RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi

RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (Full Version)

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

Message

Lawless1 -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/10/2019 2:01:10 AM)
Many ships can be converted in Dec 41 to ships with greater AA/ASW assets, the trick is to find an locate them. As was historical the vast Allied fleet is scatter throughout the various areas of operations. Each scenario has its own set of ships that can be converted, below are the ship classes that can be converted in December 1941 in the Scn#26 BabesLite A, stock map, Dec 7th start xAK to AG, AKE, AP Clemson Class DD to DE, APD, AVD, DM, DMS Wicks Class DD to DE, APD, Admiralty S Class - DD, DM Admiralty HDML Class - three different HDML Types Wilcannia xAKL to PC, AG, AMc WIlcannia Class AMc to PC, AG, xAKL Trasmarine Class xAK to AG Harriman Class xAK to AKE Dominon M Cargo Class to AP Hog Island Tender Class to AKE C2 Cargo Class to AP Bird Class AM to AVP select AMC to LST Fairmile B Class ML to MGB (three different MGB with different AA and 2 different ML) Beam Tr YP class to ACM. YMS

Cheesesteak -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/10/2019 2:56:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lawless1 Many ships can be converted in Dec 41 to ships with greater AA/ASW assets, the trick is to find an locate them. As was historical the vast Allied fleet is scatter throughout the various areas of operations. Each scenario has its own set of ships that can be converted, below are the ship classes that can be converted in December 1941 in the Scn#26 BabesLite A, stock map, Dec 7th start xAK to AG, AKE, AP Clemson Class DD to DE, APD, AVD, DM, DMS Wicks Class DD to DE, APD, Admiralty S Class - DD, DM Admiralty HDML Class - three different HDML Types Wilcannia xAKL to PC, AG, AMc WIlcannia Class AMc to PC, AG, xAKL Trasmarine Class xAK to AG Harriman Class xAK to AKE Dominon M Cargo Class to AP Hog Island Tender Class to AKE C2 Cargo Class to AP Bird Class AM to AVP select AMC to LST Fairmile B Class ML to MGB (three different MGB with different AA and 2 different ML) Beam Tr YP class to ACM. YMS Cheers! AAffins is traveling for a few days, so I will be on my own to screw this up as best I can! To paraphrase crsutton, so long as I don't sink our CVs, the war is not lost.

RangerJoe -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/10/2019 4:38:22 PM)
Just don't be a Stan Laurel to Oliver Hardy: "Another fine mess you've gotten me into!"

Cheesesteak -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/12/2019 4:51:03 PM)
Admittedly a bit too young to get the reference, but the trope is ubiquitous. Turn 2 is in the hands of our opponent! Nothing fantastically noteworthy. Many, many TFs were created as the great exodus begins. I'm curious what kind of drinks were enjoyed by the TF commanders prior to leaving port. Did the gents at Singapore drink more than those at Manila. Asking the real questions here... Supreme Command has transferred in a new anti-air specialist from CONUS. With a number of confirmed kills already under his belt, let's see what he can do on foreign soil. [image]local://upfiles/36542/15A21382338845058D8240AA03B532AA.jpg[/image]

Cheesesteak -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/15/2019 1:38:51 PM)
Apologies for the delay. Hosted guests from out of town. Turn two came back, and it's grim. Suffering immense casualties is to be expected. Everyone flees, but right into the arms of waiting SCTFs. I'll post a list of ship losses if anyone is interested. Functionally, if it started the game floating in Singapore or Manila, it is no longer above water. Force Z was intercepted while escaping. Morning Air attack on TF, near Kalidjati at 53,98 Weather in hex: Heavy rain Raid spotted at 29 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet. Estimated time to target is 12 minutes Japanese aircraft B5N1 Kate x 13 Japanese aircraft losses B5N1 Kate: 2 damaged B5N1 Kate: 2 destroyed by flak Allied Ships BB Prince of Wales, Torpedo hits 5, on fire, heavy damage BC Repulse Aircraft Attacking: 11 x B5N1 Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo going 5-11 on the PoW makes me miss the DBB mod [:@]

RangerJoe -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/15/2019 8:05:56 PM)
Laurel and Hardy were a comedy team. I think that they were in vaudeville and then made movies. Skinny Laurel would always get into trouble and phat Hardy was with him. Not that Hardy was innocent either . . . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHez6_Gwaq0

HansBolter -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/15/2019 8:45:56 PM)
Why do Allied PBEM players do this to themselves? Why on earth would anyone agree to a non-historic first turn with surprise? If the Japanese want to attack the entire world on the first turn, let them do it without surprise. Showing up with carrier and invasion forces at Mersing at the same time they are bombing Pearl Harbor means they can't possibly have surprise anywhere. Why are Allied PBEM players so masochistic? Why don't any ever stand their ground and refuse to allow this kind of "hand the game to your opponent on a silver platter" nonsense? One of the many reasons I don't engage in PBEM.

