Carrier Planes

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Carrier Planes

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] >> World in Flames >> Carrier Planes

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Carrier Planes - 12/15/2013 11:07:35 AM

jhdeerslayer

Posts: 1194
Joined: 5/25/2002
From: Michigan
Status: offline

If carrier planes are based on land, why can't they fly during the Naval Air segment like other planes?

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/15/2013 12:12:45 PM

Hokum

Posts: 59
Joined: 4/14/2002
From: France
Status: offline

Carrier planes were abused and the rules changed, now the only mission they can perform if not on a CV at sea is rebasing.

(in reply to jhdeerslayer)

Post #: 2

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/15/2013 12:49:04 PM

wolf14455

Posts: 1196
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline

Hehe abused, I or we who play the game should be the people who decide whats historicly accurate for our game play, IMHO. I remember when I played the boardgame back in the day, I constantly transported carrier planes to islands as the Jap to strenghten my areas. But maybee thats just me.

_____________________________

SwedeWolf

I was called Lill Sputnik (Little sputnik) as a baby in 58-59

(in reply to Hokum)

Post #: 3

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/15/2013 1:12:56 PM

alexvand

Posts: 380
Joined: 11/29/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

That's precisely the abuse he is describing. Those rules were changed by the original game designers, not MWiF.

All those extra CvP flying as fighters and bombers and costing much less than real fighters and bombers did unbalance the game.

(in reply to wolf14455)

Post #: 4

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/15/2013 1:19:24 PM

wolf14455

Posts: 1196
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline

Ok, I didnt think of the cost, true it wa cheaper. Good call then.

_____________________________

SwedeWolf

I was called Lill Sputnik (Little sputnik) as a baby in 58-59

(in reply to alexvand)

Post #: 5

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/15/2013 5:46:18 PM

paulderynck

Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

Another horrid abuse was using all the terrible CW CVPs from early in the game to react into out of the way sea zones and require subs to overcome a need for 4 points of surprise in order to attack CPs.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to wolf14455)

Post #: 6

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/16/2013 1:35:35 PM

jhdeerslayer

Posts: 1194
Joined: 5/25/2002
From: Michigan
Status: offline

OK got it. It seems unless you expect some carriers coming on board soon that will need filling (I'm playing Fall & Decline) maybe best to just disband these extra carrier planes and get the pilots. Or keep around to replace lost ones. I assume this is what people do?

_____________________________

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 7

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/16/2013 2:39:35 PM

Moltke71

Posts: 1253
Joined: 9/23/2000
Status: offline

Actually, Guadalcanal was saved in '42 by transferring a carrier group to the island.

_____________________________

Jim Cobb

(in reply to jhdeerslayer)

Post #: 8

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/16/2013 4:03:36 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bismarck

Actually, Guadalcanal was saved in '42 by transferring a carrier group to the island.

The one thing that WIF doesn't simulate is that carriers were commonly used to transport land-based airplanes to destinations. For instance, the British were constantly doing that to reinforce Malta. In WIF you need to use a naval transport to get short ranged air units overseas.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Moltke71)

Post #: 9

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/16/2013 4:24:46 PM

Ur_Vile_WEdge

Posts: 585
Joined: 6/28/2005
Status: offline

And I could have sworn (although I don't have my books in front of me) that the Japanese used their carrier planes extensively as just aircraft for fighting and bombing in China.

(in reply to Moltke71)

Post #: 10

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/16/2013 4:34:58 PM

wworld7

Posts: 1727
Joined: 2/25/2003
From: The Nutmeg State
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge

And I could have sworn (although I don't have my books in front of me) that the Japanese used their carrier planes extensively as just aircraft for fighting and bombing in China.

This is true.

The Japanese Army did its own thing in China and the Japanese Navy did its own thing in China.

The Army and Navy did NOT work well together, which in the end helped the Allies.

_____________________________

Flipper

(in reply to Ur_Vile_WEdge)

Post #: 11

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/16/2013 4:51:53 PM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bismarck
Actually, Guadalcanal was saved in '42 by transferring a carrier group to the island.

Good point, but I think when you think about it in terms of WiF-Zen (i.e. how does the game play overall from a big picture POV) - using CVP's to fly from land really was silly when it was allowed in WIF in the past. Each land air counter I think (from memory) represents 500 active aircraft and a CVP represents 50 or 100(?) so practically speaking should not have a big impact on the game. Having swarms of JP IJN CVP's in China has a big effect. Also many of the very short ranged CVP's can smother sea zones and subs in particular if allowed to fly land missions. I'm sure this argument can go point-counterpoint forever but I've played the boardgame since 1986 and I have had experience with CVP's flying missions from land and it really has a big effect on the game. So I wouldn't join any lobby to change this rule.....

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to Moltke71)

Post #: 12

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/16/2013 6:39:18 PM

jzardos

Posts: 662
Joined: 3/15/2011
Status: offline

So in a global game should Japan always be getting some naval air as suggested in player manual? Or should they being focusing some of their production on LBA? Maybe later LBA .. 41 onward?
What do WiF do?

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 13

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/16/2013 6:40:13 PM

jzardos

Posts: 662
Joined: 3/15/2011
Status: offline

Oh and pilots, probably need to get pilots as priority to?

(in reply to jzardos)

Post #: 14

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/16/2013 7:49:31 PM

michaelbaldur

Posts: 4774
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: offline

when you fight in china, use LBA ... but when Usa Is coming make sure you have carrier plane on all carriers.

you will need 10-15 pilots for that. and the same number of your best carrier planes.

remember to build the 6 size carrier planes, if you plan to upgrade to the biggest carrier ..

there is no point in building carriers, if you have no carrier planes to place on them

_____________________________

the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

if you have questions or issues with the game, just contact me on Michaelbaldur1@gmail.com

(in reply to jzardos)

Post #: 15

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/16/2013 7:53:58 PM

michaelbaldur

Posts: 4774
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: offline

or play without the carrier option .. much easer

_____________________________

the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

if you have questions or issues with the game, just contact me on Michaelbaldur1@gmail.com

(in reply to michaelbaldur)

Post #: 16

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/16/2013 9:16:40 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jzardos

So in a global game should Japan always be getting some naval air as suggested in player manual? Or should they being focusing some of their production on LBA? Maybe later LBA .. 41 onward?
What do WiF do?

One key item for Japan to worry about is scheduling.

If you want a strong navy against the US, you need to start building some of those units right away. But you won't need to build carrier air units until a long time later. Pilots should be built to arrive when the air units do. But if you draw some terrible air units, you can just let them sit in the reserve pool and build fewer pilots.

You will want more AMPH and TRS units, but they don't have to be build immediately because they take less than 2 years to complete.

Land units and marines should get the highest priority because they can be useful in China immediately.

In other words, lay out a general plan for what Japan wants to build over the first 2+ years. You won't always have as many build points as you would like, but having a plan is much better than winging it each time the Production form appears.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to jzardos)

Post #: 17

RE: Carrier Planes - 12/16/2013 10:04:50 PM

michaelbaldur

Posts: 4774
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: offline

and Japan have some of the best nav2 ... the are overall the best bombers Japan can build.

so empty that pool

_____________________________

the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

if you have questions or issues with the game, just contact me on Michaelbaldur1@gmail.com

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 18