The return of tristanjohn

[Nikademus]

I just wanted you to know that you wern't talking to the wall. [;)]

I had a couple ideas about logistics myself.

[Oznoyng]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
Yeah. Let's lock the thead. This is politically incorrect as trying to fix the games gross issues (or at least make them player toggled) is heresy.[8|]

If we do the AAR I want it to be CHS with your A2A mod in it. I want to see if it succeeds at correcting the grossly flawed stock uber cap and overall bloodiness in larger scale battles. No point in using the stock air stats.

Has nothing to do with political correctness. As mentioned, this has all been hashed out before. Repeating it seventeen times over won't change anything or convince anyone. Play the AAR You and TJ as Japan. Show us the uber-supply. Put up or lock up.

How best to do this? Like my earlier attempt with merchant capacities reduced to 20% of CHS levels and supply and resources in non mainland bases reduced 90% (oil increased by 90%)? Leaving as is may just result in the supply levels being high/low subject to opinion. Gutting it and being able to achieve historical goals would prove something. Perhaps 50%? What?

This will prove nothing, since the supply for the initial conquest comes from those mainland bases, not from the captured bases. Remove all supply and resource fromt he SRA beyond enough to defend, and the rate of advance through the SRA will not slow.

[bradfordkay]

(God I loved that game but could never hold enough players together long enough to teach them the rules. I've never lived in a town where there were more then 2 or 3 wargamers in the first place.)


This is a major reason many of us have switched to computer wargames. While most of you abhor the AI, at least it is always there when you're ready to play.

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Sarcasm personified

Hi, No sarcasm. TJ must realize by now the only way he is going to get what he is suggesting is to do it and show the rest of us how it is done.

MR FRag has already shown there are programmers and artists here to do the actual work all TJ has to do is write the design. Mr frag says it can all be done in under 3 months. Yet here we are.

I wonder. TJ will you let Matrix publish your game?

Nah. My company has spiffier slogans and cuter logos.

[Mr.Frag]

Even with code that already exists in the game? I beg to differ.

Ron ... don't go there ... keep your comments to things you kow something about.

Even the act of compiling code without making any changes at all can add bugs.

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

ORIGINAL: moses

Original Mr. Frag.
Actual Results: While this is a short term problem, it is offset by the extra fuel burnt coupled with wear and tear on the BB's that take forever to repair and clog up your repair ports forever meaning other ships can't get the repairs they need.

Yes good. This type of thinking needs to be repeated because it is the type of thinking that has always gone into developing wargames since well before we had computers.

Unfortunatley some will now say " So you're admitting that fuel consumption and BB systems damage are screwed up as well."

I understand, thats where people like you are of great value ... you don't immediately jump down the "it's broken path" without at least reasoning it out for the long term effect. [;)]

This game is not perfect, nothing really is, but it does put you in the drivers seat for something pretty epic.

It might be epic all day long, but who cares? The problem is it's not historic.

There are millions of things that could have been done differently, but the overall effect at the end of the day is pretty much the same ... you have the task of managing a nightmare ... too much information and not enough information at the very same time. Even if it's off by as much as 50% ... it still achieves the end result ... making you feel like you are in over your head.

The question is, in what? [8|]

[Oznoyng]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I'm willing but I want some adjustments made as stated above. I want this to be irrefutable. Be nice that when proven some assurances of change were made.

Your complaint is against stock, not against CHS, or anything else. Play stock, or don't complain about it.

Simply put, supply is the operational problem according to you. Fine, prove it in stock, and play the Japanese while you are at it. There are a lot of holes in your knowledge of the Japanese. Maybe by playing Japan rather than theorizing about what happens you will see what Mogami, Nik, and I see. Then again, maybe you won't. That's why they call it a test.

Incidentally, I don't suppose you ever considered just sticking Resource stockpiles on dot bases as a way around the resource tied to supply problem? Sticking 99,999 resources on Belitung Island, for instance, would keep Japan from extracting resources until they had built the base to a level 1 port (resources can't be loaded at a base without a port - try loading resources at Tueguegaro...) You might try some variation on that to see if it has a positive impact from your perspective. Also, you could change the nationality of some dot bases to IJA and put a Daily resource amount on each. It would not change the who owns the base initially, but would act like a resource center without the supply. The only downside is that Daily Resources can not be damaged. A combination of all three approaches might work out best. Part resource centers, part stockpile, part daily resource production (this also eliminates the problem of accumulating supply that will be captured). I dunno, I still think you are wrong that it is the problem, but there are some things to try within the capabilities of the eidtor to simulate what you want to do.

[mogami]

ORIGINAL: moses

Original: Mr Frag:

I understand, thats where people like you are of great value...

Original: Nikademus

A voice of reason

Now if Mogami says something nice TJ will have a fit. I can just hear him screaming 'fanboy' into the monitor.

Hi, I wuv you Moses. I think your the smartest and bestest player in WITP and I agree with everything you write. It is only mix up in forum and my lazy manners that have prevented me from showing this in the past. I promise to try harder in the future. Don't be mad at me.

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Why, CHS has altered roads and centres etc making it supply less abundant and easily moved? Gutting it further as stated earlier provides a much better starting point than stock. If we manage with all these cuts then something is wrong. By simply using the stock scenario I'm concerned that the proof will be too subjective...what is success judged on?

Because only a small majority play CHS. Your complaints are aimed at WitP the main game. You want a UNIVERSAL CHANGE that will impact all mods as well as stock. Thus you must use the stock as the control.

