How to make Pacific Conflict historical

@WindowWasher said in How to make Pacific Conflict historical:

@GEN-MANSTEIN Wouldn’t caps influence other areas of play like India and china? I feel like something that is very Russia specific would be better suited to prevent japan without impacting the rest of the game

Ya. Depends on your setup. Mine is not G40. He did ask for all options.

Japan has the leeway to do things like this because neither it nor the Allies have economic incentive to island hop. Why? Because neither side has national objectives that make island hopping worthwhile.

“But Japan has an NO for an outer defense perimiter” you say. My response to this is “bah”. In every game where I’ve seen Japan achieve this NO, the Axis has already won the game.

If failure to hold that NO limited Japan’s total income to say 50, Japan would fight for it and the Allies would feel compelled to fight back.

Another problem is that the Dutch East Indies are worth far too much money, even without Japan’s NO to control all of them.

(Yet another problem is the simplification of the map and the lack of terrain features affecting movement – Southeast Asia on the map is a few territories, all apparently of the same terrain. Historically though, Japan was not able to make much progress against India because the jungle terrain was prohibitive to the use of armor and mechanized troops. We accept this simplification for the same reasons that many of us don’t want to play A&A 1914 – the game would become a slog.)

(Yet another problem is the map – most of the islands in question are not strategically important. Change the map so that each island is the connection between three sea zones and suddenly an air base on that island becomes vital, and preventing/controlling that air base becomes vital.)

Fix the NOs to make the Pacific islands worth something to both Japan and the Allies. Reduce the value of the Dutch East Indies and eliminate the NO for controlling these islands. These two changes would extract enough resources from both Japan that it would be stretched much, much thinner on the mainland.

Marsh

@Marshmallow-of-War said in How to make Pacific Conflict historical:

Japan has the leeway to do things like this because neither it nor the Allies have economic incentive to island hop. Why? Because neither side has national objectives that make island hopping worthwhile.

I use my 3 island group No’s for this.

“But Japan has an NO for an outer defense perimiter” you say. My response to this is “bah”. In every game where I’ve seen Japan achieve this NO, the Axis has already won the game.

With the 3 island group NO’s this forces US to come get islands plus they also can receive the bonuses.

If failure to hold that NO limited Japan’s total income to say 50, Japan would fight for it and the Allies would feel compelled to fight back.
Works both ways in my game.

Another problem is that the Dutch East Indies are worth far too much money, even without Japan’s NO to control all of them.

This needs to stay. Take away the NO bonus here and make Japan have to hold theses islands based on they need for oil supplies. Also give Anzac a Island NO plus being able to have a better chance at taking Java. What does Anzac make 9 icps ? 9 + 5 Island bonus + 5 Java = 19 icps plus have no figs to help defend India. Need to beef up India on setup.

(Yet another problem is the simplification of the map and the lack of terrain features affecting movement – Southeast Asia on the map is a few territories, all apparently of the same terrain. Historically though, Japan was not able to make much progress against India because the jungle terrain was prohibitive to the use of armor and mechanized troops. We accept this simplification for the same reasons that many of us don’t want to play A&A 1914 – the game would become a slog.)

Yes. I have only 1 movement for all motorized units in Asia and Siberia. In India and area can move 2 to benefit FEC.

(Yet another problem is the map – most of the islands in question are not strategically important. Change the map so that each island is the connection between three sea zones and suddenly an air base on that island becomes vital, and preventing/controlling that air base becomes vital.)

Sound Idea. With the 3 island group bonus money helps this without changing or making a new map.

Fix the NOs to make the Pacific islands worth something to both Japan and the Allies. Reduce the value of the Dutch East Indies and eliminate the NO for controlling these islands. These two changes would extract enough resources from both Japan that it would be stretched much, much thinner on the mainland.

Have that in game but do not reduce the Dutch Island money. You need to give Japan more incentive to protect there oil supply. Anzac getting Java for more money. A stronger China. They did have a number of people here.
Part of the problem is time frame and setup. You also need Japan to have more incentive to go off mainland for money and be delayed or hindered on land. They didn’t go that far into China in war. Make India a bit stronger so Russia doesn’t have to send down troops to help defend India when they could be on front lines in against Germany and also be nice if UK didn’t have to send Figs to defend Moscow when they could be else where defending homeland or India. Also yes give Mongolians to Russia if Japan attacks but also make Japan pay a Icp penalty too. We have 15 icps. I just can’t play a game with blitz to Moscow. But thats just me. Not taking nothing away from other games but. There’s more but I’ll stop.

Marsh

@ShadowHAwk said in How to make Pacific Conflict historical:

The problem here is just the simplification of the map. Its the same issue that plagues the european board in some areas.
Aircraft ranges are way to long and aircraft from carriers are just as powerfull as land based bombers. So there is no need to invade an island to count as a bomber base.

As there is no supply lines or scouting the islands are also not needed for that so they are just on the map to make it complete they serve no function in the game.
To make them serve a game function the game needs to be redone but that will make the game a lot slower.

