Try again

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Try again

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 >> Opponents Wanted >> Try again

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Try again - 1/22/2012 4:22:59 PM

Dan Nichols

Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline

I started a game last year and ended up not continuing due to illness. I have spend 2 months+ recovering and feel that I am ready to play. My earlier opponent and I have exchanged passwords and he has gone on to another game.

I am interesting in a campaign game and I am willing to play either side, most any scenario, and any house rules. I am also willing to play with no house rules since it appears that the house rule sets I have seen benefit either one side or the other with the end result tending to be nil.

My preference would be to play the Allies in DBB scenario 28B game with no house rules.

[edit] I am using the latest beta version from michaelm and intend to use it.

< Message edited by Dan Nichols -- 1/22/2012 6:02:40 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: Try again - 1/24/2012 3:32:18 AM

XENXEN

Posts: 53
Joined: 12/1/2004
From: Denmark
Status: offline

I will fight you, I send you a PM with a email if you are interested

(in reply to Dan Nichols)

Post #: 2

RE: Try again - 1/24/2012 3:44:52 AM

Dan Nichols

Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline

PM sent back to you.

(in reply to XENXEN)

Post #: 3

RE: Try again - 1/26/2012 2:05:23 AM

Dan Nichols

Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline

I have decided to not play a game. It seems there may be serious problems with large scale air combat and it seems that the developers are not going to fix it.

edited in bold, I am unsure if there are problems or not and I am awaiting some resolution.

< Message edited by Dan Nichols -- 1/26/2012 3:17:05 PM >

(in reply to Dan Nichols)

Post #: 4

RE: Try again - 1/28/2012 2:31:48 AM

sdhundt

Posts: 300
Joined: 9/6/2002
From: Milwaukee, WI, USA
Status: offline

I don't know of the problems you speak of...Could you advise me of the problem areas....I haven't done much close research of the Beta fixes but if you have noticed major problems I also would like to be made aware of them, Thanks.

(in reply to Dan Nichols)

Post #: 5

RE: Try again - 1/28/2012 3:47:31 PM

Dan Nichols

Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline

Look at the Beta thread, GreyJoys and Raders AARs, and here. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3019739

(in reply to sdhundt)

Post #: 6

RE: Try again - 1/30/2012 12:39:52 AM

zuluhour

Posts: 5244
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline

Just my 2 cents but it just looks like the turkey shoot in reverse. The allies are certainly capable of putting up a thousand bomber raid, it is a simulation, why not allow the Japanese the possibility?

(in reply to Dan Nichols)

Post #: 7

RE: Try again - 1/30/2012 1:01:45 AM

Dan Nichols

Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

Just my 2 cents but it just looks like the turkey shoot in reverse. The allies are certainly capable of putting up a thousand bomber raid, it is a simulation, why not allow the Japanese the possibility?

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I have no problem with large raids by either side, but if the CAP is not working right, it's not working right. Note, I am not sure there is a problem but there reports of some and the developers did say they were not going to fix it. I am still waiting to see if there is more information that arises.

(in reply to zuluhour)

Post #: 8

RE: Try again - 1/30/2012 5:23:14 AM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

Dan, FWIIW, what Michael tries to do is get a good estimate where the upper limit of combat rounds should lie
to ensure realistic CAP even if 1000+ planes are engaged.
This salready seems to be the case as long as experienced players set it up, setting up CAP depending on opposition
is a sciences on its own.

There might be an issue with a very high number of planes, but its nothing already confirmed as bug or even in consent
whether its realistic as is. It should not prevent you from starting a game.

Do not forget that such a game behaviour affects both sides, and even if it turns out as a bug you�ll have a long way down the
road until it starts to impact your play, and this only if you do not plan accordingly.

