RE: The art of "averaging out"

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: The art of "averaging out"

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: The art of "averaging out"

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/26/2011 11:29:27 PM

vettim89

Posts: 3615
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

quote:

Which is the point I am making...change 1 variable, and it may or may not have an effect on the end outcome. We can never know.

I disagree. That's why people DO history in the first place. To look at the variables, identify the ones that matter, and project how changing them could alter outcomes. Without the codebreaking at Midway you don't have a Midway battle because the USN would not have been there. So "acquiring intel about the objective and timetable" was obviously a key variable that set the battle in motion.

It wasn't what decided the battle though. The battle was decided more or less by the Japanese use of an operational plan that required both perfect execution and the complete absence of any USN CVs in the area, and a USN operational plan that was simple and fault tolerant.

So if you assume that "Codebreaking intel of the Midway sort" was available, and if you assume that players use the same or analogous forces, then it is quite reasonable to expect the same outcome from a consim as the historical battle produced.

After all, you have to anchor your Consim on SOME sort of historical data. If you just make up a range of results from cake to catastrophe, you haven't really made a Consim at all. Just a game.

If your ConSim was only for constructing battles where the computer played both sides that may work but it falls apart when using two humans to enter their own orders. Why? Because humans know they are entering the data into a ConSim. A reasonably intuitive person will be able to quickly decipher certain constants within the engine. All systems have limits. True you could make an incredibly complex system that could even run on a PC. Problem is would players want to play a game that took twleve hours or more to resolve a single turn? At some point you have to accept that not every variable can be accounted for and insert constants. Once the person entering the orders has an appreciation for what the constants are within the system, he/she can then plot orders based on what have become expected outcomes.

Can AE give Midway like results? Probably given the right set of circumstances it could. Problem is that it is unlikely. The biggest reason for this boils down to one simple fact: unlike real life the Japan player knows the Allied player is "reading his mail". Ergo, an astute Japan player would be unlikely to stumble into a "Midway" because he would always consider the fact that the Allied player knows at least a portion of his plans. That is why a Midway scenario for AE is likely a non-starter at least for PBEM. The Japan player's first order of business would always be to find the Allied CVTF not reducing Midway's AB.

To expand on a point I made above, a very interesting game might be one where the two players have nothing more than the database and map on their computers. Instead of plotting Japan then Allied and then back to Japan where the turn is resolved, both players plot their orders and send it to a game server. The game server would have more power than the average Joe could ever afford to have on a PC. This powerful engine would resolve the turn and send both players back the combat replay. Now how cool would that be?

< Message edited by vettim89 -- 8/26/2011 11:37:45 PM >

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 31

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/26/2011 11:39:58 PM

mjk428

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline

According to Matrix...

quote:

War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Those that think it's just a game should play Risk.

_____________________________

(in reply to vettim89)

Post #: 32

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/26/2011 11:43:03 PM

vettim89

Posts: 3615
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

According to Matrix...

quote:

War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Those that think it's just a game should play Risk.

Not to be snarky but you make the point with the post. According to Matrix it is a warGAME sold by a company called Matrix GAMES.

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to mjk428)

Post #: 33

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/26/2011 11:49:36 PM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

This Consim crap is nothing but a pile of hot, wet, manure. Ya want historical, watch 'Victory at Sea'. Ya want to play a game, then play the stinking game.

I always thought Victory at Sea was a random collection of film clips, how often do you see the same bombardment or clips of aircraft & soldiers!

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 34

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/26/2011 11:51:27 PM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

According to Matrix...

quote:

War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Those that think it's just a game should play Risk.

Not to be snarky but you make the point with the post. According to Matrix it is a warGAME sold by a company called Matrix GAMES.

Further to vettim89's point. Never, at any stage, have the developers made any claim other than AE is a game. The developers know exactly what they designed and everyone else who postulates to the contrary is delusional, transferring their own desires on to the product. Which is why the "simulation" crowd is always disappointed and whining.

