RE: Solution to UPGRADE question.

RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945

[Poll]

POLL: Solution to Aircraft Upgrades

I prefer upgradable aircraft with no limitations (ahistorical)

11% (30)

I prefer upgradable aircraft with the limitations in the first post

43% (111)

I prefer upgradable aircraft with other limitations (post in thread)

7% (19)

I don't want any changes to the system unless they are optional!

22% (58)

I don't want any changes to the system, period, I'm happy as is.

14% (36)

Total Votes : 254

(last vote on : 7/23/2006 6:35:37 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

FirstPappy -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 12:59:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mjk428 quote: ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980 Been running a consistant 80%, +-3%, in favor of some kind of substanative change. That's an awful lot of consensus there for such a hotly debated issue. You're making a giant assumption. I voted for: "no changes unless it's optional". That doesn't mean I want a change, it just means if it is changed I want to be able to turn it off. I realize that some people really want a fantasy version and that's fine with me as long as it doesn't affect my games. Damn, took the words right out of my mouth. I could not have said it better. Thank you.

Caltone -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 1:00:14 AM)
Just a thought, as with many polls the way the questions are phrased can impact the results. I think for the last option it should read: I prefer the system as it is now or I'm happy with the current system Since the first choice points out it is ahistorical, shouldn't the second choice mention it is also ahistorical? Best bet might be to have someone from Matrix write this up. Also keep in mind this is not a scientific poll as with all internet polls.

ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 1:03:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Pappy quote: ORIGINAL: mjk428 quote: ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980 Been running a consistant 80%, +-3%, in favor of some kind of substanative change. That's an awful lot of consensus there for such a hotly debated issue. You're making a giant assumption. I voted for: "no changes unless it's optional". That doesn't mean I want a change, it just means if it is changed I want to be able to turn it off. I realize that some people really want a fantasy version and that's fine with me as long as it doesn't affect my games. Damn, took the words right out of my mouth. I could not have said it better. Thank you. Well I voted for that one and I support a change....i just don't want it to affect those who want things the way they are!

m10bob -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 1:04:58 AM)
Yep,I voted for the 1st because I want it as historical as possible,(fighters to fighters,DB's to DB's,etc).. I appreciate anybodies efforts to improve on this already great game and would like to choose whatever is easiest for them,but given a choice,I want historical.. I'm sure players can be limited and prevented from "dumping" all tha crud types too soon just by cost or introduction dates??

WiTP_Dude -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 1:05:47 AM)
This all seems kind of silly. When the Japanese were designing the new plane models, they didn't know beforehand how they would work out. Maybe if the player was blind as to what the end result would be, it would make sense to have ahistorical upgrades. Then maybe you pour a lot of resources into one design and it ends up that the plane is a real stinker. Or you get lucky and plane really flies well. Otherwise the current system of pushing or delaying historical plane models by a few months seems best. You already know which planes are the better ones vs those that didn't work out too well. You can use this knowledge to give the Japanese a little lift.

Sultanofsham -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 1:06:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mogami Ah new math. I see it as 57 percent want change and 42 percent are opposed (some will allow it only as an option) Opposed is opposed. The wording of #4 sure looks more like I dont care if its not in my face, not opposed. There is a difference. I do agree with the 57% for.

ZOOMIE1980 -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 1:07:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Caltone Just a thought, as with many polls the way the questions are phrased can impact the results. I think for the last option it should read: I prefer the system as it is now or I'm happy with the current system Since the first choice points out it is ahistorical, shouldn't the second choice mention it is also ahistorical? Best bet might be to have someone from Matrix write this up. Also keep in mind this is not a scientific poll as with all internet polls. That may be a problem with option 4, too. I voted for that one. The first three seemed to include no toggle option so I opted out. #4 indicates a change but make it optional. At least I thought that's what it meant. Bottom line, reworded, 80% can at least live with a re-design of this feature, of that 80% a super-majority actually want the change (all those in favor of 1, 2, or 3, and some in 4). 20% wish to impose their will on all others regardless of the ability of Matrix to change it or not.

