Maybe a PTO set up soon?

[NUTTZ]

Perdonia!  Perdonia was designed by Hblair With the stipulation "could You make a map with tiles that could be used for Europe and Pac theater?" I think the terrain could be used for both, and it is a pretty balanced map.

NUTTZ

Originally posted by hazed-



My personal experience in the PTO CT (pretty much flying each day)was of flying for ijn and getting my bellybutton handed on a plate in the zero/george for loads of fights.finally getting enough perks to fly the NIK and then after doing well in it but inevitably losing it, starting all over again in the less than equally matched zero and george again.  Like i said i wont be flying for IJA/N in the next pac set up if i fly in it.The frustration almost put me off the CT altogether last time.
Besides id rather, maps permissing, try other set ups first. The new map (cant remember its name) that nuttz made would be fine for a IJA vs VVs set up that might be fun.

anyhoooo its up to sabre and the other CM's i guess.

[ergRTC]

ohhh i hate perdonia!  Feels absolutely artificial.  everything revolves around a33, yawn........

Wide open stretches of ocean, and cvs..............  Not dinky arse rivers with carriers on em.

[NUTTZ]

I strongly suggest with all this water you reconsider adding CV's. I can make a custom group and eliminate the battlewagon in the group to weaken the effect the group can destroy the feilds. And/or put alot of shorebatts at each feild. But with all this water 60% of the map would be wasted, confining the fights within 40% of the map. If this is what your looking for great, But I really think you should add them for gameplay sake.

Just my opinion.

NUTTZ

Originally posted by brady
We have a couple realy great map's in the works for a PAC set up, the Kuriels: a set up for Aug 1945 with the Russians VS the Japanese (no CV"S), and rumor has it a Burma map is also being worked on ( no CV"S).

[NUTTZ]

yes, the CV's are very hard to manage up the "dinky arse rivers" ( i like this) but the map is still balanced good for gameplay. the fights at A33 are because the numbers in the CT ( at the moment) doesn't spread out the fights much in ANY map. It is no more "artifical" than any other map., IMO. But to each his own some like chocolate some vanilla.

NUTTZ

Originally posted by ergRTC
ohhh i hate perdonia!  Feels absolutely artificial.  everything revolves around a33, yawn........

Wide open stretches of ocean, and cvs..............  Not dinky arse rivers with carriers on em.

[ergRTC]

Really?  We had some really good carrier battles out at see in that last large ocean map.  I remember flying tbm and f6f sorties off of our carrier to search out and sink the enemy cruiser groups, before they intercepted our carriers (which we soon figured out was devastating to our carrier operations).  
I see the problem though.  Maybe separate the carrier from the cruiser groups.  If we have half a brain we would keep them together, but that is hard.  Couldnt the enemy bases be place further back from the shore to reduce the impact of 'parking the carrier'?  The large number of shore batteries seem to work reasonably well in the bob setup, I did not see too many base captures from cvs in the last setup either.  
I dont think there is any reason to limit japanese carriers, considering our planeset....

[Sabre]

Weazel was going to update the Philippine terrain a while back, adding more fields and new logistics features like convoys and trains.  It looked like he was making progress, but I don't know what the status is now.  Too late for this weekend, but I'll see if I can get him re-energized on it.  Its best feature in my opinion was the creation of separate types of fleets.  One type was a three CV carrier group (no cruisers) and the other was a three Cruiser battle group (no CVs).  The CVBG's did not have LVT's enabled, but the cruiser battle groups did.  If the land masses just had more airfields, I'd use it in a heart beat.

Sabre

[Furious]

Make a map with no land and lots of CV's.

Talk about fluid fronts.  hehehe



F.

[Karnak]

The Japanese only built 400 or so N1K2s.  That seems to be a limiting factor on it in this scenario.

However, they built 3,500 Ki84s, an aircraft that is unavailable at this time and was better than the N1K2.

It seems to me that in light of the lack of Ki84s, the Japanese should be given greater access to the N1K2.


I would love to see more Japanese aircraft added, but please, please only add the Val and Kate if lots of early American stuff is coming too.  The B6N2 or B7A2 would make a much better choice for the 1943-1945 Pacific environment.

The AA accuracy of ships needs to be turned down so as to make torpedo runs an actuall possibility.


Bring the Ki-44, Ki-84, Ki-102, J2M3 and B7A2 to Aces High.

[Löwe]

Originally posted by NUTTZ
I can make a custom group and eliminate the battlewagon in the group to weaken the effect the group can destroy the feilds.
NUTTZ
 

Hey Nuttz, thats a great idea, then there woud be no temptation for  people to put the CV groups on the beach!
It may also incline the people to CAP their CV's.

[Sabre]

Nuttz: Make a second type of fleet, the surface assualt fleet with two or three cruisers with escorts but no CV.  These will spawn LVT's while the cv groups can not.  Please, pretty please?

Sabre

[brady]

The Kuriels map will have CV's built in by NUTTZ so we can do what if set up's on it if we want, but for the initial set up I intend to do a solely Russian vs Japanese plane set. In general I realy enjoy the dynamic that CV's add to game play.

 BTW Perdonia is a very very good map imo, great ballence and game play.