Northstar

I hate to toss around the B-word, but I stumbled across a couple problems in the last week. I've been playing the Leyte Gulf campaign (and barely hanging on, thank you very much Ray ). On two separate occasions, I managed to shoot down a pair of unescorted Dauntlesses. After the second one went down, the game ended as it should, but then the bomber reappeared and I got the animation of a (damaged) bomber dropping its bomb. In both cases I got the correct point value from the mission, but I don't know if that is because it's a graphic only problem, or because the damaged Dauntless didn't have enough bomb points to damage the target. In both cases I THINK I happened to actually kill the last bomber pilot -- that may have something to do with it. Last night, a more interesting problem occured. In attack against two flights of unescorted Betties, one of the intercepting Wildcat AI's sort of locked. On turn 3 or 4, with a full hand of six cards, it selected one of my bombers for an attack, but then played no cards (I assume because it had no attack cards) and then proceeded to the discard phase. However, it did not discard or draw any cards, and when it's turn came around it did exactly the same thing: selected a bomber for attack, played no cards, made no discards or draws. Basically, for the last three or four turns, it held onto the same apparantly useless six cards. I don't know if the AI takes its target into account when making its decisions, but it seems that during the discard/draw phases the AI thought it had a decent hand (maybe against fighters?) but then had nothing to actually play against the bombers.

Stalin, 20,000 XP BEHIND :eek: ALL the pilots I've EVER had don't ADD UP to 20,000! With all due respect, any system is likely to break down at the extremes. However, it does bring up a good point. Since Dan was forsightful enough to leave an adjustable factor in the formula for XP distribution, maybe the best solution would be to allow each play to decide how to allocate his points. When creating or joining a game, maybe some radio buttons could be added for the player to select "distribute XPs based on experiance" or "distribute XPs based on performance". The program could just use the appropriate factor for each pair at the end of the fight. This would allow each player some control to develop their pair accordingly. Personally, it seems to me that since the wingies skills will be cheaper, you get more bang for the XP by diverting the experiance to a low XP wingie who can use it more frequently. Obviously, though, this is a personal choice.

Thanks for the quick reply (although I didn't get around to reading it very quickly ) I was just wondering if I was missing something. I'm glad to hear that you're moving ahead with the XP distribution change. It will help to keep a lost wingman from totally cripling a good pair, and also keep the wingie on more even footing with the leader in general.

A couple of days ago, I lost my best team's wingie. The Leader has over 1000XP (not a lot for the pros out there, but a lot for me). When I went to create a new wingman, the computer gave me the option of picking a start year. Cool, I thought, I'll start the guy with a couple hundred XP, take the 10% penalty, and I'll be able to buy a few skills so he isn't a complete loser. I proceed to do so, and find that the XPs can't be spent. I realize that this was spelled out in the change, and I just forgot. I assume that the rationale is to allow new pilots to start in better planes, which is fair enough. My question is, why is this even an option when replacing a wingie? The only thing that makes a difference in this case is the XP multiplier. Shouldn't the wingie just default to the same start year as the Leader, so that he has the same XP multiplier. Otherwise, the only logical choice is to chose 1939 (or whatever the earliest year is)for all new wingies so they get the 1.10 multiplier. Right now I'm stuck with a wingie with 200 useless XP and a 0.90 multipler! On a related note, any news on implementing the change to change the XP distribution so wingies with low XPs relative to their leader get a greater share? In my first battle, the leader got 45 XP and the wingie got 3!

Time usually playing: Evenings Time Zone: EST Usual Time Spent playing: 1-2 hrs, 2-3 days a week Best Day to Play, Sat or Sun: Sun Favorite plane in DIF: Randy (so far) Would join squadron: Yes (and already have) DIF Employee You Wish to Play Most: I will hapilly lose to any of them.

