Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3?

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: DFN
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/28/2018 10:12:26 PM   
pnzrgnral

 

Posts: 123
Joined: 2/16/2004
From: El Paso, AR
Status: offline
My previous joke aside...how about a tweak to objective preparation time? Preparation points advance a point a day to the best possible 100 points. I find this to be inordinately long, especially considering some historical examples during the PTO campaign. How to address this? Maybe linking the following on a given objective: DL, aerial recon, landing of (scouting) LCU's (good case for USMC Raiders, UDT's, Alamo Scouts), aerial bombardments/strafing (gun camera footage), naval bombardments. All of this would collect intel on the objective and speed preparation for those LCU's assigned to assault.

_____________________________

Rangers Lead The Way!
Sua Sponte

(in reply to 1275psi)
Post #: 31
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/29/2018 12:32:40 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 4703
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
How about linking this to strategic leadership. That would seem logical. The overall Theater leader would have access to all the various intel on various objectives obtained by whatever means and also would be able to reconcile that with future needs. Hate to say it but since the Japanese had quite a long lead time to plan their war plans (and then decided to commit sepoku anyways) Nimitz/MacArthur should be significantly better able to adjust priorities than Yamamoto et al.

(in reply to pnzrgnral)
Post #: 32
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/29/2018 12:40:41 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 4703
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
While we are on the subject it would be nice if there was a scenario that didn't "gift" the sinking of the POW and Repulse and the taking of Wake Island to the Japanese. While I agree that the Brits/Churchill did require POW/Repulse to sail to their doom on the 9th of December 1941 it seems to me that the Japanese invasion of Wake was: a) scheduled with much too small of a force initially and b: was scheduled without any thought to enemy defenses (dumb commander) and c: the Allied commander has no hope of surviving until Dec 22 1941 because he'll run out of supplies (and the means to resist) long before that date.

(in reply to pnzrgnral)
Post #: 33
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/29/2018 6:44:07 PM   
Mobeer


Posts: 552
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline
Some ideas:

1) Refocus on the player as a theatre commander
Remove any and all functionality that would be far below the level of the player. For example:
- if a task force is to bombard at night on the 24th/25th, don't require me to work out which hex it needs to be in on the 24th, let the Admiral decide
- have regiment commanders automatically assigned, then if the unit fights well award recognition points to its commander. When a new Division arrives assign a recognised, experienced commander without any player involvement
- don't order a squadron to sweep enemy airfield with 40% of its planes at 12,000 feet. Order a base to use its air assets to aggressively gain air superiority.


2) Have higher level formations
Let the player combine units into Armies to carry out offensives. Let an Army be loaded into transports, fitting its units as best possible for smallest load space or fastest offload.

Let the player decide by region \ high level formation how aggressive to be, what types of enemy to target etc.


3) Better convoys and submarines
Let the player assign convoy routes, escorts, air cover etc, then automate their use. Essentially have a convoy command that takes responsibility not just for moving resources but also for deploying air cover and hunter killer ASW groups. Then for submarine forces, have an automated command to deploy (spare) submarines, and only have submarines in enemy waters report in every few days for new manual orders and contact reports.


4) More Planning tools
Have new planning tools to help the player. For example:
- Task force tools to identify when a convoy can reach varying ports, when will multiple convoys arrive at a port, compare multiple task force planned paths to see where perhaps my outbound carriers will catch up with and overtake their tankers?
- when will ships in repair yards be repaired? when will bases be repaired by (if not hit again)?
- what assault value is marching to a friendly base, or preparing to invade an enemy base?


5) Smarter Intelligence Gathering
The current system fails to represent data being built up over time. By all means keep the current reports, but add in recon flights, known facts etc to produce an intelligence picture.

So don't just tell the player on this turn that IJA 2nd Infantry Division is planning for Wake Island. Let the player step through the intelligence reports for the past month to see that no other units, not even a base force are preparing for that base. Let the player see that a recon flight spotted that division 9 days ago at George Town. Or perhaps there are 3 divisions and base force preparing for Wake, no IJN CV has been spotted in 2 weeks and an Allied sub attacked a large group of tankers heading east from Marcus Island yesterday?

< Message edited by Mobeer -- 1/29/2018 6:47:06 PM >

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 34
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/29/2018 9:25:37 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 3862
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
quote:

i think future wargames should have more randomness regarding commanders capabilities.


