Kull
Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline
|
Responses in bold:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Roghain
Besides questions, I also ran into a few things that are not too obvious to a new player, but have a huge impact and need to be watched - or so I reckon. I also will keep some sort of rack of where I am at current. I will colour fully answered Qs green, and those open red. Yes, that does leave orange for half-answered (half open? depends on your philosophical outlook)
Game status:
As of last date edited (qv). Playing will be mostly limited to weekends, but some early morning activity might happen.
Game date: December 8th, 1941.
Currently doing; Entering orders from spreadsheet by Kull. Page 14 of 80.
Questions:
01) Kull's sheet mentions turning on upgrades and replacements on all LCUs except those in Manchuko and Korea. How does one select all units in a certain area?
-- Apparently, you cannot. best way to get around this is by finding out which HQs are deployed to the area you want to change, then select all the ground units attached to said HQ. needles to say, this means that when units are spread across various areas, you will select too many.
That would probably be a mistake on my part. Upgrades especially should be "off" almost universally because you might upgrade fragments and be unable to combine units into say, Divisions, until ALL the others have upgraded. Reinforcements are probably OK to have on, except in the noted regions. One less thing to worry about, especially when just learning the game.
03) If an air-unit is set to train, is it safe to say you should always set the range to 0 in order to minimize accidentally running into trouble? And setting training to 100% and range 0, is that gamey?
-- Most players do that I suppose. Higher % means more pilots from the unit are training, and with range 0 their fatigue is minimal. But the training operational loss rates are minimal anyway. Note that some house rules limit training schedules tom 80%.
Set the range to Zero on training units, or else the fatigue will definitely climb - especially at 100%
04) Kull's sheet sets the planes of CS Mizuho at the same mission (naval search) but different percentages: the Petes go 45%, the Jakes 55%. There seems to be little difference between the two units except the fatigue, though minor (Petes fatigue 1, Jakes 0). Is that indeed the deciding factor here?
There really is no difference between 45 and 55. I think they both start at 25, and that's just too low. Probably also better off to have your Pete's on ASW and the Jakes on Search, simply for range reasons.
10) In Kull's spreadsheet, I fail to understand why LCUs with almost identical destinations and orders how to get there have varying 'Future objectives'. From what I understand, using the 'Future objective' is all but mandatory for successful attacks?
Quite often the first destination isn't really the place you'll need prep points for an attack. It takes a looooong time to get a unit up to 100% from zero (or even 25-33 if you switch a 100 prepped unit to a new objective), and the Japanese need to string together a lot of conquests in a fairly short period of time. Also many of their early opponents are so weak, you can attack with no points and still wipe out the opposition. The spreadsheet can only suggest so much, and the different objectives are kind of a clue about how to sequentially deploy your forces.
11) Speaking of future objectives - is it me or are only (potential) bases valid objectives? Why?
Yes, you can't choose non-base hexes, if that's what you mean. As to why, probably limited utility in the minds of the coders, and thus better things to spend limited coding time on. The majority of your tough targets are sitting at some sort of base, anyway.
12) LCUs - I am unable to set waypoints for them like for TFs. WAD of am I missing something?
WAD
13) I keep struggling with details. I understand the need to set various altitudes for different types of planes flying different missions. But why would I want to have different altitudes for identical planes flying identical missions? Kull's sheet has a unit divide, then rebase to three different locations. All three sub-groups fly the same mission with identical parameters, but one is set to 20k, one to 15k and one to 10k. Why? What is the deciding factor here?
Air combat is a very interesting topic all by itself, and there can be many reasons for different altitudes. Bombers attacking targets with weak AA might as well go in as low as possible. Don't try that at Singapore, however! If they are fighters on defense, who and what is the likely attacker? In Malaya, those nasty stringbags (Vildebeeest and the fearsome Swordfish) will slip under your CAP if you set it too high, so even though the low CAP would be more vulnerable to a sweep (and less effective versus escorts), if you have expensive naval assets nearby, it's worth the risk. And there's probably 100s of other variables, which will slowly become apparent.
In a later post you noted that the spreadsheet becomes less useful after a few turns, and that is quite true, especially because every individual will have his own particular desires, that may not match up with my short-to-medium term objectives.
But that is totally OK! Because after a couple turns, you're knowledge of the workings will increases exponentially, just because you sat there entering in commands and destinations and setting altitudes and forming task forces, and a myriad other things.
And most of all wondering "why?", and then slowly figuring it out! Because that's where the real learning comes in.
It is a great game and I'm always thrilled to hear that my efforts (and those of the many others who spent time on tutorials and tools) have contributed toward someone's decision to join our grand adventure! Welcome aboard!
< Message edited by Kull -- 6/5/2015 1:55:27 AM >
_____________________________
|
Printable Version
RE: Starting out - drowning vs swimming - 
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