Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Wishlist thread

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Carriers At War >> RE: Wishlist thread Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Wishlist thread - 11/30/2008 1:52:45 AM   
funkatron3000

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 7/23/2008
Status: offline
I heartily endorse GeneralChaos's third wish list item.  It would be great to have all of the information presented at the end of a battle in some kind of text file.  The amount of information on SSG 's CAW stats pages suggests that some of the data is easily accessible.  Any thoughts SSG?

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)
Post #: 91
RE: Wishlist thread - 2/24/2009 8:06:54 PM   
ChrisH

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
Greetings!

I'm new here, so I wanted to say that I love the game.  Because my background is a bit more historical that gaming, I tend to see things from that persepctive. So, some things that are seen as routine I see in a different light.

So, I wanted to add my $.02 regarding a couple of items in the Wish List.

Similarly, Carriers turned into the wind all the time, to launch and recover CAP, searchplanes and ASW patrols. We see this as a routine ocuurrence which didn't affect the big picture of carrier battles. The big picture is all about how you place your forces relative to those of the enemy, and how you handle them when those relationships are established.

I don't entirely agree- I think wind not only could affect the big picture, but it did, and it did so in the most famous carrier battle of all. 

At Midway TF-16 suffered terribly on the morning of 4 June from a light wind that cause them to steam AWAY from KIDO BUTAI for one full hour between 0656 and about 0750 while launching their morning attack.  Not only did they have to steam away from the Japanese, but they also need to bend on more speed because the wind was light.  This had a number of effects:

1.  It meant the planes had to planes had to not only spend as long as 40 minutes forming up, it meant they were actually moving AWAY from their target while doing so.  This is a big deal when a strike is launched at maximum range. 

2.  The carriers (TF-16) weren't where the pilots expected them to be when they got back.  Not only was this because of the initial launch, but because TF-16 had to turn away from Point Option each time she conducted flight ops, including the rotation of CAP.  When you are short on fuel, this is a big deal.

3.  Lots of high-speed steaming is bad for destroyers with regard to range.

It's important to remember that as successful as the 1020 attack was, HIRYU escaped, and by doing so crippled YORKTOWN that afternoon.  What if HORNET's SBDs ability to searh for KIDO BUTAI when they didn't find them initially wasn't hampered by fuel shortages that resulted, in part, from a light wind from the wrong direction?  While we'll never know what happened for sure, I think it's reasonable to suppose had HORNET been able to hit a carrier, perhaps YORKTOWN might never have have never been attacked.

All 10 of the F4F-4s HORNET launched ditched for lack of fuel in part because HORNET had to steam away from the Japanese (and in part because they were stupidly launched first).  What if the Japanese emerged from the 1020 attack with, say, AKAGI undamaged.  The loss of 10 fighters could have been disasterous later in the battle.

Many an ENTERPRISE SBD ended up in the water in large part because ENTERPRISE wasn't where she was supposed to be when they got back.  As few as 10 miles meant the difference between a safe landing and a swim.  Did this affect the results of the morning attack?  No!  But it did effect future operations, including those against HIRYU later that afternoon.

All of those things "affect the big picture".  Having 17 fighters instead of 27 is a big deal- if it wasn't, VF squadrons would have stuck with the fixed wing F4F-3s and retained 18-aircraft squadrons instead of expanding them to 27 and 36.

Having three extra SBD's is a big deal- just ask AKAGI.

I do understand the need to keep things simple, and when designing software you have to make compromises, both to keep the game playable and to keep down overhead in the software.  But wind and weather (see Coral Sea) were not "routine" and they both played a huge factor in how things turned out in more than one battle.

Make the "On Station, Waiting for Strike Recovery" feature after launching a strike from a Carrier TF optional.

Although this feature is designed to prevent gaming the system by players who wish to use single pulse "dump and run" attacks, it creates 2 other issues that can also be gamed out as well.

First, it prevents sustained attacks by locking the Carrier TF in one location, and hampers pursuit for follow up attacks.
Second, it exposes a CV TF to attacks by Surface Action TF's by locking the Carrier TF in place, negating a chance to evade laterally.

Some time ago, I argued (unsuccessfully) that this "feature" could be alternately coded by imposing penalties for aircraft losses due to "failed to return" from air strikes.


I like those suggestions.  It would be nice if you could set your Point Option.  Once it's set, you can either steam towards it (and if you reach it, remain on station) or not, depending upon the tactical situation.

