Seeking allied opponent for GC#2

Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (Full Version)

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

Message

rader -> Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (3/21/2011 10:19:08 PM)
EDIT: Updated HRs (2012/01/07) (This is the Greyjoy game, I'm using this thread to track HRs) 2 day turns -Non-historical turn but Japanese cannot invade deep in allied territory 1st turn (e.g., no Mersing Gambit) -Allies may not form new TF on 1st turn (may move the already formed TFs). -Max one port attack turn 1 -Reliable torps off, allied damage control on -Fighters can be set up to an altitude where they get their second best manuever rating -Para units must be whole before paradroppping (no dropping fragments) -Must pay PPs to cross borders that start friendly (e.g., Manchuria -> China, or India -> Burma). Note that you can cross borders that start out enemy (e.g., Kwangtung units can move into Russia). You can retreat/reform a line across a friendly border to fight the same enemy (e.g., Japanese units in China can retreat into Indochina as long as they continue to fight Chinese, or Burma units can retreat into India as long as they continue to fight Japanese on the Burma border). -If activating Russia, Japan must give Russia 1 week to redeploy units. -Russian and other allied units cannot be co-located or occupy each other's bases. -Thai units can move into the Burma panhandle and Indochina (but not beyond). -No city bombing under 20,000 ft. Other than this, all city bombing (China, DEI is fine). -Night bombing: you can fly bombers up to 50% of moonlight (e.g., 60% mooonlight = 30 bombers). Min altitude = 10K ft at night. EXCEPTION: You can fly unlimited numbers of bombers at night at 15K ft+ to attack manpower in city bombing. -4Es on naval attack restricted to 15k and only one group per base -Landing or paradropping on non base/dot hex is forbidden -No gamey use of many single ships to confuse naval combat routines (but picket ships are fine). -Naval CAP trap ("bait&CAP") outside your own base must use as bait a TF composed at least CV/CVL/CVEs with 180 a/c -Normal withdrawls ("on") -PDU on Please be cautious - don't lose your carriers early and then quit

GreyJoy -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (3/21/2011 11:27:00 PM)
I was looking for a jap opponent....I do not know scenario 2 that well...which are the differences between 1 and 2?

rader -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (3/21/2011 11:31:03 PM)
It is listed somewhere, I can't remember where. I think basically Japan gets a few more divisions throughout 1942 and the Shinano as a Taiho CV.

GreyJoy -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (3/21/2011 11:46:22 PM)
Ok, fine for me. However if it's ok for you i'd discuss some of your HRs.... - Non-historical turn but Japanese cannot invade deep in allied territory 1st turn (e.g., no Mersing Gambit) Yes, fine. Common sense should be enough here... -Port attack on both Manila and Pearl is fine (this is negotiable) Isn't this causing some serious umbalance in the first year of war? i see the entire US pac fleet out of order, as long as the best subs in the PI...i'd say one port attack should be enough on turn 1... what do you think? -Reliable torps off, allied damage control on Yes, fair - No sweep/CAP above 20,000 ft (no stratosweeps) Agree. it's also unrealistic to fly above 7k feet...normally fighters engaged below that alt -Para units must be whole before paradroppping (not fragments all over) Agree. right and fair -Must pay PPs to cross borders that start friendly (e.g., Manchuria -> China, or India -> Burma). Note that you can cross borders that start out enemy (e.g., Kwangtung units can move into Russia). Agree, but for russia i'd say that, at least, if Jap decides to invade Russia, it must activate it at least 2 weeks before crossing the border...at the moment Russia is undefendable (no a/c replacements till 45 and Japan can easily trap everything around Vladivostok just crossing the border...) -Thai units can move into the Burma panhandle and Indochina. Ok -No 4Es on naval attack even above 10,000 feet? 15k could be fine? This engine, as far as i can read in the forum, should handle this pretty realisticly... what d'u think? Anyway...i'm not thinking of mass 4E bombers on naval attack to counter the KB...probably just one group per base and above 10 or 15k feet... -No city or night bombing under 20,000 ft (it's too powerful). Other than this, all city bombing (China, DEI is fine). Ok, don't know if it's too powerful...trusting your wise judgment -Landing in non-base hexes is ok, but no using fragment invasions to cut retreat paths (this is negotiable). mmm....i'd say, to avoid any possibile problem, to restrict the landings at dot-base hexes...same for paradrops. What about withdrawals?

rader -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (3/22/2011 12:40:14 AM)
(PM sent)

sdhundt -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (3/22/2011 12:44:50 AM)
That's SO, SO, SO frustrating to set up a game and play the first few turns (which are the hardest and longest to get going) and then to have an opponent quit because he is an idiot and loses his carriers. We should start some sort of rating system for pbem players so you can tell ahead of time who is a loyal player. I WILL play a NEW player but if he quits on me he would get a bad rating from me so then other players know to be cautious. Just an idea, it has been kicked around by other veteran players as well. Maybe I'll put it together myself.

GreyJoy -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (3/22/2011 12:50:50 AM)
PM recieved and sent back. Yes sdhundt, but somebody should give to the newcomers a chance of becoming veteran and reliable[;)]

sdhundt -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (3/22/2011 12:52:14 AM)
I'm ALL FOR newcomers playing. We need new players but not ones who quit. Hell I'll play ANY new player once.

zuluhour -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (3/26/2011 6:43:25 PM)
I am green as grass, but when I get another three months against the AI I hope to play as a competent, if not able Allied opponent. Beware the raw recruit training in the wings.

fodder -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (3/27/2011 1:29:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zuluhour Beware the raw recruit training in the wings. x2

mudshark -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (3/27/2011 2:40:12 PM)
I am in my first game as Allies and I lost 2 carriers in Jan 42, being stupid (man Nells can do a job on carriers)I continue to play its not like Allies don't get more than enough carriers to recover. Turn 113 now and learning a ton from getting my butt kicked! lol

rader -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (1/7/2012 5:18:17 PM)
bump with updated HRs...

GreyJoy -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (1/7/2012 6:12:50 PM)
Funny the read it back after 10months....think i've been a reliable allied opponent:-)

zuluhour -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (1/7/2012 10:13:35 PM)
+1

Rapunzel -> RE: Seeking allied opponent for GC#2 (1/8/2012 3:31:01 PM)
First it looked like you seek a new opponent ... . I was quite tempted [X(]

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

5.910156