Upset for what?

Upset for what? (Full Version)

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

Message

afspret -> Upset for what? (4/2/2005 10:14:23 AM)
Why do some people seem to be getting upset or complain about certain things that happen during this game which did not historically happen during the war? This is after all a GAME! What good would it be to play a game where every move and the end is predetermined?

Platoonist -> RE: Upset for what? (4/2/2005 11:25:51 AM)
I think most of the recent complaints have to do with the modeling of reality. For example are Allied ASW assets performing in 1941 in way that seems more in line with the deadly accuracy they achieved by dint of training and technology by 1944. Are naval bombardments in 1942 more effective in causing casualties than a modern missle strike....etc. As for a ahistorical tactic like say, the Japanese forming up a well-escorted convoy system from the get-go that one doesn't bother me at all. Especially if I am the Japanese. [:D]

afspret -> RE: Upset for what? (4/2/2005 12:16:59 PM)
I'd tend to agree if it wasn't for the fact that my early allied ASW battles are not that impressive. After 7 Dec I sent TFs made up of 3-4 DDs (of all classes) to take on the IJN subs around PH and usually end up loosing 1 or 2 (with a couple of more damaged) and not getting any hits. Those that also complain about the accuracy of US 4E bombers bug me a little as well (early on so far and mine can't hit a bull in the butt with a base fiddle!)

Mike Scholl -> RE: Upset for what? (4/2/2005 2:26:23 PM)
PLATOONIST has summed it up pretty well. If all you want is a game, play chess. It's challenging and fair. What was promised was a SIMULATION GAME. It is supposed to reflect the realities of WWII, and the re- sults should reflect those realities. In reality, the Japanese had a problem finding enough shipping to support their war effort. In the game, they have shipping sitting idle all over. This causes complaints about the realism of the model. Japan fought China from 1937 onward. By 1940 they were pretty much mired down. They could beat the Chinese, but they didn't have the ability to garrison and control the enormous population and landmass of China. They kept hoping the Chinese would give up..., and blaming Western aid for keeping them in the fight. This was why the were occupying all the Chinese Ports, and why they moved into French Indochina, and the basis for the eventual move into Burma. They couldn't seem to understand that the Chinese were starting to feel the same kind of nationalism that Japan had undergone 50 years earlier. In the game, the Japanese CAN conquer China in short order. This also causes complaints about the realism of the model. After all, if it was that easy, the Japanese would have done it in 1940 or 1941. There are a number of things of this nature that hamstring the model's accuracy on the strategic level. Then there are the kind of tactical problems Platoonist mentioned. Some players are perfectly happy with just a GAME. Others of us want what was promised..., a detailed simulation of the challenges facing both sides in the Second World War. The basics are in WITP---if only they would correct the innacuracies. Then it would really be worth 1600 turns of detailed play.

BigB -> RE: Upset for what? (4/2/2005 2:35:48 PM)
make a game that plays like a documentary and still keeps people involved then you can keep your whining realist happy

