Zero Corsair etc (Full Version)

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



Message


Tetsuo -> Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 9:23:54 AM)

*Stomps on poor dead horse*

Whats up with the corsair? Whats up with the zero in '42? Whats up with the witp air combat model in general?

Seeing as this great game would benefit froma a slightly more modest a2a combat model I dont see why its done?

Seeing as the designers were intent of creating a great gaming experience (ignroing some historical accuracy, fwiw) this decision seeems quite strange.

Witp is a great game and looking forward to my first pbem. :) Just curious why the weird a2a model from the old pacwar hasnt been upgraded..?




RAM -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 9:47:09 AM)

Don't think A2A model is going to change...

So try any of the NikMod scenarios (nikmod 8.0 or CHS 2.08 259 scenario, it includes nikmod too). They really give a great improvement. Since I tried them, I've never looked back.Stock A2A model is simply unbeliable.

I think RHS mod also changes air combat making it somewhat more accurate. Not sure about this, though. While I've tried (And I'm currently playing) CHS, I haven't given RHS a go -yet-, but you could try it to see if it suits you.




Tetsuo -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 10:12:12 AM)

Hi RAM,

I downloaded and tried the nikmod 2.8 but since I only played against the AI (which IMHO does a poor job in all games, stock or mod) I cant really say anything. Im more of the player that thinks if the original doesnt allow it, then they had something else in mind. :)

Thanks for your comments though, Im up for trying the mod against a human opponent but feel the stock game would be the best start, super corasirs/zeros or not. :)

edit: meant the CHS 2.08




goodboyladdie -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 10:14:38 AM)

Big B has also done a mod that changes A2A. He has altered mvr ratings based on wing loading and weapon accuracy too. It has reduced mvr on all Allied planes and should mean that only experienced pilots have frequent scoring opportunities. He has left other values roughly similar to prevent the knock on effect on other weapons system. The more simple solution is often better, after all. My pbem partner and I are about to start another game to try it as it looks pretty good. The over abundance of early 4E has also been dealt with as well as a more realistic China. It is a very simple install based on the stock map or ABs map and is available on Spooky's site.




el cid again -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 3:07:52 PM)

RHS attempted a rather greater set of changes to the model than Nik attempted.

These include:

a) Air to Air combat
b) Anti-Aircraft combat
c) Bombing
d) attrition

Results are so far much better than expected. Nuclear bombardment is gone. AA is much more effective - although possibly not as much as it should be (I am an AAW guy and understand the numbers). Air to air combat is
better - but only close to right for fights with fewer than 50 planes per side - due to code issues.

Contrary to what was posted above, you can expect changes to the air combat model. Ammunition limits may be restored for one thing. And a rewrite will make it handle large air combats better.

This is a very fine air combat model and a lot of the trouble was horribly inconsistent data. We had very wierd data - so wierd it is as if 1/3 was done by JFBs, 1/3 by AFBs and 1/3 by academics from Alpha Centuri who could care less who was better. This was probably due to several factors:

1) Limited funding for Matrix to track down every last thing for 200 plus types

2) No proper set of definitions - so different volunteers working on data don't know what the fields should be in many cases - and have to guess

3) Different sources - often a big deal - and difficulty understanding contradictory data on the allegedly same plane

Even so this is a very fine air combat model and it may become a standard. It looks worse than it is - and it will be improved - both officially and otherwise.

IF you look at RHS, note that there are 5 "really historical" scenarios and one "Japan enhansed scenario" (called EOS = Empire Of the Sun). Don't assume things in the latter are strictly historical in every sense - because some assumptions were made about changes after mobilization (July 1941) which show up fairly early. CVO is most like CHS and scock scenario 15. BBO is similar but assumes early war lessons didn't make the big changes to ship construction programs that really happened - so you are stuck with what was planned. Two scenarios reverse the Russians - so they can be active in peacetime for human players - but not for AI players. And there is PPO - a version with extra political points so you have freedom to send troops to different places - but so does the enemy.