Sultanofsham -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 1:14:02 AM)
I was going to take #4 since the top had no toggel in it but figured some would interpret as whatever they wanted to to bolster their point of veiw since its sort of ambiguous. Thats why I took two and posted I wanted #2 but as a toggle in the thread.

mogami -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 1:20:07 AM)
Hi, I voted for option 1. But as I tried to explain. If your going to change it you have to change it to make all the restrictions there as well. Sure build what you want but no longer can you just use generic materials to do it with. You need to have the bauxite to convert and you need the nickel and chrome. Build 50,000 Frank but ignore the machine gun and cannon and tires. I want freedom and detail. Enough of some designer abstracting me to death. We track the pilot names I want to track the factory workers. There are sneaky Petes who will try to use the same workers by turning off one factory and turning another on. (Same little Japanese girl builds Arty and AA and next day is screwing propellers onto George before reporting to shipyard next morning to weld on a new CV.) So to be fair I don't think you should count my 1 vote as in favor of change unless you agree to support my "whole hog" campaign. I suggest we get right to work and do a whole new game. (Theres a lot of absraction in WITP that needs weeding out) In the mean time I'll just play WITP as it is to get a good idea on just exactly what I hate about it the most. I'll need about 20 PBEM to decide. I'm amazed so many could decide so quickly what all needed fixing.

Oleg Mastruko -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 1:26:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980 Been running a consistant 80%, +-3%, in favor of some kind of substanative change. That's an awful lot of consensus there for such a hotly debated issue. Not really, it's just over 50% for "some kind of substantive change" IMO. Whoever picked options 3 and especially 4 is not really dying for any change I'd say. Take me for example, I voted #3 "I don't want any changes to the system unless they are optional". That's just my way of saying "just drop the issue already" [:D]. I mean if you really want to force some change and devs will comply then go ahead, but make it optional. Yet you count me in "80% in favor of substantive change". I don't think so. There were some other cases of misunderstaning as well, not to mention visitors who just went by this thread since they are not interested in this "issue" at all. Then there are those who don't visit the board at all and are perhaps happily playing v.1.00. Then there are those who have CTDs and would BEG the developers to just solve their problems, and don't give a damn about any "aircraft upgrades" etc. Zoomie you really have "skewed" view on things sometimes. No offense please [:)] Oleg

Williamb -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 1:27:06 AM)
But if you get rid of BAD Japanese aircraft what will you use for Kamakazies ??????

DrewMatrix -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 1:31:19 AM)
quote: So to be fair I don't think you should count my 1 vote as in favor of change unless you agree to support my "whole hog" campaign I like Mogami's idea as far as it goes, but he left out that the Allies should do this too (so you need to add complete flexibility in allied production). He mentioned before you also need to let the Allies choose a "Japan First" strategy" so put that in. And in return I would let the Germans share with the IJ the plans for the "2 stage V-2" (the one where the V-2 sat on a booster). So the IJ can lob V-2s at Alaska. Since the main idea here seems to be to avoid all the stuff that turned out not to be as good as it looked on the drawing board I, as the Allies, will avoid the P-39. And all my surface ships. Back to 1919. With the savings in Supply and Manpower I should be able to hit Tokyo with nuclear armed missles launched from Anchorage by about November, '42. And Berlin from Greenland maybe.

Sultanofsham -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 1:44:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Beezle I like Mogami's idea as far as it goes, but he left out that the Allies should do this too (so you need to add complete flexibility in allied production). He mentioned before you also need to let the Allies choose a "Japan First" strategy" so put that in. It would be nice if both could be added to the set up options along with a more enlightened Japanese pilot training program. I'd guess that the Japan first and Pilot training could be added in a scenario since they would be a just a change to a set value and that was done with one in UV training wise. The production for the allies we'll never see which sucks just as it sucked in BTR. At most we'll get scenarios with different aircraft like BTR. Maybe we can scream loud enough to get it into War in the Med.

mogami -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 2:00:36 AM)
Hi, Yes I agree now is the time to lobby for The Med game. Can I suggest a title? "A War that never actualy happened but is played in the Med about the same time as WWII occured" I'm not sending My Afrika Korps out with Pz-II and III I'm building Tigers

Mr.Frag -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 2:01:43 AM)
quote: "A War that never actualy happened but is played in the Med about the same time as WWII occured" Hey, why even bother with a map of the Med? Whats the point?