Alfred

(in reply to vettim89)

Post #: 35

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 12:00:45 AM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

I thought this thread was heading down the track of commenting on threads where a player is complaining about a the results of a single battle, ahistorical results in 1 battle assumed to show the system is broken.

I have found in a large number of games that if you averaged out the results you found it came out pretty close to an IRL result.

In tens of thousands of cambat reports I have seen the amzingingly brilliant to the mind numbingly hopeless, it happens to both sides and spans the entire war. I doubt few of these are war-winning/losing results, though seeing your CV's go down might seem like its the end of the world.

Outside of these observations are cases where players "use the system" to ensure an optimal force, not meaning gamey but using their intimate knowledge of the game, the units and their opponents potential to their advantage, maybe this is just being a good player.

Another exception, as pointed out by Castortroy, is where due to the players amassing massive forces, the computer engine just doesnt work. I think he put it that it works for 3 LCU, 3 Sqns, 3TF but dies when its 100 LCU, 100 Sqns, 100 TF's.

Players need to "average out" the results, not just look at 1 battle, and suck it and see.

PS I would say I have seen enough intel to ambush an invasion, not very often but enough to make reviewing the intel file worthwhile.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 36

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 12:19:42 AM

mdiehl

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

It is clearly not "just" a *GAME*. Were that the case, it would not be about a particular arena of a particular war in a particular place. It's a ConSim, all the whining and the sniveling to the contrary notwithstanding.

_____________________________

Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?

(in reply to vettim89)

Post #: 37

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 12:23:01 AM

USSAmerica

Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Graham, NC, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

It is clearly not "just" a *GAME*. Were that the case, it would not be about a particular arena of a particular war in a particular place. It's a ConSim, all the whining and the sniveling to the contrary notwithstanding.

Dude, you need to share that crack with the rest of us! It must be some good stuff!

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 38

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 12:38:00 AM

mdiehl

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

If your ConSim was only for constructing battles where the computer played both sides that may work but it falls apart when using two humans to enter their own orders.

No, it doesn't. The point is that a Consim allows player to choose alternative ways to do things. You don't have to try to invade Midway. You don't have to fight an attritional war in the southern Solomons. You don't *have* to do anything in particular, save try to meet the victory conditions.

But a good consim is designed around the premise that if you did the same thing as historically or even a similar thing (let us suppose, for example, a Japanese 4 CV TF plus supporting bombardment and transport TFs attempting to invade Johnston Island in June 1942 against a well prepared base with an airfield that operates fighters, tatical and strategic bombers, and recon, backed up by two or three USN CVs) then you'd expect similar results.

Why? Because that was the nature of air-naval combat in the PTO in 1942. The USN and IJN understood very well, at the time, that assailing a major enemy land base located outside of the range of your own land based air assets and in the face of potential enemy CV intervention was a formula for disaster. That is why, at Coral Sea, once the Japanese knew the USN CVs were there, the objective was to eliminate all the USN CVs. That is why at Santa Cruz and Eastern Solomons, the objective was to get the enemy CVs. None of these invasions could be carried off in the face of enemy CV intervention, and they were deemed AT THE TIME unlikely to succeed in the face of both enemy CVs and a substantial enemy forward base with lots of land-based a.c.

quote:

Why? Because humans know they are entering the data into a ConSim. A reasonably intuitive person will be able to quickly decipher certain constants within the engine. All systems have limits. True you could make an incredibly complex system that could even run on a PC.

Sure. But that's true of any game as well as any Consim. Frankly, really good GAMES don't necessarily require a whole lot of complexity. Totaler Krieg being a very good example. And some really complex games really stink because in adding all that detail, they not only got the model wrong, but the errors screw up the overall strategic and economic realities. A World at War is a good example of that.

quote:

Problem is would players want to play a game that took twleve hours or more to resolve a single turn?

