into Burma; let the Japs have it. In fact, pull the troops there out to India
2. Send US troops to OZ right away; you can easily get 2-3 divisions there by March, plus some tanks.
3. Send the AIF troops to Australia when available

[crsutton]

Yes, I agree. Against a good conservative Allied player, I think it is almost impossible. I don't much care for it anyways. Too many games were just "over" in Witp when the Japanese player shot his wad trying for an autovictory and then gave up when it was not done.
 
You might be very right about VP balance at the end the game but that is hard to tell until we see some more campaigns played out. However, VP can easily be adjusted for balance if that is the case. For example. I have always said that a lost Japanese carrier in 1942 should cost about twice as much in VP as a lost Alllied carrier in 42 and then in 1944-5 a lost Allied carrier could cost three or four times more than a lost Japanese carrier. Or, how about if the Allies lose major ground unit late in the war a big VP penalty. Historically there might have been a big political price to pay for excessive losses so late in the war.  There are many ways to adjust VP. Perhaps something as simple as if there are no Alllied ground unit is on the Japanese home islands by 9/45, then the best Allied result could be a draw, and if not by 1/46 then the best Allied result is a minor loss.
 
This sort of stuff would encourage the Japanese player to fight it out to the bitter end.  Much better than the unreal and ahistorical benefits given to the Japanese side in the games present form. I know that a true blue Japanese fanboy must be fatalistic about the pimp slapping he is going to take late in the game. However, there should always be a chance to win the game-to the end.

[Q-Ball]

The biggest VP adjustment I would recommend is in aircraft; I have always thought airplanes were worth too much. Is a sunk DD the same as 7 Nates? In VP terms it is. Aircraft should be worth less relative to ships and other stuff.

Another tweak might be to reduce points for strat bombing japan.

I like Herwin's idea for VP conditions in his New AAr, or some variation thereof

[topeverest]

Japan clearly can win Scen 1 as we have seen, but I agree there has to a confluence of the moon and stars. Poor allied strategy and bad luck on the battlefield are both required. I am curious if we will see any Jap auto victories in 43. It seems through the AAR's that the only time for the Japs to win is late 42, and the Japanese player was both very aggressive and successful. My quick read suggest Oz from darwin and perth driving to SE Oz is the common potinential win with the outlier in India. China, USA/Canada/Alaska, and USSR are not paths to Japanese victory.

Still an early read, but to me it seems fairly balanced. The Japanese players who resign as Japan after the initiative inflection will always occur. For whatever reason they do not want to play a defensive game. I am not sure any design change could make that go away.

[vettim89]

As this is modable, it might be better to give the Japanese a better chance. Right now bases that are infinitely valuable to Japan do not have very VP values. Palembang comes to mind. One would need to be very careful when doing this as it could lead to too many autovictories. Still if the japanese had played well through 1942 and tehn say one a huge carrier battle in early 1943, that should be rewarded. yes in Rl the Allies would have fought on but extending the war beyond its histroical by a year should in my mind be a Japanese victory. Also this would discourage overly passive Allied play which in RL would not have been tolerated from a political standpoint

[Kwik E Mart]

Although it may take many interations to get right, I would like to see a bidding system for victory conditions at the end of each year. Maybe the higher the bid, the fewer more PP's allocated? Maybe modded in the editor at the start of each year? Perhaps take both bids and somehow "normalize" them....there should be a penalty of PP's based on success for each year....the promises for the year weren't met, so it will take more "political will" to continue the struggle? Many possibilities....I'm sure some more imaginative than myself could come up with some good interations...

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

Although it may take many interations to get right, I would like to see a bidding system for victory conditions at the end of each year. Maybe the higher the bid, the fewer more PP's allocated? Maybe modded in the editor at the start of each year? Perhaps take both bids and somehow "normalize" them....there should be a penalty of PP's based on success for each year....the promises for the year weren't met, so it will take more "political will" to continue the struggle? Many possibilities....I'm sure some more imaginative than myself could come up with some good interations...

I do not think you can edit a game file. I could be wrong. Probably better dealt with as a HR

[jeffs]

In my mind...Japan getting nuked in 1944, 1945 or 1946 is a Japan loss. And the reality making it is easier for Japan to declare victory in early 1943 when the allies would have fought on is very bogus.

The reality is, from a historical simulation perspective...Japan faces incredibly long odds. And going out of ones way to "make it fair" leads to massive distortions that many players have problems with.

I do agree it does take away from the "gaming" side is Japan has a very tough situation....But I think that changing the core of the game is a mistake.[:(]
Of course if an allied player is willing to play a mod that is ahistorical in the name of a more balanced game I see no problem with that. [8D]
I do have a problem with fudging the historical scenario to make it "balanced"[:-]

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I am wondering if anyone has come close to Japanese Auto Victory in a PBEM.

It was very difficult to acheive in WITP. In AE it seems just about impossible; taking all of Australian MIGHT be enough, but that's very difficult.

As far as VPs matter, I personally think AE is almost impossible for the Japanese player to win; played all the way through the Allies will win nearly every time. Am I right, or does anyone think differently?

while I disagree that it was very difficult to achieve in WITP at all, I agree that it seems near impossible in AE. I´ve felt being smacked hard in my ongoing PBEM as Allied but the Japanese never got higher than 2.3:1 IIRC and are now (12/42) down below 2:1 already again and it seems that´s constantly going down from now on.

As in WITP, the big chance I see for the Japanese is destroying large Allied land units until the end of 42. If you get stalled, that´s it IMO.

[Bogo Mil]

ORIGINAL: vettim89
As this is modable, it might be better to give the Japanese a better chance. Right now bases that are infinitely valuable to Japan do not have very VP values. Palembang comes to mind.

I don't think so. Palembang is vital for Japan, as you wrote. Taking it is usual, if they lose it, they lost the war. There is no need to back this up with VPs.

But there are other bases which should provide more VPs - Bases which were much more valuable or otherwise important (politically, psychologically) in reality than in the game. Yenan comes to mind, Alaska, maybe the USSR.

[Q-Ball]

ORIGINAL: jeffs
I do agree it does take away from the "gaming" side is Japan has a very tough situation....But I think that changing the core of the game is a mistake.[:(]
Of course if an allied player is willing to play a mod that is ahistorical in the name of a more balanced game I see no problem with that. [8D]
I do have a problem with fudging the historical scenario to make it "balanced"[:-]

I think we make the distinction between "Winning on VP Points", vs. "Winning the War", and the game should not be unbalanced so that Japan can "Win the War". Historically of course, the Japanese loss was inevitable. I don't think anyone would argue otherwise.

The point is to do BETTER than history.

I think you understand though, after all, if the bar for "Winning the Game" was "Winning the war", it would be tough to find opponents to play Japan, or the Confederacy, or Nazi Germany in Russia, or any number of nations that were ultimately doomed.

My point: Japan should have a lower bar for "Winning the Game", without changing the game balance

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
Japanese don't score any point for strat bombing in China; only India and OZ (and US West coast too; good luck with that one!)

No, but they get points for the mass slaughter of hundreds of Chinese infantry squads when the supply runs out...