RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (Full Version)

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



Message

witpqs -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 4:22:21 AM)

quote:

Understand during Coral Sea IJN fliers reported they sunk a carrier and battleship when they
bombed USS Neosho and USS Sims.


I recall the story that at the end of the first day of the Battle of the Coral Sea one or more Japanese planes mistakenly attempted to land on USN carriers!



afspret -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 6:08:37 AM)

I've only played against the AI, mainly due to my work schedule, and I always save a turn before I run it. That way, if I get battered during a turn, I can always replay the turn after making some changes that will, hopefully, avoid the out come of the previous turn. I know it might seem gamey to some of ya'll, but I've only done this a few times. Besides, I've found that sometimes, no matter how many times I'd replay a turn, the outcome is usually the same (or worse), especially when it comes to naval engagements.



Endy -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 6:10:37 AM)

I think some players have a hard time getting used to the randomness of things in WItp. As a carrier battle was mentioned (though it also relates to ground combat in a degree), well, if you rerun the turn (of course changing some small details) you can often get results ranging from total defeat to total victory. I know this also happened in real life as well due to a million different factors the commanders could not predict, and I have gotten used to it in Witp, but I can understand how some players may get really angry because of it.

In many strategy games you can more or less predict the battle outcome. There is, of course some variety, but it is not as drastic as it can be in Witp and your whole war effort is not as luck dependant as here. This is especially infuriating while playing a PBEM game, when you plan everything to the last detail only to get the shaft... Not because you screwed up, but simply because of a dice roll.

Yes, this is all pretty realistic and I realize that, just saying that accepting certain battle outcomes, especially if you're engaged in a few months/years of playing a PBEM can be really difficult. Knowing that your game suddenly got a lot more difficult because you lost your whole carrier fleet not because of something you did wrong but simply because of bad rolls (weather, reaction, whatever), and that if you only moved that one squadron back in Japan to a different base you could have just as well won that carrier battle in the southern Pacific can be especially daunting sometimes...



LoBaron -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 7:40:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Endy
Knowing that your game suddenly got a lot more difficult because you lost your whole carrier fleet not because of something you did wrong but simply because of bad rolls (weather, reaction, whatever), and that if you only moved that one squadron back in Japan to a different base you could have just as well won that carrier battle in the southern Pacific can be especially daunting sometimes...


If you rerun a battle turn 10 times without changing anything, lose 7, draw 2, and win 1, then you definitely did something wrong - or should not have engaged at all. If players enter battles on 50/50 odds that things can go awry and a high amount of factors beyond their control, to express surprise that 50% of them end up on the low end of line and get their ass handed on a plate is a human trait I will always fail to understand.

Nearly all spectacular CV battle loss threads on this forum, where a lot of angry tears are shed about the randomness of the results and the absence of predictability, fall into one of the above categories.

A CV battle lost in a situation where objectively every factor that can be influenced by the player points to victory, and every factor beyond his influence is minimized, is a rare event indeed.



Endy -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 8:18:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

If you rerun a battle turn 10 times without changing anything, lose 7, draw 2, and win 1, then you definitely did something wrong - or should not have engaged at all. If players enter battles on 50/50 odds that things can go awry and a high amount of factors beyond their control, to express surprise that 50% of them end up on the low end of line and get their ass handed on a plate is a human trait I will always fail to understand.

Nearly all spectacular CV battle loss threads on this forum, where a lot of angry tears are shed about the randomness of the results and the absence of predictability, fall into one of the above categories.

A CV battle lost in a situation where objectively every factor that can be influenced by the player points to victory, and every factor beyond his influence is minimized, is a rare event indeed.


The point is, even if you had the odds to win 7 times out of 10, and then the 1 result that is a complete disaster rolls, then it's difficult for some to accept.

I do accept it as it's a part of the game, but some people are used to more predictable results when planning stuff especially when a significant amount of time spent is involved. It can really put someone off when he rolls a 1 despite his best planning.

