Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank
Don´t want to nitpick, but it seems to me to be dependend of the size of the raid.

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

and after a couple of hours and many more hits into this thread I can only wonder by myselve why not even one has commented on the quote I pulled out from Cuttlefish´s AAR that shows 130 Allied ac being shot down in late 42 for 3 (in words three) Zeros lost.

But this is probably due to me doing the wording wrong again

quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank
Don´t want to nitpick, but it seems to me to be dependend of the size of the raid.

Well it was 30 out of about 40-ish.

Not 2 out of 3.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank


Fine, you use the British numbers. I used Piecalciewicz and Bekker as sources. Which are yours?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

quote:


I understand the importance of correcting the record. Which you did admirably. Then you took an unnecessary shot at the originator of the thread.

I'm sorry, not sure what you mean?

You gave a good and detailed explanation of why the results Castor Troy was so unhappy about were within the bounds of a realistic result. I completely understand why you don't want the claim "Uber CAP is back" to stand, especially if that's not the case.

Then you put this totally unnecessary cherry on top:

quote:

Next time take a deep breath and run this sort of thing through a sanity filter before posting like this...

quote:

Actually mjk, my remark was neither a personal attack on Castor nor an implication that his post (or anything he said) was crazy.

I meant, "do a little research on the assets involved, run the contributing factors of the engagement (weather, LDRs, Altitude, Firepower, advantages etc...)through your head a couple times, and see if the issue you have is really as crazy as it first seems." THEN post...

If this sanity check, or filter as I called it, turns up a negative then you've solved your own problem and the only reason to post is to vent. If however you turn up an affirmative then post what you believe to be a legitimate issue with supporting references from your previous research.

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

quote:


I understand the importance of correcting the record. Which you did admirably. Then you took an unnecessary shot at the originator of the thread.

I'm sorry, not sure what you mean?

You gave a good and detailed explanation of why the results Castor Troy was so unhappy about were within the bounds of a realistic result. I completely understand why you don't want the claim "Uber CAP is back" to stand, especially if that's not the case.

Then you put this totally unnecessary cherry on top:

quote:

Next time take a deep breath and run this sort of thing through a sanity filter before posting like this...

@Mjk

I stand by this statment and fail to see how this is an "Unnecessary Cherry". Posting threads that essentially imply a massive failure in the code in Marquis letters with such a title as this one is EXACTLY why I said what I said above. It's not the cherry on top, it's the Vanilla ice cream at the heart of the argument. Alarmist threads such as this one and the "pick you topic sucks" threads all disparage AE, often before they really get over the frustration of some result. Most of the time these results are outliers, others they are explained based on rational thought, a more focused assessment of the factors involved, or purely ignorant play (like this one). This game is complex and ignorant is not meant as a slight. There are lots of parts of this game that I am ignorant about. I will likely continue to be frustrated by Sfc to Sfc combat for example...

What I said, I see, could be interpreted mistakenly as a personal attack...I suppose. That is why I clarified my meaning here:

quote:

Actually mjk, my remark was neither a personal attack on Castor nor an implication that his post (or anything he said) was crazy.

I meant, "do a little research on the assets involved, run the contributing factors of the engagement (weather, LDRs, Altitude, Firepower, advantages etc...)through your head a couple times, and see if the issue you have is really as crazy as it first seems." THEN post...

If this sanity check, or filter as I called it, turns up a negative then you've solved your own problem and the only reason to post is to vent. If however you turn up an affirmative then post what you believe to be a legitimate issue with supporting references from your previous research.

It wasn't an attack and the only person taking issue with it is you mjk. For what reason, especially given my explanation, is lost on me.

I take no issue with the fact that Castor doesn't like the result. That's fine. It is a bad beat. But it does not warrant the title it got for the reasons I stated earlier. I can guarantee it won't endear anyone to those who would likely help the matter, and it only hurts the Game and the community. People whom have not yet purchased AE DO LURK here. It's unfortunate that some have likely been influenced in their decision over something like this and previous threads like this one.

As to the only real personal attack I have read in this thread, I am neither bald nor hypocritical...I again defer to the public to decide. I'm certainly not worried about convincing you otherwise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

and after a couple of hours and many more hits into this thread I can only wonder by myselve why not even one has commented on the quote I pulled out from Cuttlefish´s AAR that shows 130 Allied ac being shot down in late 42 for 3 (in words three) Zeros lost.

