quote:

ORIGINAL: PzB

The strength ratio of Japan vs the Allies is relative and constantly changing based on a number of factors.

I first started loosing ships and ground when I grew mentally tired of the game in late 43.
By mid 43 85% of the Combined Fleet was intact and I cared for every little destroyer and sub.

It's though to stay focused for years on end though; all it takes is to let go for one turn and follow your emotions
instead of your carefully planned strategy. I sent the KB on a wild goose chase after Andy's carriers only to
be busted by LBA when I got too close. Andy then became a bit impatient and frustrated by the (for him) slow pace of his advance (compared to history) and over reached himself a couple of times. By August 45 we're like two punch drunk fighters stumbling around the ring trying to locate vulnerable locations and capture them with brute force without much thought for strategic finesse and maneuvers.

If I ever venture into another full campaign there will be carefully selected house rules and the game will probably
follow much more historical lines than the one I'm trying to bring to its conclusion now.

My conclusion based upon 3 years of campaigning is that the stock 41 full campaign scenario until now has favored Japan because everyone quickly learned what was possible to achieve. In RL Japan was as overjoyed by the fall of the PI's and DEI as Germany was by the fall of France in 1940. In WitP almost no one is content with 'only' reaching the historical limits of Japans conquests because they've learned (or is learning) how far Japan can push it. By now the Allied players have become much more skilled in punishing their opponents if they overstretch. Still, an unexperienced Allied player can still easily loose the game if they panic and fails to counter an overly aggressive Jap player properly.

The main reason I got away with 'running wild' so easily to begin with was perhaps the shock effects caused by the invasion of India. It was like launching the Blitzkrieg for the first time! No one had done it before and Wobbly was so desperate about India that he all but forgot about the Central Pacific. Everyone talked about the 'Indian Menace' and thought this to be the ultimate way to destroy the Allies early on. But oh man how weak I was in the Central Pacific throughout 1942 - couldn't even manage an invasion of PM! No way I'm ever going to do that again [:D] By now counter moves have been developed and the Jap player has to stretch the limits even further in order to achieve 'mental' shock attack surprise. The limits for how far it is possible to stretch will now slowly be formed. You really don't want to find the Allies installed in the Marianas by late 42!-)

quote:

ORIGINAL: trollelite

Andy's problem is mainly his strategical view. The tactical handling of his force is not very good, either. But if his strategical view is better you would have a much harder time. I was told he is an expericed player, but obviously strategical judgement is nowhere to find on the manual.

Until middle of 1944 tactic movement is still quite important for allies side, after that they become so strong that some misjudgement on that is not important anymore. Then strategical judgement is what count. And this ability is exactly most players in this forum seriously lacked.

"shock surprise" should not be the final target, nor should pursuing of this dangerous end affects your overall strategy.

quote:

AN EXCELLENT JAP PLAYER WILL ALWAYS GET AN AUTOMATIC VICTORY AND SHOULD TAKE INDIA AND ONE OR BOTH OF AUSTRALIA OR NEW ZEALAND BY THE FALL OF 1942

quote:

If there is a way of stopping it, I havn't found it.

quote:

I salute those of you Japanese players who have this game wired.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: trollelite

Andy's problem is mainly his strategical view. The tactical handling of his force is not very good, either. But if his strategical view is better you would have a much harder time. I was told he is an expericed player, but obviously strategical judgement is nowhere to find on the manual.

Until middle of 1944 tactic movement is still quite important for allies side, after that they become so strong that some misjudgement on that is not important anymore. Then strategical judgement is what count. And this ability is exactly most players in this forum seriously lacked.

"shock surprise" should not be the final target, nor should pursuing of this dangerous end affects your overall strategy.

trollelite ... until you prove yourself with several years of public AAR successes .. the long term players on this forum are going to dismiss your commentary on players such as AndyMac, PzB and Pauk who have proven themselves as masters.

So we wonder at your purpose in making such provocative claims which have no basis in fact from what we can see. Perhaps actions speak louder than words. If so, then Andy, PzB and Pauk's words speak very loud even if they do not speak on this thread.

If you are truly interested in playing the game - then play and post and the community will watch - and if you can show us that you have ideas of value we will learn from them. But until then we must respect those community members who have proven themselves over the years to be the masters - those very people who you have critisized.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

Thanks for the sage advice and insites PzB.

I tried a much more conservative approach in my game with Moses. My only real historical over-reach was my invasion of Northern Oz. Yet I only did this because I was concerned about Allied abilities to exploit the Northern Oz area to launch historically early and massive attacks against the critical SRA area. This had been my experience in the bulk of my previous games.

