Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

1. Strategic Bombing in China: Impossible to defend/easy for the Japanese to wipe out. This means difficult/impossible for the Chinese to replace losses/recover disrupted units and essentially impossible to utilize fighters in China through at least early '43 (damaged planes don't get repaired and can't be moved meaning that fighters get one or two sorties in and then those planes are stuck in a damaged state at a forward base forever unless you disband them). Fix: House Rule preventing strategic bombing in China until 1944.

I have lost enough ASW assets to subs and Rob Brennan, my opponent, too that I really think there is a glitch in the
sub attack routines. Maybe when the Allied/Japanese sub doctrine options where put out of the game, the code now
leans too much to the old Japanese sub doctrine, who knows.
As far as I can see there are two things that should be toned down in combination: the frequency of attacks on ASW assets
and the hit percentage of torps against those vessels.

ORIGINAL: Rob Brennan UK

I have lost enough ASW assets to subs and Rob Brennan, my opponent, too that I really think there is a glitch in the
sub attack routines. Maybe when the Allied/Japanese sub doctrine options where put out of the game, the code now
leans too much to the old Japanese sub doctrine, who knows.
As far as I can see there are two things that should be toned down in combination: the frequency of attacks on ASW assets
and the hit percentage of torps against those vessels.

Dont think i've hit a DD with a working Torp yet LoBaron [;)], yes a few 4 ish PB's have been sunk in a month and a half. and i have a lot of subs patrolling round .. sub losses have been slight (1) lost to a mine at truk when it reacted in. But many have been damaged and out of action for weeks because of DC's. My only AS is a long way behind the front (for obvious reasons) and i dont get another [:(] so patrol times are shorter. Yes Sydney can repair them pretty quick but getting them to sydney takes a long time esp with high flooding (v slow repairs at forward bases).

RE the percieved japanese sub doctine. I have v v few transport TF's anywhere(i love waypoints <hint>) and a LOT of 4 ship ASW groups based on a few DD's and lots of AM's and SC's. Hence the only readily available targets to agressive commanders are ASW assets. (lost a few AM's but no DD's yet).

Neither side had had (imo) imbalanced ASW or sub effectiveness , but those I boats are accurate as hell when they do sight a valuable target. USS Saratoga's surviving crew can attest to that effectiveness (3 hits in one salvo). And no I'm not complaining about it. Yes i has 2 ASW groups following and lots of integral DD's in the TF , LoBaon got a lucky attack (bastard [;)]) and I can live with it as thats just the unpredictability of war.

CanoeRebel - love the OP v v funny and i'm hijacker 2 for referance purposes [;)] and a sceptic at heart too if i'm honest.

ORIGINAL: Shark7
BTW, I think I'm a new skeptic...Skeptic Sixteen: 'I don't doubt you are seeing skewed results, but I'm just not seeing it myself in my own games.' [;)]

ORIGINAL: Central Blue
further proof of my theory that the same 25 people inhabit all known internet forums, with some having multiple personalities.

I think you are missing the peace maker/voice of reason, as well as my own roll:

Gee, I'm not having any problems against the AI. [:D]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

ORIGINAL: Central Blue
further proof of my theory that the same 25 people inhabit all known internet forums, with some having multiple personalities.

I think you are missing the peace maker/voice of reason, as well as my own roll:

Gee, I'm not having any problems against the AI. [:D]

Nope, that one's in there.

ORIGINAL: Central Blue

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

ORIGINAL: Central Blue
further proof of my theory that the same 25 people inhabit all known internet forums, with some having multiple personalities.

I think you are missing the peace maker/voice of reason, as well as my own roll:

Gee, I'm not having any problems against the AI. [:D]

Nope, that one's in there.

Oh.

Well then, how about the guy that can't read and is always making spurious and extraneous comments just behind or off the topic? [;)]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Kinda like the guy that comes in and says:

'ASW isn't working right...BTW, I like cheese. Does every one prefer Cheddar or Swiss?'

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

ORIGINAL: Mark Weston

Perhaps a lot of the sceptical responses are generated by the tone the Disputer uses as much as the content of his observations.

Another possibility is his tendency to think (or write as though he thinks) that the single data point of his one PBeM game is enough basis for making definitive conclusions about the state of WitP:AE.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

There is another anomaly in my game that I've mentioned many times:  Allied ASW has been pretty week, but Allied combat TFs with DDs have been very effective.  Try it - send nice juicy combat TFs (CA/CL/DD) into hexes with Japanese subs and see what happens.  75% to 90% of my sub kills over the past six to nine months of game time have been by combat TFs.

ORIGINAL: ckammp

ORIGINAL: Mark Weston

Perhaps a lot of the sceptical responses are generated by the tone the Disputer uses as much as the content of his observations.

Another possibility is his tendency to think (or write as though he thinks) that the single data point of his one PBeM game is enough basis for making definitive conclusions about the state of WitP:AE.

100% agree.

Canoerebel refuses to accept any suggestion that the combination of his tactics and strategy, his opponents's tactics and strategies, and game mechanics WAD won't always add up to favorable combat results. Instead, he blames the game for his losses, loudly claiming to have found a "genuine anomaly that needs to be addressed". The complete lack of corroborating evidence from other players doesn't faze him; he dismisses all those who disagree as "complainers" who "don't like him", as he continues to post his daily episodes of "Whine in the Pacific: Angst Edition".

Canoerebel, you have beaten this "dead horse" so much it's bones have been ground into dust. Could you please just stop the constant complaining?

ORIGINAL: ckammp

ORIGINAL: Mark Weston

Perhaps a lot of the sceptical responses are generated by the tone the Disputer uses as much as the content of his observations.

Another possibility is his tendency to think (or write as though he thinks) that the single data point of his one PBeM game is enough basis for making definitive conclusions about the state of WitP:AE.

100% agree.

Canoerebel refuses to accept any suggestion that the combination of his tactics and strategy, his opponents's tactics and strategies, and game mechanics WAD won't always add up to favorable combat results. Instead, he blames the game for his losses, loudly claiming to have found a "genuine anomaly that needs to be addressed". The complete lack of corroborating evidence from other players doesn't faze him; he dismisses all those who disagree as "complainers" who "don't like him", as he continues to post his daily episodes of "Whine in the Pacific: Angst Edition".

Canoerebel, you have beaten this "dead horse" so much it's bones have been ground into dust. Could you please just stop the constant complaining?