RE: What about EXP?

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: What about EXP?

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: What about EXP?

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 [6] 7 next > >>

[Poll]

Should changing the aircraft upgrade path cost Political points?

Yes

69% (145)

30% (64)

Total Votes : 209

(last vote on : 1/17/2005 7:42:03 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 12:37:54 AM

testarossa

Posts: 952
Joined: 9/24/2004
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
3-1? Dunno. Possibly not. Too many variables.

Althoug I agree will all of your points, I still think that every game is different even with same opponent. If Allies dont ful around (Ron's bunker strategy) Japan doesn't have a lot of chances in racking up VPs.

Try strategic bombing - 1300 points in one week. I've managed to fly 150-200 B24 from Aparri (?) (Philippines, NE corner) to Nagasaki starting June 1943. In August I've got autovictory 52000-13000 or something.

< Message edited by testarossa -- 1/12/2005 4:08:28 PM >

_____________________________

Dr. Miller: I should've called the marines!
Dalton: They're few, they're proud... And they ain't here!!!

(in reply to mlees)

Post #: 151

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 1:14:18 AM

mlees

Posts: 2263
Joined: 9/20/2003
From: San Diego
Status: offline

I am not familiar with Ron's strategy, so I can't speak to it's strengths and weaknesses. I assume that someone out there will be able to devise a counter to it.

Where's Aparri? The Marianas? Well, all I can say is that I am assuming that, with a proper defense strategy, Japan should be able to prevent the Allied player from basing bombers within 10 hexes of the home islands until '44.

I am not sure what happened in your game there, and I am definately NOT claiming to be a good player (but I suspect they exist). I think I have the thrust of the game down, just not the gazillion operational details.

Maybe, then, lets speculate on this: If the game requires too much of a perfect play by both players (because without perfect (or equally balanced bad) play the overwhelming force just buries the opposition), then with players generally being of different talents or skill level, one side or the other will be crushed, no matter how much we tinker with the OOB. (Which is what changing the upgrade paths of aircraft kinda is, tinkering.) How do we fix that? By making it so that mistakes don't hurt as much? Than good play is not as rewarding materially and/or emotionally. Penalizing one side or the other's OOB (by removing units, giving units, or allowing one side or the other to do things the other can't) is interesting for "what if" reasons, but if I stink as an Allied player, and someone at Matrix decides that the Americans are too strong and don't need any of the ships that arrived after June of '44 and delete them from the OOB (extreme example, I know), how does this help my game experience?

Lot's of Japanese players insist that Japan can't possibly survive the onslaught of '44, and this or that is unfair to the IJ players out there. (Allied side does this too, just not as much IMO.

) Well, guess what. Lot's of Allied players insist that the initial Japanese advantage(s) is/are unstoppable, too.

I like tinkering to see what happens when "x" is changed, but it's going to be a long, hard, and flame filled road for you if you want to find a truly perfectly balanced game here, just because of the one thing that the developers can't control: the players!

(in reply to testarossa)

Post #: 152

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 2:16:13 AM

testarossa

Posts: 952
Joined: 9/24/2004
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

OK. I see your point. How about make two diffrent buttons. Something like Jap upgrade path on/off. Allied upgrade path on/off. So later down the road we will be able to balance the game.

Edit: In short Ron falls back to the most easily defended bases and plays on defensive, not risking CVs and Surf TFs in some stupid forays till 1943.

I dont remember who (2Acr?) called it "bunker" stratgey - Allied player sits literally in the bunker during Jap rampage in 1942

< Message edited by testarossa -- 1/12/2005 5:01:56 PM >

_____________________________

Dr. Miller: I should've called the marines!
Dalton: They're few, they're proud... And they ain't here!!!

(in reply to mlees)

Post #: 153

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 2:29:12 AM

Ron Saueracker

Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

Incorrect. I defend what is defendable at the time. I don't sit back and wait until 1943 to fight, I just fall back to defendable positions and make the Jap player slog though everything. If an opportunity presents itself to commit CVs to a defensive or even a limited offensive operation, it will happen. What else is possible in this situation?

