WWII Pearl Harbor - [Quenched]

[Skittles!]

Cairns.. I love the bonuses.. Please don't change them. They're great. Getting heaps of armies is the best..

As for the bombardment.. How dense do you have to be to not understand that if it turns neutral after taking out the armies, you can't take it? It took me once.. Maybe it's just the Aussie in me

[cairnswk]

Cairns.. I love the bonuses.. Please don't change them. They're great. Getting heaps of armies is the best..

As for the bombardment.. How dense do you have to be to not understand that if it turns neutral after taking out the armies, you can't take it? It took me once.. Maybe it's just the Aussie in me

Skittles, that's just the problem.
Sorry to say the latesst request came from a fellow countryman to alert me to the fact there was a problem with AA Batteries changing the plane armies neutral.

And yes, you can retake the aircraft after they've been bombarded, but they have to be conquered from the ships,m not the AA Batteries.

[rebelman]

Cairns the bonuses and bombardments on this map are spot on please do not change, it makes sense the planes are so strong as they were the real winners in the original battle.

This map is helping me climb the ranks slowly but surely so the more players (in my games) underestimate the importance of the planes the happier I am.

[oaktown]

making the legend more clear is always a good thing... as for the bonuses, I think they're fine. My only concern might be giving the +1 for the AA batteries, which are already powerful in that they can take out the aircraft bonuses, but whatever.

[cairnswk]

Cairns the bonuses and bombardments on this map are spot on please do not change, it makes sense the planes are so strong as they were the real winners in the original battle.

This map is helping me climb the ranks slowly but surely so the more players (in my games) underestimate the importance of the planes the happier I am.

Wunderbar.

[Gnome]

Don't get my wrong, I love this map

this is maybe mentioned before...
but what happened to the shadows of the plains?

Z5's shadows is like km away from it while Z6's shadow is turned in the wrong direction, Z3 doesn't have a shadow and Z4 either...
V2's shadow is off the map just like V1's...
It's weird but it's like the sun comes from every way...

[yeti_c]

Just thought I'd drop in to show my appreciation for this map...

However - Speed games on here are proper brutal!!!!

C>

[cairnswk]

Just thought I'd drop in to show my appreciation for this map...

However - Speed games on here are proper brutal!!!!

C>

Yes...i guess that'd go for all my games...thanks yeti_c
Oh 'cept maybe madness coming up!

[Aerial Attack]

Quick Question:

Seeing as how you are the map maker - did you intend for people to receive a card when bombarding a territory (as opposed to actually occupying it)?

This was brought up by me about a month and a half ago (Suggestions/Bug Reports). Now Forza AZ has raised the same issue (General Discussion or Q & A).

[cairnswk]

Quick Question:

Seeing as how you are the map maker - did you intend for people to receive a card when bombarding a territory (as opposed to actually occupying it)?

This was brought up by me about a month and a half ago (Suggestions/Bug Reports). Now Forza AZ has raised the same issue (General Discussion or Q & A).

Good question...aerial attack, and Forza AZ.

I guess one would not expect to receive a card in these circumstances if that is the only move you play, although is it still a valid attack move in that you destroy the enemy if you turn the attacked terit neutral.

I would say, yes, it is a valid card move if you detroy the enemy on a bombardment and turn that terit neutral. It stop the enemy from placing armies there, and this is the basis i guess of what a normal attack move is all about, even though you don't get ot occupy the terit.

But is this something that is "lacking" (pardon the pun) on this and perhaps we need to bring Lack's attention to this fact.

I hadn't really thought about it to be honest, as it is one of those things that had not crossed my mind.

If you want me to ask of Lack then i will, but i think that receiving a card on this move, is valid.

[RobinJ]

Just want to bring up a problem I've found with this map. Firstly, I'll not lie - this is not my favourite map that you've made (I really love some of the others), even though it does look fantastic.

My problem are the bonuses within bonuses for the aircraft. +3 and +4 are simply too much. In a current 6-player game, one of my opponents started with a deployment of 111 and another with 10. They are already on 16 and 13 respectively with round 1 not even over. So, if it can be done, can you rework these bonuses to much smaller values, or remove them altogether, and ask lack to implement the change?