This should be taken care of in the combat algorithms. Knowing Grigsby and his games I would be surprised if it weren't.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to 1275psi)
Post #: 35
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/29/2018 10:08:44 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 1753
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
To be perfectly honest, UI improvements to the current game would make the game for me.

Drag-and-drop boxes, hyperlinks, better interface with pilot pools and so on.

A bunch of QoL improvements would take a large degree of the tedium right out of this game.

(in reply to Rogue187)
Post #: 36
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/29/2018 10:57:00 PM   
btd64


Posts: 4999
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in OHIO
Status: offline
Easier way to add art. This is probably the biggest problem area for modders....GP

_____________________________

Intel i7 3.4GHz,8GB Ram,1920x1080 rez

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DW Series-Beta Tester
TotS-Alpha Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

I don't like paying for the same real estate twice..Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 37
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/29/2018 11:48:03 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: online
Voice commands. Such as "Open the pod bay doors."

(in reply to btd64)
Post #: 38
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/30/2018 2:16:24 AM   
CharlieVane


Posts: 189
Joined: 10/8/2016
From: West Coast
Status: online
Add more ships that can be renamed. Later on, the Allied player gets many US destroyers that are named after people who died under very specific circumstances that wouldn't occur in-game (same goes for Destroyer escorts, but I think there's some leeway there because they're mostly named after lower-ranking servicemen). In addition, CVL-28 Langley can't be renamed on the off chance the allied player preserves AV Langley.
Also worth noting is that many of the Naval officers the aforementioned Destroyers are named after do not exist in the game files. Or they are not in command of the ships they were on historically at the game start.

It's rather odd to see people who were noteworthy enough to have a Wikipedia entry not appear in-game and have some nobody in their place.

These two are things one can add to the game database themselves, but I'm guessing not many people would go through the effort.

Some kind of 'theater system' for Leaders, or some varying delay for when a leader takes command of a unit to simulate the time it takes for them to transfer.

The option to set how many aircraft are given to a squadron when it receives an upgrade, possibly based on pilots, so that you don't send 25 precious fighters to a group when you have a thin replacement pool.

Order settings for surface TF's so that they're not as likely to bumble into an unwinnable engagement (leader ratings would determine how much these orders are followed).

Some way of showing ship formations in battle, a way to set them up beforehand (Like the formation the Japanese had at Tassafaronga-one destroyers out in front as a picket or something like that).
More ship XP values than Day/night. AA, ASW, etc.
A production/R&D system for both players (IE, Allied player wants to speed up production of the Alaska-class ships, Japanese player can dedicate some not-insubstantial amount of resources to developing an improved mid-range AA gun that's better than the Type 96 25mm).
More variables for the Captain of a ship or TF leader perishing than the ship sinking, like a lucky hit to the bridge.

The game tracks fighter pilot kills, so how about a system that lets players see any famous pilots who landed good hits on enemy ships?

A system for damaged planes to land at airfields en route to their destination and possibly appear as fragments, and for planes to be intercepted en route rather than over their destination hex by fighters flying from other places.

The chance for ships in a captured base to not be scuttled and placed into enemy service (Like USS Stewart AKA PB-102).

< Message edited by CharlieVane -- 1/30/2018 3:08:31 AM >

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 39
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/30/2018 2:56:45 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 4703
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

so how about a system that lets players see any famous pilots who landed good hits on enemy ships?


At Midway, Ltjg Dusty Kleis, flying an SBD, hit the HIJMS Kaga with his bomb in the morning then hit HIJMS Hiryu with his bomb in the afternoon. He got transferred after the battle to training new SBD pilots.

Since IJN pilots, in general, only got out of combat duty by going home in a box (of ashes) I would imagine that they had several of their own "ace" dive bomber pilots (given their actual historical statistics I'd be skeptical about saying the same about torpedo bomber pilots).

