RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game

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: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game

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] >> World in Flames >> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game

Page: << < prev 21 22 [23] 24 25 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/8/2010 6:33:26 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skanvak

A possibility to continue the game after the official end is interesting and should be added. The bottomline is that the game don't go far without extension (Patif).

Yes, this is an optional rules in MWIF. I haven't coded it yet because, unlike other optional rules, this is something the players are likely to want to change during the game. I am going to take a look at other optional rules to see if changing them "on the fly" might be a reasonable thing to enable (the coding would have to be simple though - I don't want to be adding all the light cruisers in the middle of a game).

Suggestions for which optional rules to make dynamic?

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Skanvak)

Post #: 661

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/8/2010 6:48:26 PM

CrusssDaddy

Posts: 330
Joined: 8/6/2004
Status: offline

A debug option to let you sandbox your own scenarios, like that of the old CWiF, would be golden. I've had the Axis invade America in 1939, giant German v. Russian tank battles in Africa, and Risk-style games where each side drafts minors, gets 100 build points to field a starting army, and then goes to town. That would also eliminate the need to program all of the default scenarios - we could just set them up ourselves.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 662

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/8/2010 7:29:26 PM

Anendrue

Posts: 817
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

A debug option to let you sandbox your own scenarios, like that of the old CWiF, would be golden. I've had the Axis invade America in 1939, giant German v. Russian tank battles in Africa, and Risk-style games where each side drafts minors, gets 100 build points to field a starting army, and then goes to town. That would also eliminate the need to program all of the default scenarios - we could just set them up ourselves.

Are you talking about the ability to mod and create your own scenario or use debug to change the things you don't like on the fly?

_____________________________

Integrity is what you do when nobody is watching.

(in reply to CrusssDaddy)

Post #: 663

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/8/2010 7:59:17 PM

micheljq

Posts: 791
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skanvak

A possibility to continue the game after the official end is interesting and should be added. The bottomline is that the game don't go far without extension (Patif).

Most players have more than enough with just the basic version of WiF without the options, especially when not very experimented. Then just adding the various options, is just enough already for most of them.

I find that WiF is not Axis & Allies on steroids, it's even beyond that.

_____________________________

Michel Desjardins,
"Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious" - Oscar Wilde
"History is a set of lies agreed upon" - Napoleon Bonaparte after the battle of Waterloo, june 18th, 1815

(in reply to Skanvak)

Post #: 664

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/8/2010 8:11:33 PM

michaelbaldur

Posts: 4774
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: offline

I don�t have a group to play with ...so I play alot of sandbox ...

Spain is a good place to fight .... I play with 20 random units from 2 random major powers.

with free scrapping ....

_____________________________

the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

if you have questions or issues with the game, just contact me on Michaelbaldur1@gmail.com

(in reply to micheljq)

Post #: 665

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/9/2010 2:52:31 AM

Simulation01

Posts: 540
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skanvak

A possibility to continue the game after the official end is interesting and should be added. The bottomline is that the game don't go far without extension (Patif).

Yes, this is an optional rules in MWIF. I haven't coded it yet because, unlike other optional rules, this is something the players are likely to want to change during the game. I am going to take a look at other optional rules to see if changing them "on the fly" might be a reasonable thing to enable (the coding would have to be simple though - I don't want to be adding all the light cruisers in the middle of a game).

Suggestions for which optional rules to make dynamic?

I am definitely glad to hear this. If you truly do this...despite my anxiety over these impulses....I will get the game.

Also, will the major powers have the ability to switch sides in the conflict or make peace?
I would really like to see that.

Also, how far does the research and weapons go? Will we be able to use nukes in any way? That is a request if it is not in the game.(I don't see how it couldn't be in the game)

I know you said that invading the USA would not be possible, but I was wondering if you meant that was literally a restriction built into the game code or is it simply unrealistic because of because of the magnitude of the feat?