I don't think they would. I don't think I'd design a game that required that. But considering that people seem to enjoy playing a game that takes longer to resolve the entire war than the actual war, it wouldn't surprise me if someone would want a game like that.

quote:

At some point you have to accept that not every variable can be accounted for and insert constants.

I agree. I think somewhere you missed my point then. IMO, WitP would likely be both a better game and a better Consim if they took the EXP values and the altitude settings right out of the game entirely. But that'd be a different game. I say that because there is no rational basis to the EXP values. I don't want to get into a long talk about that but consider that BB Mutsu, a ship that never in its entire career fought in any surface action, is initially rated better than HMS Warspite, a ship that had successfully and brilliantly fought more night surface engagements prior to 7 Dec 1941 than ANY ship in the Japanese fleet; the EXP ratings are objectively nonsensical. This is an example of how adding all manner of fiddley details actually makes a game worse, becuase the details have been poorly researched and poorly indexed to anything real.

quote:

Problem is that it is unlikely. The biggest reason for this boils down to one simple fact: unlike real life the Japan player knows the Allied player is "reading his mail". Ergo, an astute Japan player would be unlikely to stumble into a "Midway" because he would always consider the fact that the Allied player knows at least a portion of his plans. That is why a Midway scenario for AE is likely a non-starter at least for PBEM. The Japan player's first order of business would always be to find the Allied CVTF not reducing Midway's AB.

Exactly. No problem with that. My point is that if the Japanese player sends 4 CVs against a US level 4 airfield in 1942 with 3 USN CVs working in the area, the reasonable presumption is that the game OUGHT to produce Midway like results. Clearly, as a Consim, since the Japanese player can choose to do something else (use many more CVs, attack an island under the cover of Japanese land-based air, don't attack there but instead go on a joyraid in the Indian Ocean) you can't legislate that the players MUST attempt to do Midway, or to use the historical orders of battle.

quote:

To expand on a point I made above, a very interesting game might be one where the two players have nothing more than the database and map on their computers. Instead of plotting Japan then Allied and then back to Japan where the turn is resolved, both players plot their orders and send it to a game server. The game server would have more power than the average Joe could ever afford to have on a PC. This powerful engine would resolve the turn and send both players back the combat replay. Now how cool would that be?

Don't need a powerful computer. All you need is well researched, rational assumptions. SPI/TSR's old WW2:PTO (the pre-DecisionGames APTO) comes very close to that. SPI/TSR never did really work out a decent carrier combat routine though.

I hope all that clarifies things a bit.

< Message edited by mdiehl -- 8/27/2011 12:44:07 AM >

_____________________________

Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 39

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 12:39:11 AM

mdiehl

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

Dude, you need to share that crack with the rest of us! It must be some good stuff!

I does not surprise me that you have a desire to use crack. Or anything like it. Every time you post something, the effects of your prior use are demonstrated for all to read.

_____________________________

Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 40

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 12:46:51 AM

mjk428

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

According to Matrix...

quote:

War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Those that think it's just a game should play Risk.

Not to be snarky but you make the point with the post. According to Matrix it is a warGAME sold by a company called Matrix GAMES.

You're not being snarky, you're being willfully ignorant. Matrix GAMES claims AE to be the most realistic Pacific WARgame ever. That's a hell of a claim. If their slogan was "Lower your expectations, it's just a game" I bet they'd have sold a lot less units.

A wargame is not just a game. The people of this hobby used to understand this and raised their freak flag high. Obviously a commercial wargame has limitations when it comes to realism. However, the emphasis has always been, until relatively recently, to strive for realism over play balance when it comes to historical wargames. It's only here at Matrix that we have boobs telling those of us that like some history with our historic wargames to "read a book" or "watch Victory at Sea". As if we already don't do both.

_____________________________

(in reply to vettim89)

Post #: 41

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 12:46:52 AM

USSAmerica

Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Graham, NC, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

quote:

Dude, you need to share that crack with the rest of us! It must be some good stuff!

