Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I really think that a lot of the LCU losses being reported from these other games is coming from the SRA. Those Dutch and British/Commonwealth units are worth a lot of VPs. Not to mention all the US Army/USMC stuff on Luzon.

EDIT:

I have a Computer Both Sides game going right now, it's up to 3/21/42. There are 5600 Allied LCU losses so far. As we all know, the AI doesn't do a whole lot in China, in either direction - whether it's Quiet China or not. Changsha, Kukong, Nanning, Amoy (!), Foochow, etc. remain unconquered. Only Chuhsien has fallen. Chengchow was auto-occupied, and Loyang remains in Chinese hands. So, not much in the way of Chinese casualties here.

What's fallen:
Hong Kong
Manila
Clark Field
All of Mindanao
90% of Borneo
The Celebes
Singapore

Bataan remains with 45K Allied troops.
Sumatra and Java haven't even been touched yet.

So at least 5,000 VPs just from Malaya, Borneo, and most of Luzon. There are a LOT more to be had in Java, and this doesn't include the 44th/45th Indian Brigades or the 18th British Division (I checked the destroyed LCUs).

I'd wager that ~8000 VPs from LCUs is in the SRA alone. Do I need to go back to game's start and count up all the devices?

I might be able to give an exact number on how much VPs China is worth. Hopefully before the weekend is up!

Wanna bet?

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Replacements off. No counting respawns. No base expansion.

As you say the base VPs are easy to count. What I´m looking at are LCU losses.

We will see. I still think I´m closer to the truth. But then again many Chinese LCUs get killed off and cut off in the first few weeks. So in any normal game many LCUs will be killed off multiple times. But at least this will provide a good base line.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Damn, you beat me to it!

Will still run my test and see if our numbers add up. Can´t check the files now as I´m on my phone. But when you say "It totals up to 5903-5904 VPs just for those" do you mean WITH the SRA troops or excluding them?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spidery

Respawned units come back at 1/3 of TOE, since most of the Chinese corps start at 50% or less of strength the VP value the second time round is something like 50% of the first time - works out about 40 VP for each large Chinese Corps and 2 or 3 VP for HQ and Base forces.

How many VP does Japan directly lose taking China? Air losses from CAP traps and a few bad combat moves mean I guess it cost me about 1500-2000 VP but I expect with more competence this could be reduced to 1000 or so.

Indirectly, it does use a lot of supply, lots of PP if paying PP to cross boundaries, and keeps a fair number of fighters in China.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I got 6912 Chinese LCU losses. Thats everything in China except some of the small BDEs in the far north. No respawns, no replacements.

Kind of interesting since it shows I lost almost the entire Chinese army 2 times in my second game...Not that strange though when you consider it. Respawns come back at 30/30 having only rifle squads. That makes them extremely fragile so I figure once you start using "respawns" on the front line losses will rise tremendously.

So that would mean my estimate of 15-20k VPs is actually pretty spot on. Going by Spiderys Base VPs (9500) + our Chinese LCU losses = almost 17k VPs. And that is if NO replacements or respawns are lost. And I think its safe to assume that at least some respawns will be used. Going by my second game I lost around 10k worth of Chinese LCU losses. If you add that its around 20k VPs for China...A huge number. And relatively easy to grab for a competent Japanese player. Most definitively a huge factor in any games being played for VPs.

quote:

I don't understand how 6900 VPs, respawned at 1/3 of TOE and killed again, becomes 15-20K VPs. What are they teaching you in those Swedish math classes? Kidding! The base VPs... I exported the bases from Tracker into a CSV and had Excel add it up for me. If every Chinese base is built to maximum, it's 15822 VPs for Japan. There are lots of potential level 9 AFs that have *10 multipliers. 49 bases in total have *10 or higher for Japan, and all together they are worth 14810. 31 of those are potential level 9 AFs, and 3 of those 31 have ports as well. I would say that this is a very large, almost un-counterable VP bank for Japan...except that in order to build all of those up, Japan needs to commit a lot of engineers for years. That would leave forts weaker elsewhere.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I got 6912 Chinese LCU losses. Thats everything in China except some of the small BDEs in the far north. No respawns, no replacements.

Kind of interesting since it shows I lost almost the entire Chinese army 2 times in my second game...Not that strange though when you consider it. Respawns come back at 30/30 having only rifle squads. That makes them extremely fragile so I figure once you start using "respawns" on the front line losses will rise tremendously.

So that would mean my estimate of 15-20k VPs is actually pretty spot on. Going by Spiderys Base VPs (9500) + our Chinese LCU losses = almost 17k VPs. And that is if NO replacements or respawns are lost. And I think its safe to assume that at least some respawns will be used. Going by my second game I lost around 10k worth of Chinese LCU losses. If you add that its around 20k VPs for China...A huge number. And relatively easy to grab for a competent Japanese player. Most definitively a huge factor in any games being played for VPs.