In some other games, when you have better odds than the opponent, the % chance of a really disastrous result is minimized. Sure, you can have a bad roll but as long as you did not enter a "fair" fight then the result can be a loss but nothing major. In Witp, it can be anything, from a total victory with no losses to a total defeat with your fleet on the bottom of the ocean and the enemy unscratched no matter the odds. And sure, you can win 70, 80, 90% of the time if you plan it right, but if that kind of amplitude of results is applied then that kind of randomness is difficult to accept by some.

To sum up, it's not the amount of times you will win or lose out of 10, it's the span of possible different results (even if low chance) you get no matter the odds that puts some people off, even if they can rarely happen. It also concerns SAG engagements and land battles to some degree, not only CV fight though these seem to get noticed most for obvious reasons.

I got used to it and even like it at times since it gives it the kind of thrilling unpredictabily in every game and is pretty close to what happened in real life, but sometimes you just sigh at the result and go on because what other choice you have? :) Oh, and I'm not saying this should be changed of course, just playing devil's advocate and trying to understand other points of view.



LoBaron -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 10:00:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Endy
In some other games, when you have better odds than the opponent, the % chance of a really disastrous result is minimized. Sure, you can have a bad roll but as long as you did not enter a "fair" fight then the result can be a loss but nothing major. In Witp, it can be anything, from a total victory with no losses to a total defeat with your fleet on the bottom of the ocean and the enemy unscratched no matter the odds. And sure, you can win 70, 80, 90% of the time if you plan it right, but if that kind of amplitude of results is applied then that kind of randomness is difficult to accept by some.


And this is the part of your post - as in your first post - that I strongly disagree with.

What you attribute to 'some other games' is exactly like it works in WitP.

The only difference is that the number and interaction of variables are far more complex than in most other games. This results in many inexperienced - and not seldom veteran - players to THINK they know what the odds are and what the result should look like, while in fact they only know a fraction of the story. They take the optimistic approach, take a lot more risk than they would ever admit, and then wonder about the high variation of their battle results.

Just as often they are ignorant of the capabilities of their opponents and his options to react to their battle setup, which might lead to defeat even with seemingly superior forces.
Just as often people accept battle by defining the top 20% success result as the mission goal, and that´s a gamble and not a proper risk assessment.

Only because there are unknowns that might be beyond a player´s influence does not mean one cannot plan for them. Contingency planning and is what only a very small percentage of player do. The majority stick to their 'I did everything right so the game failed me' stance, and both fail to understand and improve.

I am aware that you are trying to show why people think this way, but TBH I do not have much sympathy for it.



Endy -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 10:28:32 AM)

While I agree that some of the whining comes from lack of knowledge of how the game works or lack of preparation, there are genuine situations, and quite a lot of them, where luck plays a major role. And it can be very easily checked by simply replaying the turn. I did my share of it with my opponent who was also interested in how stuff could play out with a different dice roll and in a few different scenarios - carrier strike, SAG battle etc. - the results varied from catastrophical to really good ones depending on a dice roll.

And I don't agree that you can plan for everything. Despite your best skills there are always factors you have absolutely no control over. Weather is just one example - absolutely no control over it and no way to plan or prepare for it because the forecasts are not a reliable tool to predict it. And just this one factor can lead to a MAJOR difference in results, for example a carrier battle or a surface action depending if you get nice weather or a thunderstorm in the target hex or hexes. And yes, it's just a matter of how lucky you are with the roll despite everything else you did.

I can name a few other factors but I believe you get my point. Yes, this kind of randomness in some factors is pretty realistic and true to life and most of us have learned to accept them. However, some players are used to something very different and to games, even pretty realistic ones, where the battle outcome just can't vary so much depending on just one factor. Many games, even the more complex or realistic ones, let you predict your chances very well, with only slight variation of the final result. Of course, you might argue that this is more similar to chess than real war but some players react very badly when this kind of control is taken away from them.

I'll say again, yes, WITP has got most of these random things right and yes, stuff you can't control like weather could play a major role in a sea battle and shape history and should do the same in game. The problems start when you realize that if you moved that one squadron somewhere on the West coast or in Japan, then that carrier battle could've been just as easily as it has been lost. And like I said, some other wargames have randomness confined to a much bigger degree and you can predict the results of your actions MUCH better without the wild disparity of results based on a random dice roll.

