RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion

RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (Full Version)

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

Message

sfbaytf -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/22/2010 4:57:42 PM)
The B-29 is definitely a hangar queen. One mission and at least half the squadron is usually down for a week- this is not counting any losses to flak or fighters. B-24s are a little better so long as the range isn't extended. Any opposition and flak will cut down the number of available bombers. The original post thesis was about fighter escorts and bombing missions. That touches on the oher problem of reliably getting your fighters to escort your bombers. Most of he time strikes are uncordinated anyway.

Zeta16 -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/22/2010 5:14:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rob Brennan UK hi all , interesting discussion. I'll add my experience using the 4E bombers in my PBEM (guadlcanal scen) There beasts seem to gobble up supply like ever hungry vacuum cleaners, given the limited supply in this scenario using the 4E is a compromise vs saving up supply for invasions. so the player is forced into making sacrifices to use them regularly. Damage to 4E bombers seems to fall into 2 categories (this is just a gut feeling by the way) wear and tear damage seemt to repair pretty fast, 1-3 days on average. however if some are damaged by flak or CAP then down time can be upto 20 days in the repair shop. so while CAP may seem to be pretty ineffective in actually killing them, for the allied player they rapidly become depleted with a lot of hanger queens. Continuous operations can be sustained if you have the planes to completely fill up a squadron i.e 12 plane unit with 16 a/c and max pilots will run at about 1/2- 2/3ds strength on a daily basis and do not accumulate much fatigue . teens max and usually 10 ish. Flying at extended range adds to the wear and tear so you'll have more planes under maintainance (look in the air unts button labelled planes for a breakdown on times etc.). Effectiveness - Bombing japanes troops behind goos forts levels i.e tassaforonga will rarely do any damage to the units even at 6k feet and good crews, i'm hopeing that they add disruption/fatige but only my opponenent can answer that one. this is with max recom too 10/10 on DL. I used them for a couple of months early game on naval search and didnt hit a thing. I dont use them often for naval attack as they cant hit the broadside of a barn , even my trained up (3 months on naval attack training) 2E bombers can't hit much that floats either but my opponent can been careful covering his shipping. any extra supply requirements would cripple the allis in this scenario , as supply is barely adequate anyway. Personally i feel they are working out ok but do not have any late war experience to add. so do they need tweaking ? not as far as i can tell, more data is needed as the opinions seem rather split which usually suggests that things are working out ok. time will eventually tell though. TTFN I just don't have this problem keeping my Allied bombers in the air. At the moment I have bombers at PM, 3 groups of B24D1's and 2 B-17F's. I fly two one day, then three the next. In doing this all but maybe 1 a group are ready to go on there day of flying. I think the key is AV support. I have more than 250 there, on say Tarawa I have a few Heavy groups that are not fly much b/c of lack of enough AV support. Now later in the War often a week did they fly the huge raids with the B29's. If there was one or two big raids a week I think I could keep them in the air, but I would never try to fly them day after day.

JohnDillworth -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/22/2010 6:09:06 PM)
quote: Yes, but wasn't one of the major complaints from WITP Vanilla the fact that the 4Es were too effective and actually made it too easy for the allies to obliterate the Japanese players economy? Both sides complained about this IIRC... Be careful what you ask for... I'd at least like to have the discussion. When AE came out the team was most responsive to super PT boats, attacks on escorts and a hot of other things. just part of the process of a new game. Great discussion on these forums and a great, measured response to the feedback. The developers really pay alot of attention to us. But most of those frequent early fixes addressed generic or obvious early game things there were clearly not palying out historically. Now that many of use have played the game through, or at lest in to the later years, results that are clearly not historical are more pronounced (Japanese aircraft production, allied historical aircraft numbers, Japanese nuclear subs, B-29's being ineffective, porous CAP). I just think some of these later game "oddities" should be given the same consideration for change that the the PT boats sinking have of the Philippines invasion force was. My pet peeve is not being able to play out the historical strategic bombing campaign.