_____________________________

(in reply to Dan Nichols)

Post #: 9

RE: Try again - 1/30/2012 1:35:12 PM

zuluhour

Posts: 5244
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline

Agree with LoBaron. +1

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 10

RE: Try again - 1/30/2012 2:16:37 PM

Dan Nichols

Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline

So, is anyone up to playing me? I am set on using DBB scenario 28B with extended map and stacking limits. As far as I can tell, only DBB and RA4.0 have the CP guns upgrade for more realistic AA results. I want to use the latest unofficial beta from michaelm. I suppose a few house rules can be used, but I don't want very many of them. I would like to play as teh Allies, but will play as Japan.

(in reply to zuluhour)

Post #: 11

RE: Try again - 1/30/2012 4:32:57 PM

castor troy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dan Nichols

I have decided to not play a game. It seems there may be serious problems with large scale air combat and it seems that the developers are not going to fix it.

edited in bold, I am unsure if there are problems or not and I am awaiting some resolution.

you could still enjoy the game until late 44/mid 45 though. Not that I want to defend the air routines too much but they are better than WITP's so if you have played WITP, you should really enjoy AE.

_____________________________

(in reply to Dan Nichols)

Post #: 12

RE: Try again - 1/30/2012 4:35:31 PM

castor troy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Dan, FWIIW, what Michael tries to do is get a good estimate where the upper limit of combat rounds should lie
to ensure realistic CAP even if 1000+ planes are engaged.
This salready seems to be the case as long as experienced players set it up, setting up CAP depending on opposition
is a sciences on its own.

There might be an issue with a very high number of planes, but its nothing already confirmed as bug or even in consent
whether its realistic as is. It should not prevent you from starting a game.

Do not forget that such a game behaviour affects both sides, and even if it turns out as a bug you�ll have a long way down the
road until it starts to impact your play, and this only if you do not plan accordingly.

sorry, but this is not the reason why 1500+ fighters on Cap aren't able to deal with 300 incoming aircraft and I am sure if you go and take a deep look into yourselve you know it too. If you don't, I may well dig up one of my late war turns with my 1500+ Hellcat/Corsair Cap and let you - the only expert - take the whatever setting and have the results posted. But yeah, it's not a bug and should not prevent ppl from starting a game as 90% of the PBEM never reach 45 anyway.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 1/30/2012 4:37:49 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 13

RE: Try again - 1/30/2012 6:07:37 PM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

Its ok CT, I was just trying to squash doubts about later war playability of WitP AE, as obviousely
some newer players got second thoughts on this topic induced by some recent posts from the usual drama
queens around here.

_____________________________

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 14

RE: Try again - 1/30/2012 10:14:08 PM

zuluhour

Posts: 5244
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Dan, FWIIW, what Michael tries to do is get a good estimate where the upper limit of combat rounds should lie
to ensure realistic CAP even if 1000+ planes are engaged.
This salready seems to be the case as long as experienced players set it up, setting up CAP depending on opposition
is a sciences on its own.

There might be an issue with a very high number of planes, but its nothing already confirmed as bug or even in consent
whether its realistic as is. It should not prevent you from starting a game.

Do not forget that such a game behaviour affects both sides, and even if it turns out as a bug you�ll have a long way down the
road until it starts to impact your play, and this only if you do not plan accordingly.

sorry, but this is not the reason why 1500+ fighters on Cap aren't able to deal with 300 incoming aircraft and I am sure if you go and take a deep look into yourselve you know it too. If you don't, I may well dig up one of my late war turns with my 1500+ Hellcat/Corsair Cap and let you - the only expert - take the whatever setting and have the results posted. But yeah, it's not a bug and should not prevent ppl from starting a game as 90% of the PBEM never reach 45 anyway.

quote:

sorry, but this is not the reason why 1500+ fighters on Cap aren't able to deal with 300 incoming aircraft and I am sure if you go and take a deep look into yourselve you know it too. If you don't, I may well dig up one of my late war turns with my 1500+ Hellcat/Corsair Cap and let you - the only expert - take the whatever setting and have the results posted. But yeah, it's not a bug and should not prevent ppl from starting a game as 90% of the PBEM never reach 45 anyway.

I may be sending you a PM in two years for advice.