Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey?

 
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 >> Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 1:04:52 PM   
Yakface


Posts: 846
Joined: 8/5/2006
Status: offline 		The complexities of the new air and training model provide a huge number of opportunities for maximising efficiency. Some legit others....les so. Wanted to run through a few different techniques to see whcih the population found generally acceptable and which crossed the line.

Clealy many people will have different opinions, which is fine. List is in increasing order of dodgyness (IMO)

1. Extracting the pilots with high defence ratings from transport aircraft and transferring them to a fighter squadron to provide them with some A2A training before use in frontline fighter units

2. Extracting the excess pilots from groups due for withdrawl.

3. Putting floatplane units on sweep trainig to create a pool of pilots that can be used in fighter squadrons

4. using the 'resize to fit ship' to create a massive single units to increase pilot training numbers

5. extracting all the trained pilots from units due for permanent withdrawl by replacing them with trainees.

6. similar to 3 and 4. As Japan - Taking some of the very small ship based FP's, resizing on a CS to enlarge from 1 to 24 planes and training pilots for use on other planes (sweep or bombing training)

And any others people can think of....
Post #: 1
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 1:12:07 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface

The complexities of the new air and training model provide a huge number of opportunities for maximising efficiency. Some legit others....les so. Wanted to run through a few different techniques to see whcih the population found generally acceptable and which crossed the line.

Clealy many people will have different opinions, which is fine. List is in increasing order of dodgyness (IMO)

1. Extracting the pilots with high defence ratings from transport aircraft and transferring them to a fighter squadron to provide them with some A2A training before use in frontline fighter units

2. Extracting the excess pilots from groups due for withdrawl.

3. Putting floatplane units on sweep trainig to create a pool of pilots that can be used in fighter squadrons

4. using the 'resize to fit ship' to create a massive single units to increase pilot training numbers

5. extracting all the trained pilots from units due for permanent withdrawl by replacing them with trainees.

6. similar to 3 and 4. As Japan - Taking some of the very small ship based FP's, resizing on a CS to enlarge from 1 to 24 planes and training pilots for use on other planes (sweep or bombing training)

And any others people can think of....




the "resize" thing is the only thing that I donīt like as this is what only works for one side, which means the Japanese side. The Japanese seem to be able to resize their untis at any time, while the Allied are stuck with the historical resize dates, thatīs why the Allied carriers run around with only 2/3 ac compliment until mid 42.

All other things should work for both sides. With the resize "trick" the Japanese not only can outproduce the Allied in first line aircraft but they can also "outproduce" the Allied in trained pilots. I doubt that pilot quality will ever be a real problem for the Japanese anyway if the Japanese player is focussing on training. So basically the WITP training methods of on map "bombing" have been changed to on map "training" with the enhancement that you now also have a reserve pool where you can transfer pilots around. Time to "train" is equal.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 3/25/2010 1:14:26 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Yakface)
Post #: 2
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 1:14:44 PM   
Yakface


Posts: 846
Joined: 8/5/2006
Status: offline 		Extracting pilots from groups due for withdrawl is really only works for allied players because Japan will get their back anyway.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 3
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 1:32:52 PM   
Mistmatz

 

Posts: 1399
Joined: 10/16/2005
Status: offline 		As far as I understand the number of pilots you can train in a squadron is not depending on the number of airframes you have in that squadron. As you can pull as many pilots into a group via the 'request veteran' button I don't think group resize is that much of a problem, especially given the sheer amount of training units that are on map anyway.

I keep most of my squadrons at 4/3 pilot strength (or less), so I don't know if there is any benefit in having even more trainees in a squadron or if the training effect is simply distributed among a bigger bunch If it wouldn't than this could be a cheesy training method as it has no natural limit.

Regarding the float planes on sweep I'm not even sure this is possible for the allies. I'm certain though it's not neccessary. For the japanese this is different as they have some float fighters, so fair game IMO.

_____________________________

If you gained knowledge through the forum, why not putting it into the AE wiki?

http://witp-ae.wikia.com/wiki/War_in_the_Pacific:_Admiral%27s_Edition_Wiki


(in reply to Yakface)
Post #: 4
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 1:33:42 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface

Extracting pilots from groups due for withdrawl is really only works for allied players because Japan will get their back anyway.



didnīt know that, never played the Japanese so far, but is it unfair then for the Allied doing so when itīs hardcoded that way for the Japanese?