Nikademus -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 4:16:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tetsuo

Hi RAM,

I downloaded and tried the nikmod 2.8 but since I only played against the AI (which IMHO does a poor job in all games, stock or mod) I cant really say anything. Im more of the player that thinks if the original doesnt allow it, then they had something else in mind. :)

Thanks for your comments though, Im up for trying the mod against a human opponent but feel the stock game would be the best start, super corasirs/zeros or not. :)

edit: meant the CHS 2.08


I recommend starting with Stock to get a feel for the game (if you havn't done so already) and then try a mod for comparison. [its usually easier to find a PBEM partner too using stock since the majority play with it] If trying Nikmod, there is a FAQ detailing all the changes.




Ursa MAior -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 4:41:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
[its usually easier to find a PBEM partner too using stock since the majority play with it] If trying Nikmod, there is a FAQ detailing all the changes.


Those must be lemmings or with suicuidal tendecies. Anyone who has ever tried NikMod -or other mods of course- would NEVER return to stock after it.




Nikademus -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 4:51:26 PM)

Well i certainly appreciate the compliment. [;)] I'm just being realistic though. Mod users are usually in a minority though. Nothing wrong with starting with stock and then trying other menu items.





Terminus -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 4:59:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
[its usually easier to find a PBEM partner too using stock since the majority play with it] If trying Nikmod, there is a FAQ detailing all the changes.


Those must be lemmings or with suicuidal tendecies. Anyone who has ever tried NikMod -or other mods of course- would NEVER return to stock after it.


Well call me lemming or "suicuidal" (whatever the hell that is), then... You arrogant *****...




Nikademus -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 5:02:03 PM)

I'd rather call you "pudgie"





Terminus -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 5:03:23 PM)

Shut up, Tons O' Fun...




Nicholas Bell -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 5:16:52 PM)

Seeing as this great game would benefit froma a slightly more modest a2a combat model I dont see why its done?

Seeing as the designers were intent of creating a great gaming experience (ignroing some historical accuracy, fwiw) this decision seeems quite strange.


Through the "back door" (ie hearsay) there has been an admission that the air combat model doesn't work as intended when there are more than 50 planes involved. Anyone who's played the game and knows anything about the actual history knows that this is true - and there are more problems than this.

Yet there is no "official" acknowledgment of the problem (or the many of the other well-known problems) by Matrix. If Matrix acknowledges a problem that means they might have to commit resources (money) to fix them, and they're in business - to make money at the lowest output of capital possible. Yeah, yeah, I know there's a new team assigned to "Fix" WitP but they must be working on it only in their spare time (which is zero because they have more important work assigned them which will make Matrix money). No offense to the programmers or their skilss intended, but if they were activily working on fixing these problems we would have seen results months ago.

So those interested in engaging in at least a somewhat historical game (not simulation) of the war before they die (waiting for around for Matrix to fix something they've never promised to fix) are left the valiant and pretty darn effective efforts of modders to fix what problems can be through data modification.




Ursa MAior -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 6:16:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
[its usually easier to find a PBEM partner too using stock since the majority play with it] If trying Nikmod, there is a FAQ detailing all the changes.


Those must be lemmings or with suicuidal tendecies. Anyone who has ever tried NikMod -or other mods of course- would NEVER return to stock after it.


Well call me lemming or "suicuidal" (whatever the hell that is), then... You arrogant *****...


Case a.
You are jokin' Then haha.

Case b.
You took it personally. Then I apologize for being harsh on you.

Case c.
You have not played anything but stock. Then I feel sorry for you [;)]

I have avoided mods in all games I've ever played until WitP. I was busy installing official patches but somehow most solved only part of the problems. After seeing so many great games failing their objectives by a small margin only I've decided to give NikMod a try. Worked out perfectly. BTW every people I've strarted PBEM with has been reading the forums so they had no problem playing any of the mods.

After I've played NikMOd I dont want ever to have the results I encountered while playing a friendly stock 44 scen. See our cancelled AAR Ursa vs Csatahajos stock 44 scen.

So hoorray for the fat wabbit!