Will you add and Alternate History scenarios? I'm requesting them if you don't have any?

Thank you, Shannon for replying and trying to dispel my bewilderment.

_____________________________

"Tho' much is taken, much abides; and though we are not now that strength which in old days moved Earth and Heaven; that which we are, we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts, made weak by time and fate, but strong in will." -Tennyson

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 666

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/9/2010 3:31:33 AM

paulderynck

Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulation01

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skanvak

A possibility to continue the game after the official end is interesting and should be added. The bottomline is that the game don't go far without extension (Patif).

Yes, this is an optional rules in MWIF. I haven't coded it yet because, unlike other optional rules, this is something the players are likely to want to change during the game. I am going to take a look at other optional rules to see if changing them "on the fly" might be a reasonable thing to enable (the coding would have to be simple though - I don't want to be adding all the light cruisers in the middle of a game).

Suggestions for which optional rules to make dynamic?

I am definitely glad to hear this. If you truly do this...despite my anxiety over these impulses....I will get the game.

Also, will the major powers have the ability to switch sides in the conflict or make peace?
I would really like to see that.

In the board game, they can make peace if both (or all those involved) powers agree under any terms that don't directly violate the rules. This is almost impossible to code in a computer game. There is a special rule for peace between Russia and Japan (if they have a war) that is specific enough to be coded.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulation01
Also, how far does the research and weapons go? Will we be able to use nukes in any way? That is a request if it is not in the game.(I don't see how it couldn't be in the game)

Research is represented abstractly by the ability to build units ahead of their year of arrival, providing all of that type are already built. Of course they cost more to build in that case.
Edit: Only the U.S. can build A-bombs and can deliver one (only) in each of the last three turns of the game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulation01
I know you said that invading the USA would not be possible, but I was wondering if you meant that was literally a restriction built into the game code or is it simply unrealistic because of because of the magnitude of the feat?

It is possible given the right conditions, by any of the Axis.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulation01
Will you add and Alternate History scenarios? I'm requesting them if you don't have any?

Thank you, Shannon for replying and trying to dispel my bewilderment.

Alternate history scenarios are not the focus for MWiF version 1. What happens after that is dependent on a great many factors.

< Message edited by paulderynck -- 6/9/2010 3:33:44 AM >

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Simulation01)

Post #: 667

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/9/2010 3:36:23 AM

Anendrue

Posts: 817
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulation01
I am definitely glad to hear this. If you truly do this...despite my anxiety over these impulses....I will get the game.

Also, will the major powers have the ability to switch sides in the conflict or make peace?
I would really like to see that.

Also, how far does the research and weapons go? Will we be able to use nukes in any way? That is a request if it is not in the game.(I don't see how it couldn't be in the game)

I know you said that invading the USA would not be possible, but I was wondering if you meant that was literally a restriction built into the game code or is it simply unrealistic because of because of the magnitude of the feat?

Will you add and Alternate History scenarios? I'm requesting them if you don't have any?

Thank you, Shannon for replying and trying to dispel my bewilderment.

Playing solitaire you can play both sides. Same for Hotseat. I am unsure if you can swith against the AI. The other two modes (Internet and PBEM) are vs. live players.
V-Weapons and atomic bombs are part of optional rule 23 from PiF (Planes in Flames)
Research in WiF is not like HoI. This game has variations in the thousands of units that exist. Building new units and scrapping old units represents a part of research and unit upgrades. So these differnces in unit capabilities combined with drawing from a blind force pool covers the success and failure aspect of research. So even if you are building and creating new units it must be balanced with a solid production plan. However, if Germany wants a navy the counters do exist.
It is somewhat unrealistic to invade the US but it can be done. However you would probably need to subdue France, England, and keep the USSR at bay or conquer them too.
I believe the scenario choices were fixed a long time ago.

