How to diversify USA strategies in WWII maps?
-
Another simpler solution is to make Japanese so weak that you simply have no use to go on them with all Americans, while making convenient to go for Pacific. For example, if Americans have 4+ times the production of Japanese, you would for sure do something in Atlantic, as there would be no point using all your production against the Japanese, you can easily beat with a fraction of it. This would be also realistic, but, of course, would make for a serious balancing challenge in Europe.
-
Better to remove connecions between western and eastern USA and also western-eastern canada otherwise USA fighters from eastern couas can already participate Pacific battles. Also I don't like preventing USA to build carrier in the western coast. But also dividing USA like 2 separate country is bad.
I don't knowis this kind of mechanism exist in the game assuming USA has total 50 Production power and nominally able to spend 25 Pus to the west and 25 Pus to the east but if USa player wants to invest more to one of the these threatz; USA player will get penalty per unit.
Example; If we had implemented %50 penalty and USA player wanted to go only Atlantic in this case USA real production power would decrease from 50 to 37.5 (25+12.5).
If USa had alread spent 25 Pus for the west and wanted to place additional battleship for example. This battleship cost would be 30 instead of 20.
-
@Schulz As I said, you can really do that with strict placement limits in pacific (like making Pacific US America worth 2 or 3), and limiting carriers to land 1 air unit of value not greater than the value of the carrier itself (again, realistic, as actually what you transport in a carrier should cost less than 1/10 the cost of the carrier itself). The inefficiency of trying to have more TUV in pacific would be given by the time required to move from the east coast through the panama canal and the inefficiency of building to max out TUV placement under constraints (like spamming battleships only or carriers plus fighters produced in the east coast), also counting placing less transports than what you would like.
Then, as long as going Pacific is a little (not too much) more convenient than going Atlantic (example: World At War), and the Japanese are half or less the production of Americans, the Americans will go both Pacific and Atlantic, if properly played. -
Limiting placements in Pacific will prevent USA to rush Japan but Won't prevent USA to go only Atlantic since Pacific islands are worthless realistically, USA would only spend land units for to defend the mainland, USA would never buy any single ship in the Pacific.
The main issue is not only worhless Pacific islands, also naval units are more expensive than land units. Without producion penalty or making pacific islands unrealistically valuable USA will always go for Atlantic. Invading France and trying to knock Germany out of war will always be more valuable than trying to save Australia.
I have convinced myself, production penalty would be only solution and the better one than making valuable pacific islands.
-
I forgot about the France factor specifically in WAW 1940.
France has second capital so fighting in France mainland, allies could not capture factories which will help them to produce the massive units required for Europe. Instead the Allies need to go through Spain but Spain was neutral in WW2 so it makes little sense. -
@Schulz Again, matters can be fine tuned in a number of ways, until the balance being in favour of going Pacific instead of Atlantic. For example, the transport's purchase cost makes less worthwhile to go atlantic the higher it is (also bomber cost should be increased coherently). So, if you make transports very costly, going Pacific will be preferred, as it would cost a lot to send land units to fight in Europe, while the Pacific is far less transports demanding. Even World At War has pacific as a clearly better option, despite the fact that transports are very cheap, and you even have more efficient bigger versions of them!
EDIT: Of course, World At War values Pacific play by assigning a lot of income to all those realistically mostly worthless Pacific islands. As I said, it is easy enough to achieve partial Pacific play by a combination of placement limits and income distribution, but it would become a huge challenge to do it realistically (and it might be that realistically going full Atlantic would have been actually the most convenient option).
-
Is production penalty possible in te current engine? I still wouldn't favour of restricting USA in Pacific.
Going Pacific is better in WaW because USA is too far to Europe and Britain-Russia can already handle Germany-Italy without USA assist in Europe. Big World also the same story.
-
Realism and history are not the same thing.
Realistically, those pacific islands are not worth much. Historically, Japan invested a lot into defending them. Which was almost certainly a mistake and a very poor use of her resources. In TripleA, players have perfect information and battles are simple probabilities. Do you want players to fight over these islands, like happened in history? Then make fighting over them worthwhile.
Its not a mystery than players will give attacking a territory worth 6 a higher priority than attacking a territory worth 0.
-
Why not making Australia and New Zealand American insted of British since Australia would have limited placement and Japan would able to conquer them if US does not help from its mainland. Also Australia and Hawaii have victory cities. And adding France would make more temting Pacific. In this case Allies would gain nothing from constantly attacking France.
-
Depends on how you value territories. Strategic/geographical and morale boosting to a countries people can(usually is) be a determination of value also.
Obviously, from a raw material stand point, midway islands are not worth anything. From a strategic point, quite a bit.
Just depends on how you want to do it. "World in Flames" is supposed to be the best WWII game for realism. Sadly, I've never played it and last I checked, no longer an online option.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login