I can say that since I am 145 kgs for my 190 cms so I am probably fatter then most of you.[;)]




AmiralLaurent -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 6:47:50 PM)


I think the model is fine to describe a fight between two air units, but it is far too bloody because:
1) an air unit will very easily detect an enemy unit in the air
2) there is no limit to the number of units an air unit may engage

The end result being that if you have 20 units on each side, each unit will have to fight 20 battles before the end of the battle. Each single fight may be OK, but after 20 fights the weakest unit will have been totally destroyed most of the times.

To reduce the chance of intercepting an enemy unit, and to limit the number of fights a given unit may do in a battle will allow the losses to come back to normal levels. And then an unit won't be destroyed in one day, as is often the case now.

But if you do that, you need to reduce the accuracy of the air torpedo (something done in all mods having modified combat IIRC).

My problem with the mods is that they are reducing the bloodiness of any fight..

In stock game, a 25 vs 25 fight will be OK, a 50 vs 50 will be too bloody and a 200 vs 200 or more will see one side annihilated

In mod (IMOO), a 25 vs 25 fight will not be bloody enough, a 100 vs 100 will be OK and a 500 vs 500 (not unusual in 1944) will again see one side annihilated. They didn't fix the problem, they just extended the range of the correct battle, and that is OK until 1944, but I'msure when CHS/RHS games will reach this date the same problems will appear.

By the way, in the Mariannas Turkey Shot Japanese losses were 2/3 of the AC launched, and more than a dozen reached the US ships. This is what WITP should simulate one day.

In another thread, Nik said that WITP was not a tactical CV simulator. I fully agree, and when we see raids by 500 AC, in fact the game should handle them as smaller raids that will be engaged by part of the CAP, not all AC available in the area.




goodboyladdie -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 6:53:23 PM)

Plenty of fun in both stock and mods as far as I can see. The amount of work Nik, AB, El Cid, Big B and many others put in certainly pays dividends and gives us mere mortals many extra things to worry about, BUT the original game that they base their mods on is a damn good game.

Terminus - if you ever fancy trying CHS, just to see what all the fuss is about, I am looking for a Jap player for CHS 2.08 155 or 156 (which is the normal A2A with or without Soviet Navy I believe).




Andy Mac -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 7:47:41 PM)

I tried CHS it was ok just not my cup of tea I liked many things about it and aprreciated the thought and effort that went in but on balance I preferred stock if that makes me a suicidal lemming so be it.  

Ironstorm was ok tried it liked it but As Sneer rightly pointed out it was hard on the Japanese production system.

So I also am one of the people who has reverted to stock and am enjoying it fine I have 5 very enjoyable PBEM's on the go.




Sardonic -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 7:58:41 PM)

I think you are all crazy.

I see nothing wrong with the Zero model.

As allied player I usually gain air superiority around 6/41, and after that I rarely lose it.

KB can attrit its fighters if he chooses.

I always get at least equal losses or better.
and that is with Hurricanes and such.




castor troy -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 8:03:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardonic

I think you are all crazy.

I see nothing wrong with the Zero model.

As allied player I usually gain air superiority around 6/41, and after that I rarely lose it.

KB can attrit its fighters if he chooses.

I always get at least equal losses or better.
and that is with Hurricanes and such.



You gain air superiority around 6/41?? [X(] When do you start the war? [;)]




Sardonic -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/15/2006 8:47:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardonic

I think you are all crazy.

I see nothing wrong with the Zero model.

As allied player I usually gain air superiority around 6/41, and after that I rarely lose it.

KB can attrit its fighters if he chooses.

I always get at least equal losses or better.
and that is with Hurricanes and such.



You gain air superiority around 6/41?? [X(] When do you start the war? [;)]



Ok 6/42 then =P





dtravel -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/16/2006 3:17:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
[its usually easier to find a PBEM partner too using stock since the majority play with it] If trying Nikmod, there is a FAQ detailing all the changes.


Those must be lemmings or with suicuidal tendecies. Anyone who has ever tried NikMod -or other mods of course- would NEVER return to stock after it.


Well, for one thing support for problem reports is only available is you are playing stock.

Second, IMHO, building mods for this game is like building a house on quicksand. If the game engine you are building on is shaky and has problems, then your mod is going to have problems.

