Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001

Look at the combat result from Greyjoy and Radar's game. Great game so far. But really ruined by the system.

What part of the system ruined the game. Over at GreyJoy's AAR both LoBaron and myself have provided extensive explanations how GreyJoy's own decisions contributed to the outcome. This is a complex game and it requires deep study to play it properly, a bit like fighting a war in real life. It is not the fault of the game system if one player has a better grasp of game mechanics than the other. Again it is not the system's fault when the wrong strategy and tactics is implemented.

Yeah, yeah I know it's now wise to stick your nose into massive Jap LBA range. But the Allied players have to do this sooner or later.

And what evidence can you adduce to support your claim that "Allied players have to do this sooner or later". I hope your not of the Field Marshal Haig school of thought and competence. Luckily for the system, there are several players with the requisite skill and creativity who constantly demonstrate how the game can be played without constant frontal assaults on narrow fronts.

Leaking cap works really well in early war, but it apparently broke at the later war stage when thousands of planes involved.

Leaking cap works just as well late war as it does early war. The system does not change due to the passage of time. Leaking CAP, whether in December 1941 or September 1944, can never substitute for a properly structured defensive zone.

So are you claiming that the result is due to the failure of leaking CAP, a claim not made by GreyJoy who most definitely did not rely on leaking CAP to provide his primary defense? Maybe you have some other instance of the failure of leaking CAP to achieve what it cannot do even in December 1941. If so, you really ought to provide the evidence to support your claim.

And the key issue is not even the leaking cap, but the coordination.

Whose coordination was a problem? It couldn't be GreyJoy because coordination of CAP does not exist at any stage of the game, it is a concept which only applies to offensive strike packages. Unless of course you are confusing CAP being out of position (a point extensively commented on in the AAR) with coordination. If so, it isn't the system's fault that you don't understand air combat.

That leaves us only with you claiming that the degree of coordination achieved by rader is a problem. Let's get this perfectly understood; you don't like that rader skillfully achieved combination on his first strike package. He was considerably less successful on subsequent strike packages but that is presumably OK, so you like one outcome of the system but dislike another outcome of the system. Why should rader's skillful play be penalised when his opponent has never properly addressed the real factors which allow rader to assemble such a potent strike package.

When in the hell did you see either Jap or Allies can deliver a 600+ planes COORDINATED strike in any time of the war? In Pearl harbor Japs delivered 2 wave of 108 planes in each wave with their best Pilots ever. And I can't image they can do this at the later war stage with less capable pilots.

Every player on this forum demands that the most minute details of military hardware accurately represents the capabilities and deficiencies of the quipment of the era. Same regarding doctrine. Same regarding strengths and weakness of historical figures. But those same people who complain about the accuracy of esotoric details are quite willing to exploit the engine which because of the inherent game abstractions, will always be prone to exploitation.

The reason why 600+ plane coordinated strikes did not occur, as you claim, is due to several reasons, all of which are ultimately attributable to how players play the game.

(a) unrealistic tempo of operations, and yet players complain if an aircraft has a service rating of 3
(b) the overly simplified logistical system in play which allows fantasy operations to be mounted
(c) the failure of players to adopt the correct strategy and tactics to limit their opponent's capabilities
(d) the ability of players to disregard the historical political and home front limits on conducting the war

It is very hypocritical for players to demand historical accuracy from the system and proceed to disregard such historical accuracy in their own play, and then proceed to blame the system. For let us be perfectly clear, every game engine can be exploited.


The same things applies to Allies too. The coordination just group too many planes together no matter the plane type, speed, etc...

I don't think you understand anything about coordination. Did you note the altitude flown by the strike package? Did you note just how standardised the aircraft models were? Did you note the actual airfields the strike packge few from? Plus contrary to your comment in the preceding paragraph, pilot skill is not a factor but then how would you know the actual skill levels of the Japanese pilots.

Next time you criticise the coordination achieved by rader, try to remember all the complaints regularly made by players who fail to achieve satisfactory coordination. Or are you claiming that rader is playing a special exe. file, or is it maybe the other players with the special exe. file who fail to achieve coordination. 'Fess up, which is the true system solely responsible for this alleged unsatisfactory state of affairs.

And any time this kind of coordination shows up it means a total demolition or either Jap/Allies carrier fleet. Which is also very unlikely happened in the real life.

So what do you call Midway and the Mariannas Turkey Shoot. Those outcomes were produced by far fewer strike packages.


And hereby I call for a major modification of the air combat model for the middle to late stage of war. Otherwise I may have to give up this game.

Yes, in light of the quality of your critique I do think it would be best for you give up this game.

Please leave your opinions below.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred



Every player on this forum demands that the most minute details of military hardware accurately represents the capabilities and deficiencies of the quipment of the era. Same regarding doctrine. Same regarding strengths and weakness of historical figures. But those same people who complain about the accuracy of esotoric details are quite willing to exploit the engine which because of the inherent game abstractions, will always be prone to exploitation.

