RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

Demosthenes -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 4:32:19 AM)

edit



Oleg Mastruko -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 4:34:43 AM)

Demosthenes, I'd have many serious arguments to throw in discussions like this. Many. Personally I have solid knowledge of WW2 in Pacific and LOTS of experience with WITP game system, AND good idea what developers wanted to achieve with it. I have solid experience with beta testing too (games other than WITP). I DO have an opinion on various issues from the game.

But to seriously participate in time wasting threads like this I'd first have to perceive this as "serious discussion" - not just *another* point in endless Allied fanboy agenda - and this I can't do.

So it's futile. Fighting vs hard core Allied fanboys who never did actually play the game, and have only one agenda on mind. Arguing vs CHS guys who have "Allied fanboi" painted on their foreheads and tatooed on their chests. Yeah that's how I perceive them so sue me if you don't agree!

Guys like Mog, Nik, pry while he was active - incidentally, beta testers and guys who I respect immenselly, and trust almost unconditionally - said it better than me dozens, no hundereds of times before.

But for some guys it's never enough.

And to correct you, I don't think mdiehl bought the game, played it for, like, couple weeks, experimented playing the grand campaign till say 43, and then returned it because he was disappointed by what he saw. I think he *never* bought it at the first place (I may be wrong here though), which makes his participation on this board truely hilariously funny when you think about it.

Finally, that some guy, who does not even own the game, keeps this thread alive - well, from sociological standpoint this fact IS also funny I think you'll agree.

The fact that there are people ready to discuss Zero bonus, which is miniscule issue in the grand scheme of things, on 15 pages, while crucial, game-screwing, balance-breaking issues like Allied 4E bomber over abundance remain ignored, is also funny.

Respect, and lots of happines for the Xmas season [8D]

O.



Honda -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 4:42:17 AM)

In Pauk's defence, he did just come back from a night out....[sm=00000436.gif][sm=Christo_pull_hair.gif][sm=00000023.gif][>:]

I think that mdiehl's knowledge is substantial. However, it's not the knowledge that is in question, or even the possesion of the game but the way he interprets it. I have never come across an argument in which he defended a Japanese position. Someone here asked how come the war wasn't over by December 10th '41 when responding to mdiehls posts. Of course that most of us have simpathys for one side or the other, but I can't be persuaded to belive that everything in this game is pro japanese because it isn't.
The fact is that depending on one's interpretation of historical data one can prove almost anything.
The sad part is that there was so much comotion about uberZero killing everything at 6:1 ratio only to be found that average losses are in the range of 2or1 : 1...Pointless waste of time[8|]

Question to mdiehl:
With all due respect, what is you point?
You decided not to play the game. You however wish to improve it but it's only improvement from your point of view. Not from mine. And I know it's CHS and not stock scenario but I also downloaded and thaught about playing it. I fear what the game would look like if you had your way with it.
So, just to go back up a little because I really am interested in what is the point of all this. We're here to improve the game but you aren't so why? Maybe for the discussions? I don't know...




Oleg Mastruko -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 4:51:31 AM)

OH and there's ANOTHER, very game-related point, while we're at it!!

I think those guys either don't play the game (as is case with Mr. Diehl) or - what is maybe even more important - *DON'T KNOW* to play the game.

In other words they suck as players, strategists, wargamers. There you go I said it [:@]

So they need to invent various faults and make some mod to their suiting, so that they can win with less effort.

I play as Allies. Zero bonus or no Zero bonus (haha, I laugh at Zero bonus) I am sure I can win. Mog threw his unlimited crazy Godzilla lunacy plans on me and I lived. Allies have MORE than enough tools to win decisively in this game. Yes, perhaps even before 43.

Also, I am GOOD player, but I lost game as IJN vs. *extremely* good Allied player who wiped the floor with my sorry ass by May 42, Zero bonus or no Zero bonus (he destroyed more of my Zeros by May 42 than IJN lost during the whole war or at least it felt that way on the receiving end).