Again, I don't mean to sound like I am complaining or I think the game is terrible- I'm not.  I love the game, and if these things never make it into the game, I can deal with it.  But for the historian in me, those little details mean a lot, and it would take a great game and make it more historically accurate and, well, greater. :)

Thanks for listening.

Chris

(in reply to funkatron3000)
Post #: 92
RE: Wishlist thread - 3/31/2012 6:50:16 PM   
Prince of Eckmühl


Posts: 2453
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
I'd genuinely like to see the game adapted to air combat in the 1930's:




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to ChrisH)
Post #: 93
RE: Wishlist thread - 3/31/2012 10:05:13 PM   
Flaurez

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 3/7/2012
Status: offline
I'd genuinely like to see the game adapted to something that wasn't abandonware. Why does it still cost anything? It's not supported in any way and noone cares anymore!

(in reply to ChrisH)
Post #: 94
RE: Wishlist thread - 4/2/2012 12:47:44 AM   
Prince of Eckmühl


Posts: 2453
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
I don't know, but these are some sweet looking birds:






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to Flaurez)
Post #: 95
RE: Wishlist thread - 4/2/2012 3:31:17 AM   
Prince of Eckmühl


Posts: 2453
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
And look at the beautiful fighters:






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to Prince of Eckmühl)
Post #: 96
RE: Wishlist thread - 4/3/2012 5:06:58 AM   
Flaurez

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 3/7/2012
Status: offline
Those are indeed some beautiul birds! I just wish there was a CAW scenario we could use them in...

(in reply to Prince of Eckmühl)
Post #: 97
RE: Wishlist thread - 4/4/2012 12:13:28 AM   
Prince of Eckmühl


Posts: 2453
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
The SBU was the first USN scout to bust 200 mph:






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to Flaurez)
Post #: 98
RE: Wishlist thread - 4/4/2012 12:14:41 AM   
Prince of Eckmühl


Posts: 2453
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
Of course, black and white photography doesn't do it justice:






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to Prince of Eckmühl)
Post #: 99
RE: Wishlist thread - 4/4/2012 12:24:09 AM   
Prince of Eckmühl


Posts: 2453
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
Then there was the Vindicator:






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to Prince of Eckmühl)
Post #: 100
RE: Wishlist thread - 4/4/2012 1:31:49 AM   
Prince of Eckmühl


Posts: 2453
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
And there's the great F3F




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Prince of Eckmühl -- 4/4/2012 1:33:51 AM >


_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to Prince of Eckmühl)
Post #: 101
RE: Wishlist thread - 4/8/2012 11:58:36 PM   
Admiral DadMan


Posts: 2613
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: Sturbridge, MA
Status: offline
The below Bolded and Underlined are my commments 4 years ago. There is an online game called "Fighting Flattops" that does not employ the "On Station" feature. I play against human opponents, and only one as attempted "dump and run" against me. He couldn't get away fast enough, and I shredded him anyway.

It is a useless feature which prevented me from buying the game, and so I found enjoyment elsewhere. It is the sole feature that keeps me from ever buying this game, and I bought the first version back in the 1990's.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChrisH

Greetings!

I'm new here, so I wanted to say that I love the game.  Because my background is a bit more historical that gaming, I tend to see things from that persepctive. So, some things that are seen as routine I see in a different light.

So, I wanted to add my $.02 regarding a couple of items in the Wish List.

Similarly, Carriers turned into the wind all the time, to launch and recover CAP, searchplanes and ASW patrols. We see this as a routine ocuurrence which didn't affect the big picture of carrier battles. The big picture is all about how you place your forces relative to those of the enemy, and how you handle them when those relationships are established.

I don't entirely agree- I think wind not only could affect the big picture, but it did, and it did so in the most famous carrier battle of all. 

At Midway TF-16 suffered terribly on the morning of 4 June from a light wind that cause them to steam AWAY from KIDO BUTAI for one full hour between 0656 and about 0750 while launching their morning attack.  Not only did they have to steam away from the Japanese, but they also need to bend on more speed because the wind was light.  This had a number of effects:

1.  It meant the planes had to planes had to not only spend as long as 40 minutes forming up, it meant they were actually moving AWAY from their target while doing so.  This is a big deal when a strike is launched at maximum range. 

2.  The carriers (TF-16) weren't where the pilots expected them to be when they got back.  Not only was this because of the initial launch, but because TF-16 had to turn away from Point Option each time she conducted flight ops, including the rotation of CAP.  When you are short on fuel, this is a big deal.

