RE: Some units move on their own... (Full Version)

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



Message

mind_messing -> RE: Some units move on their own... (3/23/2014 5:06:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Yeah, sorry about that, but I was a dev too. I know better than you.


Yes, Gary Grigsby's WITPAE is exclusively Henderson Fields, right?



Chris21wen -> RE: Some units move on their own... (3/23/2014 5:17:56 PM)

Re 27th BG
 
Operations. Activated for bombardment operations on 1 Feb 1940. Moved to the Philippines in Nov 1941. The group's A-24 aircraft, which had not arrived by 7 Dec, were diverted to Australia after the Japanese attack on the Philippines. The group's commander and 20 pilots who were flown from Luzon to Australia to get the aircraft did not return because of the continued Japanese advance in the Philippines. Some of these pilots saw service in Java, Feb-May 1942, before they were assigned to another group. The men left on Luzon flew missions against the Japanese with available aircraft and served as infantrymen in the battles of Bataan and Corregidor. Although a few managed to escape, most were either killed or taken by the Japanese as prisoners of war. The group received three Distinguished Unit Citations (DUC) for their heroic efforts in the Philippines, late 1941 and early 1942.

This extract was taken form US Air Historical Research Agency.  This info is available to all who bother to look.

http://www.afhra.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=9664



msieving1 -> RE: Some units move on their own... (3/23/2014 5:49:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: gunny3013

Case in point related directly to this post, while there are friendly reinforcements that appear on the reinforcement list designed to be placed in very odd places, there is no mention of such a significant activity anywhere in the manual to make players aware it will happen.



"16.0 REINFORCEMENTS AND REPLACEMENTS
Reinforcements are ships, air units and ground units that enter the game after a scenario has
begun. These units appear in locations displayed on the various reinforcement screens found
off of the Intelligence Screen."

It states right there that reinforcements appear at the base shown in the reinforcement screens on the Intelligence screen. You might say that this is very general, but of course it has to be. Reinforcement arrival locations are set in the scenario and can be changed in the editor that comes with the game. There's no way that the manual can list where reinforcements will appear, since that is up to the scenario designer.

I don't know what you mean by "very odd places." The arrival locations are based on historical sources. For example, the USAAF divebombers that arrive in Brisbane were the aircraft of the 27th Bombardment Group that were on their way to the Philippines when the Japanese attacked, and were diverted to Australia. They were actually part of the cargo of the convoy escorted by USS Pensacola, but because of the game mechanism that limits ships to carrying only one unit each and the LCUs that are carried by that convoy, it's not possible to load them on that convoy. So the scenario designer decided to place them in Brisbane at about the time that the convoy arrives there. A pretty elegant solution to my eye.

If you don't like where a reinforcement unit arrives, you can change the location using the editor. I am not fond of the USS Yorktown arriving in San Diego, while her escorting destroyers arrive in Balboa. It's an easy change to have them arrive together. But I don't think it's reasonable to expect the scenario designer to explain every arrival location, and it's impossible for the manual to do so.

There are plenty of valid complaints to make about the manual. It hasn't been updated since the game originally came out, and there have been numerous changes to the game since then. There no prospect of the manual being updated, so we just have to live with it. The forums are the best place for updated information.



KenchiSulla -> RE: Some units move on their own... (3/23/2014 6:30:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jakla1027


quote:

ORIGINAL: gunny3013

JeffK,

There are some US Dive bomber squadrons that show up in brisbane around Jan 42. There are units like this all accross the map on both sides of the fight that simply transfer on their own and reappear in different places undamaged and fully operational.

Not Unit withdraws and reappears with new TOE in a new location, very rare.

Not Fragments that turn into parent units.

Not LCU airlifted across the map.

It is (I guess) AI controlled units using different rules. These "rules" are not established by the players but seem to be inherantly integrated into the game. Problem arises trying to figure out the who, what, when, where, how and why of it all.


Yes I too don't understand why those air units just appear in Oz land in early 42. Considering as well when almost every other air unit or LCU in the game has to be shipped manually to wherever we want that unit to go. Thus for the units that show up in OZ land early on in game, why wasn't their a convoy set up at the game beginning that was at sea in route to OZ carrying these units? A bunch of American boy & equipment just didn't appear out of nowhere in OZ in 1942, they had to have been shipped there somehow/sometime after Dec. 7 1941


It probably has to do with the fact that supply convoys are slow. If you had knowledge of a convoy with valuable aircraft at sea on december 7th with the way this game works woudln't you try to hit it cripling the ability of Australia to defend itself? Nobody is going to hit a couple of 75mm arty pieces at sea but the aircraft (P40s and A-24s) are an attractive target for the Japanese player. You only need one or two carriers to take them down. It's a different beast then the US carriers at sea. At least they can travel 9 hexes in any direction at game start...



LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Some units move on their own... (3/23/2014 6:36:58 PM)

Oops, msieving1 said it already...



Alfred -> RE: Some units move on their own... (3/23/2014 6:55:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Yeah, sorry about that, but I was a dev too. I know better than you.


Yes, Gary Grigsby's WITPAE is exclusively Henderson Fields, right?


In simple terms, for non lawyers, the answer is yes.

I'm not privy to the actual contractual arrangements entered into by all the parties but I expect that 2By3 gave Henderson Fields a licence to use their code and subject to their approval the right to modify said code. The resultant product's (aka AE) Intellectual Property is therefore owned by Henderson Fields.

This is not the first time that someone has attempted to muddy Henderson Fields IP legitimacy. The granting of licences is extremely common and does not invalidate the new IP rights which attach to new work.

Bottom line is that when devs such as Terminus (who is not a lawyer) or Symon (who is an IP lawyer specialist) say that AE belongs to Henderson Fields, they are 100% correct. If one disagrees, take them to court. Of course then there are the technical problems of whether one has standing, let alone establishing who has better title to AE than Henderson Fields. Good luck with that exercise assuming you could find any legally qualified practioner prepared to take on the case.

Alfred



mind_messing -> RE: Some units move on their own... (3/23/2014 8:30:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Yeah, sorry about that, but I was a dev too. I know better than you.


Yes, Gary Grigsby's WITPAE is exclusively Henderson Fields, right?


In simple terms, for non lawyers, the answer is yes.

I'm not privy to the actual contractual arrangements entered into by all the parties but I expect that 2By3 gave Henderson Fields a licence to use their code and subject to their approval the right to modify said code. The resultant product's (aka AE) Intellectual Property is therefore owned by Henderson Fields.

This is not the first time that someone has attempted to muddy Henderson Fields IP legitimacy. The granting of licences is extremely common and does not invalidate the new IP rights which attach to new work.

Bottom line is that when devs such as Terminus (who is not a lawyer) or Symon (who is an IP lawyer specialist) say that AE belongs to Henderson Fields, they are 100% correct. If one disagrees, take them to court. Of course then there are the technical problems of whether one has standing, let alone establishing who has better title to AE than Henderson Fields. Good luck with that exercise assuming you could find any legally qualified practioner prepared to take on the case.

Alfred



Without the terms of the contract, who knows? Regardless, I stand corrected, and no doubt Symon will appear to point out just how incorrect I am.

This is a digression, however. My original issue was the fact that the forums belonged to Matrix, not Henderson's.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.609375