But this is probably due to me doing the wording wrong again

Hey, Castor, now please, col down a littel bit. Where is the Austrian Schmäh, your people is so famous for?

I have to support you on this one. Killing about 130 allied planes for 3 Zeroes is over the top. There weren´t any Patriot batteries there?

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

This was taken out of Cuttlefish´s AAR in his game against Q-Ball:

On the plus side, however, no attacks meant that I had about 300 Zeros, including the ones based at Makassar, for defense. About half or a bit more of them flew, enough to shred the attacking Allied planes. The results were one-sided, to say the least. I shot down somewhere around 120 planes (the scoreboard said 125, the air losses screen said 131) at a cost of exactly 3 Zeros. Call it 55 bombers, mostly SBDs and a scattering of 2-and-4-engine bombers, plus about 65 fighters, Kittyhawks (the new K model) and Warhawks and Wildcats (mostly) and P-38s. Zounds!

comments? Please don´t shoot me and The Elf or anyone else, don´t take it offensively, but I do find it as strange as my result that lead me to put up this thread. No, I do find this result even more off to be honest.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

quote:


I understand the importance of correcting the record. Which you did admirably. Then you took an unnecessary shot at the originator of the thread.

I'm sorry, not sure what you mean?

You gave a good and detailed explanation of why the results Castor Troy was so unhappy about were within the bounds of a realistic result. I completely understand why you don't want the claim "Uber CAP is back" to stand, especially if that's not the case.

Then you put this totally unnecessary cherry on top:

quote:

Next time take a deep breath and run this sort of thing through a sanity filter before posting like this...

@Mjk

I stand by this statment and fail to see how this is an "Unnecessary Cherry". Posting threads that essentially imply a massive failure in the code in Marquis letters with such a title as this one is EXACTLY why I said what I said above. It's not the cherry on top, it's the Vanilla ice cream at the heart of the argument. Alarmist threads such as this one and the "pick you topic sucks" threads all disparage AE, often before they really get over the frustration of some result. Most of the time these results are outliers, others they are explained based on rational thought, a more focused assessment of the factors involved, or purely ignorant play (like this one). This game is complex and ignorant is not meant as a slight. There are lots of parts of this game that I am ignorant about. I will likely continue to be frustrated by Sfc to Sfc combat for example...

What I said, I see, could be interpreted mistakenly as a personal attack...I suppose. That is why I clarified my meaning here:

quote:

Actually mjk, my remark was neither a personal attack on Castor nor an implication that his post (or anything he said) was crazy.

I meant, "do a little research on the assets involved, run the contributing factors of the engagement (weather, LDRs, Altitude, Firepower, advantages etc...)through your head a couple times, and see if the issue you have is really as crazy as it first seems." THEN post...

If this sanity check, or filter as I called it, turns up a negative then you've solved your own problem and the only reason to post is to vent. If however you turn up an affirmative then post what you believe to be a legitimate issue with supporting references from your previous research.

It wasn't an attack and the only person taking issue with it is you mjk. For what reason, especially given my explanation, is lost on me.

I take no issue with the fact that Castor doesn't like the result. That's fine. It is a bad beat. But it does not warrant the title it got for the reasons I stated earlier. I can guarantee it won't endear anyone to those who would likely help the matter, and it only hurts the Game and the community. People whom have not yet purchased AE DO LURK here. It's unfortunate that some have likely been influenced in their decision over something like this and previous threads like this one.

As to the only real personal attack I have read in this thread, I am neither bald nor hypocritical...I again defer to the public to decide. I'm certainly not worried about convincing you otherwise.

You were frustrated just as Castor Troy was frustrated. You both let it get the best of you. He apologized. You deny that questioning the sanity of his post was an attack.

Also as I said, I completely understand and agree with why you want to make sure that the buying public don't get bad info about the game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cuttlefish


Sorry Q-Ball, you probably shouldn't read the quote below:

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

This was taken out of Cuttlefish´s AAR in his game against Q-Ball:

On the plus side, however, no attacks meant that I had about 300 Zeros, including the ones based at Makassar, for defense. About half or a bit more of them flew, enough to shred the attacking Allied planes. The results were one-sided, to say the least. I shot down somewhere around 120 planes (the scoreboard said 125, the air losses screen said 131) at a cost of exactly 3 Zeros. Call it 55 bombers, mostly SBDs and a scattering of 2-and-4-engine bombers, plus about 65 fighters, Kittyhawks (the new K model) and Warhawks and Wildcats (mostly) and P-38s. Zounds!

comments? Please don´t shoot me and The Elf or anyone else, don´t take it offensively, but I do find it as strange as my result that lead me to put up this thread. No, I do find this result even more off to be honest.