I know you've already had several players suggest this but I thought I might lend my weight to the argument.

But keep up the good work elsewhere - I look forward to future maps!

[cairnswk]

Just want to bring up a problem I've found with this map. Firstly, I'll not lie - this is not my favourite map that you've made (I really love some of the others), even though it does look fantastic.

My problem are the bonuses within bonuses for the aircraft. +3 and +4 are simply too much. In a current 6-player game, one of my opponents started with a deployment of 111 and another with 10. They are already on 16 and 13 respectively with round 1 not even over. So, if it can be done, can you rework these bonuses to much smaller values, or remove them altogether, and ask lack to implement the change?

I know you've already had several players suggest this but I thought I might lend my weight to the argument.

But keep up the good work elsewhere - I look forward to future maps!

RobinJ....thanks for your comments....appreciate your input.
I would have to say to you, that not every game is going to be as bad as the one you obviously experienced in regard to those bonuses.

There is deliberate intention in this regard to those high bonuses.
1. without them, this would be a very difficult map and very slow to play.
Given that everyone seems to appreciate a faster game these days, then these bonuses do help this situation.
2. It is also meant to be close to reality. By this is mean that if one play get good bonuses on the drop, then that mimics very well what happened on the day in question....the Japanese had the superior hand and the USA got it's butt kicked.
3. the challenge for everyone and this is where the level playing field comes into operation more, is that not evenyone is going to get good die all the time in order to use those extra bonuses effectively. I've had a good start with the aircraft bonuses myself, but it still depends on where you place those armies and how your die roll.

I am still reluctant to change these bonuses, given that people are now starting to "learn" and play the game quite strategically as it should be played rather than just get in there and go wham bam boom boom boom. game won!

[RobinJ]

Just want to bring up a problem I've found with this map. Firstly, I'll not lie - this is not my favourite map that you've made (I really love some of the others), even though it does look fantastic.

My problem are the bonuses within bonuses for the aircraft. +3 and +4 are simply too much. In a current 6-player game, one of my opponents started with a deployment of 111 and another with 10. They are already on 16 and 13 respectively with round 1 not even over. So, if it can be done, can you rework these bonuses to much smaller values, or remove them altogether, and ask lack to implement the change?

I know you've already had several players suggest this but I thought I might lend my weight to the argument.

But keep up the good work elsewhere - I look forward to future maps!

RobinJ....thanks for your comments....appreciate your input.
I would have to say to you, that not every game is going to be as bad as the one you obviously experienced in regard to those bonuses.

There is deliberate intention in this regard to those high bonuses.
1. without them, this would be a very difficult map and very slow to play.
Given that everyone seems to appreciate a faster game these days, then these bonuses do help this situation.
2. It is also meant to be close to reality. By this is mean that if one play get good bonuses on the drop, then that mimics very well what happened on the day in question....the Japanese had the superior hand and the USA got it's butt kicked.
3. the challenge for everyone and this is where the level playing field comes into operation more, is that not evenyone is going to get good die all the time in order to use those extra bonuses effectively. I've had a good start with the aircraft bonuses myself, but it still depends on where you place those armies and how your die roll.

I am still reluctant to change these bonuses, given that people are now starting to "learn" and play the game quite strategically as it should be played rather than just get in there and go wham bam boom boom boom. game won!

Thanks cairnswk. That's fair enough. I do think though that, if lack can do it, he should implement a way of stopping people from getting dropped on bonuses like that in all maps

[LSU Tiger Josh]

I personally hate the map as I was in a 1v1 sequential game and got the 2nd turn. By the time, I got turn I started with HALF of what my opponent got and had no shot what so ever to win the game.

[Forza AZ]

I personally hate the map as I was in a 1v1 sequential game and got the 2nd turn. By the time, I got turn I started with HALF of what my opponent got and had no shot what so ever to win the game.

Yes, for 1 vs 1 games this map is not good. It favours the starting player much more then in other maps.

[cairnswk]

I am hearing what is being said about the aircraft bonuses.

I will go in and have a two player game myself, now and see what happens.

[rebelman]

I am hearing what is being said about the aircraft bonuses.

