RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT!

RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (Full Version)

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

Message

Jim D Burns -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/25/2006 8:33:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SurrenderMonkey Well, yes .. BUT: WitP players are insanely aggressive with things like CAP and Sweep. How many times do you think the Black Sheep Squadron, for example, flew 100% CAP for days on end? Yet players do it all the time because our soldiers are silicon and no one gives the SLIGHTEST thought to saving human lives. It's just the nature of the beast. What's more, we don't really care (not like they did) about losing. Hey, if we lose 20,000 troops in a bungled amphibious invasion it;s no big deal ... just start over - or, at worst, lose VP's in a GAME. Wargames will always allow us to be incredibly aggressive vis-a-vis our historical counterparts. Not true, the Black Sheep were very active, it's just that massive squadron decimating casualties didn't occur and days where many victories or casualties occured were very rare. Below is a short account of the Black sheep squadron’s two tours in the Solomon campaign, taken from here: http://www.acepilots.com/usmc_vmf214.html The first tour lists a daily record of their flights, they were in the air a lot but contact with the enemy didn’t result in huge battles all the time. In fact the big battles with lots of kills were an exception and most days saw few if any kills. Jim Black Sheep 1st Tour In early September, 1943, the new VMF-214 moved up to their new forward base in the Russells, staging through Henderson Field. They flew their first combat mission on September 14, 1943. The grinding, day-in-day-out nature of that war cannot be re-created, but the following daily summary of thier first combat tour gives a sense of it. A typical mission involved 2 divisions (eight planes). Two missions a day would mean 16 sorties, using 20-25 healthy & available pilots. So a pilot typically flew 2 days out of 3. Sep. 14 - first combat mission, a raid over Kahili Sep. 15 - photo escort Sep. 16 - escorted Dauntless dive bombers to Ballale, a small island west of Bougainville where the Japanese had a heavily fortified airstrip. In a big aerial battle, the Black Sheep claimed 11 confirmed (5 by Boyington) and 8 probables, but Bob Ewing was lost. Sept. 17 - AM: escort photo reconnaisance over Choiseul; PM: search for Ewing. The Squadron moved up to the primitve facilities on Munda. Sep. 18 - CAP over landings on Vila, 31 sorties, Case and Magee scored Sept. 19 - AM: search for missing pilot, PM: escort strike on Vila Sept. 20 - 1AM: Boyington tries to intercept 'Washing Machine Charlie'; AM: escort Adm. Halsey in PT boat; PM: escort SBD's and TBF's to Kolombangara Sept. 21 - AM: barge-strafing, Magee threw grenade; PM: Kahili strafing Sept. 23 - AM: escort 24 SBD's and TBF's to Jakohima, near Kahili; PM - missing pilot search Sept. 26 - 3 divisions took part in large inter-service mission, flying cover for SBD's and TBF's over Kangu Hill near Kahili. Rinabarger's and Mullen's Corsairs badly shot up. Mullen got one kill. Sept. 27 - AM: dawn patrol; PM: escort B-24's to Kahili, and missing pilot search; 4 claims; Case returned late to find his belongings already shared out. Sept. 28 - routine patrols Sept. 29 - PM: barge-busting off Choiseul Sept. 30 - Lt. Bob Alexander killed in friendly-fire accident with PT-126 Bruce Gamble gives a well-written narrative of this tragedy in The Black Sheep. The squadron relocated back to the relative comforts of Banika in the