Matrix Games Forums

A look through the keyhole #10!The Age of Shadows on Distant Worlds starts now!Paypal System UpdateDistant Worlds: Shadows Final Teaser!Distant Worlds: Legends gets Updated!Recruiting Testers for Commander: the Great War on Mac!Armageddon invasion starts in 2014Command Rommels Panzers in Battle Academy!Servers UpdateThe Deal goes Fourth!		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Looking for a Japanese opponent (Postponed)

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Opponents Wanted >> Looking for a Japanese opponent (Postponed) Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Looking for a Japanese opponent (Postponed) - 3/24/2012 7:52:36 PM   
Barb


Posts: 1479
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Slovakia
Status: offline 		Hi,

I am looking for a decent Japanese opponent who like the history and would like to know how the game will fare in setup close to history.

That said I like to use units in areas where they were used IRL - I would like to experience slow Solomon/New Guinea Campaigns, large leaps in the central Pacific, several actions around Burma and rather low intensity battles in China.

If you are interested, please PM or e-mail me - I had to ask you some additional questions to get into agreement.

Thanks, Barb

< Message edited by Barb -- 4/6/2012 8:07:07 PM >

_____________________________


"Hello IT. Have you tried turning it off and on again?"
Post #: 1
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/25/2012 3:38:05 AM   
SuluSea


Posts: 1900
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline 		Apologies to the staff and forum.


< Message edited by SuluSea -- 3/25/2012 10:59:07 PM >

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 2
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/25/2012 3:58:26 AM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 14913
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: online 		Guys...

Just agree to move on. No fault assigned nor implied. C'mon. Please.

_____________________________


(in reply to SuluSea)
Post #: 3
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/25/2012 11:54:51 AM   
Hanzberger


Posts: 739
Joined: 4/26/2006
From: SE Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		Well I really was thinking about finally doing my first PBEM. (not with BARB). Just in general. And my statement here has nothing to do with what is implied above except: I have heard others talking about how they use ships as point men and I think it is totally gamey. I think for me this would be an important HR, which probably eliminates most opponents. As a JFB it is hard enough on our side as it is. IMO if a single ship is found in an odd part of sea, the game should stop, screen shots sent and the person should prove what they are intending to do with such. This game takes way too many hours to waste on such nonsense.

_____________________________


Japan AC wire chart here
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2769286&mpage=1&key=?

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 4
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/25/2012 2:33:15 PM   
Barb


Posts: 1479
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Slovakia
Status: offline 		Hmm.. never intended to write here anything about my past opponents. I am not going to go through all the SuluSea had written here. I am not going even to read it all. For me it was just about different expectations...

I am an open minded player that is willing to discuss things and agree on compromises, House rules and other things. When I dislike something, I talk about it with my opponent and if there is a reasonable solution we should implement it. I expect my opponent to do the same in the first place.

_____________________________


"Hello IT. Have you tried turning it off and on again?"

(in reply to Hanzberger)
Post #: 5
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/25/2012 2:37:31 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 12401
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger

Well I really was thinking about finally doing my first PBEM. (not with BARB). Just in general. And my statement here has nothing to do with what is implied above except: I have heard others talking about how they use ships as point men and I think it is totally gamey. I think for me this would be an important HR, which probably eliminates most opponents. As a JFB it is hard enough on our side as it is. IMO if a single ship is found in an odd part of sea, the game should stop, screen shots sent and the person should prove what they are intending to do with such. This game takes way too many hours to waste on such nonsense.


You might be taking that a little too far - there was the use of picket ships and it's a legitimate tactic in context. A good example is that the CV TF carrying the Doolittle Raid ran into a picket ship. I think it's pretty difficult to sift the wheat from the chaff in the case of picket ships.

The tactic described above is quite different as it consists of deploying many single low-value ships for the purpose of taking advantage of the game engine's limitations.

And I do not wish to join the argument above I am merely referring to the tactic that is described.

(in reply to Hanzberger)
Post #: 6
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/25/2012 2:39:34 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 12401
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		I should add that in my first PBM my (IJ) opponent used pickets ships and that stopped me from getting raiders into his SLOCs.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 7
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/25/2012 2:49:06 PM   
Barb


Posts: 1479
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Slovakia
Status: offline 		These ships were not picket ships - I didn't intended to use one anyway. While ships were in 1 ship TFs, they came from different ports. While small ships (1000-1750 cargo capacity) they were loaded with supplies trying to reach Philippines. Other ships were trying to flee from Philippines or Hong Kong loaded with resources, supplies, fuel...

I used many single ship task forces in an attempt to sneak them through Naval blockade. This was not that succesfull because his SAG reacted numerous times probably due to efficient naval search and sunk many of them.

P.S.: I had offered SuluSea to discontinue the tactics as he didn't liked it, however it turned to long e-mail discussion of which parts were offered to you. And there the game ended.