Bigger maps, Island connection multiple seazones, different combat system D6 is just to limited, different aircraft ranges, different naval ranges, island values.

OK. What time frame you looking at ? This matters. My game starts Dec 8 1941.
How many moves to get from US to UK and same in Pacific ? 2 sea zones to get to UK ?
You do not like convoy routes or zones ?
What is your plane movement stat ?
What is your naval ship movement stat ?

I use D12 system. Plenty of limit.
I have regular planes and naval planes (move 1 less space). Naval can only land on Carriers.
Bombers can’t hit Naval. Bombers carpet bomb on first turn only. Some disagree based on a few things.
I still want bombers to hit naval but of course lower stat. Group not for it yet.

Some islands should only have air strips and no bomber landings.

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/assets/uploads/files/1604971485022-rays-1941-global-map-3-v3.0.jpg

I just posted map to show the 3 island groups.
This works great in my game.

Being 41 its easier to do island hopping. Japan can take a bunch of islands for cash (only way I see either side going for islands in games) which they did at this time frame Dec-Feb. Then US has to come out and take back to build there income and lower Japan’s and help Anzac, FEC to get some Dutch Islands back to cripple Japans oil supply. Japan Has to defend theses islands also based on bonus victory points. Game should be won on whole map not 1 side or the other. Both Germany and Japan should have to combine a victory.
To help the island hopping you need to make some islands worth 3 icps plus be part of a 2 island groups.
Nobody may agree but it works great in game. Also on setup The fleets are based mostly where time frame was.
I would need to post setup if anybody wants to see it.
I’m gonna bow out of here based on some of this maybe going off topic and can start a new thread if anybody
wants too.

I can probably make map changes to a 42 map to meet your specs for sea zones and island connections and have it start in Dec of 41 so on turn 1 Japan goes and take most islands but then Nav guy disagrees with Islands on map.

Here’s a 42 map ready to get new borders to islands

I can post a better pic later.

Other wise good luck to all on gaming.

Map sample

@ShadowHAwk said in How to make Pacific Conflict historical:

Land based bombers where a big threat to fleets in WW2, prince of wales was sunk by land based air for example.

I like the bigger map on europe side what i could see.

All pac islands should allow bombers to land as they where captured with the express purpose of just that serve as landing strips for long ranged bombers to attack the next island.

Naval air should be a lot less powerfull against land based targets so that you would want proper bombers to attack a beachhead that would give the islands a strategic role.

Ya we do play with bomber can land on islands. I’m gonna run by group again about bombers hitting naval but we do have tacs and dive bombers being able to pick target on first round of combat too.

@Sgt-Mclusky One easy change to the OOTB rules, Japan can’t declare on the Soviets. Soviets can declare on Japan anytime after war with Germany begins

@Alex-Phillips said in How to make Pacific Conflict historical:

@Sgt-Mclusky One easy change to the OOTB rules, Japan can’t declare on the Soviets. Soviets can declare on Japan anytime after war with Germany begins

Why doesn’t Russia suffer something for declaring war on japan ?

This is starting to cross over into house rules.

@GEN-MANSTEIN In terms of historical context, when the Soviets finally did declare war on Japan, they didn’t suffer then. One month of fighting, mostly mop up work in Manchuria against a depleted Kwangtung Army, all post atomic.

If the Soviets want to attack earlier in the game, that’s their choice. The suffering is all in the dice rolls

@Alex-Phillips said in How to make Pacific Conflict historical:

@GEN-MANSTEIN In terms of historical context, when the Soviets finally did declare war on Japan, they didn’t suffer then. One month of fighting, mostly mop up work in Manchuria against a depleted Kwangtung Army, all post atomic.

If the Soviets want to attack earlier in the game, that’s their choice. The suffering is all in the dice rolls

What date was the Russian attack
On japan. Before treaty or after ?

@GEN-MANSTEIN This all stuff you can Google yourself, I’m not here to copy and paste

Whatever dude. Already know. Seeing if u knew. Was before treaty that’s why there was a treaty and not till Aug of 45. Play the fantasy game.
Good luck and enjoy.

The pictures can look good, you need to reduce opacity and or add outer glow effect

Also, i bought flags waving for Japan and Russia, but have yet to finish and release 1942.2 upgrade

@Imperious-Leader said in How to make Pacific Conflict historical:

Also, i bought flags waving for Japan and Russia, but have yet to finish and release 1942.2 upgrade

Those waving flags motorized or wind blowing on your map ?

These are Mechanized Flags, but unfortunately different than the others.

Depends on what you looking for. If you just made most of Asia and Russian Siberian a move of 1 for motorized units would it help Moscow and Calcutta live ? Would it just force Japan fo go all out instead for India ?
Then Russia should attack Japan but can they still hold Moscow if only half inf went west ?
You may need to add more stuff but I’m assuming u are looking for changes without changing setups.

I have rule where and should be in all games. Mongolia is pro Russia. Russia can move a piece into Mongolia and receive any money and pieces on activation. If Russia attacks Japan first they don’t get money and pieces. Plus this allows Russia to send most Russian inf to Moscow. Can explain in another thread