I don't understand how 6900 VPs, respawned at 1/3 of TOE and killed again, becomes 15-20K VPs. What are they teaching you in those Swedish math classes? Kidding!

The base VPs... I exported the bases from Tracker into a CSV and had Excel add it up for me. If every Chinese base is built to maximum, it's 15822 VPs for Japan. There are lots of potential level 9 AFs that have *10 multipliers. 49 bases in total have *10 or higher for Japan, and all together they are worth 14810. 31 of those are potential level 9 AFs, and 3 of those 31 have ports as well.

I would say that this is a very large, almost un-counterable VP bank for Japan...except that in order to build all of those up, Japan needs to commit a lot of engineers for years. That would leave forts weaker elsewhere.

quote:

Doesn't base building take a lot of supply as well? Japan may get the VPs but weakens the home islands if it has to ship most of the supply to China. I wonder if Japan can generate enough supply to build the aircraft and ships it wants plus feed IJ China's base-building program?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I got 6912 Chinese LCU losses. Thats everything in China except some of the small BDEs in the far north. No respawns, no replacements.

Kind of interesting since it shows I lost almost the entire Chinese army 2 times in my second game...Not that strange though when you consider it. Respawns come back at 30/30 having only rifle squads. That makes them extremely fragile so I figure once you start using "respawns" on the front line losses will rise tremendously.

So that would mean my estimate of 15-20k VPs is actually pretty spot on. Going by Spiderys Base VPs (9500) + our Chinese LCU losses = almost 17k VPs. And that is if NO replacements or respawns are lost. And I think its safe to assume that at least some respawns will be used. Going by my second game I lost around 10k worth of Chinese LCU losses. If you add that its around 20k VPs for China...A huge number. And relatively easy to grab for a competent Japanese player. Most definitively a huge factor in any games being played for VPs.

I don't understand how 6900 VPs, respawned at 1/3 of TOE and killed again, becomes 15-20K VPs. What are they teaching you in those Swedish math classes? Kidding!

The base VPs... I exported the bases from Tracker into a CSV and had Excel add it up for me. If every Chinese base is built to maximum, it's 15822 VPs for Japan. There are lots of potential level 9 AFs that have *10 multipliers. 49 bases in total have *10 or higher for Japan, and all together they are worth 14810. 31 of those are potential level 9 AFs, and 3 of those 31 have ports as well.

I would say that this is a very large, almost un-counterable VP bank for Japan...except that in order to build all of those up, Japan needs to commit a lot of engineers for years. That would leave forts weaker elsewhere.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I got 6912 Chinese LCU losses. Thats everything in China except some of the small BDEs in the far north. No respawns, no replacements.

Kind of interesting since it shows I lost almost the entire Chinese army 2 times in my second game...Not that strange though when you consider it. Respawns come back at 30/30 having only rifle squads. That makes them extremely fragile so I figure once you start using "respawns" on the front line losses will rise tremendously.

So that would mean my estimate of 15-20k VPs is actually pretty spot on. Going by Spiderys Base VPs (9500) + our Chinese LCU losses = almost 17k VPs. And that is if NO replacements or respawns are lost. And I think its safe to assume that at least some respawns will be used. Going by my second game I lost around 10k worth of Chinese LCU losses. If you add that its around 20k VPs for China...A huge number. And relatively easy to grab for a competent Japanese player. Most definitively a huge factor in any games being played for VPs.

I don't understand how 6900 VPs, respawned at 1/3 of TOE and killed again, becomes 15-20K VPs. What are they teaching you in those Swedish math classes? Kidding!

The base VPs... I exported the bases from Tracker into a CSV and had Excel add it up for me. If every Chinese base is built to maximum, it's 15822 VPs for Japan. There are lots of potential level 9 AFs that have *10 multipliers. 49 bases in total have *10 or higher for Japan, and all together they are worth 14810. 31 of those are potential level 9 AFs, and 3 of those 31 have ports as well.

I would say that this is a very large, almost un-counterable VP bank for Japan...except that in order to build all of those up, Japan needs to commit a lot of engineers for years. That would leave forts weaker elsewhere.

Don´t be mean!

Most Chinese units actually start the game below 30% TOE or there around! So another 3000 LCU losses are not very unlikely at all. Especially considering how extremely fragile those respawns will be. 30/30 and nothing but rifle squads...ouch!

16k base VPs. Jeezus! Are you sure?

But as you say. Investing that heavily in China and you might end up having B24s bombing the HI in mid 44...

Its kind of fascinating though. China has always been considered more or less a side show. But when you look at it its loads and loads of VPs. All within easy reach of the HI. And looking at my game with Tom not much is needed but China and that crucial denial of Noumea for the allies.

I wonder if at least Noumea should be looked at. Having an allied x50 multiplier is HUGE. I wonder if it would be better to spread those x50s out to multiple locations instead. Feels kind of odd that Noumea alone is worth more then Gilberts and Marshalls combined. It encourage force projection in a quite unrealistic way.

