Attention Matrix Staff: Aircraft Upgrades

[shoevarek]

There are two elements that currently underachieve in the game (sorry three counting AI) - production and R&D. The main reason is inconsistency. I don't think the design has been thought through thoroughly. It seems as developers were waving between two goals - achieving 'historic accuracy' or giving player 'freedom of choice'. They fullfilled none.

On one hand we have production system that requires a lot of attention from the player but gives him the freedom of choice. On the other we have hardcoded 'historic' upgrades paths and very inflexible R&D. I know the effort but I don't see the reward. They should either stick to 'historic accuracy' (then entire system should be reworked possibly by freeing the player from this burden) or give the player the 'freedom of choice' (in this case paths and R&D should be flexible). Of cause the latter is more appealing to me and in my opinion would result in much better playing experience.

Why do I think the 'freedom of choice' is better option? Because 'historic accuracy' understood in the way some forum members and developers seems to understand can't be successfully implemented in a game, a simulation. We can destroy entire US CV fleet near Midway (Is it historic?) but can't rearm the air group with the planes we have in abundance (because during the war the group XY used plane Z). We can conquer China but can't alter pilots training (because Japanese suck). We can land in PH and probably even take it but can't speed up aircraft development (because Japanese suck even much more). We can even do nothing at all just hunt for the ships till there is fuel in the tanks but can't build new ships. Going this way the game should end in 1946 with a screen 'Sorry you lost the war' even though your Japanese troups are camping in Washington.

Ok I went to the extreem but sometimes I have the feeling I play Steel Panthers where your Tigers could kill thousands of Allied tanks and win all battles yet you always lost the war. It was OK for that game but here we have in our hands all the war fronts. If somebody is really good He should be able to win the war even as Japanese (especially against the AI). It should be possible to start production of some aircrafts much earlier than it happened in real life. The logistic part of the game really puts all needed constraints to disallow some gamey or unrealistic tactics (superbombers are very maintenance expensive, changing factories is time consuming etc.). It takes a lot of time and effort to organize things, provide the resources, manage the war with hampered production capability during the research process. This huge effort should be rewarded in some way.

[2ndACR]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Whoa... excuse me for writing what's most probably stupidest post in this thread but I must ask - what did you guys got so worked about? I tried to get to the core of the problem, but due to the amount of posts I obviously failed, and at least some of the people I respect care about this a great deal, so it must be something important [:D]

So, would someone please recap the issue for me and other late comers?

What's the "meat" of the problem you discuss here:

- Is it the fact there are s*it squadrons in the game, that cannot be upgraded AT ALL (I think I've seen some).

- Is it the fact that we can research and produce Good Aircraft (tm), say Frank, and have it stockpiled in hundereds, and our squadrons are still fyling Bad Aircraft (tm), say Nate or Oscar, and we can't upgrade because we didn't reach some historic date that is hard-coded in the scenario (and/or game)?

- Or is the problem something completely different from above and I missed the point completely?

Thank you. [&o]

Oleg

Sorry guys, it is about number 1 and 2 on your list. We kinda got side tracked a couple times. Those of us who have played and loved GG's Bombing the Reich were kind of wishing and praying for it's level of control of production and research and development.
If you have ever played BTR then you know what we are talking about. If you have not, then it will get kind of confusing. I glossed over it about 10 posts up.

[Caltone]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Nobody cares what you can do in user scenarios because you can do whatever you want. The whole aircraft choice "type" discussion has been around for as long as the game has been being built. If you guys seriously think that not a single member of the team didn't ask for this particular feature a million times over, I'm laughing at you.

2BY3 would not budge on the issue at all. If this is a game killer for you, pack up and move on. It's not going to change, it never was in the plan, it was stated a million times over that it was not in the game nor will it.

As far as why, there are many reasons. None of them have *anything* at all to do with coding a simple pick list. They all have to do with a historical game.

The concept of picking something because it is better completely goes against the concept of historical war games. The goal of a historic game is to make you deal with the crap they had, not replace the crap with great stuff. There is always something better, but you don't get it until after the fact. Thats how wars are fought. You can't sit back and wait until you have the perfect widget and then you go beat the other guy. It doesn't work that way.