LoBaron -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/22/2010 9:01:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth I'd at least like to have the discussion. When AE came out the team was most responsive to super PT boats, attacks on escorts and a hot of other things. just part of the process of a new game. Great discussion on these forums and a great, measured response to the feedback. The developers really pay alot of attention to us. But most of those frequent early fixes addressed generic or obvious early game things there were clearly not palying out historically. Now that many of use have played the game through, or at lest in to the later years, results that are clearly not historical are more pronounced (Japanese aircraft production, allied historical aircraft numbers, Japanese nuclear subs, B-29's being ineffective, porous CAP). I just think some of these later game "oddities" should be given the same consideration for change that the the PT boats sinking have of the Philippines invasion force was. My pet peeve is not being able to play out the historical strategic bombing campaign. I really like that statement. If it spurts discussion its something interesting. [:)] Re nuclear subs my impression is that japanese nuclear subs are depending on the opponent. I´m not sure how my opponent would rate my sub strategy but he sad that I gave him a bit of headache at least. And he found great ways to counter the threat that put my subs close to extinction if I hadn´t pulled back. Allied ASW is strong as long as you know how to use it. And I also belive Rob when he states that he has a hard time keeping his heavies in the air but I´m struggling to defend against him. If you use a bit of imagination you can nearly explain every combat result. Thats a message to the number crunchers. [:D]

TheElf -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/28/2010 7:25:05 AM)
see this thread for an education on B-29 Raids and AE. Do some research, and pay particular attention to Andy MAc and wwengr's posts http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2335277&mpage=2&key=B-29%2Craids

TheElf -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/28/2010 7:52:38 AM)
Some notable figures for those who think B-29 raids are underrepresented. Note the interval between missions. Note the variation in Raid size. If you average these raids the average sortie per raid is 186 B-29s. Raids of 300+ B-29s were an outlier. * 19 February 1945: 119 B-29s hit port and urban area * 25 February 1945: 174 B-29s dropping incendiaries destroy ~28,000 buildings * 4 March 1945: 159 B-29s hit urban area * 10 March 1945: 334 B-29s dropping incendiaries destroy ~267,000 buildings; ~25% of city (Operation Meetinghouse) killing some 100,000 civilians * 2 April 1945: >100 B-29s bomb the Nakajima aircraft factory * 3 April 1945: 68 B-29s bomb the Koizumi aircraft factory and urban areas in Tokyo * 7 April 1945: 101 B-29s bomb the Nakajima aircraft factory. * 13 April 1945: 327 B-29s bomb the arsenal area * 15 April 1945: 109 B-29s hit urban area * 24 May 1945: 520 B-29s bomb urban-industrial area south of the Imperial Palace * 26 May 1945: 464 B-29s bomb urban area immediately south of the Imperial Palace * 20 July 1945: 1 B-29 drops a Pumpkin bomb Pumpkin bomb "Pumpkin bombs" were conventional high explosive aerial bombs developed by the Manhattan Project and used by the United States Army Air Forces against Japan during World War II. The name "pumpkin bomb" resulted from the large ellipsoidal shape of the munition and was the actual reference term used... (bomb with same ballistics as nuclear bomb) through overcast aiming at but missing the Imperial Palace * 8 August 1945: ~60 B-29s bomb the aircraft factory and arsenal * 10 August 1945: 70 B-29s bomb the arsenal complex

