Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

Anyone able to help with testing along these lines?

Andrew

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: bilbow

I am playing Drex using Pry's mod where he did reduce by 50% all the APs, and AKs by varying amounts.

CHS did this as well.

Pry's mod is much more extensive in this regard.

How's that?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B
The interesting part (to me) was that in both days of high losses (15 Zeros) all the casualties were absorbed by the same unit, as well as the bulk of the rest of the 31 losses for December, in fact this unit started out with 82 exp and finished with 59 exp, despite having acquired more than 50 kills. It appears to me that once a unit has a bad day it will not come back up in experience for quite a long while and becomes subject to frequent losses as the exp level drops past 70.

AAR of my game vs Raver on my clan forum in croatian language (despite the language differences, no Ravers allowed)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Black Mamba 1942

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: bilbow

I am playing Drex using Pry's mod where he did reduce by 50% all the APs, and AKs by varying amounts.

CHS did this as well.

Pry's mod is much more extensive in this regard.

How's that?

I've tried Pry's scenarios, and I like them.
It's the quanity of AK's that blows the shipping capability out of proportion.
Cut each sides quanity by 50% across the board for AK's.
The supply issue is "null and void", if you only have limited shipping available to move things.

Don't worry about the Zero bonus, this issue is more important in determining the pace of the game.

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

quote:

ORIGINAL: doktorblood

I haven't looked at CHS for quite some time, but didn't your airplane guy already reduce the Zero advantage by gimping the Zero itself ....along with most of the rest of the Jap planes?

For Liberty! website

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlackVoid

quote:

ORIGINAL: doktorblood

I haven't looked at CHS for quite some time, but didn't your airplane guy already reduce the Zero advantage by gimping the Zero itself ....along with most of the rest of the Jap planes?

It is impossible to know as the documentation for CHS changes is practically non-existent.

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Black Mamba 1942

Good point.
I was thinking of fixes without changing the codes.

If you don't have the AK's to move those "bonus" supplies, they really don't do much good.
So with less AK's it leaves a choice. Move supplies, move resources, or move troops.
As it stands now, players can do all three at the same time. Hence, rapid expansion.

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Black Mamba 1942

Then you are an optomist Ron!

I have no faith that Matrix will do anymore code changes.
Except maybe to fix what they already boogered up.

Besides, most of those extra AK's just end up being parked in port anyway.

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob


Whoa there partner................
I believe Commander Roquefort, et al, might have had more to do with that Midway victory, than "Japanese blunders".

For Liberty! website

quote:

ORIGINAL: Honda

quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B
The interesting part (to me) was that in both days of high losses (15 Zeros) all the casualties were absorbed by the same unit, as well as the bulk of the rest of the 31 losses for December, in fact this unit started out with 82 exp and finished with 59 exp, despite having acquired more than 50 kills. It appears to me that once a unit has a bad day it will not come back up in experience for quite a long while and becomes subject to frequent losses as the exp level drops past 70.

Let me guess, the unit you're talking about was the first one in the stack?
It's like ground combat. Top of the stack takes most casulties but in A2A at least, it dishes out most punishment.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Black Mamba 1942

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: bilbow

I am playing Drex using Pry's mod where he did reduce by 50% all the APs, and AKs by varying amounts.

CHS did this as well.

Pry's mod is much more extensive in this regard.

How's that?

I've tried Pry's scenarios, and I like them.
It's the quanity of AK's that blows the shipping capability out of proportion.
Cut each sides quanity by 50% across the board for AK's.
The supply issue is "null and void", if you only have limited shipping available to move things.

Don't worry about the Zero bonus, this issue is more important in determining the pace of the game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dereck

quote:

ORIGINAL: Black Mamba 1942

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: bilbow

I am playing Drex using Pry's mod where he did reduce by 50% all the APs, and AKs by varying amounts.

CHS did this as well.

Pry's mod is much more extensive in this regard.

How's that?

I've tried Pry's scenarios, and I like them.
It's the quanity of AK's that blows the shipping capability out of proportion.
Cut each sides quanity by 50% across the board for AK's.
The supply issue is "null and void", if you only have limited shipping available to move things.

Don't worry about the Zero bonus, this issue is more important in determining the pace of the game.

The only problem with this "revisionism" is that the Americans DID have that many cargo ships. They also were on average twice the capacity of Japanese cargo ships which averaged between 2,500-3,500 tons. The Americans also had the ability as early as early 1942 to load and unload cargo vessels twice as fast as the Japanese even in combat zones.

The problem isn't with the amount of ships or the amount of supply but with people's STYLES of play. You conduct blitzes all across the Pacific because you don't have the same state of mind as real commanders (on ALL sides) did during the war and in which they were CAUTIOUS. You don't wait to build up bases, supplies, intelligence, etc because you know what's out there already and don't have the same level of concern over your cyber-ships, cyber-soldiers, cyber-airmen and cyber-sailors as the real life commanders. If you screw up it's just a game but if they screwed up the results would be devestating.

I'm playing the AI and I'm playing pretty conservatively much like the real life commanders. I build up my logistics, my bases and gather my troops as well as repair ships and things haven't gone too fast. The only thing I did a-historically was to invade Iwo Jima in November 1944 to have a fighter base close to Japan since night bombing wasn't doing squat.

You're trying to change the game -- and at the same time say it's for historical sake (hypocracy) -- when the real problem are the play styles used.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: bilbow

I am playing Drex using Pry's mod where he did reduce by 50% all the APs, and AKs by varying amounts.

CHS did this as well.

