PBEM Question

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

PBEM Question

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 >> PBEM Question

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

PBEM Question - 3/3/2011 1:18:21 PM

DOCUP

Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline

Hi guys, never played a PBEM game before (never in any game), but I think once I get some more exp in the game I might try. So have a few questions.

1. I see alot of HR's about Allies not being able to move around there units (exceptions are TF's at see). I can understand not moving many ships or lcu's. Why can't a few ships or lcu's be moved, trained or whatever? The Japanese get to change there plans to some extent.

2. I have yet to see any mention to being able to move Chinese units. Do most players move or mess with them on the first turn?

3. Please keep this civil, this is not about JFB or AFB. Just me wondering and gathering some intel on a PBEM game.

Thanks
doc

Post #: 1

RE: PBEM Question - 3/3/2011 1:43:26 PM

beppi

Posts: 382
Joined: 3/11/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Hi guys, never played a PBEM game before (never in any game), but I think once I get some more exp in the game I might try. So have a few questions.

1. I see alot of HR's about Allies not being able to move around there units (exceptions are TF's at see). I can understand not moving many ships or lcu's. Why can't a few ships or lcu's be moved, trained or whatever? The Japanese get to change there plans to some extent.

2. I have yet to see any mention to being able to move Chinese units. Do most players move or mess with them on the first turn?

3. Please keep this civil, this is not about JFB or AFB. Just me wondering and gathering some intel on a PBEM game.

Thanks
doc

^
1.) More or less the restriction on ships is related to Manila and PH. If you put your subs into TFs at Manila you cant sink them in the Harbor. At PH if you create a lot of small TFs with you BBs and send them to all available directions you can save quite a lot of units. If you go head on with KB in a Surface combat you can mess up a lot of things. In addition you can try to disrupt KB with PT/DD Fleets to eat up his Op Points or force it to evade and move around. In general you can do to much nasty things with your ships.

You can start a premature retreat in Thailand with your LCUs and mess around with them. You can move your undamaged planes prior to any Japanese attack. In general it is not necessary to shift around you Ships/LCU/Planes prior to the outbreak of the war.

2.) For myself i do not mess around with my Chinese LCU on turn one. Again not really necessary as you cant to the perfect move with them. It takes time to establish your defense there so no need to hurry.

< Message edited by beppi -- 3/3/2011 1:44:43 PM >

(in reply to DOCUP)

Post #: 2

RE: PBEM Question - 3/3/2011 1:49:36 PM

Kaletsch2007

Posts: 142
Joined: 4/2/2008
Status: offline

There are things, which are not coded in the game. For example restricted units may still leave their AOR by normal movement over land. These has to be specified by HR's.
Another example are the units in the DIE. Do they have to fight today or another day ?

China is somewhat different, as the war was already ongoing.

(in reply to DOCUP)

Post #: 3

RE: PBEM Question - 3/3/2011 1:53:01 PM

DOCUP

Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline

In my opinion it woud be gamey (cheating) to try and attack the KB on Dec 7. or move all the ships out of PH on the 6th. Honestly how many of us would leave all the BB's in one port with very lil cap etc. But I'm an trying to get a feel for how players feel and operate their PBEMS.

Thanks Beppi

doc

(in reply to beppi)

Post #: 4

RE: PBEM Question - 3/3/2011 2:16:50 PM

Cavalry Corp

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline

DOCUP

PBEM is the way to go provided you have a reliable opponent, who will fight on as you to must. The AI is ok for learning but nothing beats knowing someone else suffers their defeat and your defeat with human eyes. Think of PBEM as an AI that takes longer to make a turn. A PC is just to roll the dice , nothing more. In my WITP game my allied opponents lost all his CV in July 42 and still carried on ( hats off to him ) and is now on an interesting offensive and its now mid June 44.

If you feel uncomfortable about any house rules on Dec 7th ( which I agree should mean no allied naval units in port may be issued orders ) then you can simply start the DEC 8 SCN.

In my experience every Jap thinks they will do better by starting on Dec 7th. Some do not attack PH but Manilla to get to some of the allied subs there as thse guys will cause a lot of trouble later.

In my experience of twenty yeras of gaming and 10 on the PC, AE is at the very top of the tree. It can be improved and will be but its pretty good now.

Cav

.