Third, if you do find a bug while playing a mod, Matrix/2by3 have stated they can't fix it because they don't know if it is the mod or the game. So if you're playing a mod then nothing you report can be used to help fix the underlying game. (Which desparately needs it!)

Fourth, the posters to this forum represent a small minority of the players. And basically if you aren't on this forum, you aren't even aware of the mods.




witpqs -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/16/2006 5:00:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dtravel

Third, if you do find a bug while playing a mod, Matrix/2by3 have stated they can't fix it because they don't know if it is the mod or the game. So if you're playing a mod then nothing you report can be used to help fix the underlying game. (Which desparately needs it!)



I believe this is no longer the case - they have isolated some I found while playing CHS and RHS. I believe the same might be true for other people too.




dtravel -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/16/2006 6:01:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: dtravel

Third, if you do find a bug while playing a mod, Matrix/2by3 have stated they can't fix it because they don't know if it is the mod or the game. So if you're playing a mod then nothing you report can be used to help fix the underlying game. (Which desparately needs it!)



I believe this is no longer the case - they have isolated some I found while playing CHS and RHS. I believe the same might be true for other people too.


I was just quoting Matrix's written official policy.




Charles2222 -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/16/2006 10:27:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent


I think the model is fine to describe a fight between two air units, but it is far too bloody because:
1) an air unit will very easily detect an enemy unit in the air
2) there is no limit to the number of units an air unit may engage

The end result being that if you have 20 units on each side, each unit will have to fight 20 battles before the end of the battle. Each single fight may be OK, but after 20 fights the weakest unit will have been totally destroyed most of the times.

To reduce the chance of intercepting an enemy unit, and to limit the number of fights a given unit may do in a battle will allow the losses to come back to normal levels. And then an unit won't be destroyed in one day, as is often the case now.

But if you do that, you need to reduce the accuracy of the air torpedo (something done in all mods having modified combat IIRC).

My problem with the mods is that they are reducing the bloodiness of any fight..

In stock game, a 25 vs 25 fight will be OK, a 50 vs 50 will be too bloody and a 200 vs 200 or more will see one side annihilated

In mod (IMOO), a 25 vs 25 fight will not be bloody enough, a 100 vs 100 will be OK and a 500 vs 500 (not unusual in 1944) will again see one side annihilated. They didn't fix the problem, they just extended the range of the correct battle, and that is OK until 1944, but I'msure when CHS/RHS games will reach this date the same problems will appear.

By the way, in the Mariannas Turkey Shot Japanese losses were 2/3 of the AC launched, and more than a dozen reached the US ships. This is what WITP should simulate one day.

In another thread, Nik said that WITP was not a tactical CV simulator. I fully agree, and when we see raids by 500 AC, in fact the game should handle them as smaller raids that will be engaged by part of the CAP, not all AC available in the area.



No, the real solution was in a previous Grigsby game, BTR (or USAAF). Simply, you have each day progress in so many intervals. In BTR I think it was 10 minute pulses. Mind you, that game was every bit as strategic as this game is, so it's very possible to do. That way there's some strategy in not sending everything in one colossal raid. Such a thing was still possible for BTR, but you were pretty stupid if you did it, because you made things very easy for the interceptors. The idea, just like in real life, is you probably have no idea just how much the enemy will send at you and at what time and what intervals, so you almost always try to hold at least something back. Sure, the same groups could take off again once they were re-fueled, but they would be less efficient than when they went up the first time, and that's assuming they took no losses. Why on earth they would abandon such a fine aerial system is a mystery to me. Imagine, for example, sending up only three of your Zeroes to intercept maybe 10 Wildcats coming at you, holding some back for the expected, as yet unseen bombers and maybe getting those three to come back after the first bit of scuffle. that's another bad thing about this game, you can't ever recall them once they're into the battle, thus reducing some losses that way. In BTR there were times that the best strategy was to send a gruppen or smaller unit up just to scuffle for a minute and then return home. Just something to get the escorts or bombers a little disruption if you had little or nothing else worthy at the time.