BillBrown -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/15/2019 8:51:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter Why do Allied PBEM players do this to themselves? Why on earth would anyone agree to a non-historic first turn with surprise? If the Japanese want to attack the entire world on the first turn, let them do it without surprise. Showing up with carrier and invasion forces at Mersing at the same time they are bombing Pearl Harbor means they can't possibly have surprise anywhere. Why are Allied PBEM players so masochistic? Why don't any ever stand their ground and refuse to allow this kind of "hand the game to your opponent on a silver platter" nonsense? One of the many reasons I don't engage in PBEM. As a primarily allied PBEM player, why would I not allow it? I do try and limit my Japanese opponents to some reasonable set of first turn moves, but first turn surprise only does so much. There are 1648 more turns after turn 1, let the Japanese player get a good start. My first turn rules let me salvage PoW and Repulse for a few much less worthy ships and aircraft.

RangerJoe -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/15/2019 8:57:41 PM)
It could also be sort of an equalizer between an experienced Allied player and a lesser experienced Japanese player.

mind_messing -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/15/2019 9:21:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter Why do Allied PBEM players do this to themselves? Why on earth would anyone agree to a non-historic first turn with surprise? If the Japanese want to attack the entire world on the first turn, let them do it without surprise. Showing up with carrier and invasion forces at Mersing at the same time they are bombing Pearl Harbor means they can't possibly have surprise anywhere. Why are Allied PBEM players so masochistic? Why don't any ever stand their ground and refuse to allow this kind of "hand the game to your opponent on a silver platter" nonsense? One of the many reasons I don't engage in PBEM. We've had divergencies over this before, so I'll keep it brief. In a game that should run to something over 1600 turns, one turn (even with the benefits of the Dec 7th surprise) only has so much impact. It's a concession to rectify the massive material imbalance that exists between Japan and the Allies. Over the years, the non-historic first turn been optimized and refined in a way that's encouraged by competitive play. The fact that you don't engage if PBEM gives you less right to critiqe. Take the plunge, find someone of the same mindset of you and see what beauty there can be in PBEMs!

Cheesesteak -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 12:57:10 AM)
Picking the right scenario is always going to be a player to player call. If it was just me playing against the honorable RADM, I would not have picked Scen 2 with surprise on (I'm not confident enough in my own play to). Aaffins is a skilled player, and between the two of us, I'm excited for the challenge Scen 2 presents. At the moment, I'm enjoying playing as the allies against Aaffins in an RA 8.0 game. Different strokes for different folks. I was unaware of the min/maxing skilled opponents could perform on turn 1, but that will motivate me to return in kind [:D]

HansBolter -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 11:29:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cheesesteak I was unaware of the min/maxing skilled opponents could perform on turn 1, but that will motivate me to return in kind [:D] Another unsuspecting Allied player duped into giving the Japanese player everything he wants on a silver platter. What concessions did you get in return? None I would suppose.

HansBolter -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 11:33:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter Why do Allied PBEM players do this to themselves? Why on earth would anyone agree to a non-historic first turn with surprise? If the Japanese want to attack the entire world on the first turn, let them do it without surprise. Showing up with carrier and invasion forces at Mersing at the same time they are bombing Pearl Harbor means they can't possibly have surprise anywhere. Why are Allied PBEM players so masochistic? Why don't any ever stand their ground and refuse to allow this kind of "hand the game to your opponent on a silver platter" nonsense? One of the many reasons I don't engage in PBEM. It's a concession to rectify the massive material imbalance that exists between Japan and the Allies. The fact that you don't engage if PBEM gives you less right to critiqe. The massive material imbalance is what the war was all about. Players who can't accept that should find another game. And the PBEM elitism rears its ugly head once again. I have tried it. Did so in the Uncommon Valor days and it was such a horrid experience, with the Japanese player quitting after his auto victory gambit failed, that I swore I would never expose myself to that kind of abuse again.

