Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of long-term planning

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of long-term planning

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of long-term planning

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of long... - 10/11/2009 5:23:18 AM

fbs

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline

This, exactly as is, should be "Ensign's Edition".

Then, when Windows 9 launches, with 256-bit computers running the latest x986, there should be a "Lt Commander's Edition".

You got the drift. By the time we have quantum computers with Windows XXXP, 50 feet monitors and 1 Quantuza-byte of RAM, then you can have the "Admiral's Edition" -- the version that has the name, stats, picture and fingerprints of every single soldier in the front, you have to include "today's grub recipe" on your daily orders, and the game of course includes the effects of Moon's gravity on the each shell's trajectory(**)

Cheers

fbs

(**) and of course someone will come saying: "this thing is broken!! the Moon will vary AT MOST 0.0003-inches in tha shell target, and it is changing 0.0005 inches!!

"

< Message edited by fbs -- 10/11/2009 6:01:47 AM >

Post #: 1

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/11/2009 6:27:56 AM

scott64

Posts: 4019
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline

_____________________________

Lucky for you, tonight it's just me

Any ship can be a minesweeper..once !! :)

http://suspenseandmystery.blogspot.com/

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 2

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 6:38:58 AM

Czert

Posts: 255
Joined: 7/22/2006
Status: offline

bah, you can allways have generals edition for version with better land combat (no more battlestar tactic), generals staff edition (better graphic and mayn more), CIC (comander in chief) edition for best-in-every -aspeck verson.

_____________________________

Do you chalenge me ?
http://czert1938.mybrute.com
Mod for one of best games ever made ?
http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/board/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm&c=1
Great space shooter.
http://www.neurohack.com/transcendence/index.html

(in reply to scott64)

Post #: 3

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 12:30:58 PM

CJ Martin

Posts: 119
Joined: 5/20/2002
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline

No, it should have been named "War in the Pacific, JFB Edition"

Yeah, I'm serious. Someone talk me down form this ledge, I'm on the verge of deleting this mess from my hard drive. If the development team had been upfront with the JFB bias their design had I could accept that. Wouldn't have been my cup of tea, so I wouldn't have shelled out for the game. I'm actually suprised the Japanese don't get nukes in 1943.

<sigh>

-CJ

(in reply to Czert)

Post #: 4

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 2:19:21 PM

Halsey

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CJ Martin

No, it should have been named "War in the Pacific, JFB Edition"

Yeah, I'm serious. Someone talk me down form this ledge, I'm on the verge of deleting this mess from my hard drive. If the development team had been upfront with the JFB bias their design had I could accept that. Wouldn't have been my cup of tea, so I wouldn't have shelled out for the game. I'm actually suprised the Japanese don't get nukes in 1943.

<sigh>

-CJ

I would really love to comment on this.

Mike Scholl could probably be more eloquent that I could.

Some of the added Allied handicaps were added at the last minute before release.

(in reply to CJ Martin)

Post #: 5

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 2:22:06 PM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CJ Martin

No, it should have been named "War in the Pacific, JFB Edition"

Yeah, I'm serious. Someone talk me down form this ledge, I'm on the verge of deleting this mess from my hard drive. If the development team had been upfront with the JFB bias their design had I could accept that. Wouldn't have been my cup of tea, so I wouldn't have shelled out for the game. I'm actually suprised the Japanese don't get nukes in 1943.

<sigh>

-CJ

Uh...have you ever actually played the Japanese side? If not, you don't know what you're talking about.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to CJ Martin)

Post #: 6

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 3:02:09 PM

CJ Martin

Posts: 119
Joined: 5/20/2002
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

Uh...have you ever actually played the Japanese side? If not, you don't know what you're talking about.

Umm...how so? Why don't you go read the "Naval Gun" thread in the mod forum. JWE very clearly states IJN guns were tweaked as a "gift", while USN guns were "dialed back" to make things "fair".

But go ahead, throw smokescreens.