And some players react histerically to that and have a really hard time accepting it in Witp. Then again, this game is just not for everyone and you need to learn to accept it as it is.



geofflambert -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 11:14:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: afspret

I've only played against the AI, mainly due to my work schedule, and I always save a turn before I run it. That way, if I get battered during a turn, I can always replay the turn after making some changes that will, hopefully, avoid the out come of the previous turn. I know it might seem gamey to some of ya'll, but I've only done this a few times. Besides, I've found that sometimes, no matter how many times I'd replay a turn, the outcome is usually the same (or worse), especially when it comes to naval engagements.


The AI is "gamey". Don't be kind to it. Destroy it anyway you can.



geofflambert -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 11:23:27 AM)

Weather happens. I think it's had a large impact on most of my carrier actions, mostly in my favor. There are thunderstorms over my CVs, so the enemy can't find them but blue sky over his. No one can know exactly what will happen, and I believe the weather is fixed and won't change if you rerun. There was a historical battle (forget which one) where the Enterprise was operating with another CV (in the same hex in game terms) but was hidden by a squall when the attack came and the other CV took all of it.



btd64 -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 11:25:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

Understand during Coral Sea IJN fliers reported they sunk a carrier and battleship when they
bombed USS Neosho and USS Sims.


I recall the story that at the end of the first day of the Battle of the Coral Sea one or more Japanese planes mistakenly attempted to land on USN carriers!


I read that also. LOVE THAT FOG OF WAR....GP



btd64 -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 11:33:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: afspret

I've only played against the AI, mainly due to my work schedule, and I always save a turn before I run it. That way, if I get battered during a turn, I can always replay the turn after making some changes that will, hopefully, avoid the out come of the previous turn. I know it might seem gamey to some of ya'll, but I've only done this a few times. Besides, I've found that sometimes, no matter how many times I'd replay a turn, the outcome is usually the same (or worse), especially when it comes to naval engagements.


Good way to learn from your mistakes. Then when ready to play a PBEM, your better prepared. When I first started playing AE I did the same. The AI didn't complain and sometimes you can develope strategies that you can use latter on. I'm playing the AI now with a Andy Mac Nasty and I just located a Japanese 2 CV TF that was causing problems for me in the (can't give away the location in case you want to play it) ****** ocean and I intercepted with a combo of British and US CV's and sunk all but 1 (FOW) DD....GP

Sorry Andy.[:D][:D][:D]



btd64 -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 11:35:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

There was a historical battle (forget which one) where the Enterprise was operating with another CV (in the same hex in game terms) but was hidden by a squall when the attack came and the other CV took all of it.


Midway, I think....GP



btd64 -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 11:37:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Endy

While I agree that some of the whining comes from lack of knowledge of how the game works or lack of preparation, there are genuine situations, and quite a lot of them, where luck plays a major role. And it can be very easily checked by simply replaying the turn. I did my share of it with my opponent who was also interested in how stuff could play out with a different dice roll and in a few different scenarios - carrier strike, SAG battle etc. - the results varied from catastrophical to really good ones depending on a dice roll.

And I don't agree that you can plan for everything. Despite your best skills there are always factors you have absolutely no control over. Weather is just one example - absolutely no control over it and no way to plan or prepare for it because the forecasts are not a reliable tool to predict it. And just this one factor can lead to a MAJOR difference in results, for example a carrier battle or a surface action depending if you get nice weather or a thunderstorm in the target hex or hexes. And yes, it's just a matter of how lucky you are with the roll despite everything else you did.

I can name a few other factors but I believe you get my point. Yes, this kind of randomness in some factors is pretty realistic and true to life and most of us have learned to accept them. However, some players are used to something very different and to games, even pretty realistic ones, where the battle outcome just can't vary so much depending on just one factor. Many games, even the more complex or realistic ones, let you predict your chances very well, with only slight variation of the final result. Of course, you might argue that this is more similar to chess than real war but some players react very badly when this kind of control is taken away from them.

I'll say again, yes, WITP has got most of these random things right and yes, stuff you can't control like weather could play a major role in a sea battle and shape history and should do the same in game. The problems start when you realize that if you moved that one squadron somewhere on the West coast or in Japan, then that carrier battle could've been just as easily as it has been lost. And like I said, some other wargames have randomness confined to a much bigger degree and you can predict the results of your actions MUCH better without the wild disparity of results based on a random dice roll.

