I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth

I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (Full Version)

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

Message

Feinder -> I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 5:21:31 PM)
If I look at the threads in this forum... 1. Night bombing You can't stop it! It's gamey! The Allies can bomb Japan into the stone age, and Japan can do nothing about it! Japan has no hope of winning! 2. China You can't keep Japan from rolling China! You're doomed to lose if you're the Allies! 3. ASW Even with the patch, Allied ASW is still over-powered. You're an uber-goober if you pack your ASW TFs! Japan will collapse by 1943! 4. The KB DeathStar It can't be stopped! Allied players are doomed, because nothing can stand against the awesome power to the galaxies most powerful battlestation! Surrender your planets at once! 5. PT boats The scourge of the Pacific! IJN can't stop these little bastards even with battleships! With a few of these, the Allies can take down all of the IJN in just 6 months! 6. Allied AC The Allies don't get any "cool" advanced model aircraft! The Japanese get their neato toys from 1945, but we're stuck with the 1944 models! How can we possibly win?! 7. IJA Pilots Japan's pilot pools are too small! We're is doomed to have 6 year olds flying our aircraft by November of '42! How can we possibly compete with the Allied pilots who cover the earth like locusts! 8. Allied respawning CVs The Allies will surely dominate, because they have an endless supply of CA/CL/CVs! What's the point of sinking anything, when they majikally rise from the depts 2 years later?! So which is it, shall I go on... [:)] -F-

Mr.Frag -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 5:27:33 PM)
[:D] I'm an Axis Allied Fanboy ... gotta cover all my bases eh?

rtrapasso -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 5:44:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Feinder If I look at the threads in this forum... 1. Night bombing You can't stop it! It's gamey! The Allies can bomb Japan into the stone age, and Japan can do nothing about it! Japan has no hope of winning! 2. China You can't keep Japan from rolling China! You're doomed to lose if you're the Allies! 3. ASW Even with the patch, Allied ASW is still over-powered. You're an uber-goober if you pack your ASW TFs! Japan will collapse by 1943! 4. The KB DeathStar It can't be stopped! Allied players are doomed, because nothing can stand against the awesome power to the galaxies most powerful battlestation! Surrender your planets at once! 5. PT boats The scourge of the Pacific! IJN can't stop these little bastards even with battleships! With a few of these, the Allies can take down all of the IJN in just 6 months! 6. Allied AC The Allies don't get any "cool" advanced model aircraft! The Japanese get their neato toys from 1945, but we're stuck with the 1944 models! How can we possibly win?! 7. IJA Pilots Japan's pilot pools are too small! We're is doomed to have 6 year olds flying our aircraft by November of '42! How can we possibly compete with the Allied pilots who cover the earth like locusts! 8. Allied respawning CVs The Allies will surely dominate, because they have an endless supply of CA/CL/CVs! What's the point of sinking anything, when they majikally rise from the depts 2 years later?! So which is it, shall I go on... [:)] -F- Dunno - I guess if your approach is that "it's a game" all this is funny. If your approach is "it's a sim" then, well, not so funny.

MengCiao -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 5:45:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Feinder If I look at the threads in this forum... 1. Night bombing You can't stop it! It's gamey! The Allies can bomb Japan into the stone age, and Japan can do nothing about it! Japan has no hope of winning! 2. China You can't keep Japan from rolling China! You're doomed to lose if you're the Allies! 3. ASW Even with the patch, Allied ASW is still over-powered. You're an uber-goober if you pack your ASW TFs! Japan will collapse by 1943! 4. The KB DeathStar It can't be stopped! Allied players are doomed, because nothing can stand against the awesome power to the galaxies most powerful battlestation! Surrender your planets at once! 5. PT boats The scourge of the Pacific! IJN can't stop these little bastards even with battleships! With a few of these, the Allies can take down all of the IJN in just 6 months! 6. Allied AC The Allies don't get any "cool" advanced model aircraft! The Japanese get their neato toys from 1945, but we're stuck with the 1944 models! How can we possibly win?! 7. IJA Pilots Japan's pilot pools are too small! We're is doomed to have 6 year olds flying our aircraft by November of '42! How can we possibly compete with the Allied pilots who cover the earth like locusts! 8. Allied respawning CVs The Allies will surely dominate, because they have an endless supply of CA/CL/CVs! What's the point of sinking anything, when they majikally rise from the depts 2 years later?! So which is it, shall I go on... [:)] -F- Well, the editor can fix this all with a Vengeance. I just got beaten as the Japs, so I beefed up the Japs....but now my PBEM opponent is the Japs so I have to face beefed up Japs. O, the humanity. Talk about back and forth. Lotta fun though.