How come this guy managed to do it, and mdiehl can't? Oh that's right, this dude actually *perfected* his strategy by *playing* the friggen game, while mdiehl whined on the board, and CHS guys spent their youth tinkering with database adding craploads of Allied stuff and reducing Zero range [;)]

So stop whining and play! Get some experience and learn to play the game! It's fun BTW [8D]

O.



Demosthenes -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 4:55:30 AM)

Oleg, Honda, Pauk, anyone else..

Disagreeing with someone, debating with someone, doing your best to disprove what someone is saying - is all fine and part of the game -as it should always be.

My only out burst was aimed at the personal attack which has never been an excepted part of good public discourse.

I have no dislike or animosity for anyone, but my sense of fair play was upset at the appearant personal attacks since I have not witnessed Mdiehl partake in kind.

I would rather keep everything friendly and on good decorum, as I would hope all men of good will would do.[;)]

Demosthenes



ChezDaJez -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 5:22:57 AM)

quote:

Time after time I have read this man's arguments and they are informative and sound.


The problem is that I find them neither informative nor sound. He seldom, if ever, provides the source of his information when asked. If his data is so correct, why not provide the source so that other people can read it and draw their own conclusions. I've been a fan of WWII history for over 35 years. I have also been heavily involved in board and computer (since its inception anyways) wargaming for over 35 years.

I have little respect for his opinions relating to the game as he has little experience with it. He claims to have played a 5-month game period, probably as the allies vs the AI and washed his hands of it because it didn't meet his view of history. Well, that's too bad. If his only reaon for being here is to bad-mouth the game, then he should just move on. The vast majority of people on this forum enjoy playing the game. Do we debate its merits? Absolutely. Do we recognize there are flaws? You betcha. But from a position of knowledge and experience of which he has neither.

He claims to possess great knowledge of WWII aerial tactics. From what I've seen, his knowledge of WWII appears to be limited to watching the History Channel. Maybe he should just go find a WWII history forum and present his views there. Maybe he'll find some else to fool.

Chez



Ron Saueracker -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 5:25:45 AM)

quote:

So it's futile. Fighting vs hard core Allied fanboys who never did actually play the game, and have only one agenda on mind. Arguing vs CHS guys who have "Allied fanboi" painted on their foreheads and tatooed on their chests. Yeah that's how I perceive them so sue me if you don't agree!


You are as bad as you perceive Mdiehl to be Oleg. If you even bothered to look at the CHS you would see it has nothing to do with Allied Fanboy **** and lots to do with trying to improve accuracy of OOBs, ASW, art, other game mechanics etc. As for an agenda, why don't you just ask to be one of the official "Warm and Fuzzies" instead of spewing off a bunch of ****. Seriously, apply for a job. No company can have enough Smithers types.

Merry Xmas.



bradfordkay -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 7:08:13 AM)

What I find amusing is Oleg's comment about the CHS being an Allied Fanboy's dream. The CHS heavily reduces the amount of Allied 4E bombers, as well as allied fighter replacements, squadron upgrades, etc. I am sure that it does the same for the Japanese as well, (I'm not looking at the Japanese side until I finish playing as allied - I don't want extra intel).

Oleg, the CHS has actually implemented some of the improvements you have requested. Why not give it a chance?

Have you played the CHS, or are you pulling a Mdiehl?



pauk -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 11:36:00 AM)


Dem, i can agree with you... but you are new here and you probably did not see previous posts by Mdiehl. I can assure you, any arguments won't change his attitude so it is really pointless. And I can't have discussion with someone who dont play game (ok, try to imagine two persons talking about sex - one is pretty active on that area, while the other "tried this once and he did not like it". But the former trying to convince "active guy" that something is wrong with sex)...

I'm always for discussion and have respect for other people. Just to mention few of them: Feinder, Tom Hunter, "the big renegade" Ron Saueracker[;)] (I do not agree with most of his arguments, but he was right about ASW). But they all play the game and they know what they are talking...



pauk -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 11:42:04 AM)

oh, yes, forgot to mentioned.

discussion is nice, but i always prefer the acts rather than "tounge skills". So I've proposed me as beta-tester of new all mighty CHS without Zero bonus, but as Allied player vs "historical fanboys" in Japs boots.

