FeurerKrieg
Posts: 3397
Joined: 6/15/2005 From: Denver, CO Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: niceguy2005 What I find interesting are all the posts about how playing Japan is hard - ok, the production system is extremely complex and it's simple for the Japanese player to hang himself by screwing it up. However, what I think is underwhelmingly represented here is the difficulty of trying to defend the Pacific as an allied player in the first 12 to 18 months of the war - or even harder is to really go on the offensive. Try defending the DEI, I mean really defend it, or even Australia. Right now in a PBEM I'm trying to McGyver a defense of Northern Oz in CHS with garrison units, fragments of this and that and lots of fighters like the P-40B that essentially aren't replaceable. What's not challenging about that? This will probably become a debate about which side is harder now... so, I might as well throw the first log on the fire! I totally agree that Allies are challenging. The reason I think Japan is harder is the (lack of a) margin of error. As Japan, every ship is irreplaceable (except barges) and, more importantly, time is irreplaceable. If you screw up an operation as Allies and lose ships - "Oh well, I'll have to wait a couple months longer than I planned to get some new ships to replace these losses." If you don't land enough troops, and it take another month to attack an island again, "Darn, I won't destroy Japan until May 1945, instead of March like I was planning". If either of those things happen as Japan - you have little recourse. Lose too many ships - they are gone forever. Take two months too long to get Rabaul? Sorry - the allies got troops there, you just handed the Allies about 3-6 months of their timetable.
_____________________________
|