(in reply to CharlieVane)
Post #: 40
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/30/2018 8:37:51 AM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 3660
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
- AVGAS (or an optional grognard hardcore version with AVGAS, POL, heavy fuel and coal, plus supplies split into general supplies, weapons&ammo, food, medical supplies)
- Google Earth style zoomable map
- proper command hierarchy, with unrestricted units (and bases) requiring only symbolic amounts of PPs to change commands
- better LCU orders system, like "X Corps and subordinate units move to hex yx" instead of ordering each unit individually
- better convoy creation, like "create convoy that fits the size X port at destination" (and options like "use same class" or "use same cruise speed")
- notifications for events, like if TF XY or LCU XY has reached objective and is awaiting further orders
- clickable location links in reports
- torpedoes = device that must be produced, instead of being available in unlimited numbers as long as supply lasts
- easier pilot training system, like designating air units as training units (option available only in rear bases) with player-definable targets for skill sets and skill level, which then pull rookies from basic training, train them up and then dump them in the reserve pool automatically
- US supply production not at 1944/45 levels from Day One
- correct OOB, esp. for shipping - many ships have wrong availability dates (some arrive too late, many way too early) and/or no withdrawal dates when they did serve in the ETO (prime example USS Nevada)
- ability to court-martial subordinates for not obeying or misinterpreting orders, and player risking being relieved of command when ordering stoopid moves

_____________________________


(in reply to spence)
Post #: 41
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/30/2018 12:58:01 PM   
RichardAckermann

 

Posts: 248
Joined: 12/4/2015
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget
- ability to court-martial subordinates for not obeying or misinterpreting orders, and player risking being relieved of command when ordering stoopid moves


I wouldn't last one month then...

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 42
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/30/2018 2:14:18 PM   
Rogue187

 

Posts: 143
Joined: 2/7/2005
Status: offline
Here are some more thoughts:

1. I would like to add a Submarine-Ops screen. A button at the top of the screen, but for submarines. You could click one button and it would display all the submarines with mission, location, filter by nationality, etc. While you could still create Sub missions from base hexes, you could modify patrol locations and maybe get a quick peek at fuel and ammo loads. Maybe add the ability to return at low ammo or low fuel automatically. I think the subs return already when the fuel is too low even with human control, but at least I could see it on one dialogue box. Plus you could click on the sub name and it would jump you to that location. This would save a large amount of time hunting and clicking on subs to see their status. Here is a quick example:

SS Seawolf Sub Patrol 77,109 Ammo: Full Fuel: 86% On Patrol
SS Tambor Sub Patrol 86,108 Ammo: Empty Fuel: 50% RTB
SS Terrapin Sub Patrol 56,205 Ammo: Full Fuel: 98% ENR to Patrol

2. The ability to turn on and off hex numbers. Hunting for specific hexes is no fun and I still struggle to figure out the pattern. It seems like a few hex numbers will go in a line, then veer off in another direction.

3. A better developed auto-supply system. This may be sacrilege, but this game seems to be two games in one. War in the Pacific (Military strategy) and Logistics in the Pacific. While I have no issues with base building, deploying troops, bringing fuel and supplies, I spend far more time thinking about how to keep bases fueled and supplied. I have heard that warriors talk logistics and soldiers talk tactics, but I find that I will spend an hour playing with 45 minutes spent on figuring out how to move supplies from Perth to Broome or fuel from Aden to Colombo. It would be nice to create supply bases that feed to smaller bases. Instead of Colombo and San Fran, Karachi can feed fuel to Goa, and Colombo, then Colombo can feed Rangoon. So on and so forth. Like with the auto-TF, players could add or subtract transports and escorts as needed. Overall, it would be nice to have a better streamlined supply system for a person to focus on the military strategy and spend less time worrying that Nome, Tahiti and Christmas Island are low on supply.

< Message edited by Rogue187 -- 1/30/2018 2:15:03 PM >

(in reply to RichardAckermann)
Post #: 43
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/30/2018 2:58:42 PM   
sandlance

 

Posts: 30
Joined: 8/5/2012
Status: offline
Before any of these improvements are done, AE needs to be made more compatable with Win10.I did read Alfred post, this would take years of work. The farther we get from XP the harder the game gets to play.

(in reply to Rogue187)
Post #: 44
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/30/2018 3:12:02 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 15800
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Be able to designate a 'retreat to' button. The AI does its absolute BEST to retreat units in the WORST possible direction...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to sandlance)
Post #: 45
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/30/2018 3:47:21 PM   
RichardAckermann

 

Posts: 248
Joined: 12/4/2015
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sandlance
Before any of these improvements are done, AE needs to be made more compatable with Win10.I did read Alfred post, this would take years of work. The farther we get from XP the harder the game gets to play.