Never got any offer. I guess that Allied fanboys know what they asking for.

I'm finished with this (really).




Ron Saueracker -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 11:44:18 AM)

On a lighter note, all you Croats are making me thirsty. You guys have some really good beer over there.[&o]



pauk -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 11:47:03 AM)

well, Ron, If you ever come to Croatia i will offer you a beer "Oleg"[:D] (no, such beer doesn't exist but i'm good friend with Executive director of Ozujsko brewery so we can start a limited production "Oleg" beer - just for you).

[;)]



Ron Saueracker -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 11:48:45 AM)

quote:

i'm good friend with Executive director of Ozujsko brewery


Lucky bugger.[:)]



Oleg Mastruko -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 11:48:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay
Oleg, the CHS has actually implemented some of the improvements you have requested. Why not give it a chance?

Have you played the CHS, or are you pulling a Mdiehl?


Played it, vs AI for couple turns, which I agree is not *nearly* enough. But at least I took a look at it from *player's* perspective.

I would love to play couple CHS games, why not? But I am shallow and I need a nice map to look at [;)] What happened with plans for Sub Chaser to make his variant of AB map for CHS? Last I heard those plans were postponed, and SC disappeared from the boards?

O.




Oleg Mastruko -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 11:51:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

On a lighter note, all you Croats are making me thirsty. You guys have some really good beer over there.[&o]


Do we? Personally I prefer Belgian beers over anything else.



Ron Saueracker -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 11:52:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay
Oleg, the CHS has actually implemented some of the improvements you have requested. Why not give it a chance?

Have you played the CHS, or are you pulling a Mdiehl?


Played it, vs AI for couple turns, which I agree is not *nearly* enough. But at least I took a look at it from *player's* perspective.

I would love to play couple CHS games, why not? But I am shallow and I need a nice map to look at [;)] What happened with plans for Sub Chaser to make his variant of AB map for CHS? Last I heard those plans were postponed, and SC disappeared from the boards?

O.




I don't know what happened to SubChaser...he seems to come and go. Probably OD'd and needs a break like we all could use sometimes. Agreed, his version of the stock map is beautiful and if he and AB did the same to ABs map that would be something. ABs map is pretty good though.



Honda -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 12:02:16 PM)

Hehehehe, there's more to us then just beer...

[img=http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/4238/p10100167jo.th.jpg]



Andrew Brown -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 1:13:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
I don't know what happened to SubChaser...he seems to come and go.


Here is what I know (I have posted this before but I will post it again): Subchaser did intend to make a version of my map from scratch. After a while, however, he informed me that he thought that it would be too big a job. Instead, he made a modified version of my map, but with his style of fonts (sample attached). Although it was never 100% completed, he sent me a copy of the map. Before it could be completed (we were experimenting with industry and resource symbols) he stopped replying to my emails. When I mentioned in a previous thread that I had the map, I asked whether anyone wanted me to make it available, but I didn't receive any replies, so I never uploaded it onto my website.

Andrew

PS: CHS is all about trying to achieve as accurate a historical balance as is reasonably possible, given the limitations of the game engine and the time of the volunteer contributors. It is also very much a work in progress, as stated in the CHS documentation. The success of the scenario depends on contributions and feedback from interested players. Some seem to claim that CHS is an "Alled fanboy" mod; they are free to call it what they like, but if anyone has a genuine complaint or issue with the scenario, please let us know, along with the reasons for the complaint, and it will be looked at. If you think the scenario is unbalanced in the favour of the Allies, let us know why you think so.


[image]local://upfiles/1061/2BDB738577894D27B60EDFE2CBE0D3F9.jpg[/image]



Honda -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 2:16:49 PM)

I want my Oscars!



el cid again -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 2:36:49 PM)

quote:

PS: CHS is all about trying to achieve as accurate a historical balance as is reasonably possible, given the limitations of the game engine and the time of the volunteer contributors. It is also very much a work in progress, as stated in the CHS documentation. The success of the scenario depends on contributions and feedback from interested players. Some seem to claim that CHS is an "Alled fanboy" mod; they are free to call it what they like, but if anyone has a genuine complaint or issue with the scenario, please let us know, along with the reasons for the complaint, and it will be looked at. If you think the scenario is unbalanced in the favour of the Allies, let us know why you think so.