BBfanboy -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 11:37:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter Why do Allied PBEM players do this to themselves? Why on earth would anyone agree to a non-historic first turn with surprise? If the Japanese want to attack the entire world on the first turn, let them do it without surprise. Showing up with carrier and invasion forces at Mersing at the same time they are bombing Pearl Harbor means they can't possibly have surprise anywhere. Why are Allied PBEM players so masochistic? Why don't any ever stand their ground and refuse to allow this kind of "hand the game to your opponent on a silver platter" nonsense? One of the many reasons I don't engage in PBEM. It's a concession to rectify the massive material imbalance that exists between Japan and the Allies. The fact that you don't engage if PBEM gives you less right to critiqe. The massive material imbalance is what the war was all about. Players who can't accept that should find another game. And the PBEM elitism rears its ugly head once again. I have tried it. Did so in the Uncommon Valor days and it was such a horrid experience, with the Japanese player quitting after his auto victory gambit failed, that I swore I would never expose myself to that kind of abuse again. Not so much elitism, Hans, as not being as devoted to historical accuracy as you seem to advocate. If these players think game balance in more important, then making house rules to help with that makes sense. They could be tilting the scale too much the other way but they won't know until they try it out.

Alfred -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 2:39:46 PM)
There are pros and cons for both positions but on balance, there is more substance to HansBolter's position than for the opposite position. 1. For all it's abstractions, AE remains a game very firmly designed with historical capabilities as the guiding philosophy. 2. No private mod has totally disregarded historical capabilities In all instances the private modder has designed a mod consistent with what they think is the historical capabilities available within the parameters of their mod. 3. Occasionally AE design criticism made by players is directed towards a perceived level of unnecessary micro management. More often it is directed towards a perceived poor representation of historical capabilities. No one has ever argued for the use of this engine to represent 2019 capabilities; no request for the modern Soryu class of subs to be in the OOB, no request for the CVN class, no Apache helicopters, no Abrams tanks. Fidelity to the 1941-46 period is the only demand consistently made. The only possible conclusion from the above three points is that the purchasers of AE only want a product consistent with the historical capabilities of the PTO of WWII. Otherwise they would play Harpoon, or HOI, or the Naval Sims ship construction game or any of the other myriad wargames available in the market place. 4. This game is asymmetrical. Just as the real war was. However it is precisely the victory conditions which provide the Japanese player with a real opportunity to win the game, and force the Allied player to perform at least as well as the historical Allied commanders to achieve the historical decisive victory. I for one have no patience with all those PBEM players, from both sides, who shout from the roof that they are only interested in the journey, not the game's victory conditions and yet without any evidence of embarrassment proceed to demand conditions or house rules whose only impact is to make their play more competitive all whilst simultaneously decrying any action taken by their opponent which is not consistent with the historical record. That sure isn't any journey which would be recognisable by the real participants of the historical conflict. It is intellectual dishonesty of the highest order to claim to desire a journey along historical capabilities (else points 1-3 above inclusive would not be the case) but then demand changes away from the historical record. Were a non historically consistent journey experience really desired then one of the many other myriad wargames would be more suitable. No, this intellectual inconsistency is only rational when one understands that "pale face speaks with forked tongue"; irrespective of which side they play they expect to be able to attack and win. 5. Sure a single turn by itself doesn't amount to much in a game consisting of over 1600 turns. Yet there are so many players, overwhelmingly players who play the Japanese side who place so much weight on the parameters of turn 1. I speak from personal experience of individuals who will only play if on turn one they can attack the Saratoga in port, plus land at Mersing, plus hit the port of Manila, plus have "Surprise On", plus no Allied TFs to be created, plus no rerouting of Force Z; all on the basis that otherwise there is no point in playing Japan. So much for playing to go on the journey because Japan can't win, so much for a single turn not being that important because it is the journey which counts. Yes, "pale face does indeed speak with forked tongue", especially when point six below is factored in. 6. It is a fact that the selection of all game conditions are there to be negotiated by the two PBEM players. The more closely tied to historical capabilities it is desired the game play should be, the more those historical conditions should be selected. For each non historical condition selected, the game design balance is altered. Give the Allied player unhistorical torpedo dud rates, the Japanese player will not experience a historical journey and is morally entitled to some non historical compensation. Remove the historical Allied damage control and the Allied player will not experience a historical journey and is morally entitled to some non historical compensation. When a Japanese player demands both a non historical first move plus Surprise On, the opening war salvo is not experienced and consequently the Allied player is morally entitled to some other non historical compensation. 7. Too many Allied PBEM players are bluffed into believing that they have to accommodate JFB demands. The fact is that JFB PBEM players equally need Allied players to tango. Very few Japanese players are willing to play the Allied side in a PBEM. Too few Japanese PBEM players really understand the secret to really enjoying their side is to play for the victory conditions and thereby rejoice in small "victories" which hinder their opponent's march to a decisive victory, and in the process enjoy the journey. No the majority of Japanese players believe they have the ability to correct the historical Japanese "errors" and without an Allied opponent they cannot demonstrate their perceived skill. It is simply not true that there are so few players willing to play Japan in a PBEM that an Allied player must grovel to obtain any PBEM opponent. Alfred

