P-38 vs Zero

[mdiehl]

So the answer would be,

You are incorrect. The answer would be, and in fact is, precisely that which I wrote, rather than some imaginary response that you would like to pretend that I wrote.

Interesting you´ve included yourself in as a future buyer of AE though.

AE purports to eliminate many of the flawed assumptions by which garden variety WitP overrates Japanese power projection. Since I would like to own an obejtectivel GOOD WW2 PTO consim, I am always interested in new PTO games or updates on old ones. If someone ever gets it correct, it would save me the trouble of writing such a game -- something I will not have time to do for years at least.

[Ike99]

You are incorrect.

I am ¨incorrect¨?

[:D]

How?

I asked if you play UV or WITP. It seems no you don´t.

[SuluSea]

ORIGINAL: OG_Gleep

I asked in another thread if the P-38's can stand up to the zero, and got a resounding no.

Really? Everytime the two meet in an engagement in my game I'm a happy man.[:D] The 35th US Army FS has 127 kills and the 36th US Army FS 109 kills, I'd guess that atleast 75% of them were against enemy fighters while on escort missions.

[Ike99]

By the way, you never did say why you chose "Tojo's Loins" as your "From" rather than something less "risky". Any comment?

Yeah, here is my comment...

[Reg]

ORIGINAL: pbear

It is interesting to see that the P-39s never upgrade to P-47s.

This is an error as the 41FS transitioned from P-39 to P-47 in late '43.

I believe that upgrade list is from the original release and there have been some changes made in the various patches based on input from the players.

You will have to look at the individual patch release notes to see what they are but one that immediately springs to mind is that the Beaufort no longer upgrades to Beaufighter. There could be more.

[tocaff]

Ike your trolling again.  Why are you always doing this?  Is it that difficult not to be confrontational?

[Ike99]

Ike your trolling again. Why are you always doing this? Is it that difficult not to be confrontational?

I´m trolling again? [8|]

Am I the one hanging out on a game forums try to stir up debates for games I don´t even play?!!!

[tocaff]

So who cares if he plays, played or never did either?  What's the big deal?  You're making a mountain out of a mole hill for a change.

[DEB]

Sorry - not psychic. What's your comment? It is a serious question!

NB. Comments usually come in a word format, or if in picture, then with appropriate words included ( cartoons ).

[mdiehl]

I asked if you play UV or WITP. It seems no you don´t.

I've played it enough to know how it works. Therefore, your question was either an irrelevant non-sequitur (in effect, you weren't implying that I don't know how UV works), or else you were just engaging in mendacious straw man argumentation. Either way, you don't come across as having anything important or relevant to contribute to the discussion.

[Ike99]

Either way, you don't come across as having anything important or relevant to contribute to the discussion.

Really?

The discussion was on aircraft upgrades in UV. I posted an upgrade path post and how upgrades worked in UV.

And what did you post?

Betty Bomber hit rate overated as well as Japanese power projection. Now who is not relevant?

Obviously because you come to a game forum about a game you don´t even play, your only objective here is to debate ideas and theories with people, yes?

If it isn´t, then ask for an opponent. Otherwise your not relevant with a capital ¨N¨ & ¨R¨. Why would game makers listen to your opinion when you don´t even play the games?

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Either way, you don't come across as having anything important or relevant to contribute to the discussion.

Really?

The discussion was on aircraft upgrades in UV. I posted an upgrade path post and how upgrades worked in UV.

And what did you post?

Betty Bomber hit rate overated as well as Japanese power projection. Now who is not relevant?

Obviously because you come to a game forum about a game you don´t even play, your only objective here is to debate ideas and theories with people, yes?

If it isn´t, then ask for an opponent. Otherwise your not relevant with a capital ¨N¨ & ¨R¨. Why would game makers listen to your opinion when you don´t even play the games?

You might just want to take a long hard look in the mirror and ask yourself why anyone would ever want to listen to you!

Obviously, to anyone with more than three functional brain cells, his mention of the overblown power projection capabilities of the Japanese as modeled in this game got under your skin since it grates against your deluded belief in Japanese superiority. Since then, you have gone off on a tirade, making a compete and utter fool of yourself in this very public forum in your baseless attempts to denigrate him. You truly put the icing on the cake with your childish "ask for a game or go away because you don't belong here" rant!


Grow up!

[mdiehl]

The discussion was on aircraft upgrades in UV.

You are incorrect. This thread was initially "about" whether or not P38's can take on the Zero. Perhaps you should read again from the beginning. After that it was "about" the following observation vis Corsairs and a mixed force of Betties, and Zeroes, which subject was brought substantively into the discussion by the person who started this thread as follows:

I had forgotten just how true this was. Below is just obsene.

