WPO Wishlist

[jwilkerson]

Minelayers.

Where the heck are all the minelayers ? Maybe the Japanese have a bunch - I've only looked at the Allies and they only have 1 so far.

Where are the minelayers? They don't exist. Both Japan and the Allies have very, very few. But then again, what good would British minelayers be (remember, in 1917-1918 the British Admiralty said the North Sea Mine Belt was an impossible task). I added in all historic minelayers, but there are few of them. I suggest converted AKs to Commerce raiders, they carry about 250-500 mines.

But mines were quite effective in WWI in more constricted waters, for example Dardanells and Baltic. And many minelayers on both sides in those campaigns were improvised - to wit represented by the conversions you suggest. But since no conversions will come in for the first several months - that gives is a 3-6 month hiatus on large quantities of mines - which is probably another aid to the Japanese - in Scenario 1 - in that they have to do most of their attacking in this period.

So, OK provided both sides can convert a hefty number of AK to AMC ( or whatever you call them ) then that probably simulates the minelayers adequately.

Request withdrawn !!

[Terminus]

They can. The biggest AK's are size 5000, and they're the ones you convert. There aren't enough, but when is there ever?[8D]

[Roger Neilson]

Thanks, copied and on my desktop now.

Roger

[Hellcat_Canada]

I'd be highly interested in seeing that scenario that Tankerace meantioned concerning the Russo-Japanese War seeing the light of day. I'm about two third through "The Rising Sun and the Tumbling Bear" by Richard Connaughton, the similarities in Japanese tactics to those imployed in WWII are striking. (such as their surprise attack on Port Aurthur)

[Fallschirmjager]

In the next patch, could you also make it possible for Karachi or Columbo to be used to convert ships?
As is the British are kind of screwed out of chances to convert ships unless they make the Looooong trek across the Pacific

[RedLancer]

I've noticed that HMS Courageous was fitted as a minelayer in 1917. Would it be possible to include this role in WPO? (Presuming she retained this capacity anyway)

[Tankerace]

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

I've noticed that HMS Courageous was fitted as a minelayer in 1917. Would it be possible to include this role in WPO? (Presuming she retained this capacity anyway)

Can Do.

[BlackSunshine]

I would like to request that the Japanese start with more sub tenders. As it is now, they only begin the game with 2. For 50+ subs to begin with, I think that is a little low. It certainly doesn't allow you to spread your subs out much. I would like to see 4 more. So 6 to start the game.

[Tankerace]

No can do. While with WPO I include never were designs, I have not included any fantasy designs. Those were all the Japanese had, so it is all they get. The USN needs an actual cruiser force, but as the designs weren't there, they don't get any to round out their navy.

ORIGINAL: BlackSunshine

I would like to request that the Japanese start with more sub tenders. As it is now, they only begin the game with 2. For 50+ subs to begin with, I think that is a little low. It certainly doesn't allow you to spread your subs out much. I would like to see 4 more. So 6 to start the game.

[crsutton]

Just downloaded last night so really have little input except to say thanks for the excellent work.

Will we ever see scenarios of a later period? Say 1936-39 It would be fun to see the last pre-war generation of ships and airplanes in action. Don't know if it can be done in the scope of this game but it would be fun.

Does not have to be a big campaign. A small battle campaign would work nice.

Now that you are done, it is important that we all find things to keep you busy.[&o]

[Fallschirmjager]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

The conversion's already been done:

Could someone do one for lbs as well?

[GreyCamus1]

I would like to see combat summaries be a small window to the upper right of the location where the action occurred. You guys have created IMHO the prettiest map out there, yet the program has you jumping away from it to the rather boring summary screen(that takes up the entire screen), and then at times only gives you a hex location. Having it part of the map routine would be a excellent visual aid on what is occurring to your strategy(or lack of ).In addition have the combat summary tell you in the first line what is occurring in more detail. It states what is occurring,but does not state who is the aggressor, If the aggressor is identified it would aleviate the looking down seeing who has the sub and who has the surface ship to find out what happened. This would streamline the scrolling of the combat summaries. This could also be resolved by having a left and right side to the results, with the japanese on one side and the US coalition on the other, so you could quickly run down the summary and see the effects to each side. A summary at the bottom would be great as well.

I realize that these appear to be rather minor issues(or anal if you choose), but having played WiTP as well, I could never play the game with the combat reports active as it just takes too long, in addition given the length of each turn(and game), any time saving for information gathering is precious.

[JagdFlanker]

i realize this is likely source code stuff so i'm not expecting miracles, but as a beginner to the this interface there's 2 things that'd really make life easier when doing my turn.