Russells. Oct. 2/3 - Missions scrubbed for bad weather. Oct. 4 - escort SBD attack on Malabeta Hill near Kahili Oct. 7 - staged through Munda to cover naval task forces Oct. 10 - strike with B-24's over Kahili. Wildly inaccurate, most of the bombs dropped in the water, and thus (as Frank Walton noted in the official squadron War Diary) "killing many small fish." Ed Olander got his first victory. Oct. 11 - 3 divisions covered bombers over Kahili. More bombs landed in the water, presumably killing more "small fish." Bill Case scored a lucky kill when test-firing his guns, bringing down a Zero at extreme range. Oct. 13 - Lt. Virgil Ray, who had been traumatized in an earlier accident and therefore given light flying duties, was lost while flying a mail run. Oct. 14 - Case led a division on shipping patrol, and scored another lucky credit. In October VMF-214 moved up from their orginal base in the Russells to a more advanced location at Munda. From here they were closer to the next big objective -- the Jap bases on Bougainville. On another big day, Oct. 17, the squadron claimed 12 kills on a fighter sweep. Two days later they flew their last mission of the first tour, then went for R&R in Australia. Black Sheep 2nd Tour Since the Black Sheep had left, the Americans had captured a perimeter on the western side of Bougainville, at Empress Augusta Bay. They returned to Espiritu Santo in late November, where John Bolt conducted his ammo tests. By the 28th, VMF-214 had settled into their tents at Barakoma, on Vella Lavella; their base for the entire second tour. On Nov. 28, three divisions flew a routine patrol over Bougainville, code-named 'Cherry Blossom'. These patrols, an hour's flight from their base, occupied much of their air activity for the next three weeks. They were largely uneventful, as the Japanese planes were nowhere to be found. On Dec. 5, Boyington, Walton, Doc Reames, and others took a PT boat to Kolombangara, to search for Bob Alexander's remains. They found them, "the plane in a million pieces, and the boy, too, his bones huddled up in a pitifully small pile. We scooped out a shallow grave, laid his remains in there, painted his name on one blade of the propeller, and set it up as a headstone." as Frank Walton wrote to his wife. Three days later, some Black Sheep touched down at a brand-new airstrip on Torokina Point, at Empress Augusta Bay, Bougainville, the aircraft to use it. While the Black Sheep remained based at Vella Lavella, they would use Torokina as a refueling and emergency strip. Later squadrons, notably the Navy's VF-17, the Jolly Rogers, would operate from Torokina. After conferencing with ComAirSols, Gen. Ralph Mitchell, a large fighter sweep of eighty planes (from the Marine Corps, Navy, and RNZAF) was organized to go after Rabaul, the main Japanese base in that part of the Pacific. The idea was that they would have to come up and fight over Rabaul. They took off at 0515 on December 17. "Come up and fight." Boyington taunted over the radio. Edward Chikaki Honda, a Hawaii-raised Nisei who had ended up wearing a Japanese uniform, called back, "Come on down, sucker." In late December and early January, they engaged in a series of large and deadly dogfights with the Japanese over Rabaul; eight Black Sheep pilots (including Pappy Boyington) were lost in an 11-day period from Dec.23 through Jan. 3. In these final days, Henry Miller moved up to Exec when Major Carnagey was lost, and then to acting CO when Greg Boyington disappeared. A few days later, the 'Black Sheep' flew their last combat mission, and, as with the 'Swashbucklers', they were broken up, and a new team was designated VMF-214.