I strongly suggest you download the free Rules as Written (RaW) from ADG's website and see what the game is about. In my own opinion it is a strategic and tactical simulation of the second World War forcing players to deal with the availability and capability to produce combat units to conduct warfare. Since not every location in the world can be ideally covered, the game may branch into unexpected directions. Therefore deviating from history. Russia invading Persia, Japan sending units to the Med, and so forth. It is not your typical free wheeling game for an afternoon. Instead it is an extremely massive chess game of thousands of pieces and locations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

I don�t have a group to play with ...so I play alot of sandbox ...

Spain is a good place to fight .... I play with 20 random units from 2 random major powers.

with free scrapping ....

Well depending on how moddable WiF ends up being recreating the Spanish Civil War could be very interesting indeed.

_____________________________

Integrity is what you do when nobody is watching.

(in reply to Simulation01)

Post #: 668

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/9/2010 3:38:39 AM

paulderynck

Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

About alternate histories - having said the above, I 've found every game of WiF I've ever played has been "an alternate history".

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 669

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/9/2010 3:48:23 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulation01

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skanvak

A possibility to continue the game after the official end is interesting and should be added. The bottomline is that the game don't go far without extension (Patif).

Yes, this is an optional rules in MWIF. I haven't coded it yet because, unlike other optional rules, this is something the players are likely to want to change during the game. I am going to take a look at other optional rules to see if changing them "on the fly" might be a reasonable thing to enable (the coding would have to be simple though - I don't want to be adding all the light cruisers in the middle of a game).

Suggestions for which optional rules to make dynamic?

I am definitely glad to hear this. If you truly do this...despite my anxiety over these impulses....I will get the game.

Also, will the major powers have the ability to switch sides in the conflict or make peace?
I would really like to see that.

In the board game, they can make peace if both (or all those involved) powers agree under any terms that don't directly violate the rules. This is almost impossible to code in a computer game. There is a special rule for peace between Russia and Japan (if they have a war) that is specific enough to be coded.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulation01
Also, how far does the research and weapons go? Will we be able to use nukes in any way? That is a request if it is not in the game.(I don't see how it couldn't be in the game)

Research is represented abstractly by the ability to build units ahead of their year of arrival, providing all of that type are already built. Of course they cost more to build in that case.
Edit: Only the U.S. can build A-bombs and can deliver one (only) in each of the last three turns of the game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulation01
I know you said that invading the USA would not be possible, but I was wondering if you meant that was literally a restriction built into the game code or is it simply unrealistic because of because of the magnitude of the feat?

It is possible given the right conditions, by any of the Axis.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simulation01
Will you add and Alternate History scenarios? I'm requesting them if you don't have any?

Thank you, Shannon for replying and trying to dispel my bewilderment.

Alternate history scenarios are not the focus for MWiF version 1. What happens after that is dependent on a great many factors.

Simulation01:

Paul's answers are good enough for me. And Andy's (abj9562) augment them somewhat.

I'm busy coding and debugging, so I'll let their answers serve as stand-ins for mine.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 670

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/9/2010 4:57:32 AM

Orm

Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

Invading USA is not that unrealistic with a very succesfull Axis.

For example. A successful unexpected invasion on United Kingdom during 1940 and conquering both United Kingdom and France during 1940. Then a combined attack by all 3 axis in USSR in 1941 pushing the Soviet Union into the Urals and eventually conquering USSR in 1943. Meanwhile USA is desperate to help the USSR and loses alot of his fleet against land based axis air force. During 1940-1943 axis launches successful attacks on the mediteranian and eventually on India as well. Not all of this would be needed to invade USA. But for a successful invasion, getting more than a few hexes, it is probaly not far from what is needed.

Most of these games would have been surrendered far before the invasion. I also belive that the skill of the Axis players would need to be superior of the Allied players for this to happen.

Edit: The Axis would also need to be lucky.