I does not surprise me that you have a desire to use crack. Or anything like it. Every time you post something, the effects of your prior use are demonstrated for all to read.

< Message edited by USS America -- 8/27/2011 12:50:18 AM >

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 42

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 12:49:34 AM

USSAmerica

Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Graham, NC, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

According to Matrix...

quote:

War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Those that think it's just a game should play Risk.

Not to be snarky but you make the point with the post. According to Matrix it is a warGAME sold by a company called Matrix GAMES.

You're not being snarky, you're being willfully ignorant. Matrix GAMES claims AE to be the most realistic Pacific WARgame ever. That's a hell of a claim. If their slogan was "Lower your expectations, it's just a game" I bet they'd have sold a lot less units.

A wargame is not just a game. The people of this hobby used to understand this and raised their freak flag high. Obviously a commercial wargame has limitations when it comes to realism. However, the emphasis has always been, until relatively recently, to strive for realism over play balance when it comes to historical wargames. It's only here at Matrix that we have boobs telling those of us that like some history with our historic wargames to "read a book" or "watch Victory at Sea". As if we already don't do both.

Do you know of any other more realistic Pacific War game?

I don't. If there is one that is available, I would love to know about it!

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to mjk428)

Post #: 43

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 12:51:39 AM

Shark7

Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

Hmm, isn't it marvelous?

JWE comes in here and states that its a game and you should just enjoy it. Yet some people insist it isn't a game?

It is a game. If you expect it to replay history exactly as it happened you are in for dissapointment. Also, if it were to play out just as history what would be the point in playing? The reason it is a game is that the player can influence what happens. If you couldn't, then you are watching a fancy news reel of history.

And on my argument, even if the variables are different the game does follow history...it is impossible for the Japanese player to win the game against a competent Allied player. Historically, even if the codes are not broken, PH isn't a sneak attack, etc; Japan could not win the war...it might have taken longer or might have even been shorter, but the outcome is the same. Japan can not win in the end.

So basically, people need to quit worrying about the fact that the Japanese player may or may not produce a historical number of airframes, or if Midway takes place or not. Just enjoy the game and know that you the player can change some things to affect the end game, but not change the outcome of the end game.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 44

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 12:55:42 AM

mdiehl

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

Matrix GAMES claims AE to be the most realistic Pacific WARgame ever. That's a hell of a claim. If their slogan was "Lower your expectations, it's just a game" I bet they'd have sold a lot less units.

Exactly.

_____________________________

Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?

(in reply to Shark7)

Post #: 45

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 12:58:13 AM

mjk428

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: USS America

Do you know of any other more realistic Pacific War game?

I don't. If there is one that is available, I would love to know about it!

I don't take issue with Matrix's claim. That blurb gets it right. I take issue with those that are downplaying the importance of realiism in an historical wargame.

_____________________________

(in reply to USSAmerica)

Post #: 46

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 1:00:36 AM

mdiehl

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

Do you know of any other more realistic Pacific War game?

I can name FOUR that do a more realistic job of modeling battle outcomes based on ship stats, a.c. stats, and so forth. They are:

Pacific War by Mark Harmon.
Carrier Battles (Rising Sun Simulations).
SoPac and the other "Great Naval Battles of WW2" games by Avalanche Press.
And, ancient though it is (and not the best of the 4 wrt realism but very easy to play) Flat Top (AH/Yaquinto).

_____________________________

Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 47

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 1:05:42 AM

vettim89

Posts: 3615
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

According to Matrix...

quote:

War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Those that think it's just a game should play Risk.

Not to be snarky but you make the point with the post. According to Matrix it is a warGAME sold by a company called Matrix GAMES.

You're not being snarky, you're being willfully ignorant. Matrix GAMES claims AE to be the most realistic Pacific WARgame ever. That's a hell of a claim. If their slogan was "Lower your expectations, it's just a game" I bet they'd have sold a lot less units.

