Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tetsuo

Hi RAM,

I downloaded and tried the nikmod 2.8 but since I only played against the AI (which IMHO does a poor job in all games, stock or mod) I cant really say anything. Im more of the player that thinks if the original doesnt allow it, then they had something else in mind. :)

Thanks for your comments though, Im up for trying the mod against a human opponent but feel the stock game would be the best start, super corasirs/zeros or not. :)

edit: meant the CHS 2.08

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
[its usually easier to find a PBEM partner too using stock since the majority play with it] If trying Nikmod, there is a FAQ detailing all the changes.

Art by the amazing Dixie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
[its usually easier to find a PBEM partner too using stock since the majority play with it] If trying Nikmod, there is a FAQ detailing all the changes.

Those must be lemmings or with suicuidal tendecies. Anyone who has ever tried NikMod -or other mods of course- would NEVER return to stock after it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
[its usually easier to find a PBEM partner too using stock since the majority play with it] If trying Nikmod, there is a FAQ detailing all the changes.

Those must be lemmings or with suicuidal tendecies. Anyone who has ever tried NikMod -or other mods of course- would NEVER return to stock after it.

Well call me lemming or "suicuidal" (whatever the hell that is), then... You arrogant *****...

Art by the amazing Dixie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardonic

I think you are all crazy.

I see nothing wrong with the Zero model.

As allied player I usually gain air superiority around 6/41, and after that I rarely lose it.

KB can attrit its fighters if he chooses.

I always get at least equal losses or better.
and that is with Hurricanes and such.

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardonic

I think you are all crazy.

I see nothing wrong with the Zero model.

As allied player I usually gain air superiority around 6/41, and after that I rarely lose it.

KB can attrit its fighters if he chooses.

I always get at least equal losses or better.
and that is with Hurricanes and such.

You gain air superiority around 6/41?? When do you start the war?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
[its usually easier to find a PBEM partner too using stock since the majority play with it] If trying Nikmod, there is a FAQ detailing all the changes.

Those must be lemmings or with suicuidal tendecies. Anyone who has ever tried NikMod -or other mods of course- would NEVER return to stock after it.

This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.

"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy

Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dtravel

Third, if you do find a bug while playing a mod, Matrix/2by3 have stated they can't fix it because they don't know if it is the mod or the game. So if you're playing a mod then nothing you report can be used to help fix the underlying game. (Which desparately needs it!)

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: dtravel

Third, if you do find a bug while playing a mod, Matrix/2by3 have stated they can't fix it because they don't know if it is the mod or the game. So if you're playing a mod then nothing you report can be used to help fix the underlying game. (Which desparately needs it!)

I believe this is no longer the case - they have isolated some I found while playing CHS and RHS. I believe the same might be true for other people too.

This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.

"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy

Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent


I think the model is fine to describe a fight between two air units, but it is far too bloody because:
1) an air unit will very easily detect an enemy unit in the air
2) there is no limit to the number of units an air unit may engage

The end result being that if you have 20 units on each side, each unit will have to fight 20 battles before the end of the battle. Each single fight may be OK, but after 20 fights the weakest unit will have been totally destroyed most of the times.

To reduce the chance of intercepting an enemy unit, and to limit the number of fights a given unit may do in a battle will allow the losses to come back to normal levels. And then an unit won't be destroyed in one day, as is often the case now.

But if you do that, you need to reduce the accuracy of the air torpedo (something done in all mods having modified combat IIRC).

My problem with the mods is that they are reducing the bloodiness of any fight..

In stock game, a 25 vs 25 fight will be OK, a 50 vs 50 will be too bloody and a 200 vs 200 or more will see one side annihilated

In mod (IMOO), a 25 vs 25 fight will not be bloody enough, a 100 vs 100 will be OK and a 500 vs 500 (not unusual in 1944) will again see one side annihilated. They didn't fix the problem, they just extended the range of the correct battle, and that is OK until 1944, but I'msure when CHS/RHS games will reach this date the same problems will appear.

By the way, in the Mariannas Turkey Shot Japanese losses were 2/3 of the AC launched, and more than a dozen reached the US ships. This is what WITP should simulate one day.