Then there is the question of China and the balance there...I´ve would have loved to look at Toms setup. I´ve asked him twice if he would share his PW but no response so I guess I won´t be able to check it out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I am thinking that China probably needs a rebalance. I think Bullwinkle might be on the right tack with higher garrison requirements (for both sides?), but I think a "double whammy" of higher garrison requirements as well as some tweaking of base VPs might "fix" China and make it more of a choice rather than a no-brainer. Namely, reduce the number of bases worth *10, probably reduce the multiplier on Chungking to 150 from 200, maybe drop Chengtu to 75...

I've also thought Kunming is undervalued on VPs at only *25. Lanchow/Sining could be looked at also.

I agree with you on Noumea. Koumac is almost as good of a base. Perhaps *10 for Koumac, *40 for Noumea . That makes it harder to build up your VPs, though...so keep that in mind.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I am thinking that China probably needs a rebalance. I think Bullwinkle might be on the right tack with higher garrison requirements (for both sides?), but I think a "double whammy" of higher garrison requirements as well as some tweaking of base VPs might "fix" China and make it more of a choice rather than a no-brainer. Namely, reduce the number of bases worth *10, probably reduce the multiplier on Chungking to 150 from 200, maybe drop Chengtu to 75...

I've also thought Kunming is undervalued on VPs at only *25. Lanchow/Sining could be looked at also.

I agree with you on Noumea. Koumac is almost as good of a base. Perhaps *10 for Koumac, *40 for Noumea . That makes it harder to build up your VPs, though...so keep that in mind.

Given China in stock was laid down what? six or seven years ago before anyone had wrung out the game, I think it was fine then. It's not now. People have learned and AARs are forever.

I do think garrisons would help a lot, but I would weight them more to the western side of China where I believe the Red Army was more active. Some increases for the Chinese side too to make a full-scale bug-out for Chungking hurt. In exchange, I'd give most every city-base (not dots necessarily) some little bit of organic supply. If that's supposed to essentially represent food and clothes every city and countryside could do that without industry.

And yes, rebalancing the VPs to make Chungking less of a golden chest of VPs would make things less predictable.

I don't really have a dog in the Noumea fight. Change it, leave it alone, I don't care. It's an island. If Japan takes it they're going to lose it. Early, late, doesn't matter. If they want to build me a nice AF, fine. (This means you, Loka!) It's only a matter of when. China is a whole different kind of problem. You can walk there from most of the map.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


Why do you think I've mostly left Noumea's facilities alone? If you want them, you have to build it. I'm not doing it for you!

quote:

Doesn't base building take a lot of supply as well? Japan may get the VPs but weakens the home islands if it has to ship most of the supply to China.
I wonder if Japan can generate enough supply to build the aircraft and ships it wants plus feed IJ China's base-building program?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spidery

quote:

Doesn't base building take a lot of supply as well? Japan may get the VPs but weakens the home islands if it has to ship most of the supply to China.
I wonder if Japan can generate enough supply to build the aircraft and ships it wants plus feed IJ China's base-building program?

Could reasonably expect to capture 400 LI in China and 160 oil. In stock that produces 2000 supply per day. It takes 7000 supply to take a base from size 0 to size 7 if SRS is 7. So captured industry in China can fund the expansion of all the size 10+ bases to their SRS value within 6 months. Probably won't have the engineers to do this though.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spidery

quote:

Doesn't base building take a lot of supply as well? Japan may get the VPs but weakens the home islands if it has to ship most of the supply to China.
I wonder if Japan can generate enough supply to build the aircraft and ships it wants plus feed IJ China's base-building program?

Could reasonably expect to capture 400 LI in China and 160 oil. In stock that produces 2000 supply per day. It takes 7000 supply to take a base from size 0 to size 7 if SRS is 7. So captured industry in China can fund the expansion of all the size 10+ bases to their SRS value within 6 months. Probably won't have the engineers to do this though.

quote:

ORIGINAL: topeverest

good comments here. Enterprising JFB's have figured out this VP auto victory solution to the game. I don't think there is anything wrong with that on its face.

Our mod plays with far fewer VP's in China and larger garrison requirements. This has the impact of deterring a VP play while still allowing the empire to attempt to conquer the allied power.

IMHO - Let me suggest if you don't like the possibility of empire auto victory heavily influenced by China VP's to agree to reduce all Chinese cities to 0 (or 1) including the major cities. You also can add 50 to 100 garrison to the sizable Chinese cities to reflect historical garrison requirements.

I want to be clear that I support VP's and empire auto victory as a philosophy, but the empire needs to earn those China VP's elsewhere. Let me suggest the offset is to increase the VP's for places like NZ, OZ, Fiji, Hawaii, and Alaska. This will transfer the locations Empire will need to acquire to win auto victory.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Erik, do you and GJ use it?

Cribtop, I know its very early in your game. But have you noticed any effects from this?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Is it compatible with DBB?

thanks