treespider -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/25/2006 8:45:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns Not true, the Black Sheep were very active, it's just that massive squadron decimating casualties didn't occur and days where many victories or casualties occured were very rare. Below is a short account of the Black sheep squadron’s two tours in the Solomon campaign, taken from here: http://www.acepilots.com/usmc_vmf214.html The first tour lists a daily record of their flights, they were in the air a lot but contact with the enemy didn’t result in huge battles all the time. In fact the big battles with lots of kills were an exception and most days saw few if any kills. Jim Black Sheep 1st Tour In early September, 1943, the new VMF-214 moved up to their new forward base in the Russells, staging through Henderson Field. They flew their first combat mission on September 14, 1943. The grinding, day-in-day-out nature of that war cannot be re-created, but the following daily summary of thier first combat tour gives a sense of it. A typical mission involved 2 divisions (eight planes). Two missions a day would mean 16 sorties, using 20-25 healthy & available pilots. So a pilot typically flew 2 days out of 3. Which goes to support Monkey's claim that even IRL they were only using 66% of their assets as opposed to 100% quote: Sep. 14 - first combat mission, a raid over Kahili Sep. 15 - photo escort Sep. 16 - escorted Dauntless dive bombers to Ballale, a small island west of Bougainville where the Japanese had a heavily fortified airstrip. In a big aerial battle, the Black Sheep claimed 11 confirmed (5 by Boyington) and 8 probables, but Bob Ewing was lost. Sept. 17 - AM: escort photo reconnaisance over Choiseul; PM: search for Ewing. The Squadron moved up to the primitve facilities on Munda. Sep. 18 - CAP over landings on Vila, 31 sorties, Case and Magee scored Sept. 19 - AM: search for missing pilot, PM: escort strike on Vila Sept. 20 - 1AM: Boyington tries to intercept 'Washing Machine Charlie'; AM: escort Adm. Halsey in PT boat; PM: escort SBD's and TBF's to Kolombangara Sept. 21 - AM: barge-strafing, Magee threw grenade; PM: Kahili strafing Sept. 23 - AM: escort 24 SBD's and TBF's to Jakohima, near Kahili; PM - missing pilot search Sept. 26 - 3 divisions took part in large inter-service mission, flying cover for SBD's and TBF's over Kangu Hill near Kahili. Rinabarger's and Mullen's Corsairs badly shot up. Mullen got one kill. Sept. 27 - AM: dawn patrol; PM: escort B-24's to Kahili, and missing pilot search; 4 claims; Case returned late to find his belongings already shared out. Sept. 28 - routine patrols Sept. 29 - PM: barge-busting off Choiseul Sept. 30 - Lt. Bob Alexander killed in friendly-fire accident with PT-126 Bruce Gamble gives a well-written narrative of this tragedy in The Black Sheep. The squadron relocated back to the relative comforts of Banika in the Russells. Oct. 2/3 - Missions scrubbed for bad weather. Oct. 4 - escort SBD attack on Malabeta Hill near Kahili Oct. 7 - staged through Munda to cover naval task forces Oct. 10 - strike with B-24's over Kahili. Wildly inaccurate, most of the bombs dropped in the water, and thus (as Frank Walton noted in the official squadron War Diary) "killing many small fish." Ed Olander got his first victory. Oct. 11 - 3 divisions covered bombers over Kahili. More bombs landed in the water, presumably killing more "small fish." Bill Case scored a lucky kill when test-firing his guns, bringing down a Zero at extreme range. Oct. 13 - Lt. Virgil Ray, who had been traumatized in an earlier accident and therefore given light flying duties, was lost while flying a mail run. Oct. 14 - Case led a division on shipping patrol, and scored another lucky credit. In October VMF-214 moved up from their orginal base in the Russells to a more advanced location at Munda. From here they were closer to the next big objective -- the Jap bases on Bougainville. On another big day, Oct. 17, the squadron claimed 12 kills on a fighter sweep. Two days later they flew their last mission of the first tour, then went for R&R in Australia. Black Sheep 2nd Tour Since the Black Sheep had left, the Americans had captured a perimeter on the western side of Bougainville, at Empress Augusta Bay. They returned to Espiritu Santo in late November, where John Bolt conducted his ammo tests. By the 28th, VMF-214 had settled into their tents at Barakoma, on Vella Lavella; their base for the entire second tour. On Nov. 28, three divisions flew a routine patrol over Bougainville, code-named 'Cherry Blossom'. These patrols, an hour's flight from their base, occupied much of their air activity for the next three weeks. They were largely uneventful, as the Japanese planes were nowhere to be found. On Dec. 5, Boyington, Walton, Doc Reames, and others took a PT boat to Kolombangara, to search for Bob Alexander's remains. They found them, "the plane in a million pieces, and the boy, too, his bones huddled up in a pitifully small pile. We scooped out a shallow grave, laid his remains in there, painted his name on one blade of the propeller, and set it up as a headstone." as Frank Walton wrote to his wife. Three days later, some Black Sheep touched down at a brand-new airstrip on Torokina Point, at Empress Augusta Bay, Bougainville, the aircraft to use it. While the Black Sheep remained based at Vella Lavella, they would use Torokina as a refueling and emergency strip. Later squadrons, notably the Navy's VF-17, the Jolly Rogers, would operate from Torokina. After conferencing with ComAirSols, Gen. Ralph Mitchell, a large fighter sweep of eighty planes (from the Marine Corps, Navy, and RNZAF) was organized to go after Rabaul, the main Japanese base in that part of the Pacific. The idea was that they would have to come up and fight over Rabaul. They took off at 0515 on December 17. "Come up and fight." Boyington taunted over the radio. Edward Chikaki Honda, a Hawaii-raised Nisei who had ended up wearing a Japanese uniform, called back, "Come on down, sucker." How was the AAA over Rabaul? Why didn't they come down? How is that simulated in the game?