My apologies to you, Skuderian-san, my comrades in arms, and the Chrysanthemum throne, but I have lost to John1440 4 to 6. Excellent draws in the first sweep mission (4 Imperial fighters vs. 2 british) resulted in a devastating loss, which was compounded by two bomber pilots killed in action in the first two turns. Though I fought valiantly against the rapidly tiring British forces, I did not have enough bomb points available the last turn to eliminate the target and secure the victory.

I'm not a "power player", but I thought I'd throw in my $0.02! 1) Excellent idea! The guy who suggested it is brilliant! (Do a forum search! ) 2)I'm somewhat ambivalent about this one, but I don't think I like it. My best pilot right now has about 550 XP, and he's been playing since demo! I've been lapped so many times so far, I'm getting dizzy! A change reducing the number of skills each person can have would mean that I (or someone like me) will NEVER get to use any of the skills. I really don't think that the number of skills is an issue here, especially since the re-balancing from number one will help in finding even matchups. I can see a slight increase in skill costs, but a wholesale massive upward change seems excessive. If the issue is taking advantage of the AI, see my comments to number 4 below. 3) Seems a bit gamey, but OK. I guess it'll give us a chance to test out skills we wouldn't normally buy. I also like the idea of not being able to buy the IMS:D. I assume that these extra skills will count towards the point balancing? Or will they be treated as a extra advantage for one game only? 4) This seems OK, but does penalize people who either like to play the AI, or prefer to play people but can't find anyone or any suitable matches. If this is also an attempt at controlling the "runaway skill" issue in #2, then maybe it should be implemented in rolling fashion. Perhaps players up to some low point value -- those trying to get pilots started or just learning the game -- should get full value from AI fights (these games don't earn an awful lot of XPs anyway). At this point, a penalty could kick in, and get more severe as the pilots get more experianced. This way, new pilots would be able to move up at a decent clip, but uber-pilots won't be able to pick on the poor AI and become...uh...even more uber. (This is not a problem I think I will ever have!) 5. I like this a lot as well. Now losing wingmen won't permanently cripple the team. All in all, I like everything except the skill reduction issue. I think you should review that one a bit more carefully. However, I'm really glad to see you guys continuing to work on this game and try to make it and the community the best they can be. Keep up the good work!

I agree that that sounds like a good way of addressing the issue. Keep up the good work, guys!

I've been thinking about this a bit, and Stalin's Organist's (too many apostrphes!? :confused: ) comment above seems a good chance to bring it up. When the wingie of a high ranking pilot buys it (or a leader dies, resulting in the promotion of a wingie with lots of points) maybe the new wingman should get some initial experiance points? I'm thinking maybe half of the experiance of the leader, or something along those lines. That way, there would still be a penalty for losing a wingie/leader, but you would still end up with a viable team. Seems realistic, in a sense, too, since it seems unlikely that a high ranking ace would receive a wingman fresh out of flight school.

The links didn't seem to work, so I added the URLs below; you can cut and paste them into your browser

I found these through a thread over at The Wargamer. Looks like they should make some good squandron mascots! :cool: NOTE: These may not be very work friendly, so be aware. First, for my own squadron, Otetsuki Tokubetsu Kôkûtai: Oscar http://www.wakachan.org/os/src/1130386683954.jpg Then, for our allies in Jagdverband 44 and sechs Totschläger : Bf-109 Guess you'll have to fight over her. http://www.wakachan.org/os/src/1130376477921.jpg Finally, for Sixxkillers: Corsair http://www.wakachan.org/os/src/1129877150587.png Sorry, nothing for the British so far <EDIT: The links don't seem to work, so I added the URLs below in text. Cut and paste them into your browser> [ November 17, 2005, 05:57 PM: Message edited by: Northstar ]

Does anyone know how many rounds the tournament is going to run? I haven't seen it posted anywhere.

I seond the call for an increased dealay on the first elements first turn. I've run into trouble more than a few times when the timer is nearly out when I get to the game screen.

