Mythbusting - AE Version

[vettim89]

Having finally decompressed from my last WiTP PBEM, I am considering moving forward with AE but really have the modding itch. Basically have some ideas I want to test out to create a different sort of mod. This will be somewhat like Da Babes but with some other little nuances to address issues that are important to me (everybody has their pet peeves). As I launch myself into this project I need some input. Reading numerous "the game is borked" thread has made me realize that some issues are not really game issues but player issues. I think some of this stems form incomplete understanding of the AE system vice the WiTP system. An example of this would be where Andy Mac showed that B-29's weren't borked but you did have to make sure you had the proper Air HQ, supplies, and Av support in place to make them work correctly


So I plan to start some threads here to just put out some of the ideas that I have read about. Goal is to 1. determine which issues are real versus perceived. 2. which issues are really based upon poor and/or excellant game play by the players involved and 3. determine which problems are hard coded vs database issues. As to item #3, I am also interested if some game code issue may be fixable by manipulating the database - in other words deliberate alter a device's values to make it game correctly even if the value seems out of whack with reality

Would really appreciate any comments. Also, would like to add that I am not necessarily looking for soultions but more interested in getting a list of problems to address

[vettim89]

Myth: Japanese a/c pruduction is too high

sub-myth: Japanese a/c production is irrelevant, it the pilot pool that is too big

[vettim89]

Myth: Pilot EXP and altitude are the only important variables in air combat

Maning superior pilots even if in inferior a/c will win esp if they have an altitude advantage

[vettim89]

Myth: its almost impossible for the Allies to defend China and they will be easily be pushed much further back than the histoircal model with even a modestly determined effort

[vettim89]

Myth: AAA is not effective enough and ship AAA ammo supplies deplete too easily

[vettim89]

Myth: the P-38 is borked. It is not possible to get historical combat results with this a/c even when other factors are in the Allies favor

[Alfred]

vettim89,

You are quite a sensible fellow, so I confident you won't find anything objectionable in what I say.

Personally, I can't recall a single instance of player complaint that something is "borked which is not simply explained (Oakem's Razor) by poor player play. There is always a counter move to every move made by an opponent. That is not to say that some tweeking is sometimes appropriate, (but that essentially involves coding changes to address the very few circumstances where there really is no available counter), something beyond the reach of a modder using the editor.

Regarding Japanese aircraft production. My suggestion would be to:

(a) make Allied on map aircraft production a much larger component of the total Allied aircraft production, and
(b) subject to how you implement (a), perhaps starting Allied aircraft factories damaged so that the expenditure of supplies (and time) woulod be necessary to ramp production up.

To get the full benefit of (b) you might have to locate some of the factories in non historical locations, in overseas countries where the importation of supply to ramp up production would be necessary.

Alfred

[vettim89]

Myth: Japanese ASW is too powerful/Allied ASW is too powerful/Japanese subs are too powerful/Allied subs are too powerful

Pick a topic in this mess

[castor troy]

cool, this thread is a real bomb [:D]

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

vettim89,

You are quite a sensible fellow, so I confident you won't find anything objectionable in what I say.

Personally, I can't recall a single instance of player complaint that something is "borked which is not simply explained (Oakem's Razor) by poor player play. There is always a counter move to every move made by an opponent. That is not to say that some tweeking is sometimes appropriate, (but that essentially involves coding changes to address the very few circumstances where there really is no available counter), something beyond the reach of a modder using the editor.

Regarding Japanese aircraft production. My suggestion would be to:

(a) make Allied on map aircraft production a much larger component of the total Allied aircraft production, and
(b) subject to how you implement (a), perhaps starting Allied aircraft factories damaged so that the expenditure of supplies (and time) woulod be necessary to ramp production up.

To get the full benefit of (b) you might have to locate some of the factories in non historical locations, in overseas countries where the importation of supply to ramp up production would be necessary.

Alfred

That is exactly what I am trying to get at Alfred. For example there was a long thread regarding B-29's being borked that had some steam until Andy Mac came along with combat reports showing that if the Allied player properly configures the Marianas bases, they work just fine. It is very diificult to discern what is truly a problem vs what is just game play related.

To pick one myth, have players truly found the problem that I have personally seen where a TF will shoot its entire bolt of AAA ammunition at a relatively small strike so as to not have any ammo for follow on strikes? I saw this in Andy Mac's Marianas Scenario. If this is a problem that many people are seeing than MAYBE it can be addressed.

Keep in mind, I do not necessarily buy into any or all or these myths. To be honest I doubt if many are real problems. That said, I find that if you don't ask questions you will not know for sure even if the answer seems obvious. In my profession, I also find that people recognize something is wrong but misidentify the probable cause.