The reason why 600+ plane coordinated strikes did not occur, as you claim, is due to several reasons, all of which are ultimately attributable to how players play the game.

(a) unrealistic tempo of operations, and yet players complain if an aircraft has a service rating of 3
(b) the overly simplified logistical system in play which allows fantasy operations to be mounted
(c) the failure of players to adopt the correct strategy and tactics to limit their opponent's capabilities
(d) the ability of players to disregard the historical political and home front limits on conducting the war

It is very hypocritical for players to demand historical accuracy from the system and proceed to disregard such historical accuracy in their own play, and then proceed to blame the system. For let us be perfectly clear, every game engine can be exploited.

Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001

Look at the combat result from Greyjoy and Radar's game. Great game so far. But really ruined by the system.

What part of the system ruined the game. Over at GreyJoy's AAR both LoBaron and myself have provided extensive explanations how GreyJoy's own decisions contributed to the outcome. This is a complex game and it requires deep study to play it properly, a bit like fighting a war in real life. It is not the fault of the game system if one player has a better grasp of game mechanics than the other. Again it is not the system's fault when the wrong strategy and tactics is implemented.

The A2A model is ruining the game. And don't mention the land combat mechanism.

Yeah, yeah I know it's now wise to stick your nose into massive Jap LBA range. But the Allied players have to do this sooner or later.

And what evidence can you adduce to support your claim that "Allied players have to do this sooner or later". I hope your not of the Field Marshal Haig school of thought and competence. Luckily for the system, there are several players with the requisite skill and creativity who constantly demonstrate how the game can be played without constant frontal assaults on narrow fronts.

Leaking cap works really well in early war, but it apparently broke at the later war stage when thousands of planes involved.

Leaking cap works just as well late war as it does early war. The system does not change due to the passage of time. Leaking CAP, whether in December 1941 or September 1944, can never substitute for a properly structured defensive zone.

Yeah it works really well when 1000 planes on cap(300 in the air at least) shot down 50 out 700 planes in the first wave.

So are you claiming that the result is due to the failure of leaking CAP, a claim not made by GreyJoy who most definitely did not rely on leaking CAP to provide his primary defense? Maybe you have some other instance of the failure of leaking CAP to achieve what it cannot do even in December 1941. If so, you really ought to provide the evidence to support your claim.

Yeah I have done many tests about attack and CAP with the stock EXE and modified EXE and I post in the forum but I guess you are too busy to see it.


And the key issue is not even the leaking cap, but the coordination.

Whose coordination was a problem? It couldn't be GreyJoy because coordination of CAP does not exist at any stage of the game, it is a concept which only applies to offensive strike packages. Unless of course you are confusing CAP being out of position (a point extensively commented on in the AAR) with coordination. If so, it isn't the system's fault that you don't understand air combat.

That leaves us only with you claiming that the degree of coordination achieved by rader is a problem. Let's get this perfectly understood; you don't like that rader skillfully achieved combination on his first strike package. He was considerably less successful on subsequent strike packages but that is presumably OK, so you like one outcome of the system but dislike another outcome of the system. Why should rader's skillful play be penalised when his opponent has never properly addressed the real factors which allow rader to assemble such a potent strike package.

Radar is a respectful and skillful opponent, and my comment is not aiming at any specific player. It's just the unrealistic number of planes in one wave. No matter how hard you tried, how well you know about this game, it should just not happen when you try to simulate WWII combat.

When in the hell did you see either Jap or Allies can deliver a 600+ planes COORDINATED strike in any time of the war? In Pearl harbor Japs delivered 2 wave of 108 planes in each wave with their best Pilots ever. And I can't image they can do this at the later war stage with less capable pilots.

Every player on this forum demands that the most minute details of military hardware accurately represents the capabilities and deficiencies of the quipment of the era. Same regarding doctrine. Same regarding strengths and weakness of historical figures. But those same people who complain about the accuracy of esotoric details are quite willing to exploit the engine which because of the inherent game abstractions, will always be prone to exploitation.

The reason why 600+ plane coordinated strikes did not occur, as you claim, is due to several reasons, all of which are ultimately attributable to how players play the game.

(a) unrealistic tempo of operations, and yet players complain if an aircraft has a service rating of 3
(b) the overly simplified logistical system in play which allows fantasy operations to be mounted
(c) the failure of players to adopt the correct strategy and tactics to limit their opponent's capabilities
(d) the ability of players to disregard the historical political and home front limits on conducting the war

It is very hypocritical for players to demand historical accuracy from the system and proceed to disregard such historical accuracy in their own play, and then proceed to blame the system. For let us be perfectly clear, every game engine can be exploited.