Major upgrades on AE are not going to happen from what I know.
Probably becoming worse with the next windows.

A new game engine might do better. I have programs in plain old 32bit mode running in compatibility mode on newer OS, and they do fine.
More primitive seems to be better on the long run.

(in reply to sandlance)
Post #: 46
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/30/2018 5:40:15 PM   
Rogue187

 

Posts: 143
Joined: 2/7/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sandlance

Before any of these improvements are done, AE needs to be made more compatable with Win10.I did read Alfred post, this would take years of work. The farther we get from XP the harder the game gets to play.



Realistically, how long will this game be maintained? I know there is the unofficial beta patch that everyone uses, but my understanding is that it is more a labor of love than official development. It would be nice to see an update or overhaul of the game, but how long before it is simply abandoned and there are no longer unofficial updates? Have we already reached that point?

(in reply to sandlance)
Post #: 47
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/30/2018 6:28:46 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 12682
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
I don't know if someone's mentioned this but I wish you could order naval bombardment missions' target priority by percentage for port, airbase and LCUs. Much of the time I'd put 100% on the airfield and I'd probably order more such missions.

(in reply to Rogue187)
Post #: 48
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/30/2018 6:59:30 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 4703
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

1. I would like to add a Submarine-Ops screen. A button at the top of the screen, but for submarines. You could click one button and it would display all the submarines with mission, location, filter by nationality, etc. While you could still create Sub missions from base hexes, you could modify patrol locations and maybe get a quick peek at fuel and ammo loads. Maybe add the ability to return at low ammo or low fuel automatically. I think the subs return already when the fuel is too low even with human control, but at least I could see it on one dialogue box. Plus you could click on the sub name and it would jump you to that location. This would save a large amount of time hunting and clicking on subs to see their status. Here is a quick example:

SS Seawolf Sub Patrol 77,109 Ammo: Full Fuel: 86% On Patrol
SS Tambor Sub Patrol 86,108 Ammo: Empty Fuel: 50% RTB
SS Terrapin Sub Patrol 56,205 Ammo: Full Fuel: 98% ENR to Patrol


Seems to me that should one not check a homeport for some reason when a sub has returned from patrol with low fuel/ammo AND with damage it will refuel and re-ammo but it will also put to sea immediately on the next turn without repairing the damage. This happens even with the "Auto-sub Ops" button off. I'm not sure what tempo submarines operated at in WW2 but I do know that the crews needed rest/recreation and the ships needed maintenance and that they would spend a significant amount of time in port following any patrol. The current put right to sea "coding" is surely not correct.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 49
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/30/2018 11:41:33 PM   
InfiniteMonkey

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 9/16/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rogue187


quote:

ORIGINAL: sandlance

Before any of these improvements are done, AE needs to be made more compatable with Win10.I did read Alfred post, this would take years of work. The farther we get from XP the harder the game gets to play.



Realistically, how long will this game be maintained? I know there is the unofficial beta patch that everyone uses, but my understanding is that it is more a labor of love than official development. It would be nice to see an update or overhaul of the game, but how long before it is simply abandoned and there are no longer unofficial updates? Have we already reached that point?

The truth is, it is not maintained now. michaelm has moved to other projects and there is no published plan for a future for WitP:AE. Even while he was making changes, my impression was that he did maintenance in between his other responsibilities. I offered via PM to assist with programming, but never had anyone take me up on the offer. I suspect that the confidentiality / royalty agreements combined with the lack of interest on behalf of the parties involved in maintaining / extending WitP:AE will kill the game eventually.

(in reply to Rogue187)
Post #: 50
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/30/2018 11:42:57 PM   
InfiniteMonkey

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 9/16/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Be able to designate a 'retreat to' button. The AI does its absolute BEST to retreat units in the WORST possible direction...


NO RETREAT, NO SURRENDER! BANZAI!

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 51
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 1/31/2018 6:27:43 PM   
larrybush


Posts: 408
Joined: 11/17/2005
From: Florida nowdays
Status: offline
Oh, what a topic! You know for a guy that only played the original WITP with a friend, I have only played WITP AE against the AI. Still it is my all-time favorite war game. I would love to see it get re-booted.

