Matrix Games Forums

It's dec 43 in my pbem, and I just lost 100 tony's for 6 thunderbolts. I've been playing this game since it first came out, and been reading this message board regularly regarding the historicity (?) of the jap pilot training program. Despite all the reams of threads regarding this, it's all irrevelant. A crap plane is a crap plane. A good number of those Tony's had 80 and 90 exp pilots flying them.

Oh, and by the way, for all the allied players who cry about how powerful Japan is early in the war, etc, etc., trying playing Japan. Not only are my planes no match, my bases and ground troops suffer from daily carpet bombing raids from 200+ 4E's. I now realize I have to spend a good year of my life getting a daily arse kicking in a game which I KNOW I have no chance to win.

I'm not quitting tho. If Tojo and friends can stand it, I can....

I can assure you Japan IS too powerful in the first year of the war - in this game.
I also have no doubt that what just happened to you - happened to you, and is not realistic either.
The specs for aircraft are pretty accurate - relative to each other.

That leads me to believe what we are both seeing is that the formula for aircombat is not working well (biggest understatement of the year).

Demo

Try Nikademus' mod. The stock air to air model suxxx.

training isnt always everything. look at it this way. If youre Mario Andretti but you drive a Geo Metro wat will happen? [:D]

ORIGINAL: marky

training isnt always everything. look at it this way. If youre Mario Andretti but you drive a Geo Metro wat will happen? [:D]

Marky...are you old enough to remember Mario Andretti?[X(][:D]

ORIGINAL: marky

training isnt always everything. look at it this way. If youre Mario Andretti but you drive a Geo Metro wat will happen? [:D]

Depends if you are downtown shopping or at the oval.[:D]
He'd still get laid, handsome bugger.

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

Try Nikademus' mod. The stock air to air model suxxx.

Yah.....the stock model leaves a lot to be desired. (sigh) Even the mods acknowledge that[;)]

I would argue that the attrition modeling for aircraft is either ignored or insufficient.

The USA lost on the average 10% of all active planes per month.

I assure you I have NEVER seen anything approaching that level of attrition.

Those 200+ raids would get REAL expensive at that level.

I am not saying the planes were lost. They were written off.

The problem is in the code: one day you lose your power as Japan.
It probably should be fixed. But nothing we can do about it. This is different from the early war issues. I ran tests in 1945 (to learn about 1945 planes) - Japan might as well surrender. The whole combined air force scored a single hit on USS New Jersey! And died in the effort.

ORIGINAL: Demosthenes

ORIGINAL: marky

training isnt always everything. look at it this way. If youre Mario Andretti but you drive a Geo Metro wat will happen? [:D]

Marky...are you old enough to remember Mario Andretti?[X(][:D]

Problem is that I remember him driving in Formula one. That was before he switched to Nascar.

BTW downtown I dont think most of us could catch him with a 'regular' (ie not sports or tuned up) car, Metro or not.

And yes pilot exp DO count. Even in 1945 some P51D's (2or3) IIRC were shot down by clearly outclassed Me109's flown by surviving experten. Or even if we half Sakai's claim about shooting down Corsairs on the last day of the war, an experienced pilot CAN overcome superior planes. Erich Hartmann has survived wioth his Me109G a dogfight with as much as 10 Mustangs over a rumanian oilfield. No losses on any side. [:D]

IMHO the air combat model should take into consideration the following things

1. Altitude
2. Number ratio
3. Pilot exp
4. Plane capabilities

In this order.

ORIGINAL: el cid again

The problem is in the code: one day you lose your power as Japan.
It probably should be fixed. But nothing we can do about it. This is different from the early war issues. I ran tests in 1945 (to learn about 1945 planes) - Japan might as well surrender. The whole combined air force scored a single hit on USS New Jersey! And died in the effort.

Those stats are with the concurrence of the kamikazes??

ORIGINAL: Sardonic

I would argue that the attrition modeling for aircraft is either ignored or insufficient.

The USA lost on the average 10% of all active planes per month.

I assure you I have NEVER seen anything approaching that level of attrition.

Those 200+ raids would get REAL expensive at that level.

I am not saying the planes were lost. They were written off.

And Japan's attrition losses were slightly higher than those of the US. It's a seriously under-represented factor in the game.

not true from 2k lost jap planes half is to ops

" Marky...are you old enough to remember Mario Andretti?


Ursa Major:
Problem is that I remember him driving in Formula one. That was before he switched to Nascar. "


Actually, Mario raced Nascar before he went into Formula One. I recall him winnning the 1967 Daytona 500, long before he won the 1978 Formula One championship for Lotus.

Hey I am not THAT old![:D]

Heck, I remember him (Mario Andretti) racing in the Indy'500 back in 1966 ...though he lost to A.J.Foyt as I recall.[;)]

The problem is in the code: one day you lose your power as Japan.
It probably should be fixed. But nothing we can do about it. This is different from the early war issues. I ran tests in 1945 (to learn about 1945 planes) - Japan might as well surrender. The whole combined air force scored a single hit on USS New Jersey! And died in the effort.


Those stats are with the concurrence of the kamikazes??

No they were not. I am not sure the code will do kamakazes with new plane types it never heard of? Anyway, I don't believe in kamakazes and I wanted to know if the regular planes would fly? Well - they fly - they just cannot survive! Even though I put the US fleet at Osaka and allowed it NO air cover! They just shot down everything. Now I am an anti-air warfare guy - US Navy type - and I believe in guns - but that is rediculous.

And Japan's attrition losses were slightly higher than those of the US. It's a seriously under-represented factor in the game.

The problem is that how you use your planes affects attrition. Specifically, it matters the size of the airfield relative to the size of the plane. Also, the mission matters. So measuring what the game does is complicated. But the theory was that durability would affect attrition. I cut durability by about 6 - on the average - as far as I can go and still have a reasonable range to represent different plane types. It does not seem to have been enough - and if it is - it is barely enough. It is clearly not excessive. A code change may be required to get attrition as high as we would like. If you wish to couduct tests with the new plane values, let me know.

And Japan's attrition losses were slightly higher than those of the US. It's a seriously under-represented factor in the game.

_____________________________

This MIGHT be true - but the g ame DOES model higher losses (for Japan) due to the way the Allies were set up to recover pilots - so I would not bet on it being totally ignored. Under the hood there are some very sophisticated considerations - if we only knew about them we would be impressed. In this case, it was disclosed.

ORIGINAL: el cid again

And Japan's attrition losses were slightly higher than those of the US. It's a seriously under-represented factor in the game.

_____________________________

This MIGHT be true - but the g ame DOES model higher losses (for Japan) due to the way the Allies were set up to recover pilots - so I would not bet on it being totally ignored. Under the hood there are some very sophisticated considerations - if we only knew about them we would be impressed. In this case, it was disclosed.

Or there may be grade school drawings. That's the beauty of keeping it hidden, nobody knows if your are an idiot or not.[:)]