Don't forget to update the damaged models too. I think the damaged version of the F4F is so cool, I don't even mind it so much when I'M the one flying it. :cool:

Ok. I guess I feel the need to try to clarify my point one more time, since I don't think I made it clear the first time through. After this, I will shut up, since no one else seems to feel this is a problem. To put it more bluntly this time, it seems to me that the play balancing mechanism is off kilter because it is based on the pilot's POTENTIAL (Accumulated XP) rather than his actual ability (XPs spent on currently available skills and abilites). To use a ridiculously extreme example, if I have a pilot who has built up to 133 XPs, and has used every single point on redraws, draw extra cards, and cards, and has used them all up, he will go into his next fight as a 4 point pilot (not including aircraft). If his opponent has the same accumulated experiance, but has spent it all on say, Zoom Climb, Natural Pilot, Evasive, and say Stay with Him, he will have the same point value, but will be much more capable. Despite the fact that they are the same point value, the second pilot will have a significant advantage. To be meaningful, I think the point rating needs to be based on what the pilot actually has available to use, not including expendable skills he has bought and used in the past(or for that matter, accumulated experiance he has yet to spend). To me, it seems like a waste to buy redraws and such, because you are essentially mortgaging your future: you may have a better chance in the current fight, but you are putting yourself in a hole relative to other pilots with the same accumlated XPs who have bought permanent skills. Are ten "draw extra cards" (50 pts) over five missions really worth the same as "Aggressive" which gives you an extra card every time you are advantaged or tailing your opponent? Putting it that way, I guess it might be, if you add the consideration that a pilot might survive those five missions only because of the redraw. But, once a pilot does manage to survive, he has a definite advantage with the extra, permanent skill. I guess my final tag line is that I think the pilots should be rated based on what he is capable of NOW, not what he has done in the past. As promised, I will now shut up, unless others begin taking an interest in this issue.

Thanks for the quick reply! Actually, I handn't even considered the AI issue. My thought had to do with the limitation on the point difference between pilots in a match. For instance, (and the numbers that follow are for talking purposes only; I haven't done the math) I may have a pilot with 120 accumlated experiance, all of it spent on permanent skills. Another player may have a pilot with 200 accumulated experiance, but who has spent 80 points on various expendable skills during his carrier. Thus, we would actually have comprable pilots (both with 120 in permanent or unused expendable skills), based on the skills we have access to. However, the POINT VALUE of the pilots may be too far apart for them to actually play each other. I don't know how big an effect this is going to be -- it all depends on what proportion of XPs are spend on expendable skills. If it is a large proportion (as you guys seem to expect) it could potentially have a huge impact. If only a small proportion of XPs is spent on expendable skills (which is what I have seen so far), than this will not have much of an impact at all. I fear that in the long run we will end up with a severe stratification of pilots, as the hardcore players (or those with no life ) rapidly outpace the more occasional players. If significant XPs are divereted into expendable skills, this change will help maintain a more robust playing community. I realize that to a certain point, that is the nature of the game, and we'll have to "like it or lump it", but this is just my $0.02.

How are the point values of the pilots determined? Are they based on the accumulated experiance points, or on the purchased skills? I suspect the former, based on observations, but shouldn't it be the latter? On a related topic, is there any reference which shows the point values of the particular aircraft?

Ran into a strange occurance last night, which may be a bug. Playing on line, I was flying a Gladiator II. During my turn, I hit the "use Agility" button, and discarded a card to play Scissors. So far so good, but next I attempted to play an attack card. What I did not notice untill I clicked was that ALL my cards showed yellow. When I selected the attack card, instead of playing the attack, the Scissors animation played again. This had no game effect (since I was alread Advantaged), but I did lose the attack card: it was apparantly discarded. My turn seemed to be normal after the second Scissors, but I'm not sure, because I got confused and ended the turn at that point. It seems that the "Agility" skill was stuck open, even after it had triggered. Just something to keep an eye out for.

I have a very similar problem, although in my case it is sporadic. In general, I get the error whenever I try to join a game (Online or campaign) or start a game. I normally have to try 2 to 3 times to get through. This has been happening all along, although it seems slightly worse in full version than it was in the demo. It is an annoyance more than anything, since I can still play, but it would be nice if it could be solved.