My suggestions would probably go against the grain of most fans of the game though. There are some interesting ideas here.

First thing would be to update the drivers, codex or whatever to allow thing to work on today’s operating systems.

I like it to start at an option screen that you can tailor the game to your liking. From counting every bullet and bean to a markedly reduced level of detail. This is to allow players to spend less than 4 years playing it.

I don’t want to ruin the realism, but I would not mind letting a computer staff assistant to train my pilots and build bases up to specified levels. Take over production. Take ships to specified ports to repair and/or upgrade. Make setting up patrol zones more competent, so ships are replaced when low on fuel and they don’t run out of fuel 2/3 the way home. Make convoy routes work better. Being able to right click this kind of stuff and give instruction to a staff assistant would let me focus on the war part of the game. And hopefully reduce the time it takes to play it.

I like to see the combat screens change:
Naval surface action – an overhead animated track chart style of combat resolution. (I always loved Morrison’s books for these) being able to watch those long lance torpedoes track towards their targets and salvo splashes around ships. Of course, you could hit the escape key or turn it off completely and go directly to the text results.

Air actions would be nice instead of a top down view a side view with altitude reticules. A better visual presentation to allow more comprehension of the battle space. Animated of course. So you can see your CAP got bounced from above and out of the sun. Some rework of radar rules would be nice. It played an important part of air combat as it evolved throughout the war.

Maybe some changes to the submarine views? The periscope reticule is probably spot on for sub torpedo attacks but maybe switch to a top down showing the ASW assets doing their thing when the sub is running.

I’d certainly like to see some improvements in the ground war part of the game! Be nice to click on a hex or several hexes and get a blown-up view of them. Being able to assign units to hex sides or as reserves while in this view might be nice. Since there is so much room in each hex, having facing of units seems worthy. Being able to see numeric values on the counters in this blown up view would be nice. Just making the ground game be more like a game within a game would be nice. It just seems a little off now, like it was an afterthought or something. And the darn counters are stupid tiny.

The Intel screens could be based on real radio traffic analysis in game – You should be looking at the smaller map and seeing where radio traffic is flowing to and from. Just like both sides did in the war. On top of that when call-signs are decoded, or major parts of the code are decoded you should see that in text boxes on the same map. Both sides did this, the US succeeded better than the Japanese at code breaking, but the Japanese changed code several times during the war (after Midway). The Japanese seemed competent at radio traffic analysis. They always seemed to know when Allied Carriers were at sea.

The political points need rework or something to take the place of them. So many Japanese players are doing some very un-historical things (which is fine) but the Allies are hamstrung by not being able to react appropriately. After all Japanese invasion of India, Australia or Hawaii is really going to change things up – The Allies are not going to just sit there based on their Political points! This needs to be re-thought.

It really goes both ways too. I just finished a book some of which is based on the 101 volumes the Japanese Defense Force wrote in the late 60’s on the conduct of the war. Pretty eye opening to see the constraints they had on petroleum, steel and the overall logistics of their war effort. Now when I read about someone saying the Japanese had to win the war by the end of 1943 I believe it. Some of the things that can be done in game with the Japanese were not possible.

Sorry I think I just wrote a book – too long didn’t read!! Ha, but it is my all time favorite wargame even though it's to big to play! Maybe not to big, it just takes too darn long.

(in reply to InfiniteMonkey)
Post #: 52
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 2/1/2018 12:23:37 AM   
InfiniteMonkey

 

Posts: 346
Joined: 9/16/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: larrybush
It really goes both ways too. I just finished a book some of which is based on the 101 volumes the Japanese Defense Force wrote in the late 60’s on the conduct of the war. Pretty eye opening to see the constraints they had on petroleum, steel and the overall logistics of their war effort. Now when I read about someone saying the Japanese had to win the war by the end of 1943 I believe it. Some of the things that can be done in game with the Japanese were not possible.

Can you give the citations for a translated copy of the JSDF source or the book you refer to?

(in reply to larrybush)
Post #: 53
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 2/1/2018 11:21:31 AM   
cardas

 

Posts: 184
Joined: 4/8/2016
Status: offline
Well, if we are discussing gameplay changes as well then I'll add some. Even though it might sound like I'd want a more complicated game I really don't, I want a "smarter" game.

