Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: mlees

Basically, in the end, when I see a post that says that this game is too heavilly slanted pro-Allied, and I see plenty of AAR's where the Japanese do much better than historically (like conquering India, China, Russia), then all I can do is scratch my head in wonderment.

I don't know why your surprised, Japan did win the war you know .. took Russia in 1942, took China and India in 1943, and in 1944 dropped the Atom bomb on Washington DC and dictated peace terms...don't you remember anything?

Well you are probably scratch your head in wonderment HOW, when Japan conquered India, China and Russia, and with all these freed forces defending Pacific, Allies are still taking bases on Pacific year before history.

I don't know why your surprised, Japan did win the war you know .. took Russia in 1942, took China and India in 1943, and in 1944 dropped the Atom bomb on Washington DC and dictated peace terms...don't you remember anything?

Nope, it was in 1943 when USArmy landed in Tokyo and won the war.

I don't know why your surprised, Japan did win the war you know

Well, the Imperial Public Re-education and Information School System ("Eye"-Priss) seems to have successfully covered up thier misdeeds...

Is this why Japanese Anime' is so popular? Peek-a-Choo?

Well you are probably scratch your head in wonderment HOW, when Japan conquered India, China and Russia, and with all these freed forces defending Pacific, Allies are still taking bases on Pacific year before history.

In the AAR's where Japan took India, China, and/or Russia, the Allied player usually gives up...

So, is it an overabundance of supply? (For both sides?)

Do the forces involved use less supply than they should?

And/or are production rates for aircraft too high?

Do you agree with the OP that the game is too slanted towards the Allies? Japan?

If you want to creat a plane vs plane model you nead to not imo use real world combat results to arive at a base line, you should use preformance stats and curves, exct. A-la flight sim's. The game already has variables for Fatigue,leadership and experance, and moral. If you again base the comparative preformance expications on a situation whear the Japanese were streached to the limit in all reasionable areas one might look to compare them, and then aply that to the whole, your going to creat in this instance a Pro Allied model, because the comparasion is Pro Allied.

I can't believe your logic here. If you don't look at 'what actually happened and why' as an historical baseline, you have nothing to guage accuracy by.

Using flight sims to rate what aircraft should do - as opposed to looking at history - is absolutely wrong. Did it ever occur to you that computer games (or ANY game for that matter) are not as realistic as, well....reaility?

If you don't use historical analisys as a baseline - you cross into "Science Fiction". It may be fun and satisfying to play, but serious or realistic it won't ever be.

B

I am saying that early war overpowering of Japan is equal to late war overpowering of US. These two things are in kind of balance. Maybe slightly imbalanced towards US because of supply abundance (they had them more to use it with its overpowered toys), but also can agree that they are equal.

So I am against of any weakening of Japanese side, without weakening of US side. And generally this is the role of this pro-Japanese thread (as I understand) to counter simmiliar pro-Allied one, to maintain status-quo.

My eyes are bleeding....

Hi, I know people think the Zero bonus could have been done using pilot experiance. But pilot experiance lasts as long as the pilot is alive while the bonus expires.

Contrary to popular belief the Japanese experiance given in WITP is not that much higher then many Allied groups starting levels. The IJN and USN are almost the same with a great many IJN units being lower then starting USN units.

In a normal game the Zero bonus will not effect USN units. (by normal I mean a game where Japan fights inside SRA before going on other adventures)

I think if the AVG is to be immune then USN groups should also be immune. Or simply make the bonus only apply under these conditions. (but make it all Japanese groups)

1. The Allied group is assigned to a restricted HQ
2. It is before Apr 1942.
3. Reduce the starting experiance of all Japanese groups by 20 points.

I think these changes would reflect the INTENT of the rule without being exploitable. (early in war inside SRA the Japanese would dominate)

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

I am saying that early war overpowering of Japan is equal to late war overpowering of US. These two things are in kind of balance. Maybe slightly imbalanced towards US because of supply abundance (they had them more to use it with its overpowered toys), but also can agree that they are equal.

The Japanese strength at the beginning of the war was based on suprise and pre-war planning.
They never HAD the ability to conquer Russia, China, or India in the way the game makes possible. The Allies came back with overwhelming material and technical superiority. The sides were NEVER equal.

So I am against of any weakening of Japanese side, without weakening of US side. And generally this is the role of this pro-Japanese thread (as I understand) to counter simmiliar pro-Allied one, to maintain status-quo.

Why can't you reccognize that it's the "pro-history and reality" viewpoints that are causing you grief? The folks fighting you here were supporting you when you were complaining that US 4-engined bombers were being provided in far too large numbers. Why..., because they WERE warped! We WANT historical accuracy. But try to bring up the same point about a Japanese A/C and the howling would wake the dead.