The war in the pacific theater was not about who had the best widget, it was about a tiny upstart trying to take on the world and getting stomped on once the sleeping giant woke up. Most of this churn is from people who have not played enough of the game to understand just how depressing it is. I suggest you play the 1945 campaign AS japan for a bit and learn that even the best there is will be completely useless in the numbers there are available. You can't change this. Japan looses.

The fun is in playing the game along the way and being able to say that you took the crap you had and did better or worse then history.

This is one of your better post's Frag [;)]

It sounds like people can use the editor to accomplish most of what they want in this thread. The only piece I see missing from that are the ones who want to change upgrade paths on the fly.

From Frag's comments we can see this was not the game 2by3 intended. As it is their game, it didn't make it as a feature.

Since it is unlikely they will change their mind on this, the only suggestion is to work with the editor and perhaps hope for a saved game editor later.

[MadDawg]

My only real concern with the current upgrade paths is that, unless I am mistaken, there is currently no way for Kamikazi groups to use older aircraft for their missions as they did *historically*.

The result is that you have to use your best aircraft on these missions instead of the 100's of old airframes you have mothballed. Hopefully there is something the developers can so on this one issue, for instance maybe when you convert a group to Kamikazi maybe they could them 'upgrade' to an out of use airframe that you have large amounts of in reserve.

Dawg

[Mr.Frag]

ORIGINAL: MadDawg

My only real concern with the current upgrade paths is that, unless I am mistaken, there is currently no way for Kamikazi groups to use older aircraft for their missions as they did *historically*.

The result is that you have to use your best aircraft on these missions instead of the 100's of old airframes you have mothballed. Hopefully there is something the developers can so on this one issue, for instance maybe when you convert a group to Kamikazi maybe they could them 'upgrade' to an out of use airframe that you have large amounts of in reserve.

Dawg

Not true ... you are presuming that you will have *all* your aircraft replaced in '44/'45 when this becomes an issue. The reality is far different. Any airgroup you have can be set to that mission type. You pick what groups you want to convert. Nothing stopping you from picking your worst crap for the job. The limit is purely you can convert 1 unit per day.

[MadDawg]

Yup, true, but they wont necessaryily be in the right place at the right time (Id guess they would be mainly in China) and requires a lot of fiddling around for something which should be quite simple. I cant imagine the Japanese high command in WW2 had to do such things in order to use older aircraft for this purpose, and as this is a computer game the process should be simplier than reality. [:)]

As Kamikazi groups cant be converted back I see no harm in allowing them to convert to older aircraft, even if the system simply sent them back to the beginning of the production run (late model bettys could convert to Nells for example). Not perfect but easy enough to do.

Dawg

[Culiacan Mexico]

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng
And that sums up the whole problem for the Japanese player. This is the single most important point: the a/c upgrade paths enforce the war's history on the game when the game may not match the history…

Well said.

After turn one, both player are going to behave in an “a historical manner”. Keeping the “historical feel” is great, but trying to force history is less so. IMO

[Culiacan Mexico]

ORIGINAL: GoofTrooper
There are at least 2 threads on the topic of aircraft upgrades and I thought I'd drop my 2 cents in. Many players are complaining that the game should allow more flexibility in A/C upgrade paths. I would be interested to see any evidence that would suggest some of this was even possible for IJN...

My apologies, as you ask about the IJN and I will comment on the Army where I feel the major problems are.

Specifically, some groups flying Nate are allowed to upgrade to Tony or Tojo and some are not, and at least three of these groups are under restricted headquarters. I know that historically, these Nate groups were chosen to upgrade to Tony/Tojo while other Nate took the Oscar upgrade path. I don’t know exactly what political considerations were taken into account at the time.

I understand that my knowledge of which aircraft is the best is based on information that was not available at the time, so while I would like to have all my groups abandon the Oscar upgrade path that would be not keeping with the historical feel of the game. Yet shouldn’t I be allowed to at least choose which of the six or seven groups upgrade to “good aircraft” based on the military situation in the game at that point? I am allowed to stop or speed up the construction of ships based on my strategy and the military situation, why shouldn’t I be allowed to choice the specific groups to upgrade to Tony’s based on the military situation?

