Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Aircraft Upgrades

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Aircraft Upgrades Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 6:46:09 PM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline
Very interesting Warspite; I was hoping to see something like this here. What is your source?

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to Warspite**)
Post #: 331
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 6:50:25 PM   
ZOOMIE1980

 

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

I think the key issue that screws up the player ability to tweak production and upgrades is research. I like the earlier suggestion of undirected research. It removes the ability for the player to power tech their way to the top line fighters, and appears to remove most of the problems with flexible upgrades.


I agree completely ... research is research period. It should not be able to be directed at a specific plane. I think if it was simply removed instead of being targetable, this whole problem goes away. 2BY3 attempted to do this as best as they could without rewriting major parts of the game by making research ineffective against planes too far in the future ...

Where I seem to keep running into the wall here is that people want to use the *loophole* in the code and research aircraft against the grain then complain that because they did what the developers said no to, they should be able to use the fruits of their ill gotten gain.

I would not care about the ability to switch aircraft around at all *if* it was not the product of this *loophole* of skipping over research of planes to get to super plane xyz instead.

Some people are intent on exploiting this loophole then cloaking their intent with the "I have the planes, why can't i use them" defence. Please give a little more credit to people to see through that defense.

Just to set you straight, I am one of those who fought for user selectable aircraft within class limits. What I do not accept is using a weakness in the code to bypass aircraft to get there. I couldn't care less if you refit group with different aircraft within limits. I care about the system being exploited to achieve this due to a way of fooling the code because it doesn't say "has oscar been developed yet? If not, then no frank no matter what"

The alternative is non-directed research where no aircraft type is determined and they are all in one big list of what happens and you just get the next one in the list as available once you have spent enough on R&D. (but again, this requires major code changes so realistically is not going to happen)

Some of you need to grasp the reality that the game has been written, it is done. There will be fixes and some new features but they are not likely to gut major portions of the code because of the large numbers of problems it causes.


Yes, now I can agree with almost ALL of this. The notion I could go directly from an A6M2 to an A7M is ludicrous. Aircraft, like anything else, result from a building block approach. Each successive model depends lessons learned from prior models. Kind of like Civilization-style tech-trees. To get to C you MUST go through B, first.

Also, the war lasted less than four years for the US. That is a good deal SHORTER than the development life-cycle of almost any aircraft we used. Most of what we used in August 1945, at the conclusion of WWII, was in the design room BEFORE the war ever started. Same with Japan. Hell, the P-80 shooting star was well on its initial design phase in 1941 and never saw action in WWII at all. The B-29 hit the board in 1939 and was rushed into action in mid 1944 long before it was really even ready! So the whole notion of research as it exists in the game is a bit misguided.

But even if you take research away (or just make it generic), but still allow tweeking of production that results in those Franks, even if delivered on schedule we still should be able to use them to replace those Oscars still flying around in late 1944/early 1945....IF they are available in quantity in the pool. And open up the Allies, too....to be consistant...

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 332
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 6:51:22 PM   
Oznoyng

 

Posts: 818
Joined: 4/16/2004
From: Mars
Status: offline
What I want to fix is this:

It is late '44 and I am losing badly, Saipan just fell and B-29's have begun destroying Japan. A couple of CV battles in 42 sent the pre-war American CV's to the bottom. I reached PM and was able to capture and damage Auckland, though I had to retreat. I held Guadalcanal til early March 43. Oz was cut off for almost 6 months. Oil and resources from the SRA have sustained the economy, but those supplies no longer come. Steel sharks of the US navy tear apart our merchants and litter the seabed with the oil and ores that would otherwise feed the economy. All is lost and there is nothing left to fight to the bitter end.

The juggernaut that is the United States has produced and produced and produced and is simply grinding us to dust. In the 6 month reprieve that I have gotten, I managed to produce an extra 1800 aircraft, mostly late model fighters. Over 1000 Oscar's are still in service, despite the fact that I have better aircraft to replace them.