And some players react histerically to that and have a really hard time accepting it in Witp. Then again, this game is just not for everyone and you need to learn to accept it as it is.


All the more reason to play a PBEM.[8D]....GP



Endy -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 11:39:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

No one can know exactly what will happen, and I believe the weather is fixed and won't change if you rerun.



Nope, random weather is random each time you rerun :)



Endy -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 11:41:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: General Patton
All the more reason to play a PBEM.[8D]....GP


Sure, for some, you, me as well as most players on this forum this is a great thrill. But some people are just not prepared for the amount of randomness in Witp and how it affects each game.

Again, just playing devil's advocate here, not complaining personally :)



btd64 -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 11:49:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Endy

quote:

ORIGINAL: General Patton
All the more reason to play a PBEM.[8D]....GP


Sure, for some, you, me as well as most players on this forum this is a great thrill. But some people are just not prepared for the amount of randomness in Witp and how it affects each game.

Again, just playing devil's advocate here, not complaining personally :)

Understood, but for me, its not so much a thrill as much as having the satisfaction of planning out a battle and setting it in motion. The results are the results. Still, even with the occasional disaster, This is THE BEST WAR SIMULATION money can bye....GP



btd64 -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 11:50:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Endy


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

No one can know exactly what will happen, and I believe the weather is fixed and won't change if you rerun.



Nope, random weather is random each time you rerun :)

Die roll....GP



geofflambert -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 12:08:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Endy


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

No one can know exactly what will happen, and I believe the weather is fixed and won't change if you rerun.



Nope, random weather is random each time you rerun :)


That proves I don't rerun stuff



wdolson -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 12:33:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

There was a historical battle (forget which one) where the Enterprise was operating with another CV (in the same hex in game terms) but was hidden by a squall when the attack came and the other CV took all of it.


quote:

ORIGINAL: General Patton
Midway, I think....GP



Santa Cruz is what you're thinking of.

The Enterprise and Hornet were operating together at Midway, but the Yorktown was separate and probably 1-2 hexes away in game terms.

At Santa Cruz the Enterprise also had the benefit of operating with a BB which both drew bombers and was able to significantly contribute to the AA defense. The Enterprise still took a couple of bomb hits after the Hornet was out of action which shut down the deck for launches and jammed one of the elevators in the up position, but in one of the best landing operations of the war the LSO crammed planes onto the crowded deck. The Captain ordered him to stop when the planes backed up to the #3 wire, but he kept landing them. He held off the commander of VF-6 until last because he knew he was the best pilot on the ship. With only one wire still open, he directed the Wildcat to touch down a hair above stall speed and the Wildcat finished its run out inches from the tail of an SBD.

The LSO knew aircraft were running short and wanted to save as many as possible.

The Japanese and American strikes crossed each other in flight. The Japanese escorts peeled off and went after the after the US bombers breaking up the formation and shooting down or shooting up quite a few. One TBF that was badly damaged made it to the Japanese fleet, got into drop range, only to find his bomb bay was damaged and the torpedo would not release, nor would the bomb bay doors close. He flew back and was directed to ditch next to the USS Porter. It's believed the torpedo broke free while ditching and hit the Porter. For years it was thought to have been a Japanese sub, but there were none anywhere near the TF.

I once had a Battle of Rabaul with 4 Japanese CVs vs the Yorktowns. I still held Rabaul and had a bunch of fighters there as well as a few bombers. When the Japanese were spotted leaving Turk, the Yorktowns happened to be crossing the Coral Sea on their way to Java. I was able to top up their tanks and move them just south of Rabaul. For the first two days of the battle heavy storms over my carriers prevented flight ops as well as the Japanese knowing I was there. The KB lost a lot of planes ravaging Rabaul and pretty much wiped out the aircraft there. On day 3 the USN had clear skies and they pummeled the KB. I think two carriers lost, one badly mauled (Shokaku) in exchange for a bad torpedo hit on the Hornet. The Hornet spent a few weeks at Rabaul patching up then limped back to Pearl Harbor. The Enterprise and Yorktown air groups were badly mauled and it took a while to replace and retrain pilots.

