Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlvaroSousa

This is my take so everyone understands.

If half the players are saying the oil situation is fine and half the players are complaining they are running out of oil, then the oil situation is balanced.... so far.

There is absolutely no way I can perfectly mimic the conditions on December 7th 1941 for the oil situation. There are so many variables to consider. So we start from history then design from there taking into account hindsight. Included is both sides managing their resources.

Just remember everyone this is FUN wargame based on history, not a historical recreation.

I'm sorry but but a 'fun' wargame for me is you start with the actual historical data that you have to create the actual positions the opposing sides start with. Before any moves have been made. This has been completely ignored in this game with a '41 start. You might as well have dwarfs and elves running around as that could be 'fun' too.

Also the starting data is NOT based on history at all. Which is why I am constantly pointing it out.

You could have just looked at the data in War in the Pacific at the '41 start and converted the resource pools in that game to your system. But it looks like you completely ignored all the data available of what Japan had as resources to make a 'fun' game.

I'm sorry but that just does not cut it for me. The '41 start just has so many things wrong with it, I do not see it ever getting corrected since it appears that it would not make the game 'fun'.

I have played Japan a lot in WitP AE and I found the historical 'restrictions' on Japan's early moves to be a lot of 'fun'. But apparently you think Japan has to have massive ahistorical advantages in order for Japanese players to have 'fun'.

One suggestion would be to make a '41 historical start scenario and then have the current '41 scenario start be a Japan Fantasy start

One reason I am so harsh about all of this is I hate revisionist history and this game takes that to a new level with the '41 start as things stand now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stjeand



NO war game can or will ever be "historical" it can only start that way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: okeefe
You guys realize ships can teleport half way across the world in this game right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: incbob

quote:

ORIGINAL: okeefe
You guys realize ships can teleport half way across the world in this game right?

You realize that the Pearl Harbor Strike Force left Pearl on Nov 26 and attacked on Dec 7. They went a rough route, so as to not be noticed. They did not go top speed. So they went from Japan to Hawaii in 11 days going slow and taking their time.

A single turn is 14 days. So yeah, it makes sense that ships can go pretty far.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec

I am playing a couple of HvH games, '41 mirror match. We are both new to WPP but familiar with WPE.
We are up to turn 6, January '42. Indonesia has gone, Philippines have gone or are about to. In one game PNG has fallen, in the other it is about to. In one game India and Australia have been invaded, looks to me as if India will fall fairly easily, not sure if Australia can hold out as that last city looks tough to assault but expect it is possible.
Not sure what will happen in China but I guess once the weather clears up that Japan will be able to make progress and take all the low lying fruit.
So maybe by the end of '42 there will be African UK, Mainland US, NZ and a few bits and pieces left. Have no idea how well the Allies can come back from that, perhaps that is normal and they have every prospect of a win from there.
Is that the general sort of flow that other players are seeing for HvH games ?

quote:

I've played 3 allied PBEM games up to near the end of 1942 and have held a line at Chittagong, Changsha and Xi'an on the Asian mainland. If my opponents were a bit more aggressive they could certainly have taken New Caledonia and Fiji but haven't yet and probably won't now I have carrier parity.

A crucial aspect of play I've found has been sending all possible production from the UK and a lot, around 40 units from the US to India. With that boost, after you buy out the garrison divisions turn 1 for cheap they get reinforced in a couple of turns and India can soon be buying more divisions or even corps sized units with their massive manpower/logistics. The Indians can set up a first defensive line at Chittagong and fall back to Dacca then Calcutta. Even if Calcutta falls, it's fine as the Indians can be pumping out a division every turn by 1943. Ceylon is 100% lost if the Japanese want to take it though, not worth using carriers to try to defend.

In China, Changsha should fall by the end of '42 given good Axis play but it shouldn't be too hard to hold Chungking/Chengtu due to the horrible supply lines the Japanese have to use to get there. In the north, as long as you move the communist armies south straight away to defend the railroad, Lanzhou shouldn't be a feasible objective for the Japanese.

Australia looks nasty until you realise that there really isn't anything worth defending other than the Melbourne, Sydney, Canberra area and if the Japanese want to challenge you for that, it should present a chance for a favourable carrier battle under your land based air. Places like Cairns, Darwin, Rockhampton are fine to give up.

The only things you can't afford to lose are Delhi, Lanzhou (the ComChi's surrender), Sydney (for the level 5+ port in the South Pacific) or more than one carrier. Until you outnumber the Japanese carriers the allied CV fleet should be sitting in Sydney as it's the most vunerable key spot and it never moves anywhere dangerous unless covered by at least two land based naval bomber units. In a 4v6 fight the Japanese usually win 3-1 in carriers sunk.


Picture of how my Burma lines 1-2 are usually set up from a new PBEM game. You can see India at nearly 70 production already with more to come soon and almost all divisions non-garrison and high strength. One garrison left at Madras.

quote:

ORIGINAL: YueJin
The India situation I'm not certain on yet. I think if the Japanese dedicated 6+ armies to it along with 3-4 SNFL divisions it is likely that India would fall even with a well organised defence. The Burma line can definitely hold onto Calcutta throughout most of 1942 and in 43, the Japanese are vunerable to being cut off if they try to press all the way to Delhi. The Indians may need to start with a few more strength points on the initial divisions but I'll wait until I've played a very aggressive opponent who strips other fronts to destroy India before deciding.

quote:

The reason Japan probably needs carriers to take out Southern Aus is that it's an enormous journey through jungle along a single railroad if you don't land further south than Rockhampton and I don't think you can get there before the US transports arrive in March/April and drop off a couple of American corps which stop you dead. It may be possible but as I said no-one's tried being that aggressive against me yet and I think it would be challenging.

The India situation I'm not certain on yet. I think if the Japanese dedicated 6+ armies to it along with 3-4 SNFL divisions it is likely that India would fall even with a well organised defence. The Burma line can definitely hold onto Calcutta throughout most of 1942 and in 43, the Japanese are vunerable to being cut off if they try to press all the way to Delhi. The Indians may need to start with a few more strength points on the initial divisions but I'll wait until I've played a very aggressive opponent who strips other fronts to destroy India before deciding.

quote:

ORIGINAL: eskuche

More so than in any other game I've played, early turns for IJN are a mad land grab dash because opposition is 1. limited, 2. known (no fog of war on land/air counters -- this should probably be changed a bit), and 3. restricted in movement. Ahistorically, this opens the game for ridiculous gambits with little to no penalty.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikel

incbob, of course the oil was for both military an civil use, who said the contrary?

The facts according to Cohen are:

1. Japan had stockpiled 43 millions barrels by December 1941.

2. Japan consumed 42 millions barrels along 1942. Not an estimate, what they really used in military and civil use.


So in theory Japan could had fought the first year of war without conquering any source of oil. But not the second, they were wrong in this.

But the game is designed without nearly any reserves of oil (not historical), so you have to conquer oil sources as fast as you can or you are done. Is this not the origin of the discussion?