jwilkerson
Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: pauk
Joe, i'm getting tired of this. I've posted just one example. Then i was told everthing is working fine (just go back and see my recent posts and answers). Ok, then i posted another example - just one example of the numerous wierd results in many games. Now, i don't get any reasonable answer, just demagogic answer.
I could live with such naval combat model, but since you guys doing a more accurate game, i've tried to point that some things are not working well in WiTP. But unfortunatly, it seems that none is interested for improving the game in this particular area which is pitty . I perfectly understand that AE team will do what they thing is needed to be inproved - and that is ok. We, as customers have two choices and that is fine. I really really appreciate what is AE team trying to achive.
But, i can not accept that someone keeps telling me "hey, it is working fine" when i know no it is not working fine. And i really don't want to go into further debate. I recall how Tom Hunter tried to explain and prove some "glitchs" in naval combat, do you recall that too, Joe?
So, it is obvious that nothing is going to be changed/improved in naval combat and it is fine. But, i'm not naive, and i can not buy "the naval combat model is fine" fairy tale.
Pauk, I hope my words are not construed to be saying "the naval combat model is fine". My words were that I would not take either side of the debate "broken" or "fine" ... especially if broken means "usually produces invalid results" and fine means "usually produces valid results".
Here is a snippet from my last convoy battle from my game with Moses ... one IJN TF sneaks in to an invasion and dings a couple of convoys. I'd consider this result to be "valid" feeling.
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 06/16/43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Munda at 64,95
Japanese Ships Now the surface forces sneaks in to hit the transports!
CA Aoba
CA Kinugasa
CL Nagara
DD Hatsukari
DD Tomozuru
DD Otori
DD Hiyodori
DD Hayabusa
Allied Ships
AK Henry Dearborn
AK James B. McPherson, Shell hits 15, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AK Juan Cabrillo, Shell hits 4, on fire, heavy damage
AK Lew Wallace
AK Starr King, Shell hits 14, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Munda at 64,95
Japanese Ships Hit 'em again !!!
CA Aoba
CA Kinugasa, Shell hits 1
CL Nagara
DD Hatsukari
DD Tomozuru
DD Otori
DD Hiyodori, Shell hits 1
DD Hayabusa
Allied Ships
AP George F. Elliot, Shell hits 2, on fire
AP McCawley
AP Heywood, Shell hits 9, on fire, heavy damage
AP U.S. Grant, Shell hits 15, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
AP Henry T. Allen
But to answer your question "is this being worked on" ... I will actually answer a broader question.
Regarding the three major combat systems, Land, Sea and Air ...
Land - We are changing some things that will impact land combat, but the basic model is not being changed.
Naval - Again, we are changing something that will impact naval combat, but we are not changing the basic model.
Air - In the case of air - when we started this project, the eight or so people on board at that time, felt "uber air battles" was one of the top (actually IIRC it was THE top) issue(s) that needed to be addressed. So we have been more "intrusive" in this area. The basic sequence is unchanged - but there have been modifications to the guts of the air to air system. Mitigating Uber air combats requires at least two components: Breaking up the larger air battles and making it more difficult to operate large groups of aircraft out of a small area. We have attempted to make progress on both of these axes. So far the test results seem positive but more is needed.
So why did we not address the fundamentals of Naval and Land? Short answer is we felt like addessing the issues would result in a complete re-write and we were loathe to do this for an upgrade. We withhold the total re-write option for a future day when we will tackle a new game from the ground up. Trying to do essentially a new game, within the existing framework did not seem to fit the project parameters. I certainly "take the blame" for making this call. So be sure to sight in on the proper target!
_____________________________
AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead
|
Printable Version
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread