What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Uncommon Valor: Campaign for the South Pacific covers the campaigns for New Guinea, New Britain, New Ireland and the Solomon chain.

Moderators: Joel Billings, Tankerace, siRkid

User avatar
radar
Posts: 338
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Dayton, Ohio

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by radar »

In playing a tactical carrier battle, it seems that scouting reports would likely include speed and direction. If so, at least the direction of spotted enemy task forces should also be available while playing in the turn mode. Of course with fog of war, that information could be false at times, but it would be nice to have this as part of UV.
USS Terry (DD-513) — Battle of the Atlantic, Solomon and Marianas Islands campaigns and the Battle of Iwo Jima
User avatar
decaro
Posts: 4004
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:05 pm
Location: Stratford, Connecticut
Contact:

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by decaro »

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

If pilots are shot down in a friendly area of operations I'd be happy if some [a few?]  of them are able to be rescued. If at sea a task force could be designated to look for them, or within Catalina range maybe you could designate them as downed pilot search?

I understand that having a sub in the area increases the likelihood of recovering a downed pilot, but having "pilot rescue" as a Cat mission is clever.
Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.[center]Image[/center]
[center]"The Angel of Okinawa"[/center]
Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by HansBolter »

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

I understand that having a sub in the area increases the likelihood of recovering a downed pilot,


I'll say! [X(]

Image
Attachments
Tang.jpg
Tang.jpg (137.09 KiB) Viewed 371 times
Hans

ILCK
Posts: 422
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:28 pm

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by ILCK »



1. CAP needs to be more effect vs unescorted bombers. No more 8 B-25's sneaking by 25 Zeros to bomb ships in Rabaul with no losses.

2. Some way to exclude targets. If #1 is implemented I need to be able to tell my aircrews not to go flying into Rabaul and get shot to hades.

3. Automated rest levels for squadrons. Something so I can tell my aircrews when you get 75% of effective strength rest until you get back to 90%.

4. Easier ways to see ship abilities w/o having to drill into the ship menus. When I select ships I'd like to see their AA, ASW, SC abilities.

5. Smarter routine convoys. My stupid convoys always want to "support" empty beaches instead of my major bases.
User avatar
tocaff
Posts: 4765
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 9:30 pm
Location: USA now in Brasil

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by tocaff »

Wow!  Great list guys.....
Todd

I never thought that doing an AAR would be so time consuming and difficult.
www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2080768
User avatar
decaro
Posts: 4004
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:05 pm
Location: Stratford, Connecticut
Contact:

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by decaro »

ORIGINAL: tocaff

... Improved weather modeling that could allow a crafty player the chance of sneaking in or out under a front

Definately improved wx: either visible clouds -- as in CaW -- or a "cloud filter," not unlike the filters in BoA/AACW, which would overlay the screen (only) when activated.

Those X-ed out plane icons are fine for wx over airfields that can't move, but you're going to need something more for moving carriers.
Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.[center]Image[/center]
[center]"The Angel of Okinawa"[/center]
Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by HansBolter »

Better control over upgrades ala WitP.

See my air squadron upgrades thread for an indication of how frustrating upgrades can be in UV.
Hans

User avatar
RGIJN
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 6:18 pm
Location: far away from battlefield :-(
Contact:

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by RGIJN »

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

We are also planning some naval combat stuff to take advantage of the 15 minute turn structure.


to which extend the player is given some kind of manual control of surface engagements?
Are there any screenshots available already?

re wish list
capability to prearrange formation of TFs (e.g. AA screen, line-up... of course this should got messed up during battles)
capability to shift planes and/or pilots between squads at a certain base/ship
capability to specify direction and depth of air-search (comparable to SSI games like "Great Naval Battles" series - does anyone remember?!)

agree to most of your other great nominations!
will think about more.



User avatar
RGIJN
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 6:18 pm
Location: far away from battlefield :-(
Contact:

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by RGIJN »

one other thing comes in mind:

the option to take a vessel in tow, improving odds to get a crippled carrier into a emergency anchorage and at least so you get a very slight chance to save that ship. Mostly this issue is hampered by massive flooding that is even worsen due to the lack of sufficient speed. You´ll never make port.

User avatar
tocaff
Posts: 4765
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 9:30 pm
Location: USA now in Brasil

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by tocaff »

Maybe the tow factor is abstracted into the game?  I do agree though that if you assign a ship to escort a cripple back to port it should be assume that a tow is undertaken if needed so a minimum speed of ? should be maintained until the flooding becomes catostrophic.
Todd

I never thought that doing an AAR would be so time consuming and difficult.
www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2080768
User avatar
RGIJN
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 6:18 pm
Location: far away from battlefield :-(
Contact:

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by RGIJN »

ORIGINAL: tocaff

I do agree though that if you assign a ship to escort a cripple back to port it should be assume that a tow is undertaken if needed so a minimum speed of ? should be maintained until the flooding becomes catostrophic.

just what´s in my mind! [8D]
Al Boone
Posts: 205
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Cobleskill, New York, USA

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by Al Boone »

