Should changing the aircraft upgrade path cost Political points?

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Personally, I look at it as a free for all ... thats what you guys wanted ... thats what was built.

Adding rules that complicate it just means people will be complaining about the rules later after playing just like we are seeing in the CV coordination thread now. It was a great thing when it was added and EVERYONE was FOR it. Now it is just some eveil code that stops a player from doing what they want.

Thing very carefully when you vote for stuff. Your choice just might come back to haunt you in the future. [;)]

Don't blame me for this. I never wanted any of this nonsense and have said so start to finish.

All I ask is that a game designer select an interesting, game-able subject, do a good job of researching and building it, then present it for me to buy and play, in the same sense that a writer presents thoughts, ideas, opinions, facts, and other material for the reader's perusal and consideration.

I hope you're all happy with what this has become. It's like an Iraqi police station. It doesn't serve any identifiable function and any minute it could be all over the place and make no sense at all..

[Mr.Frag]

And yet you are so squeezed on production of P-40Es (40 per month) through 1942 that it is impossible to keep more than one or two squadrons of them in action, while you try to make do with P-39Ds, Hurricane IIs and worse.

Yea, you wonder why the Allies were not doing so good in 41/42 ? [:D]

Don't come to the war without bringing your toys ... it tends to hurt. [:'(]

[Mr.Frag]

Don't blame me for this. I never wanted any of this nonsense and have said so start to finish.

Don't worry, there is an off switch for people who are not interested.

[Tanaka]

im really more interested in keeping older planes in the game longer than turning all my planes into the best models.

i was looking for a more automatic upgrade overide so i could keep using nells instead of betty's etc...

how could anyone possibly oppose this? this should be incorporated into the game without a toggle in my opinion.


as far as a choice of upgrading yes we should have a choice but with historical realistic penalties.

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Don't blame me for this. I never wanted any of this nonsense and have said so start to finish.

Don't worry, there is an off switch for people who are not interested.

Yet the entire fabric of the game is infected with it. Look at a list of the changes that have been made at the behest of posters on these forums, Frag. Look at the degree to which modding and fiddling around with the data have taken precedence over the integrity of the core design. You can't help but see how far this game has drifted from what Grigsby's original focus was when UV was created (and WitP, perforce, contemplated) - an operational/strategic game on the Pacific Theater in WWII that places the players in the circumstances faced by the historical adversaries.

Two years ago, I said this: "If you want a World War II in the Pacific wargame construction set, fine. I'd like one, too. But this is not it."

I wish someone had been listening.

[Mr.Frag]

Different people want different things.

Go back and look at the poll results for player selectable upgrades. The numbers put the diehards in the very small minority.

[Brady]

Aside from Navy plane being available for Only Navy Units and Army ones For Army Units, I see no nead to further penalise the Japanese by paying political cost to efect a change in an uprade path that was "Bad" at best in it its atempt to reflect history, if we asume the present up grade path is historicaly corect were wrong, If the adation of the New abaility to swich upgrade paths is an atempt to give the player more choices and corect this than I think were on the right path to add an adational cost is to stear this ship back toward the path it was on in the first place and is in efect a step backwards.

[Mr.Frag]

i was looking for a more automatic upgrade overide so i could keep using nells instead of betty's etc...

Thats in the works ... one of the implications of player selected choice is that factories need to be more controllable ... odds are that the automatic upgrade will go away to balance out the choice aspect. The two don't really fit well together.

[Brady]

"one of the implications of player selected choice is that factories need to be more controllable ... odds are that the automatic upgrade will go away to balance out the choice aspect. The two don't really fit well together. "

Thats very cool[:)]

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

i was looking for a more automatic upgrade overide so i could keep using nells instead of betty's etc...

Thats in the works ... one of the implications of player selected choice is that factories need to be more controllable ... odds are that the automatic upgrade will go away to balance out the choice aspect. The two don't really fit well together.

thats great!!! thanks guys for all the hard work u guys put in for us crazy people!!! we may gripe and complain but deep down we all know yall are the best!!!