Why? Cuz someone thinks that Saipan fell 6 months ago.

(in reply to mdiehl)
Post #: 333
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 6:55:35 PM   
Captain Cruft


Posts: 3652
Joined: 3/17/2004
From: England
Status: offline
I do believe Lemurs!'s modded scenario 15 addresses this particular point about the Oscars. All Army fighter groups end up with either Franks or Tonys.

(in reply to Oznoyng)
Post #: 334
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 6:55:37 PM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng

What I want to fix is this:

It is late '44 and I am losing badly, Saipan just fell and B-29's have begun destroying Japan. A couple of CV battles in 42 sent the pre-war American CV's to the bottom. I reached PM and was able to capture and damage Auckland, though I had to retreat. I held Guadalcanal til early March 43. Oz was cut off for almost 6 months. Oil and resources from the SRA have sustained the economy, but those supplies no longer come. Steel sharks of the US navy tear apart our merchants and litter the seabed with the oil and ores that would otherwise feed the economy. All is lost and there is nothing left to fight to the bitter end.

The juggernaut that is the United States has produced and produced and produced and is simply grinding us to dust. In the 6 month reprieve that I have gotten, I managed to produce an extra 1800 aircraft, mostly late model fighters. Over 1000 Oscar's are still in service, despite the fact that I have better aircraft to replace them.

Why? Cuz someone thinks that Saipan fell 6 months ago.

Excellent post. I agree 100%. But we can already do this; just take the info from Warspites last post and open up the editor....

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to Oznoyng)
Post #: 335
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 6:56:02 PM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
quote:

But even if you take research away (or just make it generic), but still allow tweeking of production that results in those Franks, even if delivered on schedule we still should be able to use them to replace those Oscars still flying around in late 1944/early 1945....IF they are available in quantity in the pool. And open up the Allies, too....to be consistant...


And once again, that is where I can agree 100% with everyone ...

If you don't exploit the research model, go ahead and do what you want.

The problem is when people want to exploit the research model *then* use the justification of "I have these aircraft" ... that's when I start ranting. Bringing in the "I just want to downgrade" does not break these two apart, it is still one and the same "I have these aircraft" ...

If people can get together and agree on the fact that these to are linked together, perhaps we can come up with a solution that (a) makes people happy and (b) can be sold to 2BY3

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)
Post #: 336
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 7:09:39 PM   
Oznoyng

 

Posts: 818
Joined: 4/16/2004
From: Mars
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Culiacan Mexico

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng
quote:

ORIGINAL: Culiacan Mexico
It distorts the game historically.

History goes out the window as soon as I enter orders and the random number generator gets involved in resolving the first turn. We can adhere closely to the realities of WW2, but we can't reproduce it. And why would we want to? I can go read books if I want that. The problem with this rule is that it crosses the line between adhering to the realities and enforcing history on a situation that differs from history.

I don’t necessarily disagree, but I think most of us want certain limits. We want the game to maintain some kind of historical flavor as I believe the developers do also. While allowing every Japanese army unit to fly Franks might be great in the game, was it likely to happen historically… I don’t believe so.


That is why I distinguish between "adhering closely to the realities of WW2" and reproducing it. Frag views the amount of resources that Japan has, and the state of her economy as being fixed to historical results. In a game that models shipments from the SRA to Japan, more shipments to Japan means a healthier economy for longer. A healthier economy means more planes built, and more time means more time to deploy a pool of Tony's, Franks, or whatever, to more operational squadrons. If Japan enjoys more resources because more emphasis on ASW, delays to the historical timetable of conquests, depriving the Allies of forward bases for their subs, etc. then she can and should see the results in her economy. That in turn affects what is available to deploy to active squadrons. None of that is unreasonable.

Unfortunately, Frag is muddying the waters. He is using research as a reason not to do this. I have already expressed, numerous times, that I don't think research in it's current form should be in the game at all. I think it should be gone from the game or rewritten. I agree with Frag completely on that point. But to me, they are seperate issues.