-CJ

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 7

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 3:05:25 PM

CJ Martin

Posts: 119
Joined: 5/20/2002
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Halsey
Some of the added Allied handicaps were added at the last minute before release.

Nice. How many fricken "Allied handicaps" are there?

This is NOT how you balance a historical simulation. Imagine Jane's F-15, if we gave the Iraqis Tie Fighters to make it more "fair". LOL...

-CJ

(in reply to Halsey)

Post #: 8

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 3:13:00 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

Have you played the Japanese side?

_____________________________

(in reply to CJ Martin)

Post #: 9

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 3:21:03 PM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

And why do you assume there are no Japanese handicaps?

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 10

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 4:47:34 PM

CJ Martin

Posts: 119
Joined: 5/20/2002
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline

Fine...lets get all the "handicaps" out in the open. Let the users decide.

Any devs care to share this list?

-CJ

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 11

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 5:56:57 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CJ Martin

JWE very clearly states IJN guns were tweaked as a "gift", while USN guns were "dialed back" to make things "fair".

I presume that was simply a poor choice of words on his part.

Getting a game engine to behave like a 'simulation' to the degree that it provides reasonably accurate results versus real life does require balancing. To achieve this, statistics/characteristics that are fed into the engine (range, penetration, etc.) are not the same as real life. Why? Because the game's computer code with data is not the same as the real universe's laws of physics with uncountable numbers of various particles large and small. You have to 'tweak' the input you give the game engine (in this case device characteristics, etc.) until you are getting 'realistic' results.

This also applies on scales larger than just single battles - we are looking at multiple theaters of action with many campaigns, strategies, battles, and so on.

(in reply to CJ Martin)

Post #: 12

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 8:03:04 PM

CJ Martin

Posts: 119
Joined: 5/20/2002
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: CJ Martin

JWE very clearly states IJN guns were tweaked as a "gift", while USN guns were "dialed back" to make things "fair".

I presume that was simply a poor choice of words on his part.

Getting a game engine to behave like a 'simulation' to the degree that it provides reasonably accurate results versus real life does require balancing. To achieve this, statistics/characteristics that are fed into the engine (range, penetration, etc.) are not the same as real life. Why? Because the game's computer code with data is not the same as the real universe's laws of physics with uncountable numbers of various particles large and small. You have to 'tweak' the input you give the game engine (in this case device characteristics, etc.) until you are getting 'realistic' results.

This also applies on scales larger than just single battles - we are looking at multiple theaters of action with many campaigns, strategies, battles, and so on.

I totally get the need to compromise...I'd had to design around some whoppers in my day. Poor choice or words or not, what was said plus bits and pieces from other threads (including this one) lead me to believe AE has a definate ahistorical slant for the sake of "gameplay". I would like to know these gameplay changes, so that I can either try to overcome them using the editor, or give up on AE as a historical simulation. Is that too much to ask?

-CJ

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 13

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 8:27:17 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

have you played the Japanese side?

_____________________________

(in reply to CJ Martin)

Post #: 14

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 8:56:30 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

CJ,

I think an intuitive place to start is to look at documentation on the first public patch. In the "read me" section of that are a list of fixes and changes implemented because of OOB, bug issues or in the name of gameplay or playability. That will give you a list of the issues the Devs thought important enough to address with code changes.

Hope this helps.

(in reply to CJ Martin)

Post #: 15

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 10:58:28 PM

CJ Martin

Posts: 119
Joined: 5/20/2002
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

have you played the Japanese side?

Nik, I'm trying real hard not to pick a fight with you, as I respect your work.

To answer your question, I have in WitP, haven't in AE yet. Not sure I want to.

I'm guessing you are coming from the "Japan has no chance to win, so we made some changes to make it more playable" angle. If so, I profoundly disagree with that approach. It is a dead end that kills your credibility with some (read: the hard core crowd). Maybe you don't care about that, and that's cool...just be upfront about it. You can't have things both ways. Either the game is as realisitc as the engine will allow or it is not. If changes have been made in the name of "gameplay", then you are off the realistic trail.