< Message edited by Orm -- 6/9/2010 4:59:31 AM >

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 671

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/9/2010 9:59:25 AM

Joseignacio

Posts: 2449
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: micheljq

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skanvak

A possibility to continue the game after the official end is interesting and should be added. The bottomline is that the game don't go far without extension (Patif).

Most players have more than enough with just the basic version of WiF without the options, especially when not very experimented. Then just adding the various options, is just enough already for most of them.

I find that WiF is not Axis & Allies on steroids, it's even beyond that.

My eyes almost came out of their sockets when I read that, but I didn't want to be a fanboy or sound like that.

I have played both and the difference between WiF and A&A is bigger than between chess and "snake and ladders". I wonder what steroids mean in this case, but I think WiF is way much more...

< Message edited by Joseignacio -- 6/9/2010 10:06:28 AM >

(in reply to micheljq)

Post #: 672

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/19/2010 4:53:44 PM

Patience

Posts: 53
Joined: 5/15/2010
From: Colorado
Status: offline

Steve,

Just a question, not sure if this has been talked about before.

In the game do you have the options through buttons or whatever to narrow the view of military pieces by type. so if i want to just see where all fighter aircraft are i can press a button or make a selection and only the location of fighter aircraft of all nationalities are displayed on the map.

_____________________________

"Time is the greatest teacher... Unfortunately she kills all her students."

(in reply to Joseignacio)

Post #: 673

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/19/2010 10:43:16 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Patience

Steve,

Just a question, not sure if this has been talked about before.

In the game do you have the options through buttons or whatever to narrow the view of military pieces by type. so if i want to just see where all fighter aircraft are i can press a button or make a selection and only the location of fighter aircraft of all nationalities are displayed on the map.

Nope, not available.

You can use the Units form to filter by dozen of factors: nationality, unit type, location (e.g., on map), year built, etc. That form has an insert map that will center on any unit you click on. The main detailed map can be linked to center onthe unit too. So, if you bring up the Units form, you can see a shortened list of just your fighters that are on the map, and then click on each one of them in turn to have the map(s) center on them. Not exactly what you are looking for, but a close proximity.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Patience)

Post #: 674

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 7/22/2011 8:46:03 PM

38special

Posts: 24
Joined: 2/26/2007
From: Northern Virginia
Status: offline

Personally, I see many German options in WIF. Attacking France Early, especially with optional setup rebuilds allow France 39 option. UK invasion by summer of 40 and maybe the Germans can invade Iceland as a precursor to USA invasion by then as well.

I will have to try that in my next game.

_____________________________

Arrogance is the next best thing to being there.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 675

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 7/22/2011 9:42:02 PM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

About alternate histories - having said the above, I 've found every game of WiF I've ever played has been "an alternate history".

this is what makes the game so engrossing. every game is like reading a detailed alternate history of WWII. and it's a page-turner you just can't put down. All that in standard vanilla World in Flames.

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 676

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 7/22/2011 10:10:28 PM

Patton_71

Posts: 25
Joined: 2/5/2010
Status: offline

My personal favorite is a plan Z scenario where the German navy has been built up to the level Raeder was promised by 1944. Granted all other powers would have been on a faster building clip than historically, but I always wondered what a WWII version of Jutland would be like.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 677

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 7/23/2011 7:34:58 AM

oscar72se

Posts: 100
Joined: 8/28/2006
From: Gothenburg Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 38special

Personally, I see many German options in WIF. Attacking France Early, especially with optional setup rebuilds allow France 39 option. UK invasion by summer of 40 and maybe the Germans can invade Iceland as a precursor to USA invasion by then as well.

I will have to try that in my next game.

When attacking France early, I setup my RES off the Belgian border together with Rundstedt and a "reasonable" force. IF the weather is fine I reorganize the RES and attack Belgium, I always ignore Holland this early on since the US Entry chits in the '39 pool really can punish you (do this later). I gave up on Operation Seel�we for two reasons:
1. It's really, really hard to land. If the royal navy finds your task force it's game over.
2. Even if you land some units, maintaining supply is nearly impossible.
But hey, it's fun!

