Matrix Games

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

Q-Ball, thanks for the tips. However I'm wondering if this boarders on being "gamey" in that the fact is the Allies DID have good intel and that did contribute to success (in some cases some would argue it was a "key" to that success!). Are you not deforming the game substantially through "tricks" as you call them so as to substantially undermine a fact of history which I think the game tries to emulate?

Please understand this is not a criticism of what you do and of this thread, as I certainly think it is something that can be done and in game terms only, certainly should be done. I would simply like to know other players' views on this. Thanks for understanding, Hal

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

The preperation target "trick" so to speak isn't quite the hot ticket it used to be. I've found that Allied Signit rarely gives me a "Unit X is currently preparing to attack location Y message" Makes sense in a way. Midway for example was more an exception to the rule and it took a clever trick by an Intel chief to get the Japanese to essentially "reveal" their bonafide target well before hand and even then it had doubting thomas's.

The radio traffic indicators are often the best means though it's a chore to sift through them. Admittedly as Player two I only glance at Signit and tend to depend on what recon and signal traffic shows on the map. For example if i see a bustle of activity in Rabaul it's fairly evident what's going on. In my current game sure enough.....the Japanese came out with all guns blasting.....to invade tiny undeveloped Milne Bay which was defended by a sngle company of unlucky Aussies who got wiped out before the landing force attacked!!

I had a couple S boats in place. They got not one but TWO shots at KB and missed. Don't talk to me about Signit being useless. I'll hang that CO's testies over a yardarm for putting me through that!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Do any Japanese players even look at the SigInt report? After a 20th time I get nuggets like "Heavy Radio Traffic detected in San Francisco", I just decided to skip it.

Is there ANYTHING in there worth using?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Do any Japanese players even look at the SigInt report? After a 20th time I get nuggets like "Heavy Radio Traffic detected in San Francisco", I just decided to skip it.

Is there ANYTHING in there worth using?

I have picked up Allied TF's from "Heavy Radio Traffic detected at ??,??" on occasion. I don't get ship types, but it has highlighted possible routes being used by enemy shipping. At the very least, it's allowed me to vector submarines into an area and glean more intelligence on some enemy movements.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Considering Japanese intel in the game is useless and the Allies benefit from very good SigInt, I don't see any problem in a Japanese player making his dispositions as difficult as possible to determine. Just because the Japanese suffered such hubris as to think their naval code couldn't be broken, doesn't mean a Japanese player should be shackled by it. So the Allies have to work a little harder, no big deal. I always put it in this perspective, somebody on the Japanese side recognized the importance of intel and actually did his job by changing codes and encryption methods on a regular basis, as they should have been doing throughout the war.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Considering Japanese intel in the game is useless and the Allies benefit from very good SigInt, I don't see any problem in a Japanese player making his dispositions as difficult as possible to determine. Just because the Japanese suffered such hubris as to think their naval code couldn't be broken, doesn't mean a Japanese player should be shackled by it. So the Allies have to work a little harder, no big deal. I always put it in this perspective, somebody on the Japanese side recognized the importance of intel and actually did his job by changing codes and encryption methods on a regular basis, as they should have been doing throughout the war.

I assume you also always play with the option Reliable USN Torpedoes on, correct?
Because after all, if somebody on the Japanese side was smart and attentive to his job, then surely somebody on the Allied side was just as smart and attentive to their job.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Considering Japanese intel in the game is useless and the Allies benefit from very good SigInt, I don't see any problem in a Japanese player making his dispositions as difficult as possible to determine. Just because the Japanese suffered such hubris as to think their naval code couldn't be broken, doesn't mean a Japanese player should be shackled by it. So the Allies have to work a little harder, no big deal. I always put it in this perspective, somebody on the Japanese side recognized the importance of intel and actually did his job by changing codes and encryption methods on a regular basis, as they should have been doing throughout the war.

I assume you also always play with the option Reliable USN Torpedoes on, correct?
Because after all, if somebody on the Japanese side was smart and attentive to his job, then surely somebody on the Allied side was just as smart and attentive to their job.

I don't quite get the jist of your comment about US torpedoes in relation to the discussion of confusing Allied SigInt, nor apparently why my comment seems to merit some sort of dig on your part. Crap Japanese intel is historic as are the U.S. torpedo woes, but where does it say that a Japanese player can't be creative in an effort to mislead his opponent concerning his movements?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Considering Japanese intel in the game is useless and the Allies benefit from very good SigInt, I don't see any problem in a Japanese player making his dispositions as difficult as possible to determine. Just because the Japanese suffered such hubris as to think their naval code couldn't be broken, doesn't mean a Japanese player should be shackled by it. So the Allies have to work a little harder, no big deal. I always put it in this perspective, somebody on the Japanese side recognized the importance of intel and actually did his job by changing codes and encryption methods on a regular basis, as they should have been doing throughout the war.

I assume you also always play with the option Reliable USN Torpedoes on, correct?
Because after all, if somebody on the Japanese side was smart and attentive to his job, then surely somebody on the Allied side was just as smart and attentive to their job.

