Proposal for CHS - Remove the Zero bonus. Any opinions?

[Oznoyng]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

If there was a rule that accumulated base VP each month instead of the way it is handled now

This was proposed but did not meet with much support.[8|]

Another example of how Jap fan boys are having too much effect on the game... [8|]

[Demosthenes]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Why do Kamikaze pilots wear helmets? [:D]

Huh, go figure?[8|][:D]

[Oznoyng]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

First of all, the "flavor" of the first six months of the war was the perception that Japan was invincible and could take what they wanted, since they were not thwarted much until Coral Sea.

That is incorrect. Or rather, incomplete. The flavor to the Japanese was "we can take anything we want." The flavor to the USN was, "At the right moment we're gonna burn these guys." Both flavors produced a particularly satisfying dessert called "The Battle of Midway" in which the Japanese contributino to the flavor was the ice cream and the USN contribution was the hot fudge, whipped cream, a cherry on top, and a party for the occasion.

Yep, at the right moment... a month after the Zero bonus disappears in game.

[mdiehl]

Yep, at the right moment... a month after the Zero bonus disappears in game.

There is no substantive factual basis for the Zero bonus to be in the game at any time during the period covered by the simulation. Not against the USN anyhow. Maybe not against any Allied pilot other than Hurricane pilots.

Had the IJN execued the Midway plan on 8 December 1941, and had the USN executed its defense in the same way with the same foreknowledge etc on 8 December 1941, the Japanese would have suffered the same severe beating.

[Oznoyng]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

Yep, at the right moment... a month after the Zero bonus disappears in game.

There is no substantive factual basis for the Zero bonus to be in the game at any time during the period covered by the simulation. Not against the USN anyhow. Maybe not against any Allied pilot other than Hurricane pilots.

Had the IJN execued the Midway plan on 8 December 1941, and had the USN executed its defense in the same way with the same foreknowledge etc on 8 December 1941, the Japanese would have suffered the same severe beating.

On one hand you claim that by August of 42 all Allied pilots knew the no-no's of fighting the Zero, on the other you claim that lacking that knowledge in December of 41, they would have performed identically to June of 42. If you can't see the illogic in that statement, then there is nothing that we have to talk about. You have your opinion, I have mine. As the saying goes, everyone has one. I'm going to leave it at that.

[mdiehl]

On one hand you claim that by August of 42 all Allied pilots knew the no-no's of fighting the Zero, on the other you claim that lacking that knowledge in December of 41, they would have performed identically to June of 42. If you can't see the illogic in that statement, then there is nothing that we have to talk about. You have your opinion, I have mine. As the saying goes, everyone has one. I'm going to leave it at that.

I'll try to keep it brief, direct, and simple.

1. What is the Zero bonus? No one seems to know specifically what real world phenomenon it is supposed to simulate. Is this supposed to reflect the fact that Allied pilots, never having fought against the Zero, were unfamiliar with its capabilities? In that event, why is there no "Wildcat bonus?" No Japanese pilot had fought against an F4F... until they did. If you were in an A6M2 and charging into the face of an F4F (or a P-39, or a P-40, or up the six of a B-17) you would not be aware of the fact that the plane that you are approaching has the capability to rip your A6M into confetti before you can deliver a lethal hit.

There is no inherent logic in penalizing the Allies merely because no allied pilot had fought against a Zero as a general abstraction of something intangible. If you want to argue for a "Zero bonus" then you need to (a) demonstrate hard, real world evidence that one is warranted, and (b) demonstrate that the real world effects are not already accounted for in the game by such characteristics as basic plane airspeed and mvr ratings, and by the Japanese player having good operational plans and executing the plans well.

2. There is no real world evidence to indicate that the A6M2 was at any time during the war capable of achieving kill ratios against F4F pilots that are turned out by this game.

3. The only evidence that we DO have one way or the other in re F4Fs vs A6Ms does not indicate that there was any A6M general superiority. It is true that such evidence stems almost exclusively (totallye exclusively) from engagements that occurred on or after April 1942. It is also true that the game has that Zero bonus down to +1 in April 1942.

