Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: B24's oh my

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: B24's oh my Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 12:15:30 PM   
michaelm75au


Posts: 13086
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
Of course, if you want to keep closer to the real group a/c paths just don't vary from the stated upgrade paths.

The option to allow for flexible upgrade was to allow the player to "alter" history slightly, in which case the number of planes produced will depend on the production/replacement rates rather than how many groups historically had a type of plane.

Michael

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 31
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 6:34:37 PM   
rhohltjr


Posts: 536
Joined: 4/27/2000
From: When I play pacific wargames, I expect smarter AI.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski
quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22
quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski
quote:

ORIGINAL: hithere
i think it is a new reality series...they are going to call it "10 men with swords trying to hold off 100 men with wiffal bats"


Or "The proud ... the few ... the wifflewhackers."

Nah, the few would be the ones with swords.

That's what I'm saying, Charles, the few are whacking the wifflers.


That sort of TV show never interests me.
Your only qualifications for those reality series shows are hunkiness or boobs.
The contestants never relate to sword - wiffal bat history, or possible upgrade paths for the bats, i.e., going lower to stuffed sock bats because there were so many or upgrading to the later technology the "Whak a mole" bat.



_____________________________

My e-troops don't unload OVER THE BEACH anymore, see:
Amphibious Assault at Kota Bharu
TF 85 troops securing a beachhead at Kota Bharu, 51,75
whew! I still feel better.

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 32
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 8:38:16 PM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
What I enjoy most about this whole situation is watching the reactions of the Jap Fan-Boys. As long as ONLY the Japanese benefitted it was a terrific idea---greatest thing since sliced bread. But when it turns out the Allies get to play too it all of a sudden becomes a big problem and a terrible thing. What a joke...

_____________________________


(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 33
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 8:44:44 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8979
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
somehow we diverged into non"reality" realty tv and the origoanl topic..
on point A.. I would like a real reality survivor,.. gropups droped in the desert, first group to say uncle losses.. give them a knife and sunblock, and clothes, provide a dr nearby to monitor, like in boxing... if they die you at least know they where being checked.. same as boxing risk of the sport.. longest lasting team wins...

in the origonal thread.. My concern as an allied imperitor.. currently getting readdy in an aar in 12 44 to pound JApan to dust, just about to double my b29 groups in number and first p51 coming online.. as well as larger airbases to fly out of... I cannot imagine how the Jap players are going to defend against the onslaught.. maybe a ho rule that half the allied ak's must be stored in SF

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 34
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 10:21:52 PM   
Halsey

 

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline
I wasn't going to say a thing, but these were exactly my thoughts too Mike.

Ahistorical upgrade possibilities for both sides. It kind of balances out, don't ya think?


_____________________________


(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 35
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 10:51:07 PM   
Tristanjohn


Posts: 3027
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Daly City CA USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Halsey

I wasn't going to say a thing, but these were exactly my thoughts too Mike.

Ahistorical upgrade possibilities for both sides. It kind of balances out, don't ya think?



Well, it's "fair" in a manner of speaking, but every time you "balance" one of these system tomfooleries the Allies always benefit the most in the end.

I find it enormously humorous that support can righteously tell us on the one hand that in v1.6 the Allies will no longer be allowed to pull a few miserable support cadres out of the PI or DEI, even after paying the PPs for this action, which was, after all, the design intent for PPs, and that this New-and-Improved! band-aid will somehow fix something critical . . . meanwhile, this same support element continues to inflict an already hopelessly confused simulation with more "features" such as open-ended aircraft upgrades for both sides, which, the moment this new mode of play is actually installed, the very people who screamed for this then howl in protest as they shrewdly observe once again that in the long run it's the Allies which must ultimately benefit most.

This board is a hoot!

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 36
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 11:11:13 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8979
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
I am the originator, and not complaining as I have soon, three 1.5 as allied, one in a old game so no strangness..