Since I have been quoted here, let me add my two cents. My estimate (and remember, in AE estimates are the best I can do) is that 41% of the attacking planes were lost in this action. As Nik has pointed out, this is rather higher than history shows us would be the case. However, consider what these results would have looked like in WITP. I would guess that Allied aircraft losses would have been more like 80% or 90% (around 250 planes), with maybe 20 or 30 Japanese planes lost and no carriers attacked, much less hit.

My own attitude (and I am speaking strictly for myself here, not saying that Castor or anyone else is right or wrong) is that I know that in the game aircraft losses of 30% to 50% are possible if things go wrong. I accept this risk when I send out my planes and do what I can to try and obtain the best results. Personally I think the new air-to-air combat model is a marvel of improvement over what we had. Others may not be as satisfied. The fact that we do not all share the same view is actually good news. It means that we have not yet been assimilated by the Borg.

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


well, bad info? I´m doing an AAR, wonder how long I´m allowed to. Thought in the land of the free censoring is off limits but when I hear those statements I wonder when my "bad info" will be put to an end. I don´t do name calling and I´m not saying people shouldn´t buy the game. I´m saying the complete opposite. Again and again and again. If this forum has become a commercial only then have fun.

I see my games as a test, I look at every turn closely. I post every day´s combat reports, everyone can look at them. I do my rants within my annoted combat reports. Like it or leave it, don´t take every rant serious nor personal. This seems not to be true at these times anymore. Well, one thing is for sure, those that have bought the game and those that have not bought it should nevertheless know the results from playing it. I can´t post the combat report of the PBEM of Cuttlefish vs Q-Ball, they could. But I take their words in both their AARs serious and those clearly say that the Japanese shot down around 130 Allied aircraft of all advanced types in late 42 for the loss of A COUPLE of Zeros. I´m sure my statement will again be ignored or there will be again something found to just leave it aside and get back to the "you are bad and you said" discussion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

I´m sorry Cuttlefish and hope you don´t mind taking out the result from your AAR. But in all seriousness, noone here can seriously think that the 130:3 you´ve mentioned in your AAR is anything but bullocks especially if you hear when it happened and which ac were involved. Noone should take this as a personal attack but for sure should think by themselve "oh boy, what´s gone wrong here". Let´s think about to make it better.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

quote:


I understand the importance of correcting the record. Which you did admirably. Then you took an unnecessary shot at the originator of the thread.

I'm sorry, not sure what you mean?

You gave a good and detailed explanation of why the results Castor Troy was so unhappy about were within the bounds of a realistic result. I completely understand why you don't want the claim "Uber CAP is back" to stand, especially if that's not the case.

Then you put this totally unnecessary cherry on top:

quote:

Next time take a deep breath and run this sort of thing through a sanity filter before posting like this...

@Mjk

I stand by this statment and fail to see how this is an "Unnecessary Cherry". Posting threads that essentially imply a massive failure in the code in Marquis letters with such a title as this one is EXACTLY why I said what I said above. It's not the cherry on top, it's the Vanilla ice cream at the heart of the argument. Alarmist threads such as this one and the "pick you topic sucks" threads all disparage AE, often before they really get over the frustration of some result. Most of the time these results are outliers, others they are explained based on rational thought, a more focused assessment of the factors involved, or purely ignorant play (like this one). This game is complex and ignorant is not meant as a slight. There are lots of parts of this game that I am ignorant about. I will likely continue to be frustrated by Sfc to Sfc combat for example...

What I said, I see, could be interpreted mistakenly as a personal attack...I suppose. That is why I clarified my meaning here:

quote:

Actually mjk, my remark was neither a personal attack on Castor nor an implication that his post (or anything he said) was crazy.

I meant, "do a little research on the assets involved, run the contributing factors of the engagement (weather, LDRs, Altitude, Firepower, advantages etc...)through your head a couple times, and see if the issue you have is really as crazy as it first seems." THEN post...

If this sanity check, or filter as I called it, turns up a negative then you've solved your own problem and the only reason to post is to vent. If however you turn up an affirmative then post what you believe to be a legitimate issue with supporting references from your previous research.

It wasn't an attack and the only person taking issue with it is you mjk. For what reason, especially given my explanation, is lost on me.