So when the game doesn't play as expected there are a number of possible explanations:

1. The game is borked. Often the first thing people jump to because either it is the easiest answer or the real answer eludes them (i.e., I stink at this game)

2. The game mechanics are working properly but some nuances are being missed. With AE being so new, there likely is a lot of this. We were warned you cannot play AE like WiTP. Perhaps some of the "problems" are really just inexperience/failure to adapt

3. The games mechincs work per se but there is something that is way out of whack when compared to the historical model. "Sputnik Sweeps" come to mind. Some would say the system works fine but you have to see what is happening and adapt. Others would say - borked because it is so far out of the historical model.

4. The game mechanics are working but some minor database issues are causing the problem

So yes, I agree, most of the "problems" are related to #2. That said not all of them are and I am just trying to get a list started. My interest is in creating a mod ala what Big B was for WiTP. That mod did not offer all sorts of "goodies" for either side to play with but instead tried to tame the system to create more historical combat results. I may indeed call my mod the Dragonslayer Mod as its goal is to "tame the beast"

[wdolson]

The problem is that rarely do all players get the same results.  I've played the AI only, but the Chinese mopped the floor.  I've pretty much abandoned the game I started just before release, but the Chinese and British were half way down the Korean peninsula and had half of Manchuko in the bag.

I had a lot of problems with Allied ASW and Japanese uber subs until patch 2, but other developers who were playing were seeing Allied ASW sinking every Japanese sub in sight.  I still don't know for sure what they were doing differently.

My P-38 losses have been quite low and many P-38 squadrons have average experience pushing 80.  I have found with the P-38's service rating that you can't operate them continuously.  Flying them every day in large numbers will whittle down the flyable planes pretty quickly.  I took to using my P-38s as shock troops to knock down air defenses over heavily defended bases, then use other fighters to keep the air units at the enemy bases knocked down to manageable levels.

I think there is some degree of frustration from some players who try to use tricks learned in WitP and find they don't work as expected anymore.  The learning curve for this game is steep and the unlearning curve is pretty steep too.

Bill

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: vettim89

ORIGINAL: Alfred

vettim89,

You are quite a sensible fellow, so I confident you won't find anything objectionable in what I say.

Personally, I can't recall a single instance of player complaint that something is "borked which is not simply explained (Oakem's Razor) by poor player play. There is always a counter move to every move made by an opponent. That is not to say that some tweeking is sometimes appropriate, (but that essentially involves coding changes to address the very few circumstances where there really is no available counter), something beyond the reach of a modder using the editor.

Regarding Japanese aircraft production. My suggestion would be to:

(a) make Allied on map aircraft production a much larger component of the total Allied aircraft production, and
(b) subject to how you implement (a), perhaps starting Allied aircraft factories damaged so that the expenditure of supplies (and time) woulod be necessary to ramp production up.

To get the full benefit of (b) you might have to locate some of the factories in non historical locations, in overseas countries where the importation of supply to ramp up production would be necessary.

Alfred

That is exactly what I am trying to get at Alfred. For example there was a long thread regarding B-29's being borked that had some steam until Andy Mac came along with combat reports showing that if the Allied player properly configures the Marianas bases, they work just fine. It is very diificult to discern what is truly a problem vs what is just game play related.

To pick one myth, have players truly found the problem that I have personally seen where a TF will shoot its entire bolt of AAA ammunition at a relatively small strike so as to not have any ammo for follow on strikes? I saw this in Andy Mac's Marianas Scenario. If this is a problem that many people are seeing than MAYBE it can be addressed.

Keep in mind, I do not necessarily buy into any or all or these myths. To be honest I doubt if many are real problems. That said, I find that if you don't ask questions you will not know for sure even if the answer seems obvious. In my profession, I also find that people recognize something is wrong but misidentify the probable cause.

So when the game doesn't play as expected there are a number of possible explanations:

1. The game is borked. Often the first thing people jump to because either it is the easiest answer or the real answer eludes them (i.e., I stink at this game)

2. The game mechanics are working properly but some nuances are being missed. With AE being so new, there likely is a lot of this. We were warned you cannot play AE like WiTP. Perhaps some of the "problems" are really just inexperience/failure to adapt

3. The games mechincs work per se but there is something that is way out of whack when compared to the historical model. "Sputnik Sweeps" come to mind. Some would say the system works fine but you have to see what is happening and adapt. Others would say - borked because it is so far out of the historical model.

4. The game mechanics are working but some minor database issues are causing the problem

So yes, I agree, most of the "problems" are related to #2. That said not all of them are and I am just trying to get a list started. My interest is in creating a mod ala what Big B was for WiTP. That mod did not offer all sorts of "goodies" for either side to play with but instead tried to tame the system to create more historical combat results. I may indeed call my mod the Dragonslayer Mod as its goal is to "tame the beast"

Along the AA and Bombardment lines with ship's ammunition, Juan has done good work in changing this issue so it isn't so glaringly obvious. I liked it so much I had him implement it into my Reluctant Admiral Mod.

[vettim89]

John,

Can you capsulize what Juan did? Was it simply upping the ammo values a bit? BTW this would be an example of the game system working fine but maybe a DB value needs tweaked.