(in reply to DOCUP)

Post #: 5

RE: PBEM Question - 3/3/2011 2:26:53 PM

beppi

Posts: 382
Joined: 3/11/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

In my opinion it woud be gamey (cheating) to try and attack the KB on Dec 7. or move all the ships out of PH on the 6th. Honestly how many of us would leave all the BB's in one port with very lil cap etc. But I'm an trying to get a feel for how players feel and operate their PBEMS.

Thanks Beppi

doc

That always depends. For my part i play a PBEM for fun and we often discuss different moves regarding being gamey. I want to enjoy the PBEM experience as long as possible so i am always open to discussions with my partner. We adopted a lot of rules during the game (night 4E AF attacks, PT TF numbers and so on). The engine is no where near perfect and leaves a lot of ways to create gamey situations. Thats what HR are for.

When you start a game usually you want to enjoy it as long as possible so i would not create any TFs in PH even without such a HR. But HR makes it clear, don't even think about it and often it is not black/whit. In Pearl almost everyone would agree to not interfere with the KB strike but whats about all the other landings (Wake landings interruption for example). The HR just provides a smooth start for both sides in a game. There are more than enough following turns to do shiny strategic moves or awful mistakes.

Overall in an PBEM you spent 100 of hours with your partner and you should always try to get the most fun for both sides. For example i restricted myself to no invade through the SRA as i count the Route Darwin/Timor into the SRA with alle the lvl 9 bases as to easy. I would not put a HR for that cause then he could just strip everything empty there, so it is
an non HR restriction.

< Message edited by beppi -- 3/3/2011 2:28:51 PM >

(in reply to DOCUP)

Post #: 6

RE: PBEM Question - 3/4/2011 5:56:50 AM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: beppi

Overall in an PBEM you spent 100 of hours with your partner and you should always try to get the most fun for both sides. For example i restricted myself to no invade through the SRA as i count the Route Darwin/Timor into the SRA with alle the lvl 9 bases as to easy. I would not put a HR for that cause then he could just strip everything empty there, so it is
an non HR restriction

100 hours? What game are you playing? It must be more than 1 hour per turn x 1200 turns = 1200 hours (ok, half if you play 2-day turns, but an hour is probably a short turn).

EDIT: I just realized that you might have meant 100s plural...

< Message edited by rader -- 3/4/2011 5:57:28 AM >

(in reply to beppi)

Post #: 7

RE: PBEM Question - 3/4/2011 6:26:10 AM

CV 2

Posts: 376
Joined: 2/21/2011
Status: offline

Actually my usual turn (after the first week of the game) takes 20 mins. IF I get a turn at least once a day and can keep my head into what I am doing. An hour for 2 day turns (yes, they take 3 times longer because you have to be more careful

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 8

RE: PBEM Question - 3/4/2011 8:22:12 AM

beppi

Posts: 382
Joined: 3/11/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

quote:

ORIGINAL: beppi

Overall in an PBEM you spent 100 of hours with your partner and you should always try to get the most fun for both sides. For example i restricted myself to no invade through the SRA as i count the Route Darwin/Timor into the SRA with alle the lvl 9 bases as to easy. I would not put a HR for that cause then he could just strip everything empty there, so it is
an non HR restriction

100 hours? What game are you playing? It must be more than 1 hour per turn x 1200 turns = 1200 hours (ok, half if you play 2-day turns, but an hour is probably a short turn). EDIT: I just realized that you might have meant 100s plural...

Yes i meant 100s :), and yes i cant get to over 1000 hours for a PBEM game. I always try a little bit to myself about the time it consumes because i think if my girlfriend would know it she would kill me.

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 9

RE: PBEM Question - 3/8/2011 4:43:48 PM

DOCUP

Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline

Thanks for your input guys. I am useing the ai to learn the game, and intend to play a PBEM game. Yea all this is to me is fun. I wouldn't want to ruin the fun for someone else by being gamey. Its all fun and games right. Since this is my first matrix game I wanted to build a lil exp before, I go into a PBEM game. I would hate to be the first AFB to lose everything lol.

thanks again

doc

< Message edited by DOCUP -- 3/8/2011 4:52:11 PM >

(in reply to beppi)

Post #: 10

RE: PBEM Question - 3/8/2011 4:58:53 PM

Dixie

Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Thanks for your input guys. I am useing the ai to learn the game, and intend to play a PBEM game. Yea all this is to me is fun. I wouldn't want to ruin the fun for someone else by being gamey. Its all fun and games right. Since this is my first matrix game I wanted to build a lil exp before, I go into a PBEM game. I would hate to be the first AFB to lose everything lol.

thanks again

doc

I doubt you'd be the first. Or the last.