Ron Saueracker -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/16/2006 11:48:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22


quote:

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent


I think the model is fine to describe a fight between two air units, but it is far too bloody because:
1) an air unit will very easily detect an enemy unit in the air
2) there is no limit to the number of units an air unit may engage

The end result being that if you have 20 units on each side, each unit will have to fight 20 battles before the end of the battle. Each single fight may be OK, but after 20 fights the weakest unit will have been totally destroyed most of the times.

To reduce the chance of intercepting an enemy unit, and to limit the number of fights a given unit may do in a battle will allow the losses to come back to normal levels. And then an unit won't be destroyed in one day, as is often the case now.

But if you do that, you need to reduce the accuracy of the air torpedo (something done in all mods having modified combat IIRC).

My problem with the mods is that they are reducing the bloodiness of any fight..

In stock game, a 25 vs 25 fight will be OK, a 50 vs 50 will be too bloody and a 200 vs 200 or more will see one side annihilated

In mod (IMOO), a 25 vs 25 fight will not be bloody enough, a 100 vs 100 will be OK and a 500 vs 500 (not unusual in 1944) will again see one side annihilated. They didn't fix the problem, they just extended the range of the correct battle, and that is OK until 1944, but I'msure when CHS/RHS games will reach this date the same problems will appear.

By the way, in the Mariannas Turkey Shot Japanese losses were 2/3 of the AC launched, and more than a dozen reached the US ships. This is what WITP should simulate one day.

In another thread, Nik said that WITP was not a tactical CV simulator. I fully agree, and when we see raids by 500 AC, in fact the game should handle them as smaller raids that will be engaged by part of the CAP, not all AC available in the area.



No, the real solution was in a previous Grigsby game, BTR (or USAAF). Simply, you have each day progress in so many intervals. In BTR I think it was 10 minute pulses. Mind you, that game was every bit as strategic as this game is, so it's very possible to do. That way there's some strategy in not sending everything in one colossal raid. Such a thing was still possible for BTR, but you were pretty stupid if you did it, because you made things very easy for the interceptors. The idea, just like in real life, is you probably have no idea just how much the enemy will send at you and at what time and what intervals, so you almost always try to hold at least something back. Sure, the same groups could take off again once they were re-fueled, but they would be less efficient than when they went up the first time, and that's assuming they took no losses. Why on earth they would abandon such a fine aerial system is a mystery to me. Imagine, for example, sending up only three of your Zeroes to intercept maybe 10 Wildcats coming at you, holding some back for the expected, as yet unseen bombers and maybe getting those three to come back after the first bit of scuffle. that's another bad thing about this game, you can't ever recall them once they're into the battle, thus reducing some losses that way. In BTR there were times that the best strategy was to send a gruppen or smaller unit up just to scuffle for a minute and then return home. Just something to get the escorts or bombers a little disruption if you had little or nothing else worthy at the time.



Me too.[8|]




el cid again -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/16/2006 1:30:43 PM)

Nick is a bit too negative in his assessment. Actually, we have both official and semi-official communications from Matrix that there will be changes.

Backing up a step, one of the problems with the air combat model is OUR (meaning forum members) fault - and Matrix got burned because it listened to us (that is, what forum members wanted). This refers to the removal of ammunition limits - which were part of the original package. Now planes can shoot forever! Literally. This happened in UV days - so maybe many who were not around then don't remember it - but it is a point that needs stressing: not everything wrong is Matrix fault - some of the blame can be shared.

In addition, Matrix looked at fixing the air combat model as part of the process of upgrading WITP I. Turned out the issue is thorny enough to require a complete rewrite of the routine. Which is why it wasn't done for 1.8 or 1.81. But I think it is necessary to say these upgrades did do a significant number of things - a few of which may have marginal bearing on this issue. The President of Matrix himself posted the notice of intent to upgrade the game - announcing the hiring of two forum members who also are programmers to add to the team - and asked us to have a bit of faith and patience - which I think is appropriate.