Jim D Burns -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/25/2006 9:04:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: treespider Which goes to support Monkey's claim that even IRL they were only using 66% of their assets as opposed to 100% Well I can’t speak for others, but I always set my cap to 60%. If they scramble and get a 100% intercept fine if not then only 60% defend agaisnt the raid. So most days 60% fly, only an incoming raid sees more than 60% of my CAP squadrons fly in a day. Bombers can't fly more than 2 or 3 days straight before their morale plummets, so at best you can average 2-3 strikes a week, so overall I'm not using 100% of my forces, not even close. quote: How was the AAA over Rabaul? Why didn't they come down? How is that simulated in the game? You're joking right? [;)] Actually Boyington did eventually come down when he was shot down and taken captive by a sub. Jim

tsimmonds -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/25/2006 9:10:54 PM)
House rule for PBEM starting this week: Max CAP 50%. We are even discussing whether we should have all fighters not on LRCAP always set to 50% CAP.

Kwik E Mart -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/25/2006 9:18:03 PM)
Oct. 13 - Lt. Virgil Ray, who had been traumatized in an earlier accident and therefore given light flying duties, was lost while flying a mail run. ...the irony here is especially poignant...

witpqs -> Tony vs. Mohawk IV (1/25/2006 9:39:31 PM)
Jim, Here is a comparison of the Tony vs. the Mohawk IV (from CHS, not sure what you're playing). Mohawk-IV-------Stat---------Tony 323-----------Max-speed------368 2800------------ROC----------2970 31--------------MVR----------34 30--------------DUR----------31 0--------------Armor---------1 8---------------Gun----------12 In two of the most important categories, speed and gun rating, the Tony is way ahead. The guns were 4 x .303's versus 4 x 12.7mm.

el cid again -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/25/2006 11:25:36 PM)
quote: Historically groups were kept in the front lines for months on end and flew missions every day. Only the player who has air superiority can do this currently. The other player is forced to withdraw groups after only 1 or 2 days fighting. Had air units taken those kind of losses historically, even the massive US production would not have been able to keep up with all the air frames falling from the skies. You are quite correct - but I am not sure if you understand what it means? You also are incomplete: you should add that SOME units lost all or most of their planes in a day or two - and on both sides. Obviously it was the side that did NOT have air superority that lost planes fast. The model is working if it show this effect. Gamers must work in a simplified world - else we need a few million men and billions of dollars to go reinact the battles! My first ship had four WWII era twin gun mountings, complete with WWII era conical scan fire control radar. I didn't know when I got there that I would need to understand the interesting things the chief gunner's mate was doing with them a year and a half later - to defeat guided missiles! This chief ran a competition - each mount crew as a team - and ONLY the WINNER got the prize (3 out of 4 would not get extra liberty, or whatever the prize of the day was). The crews got really, really good. The chief reduced the number of rounds per team to only TWO per pass! [One per tube for twin guns]. He reasoned "if you solved the fire control problem correctly, the first round should hit the target - how close that first round is to the target is what I want to know - so no other rounds will distract me you get no other rounds at all". They got so good that it was NORMAL to hit on the first round, and in an afternoon of shooting at targets (towed by planes) we would count the times a team missed - it was a smaller number - and the lowest total was the winning team! Later I used this system (on ships with two mounts) to get back up gun crews to the skill level needed in case a missile got through my ECM or the SAMs. [In 1973 Israel got to demonstrate this gun layers works - repeatedly. It also appears that in 1982 a RN frigate did the same thing.] Modern anti-air warfare is lethal. Just as the AAA can be trained almost to perfection, so can fighter pilots. In Viet Nam we got to shoot down a missile with SAMs only once - and with guns never - not because either was not deadly - but because we never allowed the missiles through the fighters and the ECM. [I suspect that one time - USS Sterette got a Styx and two MiGs with SAMs in 1972 in one attack - we may have deliberately engaged with SAMs to proove we could.] While overall SAM rates in Viet Nam were 60 shots per kill, the anti-missile ships were selected because they NEVER missed in more than 100 live fires. The difference between good and not good is the skill of the crews combined with the organization for AAW. IF the game makes optimistic assumptions about your staff competence and training levels, your fighters are going to be lethal - mostly - because they would be. [I worked in software integration labs that "flew" planes on computers even before they were built or modified. I love to take the "lesser" plane - and I have offered USAF to fly against their F-22 in simulation - but they are afraid to let me I think - since they want to show it can always win - not that some inferior thing can beat it. In China a commander of the aggressor squadron at Nanjing was offered new Su-27s to replace his J-7Es. The J-7E is a modified MiG-21. In the west we think it has zero chance to compete. But the 7E is well reengineered, with a different wing, and it outmaneuvers even a Su - which says a lot. He offered to take on a loose duce - 4 planes - without a wingman - and he drove them from the sky - 2 kills 2 ran. In 1945 Saburo Sakai - JNAF - stopped teaching and went back to air combat again - in a hopelessly obsolete Zero - in spite of being blind in one eye and having no legs able to reach the controls. He became an ace all over again. My point is that professionalism is going to make a fighter - any fighter - very lethal.]

