RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/14/2010 9:06:49 PM

anarchyintheuk

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChickenOfTheSea

And they should obviously be forced to build the Shinano even if they want something else more???

If you require aircraft production to be historical shouldn't naval, merchant, vehicle, manpower, heavy industry, light industry, oil and resources be confined at historical levels?

Going a bit overboard no? No one is forcing anyone to have to build nates, the shinano or anything else. It's a simple recognization that pdu on is of greater benefit to Japan because they can change their production to make better use of it, the allies can't.

quote:

I think people are missing a major design intent of this game. Without the need for Japanese production, the strategic choices involved, and obtaining the necessary raw materials, why would Japan ever go to war in the first place??

I don't really understand the question as it regards pdu on or off. Japan's strategic choice to attack China is the catalyst for their production and raw material needs.

(in reply to ChickenOfTheSea)

Post #: 61

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/14/2010 9:40:55 PM

ChickenOfTheSea

Posts: 579
Joined: 6/7/2008
From: Virginia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChickenOfTheSea

And they should obviously be forced to build the Shinano even if they want something else more???

If you require aircraft production to be historical shouldn't naval, merchant, vehicle, manpower, heavy industry, light industry, oil and resources be confined at historical levels?

Going a bit overboard no? No one is forcing anyone to have to build nates, the shinano or anything else. It's a simple recognization that pdu on is of greater benefit to Japan because they can change their production to make better use of it, the allies can't.

quote:

I think people are missing a major design intent of this game. Without the need for Japanese production, the strategic choices involved, and obtaining the necessary raw materials, why would Japan ever go to war in the first place??

I don't really understand the question as it regards pdu on or off. Japan's strategic choice to attack China is the catalyst for their production and raw material needs.

I was just trying to point out that the design of the game is to allow the Japanese player to have choices in his production plans. If you start taking away those choices, I think the game suffers. Part of the point of the game is to do better than history. If the Japanese industry is still thriving into 44, why should they not be able to produce more and better. Nothing the Japanese could do short of invading the West Coast was going to affect allied production at all, so there is no reason why this should be symmetric.

I certainly didn't expect to be making people vomit.

< Message edited by ChickenOfTheSea -- 5/14/2010 9:44:18 PM >

_____________________________

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice, there is. - Manfred Eigen

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)

Post #: 62

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/14/2010 10:18:42 PM

AcePylut

Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline

simple... because the Japanese can tweak their aircraft industry to produce those planes which are effective against the allies. They aren't forced to produce those planes which were slightly less effective than their counterparts.

The allies, on the other hand, are forced to produce P-40's instead of having those factories produce P47's and Corsairs, no matter what.

_____________________________

(in reply to ChickenOfTheSea)

Post #: 63

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/14/2010 10:58:36 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

"I'm just sitting here watching the wheels go round and round
I really love to watch them roll
No longer riding on the merry-go-round
I just had to let it go"

Just had to quote John Lennon here. This thread has quickly gone off the rails. I believe the original intent was to get feedback on what the differences or merits of playing with PDU on and off were, not whether either was right. These arguments about which is more true to life, or gives an advantage to one side or the other, are pointless. Good points on either side of the issue, but it doesn't change anything, the game gives you the option to play either...period. Choose the option that fits your personality/style and the level of "alternative history" you want out of the game and be done with it. You want a historical upgrade path, go for it, you want some flexibilty in determining what air units fly what aircraft, go for it. Let's agree to disagree here and get on with things already.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/15/2010 1:17:51 AM >

(in reply to AcePylut)

Post #: 64

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 12:59:01 AM

mike scholl 1

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Osterhaut

And so why don't you just play game with production off and PDU off and leave everybody else alone? Why do I have to play the game the way you want? the designers gave options and if I want a option who are you to say I can not have it. If you do not like it you do not have to use it so leave us alone.

I do wish you folks would read what I've said before ranting. I've never said that everyone isn't/shouldn't be free to play the game any way they like. I've made two points during this discussion, and they are...

1) That the game would have been far better had its basic design been completely historical in as many respects as possible. Start with a solid and accurate historical foundation..., and then you can add as many "bells and whistles" as you wish as options. Start with "bells and whistles", and you can never get back to historically accurate.

2) "PDU on" favors the Japanese side, as only they have the ability to alter their production. I never said don't use it..., but I did suggest that an Allied player should realize this and ask for something in return if he agrees to the option.