Air attack on TF, near Lae at 9,33

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 71
A6M3 Zero x 47
G4M1 Betty x 10
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 15

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 7

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 18 destroyed
A6M3 Zero x 15 destroyed
G4M1 Betty x 3 destroyed
G4M1 Betty x 7 damaged
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 2 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair x 2 destroyed
F4U-1 Corsair x 1 damaged

FO F.Short of VMF-124 is credited with kill number 8

LTJG L.Nakajima of F1/252nd Daitai bails out and is CAPTURED

Allied Ships
DD Nicholson
BB Maryland, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CA New Orleans

My reply to that was to in effect note that the only "obscene" result from that AAR in my view is the fact that one of a few surviving but crippled Betties was able to put a torpedo into Maryland. My reply was to OG, not you. IMO, prior to the kamikaze campaigns, the only thing a crippled Betty would have done with a torpedo would have been to salvo it and abort the mission, or else be shot down. The Zero losses seem a bit high, but the AAR does not discuss which aircraft fell to flak or otherwise, so I have no general problem with those results save for the fact that a damaged Betty got a hit. In my experience torpedo-lugging Betties are far too numerous compared to their historical use, and far too accurate as well.

Betty Bomber hit rate overated as well as Japanese power projection. Now who is not relevant?

You, clearly, because my post was on topic with the thread as initiated and modified by the person who initiated the thread. Perhaps you should reread from the beginning and 'retake the test' so to speak.

Obviously because you come to a game forum about a game you don´t even play, your only objective here is to debate ideas and theories with people, yes?

My objective is to encourage the design and development of a game that I feel is worth my time to play.

Why would game makers listen to your opinion when you don´t even play the games?

Because the game makers recognize that I have a track record for substantiating my observations and for quickly identifying problems with a design that almost inevitably come up in general discussions initiated by people other than myself.

[Ike99]

You might just want to take a long hard look in the mirror and ask yourself why anyone would ever want to listen to you!

Obviously, to anyone with more than three functional brain cells, his mention of the overblown power projection capabilities of the Japanese as modeled in this game got under your skin since it grates against your deluded belief in Japanese superiority. Since then, you have gone off on a tirade, making a compete and utter fool of yourself in this very public forum in your baseless attempts to denigrate him. You truly put the icing on the cake with your childish "ask for a game or go away because you don't belong here" rant!


Grow up!

Oh Hansy boy, my dear right wing freak. If anyone is under anyones elses skin they are not under mine.

Yes, the question is very valid. If someone does not play UV or WITP why do they have an interest in posting and hanging out on these forums?

It would be like you going to an Obama campaign strategy forum and debating the best way to get him elected.

[:D]

[mdiehl]

If someone does not play UV or WITP why do they have an interest in posting and hanging out on these forums?

One might equally ask, if you are happy with UV as it is and the things I write annoy you, why do you hang around in these forums? You have the game you want. Go forth, play it, and may the farce be with you! [;)]

[AcePylut]

Ike's attempts to paint you as a person that knows nothing about UV rely on a simple argument of "syntax".

Here is your statement:

"Played UV extensively. Long enough to catalog its many errors overrating Japanese power projection capability. Played WitP briefly: long enough to see the same errors carried forward from UV to WitP. Read enough WitP AARs to confirm the many serious errors there. I'm hopeful but skeptical about the prospects that AE will correctly model relative power projection abilities "

Which Ike then argues that since you don't "play" (current tense) UV you don't know nothing about it.

Ike's argument on this point is a logical fallacy, as the ultimate point is that you aren't some person that just popped in to say "hi", you are familiar with the game and it's mechanics, and that familiarity is what Ike is trying to degrade by arguing that you don't "know squat because you don't 'play'".

[Ike99]

Not at all Ace.

I´m not talking about what Mdiehl knows about UV and what he doesn´t. Neither am I saying if what he said about the Bettys is correct or not.

I am just wondering what the attraction is for him on the UV & WITP forums. I wouldn´t go to the Napoleon forum and start debating on if the French or British had the best rifle if I didn´t play the games.

I would be indifferent.

That´s why I said it was interesting he was going to buy AE when he didn´t like WITP or UV and doesn´t play them. I´m thinking if I didn´t like a particular movie, part one. I would not waste my money to go see parts, two, three and four.

[mdiehl]

That´s why I said it was interesting he was going to buy AE when he didn´t like WITP or UV and doesn´t play them. I´m thinking if I didn´t like a particular movie, part one. I would not waste my money to go see parts, two, three and four.

Based on the AE discussion forum and some PMs I am optimistic that AE will address some of the seriously deficient assumptions in re Japanese power projection, and also some of the strange allied plays cooked up to deal with afortementioned assumptions. As ever, I intend to wait a bit after AE is released to see whether or not the AARs indicate to me that a substantive change has been implemented.

[Ike99]

Based on the AE discussion forum and some PMs I am optimistic that AE will address some of the seriously deficient assumptions in re Japanese power projection, and also some of the strange allied plays cooked up to deal with afortementioned assumptions. As ever, I intend to wait a bit after AE is released to see whether or not the AARs indicate to me that a substantive change has been implemented.

Fair enough.

[tocaff]

If a person reads the forums they can get a pretty good idea about the game, it's strengths and it's drawbacks.  So it is possible to "see" these things and to know the players thoughts about them without ever playing the game.  A person can lurk or even post on any of the forums as they present an opportunity for a free exchange of ideas.  Hitting somebody with a barrage of negatives is uncalled for and sadly the norm for our resident pain in the posterior as he does it all to often and shows little respect for others.