Peptalk!

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Peptalk!

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 >> Peptalk!

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Peptalk! - 3/10/2014 4:45:35 PM

heckler

Posts: 42
Joined: 6/29/2011
Status: offline

In other news, I am (overdue) to start a PBEM as the Japanese player-but I am terribly intimidated at the prospect. I've checked out many of the excellent AAR's for inspiration, but need that extra boost/kick in the pants to take the plunge...

Any words of wisdom?

Post #: 1

RE: Peptalk! - 3/10/2014 5:45:11 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

Ask around and find an experience Japanese player who is willing to review your initial set up and then occasionally will review your industry to make sure you are on track. Check with your opponent to make sure this is OK. The problem with playing Japan is that if you screw up your industry at the start, you will be screwed forever. So get some help to get it right and then have a good game.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to heckler)

Post #: 2

RE: Peptalk! - 3/10/2014 6:41:50 PM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

I assume you have looked at this

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3329605

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 3

RE: Peptalk! - 3/10/2014 7:00:58 PM

heckler

Posts: 42
Joined: 6/29/2011
Status: offline

Yes sir I have! Printed a hard copy (I am old as well as old school

) and it is a big part of why I'm even taking the plunge!!

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 4

RE: Peptalk! - 3/10/2014 7:45:59 PM

Spidery

Posts: 1821
Joined: 10/6/2012
From: Hampshire, UK
Status: offline

Play a GG against the AI or head-head for a couple of months to make sure you understand how to maintain the tempo in the initial attacks.

See if you can find an Allied player willing to play Scenario 2 or one of its derivatives. This gives you more leeway with the economy in 1942. If you play this, note the fuel spoilage problem at Sapporo.

You could ask for realistic R&D off with an agreement that you will only use it if you mess up upgrades from R&D to production.

I suspect PDU off is a more interesting game, but it is more work and planning.

(in reply to heckler)

Post #: 5

RE: Peptalk! - 3/10/2014 8:02:28 PM

Sabre21

Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spidery

Play a GG against the AI or head-head for a couple of months to make sure you understand how to maintain the tempo in the initial attacks.

See if you can find an Allied player willing to play Scenario 2 or one of its derivatives. This gives you more leeway with the economy in 1942. If you play this, note the fuel spoilage problem at Sapporo.

You could ask for realistic R&D off with an agreement that you will only use it if you mess up upgrades from R&D to production.

I suspect PDU off is a more interesting game, but it is more work and planning.

Why would you have PDU off? I thought with it on the player has more flexibility, is that not correct?

_____________________________

(in reply to Spidery)

Post #: 6

RE: Peptalk! - 3/10/2014 8:15:44 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spidery

Play a GG against the AI or head-head for a couple of months to make sure you understand how to maintain the tempo in the initial attacks.

See if you can find an Allied player willing to play Scenario 2 or one of its derivatives. This gives you more leeway with the economy in 1942. If you play this, note the fuel spoilage problem at Sapporo.

You could ask for realistic R&D off with an agreement that you will only use it if you mess up upgrades from R&D to production.

I suspect PDU off is a more interesting game, but it is more work and planning.

Why would you have PDU off? I thought with it on the player has more flexibility, is that not correct?

Some players feel it's more realistic to play with exactly the air group upgrades the Japanese and Allies used. This had benefits and difficulties for both sides. Most think the Japanese get far less advantage from their souped-up production capabilities with PDU-off.

Having just completed a Scen 1 PDU-on game to 7/45 I think some of this is true, but it is a lot more fun to be able to utilize planes the Japanese did not or could not, and from my limited experience with PDU-off (a few months in 42) I already felt the pinch of having to use Nates, Sonias, etc almost exclusively.

You could still produce a lot of the better planes, but you just wouldn't have many groups that could use them. In the same way the Allies can't upgrade everything to B-24J or all of the CV groups to Hellcats and Corsairs, so that part could be interesting. Seeing a lot more FM-1-2 could make the naval side of things more interesting.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Sabre21)

Post #: 7

RE: Peptalk! - 3/10/2014 8:20:10 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: heckler

In other news, I am (overdue) to start a PBEM as the Japanese player-but I am terribly intimidated at the prospect. I've checked out many of the excellent AAR's for inspiration, but need that extra boost/kick in the pants to take the plunge...

Any words of wisdom?

Advertise for a newbie like yourself and you'll be fine! There's lots of help here and if you're reading AARs you're half way there! Just PM or create threads to ask questions.

The key is don't do it all at once. Many of us could give you top five to cheek lists and you'd get through. It's not any harder than Allied logistics, withdrawals and multiple national types.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to heckler)

Post #: 8

RE: Peptalk! - 3/10/2014 8:25:22 PM

Sabre21

Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

Thanks for the quick response Obvert. You guys have a pretty good forum going here.

