Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Antw: RE: [wifdiscussion] Re: China vs Japan DOD 3/WIFFE(JA 6)

Expand Messages
  • Herbert Gratz
    But it will not get 1 good attack per turn. It needs ist good units to get the odds and they have to migrate between the North Temparate and North Monsoon
    Message 1 of 8 , Jul 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      But it will not get 1 good attack per turn. It needs ist good units to
      get the odds and they have to migrate between the North Temparate and
      North Monsoon Zones costing at least 2 turns out of 6, leaving 4. Even
      then not all good attacks will be successful.
      We've yet to see a China conquered in any of the games I've played. Be
      it DOD or RAW.

      >>> pabloisnot@... 30.06.2005 03:44:27 >>>
      Actually, they were lucky to get 2:1 usually so usually it was capped
      at +6
      or +7. And no, it was not too difficult to flip 2 out of 3 units in a
      hex
      with artillery and planes. With HQ-support, that was usually +9 or
      +10.
      Japan only needs 1 good attack a turn to conquer China if it starts in
      1937
      - which was the point of this thread I guess.



      Pablo





      -----Original Message-----
      From: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com]
      On Behalf Of Kevin
      Sent: June 29, 2005 8:34 PM
      To: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [wifdiscussion] Re: China vs Japan DOD 3/WIFFE(JA 6)



      Not to ask a dumb question but how many 2-1 attack will Japan do at
      +8 or better? They are getting some other bounses in there to do
      that. They might get one attack a turn like that with HQ support
      and some flips at best.

      Kevin


      > We experimented with it as a way to make "odds matter" on the 2d10
      CRT. We tried it primarily to help Russia but we ultimately
      discarded the idea because it had unintended consequences elsewhere
      (in particular, the Japanese v Chinese, forts in France, etc.).
      >
      > Anyway, my point was that China survived a Japanese attack in DOD3
      but the 2d10 was significantly nerfed.
      >
      > Pablo
      >
      > Kevin <kevini100@c...> wrote:
      > I had never seen a varient that restricted the 2d10 table the way
      > they describe.
      >
      > Kevin
      >
      > > Just out of curiosity, why did you use that 2d10
      > > variant? I can see how that would penalize Japan in
      > > China perhaps worse than any other power, since 2-1
      > > odds attacks in China are quite common...
      > >
      > > Cheers,
      > >
      > > Wendell
      > >
      > > --- Pablo Frank <pabloisnot@r...> wrote:
      > >
      > > > Rader is omitting certain facts about that game.
      > > >
      > > > Yes, I remember this game well. I was Japan and it
      > > > was actually 16 attacks at 12 or less on the 2d10 (I
      > > > kept track on the board). However, a BIG factor was
      > > > that we experimented with a 2d10 variant where we
      > > > capped the bonus at 2 * the odds level bonus. So,
      > > > for example, if you had a 2:1 attack, the max bonus
      > > > you could get was +8. This was instrumental in
      > > > keeping China alive since many of those attacks
      > > > ended up being capped at +6 or +7 even though I
      > > > could have easily gotten +9 or +10s. Many of those
      > > > 10s or 11s that I rolled would have succeeded.
      > > > Instead, I just got a frustrating # of 18s and 19s
      > > > which never took the hex.
      > > >
      > > > In my view, if we had played with the 2d10 CRT as
      > > > written, that game would have been very different.
      > > >
      > > > I share the concern that China in a DOD3 game can be
      > > > very dead if Japan wants it to be.
      > > >
      > > > Pablo
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ____________________________________________________
      > > Yahoo! Sports
      > > Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
      > > http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------
      > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
      >
      >
      > Visit your group "wifdiscussion" on the web.
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > wifdiscussion-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
      Service.
      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





      _____

      YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



      * Visit your group "wifdiscussion
      <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wifdiscussion> " on the web.


      * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      wifdiscussion-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      <mailto:wifdiscussion-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>



      * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
      <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.



      _____



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • Wendell Albright
      I ve seen China conquered once or twice, and seen it badly crippled several times. With patience, perseverence, average luck, and judicious use of strat & tac
      Message 2 of 8 , Jul 1, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        I've seen China conquered once or twice, and seen it
        badly crippled several times. With patience,
        perseverence, average luck, and judicious use of strat
        & tac bombing, Japan can do it.

        The migration from N temp to N Monsoon doesn't take up
        THAT much of Japan's time, and depending on flips they
        can attack in rain anyway, since they never get blitz
        bonuses...