I have done a number of mechanical and computer assisted versions of WITP for decades. I also tried to come to terms with PacWar and other computer games - and could not. This is the first system to come close.
I think it is doomed to get better - because of the great interest it has generated - and because of the large international team of volunteers supporting it. Even if Matrix went out of business tonight this game isn't going to stop getting better. And instead of abandoning it Matrix is going to help make it better.

As for "simulation" - I am a student of historical models. This game is already vastly superior to "computer models" used by famous mathmeticians for the Pentagon in our history (I am thinking of Herman Kahn, inventer of the concept). I don't know what it takes for Nik to call it a simulation - but I shamelessly do. A simulation is by definition a SIMPLIFICATION of reality - not reality itself. I have no problem with that.




el cid again -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/16/2006 1:33:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardonic

I think you are all crazy.

I see nothing wrong with the Zero model.

As allied player I usually gain air superiority around 6/41, and after that I rarely lose it.

KB can attrit its fighters if he chooses.

I always get at least equal losses or better.
and that is with Hurricanes and such.




If you gain air superiority in 6/41 - in a game that does not begin until 12/41 -
I wonder what technology you are using?




m10bob -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/16/2006 1:37:37 PM)

IMHO, CHS with Nikmod is great, and Sid's RHS mods are a step forward from there, with (to me) more historically accurate results in individual battles...............




el cid again -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/16/2006 1:39:16 PM)

I remember once getting Matrix to fix something - in UV.

As far as I know they don't fix things now.

You have a problem in a game and they fix it for you?

Where do I sign up?

One of the things RHS has brought to the table is a willingness
to fix things in a timely way. Now I am not sure what you mean
by "fix" ? But there are many things we can address in a mod
Matrix will never consider. Take a look at the map. The maps
are so awful in stock I will never consider playing it.
Of course, I am a sailor, and have been to most places on the map -
maybe most are not aware how awful it really is? Without a good
map I don't see how you get a good game...and by incredible good
fortune we found Cobra - so we have satellite imagery!




m10bob -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/16/2006 6:01:13 PM)

"so we have satellite imagery! "



So if somebody were to say China was not mountainous..................[;)]




AmiralLaurent -> RE: Zero Corsair etc (9/16/2006 8:52:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

No, the real solution was in a previous Grigsby game, BTR (or USAAF). Simply, you have each day progress in so many intervals. In BTR I think it was 10 minute pulses. Mind you, that game was every bit as strategic as this game is, so it's very possible to do. That way there's some strategy in not sending everything in one colossal raid. Such a thing was still possible for BTR, but you were pretty stupid if you did it, because you made things very easy for the interceptors. The idea, just like in real life, is you probably have no idea just how much the enemy will send at you and at what time and what intervals, so you almost always try to hold at least something back. Sure, the same groups could take off again once they were re-fueled, but they would be less efficient than when they went up the first time, and that's assuming they took no losses. Why on earth they would abandon such a fine aerial system is a mystery to me. Imagine, for example, sending up only three of your Zeroes to intercept maybe 10 Wildcats coming at you, holding some back for the expected, as yet unseen bombers and maybe getting those three to come back after the first bit of scuffle. that's another bad thing about this game, you can't ever recall them once they're into the battle, thus reducing some losses that way. In BTR there were times that the best strategy was to send a gruppen or smaller unit up just to scuffle for a minute and then return home. Just something to get the escorts or bombers a little disruption if you had little or nothing else worthy at the time.



Except that in BTR, one side did the planning (Allied) and the other reacted to it in real time (Axis). In game terms that means that Allied had to guese what to do, while Axis had any opportunity he wants to exploit Allied mistakes. It only works because at this stage of the war, Allied was already far superior to Axis.
And a turn of BTR is longer than a turn of WITP, even if there is only the air part to do.

WITP is different in the sense that both side plan the next turn and then the computer will take by itself all the 'tactical' decisions.

But on the other hand you're right that something can be taken from BTR. At least in BTR a given unit won't engage several enemy units at once and the losses were closer to history than WITP, when you keep Allied raids close to history (no raid on Ruhr with B-26 in 1943). BTR is again a bit too bloody, but just a bit, while in WITP total slaughter of an unit, or tens of it, is common.




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.578125