el cid again -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/25/2006 11:35:46 PM)
quote: The man's point was that 1) there's too much CAP to begin with in many cases and 2) it's entirely too effective, all of it engaging each incoming wave. To assert that CAP eventually gets "tired" by the fourth or fifth or sixth strike hardly argues that the air-combat system makes sense. It patently does not make sense for most (if not all) situations. CAP ought to "parceled out" to bandits, and all fighters on both sides need to be severely limited as to how many combats they're able to engage in, this to broadly simulate the limited quantity of ammo they were loaded with (an incredibly inept omission on Gary's part, First, let me remind everybody that I am almost finished with a data mod that will address air combat lethality in a big way. Second, let me say that someone we know got a Matrix programmer to admit the module has problems. So I am not saying that there are no problems here. However, the allegation that CAP is entirely too effective is actually false. CAP is not able to do what Japanese CAP could really do - engage in OTHER hexes. [See the record of Genda's Blade for one - and there was a similar JAAF outfit. They used recon planes to find enemy strikes far from their targets and engage them with fighters en route. They used electronic warning systems to find the strike packages. NONE of this is EVER possible in WITP - so you NEVER have to worry about what real commanders had to face.] CAP is also anything but 100% effective. I have had 1 or 3 or some other small number engage - when I assigned vastly greater numbers. And the post I responded to specifically said CAP never gets tired - but it does. As for ammunition - please give Gary a break. He did it RIGHT. WE (players) ASKED for a "fix" of the "too weak" fighter problem - in UV days - and they took the ammo limits out. It is still there and can be put back in - and should be. But it is NOT a design flaw.

el cid again -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/25/2006 11:40:47 PM)
quote: I couldn't care less about VPs. Shortsighted - unless you don't care when the game ends? Victory points will trigger automatic termination of play on certain dates. I don't like this - but there it is.

el cid again -> In defense of Oleg (1/25/2006 11:46:49 PM)
quote: Well, I've been around here for some time now and that's the first occasion I can recall someone calling Oleg on his neverending bullshit in such a frank and, if you don't mind my saying so, refreshing manner. (He's been called any number of times on his rudeness with regard to the work of others, especially modders, but not for this type of completely misleading feedback.) Except for me, of course. I get into it with this company yes man frequently. Of course that won't change him a jot, but it does keep my tools sharp. First of all, this post is not factual. I am a modder and you may find dozens of compliments Oleg has made about me. Second, I have actually played Oleg (who has real military rank by the way) and he is as skilled as his attitude implies. Third, in the case this post was commenting on, Oleg made quite useful and germane comments. He is not as diplomatic as I am - but English is also not his first language. You need to come to terms with the reality that things said across language barriers don't always sound smooth. Finally - criticism for being rude ought not to be rudely put in its own right - if you wish it to stick.

el cid again -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/25/2006 11:52:25 PM)
quote: Have you looked at the stock OOBs and replacement rates and such? Does any of that suggest anyone could expect historical play, given the system in place? I have. They are pretty awful. We can certainly expect a lot better results if we fix them - which we can. We probably cannot make a useful criticism of the model until we do. And if you play me, you may expect historical play by the other side. Maybe creative - I won't promise not to invade Hawaii - and in fact the only reason I won't is it is impossible with the current system. But it was really possible and should have been done - for lots of reasons. It totally changes the strategic situation, and focus of operations, and gives a nice bargaining chip to end the war with. If the US tries to take Hawaii back and fails (which is fairly likely since there are no air bases in range) - it may prefer a neutral Hawaii to a Japanese one. But I do expect historical play - not gamey play.

tsimmonds -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/25/2006 11:54:16 PM)
quote: CAP is not able to do what Japanese CAP could really do - engage in OTHER hexes. [See the record of Genda's Blade for one - and there was a similar JAAF outfit. They used recon planes to find enemy strikes far from their targets and engage them with fighters en route. They used electronic warning systems to find the strike packages. NONE of this is EVER possible in WITP - so you NEVER have to worry about what real commanders had to face.] I regularly see my area CAP effectively intercept incoming strikes against targets up to two hexes away.

el cid again -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/25/2006 11:58:25 PM)
quote: All well and good and interesting, except you misstate the case when you call the USN intelligence error an "operational defeat." It was nothing of the kind. You are not using your terminology precisely: a failure of reconnaissance is an OPERATIONAL failure, not an intelligence failure. And the Japanese understanding of our intentions was a judgement by their commander, not intelligence superiority. Our failure to understand the Japanese intentions also was an error in judgement by our commander, not a failure of intelligence. I repeat - you are about 90% confused about what happened - so you cannot achieve a useful analysis - until you come to terms with what happened. IF you don't understand our OPERATIONAL failure, you are still confused.

el cid again -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 12:36:56 AM)
quote: Make fatigue a greater factor by increasing the fatigue rate so those silicon pilots and soldiers become in effective unless they are rested and fed. So players would be foolish to abuse them so... Go over to UV and look up the way players felt about heavy bombers when they would not fly without being treated like babies. It may be that bombers and crews were temprimental, but players don't like units like that!