Naval Task Forces use different formations to suit particular needs. If Air Operations are imminent for a predominantly CV TF, they adopt a formation which suits launches, recoveries and “plane guard” duties. When a CV predominant TF expects surface combat or serious ASW problems, the TF adopts a different formation to better protect their CVs and fight a different menace. An ASW or Surface Combat TF typically has weaker AA, Air spotting and other Air Defense capabilities than an Air Combat TF.
Add an additional Task Force mission of ASW. Allow any type of ship to be in Air Combat, Surface Combat, ASW, Transport or Fast Transport mode. When BB, CA, DD, etc types are in surface combat mode, they pay a penalty when they suffer an Air Attack, say a -10% chance to hit them and 10% reduction in their Antiaircraft strength. In surface combat mode, they also pay similar penalty when under submarine attack. When they are in ASW mode, they pay penalties against Air and surface attack and have enhanced abilities against Subs. CV type Task Forces, in surface Combat mode, should incur penalties against Air and ASW attack. An Air Combat CV predominant TF cruising between Santa Cristabol and Santa Cruz might sacrifice some Air Capabilities and go into ASW mode to better meet a greater threat possibility.
In tactical Air or Surface combat mode, the actual “on-screen” ship arrangement and placement for tactical combat should reflect the chosen TF mode. A TF in ASW mode would be placed on the tactical map surface arranged differently than if in surface combat mode. A CV predominant TF would keep CVs further away from the “front lines” if it is in Surface Combat mode. CVs might not even appear until a potential “Second round”. In Air Combat mode, it would be much more likely for CVs to be reachable by surface weapons in the Tactical mode, with less of the accompanying screening ships being likely in the “gun line”.
I am not familiar with the programming algorithms which are or could be used or affected by the above suggestions, but implementation should possible in many ways. Leadership could be manipulated. “To Spot” and “To Hit” formulas and the actual AA strength number could be modified to reflect the strengths and weaknesses of each type of formation against a particular threat.
The principle value of the above suggestions is to place the player in a better position to make useful game judgements which reflect actual real historical conditions, without useless overhead. A similar case in point is a more variable TF speed being possible. Sometimes it is more important to sacrifice potential systems damage in order to accomplish a mission faster. The player should be able to chose his TF speed up a maximum speed.
User avatar
RGIJN
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 6:18 pm
Location: far away from battlefield :-(
Contact:

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by RGIJN »

another issue just pops in.
You guys should definitely reconsider the out-wearing of ships from employment at sea. I certainly understand that parameter as very important and historical correct in general but IMHO, it´s effect is far from real in UV. Given the poor repair rates even at level 9 ports, it´s just annoying. (how about additional repair ships?) Heard this is some toned down in WitP, so this should be integrated in CF too.
User avatar
gpannell
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 7:18 am

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by gpannell »

Would like to see:
Editor able to adjust date/number of A/C available as replacements. At minimum be able to have reinforcements for all aircraft types as they come available (as in WITP).
Pilots shot down over a friendly base or TF not captured.
More control vis-a-vis WITP leader assignment (air group, ship & Ground troops).
Looking forward to a new Naval Sim!
We're gonna use their guts to grease our treads! - G.S. Patton, Jr.
User avatar
tocaff
Posts: 4765
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 9:30 pm
Location: USA now in Brasil

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by tocaff »

A complete editor that works like the one in WITP. For instance where we can add, delete or change devices.
Todd

I never thought that doing an AAR would be so time consuming and difficult.
www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2080768
User avatar
jwilkerson
Posts: 7900
Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 4:02 am
Location: Kansas
Contact:

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by jwilkerson »

ORIGINAL: tocaff

A complete editor that works like the one in WITP. For instance where we can add, delete or change devices.

And aircraft, and (ship) Classes!!!

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead
User avatar
Desertmole
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2004 6:22 am

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by Desertmole »

How about a realistic reinforcement rate for Japanese aircraft.  I know this alters play balance, but perhaps an ability to have the historical rates as a switch on.  It always bugged me that the Japanese received only 50 or so Kates in all of 1942, and this probably influenced the 14 July Fleet reorganization, but UV gives them 240.  I suspect this was the monthly average based on total production, but thats a big difference.
I only wish I had you, the gentlemen of the pen, exposed for once to a smart skirmishing fire...
User avatar
SuluSea
Posts: 2385
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 2:13 pm

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by SuluSea »

Any plans for underway ammunition replenishment? I understand WITP has ships that perform that task.
 
Thanks.
"There’s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.” ~ Erwin Lutzer
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by HansBolter »

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

Any plans for underway ammunition replenishment? I understand WITP has ships that perform that task.

Thanks.

Yea, but even there they can't do it until well after the time period depicted by this game.
Hans

User avatar
SuluSea
Posts: 2385
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 2:13 pm

RE: What would you like to see in Carrier Force?

Post by SuluSea »

I didn't know the time period CF covers. Is their anywhere I can read about it? I've herard it spoken about but haven't read info on it. Thanks.[:)]
"There’s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.” ~ Erwin Lutzer
Post Reply

Return to “Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific”