Community

Hi, folks! My first new post here in our new-old blog location, as of 5/14/08.

First bit of news: I'll be out at Source Comics and Games in Minnesota on Saturday. June 7th, to help them kick off 4th Edition. If you're in the area and you'd like to stop by, I'd be happy to talk D&D, War at Sea, baseball, or whatever with you! Come on by!

Second interesting tidbit: One of the really fun things I've had a chance to play with in the last couple of weeks is a little bit of development assistance on the Player's Handbook II. The part that I got to get my hands dirty on is the sorcerer--an old friend, since I created the first draft of the sorcerer back in the early days of my work on 3rd Edition. The 3rd Edition sorcerer was spurred by the simple observation that an enormous hunk of valuable real estate in the Player's Handbook was devoted to the support of a single class--the wizard. I asked the question, "Is there some other way we can utilize all these spells?" That and the idea of cast-on-the-fly from a limited list was enough to get the sorcerer into the book, and it became one of the most popular innovations of the 3rd Edition game. In 4th Edition, we don't want to design classes for this sort of reason anymore; since every class is in effect a spellcaster, we don't want to see a 99% overlap of the power lists between two classes. That mean taking the sorcerer back to the broad story concepts (concepts that evolved later in the sorcerer's original 3e design, since the sorcerer began with mechanics in 3e) and thinking hard about what it *could* be and how it could occupy the same role and power source as the wizard but be a different class. I think we've got some great ideas cooking up on that score. (Hint: It might involve some wild magery.)

Last thought for the night: I was challenged by a visiting War at Sea fan the other day who was certain I made the Wildcat too good, since *everyone* knows the Zero was better than the Wildcat historically. Well, I looked over the cards again, and I checked my sources, and I'm inclined to disagree. The Zero had an advantage in the Zero's fight, and the Wildcat had an advantage in the Wildcat's fight. A War at Sea card doesn't just measure the equipment, it also measures the training and doctrine of the men using the equipment. For example, Zero pilots never came up with a good answer for the Thach Weave. Ultimately, the Wildcat fought the Zero to a standstill in WW2--and then, during the months of relative parity in the Solomons campaign, came out on top.

The single best book I've seen on this topic is Fire in the Sky, by Eric Bergerud -- it's a fascinating read, and I highly recommend it.

and how it could occupy the same role and power source as the wizard but be a different class.

Rich, (if I may call you Rich :D ) is that to say that the Sorcerer IS being designed as an Arcane Controller?

Rich,

I may be in the minority in saying you're absolutely right about the Wildcat and the Zero, especially the A6M2.

I've actually used Eric Bergerund's Fire in the Sky in my Master's Thesis. Another excellent book, directly from the viewpoint of one of Japan's best fighter aces, is Saburo Sakai's Samurai!

The problem wasn't only the Thatch Weave, but it was that Japanese pilots almost never coordinated with each other on the level of the American pilots. Many seem to forget that the early Japanese dominance was against P-40 Warhawks and P-39 Airacobras....the Flying Cow (the P-39) was just a poor fighter to begin with (though was fairly good at ground attack), while the P-40 could still out-fight the Zero if it stuck to the Dive-Climb-Dive style of battle and did'nt try to turn with the Zero.

Anyway, I think that the Wildcat is pretty much perfectly balanced with the Zero....the Wildcat's guns, especially using incendiary ammunition, were indeed more powerful than the Zero's, as they had more punch than the 2 7.7mm guns and a faster rate of fire than the 2 20mm cannon. The Wildcat had better armor and survivability. It could dive and climb faster, and could roll just as well as the Zero. The Zero's advantage was in turning radius and speed.

So kudos on hitting the Zeke Vs. Wildcat fight on the head.


As for competing with later American fighters.....the Shiden and Reisen should do well against the Hellcat and Corsair, they never had the chance to prove themselves due to lack of numbers and lack of pilots.

Rich,

Bergerud's book is a great read. I think he does an excellent job at pointing out the doctrinal stagnancy of Japanese pilots from late 1942 onward. And he makes a pretty convincing case for showing the Japanese *could* have improved their carrier-based air forces in 1943 but were baited into using them piecemeal to defined Rabual.

So, yes, I have to agree with the stats as they stand for the Wildcat and Zero. The Japanese could have capitalized on their initial, early war comabat experience. But they never seemed to have invested the time in a top-notch training program afterward. Instead, it dwindled and dwindled to a a former shadow of itself. Everything I have read on American pilots clearly indicates a greater trend toward improving tactics. And in the end, it paid off.

I agree with the idea of publishing something like an "early war Ace" Zero figure at some point - it does seem like in early 1942 the Zero was greatly feared, including by Wildcat pilots. Certainly part was that the US pilots hadn't yet figured out how to play to their strengths, but perhaps much of it was also because of the expert skill level of the early-war cadre of highly experienced and battle-tested Japanese pilots...?

On another subject, your earlier posts Rich which mentioned preliminary work on Set III were very encouraging to me and I think others... if and when you are able to give us any updates on the probability and potential dates for a Set III I'm sure it would help people feel more confident as they dive back into War at Sea with the release of Set II. Hopefully next time we won't face 18 months between sets, which is a long time to keep community & player momentum up...

Thanks for the insights!