Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Auchinleck

I mean I just paid $80 for the download. I started with the US side on historical difficulty, on December 8th, my first turn to do anything. So I command my scattered CV taskforces (Lexington) & (Enterprise) back to Pearl using the safest route back from air attack, so what happens? The Enterprise taskforce gets wiped out, except for a few destroyers by the apparently not too in a hurry to get his precious Pearl Harbor strike force Nagumo, back to Japan. It also attacked the Indianapolis on it's way back to Pearl also. NOT VERY REALISTIC! I'm surprised the AI didn't invade and capture Hawaii while they're at it! What, do I need to play with the AI heavily favoring the US in order for this to play out even close to historical??? Extremely discouraging to even want to start over. Considering how long my first turn took, with all that needs to be done on the first turn! I'll bet the lousy programming that went into the game would do the same thing again anyway, even if I could talk myself into starting over. Can I get my 80 bucks back???!!!

lmao.

sorry, not much more to comment on such a post. Please give him his 80$ back or there will be more such threads. In all the years this is the first time I have read someone complaining why the AI isn't exactly moving it's TFs on the exact same route/date as the Japanese did real life. OMG, how can this happen?

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

The AI doesn't want e-mails to discuss the last move or complain about its bad play. It doesn't whine about "gamey" moves or even know there's such a thing as HRs which require a CPA degree to track.

Sounds like some extra features to add to the AI- after all it's supposed to simulate a human opponent. [:D]

Supreme Allied HQ. STOP. message follows. STOP. Operated for months with one CV. STOP. You get more. STOP. Capital ship losses through September 1943 tragic. STOP. Still on schedule. STOP.

Zuluhour: commanding TWIT. STOP.
685 turns still green as grass. STOP.

ORIGINAL: castor troy

sorry, not much more to comment on such a post. Please give him his 80$ back or there will be more such threads. In all the years this is the first time I have read someone complaining why the AI isn't exactly moving it's TFs on the exact same route/date as the Japanese did real life. OMG, how can this happen?

I wouldn't be quite so hard on him Troy. He bought an "historical simulation", and after many hours work on his first turn the AI proceeded to do something a-historical on turn two. Yes, he should have taken time to look at some forum sites to discover just what the "Historical" setting for the AI meant..., but his assumption was not completely unwarented. And I get the feeling that $80 was not an inconsiderable investment for him..., so to be unexpectedly "kicked in the teeth" by the AI in his very first attempt was a shock. Hopefully he'll try again with more success and discover the joys of AE to go with the sorrows...

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: castor troy

sorry, not much more to comment on such a post. Please give him his 80$ back or there will be more such threads. In all the years this is the first time I have read someone complaining why the AI isn't exactly moving it's TFs on the exact same route/date as the Japanese did real life. OMG, how can this happen?

I wouldn't be quite so hard on him Troy. He bought an "historical simulation", and after many hours work on his first turn the AI proceeded to do something a-historical on turn two. Yes, he should have taken time to look at some forum sites to discover just what the "Historical" setting for the AI meant..., but his assumption was not completely unwarented. And I get the feeling that $80 was not an inconsiderable investment for him..., so to be unexpectedly "kicked in the teeth" by the AI in his very first attempt was a shock. Hopefully he'll try again with more success and discover the joys of AE to go with the sorrows...

yes, but it would have been the same as saying "I moved my two carriers 5 hexes near Truk in 4/6/43 and they were sunk by 60 Betties attacking out of there. What the heck, there were no 60 Betties at Truk at that date in real life". Or have I missed his point?

Maybe i just wants to play after Pearl Harbor occurred...

ORIGINAL: Treetop64

Having spent just $900, Gary apparently buys his books only from the bargain bins at used book stores, or from garage sales.

Speaking of the former, some of the best books in my collection were purchased from used book stores. Surprising how much golden material can be dug up from those establishments!

I have bought a fair deal in used book stores. You can really find some bargains there! I bought some quite hard to come by books for €2 apiece. Another good tip is to buy paperback. Easier to bring along too!

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: castor troy

sorry, not much more to comment on such a post. Please give him his 80$ back or there will be more such threads. In all the years this is the first time I have read someone complaining why the AI isn't exactly moving it's TFs on the exact same route/date as the Japanese did real life. OMG, how can this happen?