_____________________________

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to testarossa)

Post #: 154

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 2:41:31 AM

2ndACR

Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline

Ron fights for everything. He just does not come out and play in the early game. As in the 1st 6 months. Or he has not in any of our games yet.

He will not commit surface forces within my air cover, he will not commit his BB's/CV's anywhere that I may have a CV lurking.

I want him to come play with me on my terms, on my ground.

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)

Post #: 155

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 3:01:16 AM

testarossa

Posts: 952
Joined: 9/24/2004
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Ron fights for everything. He just does not come out and play in the early game. As in the 1st 6 months. Or he has not in any of our games yet.

He will not commit surface forces within my air cover, he will not commit his BB's/CV's anywhere that I may have a CV lurking.

I want him to come play with me on my terms, on my ground.

That's what I meant. Perfect Allied strategy until 1943.

Although who knows Ron's strategy better than Ron? And I play 'bunker' strategy too. I would even say I admire it.

< Message edited by testarossa -- 1/12/2005 5:04:57 PM >

_____________________________

Dr. Miller: I should've called the marines!
Dalton: They're few, they're proud... And they ain't here!!!

(in reply to 2ndACR)

Post #: 156

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 3:29:12 AM

Ron Saueracker

Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Ron fights for everything. He just does not come out and play in the early game. As in the 1st 6 months. Or he has not in any of our games yet.

He will not commit surface forces within my air cover, he will not commit his BB's/CV's anywhere that I may have a CV lurking.

I want him to come play with me on my terms, on my ground.

Well, that would be called an offensive.

Gotta have superiority to think about this.

_____________________________

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to 2ndACR)

Post #: 157

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 4:06:33 AM

mlees

Posts: 2263
Joined: 9/20/2003
From: San Diego
Status: offline

So, the dreaded "bunker" strategy means never coming out from under LBA cover? What's the problem with that? Sounds ideal to me.

The challenge is knowing when "making him pay for that base he wants" becomes "get the heck out of Dodge with all my body parts intact". I assume. I guess. I think...

2ndACR: There must be a way to convince Ron that he needs to come out and play. I have faith either you or Mogami can figure that out.

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)

Post #: 158

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 4:41:10 AM

2ndACR

Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline

I have not found the magic bait yet. I even took a little tour around Suva with my Baby KB to entice him out of hiding.

I never said it was not good strategy for the Allies. I just want to kill his CV's, but on my terms.

(in reply to mlees)

Post #: 159

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 4:54:25 AM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

Have you tried Natalie Portman yet?

(in reply to 2ndACR)

Post #: 160

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 8:40:21 AM

bradfordkay

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

So this is where the famous "bunker strategy" has been bantered about?

I happen to agree with Ron. As the Allies in the early stages of the war, you should not try to fight for everything, you're just going to get eaten up piecemeal. Isn't mass one of the major bases of strategy? I like to fight like hell for certain bases, and evacuate the rest. Some of the evacuees are used to shore up those fortified bastions (still doomed, but they're going to pay to take them), and some are sent to rear areas to prepare the next lines of defense. Some are lost on the way (KB once caught one of those huge RAF base forces sailing from Singapore on three ships, Darwin bound. Guess what, airplane mechanics can't swim 120 miles to shore...).

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 161

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 11:35:46 AM

Ron Saueracker

Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

I have not found the magic bait yet. I even took a little tour around Suva with my Baby KB to entice him out of hiding.

I never said it was not good strategy for the Allies. I just want to kill his CV's, but on my terms.

You have no idea how close we were to a scrap with odds in my favour and you so far away from safety.

Maybe 2 turns...

_____________________________

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to 2ndACR)

Post #: 162

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 11:44:20 AM

BlackVoid

Posts: 639
Joined: 10/17/2003
Status: offline

Well, there is one problem with the bunker strategy.

Japan has to look for a fight someplace in 42, while he is still superior. If the allies hunker down in Pearl, Oz and NZ, there is a good chance japan will not want to fight for those places. Allied convoys in this case are not safe, for that Allies need Noumea, Fiji and Pago.