Ron Saueracker -> RE: Upset for what? (4/2/2005 3:13:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BigB make a game that plays like a documentary and still keeps people involved then you can keep your whining realist happy Geezus Eff Crisco! I am getting pissed at the obvious ignorance out there. Yes some of us are bitching about some aspects of the game because it is ahistorical. This is not because of players using ahistorical tactics with historical assets and with the physical realities of the period intact. We are pissed that "THE GAME HAS FUDGED SO MANY ASPECTS OF THE ISSUE THAT PLAYERS CAN SUCCEED USING THEIR AHISTORICALLY REPRESENTED ASSETS AHISTORICALLY". If the game came close to modelling the realities, ahistorical tactics would not work. Making Bombardment TFs and shutting down bases with them nightly would not work. Look at the picture below. This is USS Maryland rearming. Does this look like a drive through fast food joint? Sorry, but tasks like this were major evolutions which took hours, days even, not the instantaneous add water and stir imaginations of Captain Abstract and the Fantasy Fops. See the ship next to it? It is an ammunition stores ship, and unlike WITP, can only really be in one place at a time. This being so, it would take six of these, or considerably more ammunition lighters or quayside pier space to handle the six BBs used in the recent Pago Pago Bombardment TF example posted in the "Nuke Thread." As one can imagine, the ability to rearm 1 ship or a thousand without restriction in any port as WITP allows is complete BS and basic design EFF UPs like this (and many are repeated from game to game, generation to generation) make any art and detail bells and whistles added since PACWAR totally pointless. Notice the ammo bags? These look kinda unique, don't they? Well, they are. They are specifically designed for the mark of gun used on the three Colorado Class BBs in the US Navy, and as such, had to be brought in special for these ships. Same with the shell. Guess that would mean that their availability in the game would be at least limited to lets say USN Ammunition ships, Ports with US Naval Base units, largergest of US Naval bases like Pearl Harbor, Mare Island, San Francisco, etc?.........wait for it.......NOT SO! In WITP, this specialty, unique, and limited in supply ammo is available at any cove near you, and in amounts equal to such basic staples as beans, spam, smokes, powdered eggs, asshole bosses... [image]local://upfiles/5522/FA02D8CF87DF46298BABCA388AC12E89.jpg[/image] This is the kind of stuff that allows ahistorical results. We are not asking for a history book. We are asking for a history template with which to play out the history in whatever way circumstances allow it to.

tsimmonds -> RE: Upset for what? (4/2/2005 4:14:32 PM)
Nice pic Ron. "Uh, guys, can you hurry it up there? We've got three more bombardments on our schedule this week...."

Mike Scholl -> RE: Upset for what? (4/2/2005 4:16:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BigB make a game that plays like a documentary and still keeps people involved then you can keep your whining realist happy If all you wanted was a lot of a-historic non-sense, you should have just kept playing PACIFIC WAR and saved yourself some money.

Ron Saueracker -> RE: Upset for what? (4/2/2005 4:18:19 PM)
Here is another example. Players forming ASW TFs with DDs which had 1940's DCs and sound gear would and should not bag you submarines in WITP as often as heads comes up in a coin toss. But they do. Why? Here we go...take it George. "In WITP players use wire guided depth charges with Kablammo (TM), a special explosive designed by the folks at WITP to make individual DCs not only near 75% accurate, but nearly always fatal too. IRL they used depth charges which were unguided and had basic TNT, Torpex, or some other traditional explosive trigged by timers or depth triggers. This made them extremely inaccurate and tens, if not hundreds, were usually dropped to achieve a sinking. ** In WITP it is common to spot subs from the air and from the decks of ships during daylight because, among a host of things, submariners are retards, don't submerge in enemy waters during daylight, surface ships can use sonar at full speed, and surface ships have X RAY vision. IRL spotting subs was difficult as they generally were the hunters, not the other way around (at least until advent of major tech breakthroughs in radar, sonar, techniques, availability, and sheer number of platforms on which to carry these new devices). Subs had a lower profile than surface ships so generally sighted the enemy first on the surface, day or night. Submerged, submarines generally spotted surface ships first as well through use of hydrophones and their even further reduced profile (now down to a periscope!). At speed, it was near impossible for a surface ship to even know a submarine is in the area unless a pericope or periscope feather was noticed (required basically calm sea states, careless use of periscope, and incredible diligence and luck on the part of surface ships. In WITP subs are not only easily detected but are like lambs at the slaugher as well. No evasion by sub is permitted if discovered. Subs can't even fire back. Simply, they just sit there and take it. Baaahahahahahaaa....[8\|] IRL subs generally avoided attacking ASW TFs, and because they were subs, were generally successful in doing so. If detected, subs were again generally successful at evasion unless in shallow, restricted waters or vs late war Allied escorts. When attacked, subs often fired defensively (the down the throat shot). ** In WITP, every escort regardless of total gets a crack at the sub, and do so without it affecting their other duties such as remaining with their charges they are supposed to be protecting, perhaps from further subs in the next hex (like peewee defencemen chasing the puck and not playing their man). Yep, they all get to attack and as many devs say, it's because it's a six or twelve hour hunt so of course subs get killed off at a high rate. But for some reason, those same DDs are with the TF as they go through every hex, sometimes bagging multiple subs during the movement phase. It's a veritable gang bang from hex to hex. IRL, a blow up doll has three holes and a pair of air filled titties. A women also has two hands for a total of six points of interest, barring amputations or any other corrective surgery. Any more wanting "some" must wait in line. That's four to six "service areas" in total, and they match the optimum size of a historical ASW group 4-6 ships. Any more and the ships simply get in each other's way. For ships not in a dedicated ASW group but are escorting other ships, the number of escorts which peeled off to engage the sub were basically a fraction of the total available because killing the sub, while of importance, was not the primary mission of the escorts. The escorts primary mission is the protection of their charges from subs and their safe arrival at the destination. This necessitates that the charges always have some escorts tagging along while others keep the sub from effectively attacking (of course if the number of escorts is one, it should always have a chance to see if it even notices the sub and attack). If WITP limited number of escorts which attack, then the ability to engage subs in multiple hexes is believable as the abstract restriction on escorts means that at least some of those escorts are with the TF and not racing to catch up.