A wargame is not just a game. The people of this hobby used to understand this and raised their freak flag high. Obviously a commercial wargame has limitations when it comes to realism. However, the emphasis has always been, until relatively recently, to strive for realism over play balance when it comes to historical wargames. It's only here at Matrix that we have boobs telling those of us that like some history with our historic wargames to "read a book" or "watch Victory at Sea". As if we already don't do both.

I have to disagree with your assement. Yes, wargames as a genre are different than say a "family" game like Monopoly. Some are quite simple. One of my favorite games of all times is Avalon Hill's Victory in the Pacific. Now that game was simplistic to say the least but still was quite enjoyable to play. Certainly WitP and WitP/AE are a far cry from that game. That does not change the fact that they are still games. There are things built into the system that are indeed for play balance and to make the game enjoyable to play from both sides. The Japan player's ability to extensive modify his a/c OOB is the perfect example of this type of allowance. I don't see how you can look at even that one issue and not conclude that it was included not for accuracy nor historocity; it was included to give the Japan player the opportunity to play deeper into the game before things became hopeless.

Yes, WitP/AE is an incredibly complex game. It is however first and foremost designed for the enjoyment of its players. As such it has more than succesfully accomlpished it's goal. However, looking at it as a simulation sytem meant to 100% accurate portray WWII in the PTO is, in my opinion, misguided

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to mjk428)

Post #: 48

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 1:15:06 AM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

quote:

Do you know of any other more realistic Pacific War game?

I can name FOUR that do a more realistic job of modeling battle outcomes based on ship stats, a.c. stats, and so forth. They are:

Pacific War by Mark Harmon.
Carrier Battles (Rising Sun Simulations).
SoPac and the other "Great Naval Battles of WW2" games by Avalanche Press.
And, ancient though it is (and not the best of the 4 wrt realism but very easy to play) Flat Top (AH/Yaquinto).

And these are all computer games.

Alfred

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 49

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 3:02:32 AM

ilovestrategy

Posts: 3611
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

I dunno. I looked at the top of the forum page and it reads "Matrix GAMES Forums". It's a realistic game, but a game nonetheless.

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 50

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 3:25:02 AM

mjk428

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline

quote:

War in the Pacific has detail never before achieved in a game of this scale before. .... "If you are in the market for a seriously detailed WWII strategic simulation...

http://www.matrixgames.com/Games/WarInThePacific/main.asp

Just because you're in Newark, it doesn't mean you're not in New Jersey. It's a game. It's a wargame. It's a Strategic Simulation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Simulations,_Inc.

_____________________________

(in reply to ilovestrategy)

Post #: 51

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 4:58:43 AM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

quote:

Do you know of any other more realistic Pacific War game?

I can name FOUR that do a more realistic job of modeling battle outcomes based on ship stats, a.c. stats, and so forth. They are:

Pacific War by Mark Harmon.
Carrier Battles (Rising Sun Simulations).
SoPac and the other "Great Naval Battles of WW2" games by Avalanche Press.
And, ancient though it is (and not the best of the 4 wrt realism but very easy to play) Flat Top (AH/Yaquinto).

You left out The Eagle and the Sun!

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 52

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 6:30:19 AM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

LoBaron,

When I first saw the title of this thread, I was soooooooo excited. Then when I read it, I was sooooooo disappointed.

Why the different reactions? My initial reaction was, great, at long last in stereotypical Teutonic efficiency someone is going to discuss on the forum what is really important; how one can take advantage of the opportunities presented by a bear stockmarket by averaging one's stock portfolio to a lower cost base.

Once this was addressed I thought surely, with his attention to details, LoBaron will also be addressing the proper uses of one's personal M1 money supply to best advantage in a deflationary asset market. Surely that is a subject which post Stresseman's tenure of the finance ministry in the Weimar period, every Teuton would be taught about in school. Particularly important to discuss the second issue because whilst averaging lower one's cost base is almost always a good idea in an inflationary market, it isn't necessarily so in a deflationary market. One very much needs to then factor in opportunity cost plus if one is European, sovereign risk.