I cannot resist. I wanted some changes - and CHS put me to work. Not where I wanted to work - but where they needed work done. And what is the point in joining a team if you don't do what they need you do do? Anyway, I got to look at some of the data - field by field - in the exhaustive sort of way I do everything. IF CHS (and stock for that matter - many errors in CHS are IDENTICAL in stock) can be said to be in the pocket of any "fanboys" - surely they are Japanese. Gross exaggerations of the ranges of recon planes, for example. Fictional numbers of heavy weapons in Land Combat Units. Ships that are almost nuclear powered - one can go 1.75 times as far on only 2/3 of the real fuel - but do this FASTER than the real cruising speed. [Ship speed increases the need for power at an astronomical rate - and fuel consumption goes up as power goes up - this is something like a cube function]. I could go on. Every discussion I get in with CHS people is ALWAYS about accuracy, fixing what isn't right, and what is most important to fix first. Look for it to get better with each release as long as that remains the attitude. It is very clear this is not an AFB club.



Demosthenes -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 5:22:28 PM)

Pauk, I have no hard feelings over the matter.[8D]



witpqs -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 10:16:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

And to correct you, I don't think mdiehl bought the game, played it for, like, couple weeks, experimented playing the grand campaign till say 43, and then returned it because he was disappointed by what he saw. I think he *never* bought it at the first place (I may be wrong here though), which makes his participation on this board truely hilariously funny when you think about it.



You're right - his post said he 'borrowed' it from a friend and later 'returned' it to same.



witpqs -> RE: Andrew's Map (12/18/2005 10:19:01 PM)

Andrew,

I played a bunch on Subchaser's map before trying your map. I liked Subchaser's map better than the stock map. I like your map better than Subchaser's map. Yours is easier on the eyes after a couple of hours compared to his. Please stay with your own color scheme, etc.

[:)]



ChezDaJez -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 10:47:10 PM)

quote:

And to correct you, I don't think mdiehl bought the game, played it for, like, couple weeks, experimented playing the grand campaign till say 43,


He said he played until May 42. I would like to assume the Japanese AI cleaned his clock!

Chez



Oleg Mastruko -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/18/2005 10:56:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

PS: CHS is all about trying to achieve as accurate a historical balance as is reasonably possible, given the limitations of the game engine and the time of the volunteer contributors. It is also very much a work in progress, as stated in the CHS documentation. The success of the scenario depends on contributions and feedback from interested players. Some seem to claim that CHS is an "Alled fanboy" mod; they are free to call it what they like, but if anyone has a genuine complaint or issue with the scenario, please let us know, along with the reasons for the complaint, and it will be looked at. If you think the scenario is unbalanced in the favour of the Allies, let us know why you think so.



How about that little tidbit I already posted here (and that was ignored by nearly everyone).

CHS reduced Zero range from 11 to 10 hexes, so now A6M2 can't reach Guadalcanal from Rabaul - something that was possible historically, and something that I personally find *very* important in my games. So either the map guy (you) got something wrong, or the air guy (Lemurs or whoever) got something wrong.

It's not much, and it's not war winning issue either way, but it goes a long way in showing the general attitude of "mod makers", if they choose to deliberately tweak one piece of equipment so as to make it uncapable of conducting one of most important historical missions for given piece of equipment (I hope I don't have to quote mountain of source material detailing Rabaul-Lunga A6M2 missions).

O.



Big B -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/19/2005 12:14:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

PS: CHS is all about trying to achieve as accurate a historical balance as is reasonably possible, given the limitations of the game engine and the time of the volunteer contributors. It is also very much a work in progress, as stated in the CHS documentation. The success of the scenario depends on contributions and feedback from interested players. Some seem to claim that CHS is an "Alled fanboy" mod; they are free to call it what they like, but if anyone has a genuine complaint or issue with the scenario, please let us know, along with the reasons for the complaint, and it will be looked at. If you think the scenario is unbalanced in the favour of the Allies, let us know why you think so.



