US tech advantage and play balance

[Stitch]

How many of you are able to research every tech as the US before 1945? Then you'll know it is not that hard at all. This why I deplore playing the Allies...it's just too easy to win a decisive victory via tech by spring 45.

So here I am, now playing a game as Japan against US AI. It is October 3, 1942 (not even 1 year out from war's inception) and a bold US cruiser has sidled up to my army unit in Brunei and bombards it! After recovering from my shock from US audacity, I am then put into a coma when I see that the cruiser has already been outfitted with the tech Naval Warfare 3! Game breaking...I quit.

I have complained about this before in this forum, the US starts with too much tech investments, has too large a tech limit and way too many units in queue. The US player needs to do nothing else but make cheap land units and shove the rest into tech. Maybe it's historical, but it does not make for a fun game.

Wouldn't it be great if the next patch rectified this, or allowed us to make this part of a what-if campaign, or let us modify the above factors.

Thank you!

[Bill101]

Hi Stitch

Please could you send me a save file of this game to Bill@furysoftware.com as I agree that game balance is very important and would like to take a look to see what the allies are up to.

I have actually had naval tech level 3 as Japanese by this time on a few occasions, so I'll need to look at the bigger picture before considering any changes.

Thanks!

[LampCord]

How many of you are able to research every tech as the US before 1945? Then you'll know it is not that hard at all. This why I deplore playing the Allies...it's just too easy to win a decisive victory via tech by spring 45.

So here I am, now playing a game as Japan against US AI. It is October 3, 1942 (not even 1 year out from war's inception) and a bold US cruiser has sidled up to my army unit in Brunei and bombards it! After recovering from my shock from US audacity, I am then put into a coma when I see that the cruiser has already been outfitted with the tech Naval Warfare 3! Game breaking...I quit.

I have complained about this before in this forum, the US starts with too much tech investments, has too large a tech limit and way too many units in queue. The US player needs to do nothing else but make cheap land units and shove the rest into tech. Maybe it's historical, but it does not make for a fun game.

Wouldn't it be great if the next patch rectified this, or allowed us to make this part of a what-if campaign, or let us modify the above factors.

Thank you!

Last time as Allies I decided to use an 'investment' strategy. I put max r&d into industry and kept it at max every time I had a breakthrough and then cashed in the extras when I hit level 5. I was getting something like 955 MPP's by mid 43. I also did the same with Industrial Tech so I was at level 5 a little later. That meant I could buy a CV for something like 225 which means I could buy 4 CV's per turn and still have a little change if I did nothing else.

By the time I reached the main island, I had max tech in almost every category and had purchased every single non-naval unit allowed, all CV's, BB's and most CA's and DD's as well.

Needless to say, taking Japan with Pershing tanks, jet fighters, B52? bombers, maxed out CV's and tac bombers was pretty easy!

I am finding Japan much more challenging and therefore much more fun.

Its a tough call because the real war wasn't balanced. Its almost like you need two scenarios. A balanced one and a historical one. Of course, the balanced one might be hard to pull off because the Japs start with so many more units so you can't just make everything even and expect the Allies to have a chance.

[arado234]

Just goes to show how futile and idiotic it was for Japan to even think about attacking America.Imho it should be left alone except if someone wants to edit the Allied might and make it more for play balance.

[Stitch]

Will do, Bill. I will have it available from my work comp tomorrow. Thanks for looking into this issue.

@ LampCord

Oddly enough, in that particular game I was over investing tech in intelligence (to secure that tech discovery bonus). I did manage to secure 2 points in it by that time, but it expensed me a bit in opportunity costs in Chinese theatre. Compared to other games, I was doing quite well. I think I got a total of 4 tech by then; in other games, I'd have no breakthroughs even after 1 year had gone by.

It's very true that the war was not balanced. Japan's fighters were especially good in the beginning, but was outclassed by mid-war as they didn't "upgrade" to advanced aircraft. However, as far as a computer game, it must be important to give Japan a fighting chance somehow. Or in head to head play, why would anyone willingly choose Japan?

As we saw in Blashy/Colin's AAR, Blashy sat back in most of his allied game, getting heavy bombers and a base above mainland Japan. Colin was walking all over the place in China and the Pacific, but yet still succumbed very quickly starting mid-game.