Canoerebel -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 2:45:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alfred �.. 4.� This game is asymmetrical.� Just as the real war was.��However it is precisely the victory conditions which provide the Japanese player with a real opportunity to win the game, and force the Allied player to perform at least as well as the historical Allied commanders to achieve the historical decisive victory.� I for one have no patience with all those PBEM players, from both sides,�who shout from the roof that they are only interested in the journey, not the game's victory conditions and yet without any evidence of embarrassment proceed to demand conditions or house rules whose only impact is to make their play more competitive all whilst simultaneously decrying any action taken by their opponent which is not consistent with the historical record.��That sure isn't any journey which would be recognisable by the real participants of the historical conflict.� It is intellectual dishonesty of the highest order to claim to desire a journey along historical capabilities (else points 1-3 above inclusive would not be the case) but then demand changes away from the historical record.� Were a non historically consistent journey experience really desired then one of the many other myriad wargames would be more suitable.� No, this intellectual inconsistency is only rational when one understands that "pale face speaks with forked tongue"; irrespective of which side they play they expect to be able to attack and win. .... Alfred +1 to everything Alfred said but especially to the quoted part.

BBfanboy -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 3:48:54 PM)
There are some circumstances such as an inexperienced new player in PBEM vs an experienced opponent where a tweaking of a few house rules could make the game more enjoyable/competitive. Other than that sort of thing, I agree with Alfred's points about victory conditions being the great equalizer to overall game play.

Chickenboy -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 7:31:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter quote: ORIGINAL: Cheesesteak I was unaware of the min/maxing skilled opponents could perform on turn 1, but that will motivate me to return in kind [:D] Another unsuspecting Allied player duped into giving the Japanese player everything he wants on a silver platter. What concessions did you get in return? None I would suppose. Hans, Your polemics decrying the stupidity, timidity and naivety of Allied players that allow game starts different than your own preferences are tiresome. Clearly you don't understand their rationale or their decision-making process or the fact that other people can gasp make decisions about their tolerances that are different from your own. You don't like the fact that someone quit on you >15 years ago in UV? Sorry to hear that. But don't impress your emotional baggage on others who are more willing to move on. Now, with that said, a non-historic first turn with surprise on can be made with reasonable assurances to all parties. This is, and has been, the basis of my typical first turn Manila strike. I inform my partner of my intention to only strike Manila beforehand in exchange for my partner honoring the surprise settings. Easy peasy. Also, please note that the stock "Historical first turn" (December 8 start) is, in and of itself ahistorical. PoW and Repulse get Nettied to death on December 7-8, which-of course-never happened IRL. Combined with the modeling of the pretty decent PH strike, the December 8 "Historical first turn" start is considerably more damaging to Allied efforts than a surprise PH attack OR a surprise Manila attack would be.

mind_messing -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 8:07:01 PM)
quote: 5. Sure a single turn by itself doesn't amount to much in a game consisting of over 1600 turns. Yet there are so many players, overwhelmingly players who play the Japanese side who place so much weight on the parameters of turn 1. I speak from personal experience of individuals who will only play if on turn one they can attack the Saratoga in port, plus land at Mersing, plus hit the port of Manila, plus have "Surprise On", plus no Allied TFs to be created, plus no rerouting of Force Z; all on the basis that otherwise there is no point in playing Japan. So much for playing to go on the journey because Japan can't win, so much for a single turn not being that important because it is the journey which counts. Yes, "pale face does indeed speak with forked tongue", especially when point six below is factored in. My take on that is that its a purely psychological response from Japanese players to the fact that so much of the early game consists of Japan, with a positional and psychological advantage over the Allies, doing its best to establish a firm position to attain the victory conditions. From what I've seen of it, games with a overwhelmingly successful first turn for Japan tends to send the Allies down a passive defence for the initial period of the war. From what I've seen, it's only the very savy or experienced players that avoid this. This generally means that the Allies don't attempt effective counter-strikes to Japanese Dec 7th moves. Mersing is risky, but yet not always opposed. All or part of the KB going to Manila/DEI uncovers a great deal of the Pacific for the Allies to act in, yet measured boldness is generally rare. Thoughts welcome!