I designed the Gulf War campaign for Jane's F-15. I took a lot of heat because I insisted the player start on the ground. In real life, the Strike Eagle were far behind the lines. Our map was full scale, so that meant a long flight out, hit the tanker (maybe more than once), hit the target, and get home. Yeah, we had time compression...but the engine could only speed up so much, as we had a LOT of AI running and of course this was 1996 - PC's were a pale shadow of today. "Gameplay" would have me either move the starting base, compress the map, or start in the air. I fought that battle and won. And I'm damn proud of that simulation. One small example.

Here's another, same game. On historical, the Iraqi AF is pretty much a pushover. Still, the depth of systems and the challenge of A/G made that acceptable to us. We added "harder" modes with much more aggressive A/A AI - but it was clear to the player they were departing reality. We gave them that choice. AE does not. We also created a much more balanced (in terms of A/A vs A/G) campaign, set in the future vs. Iran...clearly that was not historical, but it was a fun what if.

One of the reasons I play historical game is to learn as well as be entertained. The hard core games I designed were along those lines. You could learn a lot about the limitations of A/A radar in real life running F-15, F/A-18 or the Falcon series (the later I had nothing to do with, but I knew some of those folks and they did great work). We pushed the bar. We had no wish 'em dead weapons. Yeah, we had easier modes, but on realistic, you had to know your stuff to win. ANd to me, that was/is cool.

I play other games to escape reality. Different experience, different gameplay expectations.

So which is AE? Hard core historical simulation or a balanced strategic fantasy game based on history?

-CJ

< Message edited by CJ Martin -- 10/16/2009 10:59:48 PM >

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 16

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 11:02:21 PM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

There is no such thing as a historical simulation. Not one that also purports to be a game. There's your problem.

This is a game. It is historically based, but it may not satisfy your 'hard-core' requirements in that regard. It lies somewhere between your false dichotomy of 'hard core simulation' vs 'fantasy game'. There are lots of other permutations which fill neither of those bills.

Feel free to delete this fantasy game if you don't like it.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to CJ Martin)

Post #: 17

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 11:27:05 PM

JWE

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CJ Martin
Umm...how so? Why don't you go read the "Naval Gun" thread in the mod forum. JWE very clearly states IJN guns were tweaked as a "gift", while USN guns were "dialed back" to make things "fair".

But go ahead, throw smokescreens.

-CJ

Uh. No he didn't. In fact he went out of his way to make sure you understood that nothing was tweaked since back in the UV days. The comment refered to the original design, years ago. Please do not put false words in my mouth. It annoys.

If you don't want to purchase the game, that's fine. I bid you goodbye and wish you a good voyage wherever you go.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to CJ Martin)

Post #: 18

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/16/2009 11:43:27 PM

mjk428

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

There is no such thing as a historical simulation. Not one that also purports to be a game. There's your problem.

This is a game. It is historically based, but it may not satisfy your 'hard-core' requirements in that regard. It lies somewhere between your false dichotomy of 'hard core simulation' vs 'fantasy game'. There are lots of other permutations which fill neither of those bills.

Feel free to delete this fantasy game if you don't like it.

False advertising from the latest Matrix game:

quote:

Gary Grigsby�s Eagle Day to Bombing of the Reich is a detailed simulation of the Allied strategic bombing campaign against Germany in World War II. Combining both classic titles Battle of Britain and Twelve O'clock High into a single game package, this in depth air war simulation includes all the appeal of the original two titles with a huge list of new features and improvements.

_____________________________

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 19

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/17/2009 12:38:38 AM

Ayradon

Posts: 6
Joined: 6/7/2005
Status: offline

I don't post often. More of a lurker to find the answers to my questions but I had to comment on this bubbling feud.

The truth of the matter is that as soon as the first turn of ANY game is run it is no longer a HISTORICAL simulation. This includes the games mentioned already. A historical simulation would mean that every single move, battle casuality, battle etc, etc. would be forced upon the player. The outcome would be fixed to maintain the historical facts.

