Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Effects on Play Balance

 
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 >> Effects on Play Balance Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Effects on Play Balance - 2/14/2008 9:32:10 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline 		EDIT: My apologies, I meant this to be in the AE Discussion Forum!

I am certain that our esteemed testers, who are more experienced than I, are taking this into account, but I guess I need some reassurance.

It could be I am reading through a JFB's eyes, but it seems a number of the changes I have seen eliminate things that generally accrue to the advantage of Japan. For example, changes in shipping availability for Japan, changes in mines, changes in fuel availability for Japan, torpedo launches by planes (thinking of Bettys), fort limits on Atolls, etc. The one loophole closed that favors Allies, so far, is that base intel advantage from moving second. Other than that, most changes seem to favor Allies. I could be missing more since there is alot of pages to read.

Am I off base? Or, is that intentional to blunt Japan a bit? I also suppose it has to do with the "Do we want history", or "Do we want a more evenly matched game" approach, because historically, Japan was very fortunate to do as well as it did even, and had no business starting the war in the first place.

Anyway, thoughts welcome here. It seems to me in general, the PACE of operations are much faster in WITP than they were in history on BOTH sides. Japan didn't really have the resources to take India or Invade Australia. And the Allies can move faster in WITP than IRL in '44.


< Message edited by Q-Ball -- 2/14/2008 9:33:32 PM >

_____________________________
Post #: 1
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/15/2008 2:11:56 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		AE is not aimed at any one side in particular where the balance will fall we dont know yet - I could not sit here and say whether on balance the changes impact on Allies or Japanese more if I was to guess it reduces Japanese Advantage mid/ 42 and allied from then on.

Probably the single biggest change will be in the A2A model where we are trying to remove UBERCAP given the Japanese are on the defensive for 3/4.5 years this should favour them but at present I dont KNOW if it does.

Taking a few of the others

Betties well the same rules will impact on Beauforts, Swordfish and other allied Torpedo planes.

Fort limits yes but then stacking limits apply to both sides so forts will be lower so will garrisons and attacking forces AND we didnt mess with the terrain and fort multiplicative bonuses so forts on good defensive terrain will remain a swine to take.

Preparation for invasions are now more improtant (apart from Japanese in 1st 5 months)

In general I expect the game to slow down a little for both sides

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 2
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/15/2008 3:41:04 AM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		I'll say that the pure "game" (balanced - red vs. blue) aspect vs. the historical accuracy, is one of the oldest debates on these boards.  There is certainly merit to both sides, and I'd have to admit the number of advocates for each is considerable (and certainly both are outspoken about it, and I certainly can't exclude myself!).  Unfortunately, there is often little agreement between them since the more historical you make WitP, the more unbalanced it becomes!

However, I do get the impression that the AE team is attempting to offer the historical realism, and certainly a "balanced" game could be created thru the editor (or perhaps thru scenarios offered, altho I would not presume to volunteer the AE team to create them).

That being said, grognards such as we all are, wether red-blue or historical, we'll still find sommething to squawk about. 

-F-

_____________________________

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


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 3
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/15/2008 3:50:53 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		I expect the game to reproduce the historical situation.

If you think it needs to be "more balanced" either invent some house rules or make a mod.

I agree the speed of the game is too fast, Andy mentions some things are being done to rein this in. I also am unhappy in how much info each side has about each other, again ity is mentioned that FOW will be improved, but I still am 100% sure of the abilities of the Betty or B-25J. How this is solved I dont know.

IMHO, AE vanilla needs to hit the streets, get played for a few months then start modding. (I have ideas already, that suit me but not neccesarily others)

If a jFB wants balance, play against AI



_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 4
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/15/2008 8:53:01 AM   
histgamer

 

Posts: 1455
Joined: 11/30/2006
Status: offline 		Jeff thats kinda harsh. A JFB could make a mod also, just cause you dont want a balanced game and want more historical doesnt mean others wont play a more balanced game. Though I do favor realism myself.

