RE: PT Boat = no fun

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: PT Boat = no fun

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 >> Tech Support >> RE: PT Boat = no fun

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: PT Boat = no fun - 7/29/2004 9:49:12 PM

Tenzan

Posts: 101
Joined: 6/5/2004
Status: offline

Ok..I ran it ten times as well: both leaders at 60/60...I guess I have too much time on my hands, as well :)

1.8DD's /12 PT's

2.8DD's /15 PT's

3.8DD's /17 PT's

4.8DD's /22 PT's

5.8DD's /14 PT's....

....I guess you can see where this is going............

6.8DD's /10 PT's

7.8DD's /28 DD's (the high water mark!)

8.8DD's /12 PT's

9.8DD's /18 PT's

10.8DD's /15 PT's

So...I think this really proves two things-Moquia and I ARE playing different versions, and...Tanaka must be the greatest floating Japanese asset in the game....

I really don't know how we're getting such radically different results...hehe..Maybe it'd be more beneficial to the development of WITP if someone other than us ran a set for a change...heh-the golden mean's got to be out there somewhere :)

but-just for the record..here's how mine's set up: (modified tutorial)
Take all the PT boats at Einweitok (162 total), and move to Satawal-save.
create Desron at Palau, surface combat 60/60 leader-send to Satawal
Create PTboat div (25ships)at Satawal-surface combat-60/60 leader

Run it...

< Message edited by Tenzan -- 7/29/2004 1:57:42 PM >

(in reply to Moquia)

Post #: 61

RE: PT Boat = no fun - 7/29/2004 10:11:04 PM

Moquia

Posts: 174
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline

Well there is the little difference that i'm using 8x11=88 PT boats against 8 DDs. You are using all the PT boats, 162 you say. Plus using 25 boat divisions, as you call them.

_____________________________

(in reply to Tenzan)

Post #: 62

RE: PT Boat = no fun - 7/29/2004 10:28:43 PM

Tenzan

Posts: 101
Joined: 6/5/2004
Status: offline

just to clarify on that-I have a 25 pt boat unit IN the coastal hex...All the rest are in port (137 remainder)....

Now-when under surface attack, the AI creates TF's and feeds them in, it seems...but, All my DD's are sunk before they ever engage more than 50-60 or the total...I watch the numbers on the boats, I've never seen them engage anywhere near the full ammount..

But-I'll try it with 88 and see if that makes a difference...I'll run your setup-It may seem that I'm being antagonistic, but, I'm actually genuinely puzzled at how our results are so different....I'm trying to replicate your results...

< Message edited by Tenzan -- 7/29/2004 2:31:16 PM >

(in reply to Moquia)

Post #: 63

RE: PT Boat = no fun - 7/29/2004 10:30:11 PM

Moquia

Posts: 174
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline

Roger that.

(in reply to Tenzan)

Post #: 64

RE: PT Boat = no fun - 7/29/2004 10:38:01 PM

Tenzan

Posts: 101
Joined: 6/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

Now-when under surface attack, the AI creates TF's and feeds them in, it seems...but, All my DD's are sunk before they ever engage more than 50-60 or the total...I watch the numbers on the boats, I've never seen them engage anywhere near the full ammount..

A quick note on this-(I'm trying the 11x8 right now)

It's those 6 boat TF's that the AI creates and feeds in that do the major part of the sinking...the first two rounds are usually relatively calm, and then...They'll start getting 5 and 6 torpedo hits from those small fed-in AI TF's...It's fishy to me...

(in reply to Moquia)

Post #: 65

RE: PT Boat = no fun - 7/29/2004 10:57:56 PM

Tenzan

Posts: 101
Joined: 6/5/2004
Status: offline

ok..ran the 8x11 (nothing in port)

5DD's /25 PT's at the end of the turn.. (1 dd might not make it back to palau: 77flt)

Now..that's a comparable result...And on to my theory, I'm going to leave the bulk of the 88 in port now and see what happens..I'll run 1x11 and anchor the rest...

brb with the results-I'm beginning to think this is where a bug might be....

Ok..ran it and found roughly the same result...So, dosen't look like a port induced bug..In my previous setup there must've been more PT's than I accurately counted engaged-My mistake...but..I suppose it did prove that ~80-100 PT boats is an even match for a Desron :)

The neat thing is-And I realllllllllyyyyyyyy don't like this result, btw-
A PT boat seems to be 1/10th of a destroyer (I don't like it because the VP point values match-so much for a raise the VP cost for PT idea)

Ok..so..looks like the PT boats (at least when engaging destroyers) work as advertised..
So..I'll have to rethink my position about overeffectiveness in port hexes (never thought they were in open hexes) as, I think the overeffectiveness is a result of number power..I'm going to keep testing it though...It's still fishy to me...I'm just not seeing the evidence.