How about that little tidbit I already posted here (and that was ignored by nearly everyone).

CHS reduced Zero range from 11 to 10 hexes, so now A6M2 can't reach Guadalcanal from Rabaul - something that was possible historically, and something that I personally find *very* important in my games. So either the map guy (you) got something wrong, or the air guy (Lemurs or whoever) got something wrong.

It's not much, and it's not war winning issue either way, but it goes a long way in showing the general attitude of "mod makers", if they choose to deliberately tweak one piece of equipment so as to make it uncapable of conducting one of most important historical missions for given piece of equipment (I hope I don't have to quote mountain of source material detailing Rabaul-Lunga A6M2 missions).

O.


I have never played the CHS Mod.

As a crusader against the Zero Bonus in the name of what I think is historical accuracy - I would have to agree that that range reduction is very important to game play and would be very hard to explain away. And in an historical campaign could very well turn out to be a game breaker

Accuracy has to go both ways.

So why was it done anyway?



Oleg Mastruko -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/19/2005 12:40:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B
So why was it done anyway?


I don't know...

This is what I've been saying all along. We can discuss Zero bonus but only as part of the "whole package". If you come here to discuss removing Zero bonus in the name of "historical accuracy", after you lost your credibility *reducing* Zero range, making it *uncapable* of doing one of the most important and best known hisotrical missions, then you deserve to be laughed at and called "Allied fanboi" (which is what I did [;)]).

(I am not using "you" as you, I am using it to show my point [:D])

So there goes CHS goodwill and "historical accuracy" mumbo jumbo out of the window right there, showing what appears to be their true agenda... 15 pages of mdiehl's propaganda before anyone even mentioned the fact CHS already cheated Zero of it's range?!

mdiehl how come you don't comment on something as glaringly obvious as this? In the name of "historical accuracy"?

BTW I am no big fan of Zero bonus myself, not at all, as I stated in my first post in this thread. But then again I am no big fan of great many other things that are much more problematic.

Also, most importantly, history or no history once you start playing the game I think you have to be **REALLY bad** as Allied player to even care about ZB, let alone to come here whining begging for it to be removed. Zero was an operational surprise to Allies, developers felt it needed to be modelled and so they did. Period. Overall effect in the grand scheme of things is *negligible*, barely worth being mentioned in the manual.

If Zero bonus wasn't mentioned in the manual we would never even notice it's there. [sm=terms.gif]

O.



Helpless -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/19/2005 12:56:02 AM)

here is a thread describing the reasons for Zero range reduction - http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=899141&mpage=1&key=zero%2Crange

I think CHS guys can comment it more...


I persoanlly don't feel it to be AFB mod. I have played both sides and think that comparing to stock it is much harder to play allies in CHS. May be this is the reason in PBEM I play only CHS and only Jap side [:)]



Black Mamba 1942 -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/19/2005 1:07:18 AM)

So, out of curiosity sake.
You think CHS leans more toward the Japanese?
Is it because of more available shipping?
Or, because of VP garnishing by destroying the myriad of "fixed" Allied LCU's.

What's your opinion Helpless?



Oleg Mastruko -> RE: Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions? (12/19/2005 1:08:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Helpless

here is a thread describing the reasons for Zero range reduction - http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=899141&mpage=1&key=zero%2Crange


Just as I thought - Lemurs the Self Proclaimed Supreme Airforce Dictator arbitrarily decided to change this and that, and his changes went unchallenged (how do you challenge God? LOL) except for SubChaser, while he was still here. SC should have better spent his time redoing the maps, doing something that would last [:D]

BTW reading the above discussion I see SC was right, period.

quote:


I persoanlly don't feel it to be AFB mod. I have played both sides and think that comparing to stock it is much harder to play allies in CHS. May be this is the reason in PBEM I play only CHS and only Jap side [:)]


I'd love to play you in CHS as Allies, and wipe the floor with your bonus-boosted Zeros, but I'd need nicer map to do that [;)]

O.



Page: <<   < prev  13 14 [15] 16 17   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.921875