Sultanofsham -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 2:08:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mogami Hi, Yes I agree now is the time to lobby for The Med game. Can I suggest a title? "A War that never actualy happened but is played in the Med about the same time as WWII occured" "A War that never actualy happened but is played in the <fill in the blank> about the same time as WWII occured" would be a more fitting title for any war game wouldnt it? Unless the player did exactly what everyone did in real life and then you could call it a BOOK [:'(] quote: ORIGINAL: Mogami I'm not sending My Afrika Korps out with Pz-II and III I'm building Tigers If the game allows you to more power to ya. Far be it for me to say your wrong for doing your way.

mogami -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 2:15:13 AM)
Hi, No the book is when players of historic games are allowed to do what the actual persons planning the operations could not do. (Then it is called a Fantasy Adventure) No one is advocating games where players are forced into doing the exact operations. What we want is games where your free to plan but the existing reality applies as well. If you can't see or understand the difference then that is where the major problem that exists between our two camps resides. There is a vast gulf between "What if Spartacus had a Piper Cub" and "What if Spartacus kept going over the Alps"

DrewMatrix -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 2:18:12 AM)
I knew Mogami was very knowlegeable. But I never realized before today that Mogami is really funny too![:)]

mogami -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 2:22:32 AM)
Back before they changed the water I would post poetry and adapt musical numbers to taunt person who annoyed me. It's been more then a year. I feel one coming on.

Williamb -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 2:24:04 AM)
quote: There is a vast gulf between "What if Spartacus had a Piper Cub" and "What if Spartacus kept going over the Alps A good point. There can be a combination of historical possibilities and historical OOBs and TO&Es I dont mind the japanese being able to invade PH. I do MIND if they do it with stuff that shouldnt exist. Maybe thats part of the problem when we all want the "biggest baddest dude in the Neighborhood" I mean who wants to be the Italians in WWII ? better to be the Soviets and the Germans. but agian someone who can win even with less than good stuff is important too. I guess what Im thinking is that rather than have a comand and Conquer type game where everything looks or acts the same I LOVE the diversity in WITP and would hate to see all the various planes, ships, troops get pared down to just a select few JUST because they are the best. Simply salivating at the change to jump a flock of nell bombers with Buffalo fighters and I will enjoy that as much as if it were a flock of P-51s hitting Betty Bombers. FOr me its the games diversity that rules not its what ifs.

2ndACR -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 2:25:29 AM)
You know, i have tried not to argue with you Betas, you do after all know the inner workings, but Mr. Frag, Mogami you guys are bent on just taking it to the extreme in the most extreme way. We have asked for a change to give the player some freedom. The devs have said they would consider it at a later date. I am fine with that. I have listened to all the arguments, some of them you have thrown out make sense. Others are way out in left field. Those are the arguments that get everybody fired up. I wanted this thread so that the Devs/Matrix could gauge the players feelings onthe subject without wading thru 20+ pages of heated arguments. Ya'll want to argue, start your own thread. Leave this one without the BS. We already got 2 threads you both can go to.

DrewMatrix -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 2:27:33 AM)
quote: adapt musical numbers to taunt person who annoyed me If you do post a musical parody, please use the old .wav file format compatible with UV. I am still having trouble with some of the WITP format sound effects.

DrewMatrix -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 2:29:40 AM)
quote: I mean who wants to be the Italians in WWII ? The best wargamer I have ever met (David Kush should you run into him). He always played the Itallians in WW II armored miniatures games. Spanish irregulars in Napoleonics games. Turks in Crimean games. Sort of like always practicing with double weight weapons. You get really really good playing like that.

Mr.Frag -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 2:29:56 AM)
quote: If you do post a musical parody, please use the old .wav file format compatible with UV. I am still having trouble with some of the WITP format sound effects. You care to list what software you have installed? It seems everyone who runs perfectly has just a clean windows install of any version. Those who go ballistic seem to be running the kitchen sink ... it would be interesting to see what the folks having problems have in common from a software standpoint.

DrewMatrix -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 2:34:03 AM)
quote: You care to list what software you have installed Breaking out of parody mode: You mean ALL the stuff I have installed? And probably everything I had installed at one time would be of interest (since it might have left a scrap somewhere in my system). I can't even think how to tell. Hmm, do you want some part of my registry? (but you don't know which part. That's the hooker, right?) Let me think on that. I may Email an answer if I can come up with one.