Sonny -> RE: Upset for what? (4/2/2005 5:10:05 PM)
Simulation??? You believe advertising? If so then... well... never mind. It is a game. And while I would like the game to portray real life far better than it does there is need for abstraction/balance. I agree with the ideas for (most) improvements which have been posted in other threads. However, here still needs to be some GAME left. There are a couple things to remember: 1) there is no "fear factor" in the game (and it is very difficult to build one in). Players are going to be reckless with their assets no matter what you do - far more reckless than our RL counterparts were. This is especially true as the Allies. My 2 CAs and 4 DDs can take on a Japanese TF of 3 CAs and 6 DDs because even if I get mauled I have hurt the Japanes war effort and I have 2 more CAs and 4 more DDs coming along in another week or two. A war of attrition. 2) if the game were too much slower only the dozen or so true grognards on the forum would play it. 3) if the game were less bloody/deadly... well see #2 about grognards above. People want a war game for war not taking hours to move units around for no results. Another problem with being less bloody would relate to the fear factor. There was a post about how few US ships had been sunk by Japanese aircraft which was used as an example for supporting the position that Japanese Aircraft were too deadly. If this example were used in the game to set the stats for those aircraft then the Allies would be sailing into Tokyo bay by December '42. Despite a lot of folks clammoring for this or that improvement in GG games you have to admit they are the most playable/enjoyable WWII GAMES.

Stvitus2002 -> RE: Upset for what? (4/2/2005 6:36:45 PM)
quote: In WITP players use wire guided depth charges with Kablammo (TM), a special explosive designed by the folks at WITP to make individual DCs not only near 75% accurate, but nearly always fatal too. I think the submarine warfare model isn't that bad. The japanese AI subs in my game have finished off the Prince of Wales,sank 5 dd's that were in ASW Tf's. They also dispatched several MWS's,Tankers,AK's(including 1 with an entire squadron of B-26's,ouch). They certainly have paid the price,losing 44 subs thru March 43'. Perhaps the biggest issue with the AI's use of japanese subs is: the allies know where they will be,concentrated between Eastern Australia and New Caledonia. Knowing this, the allied player can concentrate his ASW forces there, and thin out elsewhere. Japanese ASW is not as good,and yet i've managed to lose over 30 subs to date as the allies. Of course, the japanese do not have the advantage of KABLAMMO(TM)[:'(],which is a lethal explosive.[:D][:D] Joe D.

Tankerace -> RE: Upset for what? (4/2/2005 8:43:01 PM)
You know Ron, reading you ASW comments reminded me of an interview I read of Ernest Borgnine in a Sea Classics magazine. During WW2, he was on a yacht, and in 1941, early '42, they dropped some DCs on what they thought was a sub. However, there was no explosion. They chiseled off the paint of one of the remaining depth charges, and found that instead of a new Mk 7 Depth Charge, in was an old Mk 3 with "Made in 1918" stamped on it. I don't imagine that early in the Pacific DCs were much better. I think the ASW model is pretty good, though I do acknowledge that all 15 tin cans in a convoy shouldn't be able to crap all over the sub. 3-6 is a more reasonable number (assuming 15 DDs).