_____________________________

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 9

RE: Peptalk! - 3/10/2014 8:50:02 PM

Spidery

Posts: 1821
Joined: 10/6/2012
From: Hampshire, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spidery

Play a GG against the AI or head-head for a couple of months to make sure you understand how to maintain the tempo in the initial attacks.

See if you can find an Allied player willing to play Scenario 2 or one of its derivatives. This gives you more leeway with the economy in 1942. If you play this, note the fuel spoilage problem at Sapporo.

You could ask for realistic R&D off with an agreement that you will only use it if you mess up upgrades from R&D to production.

I suspect PDU off is a more interesting game, but it is more work and planning.

Why would you have PDU off? I thought with it on the player has more flexibility, is that not correct?

PDU on gives you a lot more flexibility to field the best aircraft; with a few pitfalls to avoid, like removing upgrade paths to get night fighters deployed.

However, to make best use of PDU on means optimising R&D and engine planning to get those models early. Meanwhile, the Allied player can use the setting to move the best aircraft to the front lines, without any particular planning, and to downgrade as needed.

With PDU off you can spread R&D around and there is less benefit from optimising R&D and the Allied player also is handicapped. Also, PDU off means you get to try out every model.

(in reply to Sabre21)

Post #: 10

RE: Peptalk! - 3/10/2014 9:09:48 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

Thanks for the quick response Obvert. You guys have a pretty good forum going here.

I regularly start writing a response to a question like this and find once I post that there were several in front of me already posted where none were a few minutes before. It's pretty active. A lot of people hiding in the shadows as well who'll pop in occasionally, some extremely knowledgeable.

Often it takes a few of us to get a rounded answer anyway!

Spidery for instance makes a great point, which is that downgrading is also not allowed in PDU-off, so you have to be very careful about what you upgrade. You can get stuck with big pools and no groups to use them in.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Sabre21)

Post #: 11

RE: Peptalk! - 3/11/2014 12:08:26 PM

Mundy

Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline

I started the Japanese side myself a few months ago vs. my brother. At about a turn a week, this should keep me occupied for the next 30 years.

The Japan OOB is a real mess. Units and components of units scattered hither and yon. That and an unfamiliarity with Japanese shipping in general with regards to upgrades and conversion has made this very trying. For the most part, I've let the default invasion convoys run their course, while redirecting a few of them. I've also sent new convoys out from Japan and consolidated the fleet to work from one port, to make things easier to organize. (My SOP as Allies, too) I've pretty much decided to wait until Luzon and Singapore are taken before trying to add any sanity to the way the IJN/IJA forces are organized and deployed. Doing this, I tend to finish a turn in 15 minutes.

It's mostly a case of just wading into it and dealing with it a piece at a time.

Ed-

_____________________________

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 12

RE: Peptalk! - 3/11/2014 1:35:32 PM

heckler

Posts: 42
Joined: 6/29/2011
Status: offline

Thanks for all the feedback guys!
My cousin and I are playing Scenario 2, normal Dec 7 start, PDU on and Realistic R&D off-maximum chances to screw things up! He's got 3 games going as Japan (he's semi retired) one of which is against me, my first game. We're old time board gamers, and have always jumped into the deep end on games.

Sounds like I need to put my Big Boy Pants on and get cracking-Mundy your comments ring true for me as well-looking at those initial invasion fleets I'm like

what the hell?

Without the excellent AAR's (much respect to Obvert in particular) and Numdydar's excellent guide I wouldn't know where to start-again thanks!!

(in reply to Mundy)

Post #: 13

RE: Peptalk! - 3/11/2014 3:34:46 PM

Hanzberger

Posts: 921
Joined: 4/26/2006
From: SE Pennsylvania
Status: offline

You will want to click on the link below and print this out also for a handy refrence. Good Luck~!

_____________________________

Planning for #17 Ironman Tier2

Japan AC wire chart here
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2769286&mpage=1&key=?

(in reply to heckler)

Post #: 14

RE: Peptalk! - 3/11/2014 4:07:16 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

+1 to Hanzberger's wire schematic for airplane production. A "must have".

_____________________________

(in reply to Hanzberger)

Post #: 15

RE: Peptalk! - 3/11/2014 4:09:39 PM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: heckler

Thanks for all the feedback guys!
My cousin and I are playing Scenario 2, normal Dec 7 start, PDU on and Realistic R&D off-maximum chances to screw things up! He's got 3 games going as Japan (he's semi retired) one of which is against me, my first game. We're old time board gamers, and have always jumped into the deep end on games.