Grit -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/28/2010 1:02:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheElf Some notable figures for those who think B-29 raids are underrepresented. Note the interval between missions. Note the variation in Raid size. If you average these raids the average sortie per raid is 186 B-29s. Raids of 300+ B-29s were an outlier. * 19 February 1945: 119 B-29s hit port and urban area * 25 February 1945: 174 B-29s dropping incendiaries destroy ~28,000 buildings * 4 March 1945: 159 B-29s hit urban area * 10 March 1945: 334 B-29s dropping incendiaries destroy ~267,000 buildings; ~25% of city (Operation Meetinghouse) killing some 100,000 civilians * 2 April 1945: >100 B-29s bomb the Nakajima aircraft factory * 3 April 1945: 68 B-29s bomb the Koizumi aircraft factory and urban areas in Tokyo * 7 April 1945: 101 B-29s bomb the Nakajima aircraft factory. * 13 April 1945: 327 B-29s bomb the arsenal area * 15 April 1945: 109 B-29s hit urban area * 24 May 1945: 520 B-29s bomb urban-industrial area south of the Imperial Palace * 26 May 1945: 464 B-29s bomb urban area immediately south of the Imperial Palace * 20 July 1945: 1 B-29 drops a Pumpkin bomb Pumpkin bomb "Pumpkin bombs" were conventional high explosive aerial bombs developed by the Manhattan Project and used by the United States Army Air Forces against Japan during World War II. The name "pumpkin bomb" resulted from the large ellipsoidal shape of the munition and was the actual reference term used... (bomb with same ballistics as nuclear bomb) through overcast aiming at but missing the Imperial Palace * 8 August 1945: ~60 B-29s bomb the aircraft factory and arsenal * 10 August 1945: 70 B-29s bomb the arsenal complex Great information, thanks. Here is some more info that talks about the 10 days in March of incendiaries being dropped on several different cities. Can this be reproduced in AE? From what I've read most guys say they can't do this and their losses are much heavier. Are we doing something wrong? Is it possible to run 10 straight days of very large B-29 raids over Japan? LeMay decided that Tokyo would be the first target for a massive raid on Japan itself. The raid was planned for the night of March 10th and the B-29’s were to fly at between 5,000 and 8,000 feet. As Japan was not expected to send up night fighters, the guns from the planes were taken off as was anything that was deemed not useful to the raid. By effectively stripping the plane of non-essentials, more bombs could be carried for the raid. Along with Tokyo, Kobe, Osaka and Nagoya were also targeted. As each had flourishing cottage industries that fed the factories of each city, LeMay hoped to starve these factories of required parts. He also hoped that the fires that would be started would also destroy the larger factories as well. As the target for the raid was so large – a city area – the B-29’s did not have to fly in strict formation, especially as little resistance was expected from the Japanese. The incendiary bombs dropped were known as M-69’s. These weighed just 6 lbs each and were dropped in a cluster of 38 within a container. One B-29 usually carried 37 of these containers, which equated to just over 1,400 bombs per plane. The bombs were set free from the container at 5,000 feet by a time fuse and then exploded on contact with the ground. When they did this, they spread a jelly-petrol compound that was highly inflammable. For the attack on Tokyo, over 300 B-29’s were involved. They took off for a flight that would get them to Tokyo just before dawn, thus giving them the cover of darkness, but with daylight for the return journey to the Marianas. They flew at 7,000 feet. This in itself may have baffled the city’s defenders as they would have been used to the B-29’s flying at 30,000 feet. The raid had a massive impact on Tokyo. Photo-reconnaissance showed that 16 square miles of the city had been destroyed. Sixteen major factories – ironically scheduled for a future daylight raid – were destroyed along with many cottage industries. In parts of the city, the fires joined up to create a firestorm. The fires burned so fiercely and they consumed so much oxygen, that people in the locality suffocated. It is thought that 100,000 people were killed in the raid and another 100,000 injured. The Americans lost 14 B-29’s; under the 5% rate of loss that was considered to be ‘acceptable’. On March 12th, a similar raid took place on Nagoya. The raid was less successful as the fires did not join up and just over 1 square mile of the city was destroyed. On March 13th, Osaka was attacked. Eight square miles of the city were destroyed. Nearly 2.5 square miles of Kobe was also destroyed by incendiary raids. In the space of ten days, the Americans had dropped nearly 9,500 tons of incendiaries on Japanese cities and destroyed 29 square miles of what was considered to be important industrial land. Few men who flew on the raids felt that what they did was immoral. The Japanese treatment of prisoners and civilians in its occupied zones was all too well known to the flight crews and many felt that the Japanese had brought such attacks on themselves. The incendiary raids were carried out at night and the chance of a crew returning from such a raid was high. Only 22 bombers were lost in this ten-day period – an overall loss of 1.4%. If crews needed to land early, they could do so at Iwo Jima and the return flight to the Marianas was covered by ‘Dumbos’ and ‘Superdumbos’ – polite nicknames for the planes that escorted back the B-29’s and provided lifeboats for them if they had to ditch in the sea. These planes, usually Catalina’s and B-17’s, also radioed ahead the position of crews that had ditched in the sea and ships could picked them up with due speed. LeMay was highly impressed with the destructive results of the raids – as were the Joint Chiefs-of-Staff. For the Japanese government, the raids must have brought huge despair as they had no way of fighting back and it was obvious to all civilians who knew about the raids, that Japan was defenceless against them.