Twotribes -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 5:56:49 PM)
Of course you got beaten by the Allies. The Japanese shouldnt win LOL.

MengCiao -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 7:02:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Twotribes Of course you got beaten by the Allies. The Japanese shouldnt win LOL. I thought I was doing Okay....but wasn't....it was my own fault, though the little Empire has many odd problems.

Mark VII -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 8:30:32 PM)
Feinder; good post![;)] however: quote: ORIGINAL: Feinder 7. IJA Pilots Japan's pilot pools are too small! We're is doomed to have 6 year olds flying our aircraft by November of '42! How can we possibly compete with the Allied pilots who cover the earth like locusts! [:)] -F- Give me 200 6-year olds like my nephew Zack and I will take any one on. He can fly anything, shoots down everyone and rarely gets shot down himself. Of course this is on playstation 2 with the various flight sims. He is at least a 95 experience and 99 morale (never gets tired) in WitP terms.[:D][:D][:D]

Onime No Kyo -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 8:37:28 PM)
Here's a completely goofy question. Should I get so terminally bored that I would want to spend the time doing it, is it possible to put people in the database? As a pilot, for example?

Feinder -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 8:39:47 PM)
For the record, I was simply commenting that both sides are paranoid that their side is hopelessly gimped. Which doesn't really make any sense if you think about it. How can someone say that the Allies are assured destruction because China will cave, and then in the next breath, say that Japan's war prospects don't last beyond March 42 because their pilot pool is completely depleted. I call good it old fashioned pros and cons. Even if you can roll China (remains to be seen in my own games), Japan has it's own set of obsticles. It's your job as a player to minimize your own weaknesses, and capitalize on your strengths. Sure there are issues with the game. That's thing about public release, you now have thousands of players (obviously with -WAY- too much time on their hands) trying to figure out even the smallest detail which will give them an advantage over their opponent (whether it's a bug or just simply an exploitation of initial disposition of forces). -F-

Brausepaul -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 8:47:29 PM)
Very good post, Feinder. Apparently both sides are over-undered [:'(]

MengCiao -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 8:54:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Onime No Kyo Here's a completely goofy question. Should I get so terminally bored that I would want to spend the time doing it, is it possible to put people in the database? As a pilot, for example? Like Zak Six or Gary Seven?

mlees -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 9:13:02 PM)
Like Capt William B. Rogers... Like Mark Lees...[8D]

madflava13 -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 9:18:53 PM)
How about Art Vandelay? Or Mr. Pennypacker...

ltfightr -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 9:23:42 PM)
Feinder: I agree with your assesment. I find the game very playable and enjoyable are there some things that still need to be fixed YES. Are they game breakers not to me. Ps I will have the turn back to you when I get home from work.

erstad -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 9:29:39 PM)
Feinder: Good post, but you missed one I saw recently: The Japanese can put their kamikaze's on night attack and the Allies can't fly CAP so free victory points for the Japanese with nothing the Allies can do! With due respect to those that want this to be a fully accurate sim, it is, after all, a game. If you think something is broken and completely unbalances things or takes all the fun out, find someone who agrees and play with them. I'm not arguing that there aren't bugs that need fixing, but not all bugs are game-killers. For example (taking a pre-1.3 example to avoid some of the current emotion) "There is a coding error that makes high altitude bombing way too accurate. My opponent is taking advantage of that bug and killing me, and there's nothing I can do!" Well... you can make sure he knows that there is a bug, and ask him to stop exploiting it. We're all adults here. (I know, the how old/how young thread showed we're not all adults, but my guess is that a 15 year old with the interest and discipline to master WitP is above the adult median for maturity).

Tanaka -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 9:42:16 PM)
hehehe. good post!!! [:D] but as you can see most of these are allied advantages!!! no fair!!! no fair!!! [:'(][:D]

rtrapasso -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/1/2004 9:44:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: erstad With due respect to those that want this to be a fully accurate sim, it is, after all, a game. Well, except it wasn't marketed entirely as a game now, was it? I remember when I first read the blurbs Matrix/3x5 was distributing, there was something about it being used as a training sim for the New Zealand armed forces or some such claim. Don't see that on the web now - wonder if some one in NZ decided it was no sim and cancelled the contract.

