Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

POLL: Solution to 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 >> POLL: Solution to Aircraft Upgrades Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
[Poll]

POLL: Solution to Aircraft Upgrades


I prefer upgradable aircraft with no limitations (ahistorical)
  11% (30)
I prefer upgradable aircraft with the limitations in the first post
  43% (111)
I prefer upgradable aircraft with other limitations (post in thread)
  7% (19)
I don't want any changes to the system unless they are optional!
  22% (58)
I don't want any changes to the system, period, I'm happy as is.
  14% (36)


Total Votes : 254
(last vote on : 7/23/2006 6:35:37 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
POLL: Solution to Aircraft Upgrades - 8/16/2004 8:01:22 PM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline 		[Edited] I added some poll options to vote on. Please put any requests for new poll options in this thread. Thanks. - Erik

Here is the solution to the upgrade question put forth by Nikademus. I support it. it gives me the freedom I want. Give a yea or nay answer. Arguments can go to the UPGRADE thread.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

I was against player controlled production, unless it was a toggable option. The BTR comments only cemented my reasons behind it. Players will inevitably do the same thing with it. They will cancel the medicore or bad designs and focus exclusively (within reasons and player tested strategies) on the better aircraft ultimately creating uniform (and ahistorical) airforces. Germans will have masses of FW-190's, US will dispense with P-39 and P-40 in favor of P-38, F6F goes in favor of F4U. etc etc.

Now that i've posted enough to be flamed. Recall that i "did" say, i was against player controlled production unless it was a toggable option. Problem solved. Those who wish to fiddle, fiddle, those who dont...dont.

My idea, nay "solution" for all the ruckas regarding upgrades/downgrades was a simple restrictive system.

Japan: IJN groups can only upgrade/downgrade to IJN aircraft
IJA groups can only upgrade/downgrade to IJA aircraft

Further restrictions:

Fighter groups can only change to other types of fighter groups/Fighter-bombers
Bomber groups can only chage to other types of bomber groups.
(further: LBA to LBA only......Dive bomber to Dive bomber only, Torpedo bomber to torpedo bomber only)

added: had to do it this way since only Matrix or a mod can poll.

edited for the new guys. PLEASE READ THE RELATED THREADS I PUNTED BEFORE VOTING.

< Message edited by 2ndACR -- 11/16/2004 8:33:42 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 8:07:07 PM   
Rebel Yell


Posts: 470
Joined: 6/21/2003
From: The Woodlands, TX USA
Status: offline 		Yea.

_____________________________

I used to enjoy these forums. So many people that need the green dot now.

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 2
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 8:22:50 PM   
bradfordkay

 

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

My idea, nay "solution" for all the ruckas regarding upgrades/downgrades was a simple restrictive system.

Japan: IJN groups can only upgrade/downgrade to IJN aircraft
IJA groups can only upgrade/downgrade to IJA aircraft

Further restrictions:

Fighter groups can only change to other types of fighter groups/Fighter-bombers
Bomber groups can only chage to other types of bomber groups.
(further: LBA to LBA only......Dive bomber to Dive bomber only, Torpedo bomber to torpedo bomber only)


Yeah, sounds reasonable. I'd like a switch to toggel this on or off, however.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 3
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 8:28:06 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		You have a designer set against this...
gg patched war in russia to stop us from converting our Italian factories to tiger producers as I recall, and while I do not blame him, good luck getting this changed, ever

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 4
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 8:28:22 PM   
Blackhorse


Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline 		Affirmative. Good approach.

_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 5
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 8:30:08 PM   
BartM


Posts: 107
Joined: 7/18/2004
Status: offline 		yea (with exceptions)

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 6
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 8:36:34 PM   
Lemurs!


Posts: 788
Joined: 6/1/2004
Status: offline 		Agree with everything but the first paragraph.

Freeboy,
What do you mean by your comment? we don't have different nations factories to work with so i am confused. This is not an attack or anything i am just curious.

Mike

_____________________________



(in reply to BartM)
Post #: 7
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 8:41:47 PM   
drw61


Posts: 894
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: South Carolina
Status: offline 		I agree with this. With it being swichable it gives us more "what if" options.