P.Hausser -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/28/2010 1:45:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Grit In parts of the city, the fires joined up to create a firestorm. The fires burned so fiercely and they consumed so much oxygen, that people in the locality suffocated. It is thought that 100,000 people were killed in the raid and another 100,000 injured. The Americans lost 14 B-29’s; under the 5% rate of loss that was considered to be ‘acceptable’. hurray hurray, what a great American hero Major General Curtis LeMay must have been.

Ikazuchi0585 -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/28/2010 5:48:01 PM)
He did what it took to get the job done.He minimized US casualties while maximizing enemy losses, not to mention pursuing a controversial tactic which shortened the war. I think that would make him an hero. He was the commander of a bomber group, what do you expect? Bombers kill people and level cities nothing more, nothing less. It doesnt make a difference if they use bombs or fire to accomplish that goal. “War is cruelty. There's no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over.” -William Tecumseh Sherman

Grit -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/28/2010 6:03:19 PM)
The Japanese leadership had ample time to prepare for air attacks on their country. They simply did not prepare the civilian population. From the United States Strategic Bombing Survey Summary Report July 1, 1946. ...The experience of both the Pacific and European wars emphasizes the extent to which civilian and other forms of passive defense can reduce a country's vulnerability to air attack. Civilian injuries and fatalities can be reduced, by presently known techniques, to one-twentieth or less of the casualties which would be suffered were these techniques not employed. This does not involve moving everything underground, but does involve a progressive evacuation, dispersal, warning, air-raid shelter, and postraid emergency assistance program, the foundations for which can only be laid in peacetime.

Athius -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/28/2010 8:10:13 PM)
@dbfw190 Thats true, he did what he was expected to do and he did it very well, but I don't agree that would make him a hero because I think the very thing that he did, necessary or not, was despicable. History is full of war criminals who where very good at "doing what had to be done" but I would not call them heroes. But, of course, this could apply to virtually every war hero. You're right, war tends to mess up morals and ethics either way

Swenslim -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/28/2010 8:54:28 PM)
Common, we all know that LeMay deserves to be hanged alongside japan military criminals, but unfortunately - winners are never blamed The Japanese leadership had ample time to prepare for air attacks on their country. They simply did not prepare the civilian population. Sorry, but lets look on this stupid phrase from another point of view - The USA leadership had ample time to prepare for air attacks (haijacked airlainers) on their country. They simply did not prepare the civilian population. - Usama Ben Laden. And what are you going to say now ? Killing of civilian people can never be justified.

Whisper -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/28/2010 9:10:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: P.Hausser hurray hurray, what a great American hero Major General Curtis LeMay must have been. Yes indeed. Maybe not a hero, but a fundamentally important air general whose ideas and operations helped end a very nasty international conflict. A dork personally maybe, but nobody says you have to be Mr niceguy to have your poop together. [edit] So sorry, didn't realize the thread had devolved into the usual libero/politico doo doo. Please ignore.

chesmart -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/28/2010 10:07:35 PM)
@P.Hausser @Swenslim I am not American and up to a few months ago i would have agreed with your point of view regarding the bombings but after reading Downfall my opinion has changed regarding the Fire bombings and A-bomb attacks. Before commenting I would recommend that you spend 39 dollars and buy the book and then hopefully you will understand that the IJA was planning to fight the allied armies with total mobisation on the beaches the cost in human lives had Truman not decided to do these attacks would have been far higher (Probably 3-4 Million Japanese Casualties at least) The IJA was planning to mobilise men and women up ages 15-45 to act as militia and fight guerrilla warfare while the IJA would be Inland.