But the main thing is, if Japan feels that an operation in the Pacific is too risky/not worth it, he can divert all assets to another theater: China, Russia or India. IMHO Japan has to force a big battle in 1942 otherwise the war is lost. If in the other theater things go well, the Allies must come out and play in 1942 which is very risky.

I think Allies have to fight somewhere in the Pacific, they cannot just hide.

(in reply to bradfordkay)

Post #: 163

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 11:51:02 AM

Ron Saueracker

Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlackVoid

Well, there is one problem with the bunker strategy.

Japan has to look for a fight someplace in 42, while he is still superior. If the allies hunker down in Pearl, Oz and NZ, there is a good chance japan will not want to fight for those places. Allied convoys in this case are not safe, for that Allies need Noumea, Fiji and Pago.

But the main thing is, if Japan feels that an operation in the Pacific is too risky/not worth it, he can divert all assets to another theater: China, Russia or India. IMHO Japan has to force a big battle in 1942 otherwise the war is lost. If in the other theater things go well, the Allies must come out and play in 1942 which is very risky.

I think Allies have to fight somewhere in the Pacific, they cannot just hide.

Exactly. But it's up to the Jap to press his advantage if he so chooses. If he doesn't, Oz, NZ, the SoPac and CenPac bases are safe. If he does, his commitment occurs deep in Allied territory, close to Allied bases and FAR from Japanese LBA. Takes a while to safely start pressing in these areas. If Jap jumps the gun, he will be risking perhaps too much.

_____________________________

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to BlackVoid)

Post #: 164

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 12:31:44 PM

mogami

Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline

Hi, I was milling about Balikpapan looking for an unescorted Japanese landing to come into range. My TF contained both POW and Repulse several CL and DD.
To my amazment a Japanese TF of 8 Ships (2 CA 2CL and 4 DD) enters the hex (my ships were undocked and commanded by Adm Doorman)
Both IJN CA were sunk along with a CL and a few DD.
Repulse took 1 torpedo but damage was not heavy as a result. All in all the Allied TF suffered very little. However I had to retreat from Balikpapan a few days later when Japanese Betties based at Menado. They can't load torps yet but I have to assume the airfield will be enlarged and it is too late to leave after they have attacked.
Still looking for a good target to pounce on but I'm not going to try head to head against the 4 IJN BB that shell Tarakan last turn.
The Allies can do a lot of damage and slow the occupation of the SRA down simply by letting the Japanese player know he is still hanging around.
If Japanese air patrol spots POW and Repulse et al heading north in Indian Ocean and Houston and the other USN ships going South past Darwin he knows he does not have to provide strong escort for his landings.
By the same token if the Allied player risks a battle and has these ships lost or damaged the Japanese can proceed faster.
Win a battle or two and have the ships still in fighting condition and the Japanese now have to secure airfields, keep AC on Naval Strike and provide escorts. This is worth 3-4 months of extending the operation.
It allows Java more time to get ready. Ties down Japanese land formations.
(not to mention actually inflicts damage on Japanese )

_____________________________

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)

Post #: 165

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 1:38:04 PM

Ron Saueracker

Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, I was milling about Balikpapan looking for an unescorted Japanese landing to come into range. My TF contained both POW and Repulse several CL and DD.
To my amazment a Japanese TF of 8 Ships (2 CA 2CL and 4 DD) enters the hex (my ships were undocked and commanded by Adm Doorman)
Both IJN CA were sunk along with a CL and a few DD.
Repulse took 1 torpedo but damage was not heavy as a result. All in all the Allied TF suffered very little. However I had to retreat from Balikpapan a few days later when Japanese Betties based at Menado. They can't load torps yet but I have to assume the airfield will be enlarged and it is too late to leave after they have attacked.
Still looking for a good target to pounce on but I'm not going to try head to head against the 4 IJN BB that shell Tarakan last turn.
The Allies can do a lot of damage and slow the occupation of the SRA down simply by letting the Japanese player know he is still hanging around.
If Japanese air patrol spots POW and Repulse et al heading north in Indian Ocean and Houston and the other USN ships going South past Darwin he knows he does not have to provide strong escort for his landings.
By the same token if the Allied player risks a battle and has these ships lost or damaged the Japanese can proceed faster.
Win a battle or two and have the ships still in fighting condition and the Japanese now have to secure airfields, keep AC on Naval Strike and provide escorts. This is worth 3-4 months of extending the operation.
It allows Java more time to get ready. Ties down Japanese land formations.
(not to mention actually inflicts damage on Japanese )

Yepper, Mog. Exactly how it's done.

_____________________________

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 166

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 8:41:44 PM

hithere

Posts: 432
Joined: 4/13/2004
From: Atlanta
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

Don't blame me for this. I never wanted any of this nonsense and have said so start to finish.

Don't worry, there is an off switch for people who are not interested.

Yet the entire fabric of the game is infected with it. Look at a list of the changes that have been made at the behest of posters on these forums, Frag. Look at the degree to which modding and fiddling around with the data have taken precedence over the integrity of the core design. You can't help but see how far this game has drifted from what Grigsby's original focus was when UV was created (and WitP, perforce, contemplated) - an operational/strategic game on the Pacific Theater in WWII that places the players in the circumstances faced by the historical adversaries.

Two years ago, I said this: "If you want a World War II in the Pacific wargame construction set, fine. I'd like one, too. But this is not it."

I wish someone had been listening.

exactly,

begin sarcasm

PTO comes to mind...in that one, you could even design your own ships....WHY CAN'T WE IN THIS GAME!! i mean, the allies could have made a ship with 40's from one end to the other and no main arm. i demand that WITP allow us to design our own ships and aircraft...they could have changed the designs, why can't we. I would like a fighter plane that had 16 .50's , but only 10 rounds apiece. that would pretty much confirm 1 kill per mission. makes perfect sense to me. most pilots did not even get a kill. they could have done that.

end sarcasm

not to tick anyone off, but either side could have changed anything that they did for the most part. there are reasons they did things the way they did. one big one is that they did not have the advantage of hindsight. we look back and say, "they were stupid, why in the world didn't they start making more aircraft "A" instead of cont making aircraft "B"

why didn't Japan train more pilots earlier? that is a easy thing to due right?? and they are going to need them. but they did not know that they were going to need them. but either way, it would be one of the easiest things, and they didn't. WHY? was it the culture? was it because they believed that a very elite pilot was better than 10 lesser pilots?

I guess my point is, why didn't Japan and the other country's put their best planes and stuff out in the first place? because it just was not possible. but now, in this game it is possible to change almost every factory and therefore make every group the best aircraft

i prob am not doing a good job of explaining my position, i am just upset that because someone has something bad happen to them, it is a bug or a play bal. issue, because everyone knows that THEY can't be beat. I have been playing wargames for 15 years, but i have never seen anything like this, were people want to change THE GAME. the game is what it is, aside from the acual bugs, i wish that they would just leave it alone.

Frustrated game player, signing off

_____________________________

Quote from one of my drill sergeants, "remember, except for the extreme heat, intense radiation, and powerful blast wave, a nuclear explosion is just like any other explosion"

(in reply to pasternakski)

Post #: 167

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 9:29:19 PM

testarossa

Posts: 952
Joined: 9/24/2004
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hithere
the game is what it is, aside from the acual bugs, i wish that they would just leave it alone.

Frustrated game player, signing off

But on/off switch will provide more flexibility and game will appeal to more gamers, more satisfied customers, bigger sales. It will allow keeping this kind of games from extinction. Hardcore gamers can select this option off and fully enjoy Jap empire agony; after all it is about having fun.

I personally do not enjoy playing games where I don�t have choices. So I�d prefer to have this option. Even if they will not make it an option, you still will be able to stick to the original scenario upgrade path, right? Besides that, this option will work only in big scenarios. You�ll be able to recreate small-scale historical operations the way they were fought during WW2.