Thanks,

Tim

[John 3rd]

Check my Thread in this area. There is a long Posting where Juan mentions his changes. I know he raised the ammo a bit so ships wouldn't be nearly out of ammo after a bombardment and bumped the AA totals some as well. Also fixed the SS so they fire their Torps by pairs instead of a full salvo or nothing. Some of this is detailed in the RA Feedback Thread.

[topeverest]

Here are two more observations...but please dont think these comments infer any major issue with the game.

Subs have a very high target acquisition rate. In my view the probability of making contact in a 1600 sq mile hex is significnatly less than the 60-70% contact rates I experience. Said another way, 2 of three chances that an attack will be attempted.

Subs can park themselves in any port not covered by mines in the first six months of the war. It is very difficult to sink one during those times. ASW will not be effective in most cases no matter the effort during that time frame.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: topeverest
Here are two more observations...but please dont think these comments infer any major issue with the game.

Subs have a very high target acquisition rate. In my view the probability of making contact in a 1600 sq mile hex is significnatly less than the 60-70% contact rates I experience. Said another way, 2 of three chances that an attack will be attempted.

Target acquisition is a function of detection. DT is a single algorithm, but with a bunch of branches depending on combat type. There's no methodology by which to adapt DT in accord with ship type. Would have been nice, but would have taken time and a lot more work.

Subs can park themselves in any port not covered by mines in the first six months of the war. It is very difficult to sink one during those times. ASW will not be effective in most cases no matter the effort during that time frame.

Perhaps. Don't quite agree with your conclusions, though.

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: vettim89
Myth: Japanese a/c pruduction is too high

sub-myth: Japanese a/c production is irrelevant, it the pilot pool that is too big

No to both.
I think this depends on too many other factors that differ from one PBEM
to another. Calculating total production output by most players to historical production
reveals that in fact the in-game production is often lower than it was in WWII.

- The Allied players that neglect attriting the Japanese while still in a position of
inferiority complain most about Japanese AC production levels. You have to constantly
inflict losses on the IJ airforce to prevent the buildup of pools that stack
until late war.

- The Japanese players that seem to have too many planes available are those, that are
not forced into an attrition airwar, or have developed methods that prevent attrition.
This always comes at a cost, the target of the Allied player has to be to increase that
cost.

Sub-myth: No, or at least only neglectable so, if the Allied player handles pilot training the
same way as the Japanese player (whether that is neglecting or concentrating on pilot training
depends on the agreed style of play)

Style of play has a great impact on this topic as it should be.

Myth: Pilot EXP and altitude are the only important variables in air combat

Maning superior pilots even if in inferior a/c will win esp if they have an altitude advantage

No. Best classic example is Nates being shot out of the sky by much less experienced P40 drivers.
Altitude advantage is a factor as it is in RL, as well as pilot experience. There are enough ways
to counter both. IMO this is balanced as it should be.
This is not to say that pilot exp is not an important attribute. One of the most important
to be more precise...

Myth: its almost impossible for the Allies to defend China and they will be easily be pushed much further back than the histoircal model with even a modestly determined effort

True with the first versions of the game. We still haven´t got enough recent patch AAR´s running
to evaluate if this is now balanced the way it should be. We´ll see...

Myth: AAA is not effective enough and ship AAA ammo supplies deplete too easily

Well currently the general opinion on this seems to be that Japanese AAA is too effective
compared to Allied AAA and this could be related to a bug in the pre-CAP phase but not
enough data yet to confirm. Still when I look at the late war AAR´s it doesn´t seem to stop many Allied
players.

AAA supplies are just right. I don´t think a ship under attack by more than 1-2 alpha strikes
should have much ammo left. The combat replays of large strikes represent air attacks that cover timespans resembling 1-2 hours of continous air attack.

Myth: the P-38 is borked. It is not possible to get historical combat results with this a/c even when other factors are in the Allies favor

Partly related to myth #1 and myth #2. Just because the P38 (which is a great fighter in-game
and was in the pacific theatre) does not rake up kills against a well defended target this
does not make this the class A explanation as one might think.
The kill/loss ratios of some Allied fighters where the direct or indirect result of many
factors (the decline of the IJ airforce as a whole, careful selection of targets, use
of tactical superiority in numbers,...)
Every plane type has its use. As a Japanese player I wish for something even remotely as good
as a P38 when they first show up.
What the P38 was NOT: It was not an fighter with great climb, it was not suited for dogfights
(which it gets forced into when encountering superior numbers of well trained nimble Japanese
planes).

Myth: Japanese ASW is too powerful/Allied ASW is too powerful/Japanese subs are too powerful/Allied subs are too powerful

JWE already said it better than I could.
ASW is heavily dependent on DL of the sub. As it was in RL. A spotted sub´s effectiveness
is lowered a great deal. ASW + hunter/killer groups + escorts and you are fine.
Noone said it should be easy.


Just my two c´s. [;)]