The Problem of Clark

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

The Problem of Clark

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 >> Scenario Design and Modding >> The Problem of Clark

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

The Problem of Clark - 5/15/2013 7:18:21 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

Why is the Japanese Army so unable to take Clark when it attacks in force?

Because the hex is wrongly coded as "rough jungle."

This was explained years ago "because there is jungle in the hex, the hexes are large."

Yet the Central Luzon plain is the key fact - the good road infrastructure with open country - and IRL it was not possible to stop the IJA even with nominally superior numbers of troops. The exception was the Philippine Scouts, armed with the M-1 Garand - who consistently could stop any Japanese unit. But they were always flanked and the flanking (not Scouts) units could not hold, so they too had to fall back. [79,176]

Regretfully, I have concluded this means we must reissue pwhexe files with this hex recoded as clear terrain.

At the same time, I found that Samulaki [78,117] is improperly coded in pwhexe. The ONLY direction from which a ship can really approach the port is shown as a blocked hex side! So along with urban hex definition updates, the "final" pwhexe set will correct these issues.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 5/15/2013 7:36:04 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: The Problem of Clark - 5/15/2013 9:14:17 PM

SuluSea

Posts: 2358
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline

I believe the development team made a call and it was correct. Could a different call be made and it be correct? Maybe! Would plains or open country be one of them? I don't believe so!!

All one has to do is look at a topography map or this one to note that the 40 mile hex around Clark is not "plain" or "open country".

_____________________________

"There�s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.� ~ Erwin Lutzer

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 2

RE: The Problem of Clark - 5/15/2013 9:23:21 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Well I'm just going to make the call that if Trevethan says something it's untrue.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to SuluSea)

Post #: 3

RE: The Problem of Clark - 5/15/2013 9:55:40 PM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

Is that shaded blue area to the right of Clark swamp?

_____________________________

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 4

RE: The Problem of Clark - 5/15/2013 10:30:39 PM

SuluSea

Posts: 2358
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline

The map legend states rice paddy. The spiked looking green lines near San Augustin and Mt Arayat volcano are tropical grasses . US Army has it all wrong it can't be a volcano in that hex even if it is extinct.

< Message edited by SuluSea -- 5/15/2013 10:41:22 PM >

_____________________________

"There�s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.� ~ Erwin Lutzer

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 5

RE: The Problem of Clark - 5/16/2013 1:53:54 AM

V I Lenin

Posts: 31
Joined: 12/30/2012
Status: offline

Essentially it is a question of - what do you care more about? - the hex taken as a 46x46mi whole is mountainous, but for most practical purposes *Clark Field itself* is not - ok, if you're attacking it from the west you're going to have big problems, but from the east, which is really the relevant bit (since the Japanese in early war will 95% be coming from there, and in later war Americans probably also if they come at all) it is a relatively clear run - so it depends whether you consider the land positions or the airfield more important, I guess. Neither are 'wrong', just a different emphasis...though making it a straight jungle hex as a compromise between the two extremes seems like a better idea to me; as the attacker, there is a relatively easy run 'through' the Clark hex to the Bataan hex, so it shouldn't be a super defensible location (since troops in the super defensible areas can ~ be bypassed); but, also taking the airfield itself does not automatically make it usable if you have enemy troops in the overlooking hills - so there will be some work required to get them out, at least.

e: if you do reduce the defensibility of Clark you should probably make Bataan a rough jungle, though - since there there isn't really an easy way 'around' the mountains.

< Message edited by V I Lenin -- 5/16/2013 1:55:57 AM >

(in reply to SuluSea)

Post #: 6

RE: The Problem of Clark - 5/16/2013 2:53:45 AM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

The map legend states rice paddy. The spiked looking green lines near San Augustin and Mt Arayat volcano are tropical grasses . US Army has it all wrong it can't be a volcano in that hex even if it is extinct.

Sure looks more than a bit like a "shield" volcano to me.

(in reply to SuluSea)

Post #: 7

RE: The Problem of Clark - 5/16/2013 10:17:38 AM

moonraker65

Posts: 556
Joined: 7/14/2004
From: Swindon,Wilts. UK
Status: offline

Isn't Mount Pinatubo (Sp) near Clark ?

_____________________________

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 8

RE: The Problem of Clark - 5/16/2013 11:45:05 AM

SuluSea

Posts: 2358
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: moonraker

Isn't Mount Pinatubo (Sp) near Clark ?

Yes, it's roughly 10 miles W/SW of Clark. I believe the evidence in the maps show that the Clark hex is not clear and the developers of this game made the right call....