For want of a torpedo... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room



Message

DanielAnsell -> For want of a torpedo... (8/7/2012 8:45:16 AM)

Some while ago, I made a comment or two in the Reluctant Admiral development threads about letting the US have reliable torpedoes as a counterbalance to the various benefits given to the Japanese side by the
Reluctant Admiral mod.

I say this without intending to smear the work done by the RA team. They've done a lot of research, and I think done some really keen work on that mod, and in its later development, improved it still further.

I withdrew from that discussion, after realizing that the idea of using reliable US torpedoes held no interest for the team. As time has gone on, and I read over AARs from both sides,not just of RA matches, but using any of the Japan enhanced scenarios or mods in PBEM play.

My sense is that Japan has a number of capabilities in the game that would astonish the actual Japanese command from WWII. Netties making massed and incredibly effective torpedo strikes at more then six hundred miles from base, and the ability to throughout the war build vast numbers of only the most efficient air-frames and man them with well-trained pilots with only a bit of planning ahead being two that stand out.

The Allies have some unusual capabilities too, of course. But they can't really increase any facet of their production, or change the order or amount of reinforcement they get, without modding.

Looking into the history,and the sheer and unlikely number of errors and oversights that had to occur to allow the situation with US torpedoes to come about, it seems as least as likely that at some point it would have been spotted and corrected, as it is that the various Japanese enhancements given by scenarios and mods would have happened. (Whew! Long sentence!)

The point I am making, and asking for comment on, is this: Using reliable US torpedoes is a valid and historically viable counterbalance to the enhanced Japanese capabilities even the 'historical' scenarios provide, and even more so in a 'Japan enhanced' scenario.



Puhis -> RE: For want of a torpedo... (8/7/2012 8:55:41 AM)

Why can't you just set reliable torpedoes = on? Any reason that setting is not working with RA mod?

But I cannot understand your reason to post this to War room.



DanielAnsell -> RE: For want of a torpedo... (8/7/2012 9:33:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

Why can't you just set reliable torpedoes = on? Any reason that setting is not working with RA mod?

But I cannot understand your reason to post this to War room.


I wasn't very clear, obviously. I'm not talking about modding in functional torpedoes. What I'm talking about is using the reliable torpedoes switch as a counterbalance with any scenario or mod, especially the Japan+ ones, to offset some of the advantages in Japanese airpower. Especially, I should have added, with PDU turned on.




Puhis -> RE: For want of a torpedo... (8/7/2012 10:54:03 AM)

Sorry, I misunderstood you.

I think some people are using reliable torpedoes when they play scenario 2. IMO that's a huge advantage for allies, but as long as two players decide certain setting and know what they are doing, why not?




USSAmerica -> RE: For want of a torpedo... (8/7/2012 2:00:06 PM)

Reliable USN Torpedoes is a play balance modifier. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using it to even up an experience difference between two players or if you just feel like it against the AI. I agree that turning Reliable Torps on is a strong advantage for the Allied side, so keep that in mind if you're trying to weigh it against other scenario or House Rule advantages for the Japanese side.



Shark7 -> RE: For want of a torpedo... (8/8/2012 6:27:53 PM)

The reliable torpedoes on can actually give an experienced Allied player such an edge that it over balances in his/her favor. I'd turn it on if playing against a less experienced Allied player, but would not agree to it against one of the more experienced ones personally.

And yes, the Japanese ASW may be a bit over-done, but it does allow the game to last into 1945, where without it, the IJN player my be out extremely early. House rules can help balance the over-powered E ships though.



DanielAnsell -> RE: For want of a torpedo... (8/10/2012 9:34:26 AM)

Alright, so assuming that reliable US torpedoes are on, what changes in Japanese strategy to combat a much more dangerous sub threat?

I wonder because historically the Japanese certainly couldn't have known at the beginning that US fleet subs were effectively shooting blanks.



SuluSea -> RE: For want of a torpedo... (8/10/2012 12:53:11 PM)

From what I read the CBI theatre was a complete mess the different nations involved had their own goals.

CKS wanted all the supply and war material possible from the United States but not neccesarily to use against Japan but to hoard for later and use against the communists or other challenges within China.
Stilwell wanted a ground effort to open the Burma Road but couldn't get Divisions from the U.S. or CKS to make good on negotiated agreements.
Churchill had no interest in opening up Burma to supply China.

The Allied side being able to bypass political realities and use units as one cohesive force this theatre to conduct offensive operations years in advance of the real timetable offsets benefits the Japanese side gets in it's industrial base.

Of course the game is played best when two like minded individuals are playing so whatever you and your partner agrees to is best. I'm just playing devils advocate. [:)]



crsutton -> RE: For want of a torpedo... (8/10/2012 2:59:02 PM)

I think it is a dangerous to try to implement "political realities' into the play of the game. It will most likely just end friendships since everybody on this forum has an opinion or two about the politics of the war. Granted you are right about this as there is no way the Chinese would ever have anything to do with the British. However, I know of no Japanese player who would consider not using Japanese Army aircraft and Navy aircraft in a coordinated air attack from the same base.

Yeah, the Allies have it a bit too easy in Burma but there are counters that the Japanese player can use.

I would gladly agree to severely restrict my Allied units in Burma if my Japanese opponent would agree to severely restrict the number of medium bomber squadrons that could use torpedoes...[;)]



DanielAnsell -> RE: For want of a torpedo... (8/10/2012 3:42:15 PM)

I agree about the political considerations being a potential minefield. Most modders, and even the game designers, more or less have to pick and choose which political factors they emphasize in their work, and which they sort of gloss over or ignore completely.

That said, as the game stands, both sides get areas where the realities of politics, logistics, and other factors just aren't reflected in the game play. Probably for the best, since trying to cover everything would either lead to large swathes of abstraction, or an unplayably fiddly game experience.

Specifically though, how would Japanese side players change their game strategies, if at all, if US fleet sub torpedoes were fully operational from turn 1 on?



jmalter -> RE: For want of a torpedo... (8/10/2012 5:22:05 PM)

don't the manual state that IJN ships have a built-in negative modifier for ASW? IIRC this is implemented by a percentage reduction of ship experience.

some strategies:
1) 4-ship ASW TFs lead your transport convoys,
2) heavy training & use of LBA in ASW role,
3) CVEs & their air-groups used for ASW,
4) ship-based float-planes trained & used for ASW.

all of which reduces IJ offensive power, it's a trade-off.

in short, the IJ player must adopt Allied methods!



Puhis -> RE: For want of a torpedo... (8/11/2012 6:57:24 AM)

There is not much Japanese player can do. In 1942 there is hardly any good escort ships, and only a few air groups available. With reliable torpedoes, Japan is going to loose lot of ships in 1942 no matter what.

As a Japanese player, I wouldn't play the game with reliable torpedoes, because I think it changes early game too much. IMO subs are already too effective vs fast warships. In my PBEM game I've already torpedoed and damaged (or sunk) 10 allied carriers and 8 cruisers (it's 4/1943) and allies have done the same for me. For example CV Hiyo is torpedoed 3 times already, both Shokakus and couple CVLs have spent time in repair yard etc...

But if two players decide to play the game with reliable torpedoes, that's fine. I hope they both know what they are doing... [;)]



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.171875