P.Hausser -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/29/2010 3:16:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Swenslim Common, we all know that LeMay deserves to be hanged alongside japan military criminals, but unfortunately - winners are never blamed The Japanese leadership had ample time to prepare for air attacks on their country. They simply did not prepare the civilian population. Sorry, but lets look on this stupid phrase from another point of view - The USA leadership had ample time to prepare for air attacks (haijacked airlainers) on their country. They simply did not prepare the civilian population. - Usama Ben Laden. And what are you going to say now ? Killing of civilian people can never be justified. Quite well said.

TheElf -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/29/2010 4:50:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: P.Hausser quote: ORIGINAL: Grit In parts of the city, the fires joined up to create a firestorm. The fires burned so fiercely and they consumed so much oxygen, that people in the locality suffocated. It is thought that 100,000 people were killed in the raid and another 100,000 injured. The Americans lost 14 B-29’s; under the 5% rate of loss that was considered to be ‘acceptable’. hurray hurray, what a great American hero Major General Curtis LeMay must have been. This post is typical of your baiting Anti-American inflammatory posts of opportunity. Whatever your damage is, you should be banned, and this thread locked. And Lemay was a great American hero. But only because he had to be. Ask yourself though Hausser..why did he have to be a hero? If it weren't for men like Lemay half the world would be speaking German, and the other half would have been beheaded at the edge of a Samurai Sword.

P.Hausser -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/29/2010 7:06:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheElf If it weren't for men like Lemay half the world would be speaking German, and the other half would have been beheaded at the edge of a Samurai Sword. Once Japan was encircled, and had no relevant way of obtaining the necessary resources to wage war, then murdering civilians in the 100's of thousands are in my book not just. It makes it less just that "courts" post WW2 found German and Japanese high ranking officers guilty for conducting the same form for attacks on Chinese and British citys. I think you have to agree with me that bombing civilians in 1944 and 1945 was totally unnecessary to achieve victory, its not like you need to invade Japan, just isolate it and its government will fall once the situation gets hard enough. (Or so thought the OSS at least).

wyrmmy -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/29/2010 7:12:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: P.Hausser I think you have to agree with me that bombing civilians in 1944 and 1945 was totally unnecessary to achieve victory, its not like you need to invade Japan, just isolate it and its government will fall once the situation gets hard enough. (Or so thought the OSS at least). Actually, considering the Japanese plans for the conduct of the war in these years, and the small shop nature of their industry, I would venture to say that allied attacks on Japanese cities were easily justifiable.

Athius -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/29/2010 8:54:50 AM)
let's just all agree to disagree and move back to the subject of the topic; this discussion is not heading in a nice direction. OT: I think that the main problem with the bombers isn't their high durability but their high armament. B17's should survive many hits.

Fishbed -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/29/2010 8:59:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: P.Hausser quote: ORIGINAL: Swenslim Common, we all know that LeMay deserves to be hanged alongside japan military criminals, but unfortunately - winners are never blamed The Japanese leadership had ample time to prepare for air attacks on their country. They simply did not prepare the civilian population. Sorry, but lets look on this stupid phrase from another point of view - The USA leadership had ample time to prepare for air attacks (haijacked airlainers) on their country. They simply did not prepare the civilian population. - Usama Ben Laden. And what are you going to say now ? Killing of civilian people can never be justified. Quite well said. Statements like that coming from a guy who took Paul Hausser as a nickname (and maybe an iconic model)? Please allow me to politely laugh at that situation. LeMay was a heartless trigger-happy asshole who did the job we needed him to do. But to bring him at the same level or below guys like Hausser is simply wrong - and smells bad.

Athius -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/29/2010 9:07:14 AM)
AHUM let's just all agree to disagree and move back to the subject of the topic; this discussion is not heading in a nice direction. OT: I think that the main problem with the bombers isn't their high durability but their high armament. B17's should survive many hits.