pasternakski -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/2/2004 12:40:11 AM)
Well, you might want to read what some of have been posting a little more closely on your rush to humor. I am not so concerned with my side's ox getting gored as I am with shoddy quality control throughout the entire design process, exacerbated by willy-nilly "fixes" that do nothing but divorce the game further from historical simulation. The ground combat, movement, and "stacking" mechanics are just one example of poorly-thought-through design planning. Information on the subject of simulating land campaigns on an operational level is available from numerous sources. These, I suggest, should have been consulted before we wound up paying for a game that allows the Japanese (and, to a lesser extent, the Allies) to overachieve alarmingly and for the game to move at a pace completely unrealistic when compared to what was possible historically. As I have said before, I am no chauvinist. I enjoy my victories and suffer my defeats just as willingly with either side. I merely wish that the game presented the possibilities and capabilities in a way that would convince me that I am being inserted, to the degree a simulation game can do, into the command situation those who conducted the war actually faced. Further, I wish we were moving in that direction instead of following the "we want a balanced game" gonfalon.

bstarr -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/2/2004 1:00:44 AM)
quote: uber-goober [:D] sorry, but that cracked me up and I just had to say something.

Tanaka -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/2/2004 1:03:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pasternakski Well, you might want to read what some of have been posting a little more closely on your rush to humor. I am not so concerned with my side's ox getting gored as I am with shoddy quality control throughout the entire design process, exacerbated by willy-nilly "fixes" that do nothing but divorce the game further from historical simulation. The ground combat, movement, and "stacking" mechanics are just one example of poorly-thought-through design planning. Information on the subject of simulating land campaigns on an operational level is available from numerous sources. These, I suggest, should have been consulted before we wound up paying for a game that allows the Japanese (and, to a lesser extent, the Allies) to overachieve alarmingly and for the game to move at a pace completely unrealistic when compared to what was possible historically. As I have said before, I am no chauvinist. I enjoy my victories and suffer my defeats just as willingly with either side. I merely wish that the game presented the possibilities and capabilities in a way that would convince me that I am being inserted, to the degree a simulation game can do, into the command situation those who conducted the war actually faced. Further, I wish we were moving in that direction instead of following the "we want a balanced game" gonfalon. I dont really think this game allows the Japanese to overachieve more than the Allies. I think since everyone knows what more to do as the Japanese than the Japanese did that most will overacheive. I also think that since most of us have only played to 43 at the most that the Japanese will always be seen as overachieving because they will have the advantage up until then. Im sure as soon as people start playing past 43 that the allies will be overachieving even more soon as well!!! This doesnt mean I dont think there is still a lot to be fixed in this game!!!

moses -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/2/2004 1:48:28 AM)
Of course I love WITP. Think its a great game. But as a player who mostly plays as Japan it is clear that my job is too easy in some areas. I just added up the losses of my 24 main assault divisions that destroyed russia in a month. They suffered total losses of 171 infantry squads. An avg of 7.12 squads per division. What would that be 50 or 60 infantry casualties per division? Only a couple of divisions have more then 50 disrupted squads and they can be sent to china/ SRA pretty much immediately. My strategy was essentialy a giant Banzii charge with 15 divisions into Russia during the dead of winter. Nothing subtle or brilliant. You would think even in victory at least some of my divisions would be a wreck. I did pump 100,000 or so supply into Russia, most of which is still sitting in various russian bases. I guess I'll burn some when I turn replacements on. The point being that my invasion can be conducted at negligible cost. I'm not crying because someone just whooped up on me in a game. I'm crying because I can defeat anyone easily in this theater and there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it. And it requires no skill on my part to do it.---There are easy fixes to the problem of large area land combat and some of them should be implimented to bring these theaters into historical balance.

swamp fox -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/2/2004 2:20:37 AM)
As one who is trying to decide whether to buy, I have been completely confused by the love-hate relationship the board has with this game. Should I wait for the next patch to decide?

ADavidB -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/2/2004 2:25:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: swamp fox As one who is trying to decide whether to buy, I have been completely confused by the love-hate relationship the board has with this game. Should I wait for the next patch to decide? If you are looking for a game in which you can do all sorts of things with the weapons and forces of WW II in the Pacific and you want to have fun - buy the game. If you are looking for a serious, accurate and bug-free historical simulation of the Second World War in the Pacific Theater - you probably want to wait a bit. Dave Baranyi ("...your mileage may very")

moses -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/2/2004 2:28:46 AM)
The game is fantastic despite the many flaws that myself and many others point out, often in confusingly angry tones. The quest for perfection continues but as is it is still the most AWESOME WARGAME IN HISTORY.