Tristanjohn -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 2:08:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker quote: ORIGINAL: BigB make a game that plays like a documentary and still keeps people involved then you can keep your whining realist happy Geezus Eff Crisco! I am getting pissed at the obvious ignorance out there. Yes some of us are bitching about some aspects of the game because it is ahistorical. This is not because of players using ahistorical tactics with historical assets and with the physical realities of the period intact. We are pissed that "THE GAME HAS FUDGED SO MANY ASPECTS OF THE ISSUE THAT PLAYERS CAN SUCCEED USING THEIR AHISTORICALLY REPRESENTED ASSETS AHISTORICALLY". If the game came close to modelling the realities, ahistorical tactics would not work. Making Bombardment TFs and shutting down bases with them nightly would not work. Look at the picture below. This is USS Maryland rearming. Does this look like a drive through fast food joint? Sorry, but tasks like this were major evolutions which took hours, days even, not the instantaneous add water and stir imaginations of Captain Abstract and the Fantasy Fops. See the ship next to it? It is an ammunition stores ship, and unlike WITP, can only really be in one place at a time. This being so, it would take six of these, or considerably more ammunition lighters or quayside pier space to handle the six BBs used in the recent Pago Pago Bombardment TF example posted in the "Nuke Thread." As one can imagine, the ability to rearm 1 ship or a thousand without restriction in any port as WITP allows is complete BS and basic design EFF UPs like this (and many are repeated from game to game, generation to generation) make any art and detail bells and whistles added since PACWAR totally pointless. Notice the ammo bags? These look kinda unique, don't they? Well, they are. They are specifically designed for the mark of gun used on the three Colorado Class BBs in the US Navy, and as such, had to be brought in special for these ships. Same with the shell. Guess that would mean that their availability in the game would be at least limited to lets say USN Ammunition ships, Ports with US Naval Base units, largergest of US Naval bases like Pearl Harbor, Mare Island, San Francisco, etc?.........wait for it.......NOT SO! In WITP, this specialty, unique, and limited in supply ammo is available at any cove near you, and in amounts equal to such basic staples as beans, spam, smokes, powdered eggs, asshole bosses... [image]local://upfiles/5522/FA02D8CF87DF46298BABCA388AC12E89.jpg[/image] This is the kind of stuff that allows ahistorical results. We are not asking for a history book. We are asking for a history template with which to play out the history in whatever way circumstances allow it to. Informative and funny post. I'm afraid you're barking up the wrong tree, too, though. [:D]

Tristanjohn -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 2:16:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker Here is another example. Players forming ASW TFs with DDs which had 1940's DCs and sound gear would and should not bag you submarines in WITP as often as heads comes up in a coin toss. But they do. Why? Here we go...take it George. "In WITP players use wire guided depth charges with Kablammo (TM), a special explosive designed by the folks at WITP to make individual DCs not only near 75% accurate, but nearly always fatal too. IRL they used depth charges which were unguided and had basic TNT, Torpex, or some other traditional explosive trigged by timers or depth triggers. This made them extremely inaccurate and tens, if not hundreds, were usually dropped to achieve a sinking. ** In WITP it is common to spot subs from the air and from the decks of ships during daylight because, among a host of things, submariners are retards, don't submerge in enemy waters during daylight, surface ships can use sonar at full speed, and surface ships have X RAY vision. IRL spotting subs was difficult as they generally were the hunters, not the other way around (at least until advent of major tech breakthroughs in radar, sonar, techniques, availability, and sheer number of platforms on which to carry these new devices). Subs had a lower profile than surface ships so generally sighted the enemy first on the surface, day or night. Submerged, submarines generally spotted surface ships first as well through use of hydrophones and their even further reduced profile (now down to a periscope!). At speed, it was near impossible for a surface ship to even know a submarine is in the area unless a pericope or periscope feather was noticed (required basically calm sea states, careless use of periscope, and incredible diligence and luck on the part of surface ships. ** In WITP subs are not only easily detected but are like lambs at the slaugher as well. No evasion by sub is permitted if discovered. Subs can't even fire back. Simply, they just sit there and take it. Baaahahahahahaaa....[8\|] IRL subs generally avoided attacking ASW TFs, and because they were subs, were generally successful in doing so. If detected, subs were again generally successful at evasion unless in shallow, restricted waters or vs late war Allied escorts. When attacked, subs often fired defensively (the down the throat shot). Well, at least you're keeping me amused. [sm=00000030.gif]