I don't quite get the jist of your comment about US torpedoes in relation to the discussion of confusing Allied SigInt, nor apparently why my comment seems to merit some sort of dig on your part. Crap Japanese intel is historic as are the U.S. torpedo woes, but where does it say that a Japanese player can't be creative in an effort to mislead his opponent concerning his movements?

Where does it say that the Japanese player is free to use gamey tactics to overcome historical deficiencies (rationalized with "what if the Japanese did/did not do X?"), while the Allied player is forced to completely adhere to all historical deficiencies?

The hypocrisy of JFBs never ceases to amaze me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Do any Japanese players even look at the SigInt report? After a 20th time I get nuggets like "Heavy Radio Traffic detected in San Francisco", I just decided to skip it.

Is there ANYTHING in there worth using?

I have picked up Allied TF's from "Heavy Radio Traffic detected at ??,??" on occasion. I don't get ship types, but it has highlighted possible routes being used by enemy shipping. At the very least, it's allowed me to vector submarines into an area and glean more intelligence on some enemy movements.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Considering Japanese intel in the game is useless and the Allies benefit from very good SigInt, I don't see any problem in a Japanese player making his dispositions as difficult as possible to determine. Just because the Japanese suffered such hubris as to think their naval code couldn't be broken, doesn't mean a Japanese player should be shackled by it. So the Allies have to work a little harder, no big deal. I always put it in this perspective, somebody on the Japanese side recognized the importance of intel and actually did his job by changing codes and encryption methods on a regular basis, as they should have been doing throughout the war.

I assume you also always play with the option Reliable USN Torpedoes on, correct?
Because after all, if somebody on the Japanese side was smart and attentive to his job, then surely somebody on the Allied side was just as smart and attentive to their job.

I don't quite get the jist of your comment about US torpedoes in relation to the discussion of confusing Allied SigInt, nor apparently why my comment seems to merit some sort of dig on your part. Crap Japanese intel is historic as are the U.S. torpedo woes, but where does it say that a Japanese player can't be creative in an effort to mislead his opponent concerning his movements?

Where does it say that the Japanese player is free to use gamey tactics to overcome historical deficiencies (rationalized with "what if the Japanese did/did not do X?"), while the Allied player is forced to completely adhere to all historical deficiencies?

The hypocrisy of JFBs never ceases to amaze me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Considering Japanese intel in the game is useless and the Allies benefit from very good SigInt, I don't see any problem in a Japanese player making his dispositions as difficult as possible to determine. Just because the Japanese suffered such hubris as to think their naval code couldn't be broken, doesn't mean a Japanese player should be shackled by it. So the Allies have to work a little harder, no big deal. I always put it in this perspective, somebody on the Japanese side recognized the importance of intel and actually did his job by changing codes and encryption methods on a regular basis, as they should have been doing throughout the war.

I assume you also always play with the option Reliable USN Torpedoes on, correct?
Because after all, if somebody on the Japanese side was smart and attentive to his job, then surely somebody on the Allied side was just as smart and attentive to their job.

I don't quite get the jist of your comment about US torpedoes in relation to the discussion of confusing Allied SigInt, nor apparently why my comment seems to merit some sort of dig on your part. Crap Japanese intel is historic as are the U.S. torpedo woes, but where does it say that a Japanese player can't be creative in an effort to mislead his opponent concerning his movements?

Where does it say that the Japanese player is free to use gamey tactics to overcome historical deficiencies (rationalized with "what if the Japanese did/did not do X?"), while the Allied player is forced to completely adhere to all historical deficiencies?

The hypocrisy of JFBs never ceases to amaze me.

I always agree to do the midway invasion at the historic dates with just 4 carriers. I couldn't bear the fact that I act different from reality and that this is just a game - and not reality!

Actually, USS America and me spend hours for each turn tu read historic records where our ships have to be when, which airgroups have to do what. If the results aren't historic, we redo the turn until it is exactly as it was IRL.

Where wouzld this end, when everyone assumed that WitP AE is just a game? My sword is already next to me for seppuku once we reach 1945!

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Considering Japanese intel in the game is useless and the Allies benefit from very good SigInt, I don't see any problem in a Japanese player making his dispositions as difficult as possible to determine. Just because the Japanese suffered such hubris as to think their naval code couldn't be broken, doesn't mean a Japanese player should be shackled by it. So the Allies have to work a little harder, no big deal. I always put it in this perspective, somebody on the Japanese side recognized the importance of intel and actually did his job by changing codes and encryption methods on a regular basis, as they should have been doing throughout the war.

I assume you also always play with the option Reliable USN Torpedoes on, correct?
Because after all, if somebody on the Japanese side was smart and attentive to his job, then surely somebody on the Allied side was just as smart and attentive to their job.

I don't quite get the jist of your comment about US torpedoes in relation to the discussion of confusing Allied SigInt, nor apparently why my comment seems to merit some sort of dig on your part. Crap Japanese intel is historic as are the U.S. torpedo woes, but where does it say that a Japanese player can't be creative in an effort to mislead his opponent concerning his movements?