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 5
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/15/2008 10:08:28 AM   
Ursa MAior

 

Posts: 1416
Joined: 4/20/2005
From: Hungary, EU
Status: offline 		I want historical accuracy. If one wants can have G5N Lizes by hundreds, or Unryu's in 42 should make up his own mod. I want to see if I cn do better than historical given the SAME options.




_____________________________


Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to histgamer)
Post #: 6
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/15/2008 11:11:06 AM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline 		All the "historical" that can be placed in the game.., please! The "modding" group can take care of "flights of fancy". And as another "testor", I'm still finding plenty of unwarrented Japanese advantages still kicking around in AE. AE may not allow a player to "pull a trollelite"..., but the Japanese should still be able to have a good time.

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 7
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/15/2008 11:38:33 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

Jeff thats kinda harsh. A JFB could make a mod also, just cause you dont want a balanced game and want more historical doesnt mean others wont play a more balanced game. Though I do favor realism myself.


i dont think so, we are continually seeing posts complaining about the japanese being under more constraints than the Allies. Strangely they were under these constraints IRL.

As you say, the jFB can make his own mod or play one of the totally ahistorical scenarios available. I also think the jFB can find a balanced game against the AI, the negatives they see are balanced by the foibles of the AI

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to histgamer)
Post #: 8
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/15/2008 4:44:58 PM   
timtom


Posts: 2358
Joined: 1/29/2003
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

It could be I am reading through a JFB's eyes, but it seems a number of the changes I have seen eliminate things that generally accrue to the advantage of Japan. For example, changes in shipping availability for Japan, changes in mines, changes in fuel availability for Japan, torpedo launches by planes (thinking of Bettys), fort limits on Atolls, etc. The one loophole closed that favors Allies, so far, is that base intel advantage from moving second. Other than that, most changes seem to favor Allies. I could be missing more since there is alot of pages to read.

Am I off base? Or, is that intentional to blunt Japan a bit?



quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

CHS suffers from the same problem all/most mods suffer from. 95% of the changes benefit Japan because they reduce allied power...unfortunately AE appears to be going through a similar mod experience. Most changes are geared towards reducing allied power to historical levels and little or no changes are geared towards reducing the Japanese to those same strict historical guidelines.

Jim







_____________________________

Where's the Any key?


(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 9
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/15/2008 10:49:34 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline 		Ok, maybe I opened a can of worms. But a couple things.

I like historical accuracy. Unfortunately, we will never get 100% there, because we know too much. "The Buffalo can hold it's own against Japanese Fighter Craft", for example. Many operational plans started with this erroneous assumption, and that didn't end until Jan '42. And we can go on with specific examples.

One thing for sure: On the VP count, producing a historical result will result in a Decisive Allied Victory, every time. The Japanese will not ever be remotely close to any kind of victory. As it stands today, an auto-victory means you must conquer India, China, or Australia.

Armed with the knowledge of Japan's historical limitations will encourage a more aggressive Allied response. A more aggressive approach than historical with ships, planes will make sense, because Allied player will KNOW Japan has pitiful production capability. If we know Japan can produce only 54 carrier strike aircraft the first 6 months of the war, as she did historically, then we can exploit that, without regard for our own losses. Or, is aggressive play by the Allies without regard for losses in itself a-historical?

_____________________________


(in reply to timtom)
Post #: 10
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/15/2008 11:00:31 PM   
AcePylut


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline 		I think what you say works both ways.

For example, the Japs KNOW they can take PM in January. They "know" when US carriers are going to appear, and can "change" from an offensive nature to defensive nature when they occurs, when historically, they only changed when they got beat in combat.

The Japs "know" that the US is going to get Hellcats and Corsairs, and can research appropriate aircraft. The Japs "know" that as long as they don't do anything to Russia, russia won't attack.

And so on.

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 11
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/16/2008 12:12:46 AM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		Make it as hisorically accurate as possible and then balance the play with points. Not a big deal.