Sounds like I need to put my Big Boy Pants on and get cracking-Mundy your comments ring true for me as well-looking at those initial invasion fleets I'm like what the hell?

Without the excellent AAR's (much respect to Obvert in particular) and Numdydar's excellent guide I wouldn't know where to start-again thanks!!

Realistic R&D Off is a huge advantage for Japan btw. This allows Japan to switch factories to different plane type with NO damage (i.e. no supplies needed to repair them) and no loss of factories if changed to AC not on the upgrade path. Even as a JFB, I would not play with that Off. So I would strongly recommend finding out why he wants if off before sinking a whole lot of time into the game.

From the manual (you have read the manual right?) Bolded section is what I am refering to.

2.4.8 REALISTIC R&D
This switch controls whether the Japanese player can convert the production of factories which
are producing currently available aircraft into ones researching future aircraft, and vice versa.

If the switch is set to the �on� position, and the Japanese player wishes to change the aircraft
type being produced by a factory, the choice of aircraft to convert to will be restricted in
the following manner: When switching from an aircraft that is currently available and in
production, only other aircraft that are also in production can be selected. Similarly, when that
the Japanese player wishes to change the aircraft type of a factory that is performing research
(see section 13.5), only other aircraft that are also being researched (that is � not yet available
for production) can be selected.

This represents the differences between mass production
factories and research and development centers. In reality these are two different things, and
freely swapping between them is not realistic.

If the switch is set to the �off� position, no such restrictions apply. This will allow the Japanese
player a greater ability to switch production of their factories to any aircraft type, regardless of
whether those factories are representing aircraft production or R&D facilities.
The default position for this switch is �on�, as this is a more realistic representation of the
Japanese aircraft industry.

(in reply to heckler)

Post #: 16

RE: Peptalk! - 3/11/2014 5:56:47 PM

Sabre21

Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

If the switch is set to the �off� position, no such restrictions apply. This will allow the Japanese
player a greater ability to switch production of their factories to any aircraft type, regardless of
whether those factories are representing aircraft production or R&D facilities.
The default position for this switch is �on�, as this is a more realistic representation of the
Japanese aircraft industry.

So if it is off, could the Japanese player switch, let's say a jake factory to a Frank factory that might not yet even be in R&D?

If so, what would happen at that Frank factory? Would it go into R&D mode until the aircraft was available and then switch to production?

_____________________________

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 17

RE: Peptalk! - 3/11/2014 7:42:40 PM

Spidery

Posts: 1821
Joined: 10/6/2012
From: Hampshire, UK
Status: offline

I thought realistic R&D off meant could switch between production and research freely. However, I think the same rules as otherwise apply to changing between aircraft models (factory is damaged unless changing to the immediate upgrade).

Realistic R&D off does allow to get a few models extremely early. The A6M2 Sen Baku, the A6M5b, and all later A6M models; the D5Y1 Myojo; the Ki-43-IV Oscar; the G4M3a Betty, and the Ki-46-III Dinah spring to mind. These are models with upgrade paths from aircraft available at start so R&D factories can be changed to production, repaired, and then changed to research these. Fighting A6M8 and Ki-43-IV in April 42 is going to cramp the Allies.

However, it doesn't significantly change access to Franks etc. It does make things easier and save a bit of supply when models become available. For example, when Franks enter production obsolete Tojo factories can be changed to R&D the Ki-83 and the Frank factories enter production. With realistic R&D on would need to change the Tojos to produce Franks and the Franks to R&D the Ki-83 which would be two sets of factory changes so more supply used.

Realistic R&D off is also a big boost to managing engine production. Less so in scenario 2 where there are more production and R&D factories to go round.

(in reply to Sabre21)

Post #: 18

RE: Peptalk! - 3/11/2014 8:00:37 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

quote:

ORIGINAL: heckler

Thanks for all the feedback guys!
My cousin and I are playing Scenario 2, normal Dec 7 start, PDU on and Realistic R&D off-maximum chances to screw things up! He's got 3 games going as Japan (he's semi retired) one of which is against me, my first game. We're old time board gamers, and have always jumped into the deep end on games.

Sounds like I need to put my Big Boy Pants on and get cracking-Mundy your comments ring true for me as well-looking at those initial invasion fleets I'm like what the hell?

Without the excellent AAR's (much respect to Obvert in particular) and Numdydar's excellent guide I wouldn't know where to start-again thanks!!

Realistic R&D Off is a huge advantage for Japan btw. This allows Japan to switch factories to different plane type with NO damage (i.e. no supplies needed to repair them) and no loss of factories if changed to AC not on the upgrade path. Even as a JFB, I would not play with that Off. So I would strongly recommend finding out why he wants if off before sinking a whole lot of time into the game.