Russ wrote: " 3. Reduce the starting experiance of all Japanese groups by 20 points. "

I'm beginning to think that ALL pilots should have their experience reduced by about 20 or so points. This might just be what is necessary to cut down on the pace of the game.

Hi, If I get time I'll just do a mod where I go down and reduce every group by 10 points.
(and then after that reduce them by 20) and see what impact this has.
Or someone else can do it. I'll find out on wen May 10th when I have to go take my physical. If I pass that I could be gone in a matter of days. (Ifnot I'll be here with plenty of time to test)

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, If I get time I'll just do a mod where I go down and reduce every group by 10 points.
(and then after that reduce them by 20) and see what impact this has.
Or someone else can do it. I'll find out on wen May 10th when I have to go take my physical. If I pass that I could be gone in a matter of days. (Ifnot I'll be here with plenty of time to test)

Just for everyone's info - I have done that. It's amazing how the air combat model changes. Even the dreaded Uber CAP dosen't kill all like it used to.

As a matter of fact, re-evaluating the accuracy of all aircraft guns (my own trade secret for now) and bringing group experience ratings to 70 or less (especially for the 70+ to 90+ groups) has transformed air combat into something believable.

That is why I said in a recent thread I gained a whole new respect for what the WitP engine is capable of...

B

ORIGINAL: Big B
Just for everyone's info - I have done that. It's amazing how the air combat model changes. Even the dreaded Uber CAP dosen't kill all like it used to.

As a matter of fact, re-evaluating the accuracy of all aircraft guns (my own trade secret for now) and bringing group experience ratings to 70 or less (especially for the 70+ to 90+ groups) has transformed air combat into something believable.

That is why I said in a recent thread I gained a whole new respect for what the WitP engine is capable of...

Interesting.

By how much did you reduce the experience levels? Was it the same reduction across the board, or was it different for different nationalities?

Also, did you just reduce the experience levels of the airgroups, or did you also adjust the levels of the individual pilots?

Andrew

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl
The Japanese strength at the beginning of the war was based on suprise and pre-war planning.

AND experience from war in China. Even if not everyone fought, and those who did (I am talking of course about pilots) did it for only short period of time and did it against poorly equipped enemy, the new tactics and experience was gained. These were given by veterans to new pilots. Definetely this was better than any country theoretical practice.

They never HAD the ability to conquer Russia, China, or India in the way the game makes possible. The Allies came back with overwhelming material and technical superiority. The sides were NEVER equal.

USA never had ability to end war before 1945 in the way game makes possible. Allies had lots of material, but not infinite. Japan forces still were strong and numerous, it was time consuming to beat them. Nobody said they were equal, simply said both sides were equally overpowered.

Why can't you reccognize that it's the "pro-history and reality" viewpoints that are causing you grief?

We know that winners write history, but who decides what is reality? The only real thing is that Japs attacked Pearl Harbour, and US won that war. All between are not so obvious.

The folks fighting you here were supporting you when you were complaining that US 4-engined bombers were being provided in far too large numbers. Why..., because they WERE warped! We WANT historical accuracy. But try to bring up the same point about a Japanese A/C and the howling would wake the dead.

Yes, number of actual aircraft can be writed down by one simple number. Here you can easily get historical accuracy. But when we comes to each plane stats, we must make assumptions to translate some briefly known parameters of plane to in-game stats. When we have assumptions, we cant have historical accuracy. Only one person in the universe knows which plane which stats should have and which group which experience should have, but actually I dont believe in him (I am coalling myself an atheist)

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: Big B
Just for everyone's info - I have done that. It's amazing how the air combat model changes. Even the dreaded Uber CAP dosen't kill all like it used to.

As a matter of fact, re-evaluating the accuracy of all aircraft guns (my own trade secret for now) and bringing group experience ratings to 70 or less (especially for the 70+ to 90+ groups) has transformed air combat into something believable.

That is why I said in a recent thread I gained a whole new respect for what the WitP engine is capable of...

Interesting.

By how much did you reduce the experience levels? Was it the same reduction across the board, or was it different for different nationalities?

Also, did you just reduce the experience levels of the airgroups, or did you also adjust the levels of the individual pilots?

Andrew

Well, what I did was recalculate all guns accurracy by the same standard (I don't want to post my method just yet). And for squadrons - I took a cue from your own scen 116 and reduced all squadrons as you pretty much did, then I went to the historical pilots file and went through all 4000 of them and brought down their exp ratings also.

The net result has been, even at the upper end of large combats (over 90 a/c per side), the casualty rates are no longer in the 90%+ range, more like 33% to 40% for the really ugly ones - and typically only a couple casualties for squadron level engagements (sometimes none at all).