Post #: 65

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 1:47:15 AM

vettim89

Posts: 3615
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

"I'm just sitting here watching the wheels go round and round
I really love to watch them roll
No longer riding on the merry-go-round
I just had to let it go"

Just had to quote John Lennon here. This thread has quickly gone off the rails. I believe the original intent was to get feedback on what the differences or merits of playing with PDU on and off were, not whether either was right. These arguments about which is more true to life, or gives an advantage to one side or the other, are pointless. Good points on either side of the issue, but it doesn't change anything, the game gives you the option to play either...period. Choose the option that fits your personality/style and the level of "alternative history" you want out of the game and be done with it. You want a historical upgrade path, go for it, you want some flexibilty in determining what air units fly what aircraft, go for it. Let's agree to disagree here and get on with things already.

The voice of reason. To get back to my original post as I was the one who started this thread. From what I can glean reding between the lines, with PDU = OFF you can expect

1. Having to deal with air groups that are not filled out while waiting for production to catch up to need

2. Withdrawing groups on a regular basis to allow those units with the most urgent need to have the airframes

3. Following the historical upgrade paths which may or may not lead you to places you may not want to go

4. Having some units stuck with obsolete aircraft for a long time

Does that about sum it up? Any important points I missed?

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 66

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 2:30:12 AM

topeverest

Posts: 3376
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Houston, TX - USA
Status: offline

Lets rename this thread 'There willl be BLOOD!'

There are some pretty strong opinions on the subject out there! I must say I am a bit perplexed by the fervor of the debate. It is clear that PDU increases the net allied difficulty to win somewhat, but it is not the Japanese 'ace in the hole'. The allied supriority is so significant that these advantages cannot bring the Japanese to victory. Even if one limits the dicussion only to airframes and pilots, the allies have much more and significantly better of both even considering this option on. Said another way, the allies will win the war in the sense that they achieve minimum victory conditions in the vast majority of pbem games, regardless of the game victory. It takes a significant string of military victories to achieve Japanese VP victory in PBEM. Better Japanese airframes alone can only play a small role in that victory. Strategy, tactics, and luck on the battlefield will play a much larger role.

Fortunately we all can retreat to our own corners and choose how to play this option.

_____________________________

Andy M

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)

Post #: 67

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 4:43:39 AM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

From what I can glean reding between the lines, with PDU = OFF you can expect

1. Having to deal with air groups that are not filled out while waiting for production to catch up to need

2. Withdrawing groups on a regular basis to allow those units with the most urgent need to have the airframes

3. Following the historical upgrade paths which may or may not lead you to places you may not want to go

4. Having some units stuck with obsolete aircraft for a long time

Does that about sum it up? Any important points I missed?

I'd add be careful tinkering with production numbers and R&D too much as well, you may find you inadvertently cut off an upgrade path, or build too many of an aircraft that only has one or two units equipped with them. When I first started playing with PDU off, I was pretty gung-ho on thinking I'd produce tons of Zero's and Oscar's...stop Nate, Sonia and other airframe production of inferior aircraft that appear later in the game. Well, now that I realize that many Sonia units only upgrade to the next generation of Sonia's for example, I've had to waste resources turning a factory back on to R&D of this aircraft. Maybe I didn't need to in the grand scheme of things, but you follow what I mean. Also there's no point building 100's of Zero's and Oscar's and stockpiling them to have a huge pool built up, when many units will not end up being able to use them anyway, and the ones that do may never end up using anywhere close to the numbers you've produced before they upgrade themselves. Just some additional things I've learned about playing with PDU off.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/15/2010 4:45:54 AM >

(in reply to vettim89)

Post #: 68

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 5:25:20 AM

vettim89

Posts: 3615
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline

Please don't take this as an insult to anyone. It sounds like PDU = OFF requires a much greater understanding of the Japanese aircraft production system which is already daunting. Would you JFB agree?

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 69

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 2:58:20 PM

seydlitz_slith

Posts: 2036
Joined: 6/16/2002
From: Danville, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

Please don't take this as an insult to anyone. It sounds like PDU = OFF requires a much greater understanding of the Japanese aircraft production system which is already daunting. Would you JFB agree?

Pretty close to the truth. Until my current pbem I have always played with PDU=off. In witp others had made spreadsheets showing total build out for each model of aircraft for the grand campaign including how many units upgraded to that type, etc. I had a color copy of that spreadsheet printed out and used it extensively to govern my builds.