< Message edited by castor troy -- 3/25/2010 1:34:24 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Yakface)
Post #: 5
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 1:36:00 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mistmatz

As far as I understand the number of pilots you can train in a squadron is not depending on the number of airframes you have in that squadron. As you can pull as many pilots into a group via the 'request veteran' button I don't think group resize is that much of a problem, especially given the sheer amount of training units that are on map anyway.

I keep most of my squadrons at 4/3 pilot strength (or less), so I don't know if there is any benefit in having even more trainees in a squadron or if the training effect is simply distributed among a bigger bunch If it wouldn't than this could be a cheesy training method as it has no natural limit.

Regarding the float planes on sweep I'm not even sure this is possible for the allies. I'm certain though it's not neccessary. For the japanese this is different as they have some float fighters, so fair game IMO.



I think you can set all your float planes to Cap/escort/sweep so I guess you can also set them to train air and def skill via the train escort/sweep mission. IMO, the Japanese wonīt ever run out of trained pilots until very, very late in the war. Trained means 70 skill for me. 70 is something you can reach in no time but higher takes an awful long time.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 3/25/2010 1:37:03 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Mistmatz)
Post #: 6
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 1:40:10 PM   
Yakface


Posts: 846
Joined: 8/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface

Extracting pilots from groups due for withdrawl is really only works for allied players because Japan will get their back anyway.



didnīt know that, never played the Japanese so far, but is it unfair then for the Allied doing so when itīs hardcoded that way for the Japanese?


My personal opinion - if the game/scenario is designed to take into account the transfer of trained pilots to the western front, it would be gamey to circumvent it by pulling them out first and just sending rookies over. The reason Japan does not have pilots permanently lost is that they have only one theatre.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 7
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 2:12:25 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface


2. Extracting the excess pilots from groups due for withdrawl.


5. extracting all the trained pilots from units due for permanent withdrawl by replacing them with trainees.


These I have no problem with and don't think they are gamey


quote:


1. Extracting the pilots with high defence ratings from transport aircraft and transferring them to a fighter squadron to provide them with some A2A training before use in frontline fighter units


3. Putting floatplane units on sweep trainig to create a pool of pilots that can be used in fighter squadrons

4. using the 'resize to fit ship' to create a massive single units to increase pilot training numbers


6. similar to 3 and 4. As Japan - Taking some of the very small ship based FP's, resizing on a CS to enlarge from 1 to 24 planes and training pilots for use on other planes (sweep or bombing training)


I don't think these are real gamey either, I can see they might be abused a bit:

#1: I don't do that, I don't think you really need to go that far as Japan
#3: I don't do this either, I would just leave them on floatplanes
#4: I have done this once, but it can be abused, so should be limited/stopped. The Japanese have enough "Home-Bound" units for a good training program
#6: I have done this to a limited extent; the Japanese get very few land-based Float Plane units at start.

The pilot model does not mirror history. The game is a great one the way it is, but if you wanted to make it match history, I would make the following changes:

1. END on-map TRAINING. You can still build skills in Combat; maybe that should be enhanced
2. In lieu of on-map training, REPLACEMENTS should have higher skill levels; the Allies should get them in the 60-70 range, and Japan in the 50-ish range. That will produce the historical divergence in pilot quality after the first cadres are killed off

OR, Japan can train in pool up to 70, but you have to leave them in 2 years to do so, and the number of replacements is reduced.


_____________________________


(in reply to Yakface)
Post #: 8
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 4:14:03 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface

Extracting pilots from groups due for withdrawl is really only works for allied players because Japan will get their back anyway.



didnīt know that, never played the Japanese so far, but is it unfair then for the Allied doing so when itīs hardcoded that way for the Japanese?


My personal opinion - if the game/scenario is designed to take into account the transfer of trained pilots to the western front, it would be gamey to circumvent it by pulling them out first and just sending rookies over. The reason Japan does not have pilots permanently lost is that they have only one theatre.



If the squadrons are withdrawn yes IMO, if they are disbanded then no IMO.

