Scoring?

Scoring? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945

Message

Mr.Frag -> Scoring? (9/26/2003 2:26:27 AM)
Is the end goal of the VP values of things planned to be balanced against history in such a manner that Japan breaking even with history is considered a draw, lasting long a win, etc? I don't think anyone is under any disbeliefs this time around due to the realities of fuel/supply that Japan can actually win (like in UV where winning by auto-victory was a standard goal for any player). Strategy looking into the game obviously needs to be shaped as something that can realistically happen based on what is theoretically possible between two equally skilled players. How do others view this? Will we be looking at land grab/resource grab expansion until checked and rolled back? Denial of key areas to break convoy routes (something that can actually be done now that fuel/supply has value)? Just wondering what people are looking at getting out of the game beyond the fun of playing for the sake of playing something at such an epic scale?

Sonny -> (9/26/2003 2:49:09 AM)
I'm looking forward to the fun of playing for the sake of playing something of such an epic scale.

PzB74 -> (9/26/2003 3:06:57 AM)
This is exactly what I've been trying to address in the Ki-100 thread. 'Winning' is a relative issue and you're right when you say that Japan can't win a victory of conquest. If she can prevent the US from nuking them, then this has to be some sort of victory. Japan has to be able to survive until the end date of the scenario played and still be able to defend herself. This would also represent some kind of victory. I want both a historical accurate game and a challenge.... Loosing big time will bring total defeat on Japan already in 1944. Playing a historical accurate game should bring defeat in september 45. Performing better than history should put Japan in a better situation at this date. Using 'history' as a receipt isn't easy since every little thing that doesn't go exactly as it did during the Pacific War will change the outcome. Taking this into account is challenging and, yes - back to Snigbers famous remark - if you change history the outcome will not be historical :D Incredible how much truth such simple logic contains....

Antonius -> (9/28/2003 4:53:06 AM)
Usually I am a bit skeptical about determining victory mostly by comparing the player's achievement with the historical outcome since it means one assumes that the historical outcome was close to a fairly good though not brilliant performance by both sides and players always much more hindsight and intel than the actual commanders. But for this game I think that the timing of Japan's defeat makes a lot of sense: - for the Americans defeating Japan without any real Soviet help was a strategic victory in the emerging conflict with the USSR. If they had won in 1944 they could have used more ressources in Europe, which in turn would have altered the post-war division of the continent. Had they won in 1946 they could have faced the prospect of a Japan divided into US and Soviet zones or even worse, in turn altering the whole balance in Asia... - for the Japanese every day without a US invasion held some hope of some new development.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.640625