In AE you can not change RD factories into current production factories like you could in witp. As a result Japan can not instantly start producing huge numbers of airframes. Also, even if you set your R&D factories to focus on the few types that you really want, they still "repair" very slowly, much slower than for production airframes. You can set all of your RD factories on December 8th to research the frank but when it is said and done I highly doubt that you will get the frank 6 months early. If you want to increase capacity the best way (other than expanding current production plants) is to assign an RD plant to produce whatever type of airframe is coming into service next (soonest) in the game. That way the factory converts on that date from RD to production, and then you can change it to another current type.

(in reply to vettim89)

Post #: 70

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 4:56:44 PM

topeverest

Posts: 3376
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Houston, TX - USA
Status: offline

Vettim89, I agree, becasue you really have to understand not only your current needs, but how many airframes can be upgraded to a new type. It is not clear at first glance, and many upgrade paths are counterintuitive.

_____________________________

Andy M

(in reply to seydlitz_slith)

Post #: 71

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 6:13:11 PM

ChickenOfTheSea

Posts: 579
Joined: 6/7/2008
From: Virginia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

Please don't take this as an insult to anyone. It sounds like PDU = OFF requires a much greater understanding of the Japanese aircraft production system which is already daunting. Would you JFB agree?

Agreed. You would have to research and tally what upgrades are coming up. It does no good to produce a lot of planes if only a couple of units have them in their upgrade path. It is very easy to wastefully produce planes and engines you can't use if you are not careful with this.

_____________________________

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice, there is. - Manfred Eigen

(in reply to vettim89)

Post #: 72

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 6:35:40 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

Please don't take this as an insult to anyone. It sounds like PDU = OFF requires a much greater understanding of the Japanese aircraft production system which is already daunting. Would you JFB agree?

I agree with your statement. The IJ (and the Aussies, Brits, Dutch, Chinese, etc.) also assumes a handicap versus PDU on because it must continue to use obsolescent aircraft with no control over numbers available.

_____________________________

(in reply to vettim89)

Post #: 73

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 6:49:15 PM

JWE

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChickenOfTheSea
Agreed. You would have to research and tally what upgrades are coming up. It does no good to produce a lot of planes if only a couple of units have them in their upgrade path. It is very easy to wastefully produce planes and engines you can't use if you are not careful with this.

Yes, true. Don't forget that even PDU=On follows aircraft upgrade paths defined in the editor. Way more particular than the Sqdn/Grp stuff but, nevertheless, accessible.

btw, don't think MO was suggesting you made him wanna puke. I think he was just feeling nauseous and you just happened to be the last poster when he hit the respond button.

(in reply to ChickenOfTheSea)

Post #: 74

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 6:53:40 PM

ChickenOfTheSea

Posts: 579
Joined: 6/7/2008
From: Virginia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChickenOfTheSea
Agreed. You would have to research and tally what upgrades are coming up. It does no good to produce a lot of planes if only a couple of units have them in their upgrade path. It is very easy to wastefully produce planes and engines you can't use if you are not careful with this.

Yes, true. Don't forget that even PDU=On follows aircraft upgrade paths defined in the editor. Way more particular than the Sqdn/Grp stuff but, nevertheless, accessible.

btw, don't think MO was suggesting you made him wanna puke. I think he was just feeling nauseous and you just happened to be the last poster when he hit the respond button.

That's what I assumed. I wasn't offended in the least.

_____________________________

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice, there is. - Manfred Eigen

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 75

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 8:50:06 PM

bairdlander2

Posts: 2264
Joined: 3/28/2009
From: Toronto Ontario but living in Edmonton,Alberta
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Osterhaut

Pwople like that just make me want to vomit. They are arrogant and ignorant and they want every body to do what they want. And all they do is rant about how some body does not do it like how they want. I am sorry but these people are nothing but fat no bodys sitting in easy chairs that have never served and that pretend they know something because a website says so. These people make me sick.

MO

Take it easy.Sounds like somebody peed in your cereal

Post #: 76

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 9:15:53 PM

JWE

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

Apologies were offered and accepted. So back off birdlander.

I realize you are just trying to be amusing, but it's neither funny nor appropriate at this point. Thank you.

