TOS V3.05 PBEM "Cartwheel"

[Misfit_travel]

I agree. Alpha Centauri had far more intelligent play handling when it came to "pact" forces (and while we are at it - custom unit creation).

Hopefully these concepts will make it into CIV4.

Tony

[aksully]

Week 6, 1942.....Japan

China
Killed Chinese Guer that took over Hsinking
Hsinking>RECAPTURED!
3 Chinese Guerillas N of Kaifeng>KIA

Borneo
Allied troops bombarded

Java Sea NW of Batavia
Jap dest sunk by Allied sub
Allied sub sunk

Sully

[aksully]

Eric...just to answer your question about Bougainville. I don't like to vacate a VP. But resistance in Rabual prompted the need for more troops to quell the locals.

Anyhow, I would like to share some thoughts about the Guerilla unit. Something for you guys to think about in terms of its part in TOS. I like the idea of the unit. But I would suggest some modification. As it is right now it is perhaps the strongest unit of the game.

First I think its too early for the unit. China starts off with the Tech to build them. I would have to check references...but I don't think Mao's guerilla forces were up and running in China in 1941 or early 42. I might be wrong but it needs to be checked. At the very least....China should have to research the tech at the start of the game.

Second, I think its movement is unrealistic. In the last turn, a Chinese guerilla was on a mountain square, went to a hill square, then to a plains square, then went into Hsinking. This might be okay for Air Cav units but it seems like too much movement for a ground force. Consider Merrill's Marauders in Burma. They used mountains, hills, and jungle for concealment of movement...ie stealth to move unobserved from one point to the next.....not for fast transit.

Third, I understand the concept of giving them stealth attack but I think it gives them a very unrealistic game capability. I've lost a bunch of art units..most stacked with other troops which guerillas were able to destroy by selective attack. I don't have a problem if art is by itself. But not when stacked with other troops.

Guerilla functions are fairly well represented in Civ3's "resisting citizens". That takes x number of troops to quell resistance in captured cities. And that to a degree does represent an abstract of "guerilla" activities.

Anyhow, just some observations from what I've seen so far. As it is...its the strongest unit in play. At any rate...this is a much better scenario than what shipped with Conquests... and that's a fact.

[Misfit_travel]

Another quiet turn. Jap's are hiding in case they get spanked again.....

Sunk a Jap sub W of Pearl, must have been damaged already because my 2 hp sub took it out (and got promoted - heh,heh!).

Turn to Eric_A

Misfit

[El_Tigre]

Sully, it is not the case that my Guerillas actually survive contact with
your troops, is it? All they can do is pillage and kill defenseless (workers,
artillery) or wounded units. One turn later they are killed themselves.

[eric_A]

Originally Posted by Misfit_travel

Another quiet turn. Jap's are hiding in case they get spanked again.....

Sunk a Jap sub W of Pearl, must have been damaged already because my 2 hp sub took it out (and got promoted - heh,heh!).

Turn to Eric_A

Misfit

Misfit:

I received your turn summary, but there was no save game attached.

Eric

[aksully]

Originally Posted by El_Tigre

Sully, it is not the case that my Guerillas actually survive contact with
your troops, is it? All they can do is pillage and kill defenseless (workers,
artillery) or wounded units. One turn later they are killed themselves.

No Martin I expect that. But they have eliminated artillery in stacks with their selective attack ability. That coupled with an extreme movement capability makes the unit , IMHO, unrealistic for the time period TOS covers.

But the unit has me interested in looking into guerilla warfare in WWII China and what their capability was. As I think about it, what probably would be reasonable is the ability to withdraw to preserve their fighting ability.

Hey have your ambassador pick up his phone will ya!!!!
Sully

[aksully]

Originally Posted by Misfit_travel

Another quiet turn. Jap's are hiding in case they get spanked again.....

Sunk a Jap sub W of Pearl, must have been damaged already because my 2 hp sub took it out (and got promoted - heh,heh!).

Turn to Eric_A

Misfit

Yeah right...Hiding???!!! Look who's afraid to attach his save I'll be waiting for you my friend... around Wake or maybe even the Coral Sea perhaps? After all...Spring is a lovely time of year to watch the hulls of US ships sink below the gentle swells to see the surface....Nevermore!

Said the Raven

[Misfit_travel]

Since we are talking a little smack here......

Might I point out that it is Japan who is trailing the Allies in VPs? I don't have to come to you - you have to come to us. You need the VP locations......

I just have to build and build - and smack you whenever you stick your head out.....



Misfit

(Turn will be sent when I returned home from work this evening. Sorry I can't do that remotely).

[aksully]

You would be the one to point that out!!! Actually I am in a big pickle to be sure! Just as the IJN & IJA were in early 1942. It is as it was in reality...its just a matter of time. Too many objectives (VPs) and too few troops and resources to get them all! But there's still battles to be fought but the Japanese cannot match nor destroy the Allied production centers. That's the difference. But we'll see how many Allies can be taken out before the Allied Final Punch occurs! Occupation forces to quell resistance and no razing are definitely show stoppers for the Japanese right now.