...

since aggresive captains are often what you are looking for and all those other extra stats are not revealed unless you click on the captain (which you are often not allowed to do) it'd be VERY helpful if you could hover the mouse cursor over the captain and get ALL his stats without having to click on him.

just some observations - i know they don't have anything to do with the amazing job you did with the WPO!

[Rysyonok]

...not to mention how helpful can it be to be able to sort commanders by their naval rating, air rating etc etc etc... or by their best assignments - it's a pain to browse through 200 fighter/bomber leaders to dig out the last remaining recon guy =)

[Rysyonok]

P.S. A brief FAQ on AO (colliers), AS (sub tenders) and all those other auxiliary classes would be nice.

[chili614]

I know it has already been said, but airships and blimps would certainly add a fantastic dimension to the game. The USS Akron and USS Macon were "flying aircraft carriers" and carried 4 Sparrowhawk fighters. Other rigid airships and blimps could be used for recon and light bombing. New ships could also be added such as the USS Wright (AZ-1), the first "lighter than air" tender, and the Aroostok class tenders, just to name a few off my head.

I am a game player, not a game maker so I am not certain this is possible within the code for the game but I think it would be great if it could be developed. The scenarios in WPO take place exactly when the Golden Age of the airships was beginning. As there are no other games that model this era of (hypothetical) warfare, I hope this is an area that can be explored.

[JagdFlanker]

to take my previous request 1 step further and to shorten the learning curve it would be nice if you could hover your mouse over pretty much any unit and get the important stats without having to click directly on the unit. for example it takes a long time to figure out which ships are offensive and which are scouts by name, and if you could hover the mouse over them in any screen to show their gun mounts and armour stats you can quickly take stock and compare your forces without having to click in and out, in and out, over and over again. less clicking = good!

[Philodraco]

The Giant airship Acron and Macon was very important unit in US navy, although they were finished after 1930.

[Tankerace]

Akron and Macon would certainly be fascinating, but unfortunately not doable in the engine. (Nevermind they are out of WPO's timeframe). However, with the 1.15 patch, we did introduce non rigid blimps into the game, though only for the US (Britain had no means of deploying them to the Pacific, and Japan never fully embraced the LTA concept).

[orabera]

OB corrections/additions/ideas:

With the latest update (1.151), the Wisconsin (BB1917 class, never was BB class) appears in Mare Island in Scenario #2. When I check it using the database editor, it appears that the delay has been entered as 99999 (five 9's) vice 9999 (four 9's).

I've been looking at the ground OB in the Philippines and have a couple of suggestions:
Phlipine Division - This division was formed in 1922 and consisted of the 15th (only 1st Bn (Audy Murphy's Own) was in the Phiippines) and 31st US Inf Rgt and the 45th and 57th Ing Rgt (PS). Two additional PS Inf Rgt's (43rd, 62nd) had been disbanded in 1922. In our hypothectical scenario, the two disbanded regiments should remain and the Philippine Division should consist of the 43rd, 45th, 57th and 62nd INF (PS), with only the 26th CAV (PS),31st INF US and 1st Bn/15th INF US appearing independent units.

The Philippine Reserve Division - I really hate decisions made for game balance, the Japanese should have a cake walk in the Phlippines outside Luzon.

4th Marine Rgt - It was stationed in the Domincan Republic from 1915-24 (saving the Caribbean for American Capitalism), San Diego from 24-27, and in Shanghai from 27-Nov 41. It should not appear in the Philippines at all. In the 1922 scenario it should appear as a reinforcement in San Diego, and in the 1926 scenario it should start in San Diego.

Coastal Defenses - The individual forts should be represented, and there should be no coastal batteries at all in Manila, all Manila Bay defenses were based on islands to the south of Bataan.
An excellent site for reference for Philippinse defenses would be: http://www.cdsg.org/manila.htm, I have edited Scenario #2 for my enjoyment using this as source. Also http://corregidor.org/btty_histories/control/open.htm looks pretty good.

Subic Bay - It a long with Fort Wint (costal defenses based in Grande Island) should be represented some how. I would recommend placing it in the one hex north of Bataan to represent it being just a little too north to be contained in the Bataan final defense line, with a possible capacity of 2 or 3, with possibly 4 destroyers based there to start.

Hawaii - What about the Hawaii National Guard? Post-WWI it consisted of the 298th and 299th Inf Rgt's, probably should be represented as heavily understrength and untrained, but they should be represented.

Other Coastal Defenses - See http://www.cdsg.org/pacific.htm for a complete listing of all coastal defense installations on the Pacific Coast. My suggestion (I used in my scenario based on #2), would be to keep all the guns removed in the early Twenties (to represent heightened tension), add the 16'' guns installed in the early Twenties to The 1922 scenarios, and then add all 16'' and 6'' guns installed in the 40's to represent defense increases brought about by the arm's race between US and Japan to the 1926 scenarios.