3.  Lots of high-speed steaming is bad for destroyers with regard to range.

It's important to remember that as successful as the 1020 attack was, HIRYU escaped, and by doing so crippled YORKTOWN that afternoon.  What if HORNET's SBDs ability to searh for KIDO BUTAI when they didn't find them initially wasn't hampered by fuel shortages that resulted, in part, from a light wind from the wrong direction?  While we'll never know what happened for sure, I think it's reasonable to suppose had HORNET been able to hit a carrier, perhaps YORKTOWN might never have have never been attacked.

All 10 of the F4F-4s HORNET launched ditched for lack of fuel in part because HORNET had to steam away from the Japanese (and in part because they were stupidly launched first).  What if the Japanese emerged from the 1020 attack with, say, AKAGI undamaged.  The loss of 10 fighters could have been disasterous later in the battle.

Many an ENTERPRISE SBD ended up in the water in large part because ENTERPRISE wasn't where she was supposed to be when they got back.  As few as 10 miles meant the difference between a safe landing and a swim.  Did this affect the results of the morning attack?  No!  But it did effect future operations, including those against HIRYU later that afternoon.

All of those things "affect the big picture".  Having 17 fighters instead of 27 is a big deal- if it wasn't, VF squadrons would have stuck with the fixed wing F4F-3s and retained 18-aircraft squadrons instead of expanding them to 27 and 36.

Having three extra SBD's is a big deal- just ask AKAGI.

I do understand the need to keep things simple, and when designing software you have to make compromises, both to keep the game playable and to keep down overhead in the software.  But wind and weather (see Coral Sea) were not "routine" and they both played a huge factor in how things turned out in more than one battle.

Make the "On Station, Waiting for Strike Recovery" feature after launching a strike from a Carrier TF optional.

Although this feature is designed to prevent gaming the system by players who wish to use single pulse "dump and run" attacks, it creates 2 other issues that can also be gamed out as well.

First, it prevents sustained attacks by locking the Carrier TF in one location, and hampers pursuit for follow up attacks.
Second, it exposes a CV TF to attacks by Surface Action TF's by locking the Carrier TF in place, negating a chance to evade laterally.

Some time ago, I argued (unsuccessfully) that this "feature" could be alternately coded by imposing penalties for aircraft losses due to "failed to return" from air strikes.


I like those suggestions.  It would be nice if you could set your Point Option.  Once it's set, you can either steam towards it (and if you reach it, remain on station) or not, depending upon the tactical situation.

Again, I don't mean to sound like I am complaining or I think the game is terrible- I'm not.  I love the game, and if these things never make it into the game, I can deal with it.  But for the historian in me, those little details mean a lot, and it would take a great game and make it more historically accurate and, well, greater. :)

Thanks for listening.

Chris




_____________________________

"I miss Mogami handing my ass to me..."


(\.../)
(O.o)
(> <) A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit

(in reply to ChrisH)
Post #: 102
RE: Wishlist thread - 7/31/2012 6:35:35 PM   
CaptainRockwellTorry


Posts: 21
Joined: 1/31/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

And look at the beautiful fighters:







Yes, I love these planes, I had a model(made by Monogram, I think) when I was a kid. You could lock the propeller and retract the landing gear, and it had a fully detailed cockpit and sliding canopy, working elevators and alerons and rudder. It looks like you've got some good artwork hear. Can it be modded into the game? I remember the old version wasn't that hard to put ship and aircraft pictures into the game, but I don't know if it would be that easy to do with this new version. I thought if it used something like the Witp artwork, it would be fairly easy, as I have done alot of that myself, adding new ships for both Witp, and WPO. I really want to buy this, but it just looks like this game is withering on the vine, nobody seems to be modding it or seems to know how to!

Regards:
CaptainRockwellTorry



(in reply to Prince of Eckmühl)
Post #: 103
RE: Wishlist thread - 8/4/2012 5:51:42 PM   
CaptainRockwellTorry


Posts: 21
Joined: 1/31/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaurez

Those are indeed some beautiul birds! I just wish there was a CAW scenario we could use them in...



Well, I just bought the game a couple days ago. Looked around and found out SSG has its own official site for the game. Anyway if you are looking for scenarios, check out the Mega-Mod, it has a War Plan Orange scenario set in 1936 with all these aircraft as well as many other scenarios and graphics added for the Game. I'm currently play the WPO scenario and its very good.

Regards:
Captain Rockwell Torry

(in reply to Flaurez)
Post #: 104
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Carriers At War >> RE: Wishlist thread Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.094