China

[BigJohn]

I'm not sure what the games objective is in China but IMO against an experienced Axis player its near impossible to hold China. I've played ~280 PBEM hrs so far probably evenly divided between axis & allies. After getting up to speed as Axis (I didn't play Waw much) I take Chongqing usually in '43 and China has almost nothing left in every game. There certainly could be some elite player who could but I'm losing as China against good players and winning as Japan.

I guess China falling (for the most part) is ok but it also happens fairly early in the game giving the Japanese the ability to use their highly experienced armies elsewhere.

Japan HQs and research are way ahead of China and by the time China starts to catch up Japan has a ton of experience.

So I think China needs to be improved.

Suggestions:

China start with a chit on C&C research.

Some more forts.

Maybe an HQ (low rated) in Xian.

Balance is obviously difficult to gauge but China seems far to weak to me at this point.

ty

[Bill Runacre]

My thinking cap is on, particularly as this is a rather timely post because the subject has also been raised in the main Matrix forum:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=11997

It's the thread entitled China War too easy for Japan.

[Bill Runacre]

And feel free to add your thoughts into that thread too if you wish to.

[BigJohn]

Thanks. I don't know the history but from the game perspective I know several of my opponents are frustrated with how easy it is for Japan to take Chongqing. I've probably played 5k hours as the Allies in the Europe game so I'm very used to retreating and coming back. Not everyone is. Also unlike Russia after Chongqing falls there is no where to retreat all lv 5 cities.

I'm currently playing a couple good Axis players who are next to Chongqing in April/May '43. I have an entrenched army with lv 1 inf wpns/1 AA & I have lv 1 C&C, maybe 90%readiness. The Japanese army unit in front has lv 2 inf wpns, three* experience and a 100%+ readiness. China NM is 51 Japan 120.

I think starting China with Inf wpns & maybe the engineer would help also.

Trick is not to make China too strong.

[BigJohn]

China is also getting 115 pts / turn

[Bill Runacre]

Thanks, that is useful and gives me another idea.

[Bill Runacre]

Two ideas actually.

[LongVin]

I feel the following changes could help China without making them OP and steamrolling japan.

1. Have more pre-built fortresses as china to help stop the Japanese advance. Maybe something similar to how in war in europe if the allies are AI where they get a ton of defenses around Moscow except with them there always by default.

2. Use the soviet model from war in europe for Chinese Corps. Make them super cheap to build (Hello 600 million pop) but make them have 3 levels of infantry weapons to compensate for this. That way early on you can just throw bodies at the Japanese to keep them from advancing.

3. Up chinese communist MPP, right now as the communists their MPP seems very low especially if you lose any of the bases up north, which you probably will.

4. Make the Chinese American Air Corp(or whatever the official name of it is) an American puppet instead of Chinese for the research bonuses.

[umeu_1]

BigJohn a écrit :

Thanks. I don't know the history but from the game perspective I know several of my opponents are frustrated with how easy it is for Japan to take Chongqing. I've probably played 5k hours as the Allies in the Europe game so I'm very used to retreating and coming back. Not everyone is. Also unlike Russia after Chongqing falls there is no where to retreat all lv 5 cities.

I'm currently playing a couple good Axis players who are next to Chongqing in April/May '43. I have an entrenched army with lv 1 inf wpns/1 AA & I have lv 1 C&C, maybe 90%readiness. The Japanese army unit in front has lv 2 inf wpns, three* experience and a 100%+ readiness. China NM is 51 Japan 120.

I think starting China with Inf wpns & maybe the engineer would help also.

Trick is not to make China too strong.

Engineers is fine, but I disagree with inf weapons lvl 1.

The problem is the same as in WaW. It's simply too easy for Japan (or Axis in general in WaW) to maintain supply above 5, which allows for their superior NM to shine, and all their advantages kinda snowball. It's quite common, at least in WaW, for Japan to have better supply deep in Chinese territory than the Chinese themselves. And from what I saw of WitP, it's not very different. I guess the issue is the lack of binary options, a place should be able to give the Chinese 10 supply, while when the Japanese take over, it should be capped at 5, for example. But tbh, even at 5, the HQs give 8 supply, and with HQ chaining, it's still very easy to maintain good supply, but at least a bit more difficult than with cities that go up to 6+

Actually something similar to the tech for ports to boost supply of minor ports would also be really great for occupied cities I guess. Then you would first have to research this doctrine, and then upgrade said cities in order to benefit from the boost in supply deep in enemy territory. Maybe the existing tech for ports can be renamed and reworked to have an effect on ports, but also an effect on captured settlements?

[BigJohn]

Sorry I meant Infantry warfare. I think the game is excellent but this is the issue IMO.

The big issue with the PBEM game right now is very few people keep playing because the play is so lopsided to begin. I've logged 300 hours and maybe 40 games 20 for each side and I'm playing my first game as Axis that my opponent has continued to mid '45. I surrendered a couple when I first started. IMO the game needs more balance early and late, that is take away from Japan early and the US late.

After Chongqing falls China is done and its very easy for Japan to get units to Burma because of the rail line and Japan is getting almost 800 MPPs a turn. There are no Chinese units, defensible areas and they get almost no MPPs. After Chongqing I can clean up with two/three armies and one HQ. Maybe something like moving production to the Urals in the Europe game.

Also its too easy for Japan to spend minimally on research and build up a huge navy/amphib force early and take Hawaii before '43 . US has to research and buy land units because they start with none. Japan just wipes out the US Navy and there is nothing left. I think the penalties for going over the border line east of Hawaii should be much higher. If the US anticipates the move they can put up a good fight but they have to ignore the NM islands and Australia/India. I appreciate the disconnect between the game and history but there was no way the Japanese were going to take Hawaii after 1942.

Honestly I don't care for the early victory conditions, the game isn't that long any way. The early victory conditions just amplify the huge imbalance early. If the early victory conditions could be turned off when the game is started that would be great.

Again love the game but IMO improving the balance will generate more interest.