RE: Question about 4E Bombing

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: Question about 4E Bombing

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: Question about 4E Bombing

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/14/2018 10:42:38 PM

MakeeLearn

Posts: 4278
Joined: 9/11/2016
Status: offline

AFBs being able to outsource Aviation Support to the lowest bidder is a little too much!

Attachment (1)

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)

Post #: 61

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 2:28:48 AM

spence

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline

quote:

And as soon as an JFB dares to say something about Allied advantages, he's being shouted down by AFBs.

Perhaps that's because the ignored Allied advantages were historical advantages and the Japanese advantages were conjured up out of whole cloth to make the nut case leadership of Imperial Japan attract some sort of following.

(in reply to Lecivius)

Post #: 62

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 2:50:37 AM

AW1Steve

Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

And as soon as an JFB dares to say something about Allied advantages, he's being shouted down by AFBs.

Perhaps that's because the ignored Allied advantages were historical advantages and the Japanese advantages were conjured up out of whole cloth to make the nut case leadership of Imperial Japan attract some sort of following.

Like it or not , an awful lot of allied advantages were deliberately "nerfed" to make the game more playable for the JFB. It has to be. Most AFB's acknowledge this. (Often with gritted teeth). Hearing the JFB's allege that the game might be slanted TOWARD the AFB is more than most can take. Understanding needs to go to both sides. Otherwise , don't play against a human. Play against the AI , screw with the editor to your hearts content , and live out your WITP AE fantasy's in peace. If your going to play against a human being you need to expect to give a bit.

_____________________________

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 63

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 3:44:39 AM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter
...but on this forum it seems only the JFBs are allowed to complain.

Funny, my impression is exactly the opposite. And as soon as an JFB dares to say something about Allied advantages, he's being shouted down by AFBs...

+1

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)

Post #: 64

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 6:30:34 AM

GaryChildress

Posts: 6830
Joined: 7/17/2005
From: The Divided Nations of Earth
Status: offline

From the sounds of it, there are some unhistorical advantages and disadvantages to both sides. The Japanese get to demolish the Allies early on and the Allies then get their turn to demolish the Japanese after that. I think I have to mostly agree with Lecivius, probably best to just take it as a game and try to overcome whatever disadvantages with cunning.

However, I have to admit that "winning" a game by collecting the most victory points in the end, while my empire is a blazing ruins, maybe isn't as satisfying as a more traditional win where you get to dance on your opponent's grave. That's one reason why I was exploring the idea a while back of creating completely ficticious scenarios where both sides start on relatively even footing.

_____________________________

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 65

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 6:46:31 AM

LargeSlowTarget

Posts: 4443
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve
Like it or not , an awful lot of allied advantages were deliberately "nerfed" to make the game more playable for the JFB. It has to be. Most AFB's acknowledge this. (Often with gritted teeth). Hearing the JFB's allege that the game might be slanted TOWARD the AFB is more than most can take. Understanding needs to go to both sides. Otherwise , don't play against a human. Play against the AI , screw with the editor to your hearts content , and live out your WITP AE fantasy's in peace. If your going to play against a human being you need to expect to give a bit.

I think most players of any side agree that allied advantages were deliberately "nerfed" to make the game more playable for the JFB - for JFBs maybe not "an awful lot" but definitely a significant number. Problem for me is that some AFBs portray the Allied side quite biased as the only victim of one-sided injustice. They keep pointing out the advantages taken away from the Allied side and the advantages given to the JFBs, but seem to ignore the advantages given to the AFBs and the disadvantages given to the JFBs. For some JFBs, hearing AFBs complaining about having been "nerfed" while seeing themselves getting clobbered by the Allies sooner or later and with most games ending with Allied victories well before the historical end date, those complaints are more than they can take. As long as there are post which present the Allies as the poor victims of a one-sided pro-JFB slant, "proven" with selective presentation of examples etc., we will have these flame wars. The other way round exists as well, of course, with AFBs reacting to biased JFB views.
If we all could agree that both sides get their share of a-historical advantages and disadvantages, then all would be fine. Personally, I resent being pushed into the "JFB extremist corner" by some AFBs just because I point out someone's pro-Allied bias. I think my records and my modding efforts prove that I try to do justice to both sides and that I have "nerfed" the Japanese side at least as much if not more than the Allied side. 'nough said.

