quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

why two hundred aircraft will sortie to sink a pair of converted fishing trawlers.

That debate ended up with one fine gentleman leaving our forum [:(]

Who was that?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

In this game the objective of fighters is to clear the sky for the bomber... As Bullwinkle said, having fighters shooting holes in the sky doesn't really do anything

Set your twin engined bombers to bomb from 4000 feet against a Tojo CAP at 30k.. You'll see what I mean

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

In this game the objective of fighters is to clear the sky for the bomber... As Bullwinkle said, having fighters shooting holes in the sky doesn't really do anything

Set your twin engined bombers to bomb from 4000 feet against a Tojo CAP at 30k.. You'll see what I mean

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

In this game the objective of fighters is to clear the sky for the bomber... As Bullwinkle said, having fighters shooting holes in the sky doesn't really do anything

Set your twin engined bombers to bomb from 4000 feet against a Tojo CAP at 30k.. You'll see what I mean

And to my Allied bretheren I say: stop trying to destroy his planes on the ground! You won't win that one. Use your bombers to make it impossible for him to build planes in the first place.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Ah. I didn't make the connection with him and planes versus converted trawlers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

In this game the objective of fighters is to clear the sky for the bomber... As Bullwinkle said, having fighters shooting holes in the sky doesn't really do anything

Set your twin engined bombers to bomb from 4000 feet against a Tojo CAP at 30k.. You'll see what I mean

And to my Allied bretheren I say: stop trying to destroy his planes on the ground! You won't win that one. Use your bombers to make it impossible for him to build planes in the first place.

Bullwinkle, it all depends on the situation. If your objective is to achieve local superiority bombing aircraft on the ground might be a good idea.

It simply is not black and white....

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

In this game the objective of fighters is to clear the sky for the bomber... As Bullwinkle said, having fighters shooting holes in the sky doesn't really do anything

Set your twin engined bombers to bomb from 4000 feet against a Tojo CAP at 30k.. You'll see what I mean

And to my Allied bretheren I say: stop trying to destroy his planes on the ground! You won't win that one. Use your bombers to make it impossible for him to build planes in the first place.

Bullwinkle, it all depends on the situation. If your objective is to achieve local superiority bombing aircraft on the ground might be a good idea.

It simply is not black and white....

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

The problem for some Jap players is that they expect 1942 game results in 1945.....just aint gonna happen unless the Allied player is a total noob.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

The problem for some Jap players is that they expect 1942 game results in 1945.....just aint gonna happen unless the Allied player is a total noob.

What might be worse is a bunch of decisions in 1942 coming to roost in 1945 and then game mechanics that were good in 1942 .. become borked in 1945 ... [8D]

quote:

Simplification of course. But personally I think I prefer the early years of 42 and 43

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

If the air game is based on anything resembling real life, no fighter ever flew below 10,000ft. Ever. How good an aircraft or it's pilot is doesn't matter, it's just that maximum altitude number that matters.

Tell that to the P-47 pilots killing thousands of German AFVs at treetop level. Or Marine CAS pilots flying Corsairs full of napalm over myriad PTO islands.

Exactly my point. Care to show me one AAR where a P-47 or Corsair has flown anywhere under 10k feet?

There isn't any.

It's not players that are preventing planes from doing what they did in real life, it's the air code. It's also why flying an escort mission is a mass death sentence for pilots, and why two hundred aircraft will sortie to sink a pair of converted fishing trawlers.

I don't have any yet. When I do you'll see this.

Heck, in my game with Cliff I just drove a large Japanese tank formation away from Urumchi with BIPLANES! Destroyed/disabled about 15 tanks. He withdrew, giving the base time to up the forts and repair disablement. (If he's reading this I don't mind. [:)])

Escort in the game is there to get the bombers through. I agree the loss rates are high. But the bombers do good work if you don't constantly set them to make readily-repairable holes in runways. I personally think sweeps are vastly overused, especially by Japan. But Allied players need to learn that just because he sweeps you don't have to fight him there. You can let him waste supply and ops losses drilling holes in the sky. No sweep ever hurt a grunt.

My opinion is a lot of players are in "air ruts." They have formed habits, many pre-betas, and continue to do the same old same old. Their choice.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

The problem for some Jap players is that they expect 1942 game results in 1945.....just aint gonna happen unless the Allied player is a total noob.

What might be worse is a bunch of decisions in 1942 coming to roost in 1945 and then game mechanics that were good in 1942 .. become borked in 1945 ... [8D]

That is true for many things in the game. Generally I would say the game is much better in 42 and 43. Not only HRs and whatnot break down but the game itself doesn´t work nearly as well in late 44 and 45. It just feels like everything is optimised for early game and 44 and 45 was added just an afterthought.

Simplification of course. But personally I think I prefer the early years of 42 and 43. Despite all the setbacks I suffered I had way more fun then compared to what I have now. I miss sitting down with a coffee/beer/whiskey watching the entire replay from start to finish without touching ESC. I would say that was probably the most enjoyable part of the game. Cheering for each downed Tojo or new ace gained. Each DD sunk.

I miss those days. [:)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Lokasenna,

Ever considered doing an AAR of your game vs Bull? [:)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I miss those days. [:)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

If the air game is based on anything resembling real life, no fighter ever flew below 10,000ft. Ever. How good an aircraft or it's pilot is doesn't matter, it's just that maximum altitude number that matters.

Tell that to the P-47 pilots killing thousands of German AFVs at treetop level. Or Marine CAS pilots flying Corsairs full of napalm over myriad PTO islands.

Exactly my point. Care to show me one AAR where a P-47 or Corsair has flown anywhere under 10k feet?

There isn't any.

It's not players that are preventing planes from doing what they did in real life, it's the air code. It's also why flying an escort mission is a mass death sentence for pilots, and why two hundred aircraft will sortie to sink a pair of converted fishing trawlers.

I don't have any yet. When I do you'll see this.

Heck, in my game with Cliff I just drove a large Japanese tank formation away from Urumchi with BIPLANES! Destroyed/disabled about 15 tanks. He withdrew, giving the base time to up the forts and repair disablement. (If he's reading this I don't mind. [:)])

Escort in the game is there to get the bombers through. I agree the loss rates are high. But the bombers do good work if you don't constantly set them to make readily-repairable holes in runways. I personally think sweeps are vastly overused, especially by Japan. But Allied players need to learn that just because he sweeps you don't have to fight him there. You can let him waste supply and ops losses drilling holes in the sky. No sweep ever hurt a grunt.

My opinion is a lot of players are in "air ruts." They have formed habits, many pre-betas, and continue to do the same old same old. Their choice.

quote:

The modeling in this game is pretty realistic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

That was embarrassing [:(]. I should have known better, to wait for the next shipment of supply. I'm still coming for you, though [;)]. Those biplanes pack a punch with 2x100kg bombs!

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Lokasenna,

Ever considered doing an AAR of your game vs Bull? [:)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

The problem for some Jap players is that they expect 1942 game results in 1945.....just aint gonna happen unless the Allied player is a total noob.

What might be worse is a bunch of decisions in 1942 coming to roost in 1945 and then game mechanics that were good in 1942 .. become borked in 1945 ... [8D]

That is true for many things in the game. Generally I would say the game is much better in 42 and 43. Not only HRs and whatnot break down but the game itself doesn´t work nearly as well in late 44 and 45. It just feels like everything is optimised for early game and 44 and 45 was added just an afterthought.

Simplification of course. But personally I think I prefer the early years of 42 and 43. Despite all the setbacks I suffered I had way more fun then compared to what I have now. I miss sitting down with a coffee/beer/whiskey watching the entire replay from start to finish without touching ESC. I would say that was probably the most enjoyable part of the game. Cheering for each downed Tojo or new ace gained. Each DD sunk.

I miss those days. [:)]

Maybe the HRs breaking down and the game engine breaking down are linked - maybe the engine "breaks down" (i.e., spits out undesirable/hard to swallow results) as a result of those very HRs!

The modeling in this game is pretty realistic.


Going back a few posts, the example of bombers going in low at 4k vs. a CAP up high. Discrepancies of 4k vs. 30k, and 4k vs. 21k, were given. It doesn't even need to be that much. Without radar present, the CAP can be at 10k and bombers at 4k will get through before the CAP can engage them. Gotta be really careful with CAP altitudes early on against a cheeky Allied player.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

FWIW in my game with Apbarog we have a gentlemens agreement not to use silly altitude for planes. We're only upto June 42 so no corsairs but most air raids and planes fly between 6 and 15k with only a few raids at 20k from memory.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

The modeling in this game is pretty realistic.

I am not sure I agree with this, but I would agree the game abstractions certainly provide a set of realistic decisions for the players. However, I will go on record that most if not all in this forum disagree with my worldview on the air combat module [8D]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Lokasenna,

Ever considered doing an AAR of your game vs Bull? [:)]

Noooooo! He's kicking my betarkus. Has Darwin already, all the phone numbers of the local chicks . . .

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

I skimmed Symon's thread on airplane data changes coming for DBB and I think those will be very popular.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I did hear that those NW Aus. women were really wild, though.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

I skimmed Symon's thread on airplane data changes coming for DBB and I think those will be very popular.

Is that the "Aircraft" thread in the Scenario subforum? Is there a summary of the changes somewhere in there?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
If it's done in time and you want to stop my betarkus kicking and start over with DBB, stacking limits, and aircraft stuff I could be talked into going through another December 1941.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I think the engine "breaking down" is more about the numbers then anything. In 42-43 you have perhaps 50 fighters vs 50 fighters. In 45 you have 1000 fighters vs 1000 fighters. As I said my personal feeling is that the game just works and feels better and makes more sense when numbers are more manageable.

Having done an AAR I have to say I enjoy that actually more than playing the game. [:)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I think the engine "breaking down" is more about the numbers then anything. In 42-43 you have perhaps 50 fighters vs 50 fighters. In 45 you have 1000 fighters vs 1000 fighters. As I said my personal feeling is that the game just works and feels better and makes more sense when numbers are more manageable.

Having done an AAR I have to say I enjoy that actually more than playing the game. [:)]