- Less distinction between ships in port and in task forces. A ship can suddenly become invulnerable/invisible to, say, a carrier strike simply because it was put into a task force instead of staying in port while the carrier strike was a port attack (or vice versa).

- Less omnipresent bombardments. Somehow currently being in a coast hex means every single thing in that hex is lined up at the shore, in perfect range for even the smallest gun to hit whatever is there.

- Better/more granular ground combat model. Quite a big thing to sum up in a short sentence but I have difficulty articulating all the issues I have with it. At the moment things seems a bit too binary. One thing is that you can more or less outright lose a division in two days of combat in a fight against a unit of equal size (hostile division). Say you are moving over a river, there's an enemy unit on the other side (but you don't have good recon on it). Shock attack results, your division is shattered and the following turn the enemy shock attacks you back. Boom, one dead division. How in the world would that happen in real life?
Yes, yes, you could have done better recon, that just says what you should do in the game, it doesn't mean it's a very plausible result. Also sure, the game is an abstraction but I don't think those kind of quick results are any good for the game.
The combat model also often seem to encourage "doom" stacks instead of any kind of wide fronts. And so on and so forth...

- More granular(/verbose?) naval combat. The naval combat works, in a sense, because naval combat always seems to have been somewhat chaotic so any result the game spits out can be explained in one way or another. Regardless I'd want the game to tell me why my destroyer division with full ammo sailed within 3000 yards of an enemy merchant convoy, fired once (missing) and afterwards let them go. Sure, I can make some scenario up in my mind of how it could have happened, but then I could explain away pretty much any scenario.

- Better ship damage modelling/repair time. It seems unreasonable that a submarine can hit a mine, return to port and be back ready for sea a week later. This is somewhat less of an issue the bigger the ship is as they get pretty long repair times regardless. Though having a battleship hit by a torpedo and ending up with 0/0/0/0 damage is a bit mind boggling.

- Long term fatigue. Just to bring down operational tempo on all combat units (land, ground and air).

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget
- AVGAS (or an optional grognard hardcore version with AVGAS, POL, heavy fuel and coal, plus supplies split into general supplies, weapons&ammo, food, medical supplies)

I hesitate suggesting making the game more complicated. This is still something that at least sounds appealing I'd add "Reinforcemnts (troops etc)" to that list. Still this is something that I'd only really wanted if it was handled in a very clever way from the interface. I wouldn't want to play spreadsheet manager plus plus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: larrybush
Oh, what a topic! You know for a guy that only played the original WITP with a friend, I have only played WITP AE against the AI. Still it is my all-time favorite war game. I would love to see it get re-booted.

And on that topic... better AI?

(in reply to InfiniteMonkey)
Post #: 54
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 2/1/2018 1:03:05 PM   
larrybush


Posts: 408
Joined: 11/17/2005
From: Florida nowdays
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfiniteMonkey

quote:

ORIGINAL: larrybush
It really goes both ways too. I just finished a book some of which is based on the 101 volumes the Japanese Defense Force wrote in the late 60’s on the conduct of the war. Pretty eye opening to see the constraints they had on petroleum, steel and the overall logistics of their war effort. Now when I read about someone saying the Japanese had to win the war by the end of 1943 I believe it. Some of the things that can be done in game with the Japanese were not possible.

Can you give the citations for a translated copy of the JSDF source or the book you refer to?


The primary book that references this JSDF work is "Guadalcanal, The definitive Account of the Landmark Battle" by Richard B. Frank. ISBN 0-394-58875-4 Copyright 1990.

Out of the 5 or so books I have on this campaign this is by far the best. It has about 200 pages of notes referencing the information sources & bibliography.

The Author discusses this JSDF source, but it does not have a translated version. Most of its 101 volumes is in some archaic form of Japanese, which required a special translator who gets quite a lot of acknowledgments in the book. I got the feeling these volumes were not published for the general population. Too bad, would be a great reference. The author gives a lot of acknowledgements to a few Japanese folks for acquiring his copies of these volumes (or I should say the 4 volumes that were used as references for the book)

There are two accounts in the Guadalcanal book that lead me to believe that the Japanese were pretty concerned over their war production of materials.

