Scoring?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Scoring?

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

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

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Scoring? - 9/26/2003 2:26:27 AM

Mr.Frag

Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline

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?

Post #: 1

- 9/26/2003 2:49:09 AM

Sonny

Posts: 2008
Joined: 4/3/2002
Status: offline

I'm looking forward to the fun of playing for the sake of playing something of such an epic scale.

_____________________________

Quote from Snigbert -

"If you mess with the historical accuracy, you're going to have ahistorical outcomes."

"I'll say it again for Sonny's sake: If you mess with historical accuracy, you're going to have
ahistorical outcomes. "

(in reply to Mr.Frag)

Post #: 2

- 9/26/2003 3:06:57 AM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

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....

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to Mr.Frag)

Post #: 3

- 9/28/2003 4:53:06 AM

Antonius

Posts: 209
Joined: 6/6/2000
From: Saint Arnoult en Yvelines FRANCE
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

Wargamo, ergo sum

(in reply to Mr.Frag)

Post #: 4