Regards,
Oscar

(in reply to 38special)

Post #: 678

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 6/4/2012 11:20:54 AM

Empire101

Posts: 1950
Joined: 5/20/2008
From: Coruscant
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

About alternate histories - having said the above, I 've found every game of WiF I've ever played has been "an alternate history".

this is what makes the game so engrossing. every game is like reading a detailed alternate history of WWII. and it's a page-turner you just can't put down. All that in standard vanilla World in Flames.

I could not agree more sir!!

_____________________________

Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy. - Michael Burleigh

(in reply to brian brian)

Post #: 679

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 9/10/2013 7:10:36 PM

bosbes

Posts: 114
Joined: 10/20/2008
Status: offline

I am disappointed that no AI is included in the initial release. Hopefully later?

(in reply to Empire101)

Post #: 680

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 9/10/2013 8:55:47 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hoe ist?

I am disappointed that no AI is included in the initial release. Hopefully later?

What do you think I'll be doing in 2014?

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to bosbes)

Post #: 681

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 9/11/2013 6:48:13 PM

bosbes

Posts: 114
Joined: 10/20/2008
Status: offline

That's positive news. What's the timeframe on the development of the AI?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 682

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 9/11/2013 8:26:40 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hoe ist?

That's positive news. What's the timeframe on the development of the AI?

Now, now, as anyone who has followed this forum will be quick to tell you, having me provide a time estimate is like asking a two year old to explain the theory of relativity.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to bosbes)

Post #: 683

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 9/12/2013 7:54:18 PM

bosbes

Posts: 114
Joined: 10/20/2008
Status: offline

Well, try to explain the theory of relativity then...

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 684

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 9/12/2013 8:09:06 PM

composer99

Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline

"Well, it's like this, when a supermassive star and a nearby planet love each other very much..."

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to bosbes)

Post #: 685

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 9/13/2013 7:19:22 PM

bosbes

Posts: 114
Joined: 10/20/2008
Status: offline

Wow!!

(in reply to composer99)

Post #: 686

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 9/13/2013 8:23:17 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

"Well, it's like this, when a supermassive star and a nearby planet love each other very much..."

warspite1

Do they do a special cuddle?

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to composer99)

Post #: 687

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 10/2/2013 7:48:29 PM

bk19@mweb.co.za

Posts: 258
Joined: 7/26/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

"Well, it's like this, when a supermassive star and a nearby planet love each other very much..."

I am not that certain that what 'The Big Bang' is all about.. Steve Hawkins may be able to clarify this though.

(in reply to composer99)

Post #: 688

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 10/2/2013 10:26:41 PM

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: hoe ist?

That's positive news. What's the timeframe on the development of the AI?

Now, now, as anyone who has followed this forum will be quick to tell you, having me provide a time estimate is like asking a two year old to explain the theory of relativity.

Yes, please dont give a time estimate or I will give everyone your post # in Nov 2009 about estimates

On second thougt it is better left unsaid.

Bo

< Message edited by bo -- 10/2/2013 10:32:20 PM >

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 689

RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC... - 10/2/2013 11:34:02 PM

Greyshaft

Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Patton_71
My personal favorite is a plan Z scenario where the German navy has been built up to the level Raeder was promised by 1944. Granted all other powers would have been on a faster building clip than historically, but I always wondered what a WWII version of Jutland would be like.

If I had my druthers on alternate histories I'd like to see a MwiF 39-45 campaign with no air units or (obviously) carriers. All those build points would be available for reincarnation as battleships or artillery etc in the initial setup and perhaps allow Japanese saboteurs a free mission against Pearl Harbor to balance the Pacific War.
Of course it wouldn't be realistic but I'd be curious to see how it all played out. Would it be a replay of WW1?

_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to Patton_71)

Post #: 690