The problem is, research can be dealt with as a seperate thread and ultimately can be handled by a house rule: "No research of aircraft other than those at start, and no reassignment of research factories to anything else." Fixing aircraft upgrades, at the very least, requires an OOB change. To be truly effective, it requires code changes.

(in reply to Culiacan Mexico)
Post #: 337
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 7:19:29 PM   
mdiehl

 

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
I do not agree that Frag is arguing for exactly tracking the historical model nor that yours closely adheres to what the Japanese might have done. In WW2, Japan did not suffer substantial losses from bombing until late 1944 and substantial shipping losses to submarines until mid-1943. They were still incapable, for a variety of reasons, of introducing even a strong second place contender aircraft like the Ki-84 or Ki-100 until rather late in the war. Pretending that these designs might have arrived much earlier or in greater numbers is as serious a deviation as, for example, allowing all US factories to build F4Us in 1942 and all new US CV, CVL and CVE construction to be equipped with units flying same.

_____________________________

Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?

(in reply to Oznoyng)
Post #: 338
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 7:22:59 PM   
Apollo11


Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

As far as I can remember this debate here is the most "heated" one we ever saw in WitP forum (and I think UV as well - don't remember any topic that produced such heated discussion in past 2+ years)...


IMHO, there should be alteration in official WitP scenarios and more options for upgrade should be present for both sides.


Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________



Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 339
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 7:29:10 PM   
Oznoyng

 

Posts: 818
Joined: 4/16/2004
From: Mars
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
If people can get together and agree on the fact that these to are linked together, perhaps we can come up with a solution that (a) makes people happy and (b) can be sold to 2BY3

I can't because they aren't. The use of one rule should not imply you can't use another also. When it comes to PBEM games, players can set house rules to play by which can include how production and upgrades will be handled. For some, research is something that they want. For others, they don't want to be anywhere near it. Let the players that are playing make the choice.

My problem is that the upgrade paths editable in the scenario and db editors are not flexible enough and will actually cause more focus than a player may want. If I make Oscars upgrade to Tony's, and then to Tojo's then all production of Oscar's ceases when the Tony is available and all Tony's when the Tojo appears. The factories autoconvert. When an upgraded model is available, I can then produce it and only it. On the other hand, I may want to have all 3 around. I keep the Oscars as long range escorts for my bombers, I keep the Tony around because of it's better guns, but later want all Tojo's for it's rate of climb to intercept bombers. A linear upgrade path per Lemurs Scen 26 locks me in again. A few game option toggles take care of it. Dis/Allow production, Auto convert factories, and Allow upgrades within types. None of them, singly, or taken together, is all that hard to do.

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 340
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 7:35:01 PM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline
quote:

My problem is that the upgrade paths editable in the scenario and db editors are not flexible enough and will actually cause more focus than a player may want. If I make Oscars upgrade to Tony's, and then to Tojo's then all production of Oscar's ceases when the Tony is available and all Tony's when the Tojo appears. The factories autoconvert. When an upgraded model is available, I can then produce it and only it. On the other hand, I may want to have all 3 around.

I believe it is possible to edit the upgrade path by group. If I understand correctly it is not necessary to make the change you describe here. I could be mistaken though; I have not looked at the editor, this is just based on reading other threads, which might contain misinformation....

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to Oznoyng)
Post #: 341
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 7:37:20 PM   
Apollo11


Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Warspite**

The argument that to change it would make it unhistorical is wrong because its not historical now. Here is a list of fighters and the Sentais that used them. Bold are sentais that upgraded from Nates and Red from Hayabusas.

Nate equipped Sentais = 1, 4, 9, 11, 13, 18, 21, 24, 33, 50, 54, 59, 63, 64, 70, 77, 78, 85, 87, 144, 246.
Hayabusa equipped Sentais = 1, 11, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 30, 31, 33, 48, 50, 54, 59, 63, 64, 65, 71, 72, 73, 77, 101, 102, 103, 104, 112, 203, 204, 248.