It was worth it though. the Shokaku was out of action for a year or more and I think it was the Akagi and Hiryu sunk.

I'm sure if I had been on the other side of that one I would have been very upset!

Oh and I don't think the weather is fixed. The rule of thumb is if it can vary in the real world, it probably does in game too.

Bill



PaxMondo -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 1:27:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Nearly all spectacular CV battle loss threads on this forum, where a lot of angry tears are shed about the randomness of the results and the absence of predictability, fall into one of the above categories.

A CV battle lost in a situation where objectively every factor that can be influenced by the player points to victory, and every factor beyond his influence is minimized, is a rare event indeed.

But truthfully, in this era, CV battles were a crap shoot at best. Looking at early war outcomes, getting into a CV battle generally meant both sides took a beating. This is based upon the '42 CV battles through Midway. Yes, IJ had the worst, but most unbiased assessments of each battle fought (meaning not Morison [;)] generally conclude that a few minutes here, a couple of minutes there and outcomes change dramatically. Those razor thin margins are, I beleive, well modeled in the game.

Point being, most air combat, and particularly naval air combat, had a lot of variable NOT controlled by the commanders. Weather being first, but FOW being right with it. Intel was far from perfect. Because of these two factors alone, coordination was measured in double digit minutes, not seconds like today. I think that, more than anything, is what many [younger] players struggle with. They have never been in a situation where absolute, total control was not possible. Products of the digital age, the whole concept of analog is just foreign.

Anyway, just thoughts of an analogue Neanderthal.

OT: I was having a conversation at a picnic this past weekend with an MIT EE graduate (21 yo wunderkind) and we were talking about programming etc. He was expressing his disdain for any language except C#. When I told him my digital programming start with the 4004 and I was happy with any compiled language he looked at me with a blank look. Pretty sure he had no idea what the 4004 was nor that it was programmed with machine language only initially. Nothing else was available at that time. [;)] I wonder what he would have done if I had told him about analogue computers that I programmed? [:D][:D][:D]



geofflambert -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 2:10:18 PM)

You're ancient. I started with Fortran and stacks of punch cards five inches thick to simulate a game of tic-tac-toe. [:D]



Chickenboy -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 2:13:43 PM)

Feh. I used to program with arrays of rocks. Good ole' rock. Nothin' beats rock.



geofflambert -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 2:35:42 PM)

I didn't know you went back to the Stone Age. I thought you were from the Dirt Age. [:'(]



Chickenboy -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 2:39:56 PM)

"Dirt"? Feh. That's new-fangled. I go back to random swirling of carbon atoms.

Now AW1Steve? He's from the days of only one element. Hydrogen. Good ole' hydrogen. Nothin' beats hydrogen.



crsutton -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 3:00:20 PM)

If we had the ability to micro manage our battles to the point of guaranteed success, then this would quickly become one of the most boring games. It is the total uncertainty that keeps me playing it day after day. Most other computer games have about a three month shelf life with me.



AW1Steve -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 3:01:18 PM)

I'm not quite that old. But my 1st computer languages were Pal-d , R-basic , COBOL and Fortran. And of course in the Navy our computer in the airplane was a Univac. A CP-901. (Sad thing, the USN still uses it! State of the art , 1962![X(]). Of course , my 1st computer was a pair of metal wheels bolted together. [X(]

[:D][:D]



geofflambert -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 3:04:08 PM)

A pair? I was forced to start on three, then four before I got to two.



1EyedJacks -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 3:17:32 PM)

My first computer...



[image]local://upfiles/20162/E8CFF8B0534045D8B5FAA7C7D2EFC5C1.jpg[/image]



Chickenboy -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 3:20:23 PM)

All this high-falutin' number countin' goin' on here...I come from the old school. Just one number back then: 1. Good ole' one. Nothing beats 1.



1EyedJacks -> RE: I'm done with this ridiculous time vampire of a game. (10/21/2014 3:22:10 PM)

Ahhh - but you forgot the zero - 0. You can't have one without the other.

(Damn but that was a beautiful line [:D] )



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.78125