Anyone seen any action in the Pacific in competitive games? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII: World at War



Message

CapitaineHaddock -> Anyone seen any action in the Pacific in competitive games? (3/13/2020 11:02:28 PM)

Hi community!

Played many PBEM games in the SC series over the years. AI doesn't really interest me other than as a learning tool.

Any experience with competitive games actually being decided elsewhere than Russia/Middle East/India? IMO it tends to become a race for the allies to scramble anything they have to prop up those theaters. A race for the Eurasian Heartland so to speak. Games where this pattern is not reproduced are in my experience either not very competitive, with either one player surpassing the other in skill level or one side having already gained a decisive advantage, at which point I am usually not very interested in continuing.

In the west, the only second front gambit I've come across is Germany launching a 43 or 44 attack on Britain, which sometimes happens. For Japan the choice seems to be India or Russia, a Pacific/Australia strategy simply taking too much time and resources to build up and yielding too little. Likewise, the US is too busy scrambling units to India/ME/Russia to do much else.

Again, I'm discussing competitive games here.

Looking forward to your thoughts on this.






Helsingor -> RE: Anyone seen any action in the Pacific in competitive games? (3/14/2020 9:20:48 PM)

You're right; it's rare for the Pacific to be decisive. Not sure what you consider a competitive game, but I am in one at present where my Axis opponent took out China in early '43, but is struggling in the Middle East and is pushing forward in southern Russia only (seemingly conceding the center and north to stalemate). In that case, the Pacific may be important because it's my chance to weaken/distract Japan from further expansion.



CapitaineHaddock -> RE: Anyone seen any action in the Pacific in competitive games? (3/14/2020 10:25:00 PM)

Right, thanks for your answer. I was thinking the Pacific may be underrated. After all, so many of those Islands are NM objectives and stay so after changing hands. Would be interesting to hear the experience of someone who has actually tried a "Pacific First" approach. I guess what it ultimately means is to trade MPPs for NMs. Then again, it usually takes quite some time and effort for Japan to get much in terms of MPPs in India.



Sparky0565 -> RE: Anyone seen any action in the Pacific in competitive games? (4/27/2020 6:14:51 PM)

I have played Japan and have forced a Chinese and Indian surrender. It is a big gamble to put a lot of research tank warfare development and build all the Japanese tanks. I think Japan's best plan is to take all the island groups, and wait for an anxious ALlied player to explose his fleet and whack it. The game isnt over but the other player's morale surely suffers when there is a reverse Midway. furthermore, Japan forces the Allies ot spend MPPs in the Pacific further watering down there expenditures. If Russia evacuates SIberia, than it is an easy grab for Japan.



Elessar2 -> RE: Anyone seen any action in the Pacific in competitive games? (4/27/2020 9:18:06 PM)

I'm currently trying to upgrade the US's Pacific AI for Crispy's scenario (tho I know the OP said he prefers human opponents). I have been a bit disappointed to not see any recent AAR's which give much attention to the Pacific, mainly because I am curious to see how it all plays out (mainly to see what I'll need to do with that Pacific-only map that I've been toying with).



Sparky0565 -> RE: Anyone seen any action in the Pacific in competitive games? (4/27/2020 9:27:58 PM)

I have not encountered too many opponents with a grasp of what to do in the PTO. The fleet in being strategy is probably the safest, but not for the Allies. They need to Island hops and do fighter sweeps.



ElvisJJonesRambo -> RE: Anyone seen any action in the Pacific in competitive games? (4/27/2020 11:43:56 PM)

Depends who you play. Some like to invade Hawaii. Some split their fleet to East/West. Many hide the carriers back in ports. Takes forever to dig them out, because supply/weather drags down them down. Most enjoyable strategy is subs, problem is, takes awhile to get the tech and cost. Opponent has to play Whack-A-Mole to knock one out. Most players (as the Japs) will try to bait you into a spot where the Air Support is most likely off China. Maritime bombers only cost 150 MMP and with Long Range, are the best.

Most Allied players lose with the Yanks in the Pacific. Why? Because they typically don't spend enough MMP or take the effort, because Russia is getting pounded. Like the kids game of Axis & Allies, it's all about Russia.



Tanaka -> RE: Anyone seen any action in the Pacific in competitive games? (4/28/2020 6:51:39 AM)

I tend to do better as Japan actually than I do as Germany. In my first Axis MP game I was playing against Sveint Germany and Italy had surrendered but in the Pacific as Japan I had invaded Russia, Mongolia, India, Australia, and the U.S. But of course the game was over without the rest of the Axis so I surrendered. It was fun though. Learned a lot in that game. Now I am playing my second MP game having learned from some of my mistakes I am doing better in Russia. The Pacific is fun but yep Russia is key.



lwarmonger -> RE: Anyone seen any action in the Pacific in competitive games? (4/28/2020 7:10:58 AM)

Pacific is a trap. Every MPP the allies put into it is one less that is put into opening up a second front against Russia. In a truly competitive game, Germany can practically finish Russia by mid-1943... so the Allies have exactly that long to be in Paris. And to do that it takes mostly every MPP the allies have to accomplish that goal on that timeline.

This is why playing the allies is so demoralizing... because they are so much weaker then in real life.



Marcinos1985 -> RE: Anyone seen any action in the Pacific in competitive games? (4/28/2020 10:52:25 AM)

Well, I have an opponent I played twice with, who is hyperactive in Pacific as Japan. Going after Hawaii, and even trying to snipe some US Carriers turtling on US West Coast. In our last, seeing I sent some US BB's to France, he launched fullscale invasion - nearly whole JAP fleet, 3 LAT's with Special Forces and around 8 units in normal transports (para's, armies, HQ). Only by small luck S&I gave me warning early enough to bring in my airforce from different parts of the world. Still he managed to inflict serious losses on my remaining ships and unload transports near Seattle and this port close to Vancouver.
One may argue ofc that sending fleet on the Atlantic was a genuine invitation. But how on Earth in RL Japan would be able to perform anything similar? At the same time taking SE Asia and China interior. Of course you may devote some MPP's to Pacific by US, but it both helps Germany immensely and still Japanese doom stack will remain very strong.
quote:

This is why playing the allies is so demoralizing... because they are so much weaker then in real life.

So true. Maybe next patch will change matters a little bit. But for now Axis dictates pace of the game, not Allied Industrial power.



Tanaka -> RE: Anyone seen any action in the Pacific in competitive games? (5/1/2020 6:39:07 PM)

I think if there were NM drops for invasions and bombings of homelands this would help. For example Japan invading the Aleutians, Australia, US Coast, etc...

Seems like there should be more incentives to do these things? The invaded countries just get extra units. Seems like it would make the war in the Pacific actually important. No one seems to care about that theater action wise and the game is still all about Europe and Russia.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.734375