Drongo
Posts: 2205
Joined: 7/12/2002
From: Melb. Oztralia
Status: offline
|
Mates,
It's sad that being forced into defending our discussions on Japanese night performances (and possible solutions) would seem to have us come across as a bunch of Nipophiles. It's especially annoying for me as I have little respect for them due to what the bastards did to our POW's (and others) in WWII.
I've been watching and participating in these "IJN not good enough" threads for a while and I've never noticed anything extreme in what is requested. All we're seeing here is the result of people's frustrations that their view of what happened historically is not being recreated in the game.
I wont give you their view but I will state what I was disappointed with.
When I first got this game, my POV (from reading historical accounts) was that the IJN had an edge at night until the USN got their act together. My expectation of UV was that the IJN would have a narrow window of opportunity where it could be expected to win more battles than it lost. And that, when the opportunity arose, the Long Lance could turn those victories into major ones. I also expected that window to be firmly closed as the allies increase their night capability (I'll use this to mean exp, tactics, training, command, radar use and equipment).
My disappointment comes from the fact that the IJN (in my opinion) does not get that window of opportunity but the improvement in the allies' night capability does occur. That translates to (at best) early parity at night followed by later allied superiority. The allied superiority does not mean no IJN victories will occur. It simply means that the allies will win more than they lose (as they should).
To me, it doesn't matter that UV uses an abstract combat model (with a u-beaut little battle display to give you something to watch). It doesn't matter that only a few determining combat factors are stipulated and that you could just as easily read the AAR for the same effect. Or that both sides will make full use of ship characteristics, leaders, etc to put their best foot forward. As far as I'm concerned, if Matrix claims that the UV combat engine will give the IJN an early edge at night, then thats what I expect it to do when players fight under its game conditions and use correct game tactics. In my opinion it doesn't. And that comes from playing both sides in UV.
The early IJN advantage should not mean winning every battle, always getting high torp hit rates, always crossing the "T", etc. It should just mean being able to enter battles early in scenarios with the confidence that (all things being equal) you have a demonstrably better than average chance of winning. And that fact, combined with the Long Lance, should allow you to reasonably expect the occasional, decisively one sided, torpedo driven success like Savo or Tass (whether the game models the exact conditions or not). I'd call it making hay while the (rising) sun shines.
The perceived lack of early IJN advantage in UV is just my opinion and I dont expect to convince anyone else of it purely on that basis. That was why I ran over a 100 test battles to establish some sort of statistical reality (if thats possible). I haven't finished and nothing is conclusive yet. In the end, Matrix and 2x3 have the final say and my opinion and testing will probably have no impact. But there's no doubt they're aware of what my opinion is.:p
In the meantime, please dont give up on the idea that we may actually be open minded, caring, sharing and unbiased players whose agenda is simply misunderstood (group hug followed by sooky music). ****, I think the E's are kicking in early.
Cheers
_____________________________
Have no fear,
drink more beer.
|
Printable Version
re: Real Data - 
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