_____________________________

Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to DOCUP)

Post #: 11

RE: PBEM Question - 3/8/2011 5:33:40 PM

DOCUP

Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline

Thanks Dixie that makes me feel a lil better lol

doc

(in reply to Dixie)

Post #: 12

RE: PBEM Question - 3/8/2011 6:33:15 PM

Nikademus

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Hi guys, never played a PBEM game before (never in any game), but I think once I get some more exp in the game I might try. So have a few questions.

1. I see alot of HR's about Allies not being able to move around there units (exceptions are TF's at see). I can understand not moving many ships or lcu's. Why can't a few ships or lcu's be moved, trained or whatever? The Japanese get to change there plans to some extent.

It all depends on player tastes. Myself...i have no problem with player one (japan) altering movements on turn one while i remain static.

quote:

(2. I have yet to see any mention to being able to move Chinese units. Do most players move or mess with them on the first turn?

on average, players tend to be very active in China. For player one, he'd be foolish not to take advantage of isolated starting Chinese LCU's. For player two....he/she needs to reorg to prevent/minimize said overrunning of isolated units and build a defense.

_____________________________

(in reply to DOCUP)

Post #: 13

RE: PBEM Question - 3/9/2011 6:34:36 AM

bradfordkay

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

1. I see alot of HR's about Allies not being able to move around there units (exceptions are TF's at see). I can understand not moving many ships or lcu's. Why can't a few ships or lcu's be moved, trained or whatever? The Japanese get to change there plans to some extent.

For me, it's a little more complicated. If the Japanese player is willing to keep his initial attacks at the periphery of the allied positions, then I am perfectly happy with issuing orders only to ships already at sea. If he wishes to use the magical first turn movement bonus to strike more deeply into the SRA(is this valid only in WITP and not AE?), then I feel that the allied player would have a little more warning - those TFs would likely have been sighted and thus the allies would have been better prepared: CAP up and running, naval units on alert - new TFs issued orders, civilian shipping notified of possible aggressive moves by the Japanese empire and the like.

< Message edited by bradfordkay -- 3/9/2011 6:35:57 AM >

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 14

RE: PBEM Question - 3/9/2011 11:17:57 AM

Cavalry Corp

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline

I think most people are happy for air units to be assigned to what ever

Dec 7 was a suprise and restricting allied units in ports is reasonable.

You still get to save TF Z .

In my two day game pbem scn 2 , TF Z managed to still seek out the jap SFTF with inconclusive results, 4BB went down at PH but sevearl airsrikes were made against the KB ( no hits ) . At Manila the air sTrikes sank one allied SS. The next turn the Betty and Nell got a bloody nose

CAV

(in reply to bradfordkay)

Post #: 15

RE: PBEM Question - 3/9/2011 12:52:48 PM

Zigurat666

Posts: 374
Joined: 9/26/2008
Status: offline

PBEM are the best and I dont really play the AI at all,but you need to prepare yourself for these kinds of things...
Played 8 months of gametime then after a successful port strike recieved this.

"From ********
I'm sorry, but I can not accept that turn. It is not realistic. Your TF could not possibly transverse the area between NZ and OZ without being spotted. Either the search program is still broken or the game design is. The KB is powerful enough without an invisibility cloak. "

That was the end of that...my opponent went on a research hiatus and is not a big communicator. For the record though it was "I" who quit after asking him a few times if he was going to continue.

_____________________________

(in reply to DOCUP)

Post #: 16

RE: PBEM Question - 3/9/2011 4:47:04 PM

Cavalry Corp

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline

I think you should name that person ... I assume they werte losing ??

And there should be a data base of players who are honest and reliable .

(in reply to Zigurat666)

Post #: 17

RE: PBEM Question - 3/9/2011 4:49:10 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

I think you should name that person ... I assume they werte losing ??

And there should be a data base of players who are honest and reliable .

The more I read about stunts like this the more I agree with this idea. I'd like to try PBEM someday, but stories like this . . .

