RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch?

RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition

Message

dereck -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/24/2009 10:43:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok quote: ORIGINAL: dereck And also to be blunt about it I frankly get peeved with your crappy attitude and the attitude of those like you that think PBEM is the ONLY way to play this game. I paid good money for this game and if I - and obviously others - like to play solo we should have that ability without having to get screwed in all these patches because of people like you who play PBEM and do things that none of the AI players would do. I've been dealing with this attitude since I bought the first WITP game and it's only got worse. If this game wasn't intended to also be played solo the AI option wouldn't be there but it is so you PBEMers just have to deal with it. Wah wah wah. No one's stopping you. Have at it. It's not that PBEM is the only way to play, but it is the BEST way to play. What makes me absolutely laugh out loud is the arrogance of you AI-onlies who think you know what is the best way to play. Play both. If you go back to AI, fine. But you won't. Let me know if I've missed some rule that requires me to give a crap about AI play. PBEM doesn't mean just the GC game either. Addendum: To be perfectly correct, I think the very best way to play is head-to-head hotseat, but that is extremely difficult to arrange. PBEM is the best combination of convenience and competition. Mynok, This is the last I'm going to respond to this because it's becoming a flame type posting but ... We AI players AREN'T the ones who are arrogant and think it's the ONLY way to play. Look in a mirror - the attitude that one's way to play is the only way has been posted by more than one PBEMer and I can't recall any AI player ever saying that their way was the only way to play. I never said that and all I said was that those like myself who like to play solo should have that ability. So get off your high-horse and realize there are people who paid just as much money for this game to be able to play it solo since that is how they enjoy it.

dereck -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/24/2009 10:46:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jwilkerson I think the only issue is for Allied AI players who don't want the IJN submarines making havoc on their unescorted merchant convoys. Problems include that the Japanese did go after enemy merchant ships in the first six months of the war - and Allies didn't really use convoys in the Pacific during the period. For PBEM games, I do not think there is any issue because the players have options as to how to use their vessels on both sides. As to Allied versus AI games, I'd like to wait a bit before we decide things are broken. The new patch changed the ASW/Submarine aspect a bit and there have not been enought reports to really know how the balance has shifted. That doesn't take into account the fact that Japanese submarine doctrine WAS to go after warships first and that out of 184 merchant ships accounted for by the Japanese only 98 were US merchants. And that was for the entire war. This game has gone from being a historical simulation to a Jap Fan Boy Fantasy World with no grasp of reality. As Tomcat said if I could use the game editor to modify it back into reality I would but with this being hard coded I - and other people playing the AI - are screwed.

Richard III -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/24/2009 10:47:07 PM)
Joe, that sounds reasonable if you are indeed open to revisting the switch issue and I`ll be happy to unofficially test it in the 3 ongoing Allied VS the AI games in progress and report actual results here. If your not interesting in re-thinking it please say so now and I won`t waste my time. " Opinion" : Having said that, one of the things that has always make Joel & Gary`s game designs great is that they allow options that allow the player choices that make the game interesting and different . Removing the Sub switch removes a choice, which is a big deal for the AI gamer. The PBEM`ers can always use house rules. RL. quote: ORIGINAL: jwilkerson I think the only issue is for Allied AI players who don't want the IJN submarines making havoc on their unescorted merchant convoys. Problems include that the Japanese did go after enemy merchant ships in the first six months of the war - and Allies didn't really use convoys in the Pacific during the period. For PBEM games, I do not think there is any issue because the players have options as to how to use their vessels on both sides. As to Allied versus AI games, I'd like to wait a bit before we decide things are broken. The new patch changed the ASW/Submarine aspect a bit and there have not been enought reports to really know how the balance has shifted.

Sonny II -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/24/2009 10:47:39 PM)
quote: If this game wasn't intended to also be played solo the AI option wouldn't be there but it is so you PBEMers just have to deal with it. Likewise if the game were designed to use the IJN sub switch it would be there.

Mynok -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/24/2009 10:48:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jwilkerson I think the only issue is for Allied AI players who don't want the IJN submarines making havoc on their unescorted merchant convoys. Problems include that the Japanese did go after enemy merchant ships in the first six months of the war - and Allies didn't really use convoys in the Pacific during the period. For PBEM games, I do not think there is any issue because the players have options as to how to use their vessels on both sides. As to Allied versus AI games, I'd like to wait a bit before we decide things are broken. The new patch changed the ASW/Submarine aspect a bit and there have not been enought reports to really know how the balance has shifted. A reasonable approach. I don't care if the option is there or not, but it should default to OFF since only a few solo players are ever going to use it.