B

ORIGINAL: Big B

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, If I get time I'll just do a mod where I go down and reduce every group by 10 points.
(and then after that reduce them by 20) and see what impact this has.
Or someone else can do it. I'll find out on wen May 10th when I have to go take my physical. If I pass that I could be gone in a matter of days. (Ifnot I'll be here with plenty of time to test)

Just for everyone's info - I have done that. It's amazing how the air combat model changes. Even the dreaded Uber CAP dosen't kill all like it used to.

As a matter of fact, re-evaluating the accuracy of all aircraft guns (my own trade secret for now) and bringing group experience ratings to 70 or less (especially for the 70+ to 90+ groups) has transformed air combat into something believable.

That is why I said in a recent thread I gained a whole new respect for what the WitP engine is capable of...

B

Yes, but when they get to that experience range again, the problem re-emerges. If done in the game, all it does it knock out yet another IJ advantage of early pilot quality, unless, of course, one had fairness in mind and EVERY unit had it's experience drop 20 regardless of whether they were in in the 70-90 category.

ORIGINAL: Charles_22
Yes, but when they get to that experience range again, the problem re-emerges. If done in the game, all it does it knock out yet another IJ advantage of early pilot quality, unless, of course, one had fairness in mind and EVERY unit had it's experience drop 20 regardless of whether they were in in the 70-90 category.

Absolutely, Charles. This is one of myriad reasons I say, "Leave it alone" (of course, if you want to fiddle with things in the editor for your own purposes, fine. Mental masturbation is all perfectly good for some).

What is the actual effect of such "fiddling" over the long haul and in actual game experience from 1941 through 1945? I have trouble enough handling what people call the "vanilla" version of this game. I have no interest in having to re-learn everything all the time because I am applying Band-Aid solutions to major surgery problems.

It's been bad enough that every PBEM game I ever started was killed off by crap patches. 1.80 is playable. I'm back in the swim. Don't drown me (after he first saw me, my old man wanted to, but Ma wouldn't let him).

WWII definitely had a pro-allied slant; did you see how those b*stards won the damn thing? I mean, the only reason that happened the way it did was because Germany, Italy, and Japan decided to take on the whole rest of the world all at once. It just wasn't fair. Should never have happened that way; the Axis had all the coolest weapons systems. Just because the allies had tons more of everything they won. The allies should have to get in line, like a tag team, you know? What a joke. Where's my midgets?[:@]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

ORIGINAL: Charles_22
Yes, but when they get to that experience range again, the problem re-emerges. If done in the game, all it does it knock out yet another IJ advantage of early pilot quality, unless, of course, one had fairness in mind and EVERY unit had it's experience drop 20 regardless of whether they were in in the 70-90 category.

Absolutely, Charles. This is one of myriad reasons I say, "Leave it alone" (of course, if you want to fiddle with things in the editor for your own purposes, fine. Mental masturbation is all perfectly good for some).

What is the actual effect of such "fiddling" over the long haul and in actual game experience from 1941 through 1945? I have trouble enough handling what people call the "vanilla" version of this game. I have no interest in having to re-learn everything all the time because I am applying Band-Aid solutions to major surgery problems.

It's been bad enough that every PBEM game I ever started was killed off by crap patches. 1.80 is playable. I'm back in the swim. Don't drown me (after he first saw me, my old man wanted to, but Ma wouldn't let him).

I'm not sure ...but isn't there a routine that retires pilots after X number of missions? So instead of 90 missions at experience 90 you have 30 at exp 70, 30 at 80 and 30 at 90 then the pilot is retired.

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

ORIGINAL: Charles_22
Yes, but when they get to that experience range again, the problem re-emerges. If done in the game, all it does it knock out yet another IJ advantage of early pilot quality, unless, of course, one had fairness in mind and EVERY unit had it's experience drop 20 regardless of whether they were in in the 70-90 category.

Absolutely, Charles. This is one of myriad reasons I say, "Leave it alone" (of course, if you want to fiddle with things in the editor for your own purposes, fine. Mental masturbation is all perfectly good for some).

What is the actual effect of such "fiddling" over the long haul and in actual game experience from 1941 through 1945? I have trouble enough handling what people call the "vanilla" version of this game. I have no interest in having to re-learn everything all the time because I am applying Band-Aid solutions to major surgery problems.

It's been bad enough that every PBEM game I ever started was killed off by crap patches. 1.80 is playable. I'm back in the swim. Don't drown me (after he first saw me, my old man wanted to, but Ma wouldn't let him).

I'm not sure ...but isn't there a routine that retires pilots after X number of missions? So instead of 90 missions at experience 90 you have 30 at exp 70, 30 at 80 and 30 at 90 then the pilot is retired.

It does change things for a while, but the IJ pilots don't retire if I've heard correctly.