I think your "investment" strategy looks to be pretty much infallable. Even if Australia, China and India were down by mid-43, those Pershings, jet's and B52s would clean up Japan right quick. Wouldn't that be an interesting scenario to play out?

[Blashy]

My game vs. Colin is NOT a good one to base the game on ANYTHING. I exploited his lack of experience. For one thing he did not walk all over China, any experienced player will probably do so but Colin did not have the know how at the time.

Playing Japan can be VERY fun because an experienced player will know WHERE to make his defenses and if he does it properly it can be a very frustrating experience for the allied player as he tries to move forward and sees the clock ticking.

You have all got to stop thinking of this game as equal, that is IMHO the biggest problem with ETO, Germany can BEAT the Allies which is just totally unrealistic.

Here you have it that you can win as Japan by outlasting the Allies and it is VERY possible to do so and still maintain historical integrity.

[jon_j_rambo]

The Yanks got the dough, that's for sure. I think the problem for the Jap player, they are thinking like Germany, that they can just take over the whole board, that ain't happening.

The Yanks got alot of weapons coming. Money, Carriers, cheaper units, large force pool, name it. Those juicy subs w/ tech are deadly, annoying, tough to sink, and drain MMPs of the ports.

The Japs can't afford to make any mistakes, that's for sure. Jap players need to get an end game strategy. Anybody can wax Hong Kong, Phillipines, and the rest of the empty islands. Japs need to think about 1944 just as much as 1942-3.

[SeaMonkey]

JJR has a good point here, the Japanese player makes a mistake if he thinks he can historically spread out and have any chance in the end game. Now I'm only into the summer of 44(my first AI game since SC1) and I'm still protecting the inner sanctum pretty well even though the Allies are obviously "tech heavy".

Now the only observation pertaining to the Allied tech edge that is somewhat questionable is I have USN destroyers taking out my BBs. I guess I could justify that by thinking perhaps the Allies have obtained "smart" torpedos.

[U8led]

Just thinking out loud here:

What if all chits were consumed in a reasearch catagory upon a hit, I think that would help close the tec gap a bit.

US would still gain tec faster than JP but it would cost a lot more and be slower to get very tec heavy.

The first time I played SC (W&W) this is actually how I thought it worked and being cheap as I am I was only putting one chit in the tecs I wanted. I finally put a 2nd in something and was very surprised when I still had one left after a hit.

[Blashy]

It is fine as is. USA WAS a behemoth in WW2 and in PTO this is accurately portrayed.

BUT there definitely is a way to win as Japan.

So far the biggest mistake I see from players with Japan is the waste of MPPs. I managed to have reserve MPPs in the 1000s by the time USA and USSR on pushing me back. Those saved MPPs also mean some troops were not used improperly and are in the proper areas to hold back the enemy until the clock ticks 0.

It can be a very frustrating experience as the Allies when Japan holds strong and makes you pay for every gain.

I will give you ONE hint... engies building right from the start, get both of them to work ASAP. I won't say where .

[SeaMonkey]

Not hard to know where to build fortifications, that's how you keep "them" at bay.

One thing I have noticed is that USN BBs at naval tech level 3 are pretty much invincible. Its their bomber defense value that renders most air attacks to expensive to initiate. So they just marade around taking out all IJN assets by the summer of 44 and there are a lot of them.

BBs can take out ships in port and snuff out land units with bombardment if you leave them exposed. I think they are a bit overly potent, especially bomber defense teched up. I believe they should start at maybe one or zero for USN. Maybe ports should have a defensive upgrade against surface bombardments like artillery/shore batteries.

By 44 they were highly effective anti-air platforms and that can be modeled with naval tech 3. I would also like to see more incentive for Japan to take more islands and spread out like historically. I realize there was not any economical reason to garrison them, but as the Japanese player you really don't use much of the eastern part of the map.

I would never push my naval units into the Solomons, way too risky or too expensive operating air cover in and transport HQ support. Perhaps the ports should be worth 5 MPPs each.

Overall though I believe things unfold pretty much as they did with Japan not able to field a fleet by mid 44.

[LampCord]

@SeaMonkey - some good points.

The US BB's in WWII were extremely effective AA platforms and that is modeled well in the game. Big part of the reason the Japs resorted to Kami's.

