The reason I chose to play the Allied side was spelt out beforehand, more than once. My reasoning fit nicely into the stated purpose of the test: to see if the model were capable of rendering historic results from historic play.TIMJOT wrote:Good, the whole premise of the test was back *** backward from the get go. Now why don't you take up Mogami's offer and play the IJN side. Then no one can accuse you of incompetant game play. Its the only way anyone is going to believe each side is playing optimally and is a far better way to prove your point.
Frankly your reasons for refuseing Mogami's offer strikes me rather duplicitious. You state concerns that Mogami will utilize game play tricks on the allied side to somehow negate the supposed IJN bias. Yet you feel your own game play should somehow be beyond reproach. I am sorry but haveing your transport TF escorted by nothing more than a handful of MSW and SCs is a little more than suspicious. Maybe you can enlighten me on this particular strategy.
I knew perfectly well Mogami would not play historically but rather try to use every trick in the book to maximize benefit from the many holes in the game system.
To wit, his claim that I was trying to "throw the game" by not including warships in my transport TF.
This has already been argued and resolved in this forum, and not so long ago. It was agreed that this sort of "gamey" approach was nothing more than a workaround to a inadequately-designed game mechanic for TFs with regard to combat.
Historic usage of Allied naval assets for Watchtower would not include any such gamey approach. That the reality of the game system happens to be such that similar workarounds have become popular in certain player quarters is not an issue I'm here to argue. This popularity for gamey play does, however, always surely point to various problems with any given model, these being serious problems of inherent nature with re to UV.
So, in the belief that repetition sometimes works, let's take that from the top again:
[indent]1) The stated purpose of the Scenario #14 test was to determine through the course of historic play (i.e., to move the pieces around the same way commanders did in real life) if the model could or could not render reasonably historic results.
2) I chose to play the Allied side because I knew I was the only player who would ensure such historic usage was realized by the Allies at least, knew perfectly that Mogami would not so comply.
[/indent]Now I have to wonder why it is necessary to have to come back and labor once again over this seemingly simple point, and to the tune of fielding such an idiotic and rude post as I've fielded from you into the bargain.
The answer?
Equally simple, I'm afraid.
You're in denial, you're not given to reading for content but rather are given to reading instead what you care to believe has been written--big difference there, of course--and your capacity for retaining whatever you might have read for content, that is to say accuracy, is not apparently all that large.
I also believe you've yet to buy into the ideal of "fairness" and never wanted to determine whether or not the UV model is "accurate" or no; but you rather did wish to engage in some sort of pointless TJ bash and root good ol' Mogami on as he resorted to one outlandishly gamey move after the next to "win" the game (game mind you, for the case is for Mogami this never was a "test" but only a chance to "put TJ in his place" and Mogami imagined this would be a snap through the simple means of "squashing you like a bug") and keep his crown as the best UV player ever to stroll down the pike.
Finally, you're one of those people who likes to rub elbows and no doubt in the back of your mind harbors the fervent hope and giddy belief that one day Kid will choose you to be on the WitP playtest team. And then you'll have "made it."
That in a nutshell is where you've always come from, that's where you're coming from today, and as these sentiments are shared by more than one in this forum that must be then more or less why this game system is fouled and not likely to get much better soon.
After two years of brilliant, concise, patient argument by Mdiehl this forum is still not convinced the "Zero" was not an inherently better aircraft than anything the Allies had in 1942, and for all I know these same people would argue just as strongly that the "Zero" beat the pants off the Hellcat as well, only problem there being that by that time of the war all those "brilliant Japanese pilots" had been (somehow) killed by those inferior Allied pilots flying their inferior Allied planes.
Or something like that.
However this group's convoluted argument actually runs inside its dark head the primary point to note is that no amount of good sense or reason suffices to sway this forum as a collective body from the misdirection it wants to pursue. Unfortunately, this forum's business is primarily about the clubby atmosphere, the use of shouts, intimidation and ridicule in lieu of reasoned argument, the penchant to write whatever happens to please the writer with no special regard paid to "truth" or useful meaning.
If you want to know, this forum is not wholly dissimilar to a school playground populated with children out of the fourth grade on recess.
So, please continue apace, TIMJOT, and be part of the general problem in this forum, continue to be part and parcel of a wargame project which gives every indication at this juncture of ultimately arriving in similar shape and with similar problems as did UV.
As always, I wish you well.
The old Mdiehl would never have done that. It's a good sign.