I take no issue with the fact that Castor doesn't like the result. That's fine. It is a bad beat. But it does not warrant the title it got for the reasons I stated earlier. I can guarantee it won't endear anyone to those who would likely help the matter, and it only hurts the Game and the community. People whom have not yet purchased AE DO LURK here. It's unfortunate that some have likely been influenced in their decision over something like this and previous threads like this one.

As to the only real personal attack I have read in this thread, I am neither bald nor hypocritical...I again defer to the public to decide. I'm certainly not worried about convincing you otherwise.

You were frustrated just as Castor Troy was frustrated. You both let it get the best of you. He apologized. You deny that questioning the sanity of his post was an attack.

Also as I said, I completely understand and agree with why you want to make sure that the buying public don't get bad info about the game.

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

quote:

ORIGINAL: dbfw190
It's the man, not the machine. experienced pilots in obsolete planes can hold their own against superior fighters.. not indefinately, but long enough to make the pilot in the more superior craft to realize he's met his match.

This old chestnut really annoys me, so I'm going to actually challenge it, even though it's a slight tangent.

The Allied pilots in question were not useless!. This JFB conceit comes up all the time. They were in fact among the very best the Allies have in 1942 aside from naval aviators - experience and air skill 60-65. They may not have been spectacular, but they were competent.

I expect Japanese pilots to be better than Allied pilots, but I also expect them to be worn down in the course of the war until they are inferior. Question is - who does the wearing down? Answer - the guys who just got slaughtered. There's nobody else!

A loss ratio of 3 to 1, or 4 to 1, say, would at least inflict attrition upon the Japanese which I would say is realistic. But 30 to 1 - you cannot attritt the Japanese uberpilots with loss ratios like that. In such a scenario it is the Allies, not the Japanese, whose quality and numbers will plummet. Hell, within a few days of following that course there wouldn't be an Allied airforce left.

As for the situation in question, the background of this result - there were an equal number of Japanese planes operating from a very small airfield on CAP facing sweeping Allied fighters in somewhat superior numbers - so really, this is almost the best scenario possible as far as the Allies are concerned. It really doesn't get much better than this. I'm happy to accept that bad days and bad rolls mean bad results, I don't expect to win all the time after all even if the situation is favourable, but 30 to 1 is an absolutely crushing defeat, a wipeout which will have strategic implications, as well as being unrealistic to boot. 75% of a fighter formation shot down in one day? I don't buy it.

And from a larger scale, if this is a regular occurrence - and it does seem to be depressing regular - there can be no wearing down. Who is going to shoot down this Jap airforce of aces? Nobody. Nobody on the map can do it, so they'll be living till 1945 then, like Jedi Knights among the peons.

And as an aside, I think it's unrealistic bullshit, no matter how good the opposing pilots are. As someone said, it's not Star Wars, and we're not talking about vulnerable bombers, we're talking about a huge furball over 20,000 feet altitude differences without on board radars and with primitive or non existent direction from the ground. I'd expect fairly low casualties on both sides.

I'm not bothered too much as I realise that sending in fighters in varying altitudes is not a winning strategy in this game. Apparently Zeroes can go from 35k feet to 5k feet and back up to 15k feet all within one air phase without any problem at all. OK - lesson learned, I won't do that again, and this probably reflects as bad as a result as possible. Next time I'll stick to one altitude so my planes mass properly. The issue of massing is at least realistic.

75% casualties though is not. I'd expect Japanese pilots to survive a long time if a Fabian strategy was being pursued regarding their commitment, but packing everything you got as far forward as you can on a primitive airstrip right next to huge Allied airfields is not a Fabian strategy aimed at preserving pilot quality, it's exposing them to among the worst conditions imaginable.

Long tangent over.

Of course pilot quality is a factor, but it's one factor among many and not even necessarily the most important. I know mdiehl had some table which broke down just how valuable a mph of top speed, or a months flying experience, or a tighter turning circle or a heavier armament actually was. IIRC top speed was the #1 factor and pilot experience was pretty much equally important.

Equally important does not mean crushingly important, though. And as I said before I think an OOB filled with pilots of 90+ experience is totally whacked anyway, it's like saying that the entirety of an air force is staffed by the likes of Sailor Malan, Galland and the rest.