< Message edited by Barb -- 3/25/2012 2:53:15 PM >

_____________________________


"Hello IT. Have you tried turning it off and on again?"

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 8
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/25/2012 3:07:02 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 12401
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		Single ships are valid in many cases like that as well: scattering convoys was a real life tactic, and sending small convoys or single ships to try and sneak through a blockade.

I have no idea whether the incidents under dispute in the game above fell into these areas (and I don't want to join that discussion). I am only mentioning this for the benefit of the new guy, so he understands that there is room for consideration on those things.

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 9
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/25/2012 3:24:43 PM   
Barb


Posts: 1479
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Slovakia
Status: offline 		That was my reason too (PQ-17). Also many ships sailed independently anyway. Especially small steamers in remote areas (Pacific was just this before the war broke out).

Warship or convoy protection was usually offered to large, fast troopships carrying troops. Not to small steamers running phosphate-banana-coconut-whatever around the islands.

_____________________________


"Hello IT. Have you tried turning it off and on again?"

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 10
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/25/2012 3:40:53 PM   
SuluSea


Posts: 1900
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline 		Apologies to the staff and forum.

< Message edited by SuluSea -- 3/25/2012 10:59:35 PM >

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 11
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/25/2012 5:32:43 PM   
Hanzberger


Posts: 739
Joined: 4/26/2006
From: SE Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		I wonder how the sailors felt being on those picket ships?

_____________________________


Japan AC wire chart here
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2769286&mpage=1&key=?

(in reply to SuluSea)
Post #: 12
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/25/2012 8:41:20 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 6200
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Single ships are valid in many cases like that as well: scattering convoys was a real life tactic, and sending small convoys or single ships to try and sneak through a blockade.

I have no idea whether the incidents under dispute in the game above fell into these areas (and I don't want to join that discussion). I am only mentioning this for the benefit of the new guy, so he understands that there is room for consideration on those things.


I don't want to get into the middle of a divorce either , but I would only echo this thought. I'd boil it down to this binary:

1) Single-ship merchant TFs are often ignored by the targeting engine

but

2) A single ship Tf doesn't haul a lot of supplies either.

Thus, balance.

A single-ship TF loaded with supplies is by definition not a picket ship. It's hauling supplies. If it sees something, yes, it can report back to HQ. But it's hauling supplies. The player who owns it has made a decision to risk it in exchange for the meager amount it can carry, plus the fuel consumed both ways. That's a valid trade-off in the game.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 13
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/26/2012 6:07:40 AM   
Barb


Posts: 1479
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Slovakia
Status: offline 		Hanzberger: I presume not very well.
I was risking the lives of few hundreds to help one hundred thousand lives on Philippines. I do not play on points or autovictory, for me a ship is a ship - and each can have a purpose. Majority of ships my opponent encountered (seen or sunk) were loaded either with supplies to or resources/fuel from the area. Those that didn't carry anything were in too much hurry to get out of the danger.

_____________________________


"Hello IT. Have you tried turning it off and on again?"

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 14
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 3/29/2012 3:59:38 AM   
PizzaMan


Posts: 205
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline 		In real life, it was very common for larger fishing vessels equiped with radios to be indirectly used as pickets (fishing/whaling was their primary purpose, but if they saw something they would get on the radio). But since fishing vessels are not represented in the game....

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 15
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 4/2/2012 2:38:05 AM   
Icedawg


Posts: 1324
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: Upstate New York
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PizzaMan

In real life, it was very common for larger fishing vessels equiped with radios to be indirectly used as pickets (fishing/whaling was their primary purpose, but if they saw something they would get on the radio). But since fishing vessels are not represented in the game....


But in real life, those single fishing boats weren't targeted by 100 carrier aircraft either. As the game is, a player can easily suck all of the available sorties out of the opponent's CVs by using these "picket ships". If the game could accurately model pickets, I'd agree that they'd be a great feature in the game. But since the game engine is not smart enough to send 2 or 3 bombers after the fishing boat and keep the other 97-98 for use against worthwhile targets, I'd have to agree with Hanzberger on this one.

Single ship TFs used as air attack bait = gamey.

(in reply to PizzaMan)
Post #: 16
RE: Looking for a Japanese opponent - again - 4/2/2012 6:42:54 AM   
Barb


Posts: 1479
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Slovakia
Status: offline 		I did never used any ship as picket or bait. All ships that were in 1 ship task forces were loaded with supplies to Philippines, or resources/oil/fuel from places about to fall. Ships carrying troops were usually accompanied by some warship.

There also were no ships positioned or routed by ways where they can be considered as pickets.

Anyway I shall probably close this thread as I presume no one is going to respond to my call in near future.

_____________________________


"Hello IT. Have you tried turning it off and on again?"

(in reply to Icedawg)
Post #: 17
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Opponents Wanted >> Looking for a Japanese opponent (Postponed) Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.148