Alas, "sigh", when opened, the thread merely dealt with the old rehashed topics. All well, nothing to add to JWE's succinct comments.

But LoBaron, one last plea, any chance of you getting this initially very promising thread back to the really useful matters I mentioned.

Alfred

PS: I will not be providing any free investment advice and the above is provided only as general advice not to be relied upon by individual investors. I recommend those so inclined to discuss their investment situation with their licensed financial advisors.

Alfred, I am very sorry that the thread title was misleading you to believe I was going to do an in deph analysis of the bear stockmarket and its loopholes.
I was aware of the danger, but posted anyway. Out of malice, or simple neglectence, thats hard to reconstruct after all that happened.

Still, in case you are not completely heartbroken and lost all interest in whats big and smells like, well, bear, I might tell you that what you dream of is in the works.
I don�t know whether it will get finished in my lifetime though.
Every time I�m 5th gear theres some new variable popping up out of nowhere. The latest findings indicated a high sensitivity of the bear stockmarket to the effects
of global warming. Let me explain: The icebear market directly dependent on the ammount of and average distance between polar icecaps, decreasing as well as distance
increasing as global average temperatures rise. Since the relation of the icebear market to the bearmarket is not clear as of yet and long time studies are awaited
to get estimates on the relation between C0� percentage and bear population, I beg you to have a bit of patience. The next averaging out will average out the bear market.

Ah, btw, I only googled what bear market actually means after typing the above, so in case you again are dissatisfied, please put it down to my incomplete grasp of the English language.

_____________________________

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 53

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 6:45:00 AM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy

I dunno. I looked at the top of the forum page and it reads "Matrix GAMES Forums".� It's a realistic game, but a game nonetheless.�

Me too. But this is a very complex topic, ilovestrategy. It could also be ConSim. Probably depending on what you ate at breakfast.

It seems that to decide what it is, is VERY important to our future and the future of WitP AE, as it will change something FUNDAMENTAL about the way we look at the map
of the Pacific. I don�t know what, but mdiehl wil explain for sure.

_____________________________

(in reply to ilovestrategy)

Post #: 54

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 6:59:42 AM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

LoBaron,

When I first saw the title of this thread, I was soooooooo excited. Then when I read it, I was sooooooo disappointed.

Why the different reactions? My initial reaction was, great, at long last in stereotypical Teutonic efficiency someone is going to discuss on the forum what is really important; how one can take advantage of the opportunities presented by a bear stockmarket by averaging one's stock portfolio to a lower cost base.

Once this was addressed I thought surely, with his attention to details, LoBaron will also be addressing the proper uses of one's personal M1 money supply to best advantage in a deflationary asset market. Surely that is a subject which post Stresseman's tenure of the finance ministry in the Weimar period, every Teuton would be taught about in school. Particularly important to discuss the second issue because whilst averaging lower one's cost base is almost always a good idea in an inflationary market, it isn't necessarily so in a deflationary market. One very much needs to then factor in opportunity cost plus if one is European, sovereign risk.

Alas, "sigh", when opened, the thread merely dealt with the old rehashed topics. All well, nothing to add to JWE's succinct comments.

But LoBaron, one last plea, any chance of you getting this initially very promising thread back to the really useful matters I mentioned.

Alfred

PS: I will not be providing any free investment advice and the above is provided only as general advice not to be relied upon by individual investors. I recommend those so inclined to discuss their investment situation with their licensed financial advisors.

Alfred, I am very sorry that the thread title was misleading you to believe I was going to do an in deph analysis of the bear stockmarket and its loopholes.
I was aware of the danger, but posted anyway. Out of malice, or simple neglectence, thats hard to reconstruct after all that happened.