I've seen crazy stuff in this game due to that. In that thousand mile war game I was playing the Japs, and my Rufe squadron (Rufes ffs!) ripped Allied P40s and even B24s to little bits. I know why - because the entire Rufe squadron, we're talking 20+ pilots, had experience 90+. That must be the most badass float plane squadron in the history of the world. AVG eat your heart out, we're talking all-ace star team. That is an OOB issue, not an engine issue, far as I'm concerned. Do you really think that a Japanese floatplane squadron based in Ass End of Nowhere in 1943 was among the very best in the entire world, absolutely elite, top notch, every one of them. Cuz I don't.

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

I wonder where the nervourness from the officials is coming from. Why not starting to censor the forum anyway? Sorry Elf but at some point you overdo it and if you read all of my posts in this thread you could well come back down from being pissed off at some point. And stop saying "this or that is bad for the game"... this is starting to get ridicoulos. You can blame me for starting the thread with this stupid "Santa Clause and Buggs Bunny..." but if you have a problem with my thread title then you should ask one of the Matrix guys to completely ban me together with 500 other people that have chosen far worse thread titles for all kind of issues.

quote:

When there are 130:3 kill rates of Zeros in late 42 and you don´t even want to admit that THIS is in all kind of circumstances completely STUPID (blame me for using such a BAD word) and your only problem is my thread title that says "good to know UBER Cap is gone" then you sure have a problem. I´ve apologised more than often enough in this thread and surely at some point will step back from trying to keep the colt behind my back.

quote:

Oh how would you have praised me if you would have found out that this is a commercial threat for AE that is nothing but praising it? AE has the same problems WITP had in it´s beginning and that were taken out to a good extend with patches. The problems are not only with air combat and if you could get back to being objectivly again instead of being completely subjectivly because being part of the developers we could meet at some point not behaving like donkeys. For you the 50 Dutch bombers shot down is fine, well not for me. Can live with it being not the same oppinion with you. If you think the 130:3 result that was not brought up by stupid Castor is ok too then you will lose all reputation for sure and THAT is what is bad for the game (because the AE air team lead thinks that a 130:3 is fine too). I stand to my faults and have expressed it often enough in this thread already, all you do is pointing at the oh so bad Castor that dared to start a thread with a not so nice thread title that damages the oh so great reputation of the game.

quote:

NOONE IS ACTUALLY COMMENTING THE 130:3 RESULT OF CUTTLEFISH. And this says enough...

quote:

And people that do lurk here should know what they get. I can only repeat myselve again. I´ve loved WITP, I´ve played it for hundred, no, thousands of hours over five years. I love and play AE but one thing is for sure, not all we were told is what it is. Lots of things were more commercial than reality. Those things can become reality, but not when you guys deny that there are problems. And I won´t start to count them up, because the lurkers have enough threads to look at the problems. Both WITP and AE are definetely worth the money and while it was said a hundred times, I can repeat it again, you all did a very good job. But you guys still should stay objective when it´s related to your baby and that hasn´t been the case the last weeks/months it seems.

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

quote:

ORIGINAL: PresterJohn
From the Japanese side, if you are referring to the combats at Diamond Harbour as i recall there have been 2 major engagements. The first (which i don't think you're refering to) was the invasion turn when KB was in the DH hex and the allies lost circa 70 air, primarily from what i saw because they were on naval attack vs a prepped KB CAP.

quote:

The second major conflict was a while later and DH was a size 2 airfield at this point with 4 large fighter units ( 3 Oscar, 1 Zero) in place, all with pilots in the 70-80 range.

quote:

and the allies seemed to come in seperated.

quote:

anyway and not related to the above if you're talking about inexperienced pilots in obsolscent machines what about the Turkey Shoot?

quote:


A game with 2 human players will lead to ahistorical utilisation of forces and outcomes that would not have happened in the real world. I think at some point you have to accept that, unless you want a re-run of ww2, which for both sides would be rather dull as a game, odd outcomes will occur.

quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

quote:

ORIGINAL: PresterJohn
From the Japanese side, if you are referring to the combats at Diamond Harbour as i recall there have been 2 major engagements. The first (which i don't think you're refering to) was the invasion turn when KB was in the DH hex and the allies lost circa 70 air, primarily from what i saw because they were on naval attack vs a prepped KB CAP.

Right, fair dos. Which is why I didn't comment on that. The CAP Trap is an old device. I didn't expect you to bring KB right into the base hex, thats kinda risky...

quote:

The second major conflict was a while later and DH was a size 2 airfield at this point with 4 large fighter units ( 3 Oscar, 1 Zero) in place, all with pilots in the 70-80 range.