But Moses style and mine have proven to be very similar - both of us primarily conservative with surges of aggression - punctuated equilibrium! I would try something, he would counter, he would try something, I would counter. We have been essentially stalemated on the ground in Burma for well over a year now. Both sides, continuing to build up - but still stalemated. The situation in China has been overall stable but with potential to break open - with various moves and counter moves. Similarly we are both built up in the Aleutians and in the Solomons. He continues to advance - but we oppose to keep the advance to an acceptable pace. Our goal is to essentially lose everywhere at about the same pace - so that nowhere can he advance too rapidly toward the key areas of the SRA and the Home Islands.

I look forward to AE - and what I see as primarily a shifting of all the tactics and strategies we have learned over the years. If nothing else AE will certainly present all players with a chance to re-learn what works and what doesn't within the same familar framework in which we have lived for the past 3.5 years (well maybe 6 for us UV players!).

quote:

ORIGINAL: goodboyladdie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

quote:

ORIGINAL: goodboyladdie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

quote:

ORIGINAL: goodboyladdie

Hi Charles

I suggest you read some of t's boastful rantings before you leap to his defence. The boy has an ego. He may be as good as he thinks, but he is certainly no better than GH as he claims elsewhere. His loading of HRs to remove any early Allied advantages certainly help him have his "fun". I am enjoying watching his game, but I cannot read his AAR as he winds me up too much. I am not surprised that people are starting to have a little bit of difficulty holding their tongues...

The main point of what I was trying to make, is that sometimes we forget that otherwise irritating people can sometimes come up with gems. I don't think they're encouraged to overcome their bad habits of whenever they do, and come up with what I viewed as a good one in this case, if we never give them a break to keep reminding them of their disbehavior all the time.

I also posted to show just how one can easily let our past views of their posts, obscure every particular post they may have. It may be entirely true that Mike was looking at the post objectively and just thought it was trash anyway, but it sure sounded like just a way to punish somebody who elsewise might often be misbehaving. So see how differently I viewed it? His logonid told me something, but I had never noticed him stand out, but then I don't read AAR's anyway. Surely there are at least times where we should take a good idea for what it is worth, and disregard that we may be wanting to give them yet another spanking? I don't see why anybody who has got on the downtrodden list, would ever want to post again if that is the case, but maybe that's the entire purpose to harangue people when they are general misbehavers, to get them to not post anymore. Just throwing out some possibilities out here mind you. I saw Mike responded, but haven't read it yet.

And who are you to preach? People tend to get what they deserve. Everyone can make the odd misjudged post and the majority of people tend to ignore/forgive those. Everyone has bad days. Hopefully posters learn from the reactions to their post and become better forum citizens, but some people do not. It is not wrong for people to lose patience with persistent "offenders", be they friend or foe...

So what do you deserve goodboyladdie? Would you like me to that instrument of so-called fair play on you? You needn't worry. I have more than enough training to know that to do that is to only stain myself, and then we have two people stained, and if anything the overall situation is only worse than before. It's too bad you aren't seeing that.

Basically I am just getting tired of people taking potshots at alleged naredowells. Why? Well here's the perfect example. I enter the thread, having no ill feelings for trollelite at all, and then so many want to spew his faults to me, and then end up largely destroying the thread in so doing. You know what? Maybe I have nothing against him and some of you guys are trying to cause that very thing? Maybe I even treasure when the alleged naredowells act in sanity as he did here. It seems to me quite logical, though not foolproof, that if you treat the naredowell as a human being when they are actually doing well, that maybe they will grow to like it and improve, but if all people want to do is constantly hang a carboard sign on them saying they are unclean, I don't see them being made any better by that; and still we're often staining ourselves in the process. Why not give the guy some space when he is more lucid? Is it going to kill anybody, that one of the perhaps least regarded pulls off something good? For shame. Save the ire for when he's bad, not when he is good or neutral. If he's all that bad, just report him, just make sure to not use this thread as an example of him misbehaving, because it won't even come close to cutting it.

Maybe I do deserve criticism Old Chap. If I do, then I am more than happy to accept and apologise as you are always fair and balanced when you post. The only thing I objected to was that you seemed to be judging Mike unfairly. As you will see from the current crop of sarcasm, the forum regulars all seem to have run out of patience with this particular individual at the same time. This is what I was trying to draw your attention to in the hope that you would put Mike's seeming attitude in context. I applaud your stance, but I also object to being judged/preached to. It is your right to express your opinion and also your right to do what you feel you can to lift the tone and perhaps add balance. All I am saying is that people have a right to express themselves when they have had enough. Humour often allows alleged offenders to see their own faults when criticism fails. If that does not work then bless Matrix for the green button. I have only ever had to use it once, but I am glad that it is there should I ever need assistance in cheek turning.