< Message edited by JWE -- 5/16/2010 12:18:43 AM >

(in reply to bairdlander2)

Post #: 77

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/15/2010 11:11:39 PM

NAVMAN

Posts: 436
Joined: 12/31/2002
Status: offline

I play w/pdu "off", more for convenience and for "historical" purposes than anything else. My prob w/pdu "on",
would be low to moderate knowledge of what path Jap. and Commonwealth aircraft should be. As a "what if"
variant, I see nothing wrong w/experimenting w/pdu "on". Pdu "on" assumes that the upgrade paths are essentially historically correct and from what I have seen, w/some minor exceptions, for the US, that
is acceptable for me.
Thx

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 78

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/16/2010 1:54:17 AM

bairdlander2

Posts: 2264
Joined: 3/28/2009
From: Toronto Ontario but living in Edmonton,Alberta
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

Apologies were offered and accepted. So back off birdlander.

I realize you are just trying to be amusing, but it's neither funny nor appropriate at this point. Thank you.

I accept your apology

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 79

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/22/2010 10:21:25 PM

Deca

Posts: 96
Joined: 11/20/2007
Status: offline

Unfortunately, historical accuracy conjoined with concepts of absolute balance are virtually impossible to achive in indefectible accord.

Likewise, any debates in regards to the above are caught within that paradox.

In regards to PDU/On, I would argue that few would deny that PDU=On is of greater benefit to Japan; moreover, it can also correctly be debated that used to its fullest can create a-historical production & results.

However, even with a multitude of house rules (which I'd argue the majority are more "pro-Japan" -- see 'typical' example below) coupled with PDU/On still leads to a nearly inevitable Japan defeat unless the Japanese player continuously pulls of stunning 1-sided victories repeatedly in addition to the allied player making systematic strategic as well as tactical mistakes on a grand scale.

Examples of typical house rules which I'd claim assit the Japanese more in the long run if implemented.
No city bombing until 1944
Realistic Burma withdraw
No unit fragment to cut off retreat
No naval 4E bombing under 10k
No allied non-Chinese LCU may enter China until 1944
No more than one 4E BGroup per airbase until 1944

Having stated the above, PDU on does indeed favor the Japanese, but to suggest or imply that the allied player should get something in return is nothing more than adding 1 more nail into the japanese pre-made coffin.

Edit for clarrification:
Wanted to make clear that I'm in no way "knocking" the game as I feel that WitPAE is the best game "investment" dollar-for-dollar as it's hands down the best bang for the buck entertainment-wise as well as the best WWII game out.

< Message edited by Deca -- 5/23/2010 12:48:25 AM >

_____________________________

"In times of war, the Devil makes more room in Hell"

(in reply to bairdlander2)

Post #: 80

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/23/2010 10:24:32 AM

ChezDaJez

Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline

quote:

To get back to my original post as I was the one who started this thread. From what I can glean reding between the lines, with PDU = OFF you can expect

1. Having to deal with air groups that are not filled out while waiting for production to catch up to need

2. Withdrawing groups on a regular basis to allow those units with the most urgent need to have the airframes

3. Following the historical upgrade paths which may or may not lead you to places you may not want to go

4. Having some units stuck with obsolete aircraft for a long time

Does that about sum it up? Any important points I missed?

As Brad mentioned earlier, we are playing with PDU off in AE after plating with PDU on in our CHS game.

Your summation is pretty accurate, but I would like to provide a few insights from a Japanese perspective as to the benefit of PDU on or off.

First, despite what Mike says, PDU benefits both sides. But Mike is correct in saying that the Japanese player will see a greater benefit BUT only when playing a stock WITP game. The benefit is much more reduced in AE.

With PDU on in AE, the Japanese player can build more advanced aircraft in greater numbers than historical but in the end it does not benefit the Japanese player that much. Why? Because, generally speaking, Japanese aircraft service ratings get worse the more advanced the aircraft get. Most late-war Japanese aircraft have good stats but lousy service ratings. It's great to build a gazillion Franks and Georges but not so great when they sit on the ground due their crappy ratings. Against a smart allied player, advanced Japanese aircraft become almost a one-shot affair because once they are damaged, allied bombers can turn them into scrap metal with little difficulty.

Japanese aircraft production becomes much easier with PDU on. I want 500 Tony... I build 500 Tonys and their engines. That's assuming of course that I can keep the flow of vital materials to the home islands uninterrupted. Once those vital resources fail to arrive in the home islands, PDU becomes just a distant dream for the Japanese player as production drops to nothing. No production, no advanced aircraft... simple as that. This is a very real concern for the Japanese player once the allies get working torpedoes.