Shoki equipped Sentais = 9, 22, 29, 47, 85, 87, 246.
Hien equipped Sentais = 17, 18, 19, 23, 26, 28, 37, 55, 56, 59, 65, 68, 78, 105, 244
Hayate equipped Sentais = 1, 11, 13, 14, 20, 22, 25, 29, 47, 50, 51, 52, 64, 71, 72, 73, 85, 101, 102, 103, 104, 111, 112, 200, 246.
Only 2 Sentais operated the Randy

Okay it didn't keep my colours or bold face from my word document I created, nor allow me to attach it, so here is what you have left over after the upgrades:

Nate equipped Sentais = 4, 70, 78, 144.
Hayabusa equipped Sentais = 21, 24, 30, 31, 33, 48, 54, 63, 77, 203, 204.

We can see that the upgrade paths in the game are meaningless anyway, as there are no where near 34 groups of Hayabusas in WW2 nor anything like 12 Ki-102, and as we can see most surviving Sentais were equiped with the Frank. Its wrong now so whats the deal with letting us use what we build.


Thanks for this!

BTW, you can use BOLD here at the forum but you hav eto do it manually (just select part of text you want to enhance and press the "B" button - same is with underline and "U" button - italics "I" button)...

Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________



Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to Warspite**)
Post #: 342
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 7:47:01 PM   
Oznoyng

 

Posts: 818
Joined: 4/16/2004
From: Mars
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

quote:

My problem is that the upgrade paths editable in the scenario and db editors are not flexible enough and will actually cause more focus than a player may want. If I make Oscars upgrade to Tony's, and then to Tojo's then all production of Oscar's ceases when the Tony is available and all Tony's when the Tojo appears. The factories autoconvert. When an upgraded model is available, I can then produce it and only it. On the other hand, I may want to have all 3 around.

I believe it is possible to edit the upgrade path by group. If I understand correctly it is not necessary to make the change you describe here. I could be mistaken though; I have not looked at the editor, this is just based on reading other threads, which might contain misinformation....

And whatever I set by group is what dictates what I have available in 4 years into the game. I can't predict what I will want in 4 years because too much is unknown.

(in reply to tsimmonds)
Post #: 343
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 7:52:44 PM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
quote:

That is why I distinguish between "adhering closely to the realities of WW2" and reproducing it. Frag views the amount of resources that Japan has, and the state of her economy as being fixed to historical results.


No, I don't at all, I view them from the *perfect* standpoint with Japan owning every possible resource producer there is (apart from Russia/South Oz/Upper India).

Once I have the *perfect* state of production, I then crunch the numbers and see what can be done.

*Those* are the numbers I use and realistically no one will ever have anything better then that because the game will end off an automatic victory long before you even get Oscars should you manage to do *better* then that.

If you dig back a couple of pages, you will see my *perfect* production numbers with every airgroup still in existance and having it's perfect upgrade completed.

As far as your:

quote:

Unfortunately, Frag is muddying the waters. He is using research as a reason not to do this. I have already expressed, numerous times, that I don't think research in it's current form should be in the game at all. I think it should be gone from the game or rewritten. I agree with Frag completely on that point. But to me, they are seperate issues.

The problem is, research can be dealt with as a seperate thread and ultimately can be handled by a house rule: "No research of aircraft other than those at start, and no reassignment of research factories to anything else." Fixing aircraft upgrades, at the very least, requires an OOB change. To be truly effective, it requires code changes.


I guess you just don't see how they are linked. I am not using research as a reason to not do this. I am pointing out that your are choosing to *ignore* research *too* do it which can not be simply done based on the way the game was designed.

If you want to go add an additional upgrade path to the Oscar and change all the starting R&D factories to size 0's, you have removed research from the game and dealt with the #1 complaint of Oscars not upgrading. That can all be accomplished without a single piece of code work.