I don’t want unlimited upgrades; and hopefully my post doesn’t come across that way.

[Culiacan Mexico]

ORIGINAL: Black Cat

Should the Allies get the same abilities that you guys want for the Japanese ?

The ability to research and produce the best available AC and introduce them through upgrades into the Air Groups when the player wants ?


If not, why not ?

[8D]

[Culiacan Mexico]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Sorry guys, but I must be missing something here.

IJA planes upgrade to IJA planes

What exactly is the problem? You want to completely cross lines?

Please highlight the problem, I'm not arguing just to be difficult here, I just don't see what you are complaining about being broken.

Some Nate groups can upgrade to Tony’s/Tojo and some go to Oscars. I want my few 1942 Tony/Tojo equipped groups in Burma/SW Pacific not in China or facing Russia. Allow me to decide which Nate Groups upgrade to Tony instead of forcing me to find which groups will upgrade this path and moving them.

[Culiacan Mexico]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
2BY3 would not budge on the issue at all.

Fair enough. [:)]

[Spooky]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Nobody cares what you can do in user scenarios because you can do whatever you want. The whole aircraft choice "type" discussion has been around for as long as the game has been being built. If you guys seriously think that not a single member of the team didn't ask for this particular feature a million times over, I'm laughing at you.

2BY3 would not budge on the issue at all. If this is a game killer for you, pack up and move on. It's not going to change, it never was in the plan, it was stated a million times over that it was not in the game nor will it.

OK - what I would like is an official statement from a 2by3 or a Matrix representative on this "on the fly" aircraft upgrade issue. As Mr Frag says, I have to know if I have to pack up and move on ...

[Banquet]

I've never played the Japanese so have avoided commenting here up till now.. however, I would like to say I do find it strange that you can produce aircraft but then are not able to equip your choice of squadrons with them.

I understand you can change the upgrade path in the editor which, to an extent, will alleviate the problem. But, how will you know, at the beginning of the war, which upgrades you might need 2 years down the line?

In playing the game (and in the real war too) there was every chance the Japanese could have won Midway (or, in game, it might never happen) This would have given maybe another year of expansion/fortifying.. and presumbly more resources.

By my way of thinking if, by early 43, if things are going well, and the game allows me to produce better aircraft, in more numbers, than historically were produced, then by default I should be able to equip my squadrons with them.

I'd be quite happy for limitations of pp's or enforced 100% training for certain time spans.

It seems that the Japanese are hamstrung by the 'real war' results before the 'game war' has even started when it come's to aircraft production.

I understand the Allies have no choice at all, but considering they are also operating in other theatre's and that they have other immense advantages (re-inforcement wise) I'm quite happy for the the Allied system to remain as it is.

Apologies if I'm missing the point. I'm going to start a game as the Japanese to get a feel for the game as it's probably unfair for me to comment without having played them!

[Captain Cruft]

Phew! What a thread ...

I never played BTR but I agree with the "BTR crowd". What is the point of having a tweakable production system if you can't use the results of your tweaking? Seems simple enough to me.

[steveh11Matrix]

OK, outsider's perspective here - I'm a prospective, not current, player of WitP.

What on earth is the point of allowing the Japanese player control of his production without allowing him control of deployment of the fruits of that production?

I can't see this as a game-breaker on it's own but if it's symptomatic I may well think twice about buying WitP.

For example:

• Can I build more Yamato's? Or, can I complete Shinano as a BB? Can I build more Escort ships instead? (Oh, yes please!)
• Can I build/recruit more infantry at an earlier stage? If so, will this have an effect on my industrial capacity?

Steve.

[Kizsam]

ORIGINAL: Banquet

In playing the game (and in the real war too) there was every chance the Japanese could have won Midway (or, in game, it might never happen) This would have given maybe another year of expansion/fortifying.. and presumbly more resources.

By my way of thinking if, by early 43, if things are going well, and the game allows me to produce better aircraft, in more numbers, than historically were produced, then by default I should be able to equip my squadrons with them.

It seems that the Japanese are hamstrung by the 'real war' results before the 'game war' has even started when it come's to aircraft production.

I agree with this 100%.

[Andy Mac]

I agree with the above and would like some flexibilty.