_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to AcePylut)
Post #: 12
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/16/2008 12:19:33 AM   
Iridium


Posts: 932
Joined: 4/1/2005
From: Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Make it as hisorically accurate as possible and then balance the play with points. Not a big deal.




Points always seemed to be a lame attempt at pacifying people that have to "win" in some form or another. It doesn't really change any gameplay aspects, except maybe creating whole operations in order to garner said "points". Which seems about as far from reality as time traveling space gorrillas. At least to me...

_____________________________

Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.

"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 13
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/16/2008 2:35:36 AM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline

-F-







(* Rats, I was looking for the General from Planet of the Apes, but could only find head-shots that didn't go well with the Tardis. Oh well, that dude looks plenty tough. *)

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Feinder -- 2/16/2008 2:45:15 AM >

_____________________________

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


(in reply to Iridium)
Post #: 14
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/16/2008 7:09:49 AM   
Iridium


Posts: 932
Joined: 4/1/2005
From: Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder



-F-



So do time traveling space gorrillas exist (I admit they might, didn't really check) or that before each war nations decide how many points each plane is worth and each city/base , ship, etc etc?...

< Message edited by Iridium -- 2/16/2008 7:11:22 AM >

_____________________________

Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.

"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 15
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/16/2008 3:41:54 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball


One thing for sure: On the VP count, producing a historical result will result in a Decisive Allied Victory, every time. The Japanese will not ever be remotely close to any kind of victory. As it stands today, an auto-victory means you must conquer India, China, or Australia.



All depends on how "Victory" is defined....

Was the war really a "Decisive Allied Victory"? ....if it was why did it take until August of 1945 to make the Japanese submit and cost the Allies so many men killed as the war drew to a close? So perhaps maybe it was a "Marginal Allied Victory or a Draw". Afterall a "second-rate" nation like Japan shouldn't have been able to last as long as it did against the technical and numerical superiority of the Allies. ( I figure that statement will raise some hackles around here...)




Would it have been a "Decisive-r Allied Victory" if the Japanese submitted in April of 1945 after the fall of Iwo Jima?

Would it have been a "Decisive-st Allied Victory" if the Japanese submitted in August of 1944 after the Philippine Sea and the capture of Saipan and Guam made the Emperor come to his senses?


Bottomline - Give the players as close to history as the game will allow for - let them decide what is a Decisve victory or not and if they want to change the games version of history that is what the editor is for.




< Message edited by treespider -- 2/16/2008 3:45:36 PM >

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 16
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/16/2008 4:27:17 PM   
rockmedic109

 

Posts: 2390
Joined: 5/17/2005
From: Citrus Heights, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Iridium

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder



-F-



So do time traveling space gorrillas exist (I admit they might, didn't really check) or that before each war nations decide how many points each plane is worth and each city/base , ship, etc etc?...


I do not know if traveling space gorillas exist or not, but if they do they are probably in one of Mandrake's AARs.

(in reply to Iridium)
Post #: 17
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/16/2008 5:02:02 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rockmedic109


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iridium

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder



-F-



So do time traveling space gorrillas exist (I admit they might, didn't really check) or that before each war nations decide how many points each plane is worth and each city/base , ship, etc etc?...


I do not know if traveling space gorillas exist or not, but if they do they are probably in one of Mandrake's AARs.




How about Zombie Space Cows with Radioactive Rabies that are Pink?

Their an invention of my younger son ... I think its a good name for a band....

The Zombie Space Cows.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to rockmedic109)
Post #: 18
RE: Effects on Play Balance - 2/16/2008 5:08:21 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

All the "historical" that can be placed in the game.., please! The "modding" group can take care of "flights of fancy". And as another "testor", I'm still finding plenty of unwarrented Japanese advantages still kicking around in AE. AE may not allow a player to "pull a trollelite"..., but the Japanese should still be able to have a good time.





You mean like the fact that they can no longer train their bombers up using supply milk runs?

Or the fact that many of the units that the Japanese player receives in Stock and/or CHS that are in fact duplicates or even triplicates have been eliminated?

Among other things...

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 19
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Effects on Play Balance 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

3.969