Richard III -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/24/2009 11:06:00 PM)
It sure seems that way when taken with all the other AE changes that cripple the US player. What I really can`t understand is: if they are going to elimnate the switch, why did they go with the Ahistorical Option, which clearly benifits the Japanese player as opposed to the Historical choice. The game was coded for both since WITP version 1.0 hence the switch ? quote: This game has gone from being a historical simulation to a Jap Fan Boy Fantasy World with no grasp of reality. As Tomcat said if I could use the game editor to modify it back into reality I would but with this being hard coded I - and other people playing the AI - are screwed.

rockmedic109 -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/24/2009 11:44:46 PM)
I am not sure if it is the IJN doctrine which is to blame for the increased attacks and sinkings I am seeing or if it is the far better use of subs by the AI that is causing it. It does cause me to use more escorts and to worry when I send smaller ships out solo to outlying outposts.....and this isn't a bad thing.

Tomcat -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/25/2009 12:04:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Richard III It sure seems that way when taken with all the other AE changes that cripple the US player. What I really can`t understand is: if they are going to elimnate the switch, why did they go with the Ahistorical Option, which clearly benifits the Japanese player as opposed to the Historical choice. The game was coded for both since WITP version 1.0 hence the switch ? quote: This game has gone from being a historical simulation to a Jap Fan Boy Fantasy World with no grasp of reality. As Tomcat said if I could use the game editor to modify it back into reality I would but with this being hard coded I - and other people playing the AI - are screwed. Actually the increased Japanese sinking of my merchant ships was one of the easier things for me to deal with. I'm about to confess some heresy here, so historical purists please don't read any further -- I simply modified the game to give the allies more destroyers, and made sure that I used them with supply and transport convoys. I know that this sort of thing is liable to cause heart attacks for some people, but I believe that the point of playing the game is to have fun, and we all have different ideas about what makes the game enjoyable. There are very few games I play that I don't modify, and from what I can see on various forums one of the things that attracts people to at least some games, and makes them loyal, is the ability to make modifications. The more I can make AE do what I want it to do the happier I am with it.

jazman -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/25/2009 12:43:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Wah wah wah. No one's stopping you. Have at it. It's not that PBEM is the only way to play, but it is the BEST way to play. What makes me absolutely laugh out loud is the arrogance of you AI-onlies who think you know what is the best way to play. Play both. If you go back to AI, fine. But you won't. Let me know if I've missed some rule that requires me to give a crap about AI play. PBEM doesn't mean just the GC game either. Addendum: To be perfectly correct, I think the very best way to play is head-to-head hotseat, but that is extremely difficult to arrange. PBEM is the best combination of convenience and competition. We heard you the first time. After hearing it 527 times, it's getting repetitive.

JohnDillworth -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/25/2009 1:02:35 AM)
quote: Wah wah wah. No one's stopping you. Of course one could throw down the gauntlet and email a PBEM game and see if the challange is accepted. Sorry, that was mean.[:-]

88l71 -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/25/2009 1:53:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok quote: ORIGINAL: dereck And also to be blunt about it I frankly get peeved with your crappy attitude and the attitude of those like you that think PBEM is the ONLY way to play this game. I paid good money for this game and if I - and obviously others - like to play solo we should have that ability without having to get screwed in all these patches because of people like you who play PBEM and do things that none of the AI players would do. I've been dealing with this attitude since I bought the first WITP game and it's only got worse. If this game wasn't intended to also be played solo the AI option wouldn't be there but it is so you PBEMers just have to deal with it. Wah wah wah. No one's stopping you. Have at it. It's not that PBEM is the only way to play, but it is the BEST way to play. What makes me absolutely laugh out loud is the arrogance of you AI-onlies who think you know what is the best way to play. Play both. If you go back to AI, fine. But you won't. Let me know if I've missed some rule that requires me to give a crap about AI play. PBEM doesn't mean just the GC game either. Addendum: To be perfectly correct, I think the very best way to play is head-to-head hotseat, but that is extremely difficult to arrange. PBEM is the best combination of convenience and competition. How is putting in a toggle for sub ops for those of us who play AI only taking anything away from PBEM'ers like yourself who will run your subs manually anyway? I wouldn't go for PBEM because, quite frankly, I do a turn whenever I feel like it, if that means 3 a day or 1 a month, and it wouldn't be fair to ask my opponent to put up with an erratic schedule, not to mention committing to possibly a several-years (real time) long game. I happen to enjoy other games plus real life stuff and AE is a involving, micromanagement-heavy, detail-oriented game where it's not like I can just whip out a turn without setting aside a substantial block of time for it. Sorry, but I'm not one of those people who has been playing since vanilla WitP came out and can do allied turn 1 in his sleep. My computer opponent doesn't care about a schedule or anything else. Sorry for being long winded but just trying to say, for me, PBEM isn't the "best" way to play by any means...but I surely don't have a problem with people who exclusively play PBEM, and the issues with Japanese AI subs have nothing to do with changing PBEM play. And you may not care about AI play but it's obvious Matrix has put in a lot of effort to improve the AI from vanilla, for which I am very appreciative.