_____________________________

AE Mod "Bottlenecks" UPDATED 01/2022

(in reply to AW1Steve)

Post #: 66

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 8:04:04 AM

RichardAckermann

Posts: 271
Joined: 12/4/2015
Status: offline

My impression is that both sides complain the same way, but consider the other's advantages more valuable. For me it's a very helpfull dispute giving insight to the mechanics of the historical war, for players it's probably a breeding ground for trouble with each other.
Thus, I would also advocate for taking the game as it is. There are some balancing things very hard to get done. Having a strong Japan first under the same "game engine" calculations and later a strong allies is very hard to formulate. There are limits of what amount of RL causes and conditions can be abstracted. And it still has to be fun.

Now I would like to hear more on the actual topic of how effective 4E bombings should be and how they can or have been countered.

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)

Post #: 67

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 8:39:30 AM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

It never happens that AFBs fly planes designed for operations at 15-20K at 36K feet in 1942 to draw Japanese CAP out of their manuever bands. This never happens in the game and certainly does not constitute an absurd advantage to the allied player that is pure fantasy... lol. Nuff said... .

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)

Post #: 68

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 9:55:31 AM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter
...but on this forum it seems only the JFBs are allowed to complain.

Funny, my impression is exactly the opposite. And as soon as an JFB dares to say something about Allied advantages, he's being shouted down by AFBs...

Really? Run a search on 4E whine threads and I would bet you would get dozens of hits. How many corresponding threads of AFBs whining about Nettie's or aircraft production far out stripping the Allies do you think you'll find? We seem to get a 4E whine thread every couple of weeks.

Both sides get abilities the other can't counter, one side in the beginning and one in the end. This what created the ebb and flow of the war and the game.

Why do JFBs want a way to counter the Allied late war advantage without offering a commensurate counter to the Allies, ie...an Ability for the Allies to counter the Japanese early war advantages?

Without the Japanese early advantage there would be no game, so why do so many JFBs begrudge the Allies their late war advantages. This expectation that Japan should be able to go to to toe in late war is simply unreasonable.

For the Japanese side, the 4E threat means you can't disband ships in port in range of them. Yes its a hardship.

For the Allied side, the Nettie threat means you can't move shipping around in what should be a relatively safe area, immediately behind your front line bases, without air cover for every hex of the transit. Yes its a hardship.

Compare how many 4E whine threads there are on this forum to how many Nettie whine threads there are and you'll clearly see that the Allied players are doing a better job of grinning and bearing their hardship than the Japanese players are.

And LST, sorry if you felt my counter argument lumped you in with the extreme JFB. Wasn't my intent.

p.s. and BTW, I have no issues with being labeled as the extreme AFB I have clearly defined myself to be.

< Message edited by HansBolter -- 2/15/2018 1:18:01 PM >

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)

Post #: 69

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 12:48:00 PM

AW1Steve

Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline

LST I'm sorry that you feel I singled you and other JFB's out, and that you feel insulted. THAT SAID , I don't feel the need to apologize. I do feel , based upon the comments of those people involved in creating this (that they have made in many of the past threads on this subject) that the allied side did have many more weapons and systems "nerfed" in order to make this game playable. I stand by that , and totally agree with them that such actions were necessary to make this a more playable GAME. Please notice the word GAME. Not simulation. I accept that you disagree with this. That's your right and privilege. As it is MY right to disagree with you. And I do.

I don't consider myself an allied fan boy. I only play that side strictly in the grand campaign. And I do that only because I do not like the production model. I didn't say there was anything wrong with it. If there is , I don't see much with it. I simply don't want to play "Factory manager in the Pacific". If in some future variation of this game , a feature is offered that allows you to de-select production , then I'll probably play that side pretty much exclusively. Until them , I'll play either side in the smaller scenarios , and Allies in the GC. I'm not biased , I'm not prejudiced toward one side or the other (in this game).

So I'd appreciated it if you would stop tarring me with the AFB label.