So, what to do about the power of sheer number? And, is there any way to fix it in game?
There probably isn't-other than raising the VP cost..So..I guess house rules will have to be the awnser....

< Message edited by Tenzan -- 7/29/2004 3:26:44 PM >

(in reply to Tenzan)

Post #: 66

RE: PT Boat = no fun - 7/29/2004 11:54:10 PM

Mr.Frag

Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline

quote:

So, what to do about the power of sheer number? And, is there any way to fix it in game?

No fix for the numbers game except for bringing in a couple of CV's to clean the place up.

You have to wonder though ... who is going to sail ships into a base hex that they have recon'd and shows 100+ ships in port???

(in reply to Tenzan)

Post #: 67

RE: PT Boat = no fun - 7/30/2004 12:01:49 AM

Tenzan

Posts: 101
Joined: 6/5/2004
Status: offline

It'd be better, IMHO-if there was an 'uber PT boat bug' as it could be fixed..(and who knows, maybe there is? engagement range is still screwy, to me..3000m?)-but a numbers exploit, well, we'll just have to live with....And invent 'house rules' and so forth..

(in reply to Mr.Frag)

Post #: 68

RE: PT Boat = no fun - 7/30/2004 12:26:01 AM

von Murrin

Posts: 1760
Joined: 11/13/2001
From: That from which there is no escape.
Status: offline

Would it be possible to add another TF type sometime in the future? If so, the SC TF model could be used, but the number of allowed ships could be set to no greater than 3-10 and PT's only? If they are also excluded from SC TF's, wouldn't that be enough?

_____________________________

I give approximately two fifths of a !#$% at any given time!

(in reply to Tenzan)

Post #: 69

RE: PT Boat = no fun - 7/30/2004 12:29:31 AM

Moquia

Posts: 174
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline

Tenzan, I'm all for some restrictions in numbers per base if it can be done. Also any sane allied player would agree to a house rule on pt boats per base, maybe 10 or so. Btw i don't know why the scenario designer put so many pt boats in the Marchalls to start with. Haven't seen any sources showing that (just a google search).

_____________________________

(in reply to Tenzan)

Post #: 70

RE: PT Boat = no fun - 7/30/2004 4:50:26 AM

Tenzan

Posts: 101
Joined: 6/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

Tenzan, I'm all for some restrictions in numbers per base if it can be done. Also any sane allied player would agree to a house rule on pt boats per base, maybe 10 or so.

I just don't see it happening..It'd be too much work to go back and code in restrictions in terms of port allowance and TF allowance for one particular ship class..I think it's just one of those issues that the developers never intended to happen, i.e: they assume we play rationally, and won't create a twenty 100PT boat TF's and go on a headhunt..

One workaround I could see is some sort 'wolfpack' penalty-like the one that applies to subs and (US)carrier task forces..For example, any TF that includes more than 20 PT boats gets an attack penalty...but, this would do nothing to stop the numbers exploit of packing a portload's worth into an important base as invasion insurance..

But..the most sensible (and seemingly easy to do) option is give the targets a fighting chance by (funny how I still end up at my original complaint...) increasing the opening round range to target even to the open water range of 5000m (currently 3000m in coastal hexes)..there's a HUGE difference even there, but..in the coast hexes, going from 3000m to 2000m ..Torpedoes are going to have a hard time missing at that range...And in the end..that's what this is all about...Torpedoes, not PT boats...I think it'd be a good comprimise to counter PT boat piling...remove the exploit, no one will bother with doing it.

< Message edited by Tenzan -- 7/29/2004 8:52:02 PM >

(in reply to Moquia)

Post #: 71

RE: PT Boat = no fun - 7/30/2004 7:41:46 PM

Damien Thorn

Posts: 1107
Joined: 7/24/2003
Status: offline

I wonder what range subs fire their torpedoes at in this game. Whatever range it is, subs sure don't sem a leathal as PT boats right now. I think a sub can sneak up a lot closer to a task force than a bunch of pt boats can. I'd like to see the range the sub is at when it fires displayed on the combat screen.

(in reply to Tenzan)

Post #: 72

RE: PT Boat = no fun - 7/30/2004 10:32:24 PM

Tenzan

Posts: 101
Joined: 6/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

I wonder what range subs fire their torpedoes at in this game. Whatever range it is, subs sure don't sem a leathal as PT boats right now. I think a sub can sneak up a lot closer to a task force than a bunch of pt boats can. I'd like to see the range the sub is at when it fires displayed on the combat screen.

Good point!

The only other difference is that right now it's impossible to attack with 170 subs :)

I wonder if it's the PT range in 'open water' hexes..5000m?

(in reply to Damien Thorn)

Post #: 73

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Tech Support >> RE: PT Boat = no fun

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]