POLL: Solution to Aircraft Upgrades

[strawbuk]

ORIGINAL: strawbuk

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

it is ALLIIVEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!

Quick send for

(image)

Or better still....

[seblinselles]

I think this should be a feature:
the player(s) can choose at the beginning of the game such as 'subs doc' on/off, he will have aircraft upgrades :
-1 historical
-2 with limitation
-3 without any limitation
That way everybody will find his interest in the solution.
I don't know if it's difficult to implement in the game's code

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: strawbuk
Or better still....

uh oh.....Matrix had better watch out.....The Slayer is taking an interest in the upgrade pathing...... [X(]

[2ndACR]

Punt, still looking for a sticky.[:D]

[CatLord]

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

My idea, nay "solution" for all the ruckas regarding upgrades/downgrades was a simple restrictive system.

Japan: IJN groups can only upgrade/downgrade to IJN aircraft
IJA groups can only upgrade/downgrade to IJA aircraft

Further restrictions:

Fighter groups can only change to other types of fighter groups/Fighter-bombers
Bomber groups can only chage to other types of bomber groups.
(further: LBA to LBA only......Dive bomber to Dive bomber only, Torpedo bomber to torpedo bomber only)

Now that I have understand the Production system, this option sounds reasonnable if it can be toggled On/Off [:)]

Could we have another toggleable option to be able to build ahistorical ships and ahistorical LCU units as well please [:'(] ? (with reasonable restrictions, of course [:D])...

Cat

[pyaeen]

I think most of us want to know what decisions is made from deverloper about this topic. Say really, this production system was not my expected from Gary's games. If their next game War in Russia is the same, I really not to buy it (i have all Gary's games). How to expect I have 500 panther in pool but can't use in my panzer division....

And, wargames is military SIMULATION. We are not watching history book or movie (even history books can't describe the history in real). If we all need follow what histroy did, why not restrict our strategy decisions in game also?

[Jaws_slith]

ORIGINAL: pyaeen

I think most of us want to know what decisions is made from deverloper about this topic. Say really, this production system was not my expected from Gary's games. If their next game War in Russia is the same, I really not to buy it (i have all Gary's games). How to expect I have 500 panther in pool but can't use in my panzer division....

And, wargames is military SIMULATION. We are not watching history book or movie (even history books can't describe the history in real). If we all need follow what histroy did, why not restrict our strategy decisions in game also?

100% hit[:)]

[Bulldog61]

I voted for no limits to changing A/C upgrades. Short of adding another table to the db which would resemble a matrix of air unit A/C model and date there is no way to be historically acurate. an example is the 49th US Fighter group; it consisted of the 7th, 8th and 9th Fighter squadrons. The seventh should arrive in SF on 4 Jan 42 equiped with P-40B's Upgrade to P-40E's several months later. They upgrade to P-47C's in 1943 and then to P-38J's in 44. The 8th Squadron Also arrives with P-40B's later upgradingf to E's and N then to P-38J's in 1944. The 9th squadron resembles the 8th. I could go on.
I think players should be free to equip their squadrons limited only by availability of A/C and supply and should pay a PP penalty if a different type is chosen.

[TheElf]

I've always felt that the IJ Player's A/C Production industry should be directly related to the health of his game. In other words if it is 1943 or 1944 and his supply, resource, Heavy industry is intact and at ahistorical levels then ahistorical results should be seen. If you are playing well in 43' (ie ahistorically) the your R&D and production numbers should be ahistorical too. It is a reward for great strategy and gameplay. If the state of the game is due to the Allied players buffoonery then the repercussions are manifested in an IJ player who has better Aicraft in greater numbers than what was seen historically.

The hard part of course is translating this in terms of gameplay, but I feel this point is often lost in the fiery debates on the subject. Of course this ALL assumes that the IJ player already has the freedom to choose his upgrades, and what he R&Ds, because there is no doubt that that part of the game is broken.

Perhaps the R&D balance is can be solved by saying "You can't go below historical levels of R&D on a given Aircraft." In other words, say the historical R&D level of the A6M5 in the game is x50 factories. If a player doesn't want to use his resources on the A6M5 and would prefer to accelerate other models that is fine, but...

...Those x50 factories and their capacity are dedicated to the A6M5 until it becomes available. It can only be increased or expanded, or DECREASED to its default (x50)historical level, but never below. After the A6M5 is in production the player can choose to use or lose it. Take those x50 factories and turn them off so he can expand R&D on the George for example, or conver to production of a tyoe already available.

Therefore if the IJ player is kicking a$$ he may use his surplus supply or resource to R&D OTHER A/C which he does want to accelerate.

[mlees]

I voted for #2.

How 'bout this...

Matrix sets up a preset upgrade path based on the "at start" model flown by the squadron, for example:

P40B-> P40E -> P40N (for USAAF)

or

F2A -> F4F3 -> F4F4 -> F6F (for USN)

But if you want to switch a P40 squadon to a P38 or P47 (other USAAF fighter paths), you have to pay a political point cost just like you were changing HQ's.

Thoughts??