It remains the case that it is completely illogical to argue that a Zero bonus should be in effect during and prior to April 1942 despite the absence of any real world data that supports the existence of said bonus. If you think using data from August 1942 is "wierd" you must ask yourself how that is somehow a bigger logical error than arguing in defense of the "Zero bonus" in the absence of any real world supporting data of any kind whatsoever.

[Demosthenes]

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng

On one hand you claim that by August of 42 all Allied pilots knew the no-no's of fighting the Zero, on the other you claim that lacking that knowledge in December of 41, they would have performed identically to June of 42. If you can't see the illogic in that statement, then there is nothing that we have to talk about. You have your opinion, I have mine. As the saying goes, everyone has one. I'm going to leave it at that.

There is nothing illogical about Mdiehl's statements even though at a glance it may appear contradictory.
The reason it's not contradictory is that Mdiehl has been consistant and careful in saying that beam defense and mutual supporting tactics were being worked in in the summer of 1941 as a response to the German BF-109 which was already well known to have performance superior to the F4F3. America was preparing for war with Germany. That these tactics were used against the Zero does not mean that they developed as a response to the Zero.....that is as clear as can be.

[Ron Saueracker]

Why not give the bonus to the F4F-3 or F4F-4 rather than to a second Jap plane to negate the bonus vs USN.

[Demosthenes]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Why not give the bonus to the F4F-3 or F4F-4 rather than to a second Jap plane to negate the bonus vs USN.

I don't know, but I think that slots aircraft 3 & 4 are reserved for the Japanese

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl
That is incorrect. Or rather, incomplete. The flavor to the Japanese was "we can take anything we want." The flavor to the USN was, "At the right moment we're gonna burn these guys."

So what's the problem? If you wait for the "right moment" to "burn these guys" as long as USN waited historically you'll fight in May and June 42 by the time Zero bonus is already history. [:D]

Sorry to crash at the drunken allied fanboy party like this, but I have one, short and direct question for you mdiehl, and would appreciate equally short and direct answer(s).

Have you bought the game, and if you did, what is the furthest date you reached playing a) Allies and b) Japanese, in PBEM and/or vs AI?

Oleg

[Demosthenes]

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng

ORIGINAL: Demosthenes
A random thought - if combat experience in China is the reason for high exp ratings of Japanese air units, why are the Chinese air unit so inexperienced after four years of war?

Cuz they're dead.

Jeez, All of 'em?

[mdiehl]

So what's the problem? If you wait for the "right moment" to "burn these guys" as long as USN waited historically you'll fight in May and June 42 by the time Zero bonus is already history.

The "right moment" as defined by the USN wasn't "let's wait until the Zero bonus expires." The "right moment" was defined by the circumstances of the operation, not by "watching the clock." And that is why the "look and feel" of the Zero bonus is wrong.

I suppose it is no issue at all if you require the USN to "wait to contest" the IJN until April 1942 as long as you require the Japanese player to follow exactly the same schedule and targets of operations as did the historical Japanese. Of course, that would sort of defeat the purpose of the game.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Honda

Oh, BTW just couldn't miss the continued diminishing Zero bonus rant by mdiehl...[8|]
THE GAME ALREADY FAVOURS THE SPEED AND CONSIDERS IT THE PRIME CHARACTERISTIC IN A DOGFIGHT WHICH IS HISTORICLY ACCURATE!!!
Cheers

Honda hit the nail on the head here. The reason that no Allied bonus is needed is that the model as a whole works without one.

A similar issue goes for the zero bonus - comparing the plane database entries and adding in the bonus fails to tell the story. It's the way the whole package works together.