The truth of the matter is that you can only make a game with historical units. War is by no means predetermined. We have the advantage of hindsight when it comes to these games but the truth is that the actual battles fought during any war could have and would have had different outcomes if only one small thing was different.

If you want a historical simulation what is the point of playing any game. The object of these games is to change history not force it upon the person playing it. What would be the point of playing any nation in any era if what happened in RL was forced upon the player.

Watch the History Channel if you want a historical outcome because that is the only place where you are going to find reality.

(in reply to mjk428)

Post #: 20

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/17/2009 12:48:08 AM

rhohltjr

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: CJ Martin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Halsey
Some of the added Allied handicaps were added at the last minute before release.

Nice. How many fricken "Allied handicaps" are there?

This is NOT how you balance a historical simulation. Imagine Jane's F-15, if we gave the Iraqis Tie Fighters to make it more "fair". LOL...

-CJ

My moneys on the F-15s in the atmosphere. A tie fighter dosen't look like it would have any lift in an atmospheric flight.

_____________________________

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 CJ Martin)

Post #: 21

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/17/2009 12:58:03 AM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ayradon

I don't post often. More of a lurker to find the answers to my questions but I had to comment on this bubbling feud.

The truth of the matter is that as soon as the first turn of ANY game is run it is no longer a HISTORICAL simulation. This includes the games mentioned already. A historical simulation would mean that every single move, battle casuality, battle etc, etc. would be forced upon the player. The outcome would be fixed to maintain the historical facts.

The truth of the matter is that you can only make a game with historical units. War is by no means predetermined. We have the advantage of hindsight when it comes to these games but the truth is that the actual battles fought during any war could have and would have had different outcomes if only one small thing was different.

If you want a historical simulation what is the point of playing any game. The object of these games is to change history not force it upon the person playing it. What would be the point of playing any nation in any era if what happened in RL was forced upon the player.

Watch the History Channel if you want a historical outcome because that is the only place where you are going to find reality.

I agree 100%. The devs have done a tremendous job trying to make a game that is as historically-based as possible while still allowing some freedom to make differing choices by the players. This makes for a fun game. They have also tried to make an AI that provides a challenge to those who prefer that mode of play. Sort of like hitting bullseyes in opposite directions with one shot IMO, but they've done it.

Once they get some of the anomalies addressed, this is going to be fun for everyone, no matter what their mode of play.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Ayradon)

Post #: 22

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/17/2009 1:03:21 AM

Feinder

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

-F-

_____________________________

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

(in reply to rhohltjr)

Post #: 23

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/17/2009 1:24:09 AM

Bradley7735

Posts: 2073
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline

Ok, I feel a little bad about starting the whole gun penetration issue. I realized that the only time I post on here is if I find something in the game that I don't like, or that I think is wrong. The only two things I've noticed as being an issue is the Aussie CA's vs Mogami, and the large US BB TF vs a small Japanese BB TF.

So, despite my two threads on issues I want to see changed, I want to say that this game rocks. I'm not sure you can find a subject that has more details to it than the Pacific war. The people who made and continue to make this game have done a phenominal job. Thank you.

_____________________________

The older I get, the better I was.

(in reply to Feinder)

Post #: 24

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/17/2009 2:25:24 AM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CJ Martin
To answer your question, I have in WitP, haven't in AE yet. Not sure I want to.

I'm guessing you are coming from the "Japan has no chance to win, so we made some changes to make it more playable" angle.

Nope. I was coming from the "I'm trying to give this guy the benefit of a doubt approach" given that you've managed to irritate at least one developer so far and bore another. So....as another developer, i was curious as to why you seem to think there are anti-Allied biases built into the game. Hence, the repeated question, "have you played Japan yet in AE?".

Thx for finally answering. I figured you hadn't but again....that benefit of a doubt thingy. I now suggest that before you start ringing the firebell any further and making accusations and demands towards the AE team, that you first play the Japan side before you start condeming the game as an Allied fanboy fantasy. Delete or play the game...or design your own wargame since you say your a developer. It's your choice. All i have to say on this.

