problem with WAW 32

[von altair]

ORIGINAL: IRONCROM

@ von altair

I like all those suggestions. The SMG idea is very good. I hardly use any more since I found out they have no defense bonus.

Not sure about...
-China too strong? I thought everone said they were to weak and that is why Tom took measures to make them stronger.
-Interceptor weight? Kinda moves away from the whole idea of have carrier air. Maybe better would be increasing carrier air's air to air capability if you think that carriers need more.
-Trucks too expensive? Trains were added to the scenario so that the price of trucks could be increased to force players to use horse transport more(more accurate to the times). I happen to think this was one of the best changes Tom made to the scenario.

IMHO...

Everyone who plays with China and says its too weak, is not using terrain as it should be used. Mountains, China supply bonus + China Aid card will cause China to beat Japan at end of -42 which is not what should happen. Increased supply will cause China to spam conscripts all over with regular infantry. Japan really can't stand against that horde. Even USA had problems with Japan landforces at 44-45. They decided to use atom bomb, instead of destroyng Japan Army.

About interceptors... Yeah you got point up there. Problem is, that Carriers needs better air defense and air defense to fleet it belongs, stronger cruiser AA is not solution. Carriers should be the queen of airpower in the sea. Current balance will cause carrier owner never use cap ability, since landbased fighters can trick up carrier airs for dinner. Increasing Carrier AA value doesn't help, if AA range is not increased. I will consider more about this.

I agree with you about changes to the scenario. More expensive supply system really shines in this scenario. This forces especially German player to use horses and trains as it should. Increased supply cost alone will cause wanted effect and slows Germans quite well. By increasing truck cost as well, will tune them more, since they are very vulnerable and costs almost the same as light tank. That makes them very expensive losses, which actually affects Germans too heavily in unrealistic way.

[IRONCROM]

I'll push for a fast approval of v32a. I'll enlist Rick for some help repacking it so it can be a full replacment for v32

[alaric318]

ORIGINAL: von altair

ORIGINAL: IRONCROM

@ von altair

I like all those suggestions. The SMG idea is very good. I hardly use any more since I found out they have no defense bonus.

Not sure about...
-China too strong? I thought everone said they were to weak and that is why Tom took measures to make them stronger.
-Interceptor weight? Kinda moves away from the whole idea of have carrier air. Maybe better would be increasing carrier air's air to air capability if you think that carriers need more.
-Trucks too expensive? Trains were added to the scenario so that the price of trucks could be increased to force players to use horse transport more(more accurate to the times). I happen to think this was one of the best changes Tom made to the scenario.

IMHO...

Everyone who plays with China and says its too weak, is not using terrain as it should be used. Mountains, China supply bonus + China Aid card will cause China to beat Japan at end of -42 which is not what should happen. Increased supply will cause China to spam conscripts all over with regular infantry. Japan really can't stand against that horde. Even USA had problems with Japan landforces at 44-45. They decided to use atom bomb, instead of destroyng Japan Army.

well, i are not on discussion in line, agree that conscripts give china a chance against japan, indeed you can combine conscripts with regular troops and in each and all situations the conscripts give their, for me, their most valuable characteristic/facet, that is, hit points increase, losses goes to they, instead to better troops.
as a colateral note take in mind that japan start with 5, If I Remember Correctly, 5 marine units in mainland japan, strong units with high morale and experience, you have the freedom to take pacific resources, australia or send them to china theater, as final note, about taking japan trough conventional arms/guns/army, think on a D-Day Normandie landing with losses for the USA on 5 to 10 times these given on normandie, on the game, carrier air will be fighting land based japanese aircraft, the West/USA need to take tokyo to win the game, and as my personal opinion, in aircraft numbers i did think a land based air fleet can not be taken in mind to compare carriers capacity, indeed, carriers, at least historically, have much lesser air capacity, this is about realism, for playability make changes on it can be on the right path, not sure for me about one or the other thing, if japan, or united kingdom stack together his fleet with his aircraft a potential attacker will face on heavy losses, indeed,

just my point of view,

best regards and thanks for your work fixing the scenario,

murat30/alarick.

[von altair]

Fixed another main problem in WaW v32. More details about it in:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1784786