But I stand by my remarks in my earlier post. GAME not SIMULATION. If you want a simulation , then play against the AI and use the editor to suit yourself. IF you can get a real human to act as a sparring partner so you can try out your theories , treasure him (or her). It's no fun playing with the deck stacked against you. I've done it a couple of times (once against a VERY, VERY talented player, I can tell you that experience was extremely painful). Any person agreeing to fulfill that role is either curious, dedicated or extremely fond of you to do it. Or their exists a great skill imbalance between you. Either way you should deeply appreciate anyone who does you this favor.

Against anyone else , they are playing a game , with certain "nerfs" built in to balance the play. YOU may not be happy with this. FEW people are. That fact makes me pretty sure that the developers have hit the balance pretty dead on. It takes great skill at negotiating an issue for NOBODY to walk away happy. If you think you can do better by imposing lots of house rules , good luck with that. I might see it if there is an imbalance of skills (handicapping as it were). But as only the more skilled players should play as the Japanese player , that in itself should balance things out.

Again , sorry if you don't like my thoughts on the matter , but I have explained them , have tried to show no balance or favoritism , and gone a whole lot more into detail than I really wanted to. I suggest we agree to disagree ,and probably not play against each other.

_____________________________

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)

Post #: 70

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 1:32:20 PM

Lecivius

Posts: 4845
Joined: 8/5/2007
From: Denver
Status: offline

Agreed. It's a game

There is enough bad mojo in the world without getting excited about this

_____________________________

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

(in reply to AW1Steve)

Post #: 71

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 1:34:21 PM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

I am getting all riled up because of bad tojo.

(in reply to Lecivius)

Post #: 72

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 1:36:47 PM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

What about the fact that Japanese bombers/torpedo/dive almost never seems to be able to down an Allied fighter?

(in reply to Lecivius)

Post #: 73

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 1:58:01 PM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

There are two kinds of Japanase defensive 7.7mm MG. IJN bombers have the one which is less acurrate. IJA bombers have the more accurate variant of 7.7mm MG.

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 74

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 2:00:40 PM

Alfred

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

What about the fact that Japanese bombers/torpedo/dive almost never seems to be able to down an Allied fighter?

Ever see Allied 1E and 2E bombers down any Japanese fighters?

The fact is that you all have it wrong. The combat animation usually doesn't visually show non 4E bombers from either side downing enemy fighters, instead you have to note whether a text message says a critical hit was inflicted. Plus all those fighters lost on RTB did not crash as a result of receiving hits only from enemy fighters.

Alfred

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 75

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 3:24:31 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

It SHOULD be OK for both sides to complain about the overpowered, ahistorical advantages the other side gets, but on this forum it seems only the JFBs are allowed to complain.

It's kind of funny to me how I feel like I make people mad when I point out what's wrong or incorrect with regards to some complaint about balance for one side, and then a month or two later do the exact same thing with the other side. It's not always the same people, but it often is.

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 76

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 4:23:19 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

It SHOULD be OK for both sides to complain about the overpowered, ahistorical advantages the other side gets, but on this forum it seems only the JFBs are allowed to complain.

It's kind of funny to me how I feel like I make people mad when I point out what's wrong or incorrect with regards to some complaint about balance for one side, and then a month or two later do the exact same thing with the other side. It's not always the same people, but it often is.

Yes, if nothing else, I'm at least consistent.

I also have a thick enough skin not to take offense.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 77

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 7:11:17 PM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

There are two kinds of Japanase defensive 7.7mm MG. IJN bombers have the one which is less acurrate. IJA bombers have the more accurate variant of 7.7mm MG.

Note that Betty have a 20mm gun.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

What about the fact that Japanese bombers/torpedo/dive almost never seems to be able to down an Allied fighter?

Ever see Allied 1E and 2E bombers down any Japanese fighters?

The fact is that you all have it wrong. The combat animation usually doesn't visually show non 4E bombers from either side downing enemy fighters, instead you have to note whether a text message says a critical hit was inflicted. Plus all those fighters lost on RTB did not crash as a result of receiving hits only from enemy fighters.

Alfred

I always check squadron kills.

I have seen quite a bit specially B-25, B-26.