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Cavalry Corp)

Post #: 18

RE: PBEM Question - 3/9/2011 4:53:29 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zigurat666

PBEM are the best and I dont really play the AI at all,but you need to prepare yourself for these kinds of things...
Played 8 months of gametime then after a successful port strike recieved this.

"From ********
I'm sorry, but I can not accept that turn. It is not realistic. Your TF could not possibly transverse the area between NZ and OZ without being spotted. Either the search program is still broken or the game design is. The KB is powerful enough without an invisibility cloak. "

That was the end of that...my opponent went on a research hiatus and is not a big communicator. For the record though it was "I" who quit after asking him a few times if he was going to continue.

Eesh...bad karma ad infinitum.

_____________________________

(in reply to Zigurat666)

Post #: 19

RE: PBEM Question - 3/9/2011 5:23:58 PM

jeffk3510

Posts: 4132
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline

Reason uno I don't play PBEM....Im sure theyre great... but

_____________________________

Life is tough. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be.

Currently chasing three kids around the Midwest.

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 20

RE: PBEM Question - 3/9/2011 5:24:58 PM

Cavalry Corp

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline

I think there should be gold standard players recommended by at least two other players as reliable and decent.
They should have a gold medal by the rank thing by the number of posts

Cav

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 21

RE: PBEM Question - 3/9/2011 5:27:28 PM

Zigurat666

Posts: 374
Joined: 9/26/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

I think you should name that person ... I assume they werte losing ??

And there should be a data base of players who are honest and reliable .

The more I read about stunts like this the more I agree with this idea. I'd like to try PBEM someday, but stories like this . . .

What would be the point in naming? Whats done is done and there was that list before. I,m not into the segregation list thingy anyways because I find it extremely biased (I consider myself a good opponent,but have gotten bad raps before since its my word vs their word in the cyberworld) and probably wouldnt make it on there anyways as I,m not known well enough

_____________________________

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 22

RE: PBEM Question - 3/9/2011 5:42:26 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zigurat666

What would be the point in naming? Whats done is done and there was that list before. I,m not into the segregation list thingy anyways because I find it extremely biased (I consider myself a good opponent,but have gotten bad raps before since its my word vs their word in the cyberworld) and probably wouldnt make it on there anyways as I,m not known well enough

He might come back, not have changed his spots, and a potential opponent might take a chance, or not, based on your experience. I don't think how well known the reporter is should matter.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Zigurat666)

Post #: 23

RE: PBEM Question - 3/9/2011 7:20:08 PM

Lifer

Posts: 384
Joined: 6/8/2003
From: Caprica
Status: offline

I think if you're unsure of your opponent or if you are suitable for a PBEM game, go for a short scenario, no HRs, no restriction type of contest. Play for a while to see if you and your opponent mesh then let loose with a GC. The idea of references makes it sound too much like a job.

_____________________________

Man does not enter battle to fight, but for victory. He does everything that he can to avoid the first and obtain the second.
Ardant du Picq

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 24

RE: PBEM Question - 3/9/2011 9:51:58 PM

CaptDave

Posts: 659
Joined: 6/21/2002
From: Federal Way, WA
Status: offline

FWIW, I'm just starting a new PBEM and our only house rules are the usual about restricted units and the first turn movement. However, as the Allies I am allowed to create small coastal/port patrols, since they were -- or in some cases should have been -- active in real life but aren't in the game. Just because Kimmel was idiotic enough to have a predictable schedule doesn't mean I have to be! I fully agree, though, that if you want a somewhat-close-but-not-identical-to-historical first turn, the restrictions are reasonable.

For the record, the rest of our rules are simply a modified Golden Rule (the original, not the financial version): "don't do unto others what you wouldn't want them to do unto you in terms of gaminess."

(in reply to DOCUP)

Post #: 25

RE: PBEM Question - 3/10/2011 2:49:09 AM

ADB123

Posts: 1559
Joined: 8/18/2009
Status: offline

quote:

If he wishes to use the magical first turn movement bonus to strike more deeply into the SRA(is this valid only in WITP and not AE?),

Yes, in AE the Japanese player no longer has the ability to create TFs that will fly across the Pacific on Turn 1. Only some of the existing TFs will still do that for Game reasons (the KB, obviously), but if you want to send the 4th Division down to Port Moresby on Turn 1 it isn't going to get any farther out of Osaka Harbor than it would on Turn 2, or 3 , etc...

(in reply to bradfordkay)

Post #: 26