On the other hand, with PDU off, the Japanese player is stuck (as are the Allies) with many units flying obsolete aircraft. Some Nate and early Oscar units don't upgrade until late 43 / early 44. Guess what the smart Japanese player will do with those units? He'll tuck them away into some backwater airfield and stick them on training so that when they do upgrade, he'll have several very experienced air units that can be thrown into the fray.

Japanese production is much harder with PDU off. Timing is critical. You must research what to build, how many to build and when to start building them for each and every aircraft type. Some units are restricted not only to what they can upgrade to but also when. Doesn't do any good to plan to build 500 Tonys if I can only upgrade one unit a month. Changes must be made incrementally and care must be excercised to continue building obsolete aircraft such as Nates to keep those units that fly them reasonably well equipped unitl their upgrade time comes.

One nice thing about allied production that no one ever mentions is that YOU CAN"T CRASH IT! One mistake with Japanese production and you can crash it quite easily. It takes months to recover from crashing the Japanese economy with lots of wasted resources. Ask me how I know!

Anyhow, that's my 2 cents. Having played PDU both ways, I can say each has pluses and minuses. Choose the one that best suits your style of play. Prefer a more historically lmited game, play with it off otherwise go all out with it on. And if you play with it on, you don't need to give up anything in return to the allied player. He's going to kick your ass anyways. We Japanese players are a masochistic lot.

Chez

_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to vettim89)

Post #: 81

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/23/2010 11:04:48 AM

mike scholl 1

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deca

Having stated the above, PDU on does indeed favor the Japanese, but to suggest or imply that the allied player should get something in return is nothing more than adding 1 more nail into the japanese pre-made coffin.

So what you are saying is that we should continue along the route of adding nothing to the game that doesn't favor the Japanese Player, be it accurate or total fantasy? Presumably until the point is reached that Japan can "win" World War Two?

As I recall, when the IJN's Staff was gaming out the operations at Midway and beyond, the judges kept interfering and "unsinking" their losses, allowing the "Home Team" to win a "Decisive Victory". Unfortunately for the IJN, they proved unable to match this feat in reality. So now you want to recreate in in our game? Maybe we should re-title it "Yamamoto has a Wet Dream", as it will have nothing to do with the actual history of the War in the Pacific on this planet.

(in reply to Deca)

Post #: 82

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/23/2010 11:10:57 AM

mike scholl 1

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

Anyhow, that's my 2 cents. Having played PDU both ways, I can say each has pluses and minuses. Choose the one that best suits your style of play. Prefer a more historically lmited game, play with it off otherwise go all out with it on. And if you play with it on, you don't need to give up anything in return to the allied player. He's going to kick your ass anyways. We Japanese players are a masochistic lot.

Chez

A much more reasonable summation of the PDU rules..., though as an Allied opponent I would see nothing wrong with asking for something in return. Maybe on the order of no "Mersing Gambit" allowed, and restrictions on some of the other "cheesy moves" that have popped up in AAR's.

(in reply to ChezDaJez)

Post #: 83

RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting - 5/23/2010 10:05:44 PM

Kull

Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deca

Having stated the above, PDU on does indeed favor the Japanese, but to suggest or imply that the allied player should get something in return is nothing more than adding 1 more nail into the japanese pre-made coffin.

So what you are saying is that we should continue along the route of adding nothing to the game that doesn't favor the Japanese Player, be it accurate or total fantasy? Presumably until the point is reached that Japan can "win" World War Two?

As I recall, when the IJN's Staff was gaming out the operations at Midway and beyond, the judges kept interfering and "unsinking" their losses, allowing the "Home Team" to win a "Decisive Victory". Unfortunately for the IJN, they proved unable to match this feat in reality. So now you want to recreate in in our game? Maybe we should re-title it "Yamamoto has a Wet Dream", as it will have nothing to do with the actual history of the War in the Pacific on this planet.

No, YOU are the one who is pushing this to the extreme. Nobody in this thread or any other is demanding that AE be modifed to the point of allowing a Japanese victory. Seriously - go back and read the tripe you just posted. You are smarter than this. Give it a rest.

(in reply to mike scholl 1)

Post #: 84

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> RE: PDU = off. Does anyone play with this setting

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]