A pick list to select aircraft + changing the entire way the OOB happens to be represented to not be aircraft specific is a huge recoding effort.

(in reply to Oznoyng)
Post #: 344
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 7:54:56 PM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline
quote:

And whatever I set by group is what dictates what I have available in 4 years into the game. I can't predict what I will want in 4 years because too much is unknown.

OTOH you will know what is possible as well as what you will need to have. I know, same problem as now, but not nearly as ugly as being stuck with OscarIIs....

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to Oznoyng)
Post #: 345
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 7:56:48 PM   
MG3

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 10/14/2002
From: Mr. Diehls Asshole Country
Status: offline
quote:


IMO the problem requires no "fix" and is not an error. For those who understand how to use it and what the production system allows it should work fine. For those who want a "phased plasma rifle in the 40 GW range" for every Japanese squad, play Pacific General and you can have all the 'Axis-X-Plane-Fantasy-Realized' thrill-bytes you want.


Great, now Mr. Diehl is on- everything will go down the drain.

Please answer me my question (which the better players club failed to do): why do you want to force us into a gamesystem which you as "Mr. IKNOWITALL" (as you have show in many other threads) think is the only right thing, when the new upgraderules wouldnt even be mandatory for all players. You could simply play as before.

SO WHATS YOUR FU**ING PROBLEM?

< Message edited by MG3 -- 8/6/2004 5:57:55 PM >

(in reply to Oznoyng)
Post #: 346
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:00:41 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
Here is my suggested changes that would address what appear to be the most aggravating of issues. It would not satisfy everyone, but I believe it would satisfy the majority.

1. Filter the available-to-research planes by a date. Not perfect, because ideally a plane would become available because its predecessor was in production. Designing and defining a precedence list would be far more work and code than we will get. A simple date filter would be easy to do.

2. Edit the upgrade paths to allow more/most/all Nate groups to upgrade Nate-Oscar II-Frank. Or set some to go to the Tony or Tojo. I'm sure plenty of folk have the research materials to set this up reasonably.

A minimalist approach, but it may be something 2by3/Matrix would do.

(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 347
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:01:04 PM   
MG3

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 10/14/2002
From: Mr. Diehls Asshole Country
Status: offline
BTW "Mr." Diehl:

to tell people to play Pacific General or suggest that they want plasma rifles just because they want to use planes which they produced to the GAMES OWN SYSTEM is typical for you. I easily say youre the biggest and most arrogant selfcentered useless asshole on this board.

Maybe you should found the wargamer asshole organisation- you would be a worthy leader.

(in reply to MG3)
Post #: 348
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:01:32 PM   
ZOOMIE1980

 

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline
quote:


The question as to what sorts of aircraft a unit may fly is answered in advance. You do not get to wholesale rewrite history and deploy advanced aircraft to lots of units that never had them.
[\quote]

Why not? We are rewriting history with every turn of every game already.

quote:


In effect, you get to optimize, to a certain degree, production in a way that allows you to get the right kinds of replacements for depleted units. It's a good way to allow you to fix "ahistorical" problems in equipping units that might come about as a consequence of "ahistorical" choices as regards which units are deployed where, and losses that differ from historical ones.


I fail to understand the need to enforce rigid history on players who are not that interested in playing historically, when the designers gave players the means to significantly alter history in so many areas of the game.

quote:


It does not seem ever to have been intended as a way for the Japanese to crank out lots of advanced aircraft in greater numbers earlier than usual.