Gary D -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/25/2009 2:40:54 AM)
quote: ... but it's obvious Matrix has put in a lot of effort to improve the AI from vanilla, for which I am very appreciative. I second this sentiment. Like some of you folks I am an AI player. Same with Pacwar and Witp. Usually the way it worked out I spent a few years playing the "historical AI" and when it became stale moved on to the mods that came along tossing in a lot of twists to history. With AE I think it is a bit reversed. It seems Andys great AI is giving us a little bit of the "PBEM style" non historical feel first and sooner or latter somebody will challenge Andy at script mastery and try to stick to a more "historical" time line. I like it. Sooner or latter, as I played along in my "historical AI" mode I would read some of the great AARs our PBEM brothers post, and wish the AI could do some of the things I was reading about. I would end up making my own little house rules like garrisoning India/Oz against an attack that we all knew would never happen with the old AI. Now you just do not know and that is a very nice addition from my point of view. Next year or the year after when I have seen and enjoyed Andys new bag of tricks it will be time to pick up a mod and see the adventure from somebody elses perspective, perhaps with an AI that does not have "victory disease" from day one! My first go at the GC the IJN subs ate my lunch. So now I convoy and have lost only a single AK up to March. After the initial rush to save the merchies, convoying made it easier to keep track of things anyhow. One or two escorts of any kind keep the wolves at bay, at least up to a convoy size of 20 vessels or so. More hulls than that and my folks start playing bumper cars with each other and doing as much damage to each other as the subs did, well almost! :) All the best to you folks, AI players and PBEMers!

Mynok -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/25/2009 4:59:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth quote: Wah wah wah. No one's stopping you. Of course one could throw down the gauntlet and email a PBEM game and see if the challange is accepted. Sorry, that was mean.[:-] LOL! If I could do more PBEM games justice I would. I promise!

Mynok -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/25/2009 5:07:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 88l71 How is putting in a toggle for sub ops for those of us who play AI only taking anything away from PBEM'ers like yourself who will run your subs manually anyway? I have no problem with it at, as my prior post indicates. As long as it defaults to OFF and doesn't affect my choice to change the strategic goals of my subs. For those who are relatively new to this system, and I really have no clue if you are one of them, there has been a long-standing and annoying insistence by some these AI fanboi's that the Japs should be restricted to only historical Jap strategic decisions. I have no problem with putting some logical limitations on them at all. But some of these goofs complain because Jap players don't recreate Midway or horde pilots or decide to throw extra effort into China. As if just because the japs were stupid we have to be. AE has done a great job of putting more teeth in those logical limitations to what the Jap player can accomplish. I give tremendous credit to the dev team for that. But at least let us correct some of the stupid strategic decisions they made without penalty just because the historical joes didn't do it. For some, that it apparently anathema.

Kull -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/25/2009 6:37:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gary D My first go at the GC the IJN subs ate my lunch. So now I convoy and have lost only a single AK up to March. After the initial rush to save the merchies, convoying made it easier to keep track of things anyhow. One or two escorts of any kind keep the wolves at bay, at least up to a convoy size of 20 vessels or so. More hulls than that and my folks start playing bumper cars with each other and doing as much damage to each other as the subs did, well almost! :) All the best to you folks, AI players and PBEMers! Exactly. Using convoys will solve the "overpowered IJN subs" problem. Besides, the devs are not going to mod a switch back into the game, especially one that that may not have worked that well to begin with. But let's assume for a moment that they DO put the toggle back. In order to achieve "real world" results, here's what we'd expect to see: quote: ORIGINAL: dereck http://ahoy.tk-jk.net/macslog/TheRoleoftheSubmarineinWo.html quote: Japanese submarines accounted for about 184 merchant ships with a tonnage of 907,000 tons. In addition they sank 2 Aircraft Carriers, 2 Cruisers, and 10 Destroyers. So that means with the historical toggle "on", the Allied player should expect to lose 13 merchant ships for every warship sunk. Which kinda sounds like where we are right now.

LiquidSky -> RE: Where is the Japanese Submarine Doctrine toggle switch? (9/25/2009 6:43:11 AM)
Anything that removes hindsight from a war game is great. I don't like foreknowledge in a game that uses 'strategy'. Lets say for example that you do get Japanese subs that only shoot at warships. Where would you put your destroyers? Damn right you would. Not a single one on convoys, and every fleet with as many destroyers as you can fit. Historical doctrine for the japs maybe, but you end up with unhistorical Allied play. Lots of WWII events are like that...it doesnt take a genius to avoid famous strategic blunders. If one side is forced to recreate the blunder, the other side will use it to his advantage. The opposite is true. But since 'free will' is supposed to be a major part of playing a game, you have to err on the side of free will. Of course, if your excuse for losing is that the 'AI ' or 'insert opponent here' fought a new style of war, while you were fighting yesterdays war, well....join the long line of losers in history.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.203125