Tristanjohn -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 2:33:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sonny Simulation??? You believe advertising? If so then... well... never mind. It is a game. And while I would like the game to portray real life far better than it does there is need for abstraction/balance. I agree with the ideas for (most) improvements which have been posted in other threads. However, here still needs to be some GAME left. There are a couple things to remember: 1) there is no "fear factor" in the game (and it is very difficult to build one in). Players are going to be reckless with their assets no matter what you do - far more reckless than our RL counterparts were. This is especially true as the Allies. My 2 CAs and 4 DDs can take on a Japanese TF of 3 CAs and 6 DDs because even if I get mauled I have hurt the Japanes war effort and I have 2 more CAs and 4 more DDs coming along in another week or two. A war of attrition. 2) if the game were too much slower only the dozen or so true grognards on the forum would play it. 3) if the game were less bloody/deadly... well see #2 about grognards above. People want a war game for war not taking hours to move units around for no results. Another problem with being less bloody would relate to the fear factor. There was a post about how few US ships had been sunk by Japanese aircraft which was used as an example for supporting the position that Japanese Aircraft were too deadly. If this example were used in the game to set the stats for those aircraft then the Allies would be sailing into Tokyo bay by December '42. Despite a lot of folks clammoring for this or that improvement in GG games you have to admit they are the most playable/enjoyable WWII GAMES. I agree, as a rule GG's games are very enjoyable. To me at least. However, I think there'd still be a "game" in there worth playing for the average joe were WitP not as totally ahistoric and unrealistic at it presently is. And if you'd bother to do the (simple, as Mogami likes to say) math, there are more than a dozen so-called grognards asking for changes around here. Getting back to the "fun" factor in GG's games: this one is entirely less fun to play if only for the reason that it's so incredibly buggy, almost to the point where I nearly dropped out of my PBEM match a couple turns ago--and I don't do that sort of thing lightly. As far as I'm concerned this title isn't even in the beta stage, but more properly should be referred to as some kind of "promising alpha build." That Matrix/2by3/many casual "gamers" in this forum seem to feel differently about that doesn't impress me in the least, except that it does tell me that, along with America, my wargame hobby has been dumbed seriously down along the way.

Tankerace -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 3:12:12 AM)
Ron, you have inspired me to a new quote on my signature. See below.

doktorblood -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 3:21:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: afspret Why do some people seem to be getting upset or complain about certain things that happen during this game which did not historically happen during the war? This is after all a GAME! What good would it be to play a game where every move and the end is predetermined? Ah... such has been the nature of wargaming ever since some caveman drew the first hexegon on his cavern wall. But humankind has been progressing ...until now at least. Where arguements over CRTs and LOS may have been resolved by an impalement upon a stalagmite in days gone by ... or in more recent times, a dark result involving copious quantities of liquor, an embarassing pose and a poloroid camera... now we have the internet!!! Now we can argue such things with people we don't even know! Forever! ... or at least until everyone loses interest and moves on to their next obsession. [sm=duel.gif]

Tankerace -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 3:22:23 AM)
[image]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v147/Tankerace/Kablammo.jpg[/image] [:D]

33Vyper -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 3:23:27 AM)
what this forum really needs is a "Beating the Dead Horse" smiley :)

Ron Saueracker -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 3:24:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tankerace [image]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v147/Tankerace/Kablammo.jpg[/image] [:D] Now that's funny! We've all (me for sure!!![;)]) have been getting too hot under the collar again over this darn game.