One thing that isn't modeled though is the difference in classes. The Iowa class ships were monsters with extremely accurate guns (for the time) and a virtual wall of steel for AA. Far superior to anything else the Allies built. One possible way of dealing with that would be to lock tech for naval units which if you think about it is a lot more realistic. You can fairly easily upgrade AA in real life but you can't just slap 16" guns on lesser BB's or suddenly make them 50% larger.

One thing that could make taking the islands more valuable would be to simply have ships lose action points every turn they are more than X distance from a friendly port. Just like in real life, they don't have unlimited fuel. They need to be in reasonable range of a port in order for supplies, fuel, ammo to be ferried out. This would mean an advantage to the player closest to his own ports because his ships would be better supplied, just like real life.

Another thing would be if you could not operate planes more than a certain distance. No more warping from San Francisco to Rangoon without controlling any islands in between.

These two changes would mean controlling 'meaningless' islands could have some real defensive value for the Japs because it could delay the arrive of US planes at the fronts and make US ships much more vulnerable until the US takes control of the islands.

Just thinking out loud...

[SeaMonkey]

Something to think about LC! Its early still and I've not really gotten into depths of PTO yet.

But with this, .....dare I say it....BBull Rush, as the Japanese player I'm feeling like that wagon train surrounded by Indians here in the home islands late in 44.

Kamikazes are ineffectual against these behemoths and I can't afford to repair my airforces. There is no IJN left, even ports represent no sanctuary against the guns of these incredible battleships:mad:. At least my anti-air can somewhat degrade the US airstrikes.

I've been thinking the one counter would be for Japan to get Naval Tech 3 themselves, but with the expense of upgrading, and the need for anti-air, controlling the Russians and then Chinese partisans............:confused:

well it seems I'll be going down for the count in my first AI game at Expert +2.

Don't know how I could make another Summer with 45 looming....pray for cyclones????:eek:

[scottsmm]

Lampcord,

Iowa battleships do start out with 1.0 in experience add that to shore bombardment, and naval tech, and your right they are monsters. Maybe they should start out as a 2.0 in the experience field...

[scottsmm]

Seamonkey,

Your going to need more then just cyclones to stop that allied fleet. Your going to need about 20-25 atomic bombs. Which Japan simply doesn't have.

[SeaMonkey]

Right scotts, the AI is pummelling me, how embarassing. OK....I'm a little shell shocked at the moment, but I'm recovering......my senses are returning even though my ears are still ringing.

I've consulted with ...??...higher powers. New plan... I'm going to get abunch of units in the build Q ready to deploy at a moments notice. I will place my best, most experienced forces in places where they will not be so susceptible to naval bombardments for counter-attacks.

The new units will fill the voids when air/BB bombardment disperse the deployed, the home islands will be virtually impregnable.

Zieg Heil! whoops...wrong game....Banzai!

[arado234]

Im with Blashy.Leave it the way it is.Japan had no hope so giving them some would be wrong.As it is the A.bomb is a scripted event.Just imagine if the Amis. could go allout and have them who knows when.BOOOOOM.Japan dies even faster.

[arado234]

Im just finishing a game against the A.I.(me Japs)on only normal setting.Kinda glad I did judging by whats happening to SeaMonkey.Its early 45 and I just took the Aussis out and still hold China and all the other early conquests(Russia is in it now and things are starting to go south).Ive sank over 50 Allied ships to my 12 (no Carriers lost).I got real luck in the tech. dept by having L.R.3 and jet Carriers by early 43.I dont even want to think what the A.I.would have on expert.SeaMonkey all I can say is that you must be playing a pretty good game to still be in it,judging by what ive sunk and by what it still has coming at me.

I did try something kinda gamey.I ignored the battleships at Pearl and went on to the Westcoast with my Carriers and sank both the Allied Carriers.I was also able to lure the A.I. out of Pearl with a crusier and sank all its ships with my battlefleet.I got a bit banged up in the process though.Ive only played this game once ,so I dont know what if any overall effect it had on what the A.I. chose to do.Im sure it would never work against any human player.