_____________________________


(in reply to Yakface)
Post #: 9
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 5:30:54 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline 		No IJN training method in AE is as gamey as the "Lets bomb an abandoned Chinese base for ever" used by most IJN players in WITP.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 10
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 5:53:04 PM   
Yakface


Posts: 846
Joined: 8/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

No IJN training method in AE is as gamey as the "Lets bomb an abandoned Chinese base for ever" used by most IJN players in WITP.


Very true

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 11
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 8:28:50 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface


2. Extracting the excess pilots from groups due for withdrawl.


5. extracting all the trained pilots from units due for permanent withdrawl by replacing them with trainees.


These I have no problem with and don't think they are gamey


quote:


1. Extracting the pilots with high defence ratings from transport aircraft and transferring them to a fighter squadron to provide them with some A2A training before use in frontline fighter units


3. Putting floatplane units on sweep trainig to create a pool of pilots that can be used in fighter squadrons

4. using the 'resize to fit ship' to create a massive single units to increase pilot training numbers


6. similar to 3 and 4. As Japan - Taking some of the very small ship based FP's, resizing on a CS to enlarge from 1 to 24 planes and training pilots for use on other planes (sweep or bombing training)


I don't think these are real gamey either, I can see they might be abused a bit:

#1: I don't do that, I don't think you really need to go that far as Japan
#3: I don't do this either, I would just leave them on floatplanes
#4: I have done this once, but it can be abused, so should be limited/stopped. The Japanese have enough "Home-Bound" units for a good training program
#6: I have done this to a limited extent; the Japanese get very few land-based Float Plane units at start.

The pilot model does not mirror history. The game is a great one the way it is, but if you wanted to make it match history, I would make the following changes:

1. END on-map TRAINING. You can still build skills in Combat; maybe that should be enhanced
2. In lieu of on-map training, REPLACEMENTS should have higher skill levels; the Allies should get them in the 60-70 range, and Japan in the 50-ish range. That will produce the historical divergence in pilot quality after the first cadres are killed off

OR, Japan can train in pool up to 70, but you have to leave them in 2 years to do so, and the number of replacements is reduced.



1. Yep, training needs an overhaul as the Japanese players just get to create too many quality pilots. End on map training or fix it.

Perhaps have Allied pilots come on in the 45 range in early 42, 50 in late, 55 in early 43 and 60 thereafter. Japanese will follow the reverse course. 50 in 42, 40 in 43, 30 in 44, 25 in 45.

Allow on map training in skills but limit it. The rest to come in combat. I am already starting to see Japanese bombers nail my subs way to frequently in mid 42. Just as in WITP

As it is now, I am hard up for pilots in 9/42 and my Japanese opponent seems to be swimming in them. Something ain't right.


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 12
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 8:33:12 PM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1941
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline
quote:

3. Putting floatplane units on sweep trainig to create a pool of pilots that can be used in fighter squadrons


Many float units upgrade to dive bombers so I put them on naval attack training or asw training. I have enough squadrons as it is training fighter pilots.

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to Yakface)
Post #: 13
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 9:44:26 PM   
jrlans


Posts: 180
Joined: 8/27/2005
From: Los Angeles, CA
Status: offline 		My only sugestion would be that you limit indvidual pilots skills to no more than x% above thier current xp. So that the basline xp of the pilots actualy matters.

(in reply to khyberbill)
Post #: 14
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/25/2010 9:52:29 PM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1941
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline
quote:

My only sugestion would be that you limit indvidual pilots skills to no more than x% above thier current xp. So that the basline xp of the pilots actualy matters.


That is too much micromanagement for me. I look at pilot training once a week (in real time). I dont want to be a slave to it. I only look at EXP for determining transfer to training pools. I also look at individual expertise if I am requesting a veteran for a divebomber/fighter etc.

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to jrlans)
Post #: 15
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/26/2010 4:47:47 AM   
erstad

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline
quote:

As it is now, I am hard up for pilots in 9/42 and my Japanese opponent seems to be swimming in them. Something ain't right.


I'm about at the same point and don't have a shortage of "OK" pilots. But then I've been training since day 1. There's a bazillion restricted airgroups in the US, and in places like Oz, India, etc. my units which are not in active use are typically training.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 16
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/26/2010 4:55:40 AM   
AcePylut


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline 		How many of these ideas are based on Scenario 2, not Scenario 1?