Ron Saueracker -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 3:27:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn quote: ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker Here is another example. Players forming ASW TFs with DDs which had 1940's DCs and sound gear would and should not bag you submarines in WITP as often as heads comes up in a coin toss. But they do. Why? Here we go...take it George. "In WITP players use wire guided depth charges with Kablammo (TM), a special explosive designed by the folks at WITP to make individual DCs not only near 75% accurate, but nearly always fatal too. IRL they used depth charges which were unguided and had basic TNT, Torpex, or some other traditional explosive trigged by timers or depth triggers. This made them extremely inaccurate and tens, if not hundreds, were usually dropped to achieve a sinking. ** In WITP it is common to spot subs from the air and from the decks of ships during daylight because, among a host of things, submariners are retards, don't submerge in enemy waters during daylight, surface ships can use sonar at full speed, and surface ships have X RAY vision. IRL spotting subs was difficult as they generally were the hunters, not the other way around (at least until advent of major tech breakthroughs in radar, sonar, techniques, availability, and sheer number of platforms on which to carry these new devices). Subs had a lower profile than surface ships so generally sighted the enemy first on the surface, day or night. Submerged, submarines generally spotted surface ships first as well through use of hydrophones and their even further reduced profile (now down to a periscope!). At speed, it was near impossible for a surface ship to even know a submarine is in the area unless a pericope or periscope feather was noticed (required basically calm sea states, careless use of periscope, and incredible diligence and luck on the part of surface ships. ** In WITP subs are not only easily detected but are like lambs at the slaugher as well. No evasion by sub is permitted if discovered. Subs can't even fire back. Simply, they just sit there and take it. Baaahahahahahaaa....[8\|] IRL subs generally avoided attacking ASW TFs, and because they were subs, were generally successful in doing so. If detected, subs were again generally successful at evasion unless in shallow, restricted waters or vs late war Allied escorts. When attacked, subs often fired defensively (the down the throat shot). Well, at least you're keeping me amused. [sm=00000030.gif] I'm working on the turn, don't you worry! Lots to do!

Tankerace -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 3:29:31 AM)
I think Ill do a few more Kablammo ads... we need a good laugh at this.

madmickey -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 3:38:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker [image]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v147/Tankerace/Kablammo.jpg[/image] I thought kablammo was patened in 1942, we need another patch.

Tankerace -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 3:56:28 AM)
[image]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v147/Tankerace/Kablammo2.jpg[/image]

Tristanjohn -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 4:19:33 AM)
I think that's hilarious, Tanker. (I hope Gary's amused, too. [:D])

Tankerace -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 4:55:33 AM)
[image]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v147/Tankerace/Kablammo3.jpg[/image]

Tankerace -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 4:57:56 AM)
Wow... their went a potentially productive evening on War Plan Orange. Oh well, I needed a day off. Kablammo! Now kills more than just subs dead.

DeepSix -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 5:10:47 AM)
LOL. Got to get me some of that hot sauce.[sm=00000622.gif]

Sonny -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 5:25:45 AM)
ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn ................................. ----------------------------------------------- However, I think there'd still be a "game" in there worth playing for the average joe were WitP not as totally ahistoric and unrealistic at it presently is. ------------------------------------------------ Didn't say it couldn't use some work. I agree with many of the changes suggested. -------------------------------------------------- And if you'd bother to do the (simple, as Mogami likes to say) math, there are more than a dozen so-called grognards asking for changes around here. -------------------------------------------------- Not so-called but true grognards - you know the guys who can tell you how many rivets there are in a P-47D. If it is so simple just list the grognards here so I know who they are. I'm so dumb I can't count past 12 (I'm American which might explain that problem). ------------------------------------------------ Getting back to the "fun" factor in GG's games: this one is entirely less fun to play if only for the reason that it's so incredibly buggy, ----------------------------------------------- Yep, I feel the same. Just ask my opponents who by now are probably extremely tired of me b1tching about the problems. -------------------------------------------------------- That Matrix/2by3/many casual "gamers" in this forum seem to feel differently about that doesn't impress me in the least, except that it does tell me that, along with America, my wargame hobby has been dumbed seriously down along the way. ----------------------------------------------------- Yeah, too bad we gamers want a game and it is the only one like it around (unless we go back to PACWAR).

DrewMatrix -> RE: Upset for what? (4/3/2005 6:49:34 AM)
I would humbly suggest that KABBLAMMO needs a spokeperson to give their adds a more human touch and to link the adds together. How about "Vault Boy" from Fallout 2?

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.8125