Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
ORIGINAL: Lemurs!
I think this scenario editor is quite well built. If I were to ask for one piece of added functionality it would be a button that upgrades all ships or airgroups to their coresponding class values.
I hate modding an american destroyer class and then having to mod 67 individual ships as well.
ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
I am mildly surprised to hear you arguing the points that you have made in this thread. You are hereby reclassified to "Member: Axis Booster Club" status.
While I happen to be a Axis Fanboy, I prefer to win on my own with the crap that was available, not double the forces at the disposal. It just doesn't sit well with me that we are simply glossing over the completely well known reality of Japan's aircraft production numbers and their massive problems making anything of quality.
There was a reason they couldn't make a thousand A8M's ... and it had nothing to do with the state of their factories from Allied bombing (which was shown after the war to be largely ineffective - based on the USAAF post war studies).
Japan simply did not have the skilled manpower, the production abilities, the raw goods, and so on and so on.
They fielded what they could based on what they had. We have a grossly simplified model and people are neglecting the reality completely and saying lets just add this little interface toggle to let me do this because they are hung up on the interface mechanics of the game which has absolutely nothing to do with reality.
If you want to go down this path, fine, I have no issue with it BUT I expect it to be done *right* with all the *real* inhibiters that *REALY* controlled Japan's outcome, not some little box that lets you pick any aircraft there was and just start researching it and magically get it before any of the preceeding aircraft that made it possible have been created.
Half of Japan's aircraft are not even real aircraft, they are a future aircraft with a past aircraft engine because thats all there was available. These threads completely gloss over reality and are hung up on a silly picklist. Unless that level of simulation is available to make half aircraft (which most of the aircraft past '42 are), then this becomes so gamey it is embarrassing.
It's like saying that Germany *knowing* the Panther was the best tank didn't make any other and went straight there instead of wasting time.
ORIGINAL: mdiehl
Is that Croatian thingie an ex Texas-class or something? And forgive me for not recognizing those things sticking out .. are they torpedo net spars or just -- well, since it is the Croatian navy... err, hmmm, oars? [;)]
ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
These must be holders for anti torpedo netting. Though the practice of using anti torpedo nets on ships themselves (as opposed to having nets as part of harbor defense) was abandoned by many navies by mid-WW1, many ships retained the "poles" for anti torpedo nets even after that.
When travelling, whole "contraption" (poles, net and all) was lined alongside ships hull, well trained crew was able to extend the "poles" and lower the netting in a matter of 10-20 seconds.
Apparently nets proved unable to stop the torpedo and were thought as ineffective way to stop the torpedo based on experience from Russo-Japanese war. Then there was possibility of fouling the screw with the net etc.
The market is overwhelminingly clammouring for #2.
I'd trather not even have research, just the ability to modifey production numbers once the aircraft was in an active squadron.ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
If you want to go down this path, fine, I have no issue with it BUT I expect it to be done *right* with all the *real* inhibiters that *REALY* controlled Japan's outcome, not some little box that lets you pick any aircraft there was and just start researching it and magically get it before any of the preceeding aircraft that made it possible have been created.
What aircraft (aside from the A6M8, Shinden, and the Reppu) are "not even real aircraft"?ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Half of Japan's aircraft are not even real aircraft, they are a future aircraft with a past aircraft engine because thats all there was available. These threads completely gloss over reality and are hung up on a silly picklist. Unless that level of simulation is available to make half aircraft (which most of the aircraft past '42 are), then this becomes so gamey it is embarrassing.
ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
The market is overwhelminingly clammouring for #2.
How does 5 or so people constitute the market?
If 100+ people were saying to hell with history, I want this you might have a slightly better point.
Of the people that have enough concern over the issue to post to this thread on it, the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY, want #2.
While I happen to be a Axis Fanboy, I prefer to win on my own with the crap that was available, not double the forces at the disposal. It just doesn't sit well with me that we are simply glossing over the completely well known reality of Japan's aircraft production numbers and their massive problems making anything of quality
I'm sorry, but that post takes you off even the booster club membership list and puts you on the "Axis Fanboy: Do not call" list.
All that being said, the designers did 2 things that run counter to everything you have just said.
1) They specced out later models with exaggerated specs making the equal, if not BETTER than Allied a/c.
2) They gave us the freedom to alter production SUBSTANTIALLY from historical reality.
So SOMEONE on the design team fundementally disagrees with you.
BUT, the also gave us fixed upgrade paths, that in many cases dead-end on some pretty bad models. So someone else on the design team must agree with you.
It's like 2x3 could figure out which way they really wanted to go either. So what's the answer?
1) Make the Japanese production system like the Allied system. Out of reach of human intervention. Enforces your view of the game.
2) Make upgrade paths user configurable inside the game and give the allies the same system. Enforces the "Warcraft" view of the game.
So which choice to make? Well, for that, they go back to the market. The market is overwhelminingly clammouring for #2. IF it is technically feasable to do so, they should do #2, because that's what the users want. For those that don't want that, make houserules. If NOT technically feasible, then go with #1 and at least be consistant in design philosophy....
ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Of the people that have enough concern over the issue to post to this thread on it, the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY, want #2.
[:D]
2 out of 100,000 people responded to our survey and stated that they prefered Coke over Pepsie. I guess it's ok to infer that the other 99,998 folks must love Coke too.
[8|]
If you are letting the Japanese player modify production and industry, it was already said to hell with history.
The other 4993 are IRRELEVENT because they don't care one way or the other.
ORIGINAL: Arnir
Or perhaps the other 4993 don't want to get into what is considered to be a fruitless debate. Some of us might be waiting until it appears that the debate might have a purpose.
Of course, if the "silent majority" never speaks up then they will become the "irrelevant majority." I would imagine that if Matrix/2by3 publicly announces their willingness to consider changing the issue, more players will become involved.