I wouldn't be quite so hard on him Troy. He bought an "historical simulation", and after many hours work on his first turn the AI proceeded to do something a-historical on turn two. Yes, he should have taken time to look at some forum sites to discover just what the "Historical" setting for the AI meant..., but his assumption was not completely unwarented. And I get the feeling that $80 was not an inconsiderable investment for him..., so to be unexpectedly "kicked in the teeth" by the AI in his very first attempt was a shock. Hopefully he'll try again with more success and discover the joys of AE to go with the sorrows...

yes, but it would have been the same as saying "I moved my two carriers 5 hexes near Truk in 4/6/43 and they were sunk by 60 Betties attacking out of there. What the heck, there were no 60 Betties at Truk at that date in real life". Or have I missed his point?

No.., it wouldn't; and yes..., you have. He made precisely the same move as Halsey did historically, in an historical simulation set on the "historical" setting. We KNOW that doesn't guarantee an "historical" result---but how long have we been playing? This was the very first attempt of a total "newbie" in a game we all know has an almost 90 degree learning curve. I just thought you were being a bit harsh.

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: castor troy

sorry, not much more to comment on such a post. Please give him his 80$ back or there will be more such threads. In all the years this is the first time I have read someone complaining why the AI isn't exactly moving it's TFs on the exact same route/date as the Japanese did real life. OMG, how can this happen?

I wouldn't be quite so hard on him Troy. He bought an "historical simulation", and after many hours work on his first turn the AI proceeded to do something a-historical on turn two. Yes, he should have taken time to look at some forum sites to discover just what the "Historical" setting for the AI meant..., but his assumption was not completely unwarented. And I get the feeling that $80 was not an inconsiderable investment for him..., so to be unexpectedly "kicked in the teeth" by the AI in his very first attempt was a shock. Hopefully he'll try again with more success and discover the joys of AE to go with the sorrows...

I agree with not being too hard on the OP. He's hopefully just posting a momentary frustration we've all had when we've done something dumb with a valuable strategic asset and paid the price for it. But Castor Troy is right. Judging from the OP's follow up replies he appears to be expecting the AI to simply do exactly what the Japanese did on a given day. And he appears to want to simply do exactly what the Americans did on a given day. Is this a game or is it just to act out a role in a movie script? Hopefully it will just be a momentary setback for him and not a "game breaker".

EDIT: I don't think Matrix advertises the game as a "historic simulation" so I'm not sure where he would come up with that idea.

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1




I wouldn't be quite so hard on him Troy. He bought an "historical simulation", and after many hours work on his first turn the AI proceeded to do something a-historical on turn two. Yes, he should have taken time to look at some forum sites to discover just what the "Historical" setting for the AI meant..., but his assumption was not completely unwarented. And I get the feeling that $80 was not an inconsiderable investment for him..., so to be unexpectedly "kicked in the teeth" by the AI in his very first attempt was a shock. Hopefully he'll try again with more success and discover the joys of AE to go with the sorrows...

yes, but it would have been the same as saying "I moved my two carriers 5 hexes near Truk in 4/6/43 and they were sunk by 60 Betties attacking out of there. What the heck, there were no 60 Betties at Truk at that date in real life". Or have I missed his point?

No.., it wouldn't; and yes..., you have. He made precisely the same move as Halsey did historically, in an historical simulation set on the "historical" setting. We KNOW that doesn't guarantee an "historical" result---but how long have we been playing? This was the very first attempt of a total "newbie" in a game we all know has an almost 90 degree learning curve. I just thought you were being a bit harsh.

so, newb or not, one expects perfect historic moves by an AI of a game if he sets it to historical? If one really thinks that, then really every aircraft, every ship, every ground unit has to be at the same place in the same state each and every day of the war at the histroic dates, no matter if day one, or day five. Which starts to fail if you (as the other side) fail to sink/damage/delay/shoot down a certain ship/LCU/ac.

I still don't get it. But yes, I may have been a little harsh but considering how the op did his thread I am not really sorry.

Actually I agree with CT that the tone of the OP invited an equally direct response. More so if a simple friendly question would have had the same effect. Sometimes you need to vent, but then to live with the consequences...

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Actually I agree with CT that the tone of the OP invited an equally direct response. More so if a simple friendly question would have had the same effect. Sometimes you need to vent, but then to live with the consequences...