TheElf -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/29/2010 9:34:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: P.Hausser quote: ORIGINAL: TheElf If it weren't for men like Lemay half the world would be speaking German, and the other half would have been beheaded at the edge of a Samurai Sword. Once Japan was encircled, and had no relevant way of obtaining the necessary resources to wage war, then murdering civilians in the 100's of thousands are in my book not just. It makes it less just that "courts" post WW2 found German and Japanese high ranking officers guilty for conducting the same form for attacks on Chinese and British citys. I think you have to agree with me that bombing civilians in 1944 and 1945 was totally unnecessary to achieve victory, its not like you need to invade Japan, just isolate it and its government will fall once the situation gets hard enough. (Or so thought the OSS at least). I make it a point not to second guess the men who were put in the position that Lemay was put in. Nor do I question the morality or methods of men forced to reconcile their own demons against the demons of an enemy whose lust for widespread death to all peoples not of their liking precipitated those methods. Lemay didn't start the war, he finished it. I don't know if you've ever seen war first hand, but I have. It is a disgusting, brutal business best conducted quickly and efficiently with overwhelming force such that those innocents who are forced to suffer it can at least be spared a prolonged existence in it. For you to sit back with 20/20 hindsight free of any moral dilemma or difficult choices and condemn or judge men like Lemay is cowardice, and you should be ashamed of yourself. I'd like to see how you react to modern day Armageddon. If you were in the same position, which you've clearly shown is incomprehensible to you, I'd like to be a fly on the wall and hear your altruistic drivel then. LOCK THIS THREAD PLEASE.

Athius -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/29/2010 11:14:22 AM)
@ Elf Hauser and others The germans bombed a city in my country and managed to end the war in just 5 days. Did this shorten the war? Yes. Did this prevent many additional deaths? Probably Did this completely destroy the city center of the city I was born in and kill hundreds of innocent civilians, including members of my family? Yup. Form the German point of view, the man who came up with the idea of bombing Rotterdam must be a hero. From my family's point of view that man was a immoral monster. Destroying history, culture and human lives. I imagen the same can be said about the war in the pacific, (although the difference here is that the Japanese started the war,so in some way the victims are the aggressors at the same time) Ethics have no place in a war. The war hero who saves a fellow soldier be killing an enemy is a hero to his nation but a monster to the mother of the person he killed. It all depends on your point of view, and both views have a point. So in a way, all of you are right and wrong at the same time. War is hell. But please, shall we get back on topic?

P.Hausser -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/29/2010 12:37:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fishbed Statements like that coming from a guy who took Paul Hausser as a nickname (and maybe an iconic model)? Please allow me to politely laugh at that situation. [&:][&:] Sorry, its my name.

LoBaron -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/29/2010 12:58:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Athius @ Elf Hauser and others The germans bombed a city in my country and managed to end the war in just 5 days. Did this shorten the war? Yes. Did this prevent many additional deaths? Probably Did this completely destroy the city center of the city I was born in and kill hundreds of innocent civilians, including members of my family? Yup. Form the German point of view, the man who came up with the idea of bombing Rotterdam must be a hero. From my family's point of view that man was a immoral monster. Destroying history, culture and human lives. I imagen the same can be said about the war in the pacific, (although the difference here is that the Japanese started the war,so in some way the victims are the aggressors at the same time) Ethics have no place in a war. The war hero who saves a fellow soldier be killing an enemy is a hero to his nation but a monster to the mother of the person he killed. It all depends on your point of view, and both views have a point. So in a way, all of you are right and wrong at the same time. War is hell. But please, shall we get back on topic? Athius you beautifully formulated exactly what I was thinking. [:)]

Sardaukar -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/29/2010 3:28:47 PM)
OT, but... 2+ months ago I was travelling via Munich airport, I saw airport worker with nametag "Goebbels", so don't jump into conclusions. [:D] It came to my mind that maybe P. Hausser was nickname after THAT P. Hausser, but as he explained, it is his name, he cannot help that! [:'(]

Don Bowen -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/29/2010 7:44:08 PM)
Warning. Several people are on the verge of banning. A couple have already earned a green button.