I will go in and have a two player game myself, now and see what happens.

cairns please don't change it - this is one of cc's finest maps and the aircraft bonus makes it historically far more accurate - it makes total sense for these bonuses to be so strong

i play a lot of 1 v 1 games and the same is true of many maps - age of merchants, valley of the kings etc. its purely down to luck of the drop although a good experienced 1 v 1 player can sometimes win with a weaker drop when you play 1 v 1 you know you are taking a certain gamble regarding bonuses

[cairnswk]

I personally hate the map as I was in a 1v1 sequential game and got the 2nd turn. By the time, I got turn I started with HALF of what my opponent got and had no shot what so ever to win the game.

Yes, for 1 vs 1 games this map is not good. It favours the starting player much more then in other maps.

OK...i just had a two player game...took over an hour, but felt like three...this mpa was really not designed for two player games and the number of territories being high, doesn't help in having a quick game.
On my drop, i got:
4 for 4 kates
3 for 2 zeroes
1 for FIS AA
for a total first drop of 15.

my opponent got:
1 for NY AA
3 for 2 Vals
3 for 2 Kates
3 for 2 Zeroes
for a total first drop of 18.

almost even, but my opponent was still out on front.

Who won?

I did. Because i found that playing this game i was only able to win by sheer elimination of my opponent, and playing the most tactical game i have ever played in order to reduce his bonuses at the right time.
he had me a couple of times where the match could have gone either way.

So, the conclusion from this exercise is....

I still don't see enough evidence coming from even a two player game to reduce any of the bonuses. And even if i had a disastrous drop, i probably would make the same conclusion.
This map provides i beleieve a good balance of luck against tactcial skills.

Shame about the whole is really that for my effort, i only got 17 points from the win.

[cairnswk]

I am hearing what is being said about the aircraft bonuses.

I will go in and have a two player game myself, now and see what happens.

cairns please don't change it - this is one of cc's finest maps and the aircraft bonus makes it historically far more accurate - it makes total sense for these bonuses to be so strong

i play a lot of 1 v 1 games and the same is true of many maps - age of merchants, valley of the kings etc. its purely down to luck of the drop although a good experienced 1 v 1 player can sometimes win with a weaker drop when you play 1 v 1 you know you are taking a certain gamble regarding bonuses

Agreed rebelman....for now the bonuses remain as are!

[yeti_c]

Rejoice rejoice for all that is holy!!

C.

[ParadiceCity9]

Something that doesn't really make sense...FIS AA is pointing more towards V6 than V5 and it can only attack V5 out of the two.

[cairnswk]

Something that doesn't really make sense...FIS AA is pointing more towards V6 than V5 and it can only attack V5 out of the two.

Fair call PC9...if others think this is a real bother it can be changed, but so far you are the onyl one who has mentioned this.

[rebelman]

Something that doesn't really make sense...FIS AA is pointing more towards V6 than V5 and it can only attack V5 out of the two.

Fair call PC9...if others think this is a real bother it can be changed, but so far you are the onyl one who has mentioned this.

i noticed this before but it didn't bother me enough to post it here s all those guns woiuld be on turrets anyway and could move and not be in one fixed position.

[cairnswk]

Something that doesn't really make sense...FIS AA is pointing more towards V6 than V5 and it can only attack V5 out of the two.

Fair call PC9...if others think this is a real bother it can be changed, but so far you are the onyl one who has mentioned this.

i noticed this before but it didn't bother me enough to post it here s all those guns woiuld be on turrets anyway and could move and not be in one fixed position.

So what are you saying, rebelman. that you want it changed also?

[rebelman]

Something that doesn't really make sense...FIS AA is pointing more towards V6 than V5 and it can only attack V5 out of the two.

Fair call PC9...if others think this is a real bother it can be changed, but so far you are the onyl one who has mentioned this.

i noticed this before but it didn't bother me enough to post it here s all those guns woiuld be on turrets anyway and could move and not be in one fixed position.

So what are you saying, rebelman. that you want it changed also?

im easy on a change - id leave it up to yourself

if you were going to change i would adjust the graphics not the gameplayby moving the gun so its aimed at v5