The OP's confusion over the meaning of "Historical" is understandable given his short duration as a player. What grabbed my eye and got me into the thread was the title, which was inflamatory. Even the smartest fish falls for the old worm trick now and th . . . well, every day in fact. [:'(]

Yes I see your point, and that of Castor Troy's - on the other hand I have wasted a lot of my money over the years and can see where, had there been a useful forum I might have given vent to my annoyance also. Some have - dare I say it - been matrix titles as well!

However, given the forum, a short while reading a few of the many postings might have save Auchinlek some response because he would not have posted in such an inflammatory way.

Roger

The post could be considered inflammatory and questionable given the title....the all caps, the content and the fact that the poster has a 5 total posts between 2006 and now and all run along a common theme. (dissatisfaction)

Dissatisfaction is not a crime....but after reading his post, and the title......and the last part in particular...."Can I get my 80$ back?" I'm not moved to sooth him if he's legit.

Why ask a public forum about Matrix policy on refunds? Go to the source. Sorry you think the game is crap. My last Pearl Harbor result left me with zero battleships sunk. Then to add insult to injury I ran into Halsey and sank his Enterprise in trade for Shokaku. The horror....the pain. [:)]

Not as much pain as recently starting a PBEM using the 42 GC....and getting Lex sunk by an RO boat while the Japanese retired to await reinforcements. I'll get my opponent for that! [:'(]

Nothing confusing about Historical start....if you read the manual. There is also a Dec 8 scenario that gives you an expressly Historical first day result that is predetermined right down to the bomb hit.

Probably just a momentary venting of frustration. Many of us have had the feeling before only to feel silly after posting an overreaction to our frustration. Sounds like the AI was doing exactly what it should. On December 8, 1941 Americans weren't sure what to expect next from the Japanese. Was Hawaii going to be invaded? No one knew for sure other than the Japanese high command. If the OP is uncertain what the AI will do next, well that is a pretty historical simulation of the way the Allies really felt. Congratulations. You now know how the American high command must have felt. Simulation intact.

perhaps......but speaking as a veteran wargamer vs. a dev.....i found the "vent" to be curious more than anything. There was nothing so outragious about what happened IMO as to warrent throwing in statements like "what next?" Hawaii invaded on turn 1 as well? Then saying that your probably not going to give the game a 2nd 1st turn restart and publically asking about getting $80 back?

Sorry. sounds more like a discount than a venting and perhaps a fishing for a response. A true wargamer gives a game more consideration before publically declaring it's crap on a forum of fellow game players. I've tried many wargames and found some wanting and DID get refunds on them, all without such dramatics.
.

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

perhaps......but speaking as a veteran wargamer vs. a dev.....i found the "vent" to be curious more than anything. There was nothing so outragious about what happened IMO as to warrent throwing in statements like "what next?" Hawaii invaded on turn 1 as well? Then saying that your probably not going to give the game a 2nd 1st turn restart and publically asking about getting $80 back?

Sorry. sounds more like a discount than a venting and perhaps a fishing for a response. A true wargamer gives a game more consideration before publically declaring it's crap on a forum of fellow game players. I've tried many wargames and found some wanting and DID get refunds on them, all without such dramatics.
.

As I stated above the rant was unjustified and Castor Troy was right in his response. I was just trying to smooth things over a little after the fact. Hopefully you are aware that I have always defended the AE team and the excellent quality of their/your work. Just didn't want to scare away a potential new forum member if indeed it was possibly just a momentary and immature vent of frustration. If it wasn't then the forum is much better off without him. But as you point out the post was pretty ridiculous.

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress
As I stated above the rant was unjustified and Castor Troy was right in his response. I was just trying to smooth things over a little after the fact. Hopefully you are aware that I have always defended the AE team and the excellent quality of their/your work. Just didn't want to scare away a potential new forum member if indeed it was possibly just a momentary and immature vent of frustration. If it wasn't then the forum is much better off without him. But as you point out the post was pretty ridiculous.

Feel exactly the same way, and this was why my initial response in this thread was rather friendly.

I understand Gary. Sorry if you saw my post as a "[:-]" in your direction.

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

I understand Gary. Sorry if you saw my post as a "[:-]" in your direction.

Ah. I see now. No worries. [:)]

EDIT: My apologies for the misinterpretation.