        May differ in DOD3, which I haven't played.

        Cheers,

        Wendell

        --- Herbert Gratz <Herbert.Gratz@...> wrote:

        > But it will not get 1 good attack per turn. It needs
        > ist good units to get the odds and they have to
        > migrate between the North Temparate and North
        > Monsoon Zones costing at least 2 turns out of
        > 6, leaving 4. Even then not all good attacks will be

        > successful. We've yet to see a China conquered in
        > any of the games I've played. Be it DOD or RAW.
        >
        > >>> pabloisnot@... 30.06.2005 03:44:27 >>>
        > Actually, they were lucky to get 2:1 usually so
        > usually it was capped
        > at +6
        > or +7. And no, it was not too difficult to flip 2
        > out of 3 units in a
        > hex
        > with artillery and planes. With HQ-support, that
        > was usually +9 or
        > +10.
        > Japan only needs 1 good attack a turn to conquer
        > China if it starts in
        > 1937
        > - which was the point of this thread I guess.
        >
        >
        >
        > Pablo
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        > [mailto:wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com]
        > On Behalf Of Kevin
        > Sent: June 29, 2005 8:34 PM
        > To: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [wifdiscussion] Re: China vs Japan DOD
        > 3/WIFFE(JA 6)
        >
        >
        >
        > Not to ask a dumb question but how many 2-1 attack
        > will Japan do at
        > +8 or better? They are getting some other bounses
        > in there to do
        > that. They might get one attack a turn like that
        > with HQ support
        > and some flips at best.
        >
        > Kevin
        >
        >
        > > We experimented with it as a way to make "odds
        > matter" on the 2d10
        > CRT. We tried it primarily to help Russia but we
        > ultimately
        > discarded the idea because it had unintended
        > consequences elsewhere
        > (in particular, the Japanese v Chinese, forts in
        > France, etc.).
        > >
        > > Anyway, my point was that China survived a
        > Japanese attack in DOD3
        > but the 2d10 was significantly nerfed.
        > >
        > > Pablo
        > >
        > > Kevin <kevini100@c...> wrote:
        > > I had never seen a varient that restricted the
        > 2d10 table the way
        > > they describe.
        > >
        > > Kevin
        > >
        > > > Just out of curiosity, why did you use that 2d10
        > > > variant? I can see how that would penalize
        > Japan in
        > > > China perhaps worse than any other power, since
        > 2-1
        > > > odds attacks in China are quite common...
        > > >
        > > > Cheers,
        > > >
        > > > Wendell
        > > >
        > > > --- Pablo Frank <pabloisnot@r...> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > > Rader is omitting certain facts about that
        > game.
        > > > >
        > > > > Yes, I remember this game well. I was Japan
        > and it
        > > > > was actually 16 attacks at 12 or less on the
        > 2d10 (I
        > > > > kept track on the board). However, a BIG
        > factor was
        > > > > that we experimented with a 2d10 variant where
        > we
        > > > > capped the bonus at 2 * the odds level bonus.
        > So,
        > > > > for example, if you had a 2:1 attack, the max
        > bonus
        > > > > you could get was +8. This was instrumental
        > in
        > > > > keeping China alive since many of those
        > attacks
        > > > > ended up being capped at +6 or +7 even though
        > I
        > > > > could have easily gotten +9 or +10s. Many of
        > those
        > > > > 10s or 11s that I rolled would have succeeded.
        >
        > > > > Instead, I just got a frustrating # of 18s and
        > 19s
        > > > > which never took the hex.
        > > > >
        > > > > In my view, if we had played with the 2d10 CRT
        > as
        > > > > written, that game would have been very
        > different.
        > > > >
        > > > > I share the concern that China in a DOD3 game
        > can be
        > > > > very dead if Japan wants it to be.
        > > > >
        > > > > Pablo
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > ____________________________________________________
        >
        > > > Yahoo! Sports
        > > > Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy
        > Football
        > > > http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > ---------------------------------
        > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        > >
        > >
        > > Visit your group "wifdiscussion" on the web.
        > >
        > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
        > to:
        > > wifdiscussion-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
        > Yahoo! Terms of
        > Service.
        > >
        > >
        > > ---------------------------------
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
        > removed]
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > _____
        >
        > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        >
        >
        >
        > * Visit your group "wifdiscussion
        > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wifdiscussion> " on
        > the web.
        >
        >
        > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an
        > email to:
        > wifdiscussion-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        <mailto:wifdiscussion-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
        >
        >
        >
        > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        > the Yahoo!
        > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of
        > Service.
        >
        >
        >
        > _____
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been
        > removed]
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >




        ____________________________________________________
        Yahoo! Sports
        Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
        http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
      • Mattias Rom├ín
        ... Exactly. The Crucial thing is to keep attacking, as China can t deal with attrition. Japan can afford to roll 1 a few times, but often China can t take a
        Message 3 of 8 , Jul 1, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, Wendell Albright
          <wifwendell@y...> wrote:
          > I've seen China conquered once or twice, and seen it
          > badly crippled several times. With patience,
          > perseverence, average luck, and judicious use of strat
          > & tac bombing, Japan can do it.

          Exactly. The Crucial thing is to keep attacking, as China can't deal
          with attrition. Japan can afford to roll "1" a few times, but often
          China can't take a "0". The Chinese line cracks and melts away with a
          few high attack rolls. And like Wendell said, don't neglect strat
          bombing. Current game (Classic), China has only Lan-chow and Kun-ming
          left after 1940 and zero production.

          /Mattias
        • Kevin
          Actually we a talking about China in a DOD 3/Wiffe perspective. In our Japan went after China in J/A 36. Japan has to use combineds for the first two years
          Message 4 of 8 , Jul 1, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Actually we a talking about China in a DOD 3/Wiffe perspective. In our
            Japan went after China in J/A 36. Japan has to use combineds for the
            first two years of the limited war. The big problem China has is not
            enough units as Japan can work the length of the front between the two
            weather zones. Certainly this is slowed down a little by only doing
            combineds.

            Kevin

            > > I've seen China conquered once or twice, and seen it
            > > badly crippled several times. With patience,
            > > perseverence, average luck, and judicious use of strat
            > > & tac bombing, Japan can do it.
            >
            > Exactly. The Crucial thing is to keep attacking, as China can't deal
            > with attrition. Japan can afford to roll "1" a few times, but often
            > China can't take a "0". The Chinese line cracks and melts away with a
            > few high attack rolls. And like Wendell said, don't neglect strat
            > bombing. Current game (Classic), China has only Lan-chow and Kun-ming
            > left after 1940 and zero production.
            >
            > /Mattias
          • Wendell Albright
            As I said, I ve not played DOD3! Combineds would obviously slow Japan down... but on the other hand, it can start its push (albeit slowly) earlier than in a
            Message 5 of 8 , Jul 1, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              As I said, I've not played DOD3! Combineds would
              obviously slow Japan down... but on the other hand, it
              can start its push (albeit slowly) earlier than in a
              regular WIF game, right?

              Cheers,

              Wendell

              --- Kevin <kevini100@...> wrote:

              > Actually we a talking about China in a DOD 3/Wiffe
              > perspective. In our
              > Japan went after China in J/A 36. Japan has to use
              > combineds for the
              > first two years of the limited war. The big problem
              > China has is not
              > enough units as Japan can work the length of the
              > front between the two
              > weather zones. Certainly this is slowed down a
              > little by only doing
              > combineds.
              >
              > Kevin
              >
              > > > I've seen China conquered once or twice, and
              > seen it
              > > > badly crippled several times. With patience,
              > > > perseverence, average luck, and judicious use of
              > strat
              > > > & tac bombing, Japan can do it.
              > >
              > > Exactly. The Crucial thing is to keep attacking,
              > as China can't deal
              > > with attrition. Japan can afford to roll "1" a few
              > times, but often
              > > China can't take a "0". The Chinese line cracks
              > and melts away with a
              > > few high attack rolls. And like Wendell said,
              > don't neglect strat
              > > bombing. Current game (Classic), China has only
              > Lan-chow and Kun-ming
              > > left after 1940 and zero production.
              > >
              > > /Mattias
              >
              >
              >




              ____________________________________________________
              Yahoo! Sports
              Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
              http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
            • Mark Palius
              Anyone ever try winning the CH/JA conflict thru diplomacy instead of arms? By treatying off JA, CH gets territorial integrity & preserves her military, gets a
              Message 6 of 8 , Jul 6, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Anyone ever try winning the CH/JA conflict thru diplomacy instead of arms?

                By treatying off JA, CH gets territorial integrity & preserves her
                military, gets a BP, is free to prosecute her civil war and, most
                importantly, deflects Japanese ambitions to
                other theaters.