Bradley7735,

The data provided by mdiehl regarding F4F vs. Zero combat might be accurate (I assume it largely is), but it's irrelevant as already pointed out. It describes events that occur in the 4th month after the zero bonus expires. Extrapolating backwards might work in some cases, but in this case it is unreliable because of evolving tactics/doctrine and continued build up of intelligence data.

mdiehl,

You've pointed out that the Thatch Weave was invented in summer '41. Knowing how human organizations work I find it most credible that it took longer than 'til Dec '41 for it to permeate the air arms.

Second, I think that the problems with USN CV's having such trouble challenging IJN CV's is not due to the zero bonus. Unless the KB has been attrited, the same problem exists after the zero bonus expires. It's due to the air model - CAP, naval attack, etc. Of course the zero bonus exacerbates the issue until May '41.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Sorry to crash at the drunken allied fanboy party like this, but I have one, short and direct question for you mdiehl, and would appreciate equally short and direct answer(s).

Have you bought the game, and if you did, what is the furthest date you reached playing a) Allies and b) Japanese, in PBEM and/or vs AI?

Oleg

Are you trying to bring reality into this discussion? [&o]

[rtrapasso]

The reason that no Allied bonus is needed is that the model as a whole works without one.

Yes, if you are the Japanese.

Personally, i am experiencing something in the range 3-1 up to 6-1 in Wildcats vs. Zeros (after the Zero bonus).

EDIT - It was worse before the Zero bonus wore off, but wasn't paying attention that closely.

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Extrapolating backwards might work in some cases, but in this case it is unreliable because of evolving tactics/doctrine and continued build up of intelligence data.

I never extrapolated backwards, but it sounds painful. Beyond that, I have no idea what you are saying.

When those responsible for putting Band Aids (tm) on this game and calling them "patches" resorted to "bonuses," the light of the stars started slowly to fade from their sight.

[spence]

Personally, i am experiencing something in the range 3-1 up to 6-1 in Wildcats vs. Zeros (after the Zero bonus).

I haven't had a game extend to the end of the Zero Bonus yet but have played UV and the losses of F4Fs to Zeros in that game seemed a bit excessive. If people are experiencing relative losses such as quoted above in the latter half of 1942 then something is fundamentally wrong with the way the F4F or the Zero is modelled in "regular time". The IJN aviator pool was not devastated at Midway as is commonly believed. It really got killed off in the Solomons.

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: Demosthenes

ORIGINAL: pauk

ORIGINAL: Honda

Last time I talked to AN American (US citizen, not a Canadian, eh) I told him Croatia should invade Phillipines. He told me there's no way we could acomplish that 'cause the US would stop us from doing it.
He was dead serious. [X(]
I got a great story.

[:D][:D][:D]

I know what you mean, Snake, and I agree with you.[:D]

"What can I say Pauk, some Americans are real idiots..."[8|]

We in America recognize the problem, and try our damnest to keep them in D.C.,once they have been identified.(Sen Kennedy leads the pack, we just don't let him drive.)[:)]

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

The reason that no Allied bonus is needed is that the model as a whole works without one.

Yes, if you are the Japanese.

Personally, i am experiencing something in the range 3-1 up to 6-1 in Wildcats vs. Zeros (after the Zero bonus).

EDIT - It was worse before the Zero bonus wore off, but wasn't paying attention that closely.

I was referring to the later war period (responding to an earlier post).

Is your pilots' experience on a par with your opponents pilots' experience? A big difference there makes a huge difference in combat results. Try to manage your squadrons to get experience up before they get wiped out (easier to say than to do). When you begin getting better planes - Corsairs and P-38's - you will start to make serious headway. After his pilots' experience is down and your pilots' is up, even Wildcats do much better.

Mind you I am not claiming that the air simulation is perfect, just that this has nothing to do with the zero bonus. Different issue.

[Ron Saueracker]

Oleg pisses me off because he simply criticises peoples views and not the game. Perhaps that (being critical) might jeapodize something.? Seriously, you are just another "warm and fuzzy" Oleg. Why not call a spade a spade? Ever do a negative review?

Kiss, kiss...smooch,smooch.[8|]