(in reply to Tristanjohn)
Post #: 37
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 11:24:01 PM   
Tristanjohn


Posts: 3027
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Daly City CA USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

I am the originator, and not complaining as I have soon, three 1.5 as allied, one in a old game so no strangness..


That's fine, you're not complaining. I'm happy for you. But the game is turning into a kind of mockery of World War II.


(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 38
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 11:30:44 PM   
Halsey

 

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline
I can already imagine scores of B-24 and P-38 groups.

Go ahead and let the Japanese upgrade to Frank's and George's.
They're gonna need them!

< Message edited by Halsey -- 5/2/2005 11:31:02 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Tristanjohn)
Post #: 39
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 11:36:35 PM   
Bradley7735


Posts: 2073
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline
Don't forget about Corsairs on US (and British) CV's and CVE's. That's probably the worst example I can think of. Corsairs being traded out for F6F's (or F4F's in early 43). And forget about the F4F subtypes operating on CVE's. They'll go to F6F's in no time (or even Corsairs).

I remember when they said that we'd be able to change aircraft willy nilly. Most of the japan fan boys just loved it. When you see Corsairs on the Big E in 3/43 you'll wish the rule wasn't in effect.

The only thing that will keep this remotely realistic is that allies can't increase the production rate of any plane. So, you'll only have to shoot down 150 corsairs a month to stay alive. (can't quite remember the production rate of corsairs)

_____________________________

The older I get, the better I was.

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 40
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 11:36:37 PM   
DrewMatrix


Posts: 1429
Joined: 7/15/2004
Status: offline
This actually doesn't bother me. Maybe because I play vs the AI.

I am currently using the option, and enjoying it seeing what I can do. Just fiddling with the "might have beens" is something I enjoy.

This is an option, remember. So if you like it you can use it and if you don't you needn't flip the switch for that particular option.



_____________________________


Beezle - Rapidly running out of altitude, airspeed and ideas.

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 41
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 11:36:43 PM   
Tristanjohn


Posts: 3027
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Daly City CA USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Halsey

I can already imagine scores of B-24 and P-38 groups.

Go ahead and let the Japanese upgrade to Frank's and George's.
They're gonna need them!


It's like Japanese players who inisist there's nothing wrong at all with the naval bombardment model . . . as they rampage from one island to the next in the opening months of the war . . . but then these same Japanese players are likely to scream bloody murder the minute Allied bombers begin to take their grisly toll. And there's apparently no way to get through to these people. I've tried.


(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 42
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 11:39:30 PM   
Tristanjohn


Posts: 3027
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Daly City CA USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

Don't forget about Corsairs on US (and British) CV's and CVE's. That's probably the worst example I can think of. Corsairs being traded out for F6F's (or F4F's in early 43). And forget about the F4F subtypes operating on CVE's. They'll go to F6F's in no time (or even Corsairs).

I remember when they said that we'd be able to change aircraft willy nilly. Most of the japan fan boys just loved it. When you see Corsairs on the Big E in 3/43 you'll wish the rule wasn't in effect.


Yup.

It's kind of sad when you think about it, though. The game keeps sliding further away from reality. We all lose.

(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 43
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 11:49:18 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6588
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline
The fundamental problem tho is that, the vocal minority doesn't want reality. They are the product of too many episodes on the History Channel of "Japanese wonder-weapons of WW2" and "How Japan could have won WW2".

It's simple. They couldn't. After that first bomb fell on 12-07-41, they never stood a chance.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to Tristanjohn)
Post #: 44
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 11:49:25 PM   
Grotius


Posts: 5788
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline
It's an option. If you don't like it, don't use it. I'm enjoying playing around with it against the AI, but that doesn't mean I'm going to use it in a PBEM game.

Sure, the game has its flaws. IMHO, it's still the best computer wargame ever made.

(in reply to Tristanjohn)
Post #: 45
RE: B24's oh my - 5/2/2005 11:52:18 PM   
Banquet

 

Posts: 1184
Joined: 8/23/2002
From: England
Status: offline
As has been pointed out.. it's an optional feature. If you don't like it, turn it off. So in this case it's not really that hard to stop the game sliding further away from reality if you feel that's what it's doing

Personally I like having the option. I'm neither a Japanese or a Allied fanboy and look forward to using it playing as both sides.