pasternakski -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/2/2004 3:50:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tanaka I dont really think this game allows the Japanese to overachieve more than the Allies. I think since everyone knows what more to do as the Japanese than the Japanese did that most will overacheive. I also think that since most of us have only played to 43 at the most that the Japanese will always be seen as overachieving because they will have the advantage up until then. Im sure as soon as people start playing past 43 that the allies will be overachieving even more soon as well!!! I agree with these intelligent comments, at least to the degree they recognize that each side will "overachieve" in its own period of strength ascendancy.

byron13 -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/2/2004 4:26:10 AM)
Swamp Fox: You must keep in mind that this game is a tremendous undertaking, seeking to combine in one game air, ground, and sea units. And, of course, within each of these general types are numerous sub-types, each of which require special treatment, such as cargo carriers, fighters, amphibous-capable, level bombers, dive bombers, radar-equipped night fighters, etc. Most games that have attempted to meld these three into one game usually do so abstractly - either by design or because of the scale of the game. But this game gives you hands on control at a remarkable scale over all units covering approximately half of the globe. It is truly a remarkable achievement. Add in the fine details like some ships can only carry infantry or light weapons, while other specialize in heavy equipment; tracking fuel usage for ships but allowing refueling at sea; affects of malaria; requiring tenders to refit and rearm certain types of combat ships . . . the list goes on and on. Because the game is so much more complex and detailed than any other game on the market, the coding is more complex. The game as released is very playable, but there are a couple of quirks that you see people focusing on. No game is ever perfect, and because this one is based on history and not fantasy, anything that is not precisely historical is deemed a design error or, in some cases, even a bug (and, yes, some are actually bugs). I, frankly, haven't even noticed some of the issues people are railing on. The biggest problem is probably the accelerated land combat. But trust me when I say that the people that declare an issue/bug to be a "gamebreaker" or render the game "unplayable" are out of their heads. To the contrary, this game is very stable and imminently playable. There is simply no other game like it on the market today. The scope and grandeur is breath-taking. Most of the problems either balance out or affect a very small portion of the overall game so that their affects are negligible. If I ever actually notice the issues of which other people complain, I will write it off to an odd happening that will, in all likelihood, be well within the spectrum of possible outcomes. Unplayable? Hardly. If anything, it has rendered many of my other games virtually unplayable because of their relative simplicity and the frustration at not being able to micro-manage. It's like going from an immensely complicated board game, like Campaign for North Africa, back to Tactics II. You can't make the switch. Tactics II is no longer a military simulation but is just an abstract board game like Risk or chess - possibly fun, but not a simulation. Looked at another way, if you scaled this game down in both size and ability to micro-manage to the size of other games, the problems would also scale down to such a small level that they wouldn't even be noticeable and would beat all other games hands down. Bottom line: there simply is no other game like it and there is no substitute. I would gladly pay $80 again for the pleasure of playing it.

Cap Mandrake -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/2/2004 5:19:09 AM)
It is a truly awesome undertaking. Is it perfect..of course not..but still dang fun. A new idea or tactical approach will occur to you every time you fire the game up. The Land combat does involve some abstraction..but one musn't expect an olive in one's martini in a war zone.

swamp fox -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/2/2004 5:28:28 AM)
Thanks for the response. As a gamer who started with Tactics II, and who has attempted to play Campaign for North Africa, your comparisons struck a chord. I remember owning three games back in my boardgaming days that I never came close to finishing, War in Europe, War in the Pacific, and CFNA, all by SPI. I couldn't even set the maps up in the living room of my apartment. But I really wasn't sorry I bought the games, because I loved to set them up and play around with them. And now I won't even need a spare room. Off to the store.