< Message edited by Nikademus -- 10/17/2009 2:26:07 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to CJ Martin)

Post #: 25

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/17/2009 3:43:26 AM

TOMLABEL

Posts: 5116
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: Alabama - ROLL TIDE!!!!!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ayradon

I don't post often. More of a lurker to find the answers to my questions but I had to comment on this bubbling feud.

The truth of the matter is that as soon as the first turn of ANY game is run it is no longer a HISTORICAL simulation. This includes the games mentioned already. A historical simulation would mean that every single move, battle casuality, battle etc, etc. would be forced upon the player. The outcome would be fixed to maintain the historical facts.

The truth of the matter is that you can only make a game with historical units. War is by no means predetermined. We have the advantage of hindsight when it comes to these games but the truth is that the actual battles fought during any war could have and would have had different outcomes if only one small thing was different.

If you want a historical simulation what is the point of playing any game. The object of these games is to change history not force it upon the person playing it. What would be the point of playing any nation in any era if what happened in RL was forced upon the player.

Watch the History Channel if you want a historical outcome because that is the only place where you are going to find reality.

Well....WELCOME ABOARD!!!!

Glad to have your thoughts and input! In my opinion, the more thoughts we have posted here the better! I hope this won't be your last!!

_____________________________

Art by the Rogue-USMC

WITP Admiral's Edition: Ship & Sub Art/Base Unit Art/Map Icon Art

"If destruction be our lot - it will come from within"...Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Ayradon)

Post #: 26

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/17/2009 4:22:36 AM

V22 Osprey

Posts: 1593
Joined: 4/8/2008
From: Corona, CA
Status: offline

Currently playing the Grand Campaign.....Lost a lot of land, hopefully the enterprise can save midway....anyway I love this game.I think that this is game is very well done, but I won't be convinced that you can actually do *anything* in this game until I see some kind of invasion of the Japanese Home Islands or American West Coast.I would be happy just being able to take Pearl Harbor as the Japs.

_____________________________

Art by rogueusmc.

(in reply to TOMLABEL)

Post #: 27

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/17/2009 4:31:19 AM

sfbaytf

Posts: 1122
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline

For whatever its worth when playing against a competent PBEM Japanese opponent-and my opponent is quite good, you should forget about a Midway moment. A human opponent isn't going to make the same mistakes as Yamamoto did and the allieds you won't have the advantage of reading the enemies plans like what happened in real life when the US Navy broke the Japanese codes.

Take your carriers and hide till 43. I'm sure there are some players who are good enough to take on Japan with American carriers in 42, but I'm not one of them.

Its easy to beat up on the AI. Against a good PBEM opponent its a different story. In 42 the allieds do possess many other advantages besides carriers...

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 28

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/17/2009 8:16:58 AM

stuman

Posts: 3907
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline

I have many wise things I could say that would settle this debate to the complete satisfaction of one and all. But it is late, so I will try to remember to explain all tomorrow.

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley

(in reply to sfbaytf)

Post #: 29

RE: Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of ... - 10/17/2009 12:39:47 PM

bklooste

Posts: 1104
Joined: 4/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

so? Why don't you go read the "Naval Gun" thread in the mod forum. JWE very clearly states IJN guns were tweaked as a "gift", while USN guns were "dialed back" to make things "fair".

Read it again its like 1-2% on penetration ... big deal ie prob 0.1% impact as you penetrate most things anyway and you wont penetrate BBs. Most of these were just favorable roundings 237 to 240 and for the US 242 to 240.

Note the US gets a few massive bonuses
- Non Barbette Turreted 5"/38 like on all the carriers had about half the fire rate but in the game they get full fire rate ( this is like 2* the AA value on US CVs)
- US gets like ~10-20% bonus with its guns early in the war because it uses the late war fire control bonus on accuracy on the 5"/38 at the start ..See the accuracy threads.

Ben

(in reply to CJ Martin)

Post #: 30

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Name "Admiral's Edition" reveals lack of long-term planning

Page: [1] 2 next > >>