_____________________________


(in reply to erstad)
Post #: 17
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/26/2010 8:15:35 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

No IJN training method in AE is as gamey as the "Lets bomb an abandoned Chinese base for ever" used by most IJN players in WITP.



whereīs the sense behind this in AE? In my experience crews on "training" are gaining skill FASTER until 70 then crews doing actually opposed bombing runs.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 3/26/2010 8:17:13 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 18
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/26/2010 12:46:03 PM   
Mark Weston

 

Posts: 188
Joined: 2/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface

1. Extracting the pilots with high defence ratings from transport aircraft and transferring them to a fighter squadron to provide them with some A2A training before use in frontline fighter units


Nothing wrong with this. I'm sure re-assignment and cross-training were reasonably common in real life. More to the point, I'm not even sure I see an advantage. Most training choices seem to train Defn and the chosen skill simultaneously anyway.

quote:

2. Extracting the excess pilots from groups due for withdrawl.


Lots of commanders (at all levels) would try to keep the best equipment/personnel of units they were forced to transfer elsewhere. No reason players can't.

quote:

3. Putting floatplane units on sweep trainig to create a pool of pilots that can be used in fighter squadrons


This one's a little closer to the edge of gaminess IMO. Would your average search/recon float-plane really have the flight characteristics for decent A2A training? On the other hand fighter pilots are among the quickest and easiest to train so it's probably not a big deal.

quote:

4. using the 'resize to fit ship' to create a massive single units to increase pilot training numbers


This pushed to the limit is hugely abusable. It's possible to create up to 100 extra training slots per CV. That's an increase in the IJN air capacity by over 1000 in total, which means the ability to create a huge pool of trained pilots and then possibly just as huge a surge in front-line IJN air power (if the factories can keep up). I think that is a genuine game balance issue. Suggested house rule; no air group to be expanded beyond size 27.

quote:

5. extracting all the trained pilots from units due for permanent withdrawl by replacing them with trainees.


Same answer as 2.

quote:

6. similar to 3 and 4. As Japan - Taking some of the very small ship based FP's, resizing on a CS to enlarge from 1 to 24 planes and training pilots for use on other planes (sweep or bombing training)


This is another area I'm unsure of. Japan can quite seriously increase its naval and ASW search capabilities by resizing lots of FP squadrons. Now none of it's free of course, all those pilots and airframes have to be paid for. Again, pushed to the limit it's an approach that could massively increase the size of the IJN air forces. Thoughts?

< Message edited by Mark Weston -- 3/26/2010 12:48:36 PM >

(in reply to Yakface)
Post #: 19
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/26/2010 5:12:26 PM   
bilbow


Posts: 741
Joined: 8/22/2002
From: Concord NH
Status: offline

quote:

4. using the 'resize to fit ship' to create a massive single units to increase pilot training numbers


quote:

This pushed to the limit is hugely abusable. It's possible to create up to 100 extra training slots per CV. That's an increase in the IJN air capacity by over 1000 in total, which means the ability to create a huge pool of trained pilots and then possibly just as huge a surge in front-line IJN air power (if the factories can keep up). I think that is a genuine game balance issue. Suggested house rule; no air group to be expanded beyond size 27.




Pushed to the limit is also pointless, since land-based aviation support for the Japanese is very limited. I expanded a few float groups to 24, same for a couple of small carrier groups, and find I've pretty much maxed out my aviation support in the HI. The resize feature is useful, but also self-limiting.

< Message edited by bilbow -- 3/26/2010 5:13:15 PM >

_____________________________

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile- hoping it will eat him last
- Winston Churchill

(in reply to Mark Weston)
Post #: 20
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/26/2010 5:26:13 PM   
Central Blue

 

Posts: 695
Joined: 8/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface

4. using the 'resize to fit ship' to create a massive single units to increase pilot training numbers



I have tested that "button" as the allies and I don't think any of the groups re-size, so it was interesting to read how well it works for the Japanese.

As for the rest, I am not sure why you would want to do some of the things listed, but it wouldn't concern me.

