Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >>

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

- 10/2/2003 3:10:33 AM

mdiehl

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

[QUOTE]Mdiehl, but instead chose to criticize my presence here[/QUOTE]

Not your presence here, TJ, just your rhetoric. I don't see the vast Billings-Grigsby-Mogami conspiracy here. To be sure, GGPW was all fubar, but it really seems to me like some substantive changes have been incorporated. Mogami seems on the whole to get relatively reasonable results except when the a/c totals are horridly skewed. There might be something wrong with the game overall if the Japanese can base 150 Zekes ANYWHERE in the SoPac, but that's different form the a-a combat model.

Think maybe the numbers game needs to take into account the reduced range that comes with greater numbers of a/c launched. Old Flat Top (AH) used to accomplish that quite well. If 150 Zekes are launched on sweep and they are all seriously to participate in combat, their range should be shortened by 200 miles and there should still be a decent chance that the formation would lose aircraft to navigational error, straggling, etc and thus be broken up into smaller waves that a cap of 30 F4Fs could fend off or defeat in detail.

But as to the a-a combat results, I'm not sure there's any huge problem based on Mogami's results.

The last Corsair result was odd. Exp 20 pilots clobbering exp 99 pilots. I take it that EXP substantially affects operational losses. I wonder what EXP 20 means. If that means 400 hours of air time the result seems fine because, above a certain level of airtime, the importance of a pilot's experience should be overridden by the use of a far superior machine. But if EXP 20 means "I just transitioned from 100 hours in a T6 to an F4U because we were desperate" then I'd expect more F4Us to have been scragged.

_____________________________

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 Tristanjohn)