Pry's mod is much more extensive in this regard.

How's that?

quote:

ORIGINAL: pauk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

Anyone able to help with testing along these lines?

Andrew

Greetings, why not ask people who are playing first few months of campaign to post A2A losses? I think this is a good idea, better than testing - let's see how really look in the game.

Here is mine, if helps.

I'm very careful with my pilots, always tried to achive numerical supperiority. Good leaders are in charge in every group if it is possible. So yes, i can consider myself as a Airforce fanboy. Those who played with me can confirm this (so i'm not a bad player when we talking about Air combat). And my opponent is very skilled.

From screen you can see that actually losses are not near 8-1, not even close. Of course, not that all of my Zeros shot down by enemy fighters (enemy bombers can claim some), but this is what you will get in the game.

To be honest, i easily crushed his AVG because every time i had numerical advantage...






EDIT: it is a stock game...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Black Mamba 1942

In this, it is not for historical accuracy. I'll be the first to admit that.
It is a question of play balance however.
Since the majority of players DO NOT restrain themsleves in the usage of AK's.
The only way to stop it, is to take them out for play balance.

Then I hear, but they really have that many merchant ships.
Of course they do. I'm not disputing that.

Except that all those AK's were not being used to form massive invasion TF's.
Instead they were being used to move supplies and resources.
Except they aren't being used that way in WITP.
This is the point I'm trying to get across.

My reply then is this. Why does Mogami park 300 AK's in his games?
It's because there are supplies already in place, and he doesn't "feel" that's it's right to use all those extra AK's for amphibious operations. So he puts them in mothball.
It's his way of balancing out the over abundance of transport. It's a good idea.

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

quote:

Comparing the two, pry's mod cuts shipping capacity more, especially AP's. I think the AP's might be cut too much.

quote:

Or you can castrate non military AKs like I did in my Hack Job test mod. Pretty useless for anything but supply/resource movement. Of course I think I should have left some Japanese civilian AKs with original capacities for amphib ops because they were used in this role, however inefficiently.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dereck

quote:

ORIGINAL: Black Mamba 1942

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: bilbow

I am playing Drex using Pry's mod where he did reduce by 50% all the APs, and AKs by varying amounts.

CHS did this as well.

Pry's mod is much more extensive in this regard.

How's that?

I've tried Pry's scenarios, and I like them.
It's the quanity of AK's that blows the shipping capability out of proportion.
Cut each sides quanity by 50% across the board for AK's.
The supply issue is "null and void", if you only have limited shipping available to move things.

Don't worry about the Zero bonus, this issue is more important in determining the pace of the game.

The only problem with this "revisionism" is that the Americans DID have that many cargo ships. They also were on average twice the capacity of Japanese cargo ships which averaged between 2,500-3,500 tons. The Americans also had the ability as early as early 1942 to load and unload cargo vessels twice as fast as the Japanese even in combat zones.

The problem isn't with the amount of ships or the amount of supply but with people's STYLES of play. You conduct blitzes all across the Pacific because you don't have the same state of mind as real commanders (on ALL sides) did during the war and in which they were CAUTIOUS. You don't wait to build up bases, supplies, intelligence, etc because you know what's out there already and don't have the same level of concern over your cyber-ships, cyber-soldiers, cyber-airmen and cyber-sailors as the real life commanders. If you screw up it's just a game but if they screwed up the results would be devestating.

I'm playing the AI and I'm playing pretty conservatively much like the real life commanders. I build up my logistics, my bases and gather my troops as well as repair ships and things haven't gone too fast. The only thing I did a-historically was to invade Iwo Jima in November 1944 to have a fighter base close to Japan since night bombing wasn't doing squat.

You're trying to change the game -- and at the same time say it's for historical sake (hypocracy) -- when the real problem are the play styles used.

quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

quote:

Comparing the two, pry's mod cuts shipping capacity more, especially AP's. I think the AP's might be cut too much.

No, there's still plenty of AP capacity in Pry's mods; there was enough for me to take Singapore, Kendari, Brunei, Miri, half of Luzon, all of Mindinao, Midway, Wake, Guam, all of New Britain, most of the Solomons, Port Moresby, Lae, Buna, Gili Gili, and Luganville, with ops underway to take Efate, Noumea, Nandi, Suva, Menado, Kendari, Amboina and Timor, all by Feb 1. No shortage of AP capacity, even with the reductions.

quote:

Or you can castrate non military AKs like I did in my Hack Job test mod. Pretty useless for anything but supply/resource movement. Of course I think I should have left some Japanese civilian AKs with original capacities for amphib ops because they were used in this role, however inefficiently.

Cutting the AKs hasn't really hurt me so much. In fact it rather helps as they get full of supply faster, and they don't stop loading because of the 10% rule. It is the reduced AP capacity combined with the doubled load costs of LCUs. At the schwerpunkte it's LCUs I'm short of (especially support units), not supply. You want to hurt IJ in the AK department, leave them full-size and get rid of about 2/3s of them.

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

quote:

Comparing the two, pry's mod cuts shipping capacity more, especially AP's. I think the AP's might be cut too much.

No, there's still plenty of AP capacity in Pry's mods; there was enough for me to take Singapore, Kendari, Brunei, Miri, half of Luzon, all of Mindinao, Midway, Wake, Guam, all of New Britain, most of the Solomons, Port Moresby, Lae, Buna, Gili Gili, and Luganville, with ops underway to take Efate, Noumea, Nandi, Suva, Menado, Kendari, Amboina and Timor, all by Feb 1. No shortage of AP capacity, even with the reductions.