ON another note. My wife who has been gone for a week gets home this evening. So I probably won't get a turn done tonight....sorry but duty calls tonight and probably tomorrow. I'll do my best.
Sully

[eric_A]

Bombed and damaged Zeros in Rabaul again, but
couldn't kill them.

[aksully]

Have you lost any bombers in these attacks yet Eric?

[El_Tigre]

Eric, I haven't received an email from you (neither report nor save game).

[Misfit_travel]

Originally Posted by aksully

Anyhow, I would like to share some thoughts about the Guerilla unit. Something for you guys to think about in terms of its part in TOS. I like the idea of the unit. But I would suggest some modification. As it is right now it is perhaps the strongest unit of the game.

First I think its too early for the unit. China starts off with the Tech to build them. I would have to check references...but I don't think Mao's guerilla forces were up and running in China in 1941 or early 42. I might be wrong but it needs to be checked. At the very least....China should have to research the tech at the start of the game.

Second, I think its movement is unrealistic. In the last turn, a Chinese guerilla was on a mountain square, went to a hill square, then to a plains square, then went into Hsinking. This might be okay for Air Cav units but it seems like too much movement for a ground force. Consider Merrill's Marauders in Burma. They used mountains, hills, and jungle for concealment of movement...ie stealth to move unobserved from one point to the next.....not for fast transit.

Third, I understand the concept of giving them stealth attack but I think it gives them a very unrealistic game capability. I've lost a bunch of art units..most stacked with other troops which guerillas were able to destroy by selective attack. I don't have a problem if art is by itself. But not when stacked with other troops.

Guerilla functions are fairly well represented in Civ3's "resisting citizens". That takes x number of troops to quell resistance in captured cities. And that to a degree does represent an abstract of "guerilla" activities.

Option 1)

So are you suggesting to make the Guerrila unit invisible? That would be an interesting twist. Remove stealth attack, but make the unit type invisible. I would suppose that the Security Battalion would then need to have see invisible to balance it out.

In such a situation though, you'd basically have to restrict Guerillas to being a Chinese only unit. That would get majorly abused by the other countries.

It might be a good way to insure that Japan actually garrison its cities in Manchuria and Korea. Guerillas could move invisibly behind the lines, kill undefended workers and pillage. Selectively they could attack garrisons (or garrisoned units protecting vulnerable unit types like artillery or workers). "Wolfpacking" guerrillas could get pretty nasty and take out what the Jap thought was a safe stack of workers building a railroad etc.

I kind of like the idea, but you would have to dramatically reduce the number of game start guerillas to make it practical. (I'd suggest no more than 4-5 of them and no where Japan can kill them on turn 1). I'd also suggest giving them 2 mps and removing their "ignore terrain costs of hills / mountain".


Option 2)

I agree with Sully that there are way too many guerillas in v3.05. I've run a couple of playtest simulations and with the new unit setups, combined with the damaged tiles, combined with the large numbers of guerilla units, an effective Chinese player can wipe out virtually all Japanese artillery in 2-3 turns. That makes a huge dent in the Japanese offensive capability since its suicide to attack the bunkers (defended by the MGs) with regular infantry that isn't backed by artillery.

I think starting China with about 1/3 of the number of guerillas currently on the map might be more playable (especially if those guerillas in cities and on the front lines are removed). That way the Japs can't reach any of them on turn 1 (and would have no idea where you are moving them to).

I also think that Canton is understrength. I think it should have a tank there. The offensive and movement ability is necessary given the significant possibility of a 1 unit loss taking Hong Kong (and the damaged terrain in the area). I'd suggest removing one of the MGs and putting a light tank in its place.

Adding a tank to Canton creates a possibilty of Nanning being taken on turn 1, but Japan would have to be very lucky in taking out Hong Kong with 1 infantry (and no artillery). Then the artillery would have to hit (and do 2 hps of damage to the MG in Nanning). Then you'd need 2 (or more) tank attacks to finish the city off. Not real good odds in my book.


Misfit

[eric_A]

Originally Posted by El_Tigre

Eric, I haven't received an email from you (neither report nor save game).

El_tigre, sorry, my mistake.
I sent the message but the send failed, so it was still in my send queue.
I resent it this morning.

[eric_A]

Originally Posted by aksully

Have you lost any bombers in these attacks yet Eric?

No I have not lost any of my attacking aircraft yet, but I haven't been
able to destroy any of your planes either, a stalemate.

[eric_A]

Originally Posted by Misfit_travel

Option 1)

So are you suggesting to make the Guerrila unit invisible? That would be an interesting twist. Remove stealth attack, but make the unit type invisible. I would suppose that the Security Battalion would then need to have see invisible to balance it out.

In such a situation though, you'd basically have to restrict Guerillas to being a Chinese only unit. That would get majorly abused by the other countries.