How do you come by that conclusion? It appears they gave us about 50% of the ability to do just that. The only thing I can conclude is that they were either conflicted as we are in the design room, or failed to realize that an attempt to provide the player a means to "balance" his production after bombing raids and such actually gave them a "warcraft" kind of ability as well.

quote:


The people complaining about it seem to fall into two camps: 1. Those who thought the system could be used in that way and lack a means to correct the production mistakes they've made. Maybe you can edit your game-in-progress to restore some balance to your production. 2. Those who seem to think that this capability to address some balancing problems caused by ahistoric losses should be morphed into some sort of Starship Troopers type time-warp that has the Japanese knowing in 1941 which of their 1944 designs will be the best at countering the as-yet-unseen 1943-44 Allied designs.


Yes, that about sums it up. The designers gave them tools to just that, but only about half-way. And that's the crux of the problem.

quote:


IMO the problem requires no "fix" and is not an error. For those who understand how to use it and what the production system allows it should work fine. For those who want a "phased plasma rifle in the 40 GW range" for every Japanese squad, play Pacific General and you can have all the 'Axis-X-Plane-Fantasy-Realized' thrill-bytes you want.


And this is where your argument is all wet. The fact this thread is now going on 12 pages indicates this is indeed a HUGE error. Not so much an error in code or even in design, per-se, but an error in communicating a consistant intent to the player. For good or bad, it is quite obvious a significant number of players are demanding the ability to want their phased plasma rifles because the designers gave them the very tools in the game to build them with. As far as I'm concerned, if they can provide the rest (open-ended-on-the-fly-upgrade-paths) with a fairly small amount of work, they should, to make these people happy. Doing that will not in any way detract from the way the "rigid adherence to history fanatics" want to play the game.

I fail to see why, if BOTH crowds could be provided the facilities to play the game in accordance to their view of its intent why it should NOT be done. And it is the not that the "historical fanatics" view of the game is wrong, it is the desire to impose that view on others, when the game clearly allows for that other view, that IS wrong.

(in reply to mdiehl)
Post #: 349
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:04:24 PM   
MG3

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 10/14/2002
From: Mr. Diehls Asshole Country
Status: offline
Just given up the game.

Maybe some emule users will be happy about the game, since I am not worthy to play it. The would be community surly make everything possible to piss of their customers. First rip offs and scams while buying, then youre being told to be a sissy child wargamer because you critizise some of the features.

< Message edited by MG3 -- 8/6/2004 6:05:21 PM >

(in reply to MG3)
Post #: 350
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:10:44 PM   
Drongo

 

Posts: 2205
Joined: 7/12/2002
From: Melb. Oztralia
Status: offline
Is it thread locking time already?

_____________________________

Have no fear,
drink more beer.

(in reply to MG3)
Post #: 351
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:11:37 PM   
SunDevil_MatrixForum

 

Posts: 783
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline
No, not because of one troll who already got reported by me.

_____________________________

There is no chance, no destiny, no fate, that can circumvent or hinder or control the firm resolve of a determined soul.

(in reply to Drongo)
Post #: 352
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:13:02 PM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline
quote:

Just given up the game.

We'll miss you.

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to MG3)
Post #: 353
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:13:32 PM   
VicKevlar

 

Posts: 881
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Minneapolis, MN
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MG3

BTW "Mr." Diehl:

to tell people to play Pacific General or suggest that they want plasma rifles just because they want to use planes which they produced to the GAMES OWN SYSTEM is typical for you. I easily say youre the biggest and most arrogant selfcentered useless asshole on this board.

Maybe you should found the wargamer asshole organisation- you would be a worthy leader.


@MG3

I highly, highly suggest you cease the insults and profanity right now. If not.......I shall make you.

Here's what's gonna happen.........you will edit your profile immediately and edit the location. No choice. It will happen asap. Got it?

@all.......the temperature in here better drop fast.

_____________________________

The infantry doesn't change. We're the only arm of the military where the weapon is the man himself.

C. T. Shortis


(in reply to MG3)
Post #: 354
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:14:04 PM   
Marc von Martial


Posts: 10875
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Bonn, Germany
Status: offline
Okay MG3, everybody can come here and complain about the game or discuss it.