It's all about how the game engine limits the unrealistic happenings. And it's doable by current engine. In WITP I was attacked by 1200 coordinated Jap carrier aircraft in a single wave, and NONE of the 1200 planes piloted by 80 exp pilots pass through the CAP. NONE of them. I don't call this realistic either. The current AE A2A model just go to far on the other end.

The same things applies to Allies too. The coordination just group too many planes together no matter the plane type, speed, etc...

I don't think you understand anything about coordination. Did you note the altitude flown by the strike package? Did you note just how standardised the aircraft models were? Did you note the actual airfields the strike packge few from? Plus contrary to your comment in the preceding paragraph, pilot skill is not a factor but then how would you know the actual skill levels of the Japanese pilots.

Next time you criticise the coordination achieved by rader, try to remember all the complaints regularly made by players who fail to achieve satisfactory coordination. Or are you claiming that rader is playing a special exe. file, or is it maybe the other players with the special exe. file who fail to achieve coordination. 'Fess up, which is the true system solely responsible for this alleged unsatisfactory state of affairs.

And any time this kind of coordination shows up it means a total demolition or either Jap/Allies carrier fleet. Which is also very unlikely happened in the real life.

So what do you call Midway and the Mariannas Turkey Shoot. Those outcomes were produced by far fewer strike packages.

Excuse me, how many planes involves in the Midway, how many Japs fighter on CAP at that time? The game engine simulates the small to middle carrier engagement perfectly. But when things go to later war and thousands of planes involved, it just failed


And hereby I call for a major modification of the air combat model for the middle to late stage of war. Otherwise I may have to give up this game.

Yes, in light of the quality of your critique I do think it would be best for you give up this game.

yeah you bet

Please leave your opinions below.

Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

Hades, I see your point and I dont think the actual game rules are perfect in this case. However you overuse the word realistic by a large decree. Realism is gradual, one does not simply have it or not.
Just saying. No offence meant just my two Credits <--(Currency in the SW universe)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
What part of the system ruined the game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluebook

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
What part of the system ruined the game.

The part where 200 Hellcats and Corsairs on CAP and in position (lets ignore, like you do, that of 1200 fighters on 60% CAP, only 1/3 of those 60% are actually...you know...on CAP) attacks 300 bombers and 300 fighters and only manages to shoot down 7 fighters and 15 bombers in 40 minutes.

THAT is what you defend. While being both rude and condescending at the same time no less!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluebook

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
What part of the system ruined the game.

The part where 200 Hellcats and Corsairs on CAP and in position (lets ignore, like you do, that of 1200 fighters on 60% CAP, only 1/3 of those 60% are actually...you know...on CAP) attacks 300 bombers and 300 fighters and only manages to shoot down 7 fighters and 15 bombers in 40 minutes.

THAT is what you defend. While being both rude and condescending at the same time no less!

Please try to get your facts right first.

Others have shown the correct numbers.

Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluebook

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluebook

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
What part of the system ruined the game.

The part where 200 Hellcats and Corsairs on CAP and in position (lets ignore, like you do, that of 1200 fighters on 60% CAP, only 1/3 of those 60% are actually...you know...on CAP) attacks 300 bombers and 300 fighters and only manages to shoot down 7 fighters and 15 bombers in 40 minutes.

THAT is what you defend. While being both rude and condescending at the same time no less!

Please try to get your facts right first.

Others have shown the correct numbers.

Alfred

The "correct" numbers are guesses and estimates, remember that.

But even using them, the system is stil flawed. 200 Hellcats and Corsairs on CAP and in position should shoot down more than 50 bombers and escorts during a 40 minute engagement.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7
You complain about results that are (in your opinion) too few shot down, while I have seen battles that had (in my opinion) far too many shot down. In the end it balances out, one raid will be very successful, the next may be a total disaster. Toward the end game, it becomes skewed in favor of the Allies (not terribly unrealistic) to an extent, as the more capable airframes with well trained pilots are harder to overcome with raw skill of the Japanese pilots in obsolete aircraft.

quote:

ORIGINAL: hades1001
By examine the facts, we have:
84 fighters: airborne
303 fighters: standby
259 fighters: scrambling

and they have about 40 minutes to react.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluebook

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluebook

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
What part of the system ruined the game.

The part where 200 Hellcats and Corsairs on CAP and in position (lets ignore, like you do, that of 1200 fighters on 60% CAP, only 1/3 of those 60% are actually...you know...on CAP) attacks 300 bombers and 300 fighters and only manages to shoot down 7 fighters and 15 bombers in 40 minutes.

THAT is what you defend. While being both rude and condescending at the same time no less!

Please try to get your facts right first.

Others have shown the correct numbers.

Alfred

The "correct" numbers are guesses and estimates, remember that.

But even using them, the system is stil flawed. 200 Hellcats and Corsairs on CAP and in position should shoot down more than 50 bombers and escorts during a 40 minute engagement.