[scottsmm]

Seamonkey,

I'm not sure, but if as the Japanese player you hold Tokyo and Kyoto to the clock runs out you get a minor Japanese victory. So if you've lossed sight of any realistic chance of achieving any other victory conditions then if you don't want to lose totally you should make Japan an "impenetrable fortress". Which with it's terrain and points of attack wouldn't be all that hard.

Arado,

Your right Japan, didn't have a chance in the war, but what fun is it playing a game if the AI doesn't have a chance against you. Do you remember PDE, none of that was even slightly historical. So why not just design a modified version of Operation Z, were Japan can have a chance. Also should keep the real campagin for those of you who like playing the game how it really happenend.

[scottsmm]

Arado,

I'm sure that wouldn't happen either, because you would have to expect it (plus intel) if nothing happenend, and then you saw carriers getting closer and closer to San Francisco.

[SeaMonkey]

Thanks scotts, I'll take that advice. I've got some very experienced units with IW & AT 2 plus mobility and HQs in China and Burma. I'm going to try to get them home to face off with the Amis.

Its not going to be pretty!

[SeaMonkey]

I have a bit of a dilemma here! OK, so maybe I was a bit premature with my statement about the total demise of the IJN.

I was able to port 5 CVs and upgrade the ports to level 2 AA. They are strewn around the Sea of Japan, East China and Yellow Seas, but within striking distance of the Home Islands. So far rain and storms have masked them against the evil USA AI although USN Super BBs are very close to these ports.

Problem is, they have been decimated and need repair and aircraft replacements. There is nothing to screen them, at least anything that would do them any good.

Here's the kicker, I'm getting around 650 MPPs a turn and can probably rebuild them in three turns, but my losses are mounting in Burma and Manchuria and I face the question of whether to rebuild the lost Armies and SNLF for Homeland deployment.

I have wall to wall Tac Naval Bombers based in Okinawa and Taiwan, HQ supported with fighter, level 2, cover. I have maxed research with emphasis in Naval tech and advanced fighters but only have level 2 in both along with LR2.

The USN sharks are circling their prey and I'm unable to be effective against these BBs, it absolutely cost too much to repair my air groups after attacking them, but I can take out Amis Carriers.

Do I.....gather the ground forces or replenish the Carriers? Winter 44/45 is looming.

[scottsmm]

SeaMonkey,

As you've been around this series for awhile you should try to fall on your previous experiences with this type of game. Personally though you should like what you've seen as the AI for SCET was at best lacking, and from this it looks like you have your hands full. I guess Hubert and Company deserve a lot of credit for that. What you should know though is expecting that the units that are attacking you are British they won't push for the home islands, and in total Burma, Singapore, Manchukuo, and present day Vietnam aren't important to the overall outcome of the game. In the mean time expect the US to be coming full force at Japan. So I hate to say this (it is a tough decision for you), but I think you need to sacrifice or transport those units in the Burma theater to Japan. You must hold Japan if possible load Honshu up with units so that the Allies (US) can't take it. With that being said I think it would be best to get as many units to fight the US on the home islands as possible. Including naval units at full strength and upgraded. This is however your decision though. The only thing that is certain is you must hold out for one year (Honshu Island) if you do that you win the game, even though the Allies had the might to wipe the Japs totally off the face of the earth. Good luck and Godspeed SeaMonkey. Maybe some sea guerillas would come in handy .

[arado234]

scottsmm I agree totally with you in that the game should have an option for Japan to win but if you do that then where do you take away from the Allies and how much?Do you then change the overall victory conditions because the Allies must have to be weakend somewhere substantially for Japan to have a chance to win outright.It would be a tough one but I think it would be a fun option.

[scottsmm]

Arado,

Let's just say if it's tough for the SC team to equal the play balance out they should have me join the team, or at least look at some images I have of campaigns I've made. It's not at all tough I assure you Arado, to equal the play balance with the editor. What's tough is that there will be people who will argue with you that you made it more favorable, and actually gave Japan the advantage to win the war. IMHO that's the biggest problem for anybody to equal the play balance out. I probably should have posted a few games as mods they were equal in play balance as I won outright on both sides Japan and Allies (one was a Midway Major campaign). Honestly though I'm an expert now on how to equal out the play balance it's really not that hard I can promise you that. It definitely would be a fun option to have plus a Major Midway Campaign and it would be a blast.