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

i was looking for a more automatic upgrade overide so i could keep using nells instead of betty's etc...

Thats in the works ... one of the implications of player selected choice is that factories need to be more controllable ... odds are that the automatic upgrade will go away to balance out the choice aspect. The two don't really fit well together.

by the way i do not think there should be a political cost for downgrading. you lose enough by taking the risk to use a less valuable plane.

[testarossa]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Don't blame me for this. I never wanted any of this nonsense and have said so start to finish.

Don't worry, there is an off switch for people who are not interested.

Yet the entire fabric of the game is infected with it. Look at a list of the changes that have been made at the behest of posters on these forums, Frag. Look at the degree to which modding and fiddling around with the data have taken precedence over the integrity of the core design. You can't help but see how far this game has drifted from what Grigsby's original focus was when UV was created (and WitP, perforce, contemplated) - an operational/strategic game on the Pacific Theater in WWII that places the players in the circumstances faced by the historical adversaries.

Two years ago, I said this: "If you want a World War II in the Pacific wargame construction set, fine. I'd like one, too. But this is not it."

I wish someone had been listening.

Man, I bought this game because I was listening to you, grognards[:D]. So far it stands up to the promises.

[Halsey]

This is the only answer needed for anyone concerned by this new feature.

If you want it use it.
If you don't like it, then ignore it.

Now on to CV TF coordination and LBA attacks on ports and shipping, and the China solution.![:D]

[pasternakski]

You still got the "America - Love It or Leave It" bumper sticker on the de Soto, Halsey?

[mlees]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

You still got the "America - Love It or Leave It" bumper sticker on the de Soto, Halsey?

"You can have my WiTP when you pry it from my cold, dead hard drive."

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Different people want different things.

Go back and look at the poll results for player selectable upgrades. The numbers put the diehards in the very small minority.

Okay, Frag, say you're running a restaurant. Do you create your dishes by committee, or do you seize the creative initiative and produce food that persuades the consumer palate without pandering to it? Your menu of dishes, of course, is varied in order to suit a wide range of tastes, but you do not throw your talent to the dogs.

Tout suite. Comme il faut. And the other two or three French words I know. I don't expect my girlfriend to be anything other than who she is (unless we're roleplaying, of course). If a game says it's a game, let it be a game. Where's the room for polls and such? If the product announces itself as a salad shooter for the plastic fantastic home gourmet, fine. Let's just have some integrity. Set out on a path and follow it.

All right, I'm done talking about it. I'll be curmudgeonly, but I have nothing else to say on the subject. I'm going back to playing the best WWII Pacific wargame ever published ...

[Halsey]

It's on my 1968 Corvair.[:D]

An on/off button is fine. That should satisfy the grognards and sci-fi players alike.[:D]

[Bulldog61]

I voted Yes. It's too easy for the Japanese to expand their industry as it is now. This will lead to a very ahistoric situation as the Japanesse will be flying only the best possible A/C while the allies are stuck with what they get.

[Tankerace]

I voted yes.

Reason? Gamey tactics. While no one would do it, without any hit it would be possible to go from A6M2s to A6M3s (assuming you had them) to A5M4s, and Back to A6M2s. The player should have to do something to facillitate a change. That said, I don't mind if they don't pay PPs, but if the pay in supply, HI, etc. But the player should not be allowed that as soon as all planes get shot down he can instantly up or downgrade and get new planes. I applaud giving the player a choice, but lets not make it gamey.

[madflava13]

I think NO is a better option. There's already a built in cost - you have to be able to stock the planes. If you are only making 8 B-29s a month or whatever, yet you switch all your bomber squadrons to B-29s, you'll have a ton of understrength squadrons for a long time. That's the penalty. On the IJN side, it's even more pronounced, since you take a supply hit for changing your factories. That alone is a sufficient penalty in my mind to keep people from doing crazy things... No need to tack on a PP penalty.