Ranting mode on

I understand position of history reincarnators, but software development is not about pleasing some diehard wargamers, it�s about making money. We are just lucky that they like to make wargames, not RTS, or god forbid arcades. Look how other developers switching to consoles just because revenues in that segment of industry 2-3 times higher than in PC segment; and stockholders care less about quality games as long as stocks are growing. And I don�t blame them for that either; everyone has a family to support.

I happen to know some people from EA office here in Burnaby. They think that what they are making is just an entertainment product, designed to please the customer, the same way music or movie does. They care less about anything else. Especially about supporting games with poor sales.

Ranting mode off.

I�ve bought this one in October and I like the way the game is evolving. And they do listen to what players want. It�s just that some players are in minority.

_____________________________

Dr. Miller: I should've called the marines!
Dalton: They're few, they're proud... And they ain't here!!!

(in reply to hithere)

Post #: 168

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 11:01:23 PM

hithere

Posts: 432
Joined: 4/13/2004
From: Atlanta
Status: offline

i understand what you are saying and do agree with some of it. i am certainly not a hard core wargamer, why even play a game you already know the exact outcome.
but some of the changes of weapon strength and aircraft and such do not have a on/off switch. as anyone who has gotten involved in a wildcat/zero or a sherman/tiger disagreement can tell you, it is all a matter of perspective. to me, the challenge (sp?) when i play Japan would be to see if i could hold off longer, or as the allies, to win quicker, or with fewer loses, or whatever. but still within the same basic frame work of abilities. sure, it would me sense to build more zero's, but it was not possible for Japan to change like what is now/shortly possible in this game.

I guess i am afraid of this turning into a Command and Conquer type of game. We have PTO (well, kinda), hearts of iron, stratigic command, and several others. there is only 1 uncommon valor and 1 war in the pacific. that is why i bought it and not one of the others.

testarossa said:
I�ve bought this one in October and I like the way the game is evolving. And they do listen to what players want. It�s just that some players are in minority.

i'm not sure of which way you meant this. I do not believe just anyone would buy this game. esp if they came from UV. they would know what they were getting. If they did not play UV, then how did they know about the game? There was no real advertisment for this game. so the only 2 real ways to find out about it would be from word of mouth or on the Matrix site for another game...then they would read the description and say, "yes, that is a game i would like", or "are you crazy, i'm not playing a game with thousand of ships and stuff"

I guess what I am saying is, I can count the people who want the game changed (either way) on 2 hands. maybe 1 foot. the most response i have seen on a poll is like a hundred people. how can somone say that they are in the majority? it seems to me that it is not a majority, it is who is the loudest.

another fav for a change (and i am NOT pointing anyone out, this is in other boards as well.) is for someone to give a historical "fact" and quote a book ref or something. then, the next post, another person gives a different "fact" that is 180 degrees diff. than the first one, and they have a ref too. I will be the 1st too admit, i'm not very smart, avg at best, but i am able to reason pretty well. through deductive reasoning, i know that both can not be true. the problem is that books are written by people, and people have bias. alot of times fact are left out to support a authors position. i think that 2by3 and matrix did a pretty good job with the strenghts of diff eq. esp because alot of people are going to use stuff in ways that hisorically, though possible, would not have been likely. for example, and i am just pulling this off the top of my head because i know there is evidece (SP) both ways, but the early allied ASW. it does rock. but a large problem is also the comp and some people are camping them right off harbor entrances. from what i understand, this was not the normal Japanese use of subs during WW2. the problem is then when the subs get waylayed, they site historical numbers of subs sunk. the conclusion is the allied ASW is too powerful. (once again, this is a example, please do not apply to earlier agruments)

_____________________________

Quote from one of my drill sergeants, "remember, except for the extreme heat, intense radiation, and powerful blast wave, a nuclear explosion is just like any other explosion"

(in reply to testarossa)

Post #: 169

RE: What about EXP? - 1/13/2005 11:52:49 PM

testarossa

Posts: 952
Joined: 9/24/2004
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

So this poll should've been not about PP points, but about if we want this feature at all?