At beginning there are some fighters with only rifle machine guns so they are at same level of Japanese bombers. Also Betty and later other models get more than just 7.7's

(edited)

< Message edited by Dili -- 2/15/2018 7:21:24 PM >

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 78

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 8:17:58 PM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

OK, this 4E bombing thread raises its ugly head around here every so often. I haven't read this whole thread, as I've read many before. The only thing I'll input/add to things here relates to the only input I could find by one of the DEV's. Read Nicodemus' inputs and take away what you will. I have.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3182549&mpage=1&key=night+bombing+status+update#

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 79

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/15/2018 8:33:20 PM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

Oops, just noticed this.

quote:

Ever see Allied... 2E bombers down any Japanese fighters? The fact is that you all have it wrong. The combat animation usually doesn't visually show non 4E bombers from either side downing enemy fighters, instead you have to note whether a text message says a critical hit was inflicted.

Sorry Alfred, I know your knowledge of the game is far more in depth than mine, but here I have to disagree. I always watch the combat animations, and I must say I have seen 2E bombers down Japanese fighters directly. Mitchel's are usually rather good at this in my experience. This is of course with early Japanese fighters. i.e. Nate's, Oscar's, and A6M2's, as their frames are rather weak. Not sure about Tojo's, but I'll watch more closely and report back what I find.

I have never noticed it with 1E bombers, but I'll be on the lookout now.

_____________________________

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 80

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/16/2018 1:00:09 AM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: kfmiller41

Am playing Japan in a PBEM and my opponent just bombed my base at truk using about 50 heavy bombers. Date was 29 Dec 42. 5 raids came in at between 14000 to 18000 feet and total planes for all raids were 89. He lost no planes to my 30 zeros. He scored 18 hits, put 8 carriers and 1 battleship out of commission for at least 3-6 months with major damage. While I congratulate him on doing that I also feel like this accuracy is so out of whack I can understand why so many Japanese players call it quits. I mean I want to be competitive but I have nothing to shoot down hordes of 4 engine bombers, even my 2 engine fighters cannot stop them.
Am I just a bad player or is this something that should be house ruled to limit the uncanny accuracy these things have? It is only December 42 and he is already clobbering my bases with these beasts.

If you're looking for some help on settings drop in some screen shots of your fighter CAP settings, the combat report of the strikes, and some info on your pilot experience and skills. Too little here to go on.

That said, it's not out of the ordinary for massed 4Es to do a lot of damage on port strikes, as everyone has basically confirmed.

This uncanny accuracy during daylight is something that might be explained away, but when you see them coming in at night in 0% moonlight and getting multiple hits on pinpoint targets, while shooting down droves of night-fighters to boot without suffering much themselves, then you start wondering...

Thank You LST. I have stayed out of this thread due to my strong feeling on this subject. You, politely, hit the nail on the head.

Add to that the ability of 40-50 4EB to inflict 1,000+ Casualties on troops in Lvl-6 Forts and we're moving farther into the fantasy realms...

I held back, but wondered if someone else would add this in. If you know my games you know that I ask for (and inflict on myself playing the Allies) an HR for no more than 50 bombers o night strike against any one port/airfield. The DBB AA makes night strikes slightly less lethal, but not enough.

In the war the Brits tested and proved early on that hitting an airfield at night, even with the many landmarks and guides at night in Europe, was next to impossible. In the Pacific it was even harder. There are a few cases where it worked, but usually later in the war. Not to say the early 4Es especially didn't try it a lot, but they certainly didn't sink 70-90% of ships in port, and definitely didn't hit 50% of the aircraft on a busy base.

There is a great book on the difficulties (and amazing perseverance and achievements) of the 4Es that started it new PI and moved to OZ throughout the early part of the war, called Fortress Against the Sun by Gene Eric Salecker. A really good read. Also talks about the tactics of Japanese pilots trying to bring them down and how many they'd routinely hit with their defensive guns.

Yep my opponent and I by mutual agreement limit night missions to one unit per theater per night. That keeps it sane. Massive night bombing has no real business in the simulation. It just did not happen that way except attacks against city centers.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 81

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/16/2018 1:01:57 AM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Oops, just noticed this.

quote:

Ever see Allied... 2E bombers down any Japanese fighters? The fact is that you all have it wrong. The combat animation usually doesn't visually show non 4E bombers from either side downing enemy fighters, instead you have to note whether a text message says a critical hit was inflicted.