Edit.. Grotius beat me to it



< Message edited by Banquet -- 5/2/2005 11:54:17 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Tristanjohn)
Post #: 46
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 12:03:03 AM   
sprior


Posts: 8598
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Portsmouth, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hithere

Hey wiffle bats are no joke, my 45 lb daughter totally incapacitated her 6'1" 210 pound dad for about 15 min


Not.......that...............ball.................

_____________________________

"Grown ups are what's left when skool is finished."
"History started badly and hav been geting steadily worse."
- Nigel Molesworth.



(in reply to hithere)
Post #: 47
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 12:06:45 AM   
Tristanjohn


Posts: 3027
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Daly City CA USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Grotius

It's an option. If you don't like it, don't use it. I'm enjoying playing around with it against the AI, but that doesn't mean I'm going to use it in a PBEM game.

Sure, the game has its flaws. IMHO, it's still the best computer wargame ever made.


I keep hearing "it's still the best computer wargame ever made" but that doesn't help it hurts. Worshipping at the feet of game designers will never get us better wargames. Basically, WitP doesn't strike me as much of an improvement over what we had with PacWar, except there is a lot more "detail." But as it plays about the same I just don't see any real improvement in the art and science of wargames.

I like this game, too. But I like it not for what it is so much but for the fact that no one else is offering anything better and I want to play something on the period.

As for open-ended aircraft upgrades being offered as an option: sure, but you ought to know as well as I know that players will use it, which only further reinforces the fantasy mindset out there in the community, which will undoubtedly then be catered to when the next "historical simulation" title hits the street. I see no good coming from these kinds of "features." It takes everyone in the wrong direction.

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 48
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 12:21:44 AM   
juliet7bravo

 

Posts: 894
Joined: 5/30/2001
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

Don't forget about Corsairs on US (and British) CV's and CVE's. That's probably the worst example I can think of. Corsairs being traded out for F6F's (or F4F's in early 43). And forget about the F4F subtypes operating on CVE's. They'll go to F6F's in no time (or even Corsairs).

I remember when they said that we'd be able to change aircraft willy nilly. Most of the japan fan boys just loved it. When you see Corsairs on the Big E in 3/43 you'll wish the rule wasn't in effect.


Yup.

It's kind of sad when you think about it, though. The game keeps sliding further away from reality. We all lose.



Coming soon to theatre near YOU!!!




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by juliet7bravo -- 5/3/2005 12:22:46 AM >

(in reply to Tristanjohn)
Post #: 49
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 12:28:36 AM   
jwilkerson


Posts: 10461
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline
Tris - what was I saying about "space ships annd Orcs" !?


(in reply to juliet7bravo)
Post #: 50
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 12:35:27 AM   
Banquet

 

Posts: 1184
Joined: 8/23/2002
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn
I like this game, too.


Hold the front page.. Need this is me sig!!

I can't speak for anyone else, Tristanjohn, but I only enjoy playing wargames in a historical manner. Therefore I trust myself to use it and not abuse the system.

Also, I don't see why a historical wargame can't cater for player production and deployment of their assets.. but that was all debated in another thread.. and I ain't going there again.



< Message edited by Banquet -- 5/3/2005 12:37:09 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Tristanjohn)
Post #: 51
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 12:57:49 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8979
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline

omg lmao!!! just love this forum.. star wars meets witp!


quote:

Don't forget about Corsairs on US (and British) CV's and CVE's. That's probably the worst example I can think of. Corsairs being traded out for F6F's (or F4F's in early 43). And forget about the F4F subtypes operating on CVE's. They'll go to F6F's in no time (or even Corsairs).


and on another note. I do not play games to be either silly or historical and allow for uses none historical but realistic... on I had to due in last pbem was put marine fightersand bombers on CVE/CVL due to lack of naval pilots



(in reply to Banquet)
Post #: 52
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 1:02:38 AM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
quote:

I find it enormously humorous that support can righteously tell us on the one hand that in v1.6 the Allies will no longer be allowed to pull a few miserable support cadres out of the PI or DEI, even after paying the PPs for this action, which was, after all, the design intent for PPs,


TJ, quit inventing things and misquoting what was stated.

