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: disapointing Victory

 
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 >> RE: disapointing Victory Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 7 [8]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: disapointing Victory - 9/8/2004 4:58:39 AM   
Mr.Frag


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

What about as the Yankee's?


Shouldn't be any Yank problems as the deck is stacked against them. If you pull off an AV, you earned it because most of your points from from Japan itself.

(in reply to Tankerace)
Post #: 211
RE: disapointing Victory - 9/8/2004 5:05:06 AM   
Tankerace


Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline 		Sweet.

I'm REALLY behind right now... hehe, the "stupid" AI is giving me a thrashing. I thought I was scared to sacrifice ships in UV... but that isn't anything compared ot this.

_____________________________

Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med

Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 212
RE: disapointing Victory - 9/8/2004 7:03:18 AM   
ZOOMIE1980

 

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline 		Remember this toggle issue just isn't for Japanese players drumming the AI, but Allied players, even playing a good historical game, getting to Aug or Sep 1945 and finally getting their 2-1 margin and seeing the game end. I would STILL like to go ahead and have the option to invade Japan at that point in a "capture the flag" kind of thing. I mentioned back during the beta testing that many will victory points are totally useless and would just as soon see them gotten rid of or at least hidden away for the benifit of the AI under the covers.

(in reply to Tankerace)
Post #: 213
RE: disapointing Victory - 9/8/2004 8:53:06 AM   
Culiacan Mexico

 

Posts: 8348
Joined: 11/10/2000
From: Bad Windsheim Germany
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
You still don't get my position do you?

I am not "for or against" changing VP conditions.

I am "against" opening up a new can of worms full of bugs due to enabling something that is completely untested and against the design of the game. I am also "againt" wasting programmers time implementing things that don't make game play better. Anything that doesn't improve the game play strikes me as time taken away from things that could improve the game play.
That is a position I respect… even if it blocks something on my wish list.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Thats why I fight against these types of enhancements. There are 8 hours in a business day. If Mike spends 4 of them to add new code to deal with disabling auto-victory, thats 4 hours not spent correcting the bug that results in units vanishing.

Which is more important to game play?...
Subjective.

I believe that removing upgrade restrictions and placing restrictions on Japanese production would enhance ‘game play’ for many Japanese players, while other feel it wouldn’t be worth the effort.

Cost vs benefit is not something I can do from the outside.

_____________________________

"If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lig

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 214
RE: disapointing Victory - 9/8/2004 8:59:34 AM   
Culiacan Mexico

 

Posts: 8348
Joined: 11/10/2000
From: Bad Windsheim Germany
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski
I just want the whole mess to shut up and go away. Those of us with a balanced view...


_____________________________

"If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lig

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 215
RE: disapointing Victory - 9/8/2004 11:08:58 AM   
Adnan Meshuggi

 

Posts: 2220
Joined: 8/2/2001
Status: offline 		Frag, you can´t bash players for this.... i want to play BOTH sides... if i play as the japanese i allways will try to conquer china... why ? cause for me it is logistical a support and i could save planes and, err piolets().. also i think, with a conquered china, the japanese could hold better against the evil brits and could resupply their worn out troops in the pacific.... this is my way to solve this nightmare for the japanese.... if the game was developted for ONLY the allied player against the AI, then this is the real problem behind many things. But again, this is the fault of 2by3, they should have made it an allied player-only game (but then i would not buy it, and many others, too) or, as you mentioned, there need to be more scenarios with stronger (but not too strong) chinese units.... i think this should be possible to realize.
The AV-button is useless for me - cause i want to play it out... if you think about russia 1941... a realistic autovictory would end the "game" in nov. 1941... but still the russians won the war. So, the possibility to remove the AV-conditions for the player (he can play all along) is good. With a toggle, everybody is happy... the time to do it is not lost to "anti-bug", cause it is for me and many other players a real huge "bug"... i can live with some bugs that stop the game, as long as an easy workaround avoid it (like the strange Shiplist - back-button end the game-crash - i just press exit and the game run...)

so, everybody has an opinion about this game and you (the testers) have spent a lot time and energy with it - i have much respect for you but still there exist problems you do not see (cause you have a different opinion, yeah, you have the same right to have a different pov ) and i like them fixed. Also, the allied side should be programmed the way it should ALLWAYS strike back (say you loose all carriers and bb´s in 1942 and untill mid 43, together with 1000 ak/ap... well then the americans built 20 more essex and bring in 1000 new ak/ap and 1 million more troops... why not solve it this way ? For me, this would be the "realistic" way to handle this situation.... japan manage to invade pearl, conquer china and force the brits back to karachi ? conquer australia and oz ? fine, then the invasion force first take back this .... you just need for india a jump point that can´t be touched by axis troops...

_____________________________

Don't tickle yourself with some moralist crap thinking we have some sort of obligation to help these people. We're there for our self-interest, and anything we do to be 'nice' should be considered a courtesy dweebespit

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 216
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 6 7 [8]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: disapointing Victory Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 7 [8]
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.688