HansBolter -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 8:12:16 PM)
And of course, now the personal attacks start...... Time to shout Hans down again. I'll stop posting here as this AAR has already been hijacked beyond all propriety. Apologies to the OP.

mind_messing -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 8:14:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter Why do Allied PBEM players do this to themselves? Why on earth would anyone agree to a non-historic first turn with surprise? If the Japanese want to attack the entire world on the first turn, let them do it without surprise. Showing up with carrier and invasion forces at Mersing at the same time they are bombing Pearl Harbor means they can't possibly have surprise anywhere. Why are Allied PBEM players so masochistic? Why don't any ever stand their ground and refuse to allow this kind of "hand the game to your opponent on a silver platter" nonsense? One of the many reasons I don't engage in PBEM. It's a concession to rectify the massive material imbalance that exists between Japan and the Allies. The fact that you don't engage if PBEM gives you less right to critiqe. The massive material imbalance is what the war was all about. Players who can't accept that should find another game. And the PBEM elitism rears its ugly head once again. I have tried it. Did so in the Uncommon Valor days and it was such a horrid experience, with the Japanese player quitting after his auto victory gambit failed, that I swore I would never expose myself to that kind of abuse again. You're quite right that the material imbalance is a core aspect of the game, but the whole premise of the Japanese attack on the US was to remedy that on the first day of the war [:)] As for PBEM elitism, I'd agree that there is an element of elitism. The scripts for solo play are good, and the computer can be a formidable opponent, but it just can't think. A genuine opponent can think (maybe very badly, mind you) and respond in creative and interesting ways. Uncommon Valor was released in 2002. Maybe time to reconsider your stance: the PBEM community is quite vibrant, and I'm sure there's somebody out there just waiting for you [;)]

mind_messing -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 8:20:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter And of course, now the personal attacks start...... Time to shout Hans down again. I'll stop posting here as this AAR has already been hijacked beyond all propriety. Apologies to the OP. Nah, don't take it personally. There's more than one way to play AE [:)] Plus, you're here to off-set my "let people do whatever they can get away with in the game" mentality [:D]

RangerJoe -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 8:20:47 PM)
The beginning and the end are important. The journey is the fun part. Can the Allies upset the Japanese plans enough to keep an auto victory at bay? They need to do so without sacrificing too much. Then can the Japanese keep the Allies at bay long enough so that Strategic bombing isn't the game winner before the Soviets come in? Can the Japanese slow the Allied juggernaut down so Allied victory is much later than historical or can they even keep the Allies from a victory? some If the Japanese player doesn't do something against an inexperienced Allied player like invading Portland to get an auto victory, is he satisfied or will he do anything just to get the auto victory? That is important. Then again, will the Allied player be on the ropes but suddenly invade Hokkaido in 1944 while still mucking around in the Solomons? Especially with creative spelling in his AAR? House rules are nice sometimes, some might pertain to the first turn especially since the invasion task forces would probably have been detected as such and not just troop convoys to Thailand. Some house rules restrict something that a good player can counter but lazy players don't want to bother doing. Some are to restrict creative purchasing of units to reduce the PP expenditures. It is up to the players to decide them. As far as having one player drop when he could not have an auto victory, I would never play that person again and I would warm others. The important things are first of all, have fun! then learn, and improve your game. Also,you might make new friends.

Cheesesteak -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 8:32:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter And of course, now the personal attacks start...... Time to shout Hans down again. I'll stop posting here as this AAR has already been hijacked beyond all propriety. Apologies to the OP. I hope that is not the case. I've been quite busy at work today and haven't chimed in as yet. I'll add more later. I've appreciated yours (and others) contributions greatly. Selfishly, I hope you stick around.

