Admiral's Edition General Thread

[BB57]

Woos are you at a position to hopefully maybe give us some hints or better yet screenies of the new decoder?

I want AE yesterday but if that means it will need two patches before we can get it out of the box take your time.

Thanks everyone involved for your hard work.

[Terminus]

Well, they DID read all the mail.

[Alikchi2]

British Withdrawal - inspired by the thread on the main board.. any changes here?

[witpqs]

IIRC they said that the cost of not sending the required ships back will be overwhelming. In other words, you will withdraw the required ships!

[Dixie]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

IIRC they said that the cost of not sending the required ships back will be overwhelming. In other words, you will withdraw the required ships!

IIRC every ship has a withdrawl date, if they left the Pacific. Ships that were sunk before they could be withdrawn (PoW, Repulse etc) don't have withdrawl dates. Ships can be kept past their date, but like witpqs said the cost is expensive. Or as I understand it, it starts at expensive for destroyers etc and climbs to crippling for carriers. Every day extra that the ship is kept costs PPs.

[Terminus]

ORIGINAL: Alikchi

British Withdrawal - inspired by the thread on the main board.. any changes here?

It's "Allied Withdrawal" now, not "British". Dixie summarizes it well in his post.

[Alikchi2]

Oh, I like this system much better.[&o] It's much less arbitrary. Thanks!

[Yamato hugger]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

IIRC they said that the cost of not sending the required ships back will be overwhelming. In other words, you will withdraw the required ships!

It costs 150pps to relieve those worthless starting commanders in AE.

[Andy Mac]

Aye selected HQ level leaders cost a lot more especially ones in the early war or of historical significance
 
Replacing all the leaders of III Corps (Heath - 125), Malaya Army (Percival - 150) and the two Indian Div commanders (50 each) is expensive.
 
Later on these costs reduce a typical Allied HQ level Lt General costs 50 PP's to replace
 
 

[Heeward]

IIRC every ship has a withdrawal date, if they left the Pacific. Ships that were sunk before they could be withdrawn (PoW, Repulse etc) don't have withdrawal dates. Ships can be kept past their date, but like witpqs said the cost is expensive. Or as I understand it, it starts at expensive for destroyers etc and climbs to crippling for carriers. Every day extra that the ship is kept costs PPs.

 
Is this major change correct? PP points are charged on a daily basis for not withdrawing ships?

[bradfordkay]

One can only hope that the per day PP cost will be substantially lower than the WITP one time cost. Otherwise, this could become an expensive PP tax on senility... 

[JeffroK]

Andy.

Has there been a reappraisal of some of the Leader stats for AE.

Just picking 1/10,000, "Piggy" Heath in Malaya suffers in CHS for poor setup by the highers and the overwhelming inexperience of his troops.

Given his experiences in Abbysynia & Western Desert I beleve he rates as average rather than poor.

[Terminus]

As has been said several times, the leader database (and especially Commonwealth leaders) has been thoroughly scrubbed. Don't worry about it.

[Andy Mac]

Heath ratings are difficult he was experienced and capable but he severely under rated the Japanese and his Corps was not trained.
 
He wasnt able to overcome his dislike of Percival and that severely compromised the defence.
 
His Land Rating is given as 45 and Admin at 45 as well.
 
I would have made them higher given his experience but he he gets a big reduction for not being able to get over the fact that he worked for Percival.
 
 

[Monter_Trismegistos]

Can we now withdraw heavily damaged ships? Now I need to repair ship to sysdmg < 50 (?).

Do we need in AE to keep out of harm ships which are just about to be withdrawn? To avoid penalty of not withdrawing damaged ship which we couldn't withdraw.

[Blackhorse]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Andy.

Has there been a reappraisal of some of the Leader stats for AE.

Just picking 1/10,000, "Piggy" Heath in Malaya suffers in CHS for poor setup by the highers and the overwhelming inexperience of his troops.

Given his experiences in Abbysynia & Western Desert I beleve he rates as average rather than poor.

As Terminus said, the leader database has been thoroughly scrubbed.

For land leaders, virtually every two-star General and above will be a genuine historical leader (vs stock, where 3/4s of the US Generals were fictional, and the Australian LCU commanders all had identical ratings, depending on their rank).

As part of the US reappraisal, most US Army Generals have low aggressiveness ratings. Throughout the war this was a constant sore point between the Army and the Marines/Navy. MacArthur, whose overall ratings are not impressive, has value to the Allies as one of the only HQ-level land commanders with good aggressiveness.

There will always be controversies about leader rankings, especially for the allied ground leaders that were overwhelmed in the opening months -- then relieved -- but might have been average or better if they had happened to appear later in the war.

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Heath ratings are difficult he was experienced and capable but he severely under rated the Japanese and his Corps was not trained.

He wasnt able to overcome his dislike of Percival and that severely compromised the defence.

His Land Rating is given as 45 and Admin at 45 as well.

I would have made them higher given his experience but he he gets a big reduction for not being able to get over the fact that he worked for Percival.

Thanks Andy, this puts him in the middle somewhere at least, but shouldnt the effect of your last comment be taken away from Heath, what if someone replaced Percival and Heath got along famously with him (Any Indian Army General??)

[Andy Mac]

Possibly but thats out of scope for us you also need to factor in that pretty much no general in theatre was really senior to Heath so the only way would be if Heath were given Malaya Command at which point he would probably interfere with his battlefield commander.

I can only rate leaders on the basis of the tools we have and there proven abilities.

We know Heath/Percival was dysfunctional therefore they both get a reduction for the inability to act professionally

[trojan58]

I know this is possibly a very late suggestion, but would it be possible to make all nations in the game either active or inactive. This would be similar to what is currently available with the Soviets in WITP. The rational would be that doing so would open many more possibilities for mod writers.


ie: Japan attacks the Soviets ( a Northern startegy rather than South), Japan attacks only Britain and France (etc) no USA attack.


what do you think

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: trojan

I know this is possibly a very late suggestion, but would it be possible to make all nations in the game either active or inactive. This would be similar to what is currently available with the Soviets in WITP. The rational would be that doing so would open many more possibilities for mod writers.


ie: Japan attacks the Soviets ( a Northern startegy rather than South), Japan attacks only Britain and France (etc) no USA attack.


what do you think

Just my opinion but a very emphatic NO! The Soviet active/inactive complicates things beyond believe and multiplying that times more nations would be a Mark 1, Left Handed, Bitch.