Buyer's Remorse?

[Steel God]

I get the subject matter, and I get that historically the war in the Pacific from 1943 on was the Japanese refusing to die and the Americans killing them one by one and taking territory yard by yard.....and that's the game facts that need to be dealt with.....but ......well.....can anybody out there step up and tell me, nah man you got it wrong; P44 is a great title and here's why.  

As the game offers precisely the kind of struggle you describe, doesn't that make it a great title in terms of the conflict it represents?

The battles in the island campaigns on Leyte and Luzon were, for the most part, not won by movement. I think the designer notes and the scenario descriptions are very honest about what the game offers.

Out of curiosity: why did you buy the game? What piqued your interest?

I re-installed the title recently for a tournament game, and had not played it since I tested two small scenarios before release. Having played Japan '45 and Japan '46, I wanted to try a non-Pacific PzC title again and had not touched it after release.

The fact that many scenarios are vs. AI or HTH isn't too much of a problem for me, given the terrain. Many scenarios will be decided by Disruption results and if you roll high or low assault losses on Japanese units in bunkers. I can understand why those scenarios are labelled as vs. AI. Most of the result would depend on luck in HTH.

Regarding the campaign size: there are only a handful of divisions per side. The turn rate wouldn't be that bad against a dedicated opponent.

I can't tell you that you're wrong. Your description of the subject matter is very accurate, I just wonder why you bought it. It doesn't sound like you're interested in the slow slugging matches that the PzC Pacific titles turn into.

I get that historical accuracy is and should be a high priority, but these are still games not "simulations" and as such they should be playable by 2 humans (playing against the AI is simply a waste of time, WDS's business model not withstanding).  I think hands down one of the absolute best simulations I've ever played is War in the East, but it is an utter failure as a game because it's more like watching a movie because it's well nigh impossible to change anything. 

So why did I buy P44?  Well I specifically wanted to try one of the Pacific games, and a slogging match, while not my favorite game situation, is fine and I don't shy away from them.  I wanted a Pacific game because I love the theater at the Strategic level, and in fact some of my favorite board war games are based on it.....so I thought why not P44 instead of the hypotheticals.  As a secondary notion, I thought maybe some day a set of scenarios could be developed based on the 1941/42 invasion of the PI by the IJA which I honestly think would be a more interesting situation since despite it's considerable success the Commanding General was very much chastised for what the Imperial High Command considered the slow pace he achieved it at.....I mean that's a built in gaming situation if you ask me.  But I have a preference for early war generally - more mobility - less unit density - less prepared defenses.  I think a title covering the conquest of the DEI and Malaya would be a blast too.  Anyway.....I'm not saying P44 isn't well done, well researched, or accurately portrays it's subject matter.....it's just not really done with H2H in mind and frankly, I'd rather stop gaming than play any AI.