Page 2 of 3
RE: John 3rd vs Canoerebel: HR Discussion
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:52 pm
by John 3rd
What do people think is the best manner to address Fighters and stratospheric sweeps? Many say it is using the Fighters primary or secondary maneuver altitudes while others say to simply place an altitude restriction that gradually moves up as time passes.
Thoughts here?
RE: John 3rd vs Canoerebel: HR Discussion
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:42 pm
by witpqs
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
What do people think is the best manner to address Fighters and stratospheric sweeps? Many say it is using the Fighters primary or secondary maneuver altitudes while others say to simply place an altitude restriction that gradually moves up as time passes.
Thoughts here?
The best way is don't waste any time on that. There are counter-measures for the defender, and in cases where the counter-measures don't work well it's just a reasonable analog of reality. That approach is working well for Andav and I, and for four of us in a 2x2.
RE: John 3rd vs Canoerebel: HR Discussion
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:02 pm
by Canoerebel
I don't care anything about HR regarding fighter altitude. In the first place, I've never looked at "altitude bands." I have no idea what they are or how to find them. I don't want to know. Secondly, I seldom run sweeps as the Allied player. Sweeps in '42 are a good way to get destroyed, and all my games (seemingly) end in '42.
With respect to John's gaming, there seem to be some currents here. I'm not aware of them, what's behind them, etc. I trust John to deal with the situation, especially now that concerns have been brought to his attention.
John is my most veteran opponent going way back to UV days (with Miller a close second). John and I have enjoyed some great matches. Too, like he said, we've become good friends through some real life channels. I'll really enjoy locking horms with him.
PoultryLad's advice is good advice, but I'm probably not going to take it. [:)] I'm willing to jump into RA nearly blind, because that's the kinda thing I want to do. I'm contemplating a different AAR format, and I think this might work well. Besides, it's the best way I can think of to avoid the "Godlike foreknowledge" that is a mostly unavoidable aspect of the game. I love the idea of being in the dark.
I'd still love to play with reliable Allied torps on. I know John is concerned about this, but perhaps he'll agree give all the other advantages he should have (at least I think he's getting a fair number of them).
RE: John 3rd vs Canoerebel: HR Discussion
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:06 pm
by BBfanboy
Didn't Michael M try to tone down the altitude advantage results in recent updates? i.e. they still get an initial diving pass but the number of opponents hit during this pass is less than previous? If that is the case, perhaps witpqs is right that it doesn't need any more fixing.
If there is still an issue of sorts, the maneuver band sounds like a better historical indicator. I think it was hard on engines to fly at max altitude [not enough air for the fuel being used as the engine strained at full throttle] so patrols would normally be set where the engine can operate well on cruise and still leave some room for adding throttle.
RE: John 3rd vs Canoerebel: HR Discussion
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:52 pm
by GreyJoy
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
I don't care anything about HR regarding fighter altitude. In the first place, I've never looked at "altitude bands." I have no idea what they are or how to find them. I don't want to know. Secondly, I seldom run sweeps as the Allied player. Sweeps in '42 are a good way to get destroyed, and all my games (seemingly) end in '42.
With respect to John's gaming, there seem to be some currents here. I'm not aware of them, what's behind them, etc. I trust John to deal with the situation, especially now that concerns have been brought to his attention.
John is my most veteran opponent going way back to UV days (with Miller a close second). John and I have enjoyed some great matches. Too, like he said, we've become good friends through some real life channels. I'll really enjoy locking horms with him.
PoultryLad's advice is good advice, but I'm probably not going to take it. [:)] I'm willing to jump into RA nearly blind, because that's the kinda thing I want to do. I'm contemplating a different AAR format, and I think this might work well. Besides, it's the best way I can think of to avoid the "Godlike foreknowledge" that is a mostly unavoidable aspect of the game. I love the idea of being in the dark.
I'd still love to play with reliable Allied torps on. I know John is concerned about this, but perhaps he'll agree give all the other advantages he should have (at least I think he's getting a fair number of them).
Dan, if RA uses the same DBB modifications concerning japanese ASW, i can assure you that the reliable allied torp option is a game breaker. Believe me: with the DBB modifications, the japanese ASW is so nerfed that even with the non reliable torps Brad has sunk nearly 60 ships by october 42 (and he never came across a CV or a BB thank God!). So i truly think it may become a problem for you both.
Again, i strongly suggest you to keep a door open for the stacking limit rule...it ROCKS!
can't say about altitudes...i've played against Rader using first a fixed altitude (20k), then the "second mnvr alt band" rule... and both worked without much problems.
I'm now playing with Brad with the latter rule and neither of us is having a problem with it...works fine.