But, and I have allready warned you previously, insulting of other forum members will not be tolerated. Cool down or you will find yourself on a two week vacation.

Emule? Well at least we know where to look at when we find a copy of WITP popping up there.

_____________________________


(in reply to MG3)
Post #: 355
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:14:14 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

quote:

Just given up the game.

We'll miss you.


We will?

(in reply to tsimmonds)
Post #: 356
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:24:03 PM   
mdiehl

 

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

Please answer me my question (which the better players club failed to do): why do you want to force us into a gamesystem which you as "Mr. IKNOWITALL" (as you have show in many other threads) think is the only right thing, when the new upgraderules wouldnt even be mandatory for all players. You could simply play as before.


I do not see how you have been forced to do anything. The way that I see it Frag has given some pretty coherent explanations as to why the system works the way that it does. You seem to be casting his position as one who advocates a over-restricted dedication to historical events. I know that's not the Frag I've crossed arguments with many times. If anything I am far more a, err, "historical constructionist" than he. My understanding of his point is that people are using the prod system to attempt something that was outside the scope of its intended purpose.

I'm saying I don't see it as Matrix/2by3's burden to recode the thing to provide a feature that they seem never to have intended to provide. It would cost yet more money. At some point game manufacturers have to show a profit or at the least break even.

And if you took my comment about Pacific General as being personally directed or, for that matter, highly insulting, then I apologize. My point was literally that there exist games in which ONE, as the Japanese player, can purchase (through a point system) large numbers of top-of-the-line (over the top in the case of ME262s bought by Japan) late war fighters. There IS such a product available. You've got a choice. But hey, if you keep asking for the change maybe Matrix will give you what you want.

And to Matrix/2by3 I suppose I apologize for mentioning the other product. I just figured it's different enough in scope and old enough that it is not necessarily a competing product. I won't do it again.

< Message edited by mdiehl -- 8/6/2004 6:30:58 PM >


_____________________________

Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?

(in reply to Drongo)
Post #: 357
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:27:27 PM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
quote:

1. Filter the available-to-research planes by a date. Not perfect, because ideally a plane would become available because its predecessor was in production. Designing and defining a precedence list would be far more work and code than we will get. A simple date filter would be easy to do.

2. Edit the upgrade paths to allow more/most/all Nate groups to upgrade Nate-Oscar II-Frank. Or set some to go to the Tony or Tojo. I'm sure plenty of folk have the research materials to set this up reasonably.


Thats exactly what I said in different words

quote:

If you want to go add an additional upgrade path to the Oscar and change all the starting R&D factories to size 0's, you have removed research from the game and dealt with the #1 complaint of Oscars not upgrading. That can all be accomplished without a single piece of code work.


It does not need 2BY3 to do, thats what they gave you an editor for ... Zeroing all the starting R&D is simple, adding an upgrade path for the Oscar is simple.

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 358
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:32:08 PM   
Apollo11


Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

I'm saying I don't see it as Matrix/2by3's burden to recode the thing to provide a feature that they seem never to have intended to provide. It would cost yet more money. At some point game manufacturers have to show a profit or at the least break even.


I also always maintained that is is all solvable via WitP editor.

But I would like that Matrix/2By3 fixes that (official campaigns) because current upgrades (as "Warspite" explained) are also inaccurate...


Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________



Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to mdiehl)
Post #: 359
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 8/6/2004 8:34:03 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

1. Filter the available-to-research planes by a date. Not perfect, because ideally a plane would become available because its predecessor was in production. Designing and defining a precedence list would be far more work and code than we will get. A simple date filter would be easy to do.

2. Edit the upgrade paths to allow more/most/all Nate groups to upgrade Nate-Oscar II-Frank. Or set some to go to the Tony or Tojo. I'm sure plenty of folk have the research materials to set this up reasonably.


Thats exactly what I said in different words


Oops. Honest, I never say you make the first suggestion......

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 360
Page:   <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Aircraft Upgrades Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
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

2.062