Along the same lines as the original suggestion (not that I want to put this thread back on topic, or anything ), it would be nice if there was some way to check the status of people in games. Right now, if you log on, there is no way to tell if the people currently playing have just started -- and thus won't be availible for a while -- or are almost done. Makes it difficult to decide whether to wait around, or play a campaign or something. Ideally, it would be nice to be able to hover over or right click the "in game" icon and get a report on who is in the game and what turn it is. At a minimum, maybe we could see if it is a 1v1 or 2v2, with the local time the game started. That way, we can determine if it is worth waiting until the game wraps up to try to get in, or to move on.

Thanks, that makes perfect sense. However, what about the "Distract Leader" skill? To my mind, this is neither an offensive or defensive skill. It reduces leader performance by one, but performance is only relavant during the draw phase. How is this skill handled?

Guess I should have saved all these rule questions up for one thread, but unfortunately, I pretty much work on "stream of conciousness"... For those skills (like Distract Wingman) which affect the opposing player: - Is the opponent affected throughout the whole game, or only if engaged (by some gameplay definition)? - If the former, I assume that both opponents are affected in a 2 vs 2 game? - If both wingmen on one side of a 2 vs. 2 have the skill, is the effect cumulative? Or does it just mean that both wingies would have to be shot down to remove the effect? Thanks in advance!

This is definitely something I would like to see added in the future. It would add a nice tactical dimension, and one more thing to keep on your toes about. There you are, flying along two altitude levels below your opponent, not a care in the world, when he plays "Vertical Roll" and WHAM! This is, or course, assuming I am the WHAMMER!, not the WHAMMEE!

The answer to this question would be obvious if I was familiar with the card game, but since I'm not... Is the fact that a Vertical Roll card cannot be used if you do not start the Leader turn at the same elevation as an enemy a design decision (a rule from the card game) or is it a side effect of the interface (the fact that your hand doesn't open for play until you click on a target icon, and if you are not at the same elevation as an enemy there are no target icons). It seems a bit odd that I am allowed to make two elevation changes if I have a Vertical Roll card, but only if I am at the same altitude as an enemy aircraft. Just wondering.

I have to admit I'm of two minds on this. On the one hand Pawlock's point is well taken; it does seem a bit unfair and unrealistic for a wingie who takes over at altitude to get a full hand of cards. On the other hand, I also agree with Kuroi that it gives a player with a smoking leader some sort of strategy (albeit a desperate one)to play rather than just pray for cards. Try to get high and make your oppenent think twice about finishing you off without at least trying to damage the wingman. Earlier today, I had a battle where I damaged the leader on the second turn, at high altitude. I went on through to Medium to replenish cards, and he climbed to Very High. "Fine", says I, "I'll come up to High and wait. He gets no cards, and I draw one a turn. Hopefully, I'll get something decent in a turn or two and go up to finish him off." But then he uses a "Take the Lead" and comes zooming down on me with seven cards, spanks my leader, and a few turns later shoots me down for the minor victory. Now on the one hand, that was a annoying turn of events, and one can argue (like Pawlock) that it was an unreasonable event and there was no way that Wingie should have been able to come down like and Avenging Angel with all that energy. On the other hand, it was an excellant tactical move to reverse the game momentum. And really, if I'd been more concientious in checking out the pilot skills, I should have seen it coming. So after rambling on, and on. I have to say I'm agnostic. It is a bit "gamey" and unrealistic, but it adds some tactical decision making to the game, which is a good thing. The game depends quite a bit as it is on luck of the draw, I don't see any reason to remove something that can actually be controled (to a degree, at least) by the players. A little uncertainty and the chance to turn around a losing game add to the fun factor, if not the realism factor, in my opinion. I think it should be left as it is, at least for now. Although I wouldn't be teribly upset if it was changed. Ultimately,it is Dan's decision.