Charles2222 -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/2/2004 7:44:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: moses Of course I love WITP. Think its a great game. But as a player who mostly plays as Japan it is clear that my job is too easy in some areas. I just added up the losses of my 24 main assault divisions that destroyed russia in a month. They suffered total losses of 171 infantry squads. An avg of 7.12 squads per division. What would that be 50 or 60 infantry casualties per division? Only a couple of divisions have more then 50 disrupted squads and they can be sent to china/ SRA pretty much immediately. My strategy was essentialy a giant Banzii charge with 15 divisions into Russia during the dead of winter. Nothing subtle or brilliant. You would think even in victory at least some of my divisions would be a wreck. I did pump 100,000 or so supply into Russia, most of which is still sitting in various russian bases. I guess I'll burn some when I turn replacements on. The point being that my invasion can be conducted at negligible cost. I'm not crying because someone just whooped up on me in a game. I'm crying because I can defeat anyone easily in this theater and there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it. And it requires no skill on my part to do it.---There are easy fixes to the problem of large area land combat and some of them should be implimented to bring these theaters into historical balance. The problem is that you have to expect, to some degree, that the game is designed NOT on you making major efforts in the USSR, but the Pacific, hence the name. It's too bad they can't endlessly deal with all hypothetical possibilities, but the reason it's too easy is because we're focusing our attention on areas where WE KNOW the programmers haven't put forth much effort to contain. Nothing wrong with looking for an avenue for victory but when it's apparent that it only succeeds because the programmer didn't get hypothetical with that theatre, then it's pretty useless as I view it. If this game were more of a take control of Japan and do anything, anywhere, then I could understand this more. The only probelm though, is that trying to knock the USSR out of the war is a realistic ambition, cince later in the war they can devour you. The problem with that however is that the USSR isn't designed to do anything really eactive there if you put forth a major effort. Unless I'm mistaken, I believe the Japanese are at war with the US, even if they don't use the historic 1st turn, or don't attack anywhere in this game. If that's true I suppose they thought such a thing would force you to fight in the Pacific, therefore there would be no need of using hypothetical forces beyond the ship spawning rule to cover a major effort on the USSR for example. From my view, while I think it's interesting to see what you can do in the USSR to some extent if they didn't put up any defense to deal with such a contingency then you shouldn't really claim the game is weak because of it, because the game isn't designed to simulate a USSR attack (though we might like that to be included). While I hate to have my direction pretty much dictated for me when there's other land that can be conquered, one can only say the game is really weak when you attack in the theatre that the game is really focused on.

Rob322 -> RE: I gotta admit, I find it amusing the back-n-forth (12/2/2004 7:58:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: swamp fox As one who is trying to decide whether to buy, I have been completely confused by the love-hate relationship the board has with this game. Should I wait for the next patch to decide? You know, this love/hate thing is typical of many game boards. Every game I play generally has a contingent that screams "the game is the absolute best thing ever" and a contingent that screams "this game is too buggy and I refuse to play until they're fixed!" I find that both groups tend to cancel each other out over time (and no, I don't mean this as criticism of anyone on here) and they often get into rather amusing food fights with each other. Some people are more easily pleased than others and sometimes people get an impression of how things will go that doesn't get fulfilled (sometimes that's the games' fault, sometimes, that's the customers' fault). I'm sure there was at least one person who went to see Star Wars on it's opening night and left the theater thinking, "what garbage, I should ask for my money back!" The simple fact is that you can listen to people up to a point but ultimately you're going to have to try it in order to decide if you like it or not. It's a common element of games that they tend to have bugs. Some a lot, some a few, some that cripple the entire game, others that are merely strange or annoying. I personally have experienced few of the problems that have been reported here; maybe I'm lucky, maybe it's because I have a brand new computer, maybe I have a higher tolerance/patience level than some for the difficulties. Some of the issues that have been reported may indeed be due to gameplay choices rather than bugs or poor design. It's difficult to judge anything on one run through, it could be the skill/experience of players or luck. Interestingly, there are some who claim the game is not enough of a simulation for their tastes. Many of us who bought this game are history buffs and know something about the Pacific campaign. We have opinions about what Japan "should have done" and we use this game to implement those. This creates ahistoric results at times that leads some to contend things are broken (like Japan conquering China, but who knows? In the real world Japan did not set out to conquer all of China, what would've happened if they had?). Yet, there is another group that claims that the game is too much of a simulation, that is they want to be able to go off and do things ahistorically and the game holds them back (like on Japanese aircraft production). Is this a design flaw or is this a deliberate attempt on the developer's part to balance the game between the die-hard simulation types and those seeking enough flexibility to try and change history? If you buy the game, you'll have to decide that for yourself. It's an expensive game and there are some who took the position that if you spend $70 on a game, it should be absolutely perfect. I chose to take a different position (where humans are involved there is generally no such thing as perfect) and so probably emotionally I've weathered the occasional hiccup fairly well and like I've said I have noticed very few problems. There's an interesting letter from the developer on the main page entitled "Clarification of future development plans" (I'm not sure how to do a hyperlink here [&:]) that to me indicates the game will continue to be supported for the time being. As far as I'm concerned, the game is completely playable as is and for me the patches were more augmentations as opposed to necessary. If you want it, I say buy it. Personally, this has been the most absorbing, addictive, and interesting game I've ever played and I do it all over again in a minute. Cheers, Rob [8D]

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.71875