Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Looking for Allied Player - CLOSED

 
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 Allied Player - CLOSED Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Looking for Allied Player - CLOSED - 4/1/2012 9:36:27 PM   
armin


Posts: 57
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline
I offer two options of gameplay. Free mode or more realistical. Changes to any settings can be made per request.

Free mode:
SCEN 1

*historical first turn off
*december suprise on
*hexes on
*allied dmg control off
*reliable torpedos off
*no night bombing
*player defined upgrade on
*realistical research off
*reinforcment +-60 days (to balance the research and upgrades)
*max alt 29ft
*crossing borders costs pp
*strategic bombing of assets after 6/43
*no naval bombing with 4e under 10k ft
*no FP units resizing to boost training system
*fast transports (7th dec) cant deploy units behind enemy lines

More realistical:
DABIGBABES-B 28

*historical first turn off
*december suprise on
*hexes off
*allied dmg control on
*reliable torpedos off
*no night bombing
*no strategic bombing before 1943
*player defined upgrade off
*realistical research on
*reinforcments historical - fixed
*no unified command (each nations unit need to be managed separately (example: no rushing 70 hexes with us/new zealand units to save dutch units etc, mixed fleets need to have at least 70% one faction dominant.)
*Chinese units may only operate in China and Burma.Thailand units may not invade beyond Rangoon.
*The Allied player can move only existing fleets on 7 Dec.
*crossing borders - pp price
*no FP units resizing to boost training system
*fast transports (7th dec) cant deploy units behind enemy lines - means cant bypass more then one hostile base on the route.
* no allied skip bombing before 1943
* no allied subs in the sea of japan until 1945
* no allied kamikaze attacks (spamming convoys to protect main target or using ships without backup as throw aways.)

< Message edited by armin -- 4/18/2012 10:41:38 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Looking for american opponent - 4/2/2012 6:49:26 AM   
Barb


Posts: 1637
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Slovakia
Status: offline
American=allied or located in america?

_____________________________


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

(in reply to armin)
Post #: 2
RE: Looking for american opponent - 4/2/2012 8:07:07 AM   
armin


Posts: 57
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline
Yes allied player, sorry for my english.

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 3
RE: Looking for american opponent - 4/2/2012 10:44:35 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
why would you think Allied damage control off would be more realistic? Off means they would be as good/bad as the Japanese in the game, does that sound realistic to you?

_____________________________


(in reply to armin)
Post #: 4
RE: Looking for american opponent - 4/2/2012 1:08:25 PM   
Puhis

 

Posts: 1705
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline
He is not saying it's totally realistic, he is only suggesting two modes, 'free' and 'more realistic'... As far as I can tell both modes have allied damage control off but other options vary.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 5
RE: Looking for american opponent - 4/2/2012 1:55:13 PM   
armin


Posts: 57
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline
Well manual considers it in general way for all crafts which historically would be not correct. There is no way that some merchant vessel, submarine would have the same trained crew or facilities as destroyer or carrier. if there would be multiple options i would agree but they arent.

(in reply to Puhis)
Post #: 6
RE: Looking for american opponent - 4/3/2012 9:25:13 PM   
ALF1


Posts: 45
Joined: 5/10/2011
From: Czech republic
Status: offline
I send you PM. please replay. thanks

(in reply to armin)
Post #: 7
RE: Looking for american opponent - 4/3/2012 10:35:32 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 3830
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: armin

Well manual considers it in general way for all crafts which historically would be not correct. There is no way that some merchant vessel, submarine would have the same trained crew or facilities as destroyer or carrier. if there would be multiple options i would agree but they arent.


The game scenarios already take those differences into account.

Alfred

(in reply to armin)
Post #: 8
RE: Looking for american opponent - 4/3/2012 11:19:22 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 8793
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: armin

Well manual considers it in general way for all crafts which historically would be not correct. There is no way that some merchant vessel, submarine would have the same trained crew or facilities as destroyer or carrier. if there would be multiple options i would agree but they arent.


The game scenarios already take those differences into account.

Alfred


I successfully restrained myself from commenting that submarine crews were much, much more trained man-per-man than DDs and CVs of the era. Surface warfare qualification in the USN only appeared in the 1970s.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 9
RE: Looking for american opponent - 4/4/2012 12:12:38 AM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18493
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

I successfully restrained myself


You did?

_____________________________


(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 10
RE: Looking for american opponent - 4/4/2012 12:41:31 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 8793
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

I successfully restrained myself


You did?


For awhile.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 11
RE: Looking for american opponent - 4/4/2012 7:35:10 AM   
armin


Posts: 57
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: armin

Well manual considers it in general way for all crafts which historically would be not correct. There is no way that some merchant vessel, submarine would have the same trained crew or facilities as destroyer or carrier. if there would be multiple options i would agree but they arent.


The game scenarios already take those differences into account.

Alfred


So is allied damage control a historical option or its a bonus for new players who fight japanese AI side?

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 12
RE: Looking for american opponent - 4/4/2012 2:32:33 PM   
mike scholl 1

 

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline
I'm more intrigued by:

*historical first turn off
*december suprise on

...with no limit placed on Japanese "non-historical" movement. There is a large portion of thee map where Japanese TF's can't sail without being spotted, and for which there is no justification except war for their presense, but you want to mandate "surprise" regardless.

(in reply to armin)
Post #: 13
RE: Looking for american opponent - 4/4/2012 2:36:16 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: armin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: armin

Well manual considers it in general way for all crafts which historically would be not correct. There is no way that some merchant vessel, submarine would have the same trained crew or facilities as destroyer or carrier. if there would be multiple options i would agree but they arent.


The game scenarios already take those differences into account.

Alfred


So is allied damage control a historical option or its a bonus for new players who fight japanese AI side?



if you turn it off, it's the same for both sides, which means the Japanese will have better damage control abilities than the Allied as the Japanese have overall higher experience. Does this sound realistic or historic to you? It doesn't for me but to each his own.

_____________________________


(in reply to armin)
Post #: 14
RE: Looking for Allied Player - OPEN - 4/4/2012 6:21:18 PM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1941
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline
quote:

*allied dmg control off

I have never seen this as an HR option before. Also, while not exactly historical, I suspect the Japanese player really wants to play with PDU ON. For the allied player, at the beginning of the game it doesnt matter because there arent enough planes to worry about it and at the end of the game, the Allied player has more than enough planes.

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to armin)
Post #: 15
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Opponents Wanted >> Looking for Allied Player - CLOSED 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

0.090