DrewMatrix -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 2:57:09 AM)
quote: You care to list what software you have installed? (This is about the Sound Problem, not about A/C upgrades) I guess one could do a series of system restores back to the original configuration of the system years ago until you find the point where you get a configuration that causes the sound-crashes. My computer is a) about 2 years old b) has about 200 restore points c) I need it for a few other activities than WITP (although I am trying to keep those other activities like work and personnel finance to a minimum to have more time for the game) and I am worried doing dozens of system restores to various old configurations could make something disappear. Something I wouldn't know was gone until I needed that file to do my income tax for example. But someone who has sound crashes might be able to try that.

Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 3:03:04 AM)
As for me i Vote no changes. New is not always better, and if there are any changes, I hope it does not screw up the Best Pacific War Sim ever produced. I want too cope with and plan operations that did happen and one's that could have happened tied around the units, supply, leadership and general overall strength and weakness of each side. Even if one side is the underdog in the big picture(and ill play the underdog). It's a historical wargame-not EA generals. If i wanted that crap I would go to Hasting and pull it off the shelf.[;)]

Sultanofsham -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 3:07:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mogami Hi, No the book is when players of historic games are allowed to do what the actual persons planning the operations could not do. No a book is a recounting of what took place. Read it again and again and the book doesnt change. quote: ORIGINAL: Mogami No one is advocating games where players are forced into doing the exact operations. What we want is games where your free to plan but the existing reality applies as well. I have no problem with that but chances are thats not going to happen here. You have a game that has been released with a problem. It took a half step when it should have taken a full step or none. I'd love for them to fix the whole production system. I never said there wasnt a problem, in fact I agreed with a nember of things pointed out about it. The point is what are chances that they'll do anything about it? Just making it so a person can select what aircraft a group will fly is a less than best fix but its also alot easier to do that then to go in and add that and revamp the whole production ablility of the game code. What do you think is more likely to happen? I know what I think is more likely to have a chance to be done over the short run and thats why I'm fighting for it. It also seems to be why certain people kept bringing up production in the tread asking for the ability to select as an arguement against it. They know that there is less of a chance of that happening so they play the poison pill game to make sure the chances are low to nil anything happens period. The production system was broke before this came up and is still broke now but I see no super thread for fixing it. You'd think that if they really cared so much about it they would have been going on about it for quit awhile now. quote: ORIGINAL: Mogami If you can't see or understand the difference then that is where the major problem that exists between our two camps resides. I see it but the point is that options in a game do not effect people who do not use them. As I said if you want to use all Tigers for the Africa Korps more power to ya. I'm not going to but I'm not going to get all hot and bothered if you do what you want. The more options in a game the more chance there will be less unhappy people about one thing or another. After all it is a game. quote: ORIGINAL: Mogami There is a vast gulf between "What if Spartacus had a Piper Cub" and "What if Spartacus kept going over the Alps" There isnt a vast gulf between those options I talked about a few posts up. Somehow now im asking for Spartacus to have a piper cub? What next? Claim im asking for F18's to demogog what Im asking for more into something its not?

Mr.Frag -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 3:12:04 AM)
quote: You have a game that has been released with a problem. Once again ... utter crap ... prove it. Between you and Zoomie somehow what is a minor "feature request" has been converted into a major show stopping bug without a single fact supporting your claims. As the Wendies commercial says, "Where's the beef?"

mogami -> RE: Solution to UPGRADE question. (8/17/2004 3:13:45 AM)
Hi, I find the entire debate amusing for 1 reason. I doubt anyone here posting in favor of change has ever reached a point where they were saddled with oddles of worthless aircraft on the map and lots of good ac in the pool. The only path by which that situation is possible is whole scale tinkering with the starting aircraft factores. Factories that in the majority do not even exist except for the AI. In every post before the release of the game a designer or tester advised agaisnt tinkering with production. Now we have to alter upgrade paths to allow for this tinkering to pay off. But thats not a Piper Cub. Why have no one asked about Allies being forbidden to upgrade prior to May 1942? Talk about handcuffs.

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

0.640625