Sorry Alfred, I know your knowledge of the game is far more in depth than mine, but here I have to disagree. I always watch the combat animations, and I must say I have seen 2E bombers down Japanese fighters directly. Mitchel's are usually rather good at this in my experience. This is of course with early Japanese fighters. i.e. Nate's, Oscar's, and A6M2's, as their frames are rather weak. Not sure about Tojo's, but I'll watch more closely and report back what I find.

I have never noticed it with 1E bombers, but I'll be on the lookout now.

We restrict 4Es by no ground attacks in open terrain but otherwise any base or other terrain is fair game. Works pretty well.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 82

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/16/2018 1:35:29 AM

spence

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline

quote:

We restrict 4Es by no ground attacks in open terrain but otherwise any base or other terrain is fair game. Works pretty well.

That's obviously because troops moving in open terrain are way to easy to spot. No air commander worth his salt would deign to attack easy targets.

(in reply to MakeeLearn)

Post #: 83

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/16/2018 2:52:17 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

We restrict 4Es by no ground attacks in open terrain but otherwise any base or other terrain is fair game. Works pretty well.

That's obviously because troops moving in open terrain are way to easy to spot. No air commander worth his salt would deign to attack easy targets.

Yeah, where's the challenge in that?

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 84

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/16/2018 4:50:41 PM

Zorch

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

We restrict 4Es by no ground attacks in open terrain but otherwise any base or other terrain is fair game. Works pretty well.

That's obviously because troops moving in open terrain are way to easy to spot. No air commander worth his salt would deign to attack easy targets.

Yeah, where's the challenge in that?

They must be a decoy to hide the really important troop movement.

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 85

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/16/2018 5:06:18 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

Say what you want. Yes, I think a lot of things are way nerfed towards the Japanese player. (Come on now-every betty and nell torpedo capable!) However, that said, I think between matched players that the Allied player should always win. So, I really don't care. Let it go.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Zorch)

Post #: 86

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/16/2018 6:23:17 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Oops, just noticed this.

quote:

Ever see Allied... 2E bombers down any Japanese fighters? The fact is that you all have it wrong. The combat animation usually doesn't visually show non 4E bombers from either side downing enemy fighters, instead you have to note whether a text message says a critical hit was inflicted.

Sorry Alfred, I know your knowledge of the game is far more in depth than mine, but here I have to disagree. I always watch the combat animations, and I must say I have seen 2E bombers down Japanese fighters directly. Mitchel's are usually rather good at this in my experience. This is of course with early Japanese fighters. i.e. Nate's, Oscar's, and A6M2's, as their frames are rather weak. Not sure about Tojo's, but I'll watch more closely and report back what I find.

I have never noticed it with 1E bombers, but I'll be on the lookout now.

We restrict 4Es by no ground attacks in open terrain but otherwise any base or other terrain is fair game. Works pretty well.

Do you also restrict netties to only making torpedo attacks in fighter escort range?

Or are they left free to tilt the game in Japan's favor while you agree to fight with one hand tied behind your back?

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 87

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/16/2018 6:24:49 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Say what you want. Yes, I think a lot of things are way nerfed towards the Japanese player. (Come on now-every betty and nell torpedo capable!) However, that said, I think between matched players that the Allied player should always win. So, I really don't care. Let it go.

It isn't about who always gets to win. Its about who gets to win fairly.

Those of us who do care will not let it go.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 88

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/16/2018 6:34:02 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

It sounds like some comments are mentioning 'winning the war' as equivalent to 'winning the game'. The basic game scenarios (and many mods) do *not* equate the two. There are mods that strive to make them the same, which is great, but discussing 'winning the war' for mods that don't equate the two is asking for a different game.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 89

RE: Question about 4E Bombing - 2/17/2018 4:32:35 PM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

quote:

We restrict 4Es by no ground attacks in open terrain but otherwise any base or other terrain is fair game. Works pretty well.

My line of thinking.

quote:

Say what you want. Yes, I think a lot of things are way nerfed towards the Japanese player. (Come on now-every betty and nell torpedo capable!) However, that said, I think between matched players that the Allied player should always win. So, I really don't care. Let it go.

quote:

(Come on now-every betty and nell torpedo capable!)

Yes, the aircraft are, but the base is limited by an HQ that's in range. Its not really possible to have them everywhere. More than RL, yes, but not everywhere.

_____________________________

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 90