                By treating off CH, JA gets lots of resources for 1 BP, avoids a
                land war in asia and, most
                importantly, frees up her army for conquering/garissoning the
                co-prosperity sphere as well as BP available for building navy.

                Since the US tends to object to Japanese "pacificism" in asia & the CW
                tends to object to Japanese Indo-Pacficism, this line of play only
                develops when during independent CH play.

                best regards,
                /mp
              • Kevin
                ... of arms? This is an option that DOD 3 with WIFFE allows for. One of the many reasons why I like. ... CW ... How many resources can Japan get in this
                Message 7 of 8 , Jul 6, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  > Anyone ever try winning the CH/JA conflict thru diplomacy instead
                  of arms?

                  This is an option that DOD 3 with WIFFE allows for. One of the many
                  reasons why I like.

                  > By treatying off JA, CH gets territorial integrity & preserves her
                  > military, gets a BP, is free to prosecute her civil war and, most
                  > importantly, deflects Japanese ambitions to
                  > other theaters.
                  >
                  > By treating off CH, JA gets lots of resources for 1 BP, avoids a
                  > land war in asia and, most
                  > importantly, frees up her army for conquering/garissoning the
                  > co-prosperity sphere as well as BP available for building navy.
                  >
                  > Since the US tends to object to Japanese "pacificism" in asia & the
                  CW
                  > tends to object to Japanese Indo-Pacficism, this line of play only
                  > develops when during independent CH play.
                  >
                  > best regards,
                  > /mp

                  How many resources can Japan get in this exchange? Another thing is
                  eventually China will be able to go to war with Japan one way or
                  another even if a treaty is made unless it goes to a level 2 treaty.
                  A treaty with Japan is always the best way to go for China as it
                  gives them time early in the game. This is when China is most
                  vunerable to a Japanese attack.

                  Kevin
                • Karl
                  My group is a big fan of the combined DOD3/WIFFE for the added flexibility and variety it provides. Our current game has reached J/F 1942 (I am the CW/China
                  Message 8 of 8 , Jul 6, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    My group is a big fan of the combined DOD3/WIFFE for the added
                    flexibility and variety it provides.

                    Our current game has reached J/F 1942 (I am the CW/China player).
                    China remains neutral as the Axis have taken an anti-CW strategy that
                    had all three Axis powers striking at the CW. Russia also remains
                    neutral (and has conquered Persia and the Baltic States).

                    Besides building up her military China spent her time thus far
                    winning the Civil War against those evil Commies, which caused poor
                    political relations between the Democrats and Russia. Russia signed a
                    treaty and trade deal with Japan but there is no pact between Russia
                    and Germany.

                    Now that the US has joined the war against all Axis powers (Germany
                    in N/D 1940, Japan and Italy in J/F 1942) China will be able to take
                    a more aggressive stance again Japan (at least as aggressive as China
                    can be). Both New Zealand and Australia have been conquered so far
                    (hitting them while their force pool was small and Japan could
                    control the oceans) while Vichy France has been created and then
                    collapsed (and yes, they did a France first plan so France was
                    attacked and conquered while Poland still remained neutral - they
                    took Poland out after France was finished). Germany invaded Spain in
                    N/D 1941 and that war is ongoing.

                    I just wanted to point out that China could remain friendly with
                    Japan for a long while even when other Democrats are at war (and
                    despite it being played by one of the CW or US players). The
                    requirement for China to have a causus bellum to enter the war takes
                    time to obtain and has US entry impacts thus it could take a while
                    before China declares war.

                    Thanks,
                    Karl

                    --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, Mark Palius <mp47@c...> wrote:
                    > Anyone ever try winning the CH/JA conflict thru diplomacy instead
                    of arms?
                    >
                    > By treatying off JA, CH gets territorial integrity & preserves her
                    > military, gets a BP, is free to prosecute her civil war and, most
                    > importantly, deflects Japanese ambitions to
                    > other theaters.
                    >
                    > By treating off CH, JA gets lots of resources for 1 BP, avoids a
                    > land war in asia and, most
                    > importantly, frees up her army for conquering/garissoning the
                    > co-prosperity sphere as well as BP available for building navy.
                    >
                    > Since the US tends to object to Japanese "pacificism" in asia & the
                    CW
                    > tends to object to Japanese Indo-Pacficism, this line of play only
                    > develops when during independent CH play.
                    >
                    > best regards,
                    > /mp
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.