Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

I have been meaning to ask this for some time, and finally have remembered to do so!

I noticed some time ago that you all have expanded the categories for bomber selection. So help me out here . . .

HB - Heavy Bomber - Example: B-24
MB - Medium Bomber - Example: B-25
LB - Light Bomber - Example: Hudson
AB - Attack Bomber - Example: A-20
BM - ????? - Example: ?????

Is this simply for additional organisation reasons, or is there going to be a fundamental difference between heavy, medium, light and attack bombers or their pilots?, outside of obvious plane characteristiscs defining what they are best at (such as the A-20's speed and manuverability, but lower payload and durability).

Thanks in advance.

Chad

BM is "bomber" - will show all of the above categories.

And a bomber is a bomber really. Except DBs and TBs.

ORIGINAL: Panther Bait

I don't completely disagree with you, but it could be thought of as all the heavy equipment being loaded onto trains, and the men temporarily encamped nearby (or settled in existing housing). If the cargo was already loaded, it wouldn't take long to load the men and get the train moving.

The disconnect is that you probably don't have railyard space or enough rolling stock in a lot of WitP areas (like Malaysia) to keep whole divisions (or perhaps even regiments) loaded up and immobile all at one time. Especially not and keep the supply trains moving (assuming that rail lines are still prime supply pathways in the game).

So it might make sense to load and hold for a couple days, but not for weeks on end.

Mike

Not disagreeing with you. It depends on what you are doing, really. If you are playing a sim, then trains, engines, types of cars, ammo, aviation fuel, ect should all be represented. Personally, I play a game. Somewhere down the line they will probably add a fatigue factor for being in strat mode, but there are a lot of "unrealistic" things about rails in this game. For example: you want to base your aircraft on airfields that have a rail line running through them as much as possible. This way, if you have a lot of damaged aircraft at a base or the base is about to be over run, you just pop them on a train, and zoom you're off. Other things you can do is if you see your line is going to be cut in the next turn or 2 and rails are the only way you can move an air unit to a given point (like between Perth and eastern Oz), you can pop them on a train and send them out. As long as the rail line is open at the time, the air unit will appear at the base it was sent to as it is physically taken off the map and put on the reinforcement track to arrive at the target base in 1 to 4 days depending on distance and type of rail between start and end points.

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

BM is "bomber" - will show all of the above categories.

And a bomber is a bomber really. Except DBs and TBs.

Cool, thanks for the reply Yammy.

So like I said above, there is no special code written to make a B-29 behave differently than an A-20: their differences are in the actual plane characteristics, not some special code that makes a super heavy bomber different than an attack bomber.

Curious, are the main pilot skills different for say a fighter group vs a fighter bomber group? Or a super heavy bomber group vs an attack bomber group? Or are the main skills and skill levels the same.

Thanks again

Chad

I have been wondering how the train travel restriction would work. I suspect that it works up to the last hex under your sole control, not necessarily the closest base hex. In reality there could very well be additional rail stops, side rails, turnouts, etc. at each hex regardless of whether there is an official base at that hex or not.

Of course, that is complete speculation on my part.

YH,

You're right of course. The game doesn't model rolling stock in any way other than very abstractly, so there is a limit to what can be done. Personally I have no problem with the abstraction.

A fatigue or disruption penalty would be good, but either way the switch back out of strategic move mode at the destination should still reduce the instant reinforcement effect quite a bit from stock.

Mike

ORIGINAL: IndyShark

I'd love a Allied AAR to see how the other side works and to get an idea of how much FOW changes the results.

I sent a PM to Tree saying people wanted to see AFB stuff, and the repair routines. Dont know if he will have time for it this week though with something he referred to as "a life" [&:]

Whatever the hell that is. [&:]

Arg!!![:(]

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

I sent a PM to Tree saying people wanted to see AFB stuff, and the repair routines. Dont know if he will have time for it this week though with something he referred to as "a life" [&:]

Whatever the hell that is. [&:]

That thing nobody else on these boards will have after AE is released?

A Life? Do you mean this period of time where I've built a new computer, stocked up on cheetos and Dr. Peeper and paid off the credit cards so when wifey says "are you playing that "Blue-Green" game again?" I can distract her with spakley's?

Yes We Can!

Welcome to the boards, Mojo! I think the motto in this place is "Abandon life, all ye who enter here".

ORIGINAL: Kull

Welcome to the boards, Mojo! I think the motto in this place is "Abandon life, all ye who enter here".

There's absolutely no truth to this. Witp/AE is life.

[:D]

Oh, you have NO idea...

BTW, just to update you, the dev forum has been looking into the PH attack (sigh, again), and Tree did 20 test runs. This was his result:

Total 1-20

2- 6 BB sunk
3- 5 BB sunk
2- 4 BB Sunk
5- 3 BB sunk
5- 2 BB sunk
1- 1 BB sunk
2- 0 BB sunk

So in 40% of his test runs, he scored the "historical" 2 BBs sunk or less. 50% of his test were either 2 or 3 BBs. So dont take the 7 I sank in this game as "typical" [;)]

Also note, in NONE of his 20 runs did he get 7 or 8, so I was very lucky.

That means with my luck I will be looking at the lower edge of that range (sigh) and here I was hoping to sink everything the the harbor[:-]

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

Also note, in NONE of his 20 runs did he get 7 or 8, so I was very lucky.

That reminds me of something a couple of dev's said in this thread and others . . . what was it? Oh yes, dont base the entire AE engine on a single result of a single battle?

Amazing what happens when you listen to the people who built the game and have been playing it for the past couple of years . . .

 Fellas,fellas what do you expect? People are all keyed-up and ready to go for AE. This latest unpleasantness is simply the pressure release valve in operation. Don't read too much into people acting off kilter.

Excellent thread. Waiting for the next update...

ORIGINAL: traskott

Excellent thread. Waiting for the next update...

Will be later tonight. Just got home from a 13 hour "day" and downloading the latest patch as I speak. Bed time.

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

BTW, just to update you, the dev forum has been looking into the PH attack (sigh, again), and Tree did 20 test runs. This was his result:

Total 1-20

2- 6 BB sunk
3- 5 BB sunk
2- 4 BB Sunk
5- 3 BB sunk
5- 2 BB sunk
1- 1 BB sunk
2- 0 BB sunk

So in 40% of his test runs, he scored the "historical" 2 BBs sunk or less. 50% of his test were either 2 or 3 BBs. So dont take the 7 I sank in this game as "typical" [;)]

Also note, in NONE of his 20 runs did he get 7 or 8, so I was very lucky.

so now we can say a big 'thanks for nothing' to all the whingers, who not only prevented this AAR from progressing (because tree got sidetracked re-running turn one 20 times) but also for delaying the release while all the dev team ran around responding to the panic merchants who were screaming "its broken, its broken". Now.... enough whinging. play the AAR. Release the game. Enough said!!