Ron Saueracker -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 12:46:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again quote: Make fatigue a greater factor by increasing the fatigue rate so those silicon pilots and soldiers become in effective unless they are rested and fed. So players would be foolish to abuse them so... Go over to UV and look up the way players felt about heavy bombers when they would not fly without being treated like babies. It may be that bombers and crews were temprimental, but players don't like units like that! Well Cid, if you are saying the sqweeky wheel get's the grease, I'd say you are generalizing. I'm like a screaming seized bearing and have been, but no joy aside from getting Canada in...guess you have to be loud and wrong to get something alterred.[8D]

treespider -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 12:59:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again quote: Make fatigue a greater factor by increasing the fatigue rate so those silicon pilots and soldiers become ineffective unless they are rested and fed. So players would be foolish to abuse them so... Go over to UV and look up the way players felt about heavy bombers when they would not fly without being treated like babies. It may be that bombers and crews were temprimental, but players don't like units like that! So are we striving for a game or a simulation? I didn't suggest that the pilots shouldn't fly if they don't pass their tests...what I am suggesting is that when they do fly, they are substantially penalized.

Ron Saueracker -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 1:02:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: treespider quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again quote: Make fatigue a greater factor by increasing the fatigue rate so those silicon pilots and soldiers become ineffective unless they are rested and fed. So players would be foolish to abuse them so... Go over to UV and look up the way players felt about heavy bombers when they would not fly without being treated like babies. It may be that bombers and crews were temprimental, but players don't like units like that! So are we striving for a game or a simulation? I didn't suggest that the pilots shouldn't fly if they don't pass their tests...what I am suggesting is that when they do fly, they are substantially penalized. Exactly how the model should have been approached initially.

treespider -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 1:06:13 AM)
quote: Exactly how the model should have been approached initially. If I only knew how to code....Perhaps 20 years from now after I self teach myself I'll design a game.

witpqs -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 1:52:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again quote: Make fatigue a greater factor by increasing the fatigue rate so those silicon pilots and soldiers become in effective unless they are rested and fed. So players would be foolish to abuse them so... Go over to UV and look up the way players felt about heavy bombers when they would not fly without being treated like babies. It may be that bombers and crews were temprimental, but players don't like units like that! Well Cid, if you are saying the sqweeky wheel get's the grease, I'd say you are generalizing. I'm like a screaming seized bearing and have been, but no joy aside from getting Canada in...guess you have to be loud and wrong to get something alterred.[8D] I got a favorable response by being polite and right...

witpqs -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 1:55:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: irrelevant quote: CAP is not able to do what Japanese CAP could really do - engage in OTHER hexes. [See the record of Genda's Blade for one - and there was a similar JAAF outfit. They used recon planes to find enemy strikes far from their targets and engage them with fighters en route. They used electronic warning systems to find the strike packages. NONE of this is EVER possible in WITP - so you NEVER have to worry about what real commanders had to face.] I regularly see my area CAP effectively intercept incoming strikes against targets up to two hexes away. True. I was going to point that out also. I think what Cid is referring to is multiple waves of fighter attacks against the strike headed to the CAP's own hex. What it boils down to is this: CAP action is abstracted to a degree. Rather than show multiple CAP battles for one raid, it's all rolled into one. So what we really should strive for is the right level of effectiveness for that one battle as it represents the overall CAP against the strike.

witpqs -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 1:57:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again quote: I couldn't care less about VPs. Shortsighted - unless you don't care when the game ends? Victory points will trigger automatic termination of play on certain dates. I don't like this - but there it is. Actually, you get a dialogue box informing you of the outcome and asking you if you want to continue playing, look at the map and quit, or quit. 'Continue Playing' works just fine. This is as of 1.795, uncertain in what version the change was first included.