I dont care if its PP limited or training limited but I would like some flexibility even if its just for PBEM games.

For me it is the only flaw in a wonderful game.

Andy

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Caltone

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Nobody cares what you can do in user scenarios because you can do whatever you want. The whole aircraft choice "type" discussion has been around for as long as the game has been being built. If you guys seriously think that not a single member of the team didn't ask for this particular feature a million times over, I'm laughing at you.

2BY3 would not budge on the issue at all. If this is a game killer for you, pack up and move on. It's not going to change, it never was in the plan, it was stated a million times over that it was not in the game nor will it.

As far as why, there are many reasons. None of them have *anything* at all to do with coding a simple pick list. They all have to do with a historical game.

The concept of picking something because it is better completely goes against the concept of historical war games. The goal of a historic game is to make you deal with the crap they had, not replace the crap with great stuff. There is always something better, but you don't get it until after the fact. Thats how wars are fought. You can't sit back and wait until you have the perfect widget and then you go beat the other guy. It doesn't work that way.

The war in the pacific theater was not about who had the best widget, it was about a tiny upstart trying to take on the world and getting stomped on once the sleeping giant woke up. Most of this churn is from people who have not played enough of the game to understand just how depressing it is. I suggest you play the 1945 campaign AS japan for a bit and learn that even the best there is will be completely useless in the numbers there are available. You can't change this. Japan looses.

The fun is in playing the game along the way and being able to say that you took the crap you had and did better or worse then history.

This is one of your better post's Frag [;)]

It sounds like people can use the editor to accomplish most of what they want in this thread. The only piece I see missing from that are the ones who want to change upgrade paths on the fly.

From Frag's comments we can see this was not the game 2by3 intended. As it is their game, it didn't make it as a feature.

Since it is unlikely they will change their mind on this, the only suggestion is to work with the editor and perhaps hope for a saved game editor later.

Yea, I think this pretty much sums it all up, nicely. I don't think we will see "on-the-fly" upgrade path changes....just have to give it our best guess in the editors...

[joliverlay]

Mr. Frag:

I am completely puzzeled by your post:

Nobody cares.......etc

and especially your explanations there and elsewhere regarding the aircraft upgrades. I don't disagree with your companies right to make whatever game you design (and take the consequences if it does not please your customers). I like the game, and will play it, for years perhaps. What I am bother buy is the explanation that you give. There is no reason historical, gamewise or other that the Japanese could not have upgraded an additional squadron of Oscars to Tonys of Franks if they had produced the planes. If they are able in the game to produce more of one type of fighter than they did historically it is not NON-Historical to allow them to use them. I would agree that if you could make a lot of them, perhaps the production system was broken, but thats another matter. {Are you restricting use of these aircraft because the production system IS broken?}

Speaking of history.....the Japanese restarted construction of OLD obsolete aircraft for use in Kamakazi attacks. Can you downgrade the equipment on squadrons as the Japanese actually did in this game? If not, I am really puzzeled by your arguments about how unhistorical it would be for one or two more Oscar squadrons to upgrade to Tonys or something else.

Finally, the argument that the system is there only to give the allies something to bomb. That is somewhat strange. Whether or not extra Tonys can be used in an Oscar squadron has nothing to do with bombing the Japanese aircraft industry to dust. You can do that no matter what they produce. If the question is one of alloys or rare materials, I don't know why that is not handled as it was in BTR, simply making some planes more expensive to build (or actually inhibiting their production by making large numbers harder to produce than small.)

What I'm saying is that your arguments don't seem to make sense to me. Please give us the "real" reason behind this decision if there is one.

[Captain Cruft]

Possibly the most useful thing that could happen here is that Mr Frag (or other "staff representative") formally present this thread to "The Devs" in the form of a "petition". Having been thus addressed "The Devs" can then formally say No (or Yes) and that would be end of story.

One minor point I might add to the discussion. Earlier on Frag expressed the idea, and I paraphrase, "you don't want to turn the game into an RTS". Well, I would argue that it is precisely the RTS-like "building stuff" features of the game that make it attractive to many people. If a thing was practically possible in reality then it should be possible in the game. If that same thing was politically impossible or just extremely difficult then that should be reflected in the PP cost of the action.