From the manual (you have read the manual right?) Bolded section is what I am refering to.

2.4.8 REALISTIC R&D
This switch controls whether the Japanese player can convert the production of factories which
are producing currently available aircraft into ones researching future aircraft, and vice versa.

If the switch is set to the �on� position, and the Japanese player wishes to change the aircraft
type being produced by a factory, the choice of aircraft to convert to will be restricted in
the following manner: When switching from an aircraft that is currently available and in
production, only other aircraft that are also in production can be selected. Similarly, when that
the Japanese player wishes to change the aircraft type of a factory that is performing research
(see section 13.5), only other aircraft that are also being researched (that is � not yet available
for production) can be selected.

This represents the differences between mass production
factories and research and development centers. In reality these are two different things, and
freely swapping between them is not realistic.

If the switch is set to the �off� position, no such restrictions apply. This will allow the Japanese
player a greater ability to switch production of their factories to any aircraft type, regardless of
whether those factories are representing aircraft production or R&D facilities.
The default position for this switch is �on�, as this is a more realistic representation of the
Japanese aircraft industry.

The bold, underlined part is absolutely not true. With Realistic R&D Off, I suffer factory damage if I change factories to a line not in the upgrade path. I suffer factory damage when switching BACK to production.

Only when switching from production to R&D of the NEXT MODEL do I not suffer damage.

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 19

RE: Peptalk! - 3/12/2014 12:35:51 AM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

Good to know as I have never played with PDU Off so I was under the impression that damage was prevented as well. But being able to freely switch Prod to R&D and back freely is still a huge deal to me so would never play with it off even as Japan as I think it really can unbalance the game.

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 20

RE: Peptalk! - 3/12/2014 1:52:12 AM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Good to know as I have never played with PDU Off so I was under the impression that damage was prevented as well. But being able to freely switch Prod to R&D and back freely is still a huge deal to me so would never play with it off even as Japan as I think it really can unbalance the game.

You can't switch back to production without damage. See Lowpe's post in his AAR after he tried it. It goes one way only - from production to R&D, and it has to be to the next model.

That appears to be all that Realistic R&D Off does, other than expand the list of models you can change factories to.

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 21

RE: Peptalk! - 3/12/2014 2:13:20 AM

Sabre21

Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

Don't mean to hijack the thread but we seem to have traveled that path already so as it stands I am pretty confused on what exactly Realistic R&D actually does.

Based on the last few posts I gather that if the Realistic R&D is switched OFF, then:

a) if the Japanese player changes an aircraft production or R&D factory to any other type, and if that type is not in the upgrade path of the selected factory, then that factory will be damaged; and

b) when the Japanese player changes an R&D factory to production status, that factory is then damaged.

Are these statements true or not then?

< Message edited by Sabre21 -- 3/12/2014 3:14:20 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 22

RE: Peptalk! - 3/12/2014 4:15:40 AM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

According to the manual above.

On - default
AC factory in Prod can only be changed to another plane type that is also in Prod.
AC factory in R&D can only be changed to another plane type that is also in R&D

Off
AC factory in Prod can be changed to any plane type whether in Prod OR R&D. Or visa versa. In other words AC factories can freely switch between Prod and R&D at any time desired by the player.

In BOTH cases switching factory AC types for AC that are NOT in the proper upgrade path WILL cause damage to the factories. While switching factories of AC that ARE in the proper upgrade path will NOT cause damage.

As an example Tojo IIa, b, c
You have a in Prod and b/c in R&D say 30 AC/factory. So 30 a, 30b, 30c. All fully repaired.
With Realistic R&D Off you could ...

Assign the 30 in Prod for a into research for b with no damage to the factories since it is the next model in the line. So now you would have 2 R&D factories of 30 each (total of 60) reseaching the b model. However switching one of these back to Prod for the a version WOULD cause damage since you are going backwards versus forward in the model sequence. So now you can research the b model at twice the rate as before so you would get it twice as early. So instead of 7/43 maybe 11/42.

However the major issue is that you when you switch factories from R&D to Prod, they now repair at 1/day versus the much slower rate of normal R&D. So in the example above, once you got the b model, you could switch as many Prod factories as you wanted to the b version, wait for them to fully repair if needed, then switch ALL of them to the c model R&D with no damage and fully functional towards research. So just imaging this with long plane paths like the Oscars, Zeros, etc. and see how fast you could get the top of the line planes with this being Off.

This is why I think it breaks the game. Get a bunch of Zero factories fully repaired at the start of the game, switch them to the next model as R&D factories with no damage incured, and see how early you can get advanced AC. You could easily have 100+ R&D factories researching an advance AC type like the Zero within a few months of the game start.

I hope this helps

(in reply to Sabre21)

Post #: 23