JWE -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/30/2010 1:33:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Don Bowen Warning. Several people are on the verge of banning. A couple have already earned a green button. I, for one, would like to see P Hausser's login privileges permamently removed, and have strongly made that recommendation to the forum moderators.

War History -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/30/2010 3:05:06 AM)
I have a few comments, both on topic and off. First of all let me preface these comments as not aimed at any 1 individual nor is it mean to "bash the game", just a general observation from someone that has read the board on and off for probably close to 10 year now. Yes, this is post number 1. First off, the "on topic" stuff. Now from my personal point of view the design of this game is fundamentally flawed. I say that for the following reasons: 1) It is a game. In any game all players should have an equal chance to win. Note, I am not saying that all players should have an equal chance to win the war, just the game. In that light, in my opinion what the designers should have done first was determine what players are going to score points for. Having that, they next should have determined how many points were scored in the real war by both sides. The third thing that should have been done was the starting point total should have been adjusted accordingly. In this way a player must do better than his historical counterparts in order to "win". The game fails on this. 2) I have played Grigsby games since they first started coming out on the Apple back in the 80s. One of my favorites was called USAAF. It was a simple, fast, fun game. Its counterpart "Fighter Command" was just as good for the same reason. I also had the Talonsoft game 12 O'Clock high (which I can only guess is similar to Bombing the Reich) and it was a failure in comparison. He also had that one a few years back (the name escapes me right now) that was an Axis and Allies on steroids. More detail is not always a good thing. I have read comments from devs telling tales of the old days of playing SPIs Pacific war (of which I have many hours invested in as well). The game seems from an outsider looking in to want the players to make the decisions that hundreds of commanders had to make daily. Why? More detail lends itself to more problems. On one hand I read time and time again about how unrealistic this game is, and on the other hand how close to reality it is. Can not have it both ways. 3) I have noted that several of the people involved with the production of this game have been on these boards making comments to and about people that are hardly what one could consider as professional. Belittling people is hardly the proper way to retain and create more customers. I never bought WitP. I saw Matrix doing these same things back in the UV days. Mr. Frag for example was quite knowledgeable but not terribly tactful. Tankerace I believe it was same deal. Frankly it was because of the problems in UV and the comments from the devs of WitP that kept me from getting that game. And the same is true for this one. Now, please feel free to tell me what an idiot I am for having these feelings, I fully expect it from you because history has shown this to be true. Now as for the off topic issues. First of all, LeMay. Even the British, who fully embraced the pratice of firebombing, condoned LeMays actions. If the US had lost the war he would have been tried as a war criminal and been hanged. Saying things like this does not mean a person is making anti-American remarks. It is a simple fact. While I may or may not agree with anyone for their feelings on this, banning someone from the board because their opinion is different than yours just goes to reinforce the attitude I was commenting on above. Secondly, Rotterdam. I read a book many years ago called "the Luftwaffe War Diaries" where it actually discussed that raid in detail. The Germans had actually negotiated a deal to make Rotterdam an open city and had a code in place to warn the bombers off. That code was several red flares. Unfortunately, when the bombers approached, the Dutch opened fire with their AA guns and the flares were not seen. And since they were taking fire, it was clear to the crews that an agreement had not been reached. Rotterdam was a mistake that can be blamed on an accident of war.

bigred -> RE: Solution for the 4 engine discussion (4/30/2010 3:23:00 AM)
Hi Don, I disagree that anyone should be permanetly banded. The beauty of this forum is that many players from all over the planet (most with high IQ) can talk without killing each other. We do need to stick to the basic discussion of our games, but from time to time some allowance for informed discussion of all topics makes us all better individuals. We all need to also realize Paul Hausser is calling the subject as he sees it. My comment on war crimes is the loser is hung, war is ugly(if you have held a dead buddy then u understand what I mean) and if you really dont like what someone thinks then challenge him a game. We should lock the thread if everyone is getting angry.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.328125