John 3rd vs Canoerebel: HR Discussion

[John 3rd]

I've started my AAR.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Lots of good choices there. I won't weigh in, other than to say I'll pick something totally different. It won't matter. After a short time, people who want to read either will know where to find them no matter what titles we choose.

I'm still mulling over the AAR format. I am tempted to try something different, but I keep having this nagging fear that it will take too much time and that I'll regret it if I try it. So I dunno yet.

I've found as a newbie that the AAR can take a lot of time, yes. I get some of my creative itching scratched there though, so it's keeping me from starting to write another novel, for which the world is grateful.[:)]

I see some amazing formats in the AAR section. Obvert's jumps out at me as a great use of color and sectionizing to organize. I wonder if he's a graphic artist or tech writer in RL? I personally don't like the "fictionalizing" formats where each day is part of a serialized narrative. Many do like those, however.

As I finish my first month I still struggle with getting too micro as well as the balance between reporting and predicting and explaining. In part I'm trying to keep a record for my opponent to read someday since he requested that in order to put his side-by-side with mine as a learning tool. I continue to wonder if I can keep up the volume over 1500 turns though.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Do you have any thoughts?

Hmmm..."Yellow Peril meets Yellow Journalism"?

or

"Back country barrister beatdown"?

or

"Kayak Johnie reluctantly falls again"?

or

"Southern fried Samurai"?

[:)]

Well, on the back country theme there is always "Deliverance" [;)]

[Canoerebel]

I agree with Bullwinkle. We are a small minority in not being big fans of fictionalized AARs. So why am I contemplating a fictionalized AAR? I don't know. Writing fiction takes a tremendous amount of research, unless you make up an entirely new world ala Tolkien. I'm not sure I have the time. I'm not sure I have the ability. And I'm afraid I'll start it and then I'll regret it very soon. So I'm sifting and sorting and weighing my thoughts carefully. In the meantime, I have written the first entry. I'll let it sit a day or so. If I still like it then, we'll see.

[FatR]

John and I haven't gone any further than to discuss the possibility "in general." We haven't done anything like discuss house rules or settings. I'm inclined to tell him all settings in favor of Japan (PDU On, Realistic R&D Off, etc.) with one concession to the Allies: historical torps off. I don't think this gives the Allies a huge advantage, at least the way I use subs, but it helps when you know the subs aren't entirely useless early in the war.

PDU ON, Realistic R&D OFF in exchange for good torps early on? I think that might be relatively balanced, but the balance will come from mutually breaking an aspect of the game in half. Good torps in 1942-43, when Japanese ASW is extremely weak is huge. So is ability to field A7M3s and similar on about 1/44.

Just in case, I'm personally more in favor of setting a HR limit on plane acceleration instead. It is annoying for me as a Japanese player, but otherwise there is just too much temptation (and ability) to accelerate key planes ridiculously.

[FatR]

The best way is don't waste any time on that. There are counter-measures for the defender, and in cases where the counter-measures don't work well it's just a reasonable analog of reality. That approach is working well for Andav and I, and for four of us in a 2x2.

I wholeheartedly agree. I feel that (A)the issue of stratosweeps is overrated in general (B)interplay between the altitude bands pretty well reflect reality, as long as you ignore precise numbers of those bands. I prefer no HRs about altitude. And if anything about it needs HRs, it is stratokamikazes and 1k-altitude torpedo/skip raids (reliably drop range of detection to 40km). Although even that can be dealt with.