In another thread, Nik said that WITP was not a tactical CV simulator. I fully agree, and when we see raids by 500 AC, in fact the game should handle them as smaller raids that will be engaged by part of the CAP, not all AC available in the area.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

quote:

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent


I think the model is fine to describe a fight between two air units, but it is far too bloody because:
1) an air unit will very easily detect an enemy unit in the air
2) there is no limit to the number of units an air unit may engage

The end result being that if you have 20 units on each side, each unit will have to fight 20 battles before the end of the battle. Each single fight may be OK, but after 20 fights the weakest unit will have been totally destroyed most of the times.

To reduce the chance of intercepting an enemy unit, and to limit the number of fights a given unit may do in a battle will allow the losses to come back to normal levels. And then an unit won't be destroyed in one day, as is often the case now.

But if you do that, you need to reduce the accuracy of the air torpedo (something done in all mods having modified combat IIRC).

My problem with the mods is that they are reducing the bloodiness of any fight..

In stock game, a 25 vs 25 fight will be OK, a 50 vs 50 will be too bloody and a 200 vs 200 or more will see one side annihilated

In mod (IMOO), a 25 vs 25 fight will not be bloody enough, a 100 vs 100 will be OK and a 500 vs 500 (not unusual in 1944) will again see one side annihilated. They didn't fix the problem, they just extended the range of the correct battle, and that is OK until 1944, but I'msure when CHS/RHS games will reach this date the same problems will appear.

By the way, in the Mariannas Turkey Shot Japanese losses were 2/3 of the AC launched, and more than a dozen reached the US ships. This is what WITP should simulate one day.

In another thread, Nik said that WITP was not a tactical CV simulator. I fully agree, and when we see raids by 500 AC, in fact the game should handle them as smaller raids that will be engaged by part of the CAP, not all AC available in the area.

No, the real solution was in a previous Grigsby game, BTR (or USAAF). Simply, you have each day progress in so many intervals. In BTR I think it was 10 minute pulses. Mind you, that game was every bit as strategic as this game is, so it's very possible to do. That way there's some strategy in not sending everything in one colossal raid. Such a thing was still possible for BTR, but you were pretty stupid if you did it, because you made things very easy for the interceptors. The idea, just like in real life, is you probably have no idea just how much the enemy will send at you and at what time and what intervals, so you almost always try to hold at least something back. Sure, the same groups could take off again once they were re-fueled, but they would be less efficient than when they went up the first time, and that's assuming they took no losses. Why on earth they would abandon such a fine aerial system is a mystery to me. Imagine, for example, sending up only three of your Zeroes to intercept maybe 10 Wildcats coming at you, holding some back for the expected, as yet unseen bombers and maybe getting those three to come back after the first bit of scuffle. that's another bad thing about this game, you can't ever recall them once they're into the battle, thus reducing some losses that way. In BTR there were times that the best strategy was to send a gruppen or smaller unit up just to scuffle for a minute and then return home. Just something to get the escorts or bombers a little disruption if you had little or nothing else worthy at the time.

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardonic

I think you are all crazy.

I see nothing wrong with the Zero model.

As allied player I usually gain air superiority around 6/41, and after that I rarely lose it.

KB can attrit its fighters if he chooses.

I always get at least equal losses or better.
and that is with Hurricanes and such.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

No, the real solution was in a previous Grigsby game, BTR (or USAAF). Simply, you have each day progress in so many intervals. In BTR I think it was 10 minute pulses. Mind you, that game was every bit as strategic as this game is, so it's very possible to do. That way there's some strategy in not sending everything in one colossal raid. Such a thing was still possible for BTR, but you were pretty stupid if you did it, because you made things very easy for the interceptors. The idea, just like in real life, is you probably have no idea just how much the enemy will send at you and at what time and what intervals, so you almost always try to hold at least something back. Sure, the same groups could take off again once they were re-fueled, but they would be less efficient than when they went up the first time, and that's assuming they took no losses. Why on earth they would abandon such a fine aerial system is a mystery to me. Imagine, for example, sending up only three of your Zeroes to intercept maybe 10 Wildcats coming at you, holding some back for the expected, as yet unseen bombers and maybe getting those three to come back after the first bit of scuffle. that's another bad thing about this game, you can't ever recall them once they're into the battle, thus reducing some losses that way. In BTR there were times that the best strategy was to send a gruppen or smaller unit up just to scuffle for a minute and then return home. Just something to get the escorts or bombers a little disruption if you had little or nothing else worthy at the time.