(in reply to Lemurs!)
Post #: 8
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 8:48:00 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		Fisrt off, I love this game and gg's work..
I mean the game is hard coded against player changes without the editor... use of the editor is a compromise, one still cannot make choices for paths other than those set..
Frag mentioned the oposition was on the design side, and I know gg has a historical mindset in creating fun, historical relevent work...

My point to recap, no pun intended, is that it will never be the case,, that one can change from a directed upgrade path for units without the editor
the origonal posting talks about production and groups.. two seperate but interelated and interdependant features... sorry to be vague, no disrespect to the designers either..

BTW:I love the ability to create better than historical units for both sides as an option

< Message edited by freeboy -- 8/17/2004 2:48:39 AM >

(in reply to Lemurs!)
Post #: 9
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 8:51:07 PM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline 		Easy answer, any debates can go to the upgrade thread. I want this to remain a "simple" thread if possible.

We have enough "hot" debate threads going on this subject already.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 10
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 8:52:28 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		right, not an issue for me anyway since the out is the editor.. I still am pouting about the no min ocean intercepts , boo bhoo hoo.. can you hear my tears hitting the keyboard?

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 11
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 8:54:14 PM   
Brausepaul


Posts: 484
Joined: 8/11/2004
From: Braunschweig, Deutschland
Status: offline 		Yes, if toggable.

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 12
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 8:56:15 PM   
ZOOMIE1980

 

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline 		Yes. Good solution, if doable in reasonable timeframe. Add for BOTH sides, though. Rigid history buffs happy, BTR buffs happy. Only unhappy ones? Those that wish to impose their "game views" on everyone else.

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 13
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 9:37:25 PM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline 		Thank You Erik!!!!

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)
Post #: 14
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 9:41:25 PM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline 		The only change I am really interested in is that the squadrons that appear in the game should be able to upgrade to aircraft that they actually used during the war. This is not currently the case, as many squadrons that stop in the game with Oscar II actually went on to receive Tony, Tojo, and/or Frank. If a squadron was destroyed IRL with an Oscar II TOE, it should still be given an upgrade path to one of the other IJA fighters in the game, in the same way that several IJN CVs have upgrade paths which reflect improvements that would have been made had they not been sunk instead.

Edit: I voted for "other limitations"

< Message edited by irrelevant -- 8/16/2004 2:59:50 PM >

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)
Post #: 15
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 9:46:43 PM   
Damien Thorn

 

Posts: 1107
Joined: 7/24/2003
Status: offline 		I actually voted to keep things they way they are now. Why? Well, I know it would help the Japanese to be able to actually USE those planes they produce (and that's a very good thing) but it would help the US even more to be able to churn out tons of P-38 and F4U groups.

(in reply to tsimmonds)
Post #: 16
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 9:51:08 PM   
Mr.Frag


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

but it would help the US even more to be able to churn out tons of P-38 and F4U groups.


Yep, one tends to not see the forest when staring at the type of bark on a tree.

Allow changes = end of game in 1943 - Allied Decisive Victory. I can see it now.

Just sit back and wait for the F4U's to kick in then sweep the board. All those useless Allied fighters become death machines. All those useless bombers become B-17E's and shoot down more fighters then the fighters

(in reply to Damien Thorn)
Post #: 17
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 9:54:51 PM   
hithere

 

Posts: 432
Joined: 4/13/2004
From: Atlanta
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn

I actually voted to keep things they way they are now. Why? Well, I know it would help the Japanese to be able to actually USE those planes they produce (and that's a very good thing) but it would help the US even more to be able to churn out tons of P-38 and F4U groups.


and that is a point alot of people are missing i think. here's a good what if....what if the US had a "screw you, Churchill" option and chose a "pacific first" stratagy? (can I say screw?) that should what? triple the industry output in the first year, 5 times by mid 43?

< Message edited by hithere -- 8/16/2004 2:56:16 PM >

_____________________________

Quote from one of my drill sergeants, "remember, except for the extreme heat, intense radiation, and powerful blast wave, a nuclear explosion is just like any other explosion"

(in reply to Damien Thorn)
Post #: 18
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 9:55:50 PM   
hithere

 

Posts: 432
Joined: 4/13/2004
From: Atlanta
Status: offline 		double post

< Message edited by hithere -- 8/16/2004 2:56:57 PM >

_____________________________

Quote from one of my drill sergeants, "remember, except for the extreme heat, intense radiation, and powerful blast wave, a nuclear explosion is just like any other explosion"

(in reply to hithere)
Post #: 19
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 9:58:07 PM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Hi, I voted for no limits. (no option I don't want code that is not used in every game)

My system.