Still, in case you are not completely heartbroken and lost all interest in whats big and smells like, well, bear, I might tell you that what you dream of is in the works.
I don�t know whether it will get finished in my lifetime though.
Every time I�m 5th gear theres some new variable popping up out of nowhere. The latest findings indicated a high sensitivity of the bear stockmarket to the effects
of global warming. Let me explain: The icebear market directly dependent on the ammount of and average distance between polar icecaps, decreasing as well as distance
increasing as global average temperatures rise. Since the relation of the icebear market to the bearmarket is not clear as of yet and long time studies are awaited
to get estimates on the relation between C0� percentage and bear population, I beg you to have a bit of patience. The next averaging out will average out the bear market.

Ah, btw, I only googled what bear market actually means after typing the above, so in case you again are dissatisfied, please put it down to my incomplete grasp of the English language.

Au contraire, mon frere, my interest has been piqued by your response. From the undoubtedly linked variables you have pointed out, I'm heartened that you will tie all this into the Kondratieff long term cycle. Personnally, I've never felt that Keynesian theory has given due regard to the Kondratieff long term cycle.

Of course, if one is confident there is no sovereign risk, then one can expand from the restricted M1 money supply to the much more expansive M3 money supply. Once one starts down that path even M4 and M5 could enter into the debate. It would then be quite interesting to see how the consim school would react to the interaction of monetary theory and how AE plays out.

Not to forget the disappearance of Kondratieff in this involved story. I've always maintained that the 1938 and 1939 Soviet -Japanese border clashes were the direct result of the Manchukuo authorities sending a rescue party to find out exactly where Stalin had extended to Kondratieff a long term Siberian dacha.

Keep up the research, LoBaron. I can see a Nobel Economics prize awaits you 20 years down the track. Tie in the Co2 element, and you might also get a Nobel Science prize too.

Alfred

< Message edited by Alfred -- 8/27/2011 7:02:18 AM >

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 55

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 9:11:43 AM

RHoenig

Posts: 89
Joined: 12/8/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

quote:

ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy

I dunno. I looked at the top of the forum page and it reads "Matrix GAMES Forums".� It's a realistic game, but a game nonetheless.�

Me too. But this is a very complex topic, ilovestrategy. It could also be ConSim. Probably depending on what you ate at breakfast.

It seems that to decide what it is, is VERY important to our future and the future of WitP AE, as it will change something FUNDAMENTAL about the way we look at the map
of the Pacific. I don�t know what, but mdiehl wil explain for sure.

I read through the threat and I have to say: What the hell are you arguing about?

IMO, a wargame is a cosim and a cosim is a wargame - period!

Sure, a "true cosim" might put more emphasis on "historical accuracy" and a "true game" might put more emphasis on game-balance, but in the end, they are both games/cosims nontheless.

I seem to remember that the japanese *played through* their midway plan (somewhat/highly stacked in their favor), I also seem to remember that the naval academies *play through* various scenarios.

Wargame, Cosim - where�s the bloody difference?

_____________________________

"Tell the King: After the battle my head is at his disposal, during the battle he may allow me to use it!
GenLt. Seydlitz to Frederik the Great after disobeying an order to attack

R. Hoenig, Germany

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 56

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 9:49:28 AM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

This, RHoenig, is the bloody question. You got straight to the point.

The answer may be 42.

That said, most of us are just having fun in here...

_____________________________

(in reply to RHoenig)

Post #: 57

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 10:25:03 AM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

This, RHoenig, is the bloody question. You got straight to the point.
The answer may be 42.

That said, most of us are just having fun in here...

Problem is the question was "What is 6 times 8??"

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 58

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 10:26:21 AM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

This, RHoenig, is the bloody question. You got straight to the point.
The answer may be 42.

That said, most of us are just having fun in here...

Problem is the question was "What is 6 times 8??"

I note you are no follower of DNA.

< Message edited by LoBaron -- 8/27/2011 11:24:29 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 59

RE: The art of "averaging out" - 8/27/2011 3:49:35 PM

mdiehl

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

You left out The Eagle and the Sun!

In the immortal words of Gimli the dwarf: "It was deliberate."

_____________________________

Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 60