But still it is all about having a choice, don't you agree? There are some design features, which cannot be changed. So people have to mode stock scenarios. I personally not that savvy to do this. Don�t have time and desire.

What they are actually doing is saving us from labour making our own scenario mod if we don't like to be stuck with Nates or whatever. And I appreciate it very much.

There are a lot of other issues some people keep screaming about - land combat, b-29 antishipping use, ASW, etc. Will it be addressed? Who knows.

2by3 have designed this game, it is their responsibility to insure that it is playable, bug free and appeals to the widest group of potential buyers possible without offending existing users. So if they think it is a good feature, than quite possible it is a good one. Is it going to unbalance the game? I don�t know. Only time will prove if some design decisions were wrong. But looks like Jap player will still face pretty tough times considering how expensive is to switch manufacturing from one a/c to another without autoupgrade option.

And if they think that some features will benefit (or don�t) the overall concept of the project I don�t think I will argue about it. I didn�t suffer from old zone of control issue in land combat. Didn�t say a word about it. They changed it, so now small squad can force the surrender of the army. So what? I�m just paying attention to the forces disposition now.

P.S. I don�t think it will ever get close to something like PTO, although ability to design my own ships would�ve been nice, or even some kind of card trade mini game so you can simulate monthly political briefings with president for US or prime minister for Japan. Yea and port it to PS2 or XBOX so I can play it on my new Plasma TV and don�t suffer from Times New Roman. Just kidding.

_____________________________

Dr. Miller: I should've called the marines!
Dalton: They're few, they're proud... And they ain't here!!!

(in reply to hithere)

Post #: 170

RE: What about EXP? - 1/14/2005 3:17:52 PM

hithere

Posts: 432
Joined: 4/13/2004
From: Atlanta
Status: offline

I guess overall, this option will prob be a good one, but i'm afraid it will get abused. i think the best will be if you can, as Japan at the end of the war, revert back to nates and stuff when your HI gets destroyed. Since I only have a select few that I will PBEM with, it will prob not even be a problem for me, so i really guess i am crying over someone else's spilt milk.

As for PTO 2, i always thought that they should have replaced the card game with a game of quarters. with the losers puking to add insult to injury

_____________________________

Quote from one of my drill sergeants, "remember, except for the extreme heat, intense radiation, and powerful blast wave, a nuclear explosion is just like any other explosion"

(in reply to testarossa)

Post #: 171

RE: What about EXP? - 1/14/2005 7:05:37 PM

Ron Saueracker

Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

2ACR had squadrons of Judy's on CVs by July 42. How much of a stretch is this and is it a sign of worse things to come.

_____________________________

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to hithere)

Post #: 172

RE: What about EXP? - 1/14/2005 8:05:01 PM

Xargun

Posts: 3690
Joined: 2/14/2004
From: Near Columbus, Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

2ACR had squadrons of Judy's on CVs by July 42. How much of a stretch is this and is it a sign of worse things to come.

Its possible. He accelerated a CV which comes equipped with them to arrive before the aircraft are actually available. You might want to cry foul and complain, but the trick is when he takes losses, he cannot replace them - he has no Judys to replace them with. Right now he would be completely screwed and the CV would probably never see battle until he can make good his losses.

Now with the new aircraft upgrade coming you will be able to 'downgrade' the Judys back into Vals (I think) that you can cover combat losses with - thus making the CV usable again.

Xargun

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)

Post #: 173

RE: What about EXP? - 1/14/2005 8:35:43 PM

testarossa

Posts: 952
Joined: 9/24/2004
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

I've had the same problem. Mogami told me that as my CV will get damaged I should move squadrons from damaged CVs to the CVs with Judies and everything will be fine.

_____________________________

Dr. Miller: I should've called the marines!
Dalton: They're few, they're proud... And they ain't here!!!

(in reply to Xargun)

Post #: 174

RE: What about EXP? - 1/14/2005 9:26:02 PM

Xargun

Posts: 3690
Joined: 2/14/2004
From: Near Columbus, Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: testarossa

I've had the same problem. Mogami told me that as my CV will get damaged I should move squadrons from damaged CVs to the CVs with Judies and everything will be fine.

That will work as well... but if they are all at 100% you are almost penalized by having the extra CV early. I will probably have the same problem soon, once my next acclerated CV appears. But by then 1.5 should be out and I can 'downgrade' the air groups and get a free starting pool of advanced aircraft to use somewhere special...

Xargun

(in reply to testarossa)

Post #: 175

RE: What about EXP? - 1/14/2005 10:14:11 PM

Mr.Frag

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

quote:

That will work as well... but if they are all at 100% you are almost penalized by having the extra CV early. I will probably have the same problem soon, once my next acclerated CV appears. But by then 1.5 should be out and I can 'downgrade' the air groups and get a free starting pool of advanced aircraft to use somewhere special...

We were discussing downgrading the aircraft in the OOB to deal with possible early arrivals like this to resolve this type of situation.

(in reply to Xargun)

Post #: 176

RE: Should changing the aircraft upgrade path cost Poli... - 1/16/2005 10:12:46 AM

dpstafford

Posts: 1910
Joined: 5/26/2002
From: Colbert Nation
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kid
I thought this was a good question.

No! But each time an air group's plane type is changed, it should cost every pilot in the group some EXPERIENCE. Whether the change is automatic or not, in or out of "historical" upgrade path. You know, the way it is in PACWAR.

I just hate it when people try to fix things that aren't broken (such as aircraft upgrades in PACWAR).

_____________________________

(in reply to siRkid)

Post #: 177

RE: What about EXP? - 1/16/2005 1:52:38 PM

doktorblood

Posts: 648
Joined: 2/14/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xargun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

2ACR had squadrons of Judy's on CVs by July 42. How much of a stretch is this and is it a sign of worse things to come.

Its possible. He accelerated a CV which comes equipped with them to arrive before the aircraft are actually available. You might want to cry foul and complain, but the trick is when he takes losses, he cannot replace them - he has no Judys to replace them with. Right now he would be completely screwed and the CV would probably never see battle until he can make good his losses.

Now with the new aircraft upgrade coming you will be able to 'downgrade' the Judys back into Vals (I think) that you can cover combat losses with - thus making the CV usable again.

Xargun

Of course there really were Judys that went down with the Soryu in 6/42 so I don't see that as so bad. The real crime is that WitP doesn't have them coming out until 11/43.

< Message edited by doktorblood -- 1/16/2005 4:57:20 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Xargun)

Post #: 178

RE: What about EXP? - 1/16/2005 5:07:50 PM

Iron Duke

Posts: 529
Joined: 1/7/2002
From: UK
Status: offline

hi,

Initial production (spring 1942) D4Y1 were unsuited for divebombing, wing flutter developed cracks in the wing spars, they became D4Y1-C carrier bourne recon a/c .
By March 1943 only 25 a/c had been built.
March 1943 the D4Y1 divebomber entered production with strengthened wing spars and improved dive brakes
Total production of D4Y(1),(2),(3) and (4)'s was 2,038

D4Y Judy's availability should be sometime around march/april 43

cheers

_____________________________

"Bombers outpacing fighters - you've got to bloody well laugh!" Australian Buffalo pilot - Singapore

(in reply to doktorblood)

Post #: 179

RE: What about EXP? - 1/16/2005 10:40:09 PM

Tanaka

Posts: 4378
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iron Duke

hi,

Initial production (spring 1942) D4Y1 were unsuited for divebombing, wing flutter developed cracks in the wing spars, they became D4Y1-C carrier bourne recon a/c .
By March 1943 only 25 a/c had been built.
March 1943 the D4Y1 divebomber entered production with strengthened wing spars and improved dive brakes
Total production of D4Y(1),(2),(3) and (4)'s was 2,038

D4Y Judy's availability should be sometime around march/april 43

cheers

maybe they should put this prototype scouting type into the game as a prototype group kind of like the prototype tojo group at canton in dec 41.

_____________________________