No airgroup reinforcements beyond those in pipeline at start of war. (nothing beyond 3 months)
Players must create their airgroups.
Airgroups can upgrade to models of same type. (they just pay supply cost for new aircraft and have to wait for them to repair like present system)

Decide how many airgroups can be in play at one time. When limit is reached in order to introduce a new group an existing group must be disbanded

Disbanded groups would not return on their own. The player would have to reform them like building a new group. (Withdrawn groups would work same as currently)

The reinforcement menu could be deleted and space used for other options.

Do the same with ground units.

I think we are stuck with the majority or ships being built. Any considered not acutally planned and paid for at start of game would be placed into a pool. Players could draw from pool for builds. When out of ships of a type and desired to build another he selects and ship is assigned a name from a pool of unused names (sunk ships names would return to pool) by type.


After all these changes are in place we will find the game still belongs to those who spend their time planning operations rather then playing factory supervisor

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to Damien Thorn)
Post #: 20
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 10:07:32 PM   
Sultanofsham

 

Posts: 728
Joined: 4/20/2002
Status: offline 		I took #2 but it should be a toggel so that the guys who picked that they dont want to deal with it have a choice.

_____________________________

Sci-fi channel SUCKS.

One of the true tests of leadership is the ability to recognize a problem before it becomes an emergency.
-- Arnold H. Glasow

(in reply to mogami)
Post #: 21
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 10:16:47 PM   
Rebel Yell


Posts: 470
Joined: 6/21/2003
From: The Woodlands, TX USA
Status: offline 		Option 4 in the poll needs to go away, as the proposed Nikademus solution is, itself, an option, thus option 2 includes option 4.

_____________________________

I used to enjoy these forums. So many people that need the green dot now.

(in reply to mogami)
Post #: 22
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/16/2004 11:36:34 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		well i guess it's no secret which one i picked.....

_____________________________


(in reply to Rebel Yell)
Post #: 23
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/17/2004 12:23:16 AM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline 		Punt back to the top. This is your vote guys. Speak now or forever hold your peace.

No guarantees it will happen, but you never know.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 24
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/17/2004 12:24:20 AM   
Sultanofsham

 

Posts: 728
Joined: 4/20/2002
Status: offline 		Sticky?

_____________________________

Sci-fi channel SUCKS.

One of the true tests of leadership is the ability to recognize a problem before it becomes an emergency.
-- Arnold H. Glasow

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 25
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/17/2004 12:27:37 AM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline 		I asked for it, but until then I will keep punting it to the top.

(in reply to Sultanofsham)
Post #: 26
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/17/2004 12:29:07 AM   
ZOOMIE1980

 

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

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

I asked for it, but until then I will keep punting it to the top.


Been running a consistant 80%, +-3%, in favor of some kind of substanative change. That's an awful lot of consensus there for such a hotly debated issue.

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 27
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/17/2004 12:51:11 AM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Ah new math. I see it as 57 percent want change and 42 percent are opposed (some will allow it only as an option)

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)
Post #: 28
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/17/2004 12:56:07 AM   
mjk428

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980

Been running a consistant 80%, +-3%, in favor of some kind of substanative change. That's an awful lot of consensus there for such a hotly debated issue.


You're making a giant assumption. I voted for: "no changes unless it's optional". That doesn't mean I want a change, it just means if it is changed I want to be able to turn it off. I realize that some people really want a fantasy version and that's fine with me as long as it doesn't affect my games.

_____________________________


(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)
Post #: 29
RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. - 8/17/2004 12:57:49 AM   
DrewMatrix


Posts: 1429
Joined: 7/15/2004
Status: offline 		You are not counting the "I don't want to read all the harangues to decide which vote means what so I am not even bothering to vote" crowd.

Count me in that group.

_____________________________


Beezle - Rapidly running out of altitude, airspeed and ideas.

(in reply to mogami)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> POLL: Solution to Aircraft Upgrades Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   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

3.688