It might be a good way to insure that Japan actually garrison its cities in Manchuria and Korea. Guerillas could move invisibly behind the lines, kill undefended workers and pillage. Selectively they could attack garrisons (or garrisoned units protecting vulnerable unit types like artillery or workers). "Wolfpacking" guerrillas could get pretty nasty and take out what the Jap thought was a safe stack of workers building a railroad etc.

I kind of like the idea, but you would have to dramatically reduce the number of game start guerillas to make it practical. (I'd suggest no more than 4-5 of them and no where Japan can kill them on turn 1). I'd also suggest giving them 2 mps and removing their "ignore terrain costs of hills / mountain".


Option 2)

I agree with Sully that there are way too many guerillas in v3.05. I've run a couple of playtest simulations and with the new unit setups, combined with the damaged tiles, combined with the large numbers of guerilla units, an effective Chinese player can wipe out virtually all Japanese artillery in 2-3 turns. That makes a huge dent in the Japanese offensive capability since its suicide to attack the bunkers (defended by the MGs) with regular infantry that isn't backed by artillery.

I think starting China with about 1/3 of the number of guerillas currently on the map might be more playable (especially if those guerillas in cities and on the front lines are removed). That way the Japs can't reach any of them on turn 1 (and would have no idea where you are moving them to).

I also think that Canton is understrength. I think it should have a tank there. The offensive and movement ability is necessary given the significant possibility of a 1 unit loss taking Hong Kong (and the damaged terrain in the area). I'd suggest removing one of the MGs and putting a light tank in its place.

Adding a tank to Canton creates a possibilty of Nanning being taken on turn 1, but Japan would have to be very lucky in taking out Hong Kong with 1 infantry (and no artillery). Then the artillery would have to hit (and do 2 hps of damage to the MG in Nanning). Then you'd need 2 (or more) tank attacks to finish the city off. Not real good odds in my book.


Misfit

I had originally wanted to make guerillas invisinble but that approach led
to all kinds of sillyness, like using ASW aircraft and destroyer escorts to
detect guerillas, so option one was discarded long ago.

So for version 3.06, which I'm working on now I will remove some of
the starting guerilias and beef up the starting forces in Canton.l

[aksully]

Eric, How would you like to handle feedback on this version from us? Post it here, send by email? Wait until the end of the game or post/send as we go? Do you want to base initial unit placement based upon actual historical references? I am actively hunting down what many longtime wargamers consider the gold standard for the Jap Naval, air, and ground forces actual Dec 7/8th locations, strengths, morale, with OOB. I hope to acquire this info in a weeks time. I'd be more than willing to share that info for use in the scenario if desired.
Sully

[eric_A]

Sully:
I have been studying that as well on the web site you pointed
out. It will not be possible to be 100% accurate, subs for example
will need to be placed where they cannot attacked before they have
a chance to move. But I will try to be as accurate as possible; so
when you have the info., post it on the thread in the completed
scenarios forum.

Eric

[aksully]

Right, I have a couple of things i've been thinking about to share and see what you think. Not sure if you want it here or the other one but I'll post it here now so you can think about it. The changes you've made with sea movement really encourages naval actions. It just hurts the Jap player though on turn one as I mentioned previously. Without changing the movement concept you've come up with...why not have the game start prior to Dec7th. The Japs would be the only one one move. This way they can have the opportunity to make the historical # of assaults as they actually did make. The human player doesn't have to select the actual locations but can if they so desire. Or as I think I mentioned before..put a spect of land with the #of assault troops that were available within one move of Malaysia, Phillipines (east and west coasts).Place the appropriate transports and support ships next to these staging spots. Anyways that's my take from playing the Japs.

2nd. Create a new map of Oahu. Have it where it has Honolulu where you place the bank, marketplace, temple etc with this being the main population center. Then to the west of Honolulu, place another town spot called Pearl Harbor where you have a barracks and harbor. Place the ships in coastal squares with the battleships in 2 groups of 4. You can then have another square with a CA, DD, sub. Also place an airfield a sq N of PH (Hickam Field, another airfield in a sq NE corner of Oahu (Kanehoe airfield), and finally another airfield in the NW corner of the island (Wheeler Field). Place a F4F at Kanehoe, P-40s at Wheeler and Hickam, and a B-17 at Hickam also. Now you have a great new component for the game! The Jap player now has a fair shot at the ships in coastal squares. Then has the decision of what else to attack!

Carrier Ops. The last major thought involves improving carrier ops. I suggest that a couple of new units be considered. First, increase the carrier capacity to 4. Then modify either the dive bomber or torpedo bomber and name it Recon. It would have a nominal attack factor. Its primary purpose is to be used for search.

Land-based Search. Finally consider adding a land-based air search unit. A PBY icon could be used for the Allies and we can find the appropriate Jap plane and see if Wyrmshadow or someone else has created it or an appropriate substitution. Land and sea based search ops were huge in the Pacific. As it is right now we have to lose an attack group to search.

Anyhow...just some things I thought I'd throw out there and see what you think.
Sully