Where does it say that the Japanese player is free to use gamey tactics to overcome historical deficiencies (rationalized with "what if the Japanese did/did not do X?"), while the Allied player is forced to completely adhere to all historical deficiencies?

The hypocrisy of JFBs never ceases to amaze me.

I always agree to do the midway invasion at the historic dates with just 4 carriers. I couldn't bear the fact that I act different from reality and that this is just a game - and not reality!

Actually, USS America and me spend hours for each turn tu read historic records where our ships have to be when, which airgroups have to do what. If the results aren't historic, we redo the turn until it is exactly as it was IRL.

Where wouzld this end, when everyone assumed that WitP AE is just a game? My sword is already next to me for seppuku once we reach 1945!

Yes, AE is a game.
I merely wonder why JFBs insist on the ability for Japan to deviate from historical deficiencies while denying the same ability to the Allies?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Considering Japanese intel in the game is useless and the Allies benefit from very good SigInt, I don't see any problem in a Japanese player making his dispositions as difficult as possible to determine. Just because the Japanese suffered such hubris as to think their naval code couldn't be broken, doesn't mean a Japanese player should be shackled by it. So the Allies have to work a little harder, no big deal. I always put it in this perspective, somebody on the Japanese side recognized the importance of intel and actually did his job by changing codes and encryption methods on a regular basis, as they should have been doing throughout the war.

I assume you also always play with the option Reliable USN Torpedoes on, correct?
Because after all, if somebody on the Japanese side was smart and attentive to his job, then surely somebody on the Allied side was just as smart and attentive to their job.

I don't quite get the jist of your comment about US torpedoes in relation to the discussion of confusing Allied SigInt, nor apparently why my comment seems to merit some sort of dig on your part. Crap Japanese intel is historic as are the U.S. torpedo woes, but where does it say that a Japanese player can't be creative in an effort to mislead his opponent concerning his movements?

Where does it say that the Japanese player is free to use gamey tactics to overcome historical deficiencies (rationalized with "what if the Japanese did/did not do X?"), while the Allied player is forced to completely adhere to all historical deficiencies?

The hypocrisy of JFBs never ceases to amaze me.

I always agree to do the midway invasion at the historic dates with just 4 carriers. I couldn't bear the fact that I act different from reality and that this is just a game - and not reality!

Actually, USS America and me spend hours for each turn tu read historic records where our ships have to be when, which airgroups have to do what. If the results aren't historic, we redo the turn until it is exactly as it was IRL.

Where wouzld this end, when everyone assumed that WitP AE is just a game? My sword is already next to me for seppuku once we reach 1945!

Yes, AE is a game.
I merely wonder why JFBs insist on the ability for Japan to deviate from historical deficiencies while denying the same ability to the Allies?

do they?

I could name dozends of games that were way out of proportion. Almost every Allied player acts in a totally ahistoric way.

quote:

The fact that Q-Ball calls them tricks makes them gamey IMHO.

If they were strategies or tactics it would be different.

But, If you play against him you sort or your own rules.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

The fact that Q-Ball calls them tricks makes them gamey IMHO.

If they were strategies or tactics it would be different.

But, If you play against him you sort or your own rules.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker


I could name dozends of games that were way out of proportion. Almost every Allied player acts in a totally ahistoric way.

But were those games out of proportion due solely to a-historical play by the Allied player? Or did other factors - skill level of the players, tactical/strategic decisions by either/both players - also have an impact?
I do not understand why so many of those who chose to play Japan insist on a-historical benefits while at the same time acknowledging that the game will end in the historical result.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

The fact that Q-Ball calls them tricks makes them gamey IMHO.

If they were strategies or tactics it would be different.

But, If you play against him you sort or your own rules.

What is the problem with using intel deception? The Japanese get NO intel other than radio traffic messages which might be something good or might not. In the war they actually had a lot more than this.

Isn't the goal of a player on either side to attempt to improve upon historical results while having fun doing it? Veiling your intentions takes many forms in game. This is just a small part of it, and in no way detracts from the experience of either side. It should make the game MORE interesting, and more like real intel, as stated above, where players have to sift through carefully and make some sense of what is happening.

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker


I could name dozends of games that were way out of proportion. Almost every Allied player acts in a totally ahistoric way.

But were those games out of proportion due solely to a-historical play by the Allied player? Or did other factors - skill level of the players, tactical/strategic decisions by either/both players - also have an impact?
I do not understand why so many of those who chose to play Japan insist on a-historical benefits while at the same time acknowledging that the game will end in the historical result.

When in any game will the Allied player be forced to consider the civilian populations of Singapore, Batavia or Manila and offer those locations relatively free of charge to the Japanese player?

Instead we regularly see protracted sieges in those locations that would have resulted in the deaths of thousands of civilians....which is the primary reason Singapore and Java capitulated as quickly as they did.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker


I guess some AFB want to force Japan to move exactly as IRL, so they can intercept the KB in Midway and don't have to worry after that any more. The Japanese instead want to find a way to win the war militarily...