With that I could agree from one point of view, though Ron's suggestion has merit as well. I haven't kept up with the CHS project, but I accept that it's been toned down with regard to supply in general as far as the editor would permit, so any untoward Japanese progress with that version of the game would serve to prove the same point, and possibly in more distinct outline. My main concern is I'd just hate to regress back to stock at this late date. That's the pits.

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

(God I loved that game but could never hold enough players together long enough to teach them the rules. I've never lived in a town where there were more then 2 or 3 wargamers in the first place.)


This is a major reason many of us have switched to computer wargames. While most of you abhor the AI, at least it is always there when you're ready to play.

Yeah, except in the case with this game there isn't any there there.

[mogami]

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

(God I loved that game but could never hold enough players together long enough to teach them the rules. I've never lived in a town where there were more then 2 or 3 wargamers in the first place.)


This is a major reason many of us have switched to computer wargames. While most of you abhor the AI, at least it is always there when you're ready to play.

Yeah, except in the case with this game there isn't any there there.

Hi, And you've won how many games against the AI? Both sides?

Here is the easiest test I can devise.
One of you (TJ or RS) play Japan scenario 15 the game ends when you capture Ceylon and Dacca. You don't need to write an AAR just write
"Jan 13th 1942 refueled bombardment TF Toboali BB ammo went from 5 to 9 supply consumed XXX supply remaining xxx. replaced 5xA6m2 tobolai consumed 60 supply" and so on so we can see the SRA supply propell Japan through the SRA and on to India.

Don't worry about any thing east of Palau. Use the entire might of Japan to get to Dacca. It's the only thing that matters. Lose as much as you want. Just keep track of how much SRA supply you use and what it is used for.

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

(God I loved that game but could never hold enough players together long enough to teach them the rules. I've never lived in a town where there were more then 2 or 3 wargamers in the first place.)


This is a major reason many of us have switched to computer wargames. While most of you abhor the AI, at least it is always there when you're ready to play.

Yeah, except in the case with this game there isn't any there there.

Hi, And you've won how many games against the AI? Both sides?

None. But I've toyed around with it versus the AI from both sides of the board and in head-to-head mode enough to know that the AI isn't so hot. Please don't tell me you want to argue about that, too. [8|]

[moses]

None. But I've toyed around with it versus the AI from both sides of the board and in head-to-head mode enough to know that the AI isn't so hot. Please don't tell me you want to argue about that, too.

Do you realy expect them to develope an AI that could defeat you in a game of wits and cunning.[:D][:D]

[mogami]

Hi, No but the AI does ok against novice humans and experianced humans play it on the harder level where it does ok for the first year or so. (have you ever played an entire year?) The AI plays much better then a cat or dog might and at least equals an intelligent chimp. You know the same as every computer AI. Are you going to include one in the new game? That makes everything much harder you know. If you limit the AI's supply or how it can use it you make it dumber not smarter. And then you'd need 2 OOB and rules for Human versus Human and Human verus AI because the humans will pick apart what you have to do for the AI to work.

You'll have to write a lot of code that says "AI can do Human cannot do" or a pack of jackels will decend on you when Humans play one another and tear you to shreads and call you bad names.

[Mr.Frag]

So ... I'm sitting here with $60K and coders who cost me $28/hr, thats 2,000 hours of dedicated coding. (10 weeks @ 5 FTE)

Sell 1,200 copies @ $50 and I get my money back.

Waiting for that design document

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

So ... I'm sitting here with $60K and coders who cost me $28/hr, thats 2,000 hours of dedicated coding. (10 weeks @ 5 FTE)

Sell 1,200 copies @ $50 and I get my money back.

Waiting for that design document

If it's really as daunting as you guys make out then I think the best business model would be to buy a few dozen cases of playing cards and have those done up in ships and tanks and planes. Hell, you could just deal seconds for your what-ifs and never sweat the die rolls at all. I'll get right on it.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Even with code that already exists in the game? I beg to differ.

Ron ... don't go there ... keep your comments to things you kow something about.

Even the act of compiling code without making any changes at all can add bugs.

OK, I'm assuming.[;)]

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I'm willing but I want some adjustments made as stated above. I want this to be irrefutable. Be nice that when proven some assurances of change were made.

Your complaint is against stock, not against CHS, or anything else. Play stock, or don't complain about it.

Simply put, supply is the operational problem according to you. Fine, prove it in stock, and play the Japanese while you are at it. There are a lot of holes in your knowledge of the Japanese. Maybe by playing Japan rather than theorizing about what happens you will see what Mogami, Nik, and I see. Then again, maybe you won't. That's why they call it a test.

Incidentally, I don't suppose you ever considered just sticking Resource stockpiles on dot bases as a way around the resource tied to supply problem? Sticking 99,999 resources on Belitung Island, for instance, would keep Japan from extracting resources until they had built the base to a level 1 port (resources can't be loaded at a base without a port - try loading resources at Tueguegaro...) You might try some variation on that to see if it has a positive impact from your perspective. Also, you could change the nationality of some dot bases to IJA and put a Daily resource amount on each. It would not change the who owns the base initially, but would act like a resource center without the supply. The only downside is that Daily Resources can not be damaged. A combination of all three approaches might work out best. Part resource centers, part stockpile, part daily resource production (this also eliminates the problem of accumulating supply that will be captured). I dunno, I still think you are wrong that it is the problem, but there are some things to try within the capabilities of the eidtor to simulate what you want to do.

My complaint is against the 1.25:1 ratio of resources/supply. CHS extended map serves the same purpose but better. If I'm to pay for sex I get to pick the slut.[:)]

[mogami]

Hi, I know the 1.25 ratio of supply to resources burns me up too. It should be 5 supply per resource. Trying to make out like Japan hauled more tin then it did rice and coconuts

[Nikademus]

Well here's your chance to prove it.