OK, well, I had a 25 plane P40 squadron, a 16 plane Mohawk IV squadron and a 16 plane Hurricane squadron. All of them had experience at least 60, the Mohawks had about 65 ish as the Mohawk IV is, I would guess, the best plane of the lot if you look at their stats. Thats basically as good as it gets for the Allies in 1942, hence my umbrage at "but your using crap fighters", no I'm not. Buffaloes are crap fighters, and 60+ experience is competent not green.

They all got sent in en masse, ie sweep and zero CAP. The error I made I think was staggering the altitude, the Hurris were at max altitude, the Mohawks were at 20k or so and P40s were at 10k - thus going by their maneuverability bands.

quote:

and the allies seemed to come in seperated.

Yeah, cuz of the altitude thing. I won't do that again, I figure max altitude always wins, certainly seems to. I'm not sure how P40s will do with maneuverability 2 at 35k feet. We'll see. Better than they do at 10k feet though I would imagine.

...I think that in itself is kinda dodgy, but I'm hardly the first to say that, I think everybody has noticed that high altitude seems to be the way to go.

quote:

anyway and not related to the above if you're talking about inexperienced pilots in obsolscent machines what about the Turkey Shoot?

I don't think the P40 can really be judged as obsolescent. (Especially against Oscars, now thats obsolescent, look at the flyswatter armament). I don't complain when Buffaloes are massacred.

It is the best plane the Allies have until the Corsair - as I mentioned the P38 is dismal, the P40 is basically what you got well into 1943.

quote:


A game with 2 human players will lead to ahistorical utilisation of forces and outcomes that would not have happened in the real world. I think at some point you have to accept that, unless you want a re-run of ww2, which for both sides would be rather dull as a game, odd outcomes will occur.

Sure, but odd outcomes seem to happen all the time. They happen when I play the Japanese, though I don't really like it when I see Rufes smashing up all comers.

Way back when there was a thread about Zeroes being too bad, I think rominet put it up? About 2 pages of tests where the Zeroes got more or less 1:1 kill ratios over all the tests - better at times, worse at times. There was a fair bit of outrage and 'this must be fixed!' - I remember it distinctly. Look back at the very early threads when AE was released, "Wow, P40s arent crap anymore" featured heavily. Someone apparently didn't like this as they sure are back to being crap again now.

I don't really mind per se, I'm well aware that by mid 43 things are going to be very different, and that even in 1942 the Allies have plenty of things in their favour. They got so many cargo ships I really think you could raid or sink as many as you want, won't make any odds unless you wipe out 500 plus in a couple of months. Most of them are in Cape Town or San Fran twiddling their thumbs. And the Japanese are definitely the harder side to play, even early on, I know that the opening months are critical and I doubt I could organise them myself.

...However, I think castor troy has a point, as people all slogpile him. And it's kinda one sided slogpiling too, there was huge amounts of bitching about Zeroes on this board from JFBs when the game was released. What they said appears to have been taken on board by the devs as it sure isn't that way now after all the patches.

Here's some moaning at Zeroes not destroying the world at a glance :-

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2232545

On top of that there are these lame old canards being brought out, like in the 'Allied fighters suck' thread. 'You're playing it wrong'. No, they really do suck!

quote:

ORIGINAL: PresterJohn
I'm no expert so i was just posting the Japanese perspective for a fuller understanding of the situation :)

quote:

As i may have said before i am a gamer who enjoys the fantastic detail and depth of witp:ae and so don't mind the variation too much.

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ahh, who cares, kill rate is as least as good as in WITP but the replacement rates have been decreased by a factor of 10. But don´t forget, if you start as the Japanese, you will still be able to build hundreds of superb aircraft, starting in mid 42 until at least 6/45.

50 out of 89 bombers shot down, don´t have the confirmation yet but it seems this was LEAKING Cap from mini KB out to THREE hexes... someone give me some alcohol because pills don´t help when playing this game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Is it just me. I have yet to see a bomber actually shoot down a fighter in the game. Lots of damage but never a red destroyed. Anyone?

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cuttlefish

It is uncommon but not all that rare for Allied 4E bombers to shoot down one of my fighters in my two PBEMs. And they damage a lot of them, not all of which then land safely or successfully.

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Considering that some persons basically frustrated The Elf out of replying on forum anymore....

If I had spent years of my free time FOR FREE to make game better and then getting asinine comments from some contributors, I'd have told them to "go pound sand" lot earlier.

Anyway, The Elf is both officer and gentleman...I am just ex-officer, but definitely not a gentleman.