1) The Army and Navy both went to Tojo (after the battle of Bloody Ridge and when the Japanese high command in theater staring to realize this might be the decisive battle they were looking for) to ask for additional shipping to move divisions to Guadalcanal. Tojo said no way it would impact the next years steel production. After quite a bit of begging and influence peddling they finally got shipping to move 2 divisions. Tojo stated this would reduce the steel production by 1 million (tons or pounds I can’t remember which) for the next year.

2) Every sortie by the combined fleet out of Truk in all three Carrier battles was performed with the fuel oil dictating the pace and length of each of those operations. Along with which ships stayed in port and which ships sortied. The Japanese Military Planners were very concerned over the fuel oil and aviation gasoline that was being consumed during the campaign.

The chapters on Radio Traffic Analysis and Cryptology are pretty darn interesting too.

(in reply to InfiniteMonkey)
Post #: 55
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 2/1/2018 1:20:44 PM   
larrybush


Posts: 408
Joined: 11/17/2005
From: Florida nowdays
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: larrybush
Oh, what a topic! You know for a guy that only played the original WITP with a friend, I have only played WITP AE against the AI. Still it is my all-time favorite war game. I would love to see it get re-booted.

And on that topic... better AI?


Well you absolutely correct, I did not mention because I don't think the state of the art of software can ever create an AI that can make all the dynamic decisions to play a game of this complexity.(with credibility)

Maybe scripted versions can be written you choose at the beginning of a game or are randomly assigned, but as the opponent you kind of have to follow the script too otherwise the AI gets lost in it's responses to your moves.

Example: I choose to have the Allied script to follow history. As the Japanese human player I need to follow history too. Otherwise if I invade India the AI does not make the necessary moves to counter this move (not part of it's scripted play)

(in reply to cardas)
Post #: 56
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 2/1/2018 4:08:50 PM   
RichardAckermann

 

Posts: 248
Joined: 12/4/2015
Status: offline
Not impossible, my AI is not doing that bad, it just has a little lack of considering enemy fleet force in a given area, as well as lacks overview of where to ship reinforcements. Apart from that, you can calculate all the risk and strategic value of a base, own assets, supply and stuff available to let the AI strike, harass, defend or evacuate a given base or area.

I admit it takes a lot of time to fine tune and add various values to consider, but I think it can be done - and I do not see an alternative. A scripted AI will always be prone to be outmaneuvered by a human player.

(in reply to larrybush)
Post #: 57
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 2/1/2018 4:32:38 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 6050
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mobeer

Some ideas:

1) Refocus on the player as a theatre commander
Remove any and all functionality that would be far below the level of the player. For example:
- if a task force is to bombard at night on the 24th/25th, don't require me to work out which hex it needs to be in on the 24th, let the Admiral decide
- have regiment commanders automatically assigned, then if the unit fights well award recognition points to its commander. When a new Division arrives assign a recognised, experienced commander without any player involvement
- don't order a squadron to sweep enemy airfield with 40% of its planes at 12,000 feet. Order a base to use its air assets to aggressively gain air superiority.




I would be extremely unhappy with changes like this and would not play that game.

I don't want a WiTPAE Lite.

The devil is in the details and it's the level of detail and required micromanagement that make this game great!


_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Mobeer)
Post #: 58
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 2/1/2018 6:23:47 PM   
LeeChard

 

Posts: 827
Joined: 9/12/2007
From: Michigan
Status: offline
An AI that would be able to change it's mission when it hits a brick wall would be my first choice.
I've had the AI attempt to take a position that I had strong forces at and it tries over and over while I'm sinking ships like target practice

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 59
RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? - 2/1/2018 7:33:43 PM   
larrybush


Posts: 408
Joined: 11/17/2005
From: Florida nowdays
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RichardAckermann

Not impossible, my AI is not doing that bad, it just has a little lack of considering enemy fleet force in a given area, as well as lacks overview of where to ship reinforcements. Apart from that, you can calculate all the risk and strategic value of a base, own assets, supply and stuff available to let the AI strike, harass, defend or evacuate a given base or area.

I admit it takes a lot of time to fine tune and add various values to consider, but I think it can be done - and I do not see an alternative. A scripted AI will always be prone to be outmaneuvered by a human player.


Well I honestly hope you are correct.

I've had some pretty bad luck with the AI not knowing what's going on.

(in reply to RichardAckermann)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: What would you want in War in the Pacific 3? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
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

0.191