Ron Saueracker -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 2:13:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: witpqs quote: ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again quote: Make fatigue a greater factor by increasing the fatigue rate so those silicon pilots and soldiers become in effective unless they are rested and fed. So players would be foolish to abuse them so... Go over to UV and look up the way players felt about heavy bombers when they would not fly without being treated like babies. It may be that bombers and crews were temprimental, but players don't like units like that! Well Cid, if you are saying the sqweeky wheel get's the grease, I'd say you are generalizing. I'm like a screaming seized bearing and have been, but no joy aside from getting Canada in...guess you have to be loud and wrong to get something alterred.[8D] I got a favorable response by being polite and right... I used to be polite...[:(]

Nomad -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 2:22:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker [/snip] I used to be polite...[:(] Really? [:D]

Ron Saueracker -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 2:46:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nomad quote: ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker [/snip] I used to be polite...[:(] Really? [:D] [img]http://emoticons4u.com/cool/cool23.gif[/img] Would you believe reserved?

witpqs -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 4:11:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker quote: ORIGINAL: witpqs quote: ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again quote: Make fatigue a greater factor by increasing the fatigue rate so those silicon pilots and soldiers become in effective unless they are rested and fed. So players would be foolish to abuse them so... Go over to UV and look up the way players felt about heavy bombers when they would not fly without being treated like babies. It may be that bombers and crews were temprimental, but players don't like units like that! Well Cid, if you are saying the sqweeky wheel get's the grease, I'd say you are generalizing. I'm like a screaming seized bearing and have been, but no joy aside from getting Canada in...guess you have to be loud and wrong to get something alterred.[8D] I got a favorable response by being polite and right... I used to be polite...[:(] We need verifiable data! [;)]

witpqs -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 4:38:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again quote: Have you looked at the stock OOBs and replacement rates and such? Does any of that suggest anyone could expect historical play, given the system in place? I have. They are pretty awful. We can certainly expect a lot better results if we fix them - which we can. We probably cannot make a useful criticism of the model until we do. And if you play me, you may expect historical play by the other side. Maybe creative - I won't promise not to invade Hawaii - and in fact the only reason I won't is it is impossible with the current system. But it was really possible and should have been done - for lots of reasons. It totally changes the strategic situation, and focus of operations, and gives a nice bargaining chip to end the war with. If the US tries to take Hawaii back and fails (which is fairly likely since there are no air bases in range) - it may prefer a neutral Hawaii to a Japanese one. But I do expect historical play - not gamey play. See the 'Bloody Pacific' AAR. Admiral Laurent captured Hawaii.

Ron Saueracker -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (1/26/2006 5:03:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: witpqs quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again quote: Have you looked at the stock OOBs and replacement rates and such? Does any of that suggest anyone could expect historical play, given the system in place? I have. They are pretty awful. We can certainly expect a lot better results if we fix them - which we can. We probably cannot make a useful criticism of the model until we do. And if you play me, you may expect historical play by the other side. Maybe creative - I won't promise not to invade Hawaii - and in fact the only reason I won't is it is impossible with the current system. But it was really possible and should have been done - for lots of reasons. It totally changes the strategic situation, and focus of operations, and gives a nice bargaining chip to end the war with. If the US tries to take Hawaii back and fails (which is fairly likely since there are no air bases in range) - it may prefer a neutral Hawaii to a Japanese one. But I do expect historical play - not gamey play. See the 'Bloody Pacific' AAR. Admiral Laurent captured Hawaii. Only because it is possible to get an airbase running at full tilt in one day.[8\|]