BillBrown -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 9:03:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter Why do Allied PBEM players do this to themselves? Why on earth would anyone agree to a non-historic first turn with surprise? If the Japanese want to attack the entire world on the first turn, let them do it without surprise. Showing up with carrier and invasion forces at Mersing at the same time they are bombing Pearl Harbor means they can't possibly have surprise anywhere. Why are Allied PBEM players so masochistic? Why don't any ever stand their ground and refuse to allow this kind of "hand the game to your opponent on a silver platter" nonsense? One of the many reasons I don't engage in PBEM. My problem with this is that is it wrong. This is my preferred settings and rules, and all but one of my PBEM games has been as the Allies: No house rules, just normal first turn rules: First turn rules: 1. Allied TF that exist on turn one can change their orders, no new TFs can be created 2. Only ground and air units either in China or attached to China Command can be given orders on turn 1. 3. No deep penetrations by the Japanese( No Mersing turn 1, no Palambang, etc. ) game settings: REALISM OPTIONS FOW ON Advanced weather ON Allied damage control ON PDU ON Historical first turn OFF Dec 7 surprise ON Reliable USN torps OFF Realistic R&D ON No unit withdrawals OFF Reinforcements +/- 0 GAME OPTIONS Combat reports ON Auto sub ops OFF TF move radius ON Plane move radius ON Facilities expand OFF Auto upgrade ships and airgroups OFF Air and ground replacements OFF Turn cycle 1 TURN In other words, I propose these settings. I have had some opponents opt to do a historical first turn, and that is fine with me. The bottom line is that I do not "hand the game to my opponent on a silver platter." I happen to think it provides an excellent start to a game. I am always intrigued as to what my opponent will come up with.

RangerJoe -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 9:04:37 PM)
Keep posting and have the other player wondering just what is going on. Like when someone posted a picture of a tree and 6 pages of comments were made before the opponent did another turn. He thought that some big operation was being planned . . . [:D]

GetAssista -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 10:23:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe Keep posting and have the other player wondering just what is going on. Like when someone posted a picture of a tree and 6 pages of comments were made before the opponent did another turn. He thought that some big operation was being planned . . . [:D] Yeah, nothing keeps your Japanese opponent up at night like thinking what kind of a big operation Allies can possibly plan in Dec'41 [:D]

rsallen64 -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 10:57:59 PM)
Way back in the late '70s and early '80s, when I was getting into board war-games with a vengeance, a friend and I spent a great deal of money (mostly mine) purchasing many Avalon Hill and SPI games so we could take a crack at each other. In every instance, as soon as things started to go south for him, he would quit, and we never picked up the game again. I played many solo, but games like Flat Top wouldn't work solo, and I was peeved and disgusted, until I gave up on this guy completely. Computer games with an AI were a saving grace. I get what Hans is saying. The shell shock from an experience like that goes deep and is not easily shaken off, and perusing this forum and others for 10 years tells me that even here, after lengthy commitments to a campaign, some players walk away when they don't like how things are going. That being said, looking through the AARs, it's clear there are MANY players who play with honor and commitment. That's encouraging to me. At some point, when my skill level has advanced to the point where I feel somewhat comfortable and I have more time to commit to a PBEM campaign, I will stick my neck out for one. There are good people here who will challenge me, and probably kick my a**, and I am looking forward to the journey, even if the ending is a loss.

RangerJoe -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/16/2019 11:22:12 PM)
Of course, being a 19E someone will kick your a$$ unless you have something like a Scout giving you guidance. But of course, instead of campaign games you could try scenarios since that is much less of a commitment. You could also agree to exchange passwords with someone that you trust in case one player drops out.

Cheesesteak -> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi (7/17/2019 12:49:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rsallen64 Way back in the late '70s and early '80s, when I was getting into board war-games with a vengeance, a friend and I spent a great deal of money (mostly mine) purchasing many Avalon Hill and SPI games so we could take a crack at each other. In every instance, as soon as things started to go south for him, he would quit, and we never picked up the game again. I played many solo, but games like Flat Top wouldn't work solo, and I was peeved and disgusted, until I gave up on this guy completely. Computer games with an AI were a saving grace. I get what Hans is saying. The shell shock from an experience like that goes deep and is not easily shaken off, and perusing this forum and others for 10 years tells me that even here, after lengthy commitments to a campaign, some players walk away when they don't like how things are going. That being said, looking through the AARs, it's clear there are MANY players who play with honor and commitment. That's encouraging to me. At some point, when my skill level has advanced to the point where I feel somewhat comfortable and I have more time to commit to a PBEM campaign, I will stick my neck out for one. There are good people here who will challenge me, and probably kick my a**, and I am looking forward to the journey, even if the ending is a loss. Cheers to that!

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

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

6.796875