No one has ever said that you can't move whole units out. The problem is specifically with people picking up a single grunt on a sub to have the unit completely regrow when the real unit is lost in combat. I have absolutely no problem with people risking ships to load troops and try and get them out.

Sneaking in underwater in a sub and pulling a grunt is a different story.

Separate to that is the handling of base units ... a mechanic with no tools is not going to be servicing an aircraft. Pretending that you picked up the machinery shop with your sub is being rediculious.

(in reply to Tristanjohn)
Post #: 53
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 1:35:14 AM   
Hornblower


Posts: 1361
Joined: 9/10/2003
From: New York'er relocated to Chicago
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

I find it enormously humorous that support can righteously tell us on the one hand that in v1.6 the Allies will no longer be allowed to pull a few miserable support cadres out of the PI or DEI, even after paying the PPs for this action, which was, after all, the design intent for PPs,


TJ, quit inventing things and misquoting what was stated.

No one has ever said that you can't move whole units out. The problem is specifically with people picking up a single grunt on a sub to have the unit completely regrow when the real unit is lost in combat. I have absolutely no problem with people risking ships to load troops and try and get them out.

Sneaking in underwater in a sub and pulling a grunt is a different story.

Separate to that is the handling of base units ... a mechanic with no tools is not going to be servicing an aircraft. Pretending that you picked up the machinery shop with your sub is being rediculious.


I agree. Pulling a whole unit out is one story. Pulling a company out to reconstitute a regiment or a division is completely another

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 54
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 1:48:46 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8979
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
Why cannot I pull out all the officer ? noncoms and form a new unit?.. I guess the moral would go down some forthose left behind??? I think the in ability to remove pilots is another related oopsi.. why not be able to pull pilots only from a group with damaged planes and no hope of getting out??

(in reply to Hornblower)
Post #: 55
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 2:02:41 AM   
Knavey

 

Posts: 3038
Joined: 9/12/2002
From: Valrico, Florida
Status: offline
Methinks Frag will call foul when someone figures out how to put B-25s on a CV...oh wait, nevermind, that was done already. Oh wait, nevermind again, it was done by Doolittle in the REAL war.

Pshaw! Thats sort of gaming the system don't you think? Those pilots weren't CV trained, they weren't flying planes that were supposed to be used on CVs.

I still maintain that the replacements pulled into the units evaced from the PI just aren't going to go into units elsewhere therefore pull what you want, and from where you want. You are limited by the number of replacements in your pools. If you don't like the fact that I can staff an evaced HQ unit, then drop the number of support squads in my pool.

_____________________________

x-Nuc twidget
CVN-71
USN 87-93
"Going slow in the fast direction"

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 56
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 2:05:25 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8979
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
Some things are in need of ho rules.. like moving troops in MAnchuria.. others are between the players involved.. non of my pbem oponents ever asked for this as a rule, but if they did I probably would be ok with it.. that is restricting sub withdrawls..

(in reply to Knavey)
Post #: 57
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 2:08:18 AM   
DrewMatrix


Posts: 1429
Joined: 7/15/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Pulling a company out to reconstitute a regiment or a division is completely another


I must say this doesn't bother me at all.

Yes, you need officers and trained specialists to fill out the unit, but those are the support and engineer etc items in the pool (that you use up).

All pulling out a cadre gives you is the ability to put those support, engineer and combat items in two hexes instead of one (one hex containing the unit you "rebuilt" from the cadre).

I guess that is what the cadre gives you: "Change" to divide your assets into more packets.

_____________________________


Beezle - Rapidly running out of altitude, airspeed and ideas.