And i can guarantee that going stratosphere means, with the latest betas, a great fatigue and a low morale for the unit. I remember when i was using P-47s over Tokyo flying between 36k and 41k they had to be rotated out of the line every other day to recover after a sweep
RE: John 3rd vs Canoerebel: HR Discussion
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:00 pm
by John 3rd
The Max Altitude Rule I have used before is quite simple and here it is:
Combat altitude from:
Dec 1941- May 1942 20,000
June 1942-Dec 1942 25,000
1943 30,000
1944--45 Whatever
This being said above, I tend to agree with Greyjoy. We could leave the Fighter stuff alone since it appears there has been some serious work to 'correct' some of the issues.
As to TTs and ASW. I can speak from serious experience with RA, as a DBB-Based Mod, that I CANNOT sink an Allied SS. In Lew and I's game (July 42) I think I have sunk maybe 1 strictly due to ASW. Allied TT scare the HELL out of me. They can truly change the game from day one due to allllllllllllllll those SS in Manila.
RE: John 3rd vs Canoerebel: HR Discussion
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:16 pm
by Canoerebel
Okay, I hear you about subs. As I understand it, the mod we'll play has nerfed IJN ASW. Based on that, you feel that reliable Allied torps is "too much." I can live with that.
I prefer as few HR as possible, so it sounds like we can leave fighters out of it. The problem has been addressed. Even if it hasn't, I don't play in a way that would have taken advantage of the old problem. I'd rather not have to keep up with the minutae of a House Rule if I can avoid doing so and if it is unnecessary to the game.
RE: John 3rd vs Canoerebel: HR Discussion
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 6:47 pm
by witpqs
In DaBabes 28-C (which is version B plus reduced cargo loads) my Allied subs get sunk:
RE: John 3rd vs Canoerebel: HR Discussion
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:44 pm
by Lecivius
Having played RA myself, I can state I have been pleasantly surprised with US sub operations. You don't get a lot of 'bang!', but you get enough that sub ops are not a waste of time. And I have lost a few subs to ASW going into the end of '42.
RE: John 3rd vs Canoerebel: HR Discussion
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:28 am
by John 3rd
OK. Dan I concur regarding limiting HR. I'll put something together tomorrow morning and shoot it over to you. Will keep it simple and SHORT!
Need a Title
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:48 am
by John 3rd
Dan: We NEED a title for the AARs. Do you have any ideas?
How about the fan base? Thoughts and/or suggestions?
I generally like to use Book Titles. Initial Ideas from me:
1. Islands of Destiny
2. The Darkest Hour
3. The Fleet the Gods Forgot
4. Typhoon of Steel
RE: Need a Title
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:12 am
by Admiral Mitscher
How about 'Admiral John Against The Rebel'
RE: Need a Title
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:47 am
by BBfanboy
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Dan: We NEED a title for the AARs. Do you have any ideas?
How about the fan base? Thoughts and/or suggestions?
I generally like to use Book Titles. Initial Ideas from me:
1. Islands of Destiny
2. The Darkest Hour
3. The Fleet the Gods Forgot
4. Typhoon of Steel
Or perhaps a computer game "Burning Steel" , or "Steel Ships and Iron Men"
Of your four ideas, Typhoon of Steel sounds right for both sea and ground parts of the game. Maybe add ", Aluminum and Lead" to cover sea-land-air.
Or for CR - Up the Creek without a Paddle!
RE: Need a Title
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:48 pm
by Bullwinkle58
ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Or for CR - Up the Creek without a Paddle!
For the lawyer in him: "Always Read Contracts Before Signing." [:)]
RE: Need a Title
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:31 pm
by John 3rd
Georgia Backroads?
Dan--Do you have any thoughts?
RE: Need a Title
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:50 pm
by witpqs
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Dan--Do you have any thoughts?
Is that a trick question? He's a journalist and a lawyer, for Pete's sake! [:D]
RE: Need a Title
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:06 pm
by John 3rd
...for an AAR Title...
I do know he is a man of many SOUTHERN thoughts!
RE: Need a Title
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:16 pm
by Chickenboy
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Do you have any thoughts?
Hmmm..."Yellow Peril meets Yellow Journalism"?
or
"Back country barrister beatdown"?
or
"Kayak Johnie reluctantly falls again"?
or
"Southern fried Samurai"?
[:)]
RE: Need a Title
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 6:52 pm
by John 3rd
I LOVED Southern Fried Samurai. Sorta rolls right off the tongue....
RE: Need a Title
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:37 pm
by Canoerebel
Lots of good choices there. I won't weigh in, other than to say I'll pick something totally different. It won't matter. After a short time, people who want to read either will know where to find them no matter what titles we choose.
I'm still mulling over the AAR format. I am tempted to try something different, but I keep having this nagging fear that it will take too much time and that I'll regret it if I try it. So I dunno yet.