Tristanjohn -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (2/3/2006 4:16:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again quote: The man's point was that 1) there's too much CAP to begin with in many cases and 2) it's entirely too effective, all of it engaging each incoming wave. To assert that CAP eventually gets "tired" by the fourth or fifth or sixth strike hardly argues that the air-combat system makes sense. It patently does not make sense for most (if not all) situations. CAP ought to "parceled out" to bandits, and all fighters on both sides need to be severely limited as to how many combats they're able to engage in, this to broadly simulate the limited quantity of ammo they were loaded with (an incredibly inept omission on Gary's part, First, let me remind everybody that I am almost finished with a data mod that will address air combat lethality in a big way. Second, let me say that someone we know got a Matrix programmer to admit the module has problems. So I am not saying that there are no problems here. However, the allegation that CAP is entirely too effective is actually false. CAP is not able to do what Japanese CAP could really do - engage in OTHER hexes. [See the record of Genda's Blade for one - and there was a similar JAAF outfit. They used recon planes to find enemy strikes far from their targets and engage them with fighters en route. They used electronic warning systems to find the strike packages. NONE of this is EVER possible in WITP - so you NEVER have to worry about what real commanders had to face.] CAP is also anything but 100% effective. I have had 1 or 3 or some other small number engage - when I assigned vastly greater numbers. And the post I responded to specifically said CAP never gets tired - but it does. As for ammunition - please give Gary a break. He did it RIGHT. WE (players) ASKED for a "fix" of the "too weak" fighter problem - in UV days - and they took the ammo limits out. It is still there and can be put back in - and should be. But it is NOT a design flaw. Sid, the bottom line is that CAP as presented in this system does not work correctly. If it were ever to work correctly in the bloody sense this system has it then it would be American CAP that would be so effective, starting in 1943, and reaching a fairly serious level by the summer of 1944 I'd say. At no time were the Japanese as far along on that issue as were the Americans for various reasons, some having to do with technology, others with doctrine--and that itself was tied back to technology all too often. As for how Matrix reacted to the shortsighted whines from the days of UV, that's on Matrix, as it was their decision to make. And it is very much a design issue. What else could you call it? A problem with astrology? We have, just for example, F4F-4 Wildcats in the game with what, historically about 15-18 seconds of .50 Cal bursts (about 18 seconds figuring 240 rounds per gun, but Lundstrom states there were provisions to only load up with just 200 rounds for only four of the inboard .50s, with nothing at all for the outboard .50s, to save on weight) available and then they were out of the fight. But in the game they fight half the day long! Come on. Just because the fighters weren't "performing as people wanted" with UV was no good excuse to willy-nilly scrap ammo loadouts. Isn't Matrix the first one to argue that one has to be careful about changes and the eventual effects these changes might cause to the overall system? Well, this is the perfect example of that. Meanwhile, the company refuses to look at the load rates of ports and the efficiency of engineers at air bases, or even to adjust the OP-loss rates, because futzing around with something that "delicate" might break everything else in sight. Right. [8D]

Tristanjohn -> RE: PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT! (2/3/2006 4:29:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again quote: I couldn't care less about VPs. Shortsighted - unless you don't care when the game ends? Victory points will trigger automatic termination of play on certain dates. I don't like this - but there it is. That could be disconnected in a heartbeat, or better still given a toggle. My point was that the very concept of Victory Points is weak. If players can't agree on who is and who is not "winning" and "losing" then neither one of them has a clue, or perhaps the game really is "even" at that juncture in time. In any event, the enjoyment of playing these games ought to come with wrestling with the mechanics as one tries to achieve one's goals, assuming those mechanics are resonable. If someone needs some phony-baloney screen at the end of play with meaningless numbers on it to make all that worthwhile then I'd submit the game itself must be weak to begin with. I happen to have more respect for Grigsby's efforts than that and on that particular score. His games are already "fun" to play as far as that goes. Anyone who cannot "enjoy" a Grigsby game is close to impossible to please, no matter how one presents VPs at the end of play. For myself, I see no need to reflect these matters other than how it's done in chess. The idea is to destroy the opponent (a fundamental of war), and along the way it's usually the case that one side or the other will recognize the futility of further resistance and resign. Which is how it ought to be . . . and is in real life. No?

Tristanjohn -> RE: In defense of Oleg (2/3/2006 4:40:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again quote: Well, I've been around here for some time now and that's the first occasion I can recall someone calling Oleg on his neverending bullshit in such a frank and, if you don't mind my saying so, refreshing manner. (He's been called any number of times on his rudeness with regard to the work of others, especially modders, but not for this type of completely misleading feedback.) Except for me, of course. I get into it with this company yes man frequently. Of course that won't change him a jot, but it does keep my tools sharp. First of all, this post is not factual. I am a modder and you may find dozens of compliments Oleg has made about me. Your statement is illogical. Just becaue Oleg has been complimentary to you does not argue that he has been complimentary (or even polite, which is my point) to others. Go ask The Elf if you don't believe me, just for example. quote: Second, I have actually played Oleg (who has real military rank by the way) and he is as skilled as his attitude implies. Non sequitur. quote: Third, in the case this post was commenting on, Oleg made quite useful and germane comments. He is not as diplomatic as I am - but English is also not his first language. You need to come to terms with the reality that things said across language barriers don't always sound smooth. Finally - criticism for being rude ought not to be rudely put in its own right - if you wish it to stick. In Oleg's case it isn't the language barrier but his attitude. I don't say he's always rude, just often, and whenever he pleases. Actually, it doesn't even bother me all that much. I do call him on it when it happens, though. As for language barriers in general: been there, done that. I once lived and worked in Spain, and as my linguistic skills are apparently somewhat limited (I only had half a semester of Spanish in college, the rest I picked up on the street) I'm the first one to be sympathetic to anyone trying to converse effectively in a foreign tongue.

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.766113