(in reply to Knavey)
Post #: 58
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 2:40:27 AM   
Tristanjohn


Posts: 3027
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Daly City CA USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

I find it enormously humorous that support can righteously tell us on the one hand that in v1.6 the Allies will no longer be allowed to pull a few miserable support cadres out of the PI or DEI, even after paying the PPs for this action, which was, after all, the design intent for PPs,


TJ, quit inventing things and misquoting what was stated.

No one has ever said that you can't move whole units out. The problem is specifically with people picking up a single grunt on a sub to have the unit completely regrow when the real unit is lost in combat. I have absolutely no problem with people risking ships to load troops and try and get them out.

Sneaking in underwater in a sub and pulling a grunt is a different story.

Separate to that is the handling of base units ... a mechanic with no tools is not going to be servicing an aircraft. Pretending that you picked up the machinery shop with your sub is being rediculious.


Not trying to misquote you, Ray. Let me try again.

As I understand it, you don't want Allied players to pull a squad here and there of, say, base forces, only to see these one day grow into full-fledged base forces. Is that correct or incorrect? Same same with HQ units?

As I see it, this runs counter to the purpose of including PPs in the first place. (I don't argue here that PPs make good sense, mind you, just that that was their intended purpose.) I also don't see this as any great gain for the Allies in the long run as replacements must be drawn from their pools to affect these unit reconstitutions, which is, again, part of the normal (intended) course of play.

I see it like this. An Allied player uses a sub to extract, say, a couple of air support squads and a couple of general support squads from an air-base unit. Is that unrealistic? I don't know. Were I the Allies and saw valuable troops about to be killed I'd make an effort to extract as many as I could. Didn't the British do this at Dunkerque? Was that gamey? Should they instead have said, "Well, Heinie got the best of us this time, and after all we don't want to be called "gamey" players, so maybe it's best to let those men all die or walk into POW camps and just start over from scratch"?

If you want to know, if the submarine/ASW model worked about half right I doubt I'd assign any of my boats to do any such thing. I might assign one or two to grab some HQ cadres. That directly parallels history as I'm sure even you would agree, no? Or must we squabble over that obvious point, too?

It amazes me that on the one hand you can be part of a development team which came up with a system which allows the Japanese to run perfectly amok all the way across China and all way to India if they choose in the opening months of the war, yet you then balk at something as inconsequential as a submarine carrying a cadre out of harm's way, which must be paid for eventually in terms of real game cost in any event, but have no problem whatsoever with loading that same unit in its entirety on an AP and then lifting it somewhere more useful.

So, your objection is actually the use of submarines but not APs for this purpose? Or is your objection that the replacement rules make no sense? What?

The only rationale I've heard so far is that these sub lifts are ahistoric (which they categorically are not in terms of purpose) and "gamey," which I also don't agree with. At least not nearly as "gamey" as the incredibly-stuffed naval bombardment routine, just for example, which all Japanese players that I'm aware of use not only happily but energetically defend as something they "see no problem with" in the first place.

But like I said. Fix the submarine/ASW model so my boats have some good purpose other than to lift out cadres and sow mines and I'd be more thasn happy to instead sink Japanese shipping with them. I still wouldn't understand your willingness to allow APs to lift any units they please out of the PI and SRA, but that's another issue, I guess.





(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 59
RE: B24's oh my - 5/3/2005 2:45:40 AM   
Tristanjohn


Posts: 3027
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Daly City CA USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

Why cannot I pull out all the officer ? noncoms and form a new unit?.. I guess the moral would go down some forthose left behind??? I think the in ability to remove pilots is another related oopsi.. why not be able to pull pilots only from a group with damaged planes and no hope of getting out??



Just another oversight. Or, if anyone did bother with this glitch, it was decided not to do anything about it. This was brought up in the UV forums along with lots of other stuff a long time ago, and then forgotten or ignored to death. Pilots, by the way, would be an excellent sub cargo if this ability did exist. Very valuable assets, they.




(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: B24's oh my Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
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

0.209