_____________________________

USS St. Louis firing on Guam, July 1944. The Cardinals and Browns faced each other in the World Series that year

(in reply to Yakface)
Post #: 21
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/26/2010 6:29:22 PM   
Grotius


Posts: 5798
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline
quote:

I have tested that "button" as the allies and I don't think any of the groups re-size, so it was interesting to read how well it works for the Japanese.

For Japan, the button doesn't do anything unless you run a turn with it toggled on. Also, the air unit has to be on board a ship whose aircraft-capacity exceeds the total number of aircraft on it. This procedure doesn't work for the Allies?

_____________________________


(in reply to Central Blue)
Post #: 22
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/26/2010 6:29:59 PM   
Mark Weston

 

Posts: 188
Joined: 2/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bilbow

Pushed to the limit is also pointless, since land-based aviation support for the Japanese is very limited. I expanded a few float groups to 24, same for a couple of small carrier groups, and find I've pretty much maxed out my aviation support in the HI. The resize feature is useful, but also self-limiting.


That's a good point, at least in part. It should limit the Japanese ability to use all those aircraft in combat. However, aviation support doesn't seem to be much of a limitation for training. I've had training air units on heavily overstacked bases show little sign of generating ops losses or maintenance problems.

(in reply to bilbow)
Post #: 23
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/26/2010 8:24:30 PM   
Moss Orleni

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 11/3/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface

1. Extracting the pilots with high defence ratings from transport aircraft and transferring them to a fighter squadron to provide them with some A2A training before use in frontline fighter units

3. Putting floatplane units on sweep trainig to create a pool of pilots that can be used in fighter squadrons

6. similar to 3 and 4. As Japan - Taking some of the very small ship based FP's, resizing on a CS to enlarge from 1 to 24 planes and training pilots for use on other planes (sweep or bombing training)



IIRC, transferring pilots between different types of air units (e.g. bomber pilots to fighter units) is subject to considerable loss of experience/skill.

(in reply to Yakface)
Post #: 24
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/27/2010 5:47:36 AM   
Central Blue

 

Posts: 695
Joined: 8/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Grotius

quote:

I have tested that "button" as the allies and I don't think any of the groups re-size, so it was interesting to read how well it works for the Japanese.

For Japan, the button doesn't do anything unless you run a turn with it toggled on. Also, the air unit has to be on board a ship whose aircraft-capacity exceeds the total number of aircraft on it. This procedure doesn't work for the Allies?


I tested your recipe on the Hornet's fighter group, and it is specifically set to not re-size. If memory serves, I think that all of the US groups are similarly restricted.

I will try it with some Brit groups at the earliest opportunity since I tend to steal their air groups to Colombo before the ships cycle back to the European theater. It seems I have been doing it wrong.

Thanks for the tip!

_____________________________

USS St. Louis firing on Guam, July 1944. The Cardinals and Browns faced each other in the World Series that year

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 25
RE: Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? - 3/28/2010 6:57:32 AM   
Central Blue

 

Posts: 695
Joined: 8/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Central Blue


quote:

ORIGINAL: Grotius

quote:

I have tested that "button" as the allies and I don't think any of the groups re-size, so it was interesting to read how well it works for the Japanese.

For Japan, the button doesn't do anything unless you run a turn with it toggled on. Also, the air unit has to be on board a ship whose aircraft-capacity exceeds the total number of aircraft on it. This procedure doesn't work for the Allies?


I tested your recipe on the Hornet's fighter group, and it is specifically set to not re-size. If memory serves, I think that all of the US groups are similarly restricted.

I will try it with some Brit groups at the earliest opportunity since I tend to steal their air groups to Colombo before the ships cycle back to the European theater. It seems I have been doing it wrong.

Thanks for the tip!



OK. It works for some of the British FAA units. Seems to me that the concept is working as designed by the folks that wrote the stock scenarios using the tools provided by the coders. Folks that think this sort of thing is "gamey" should write their own mods or be real up-front about their house rule needs if they play stock versions.

_____________________________

USS St. Louis firing on Guam, July 1944. The Cardinals and Browns faced each other in the World Series that year

(in reply to Central Blue)
Post #: 26
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Pilot training methods - acceptable or gamey? 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

1.672