Matrix Games Forums

The fight for Armageddon begins! The Matrix Holiday sales are starting today! Warhammer - Weapons of WarFlashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm gets huge update and a Steam release!Battle Academy 2 opens up a new front!Flashpoint Campaigns Featured on weekly Streaming SessionFrontline: The Longest Day - New Screenshots!Deal of the Week: Hannibal Rome and CarthageFlashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm gets Players Edition!To End All Wars gets its first major patch!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Database screens

 
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] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Database screens Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Database screens - 8/22/2004 2:47:47 AM   
fbastos


Posts: 827
Joined: 8/7/2004
Status: offline
DISRUPT THE UNITS WHEN CHANGING THE LEADER

This should stop the player from moving his best commanders around the map as he is attacked.

(in reply to bgibs)
Post #: 91
RE: Database screens - 8/22/2004 7:40:26 AM   
fbastos


Posts: 827
Joined: 8/7/2004
Status: offline
ASK "DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE?" WHEN PLAYER WINS

I want to see the complete destruction of all Japanese ships!

HAVE A "HIGH PRIORITY" TOGGLE ON THE SHIPS FOR REPAIRS

That's what happened with Yorktown on 1942, right? Give her repairs priority?

I WANT THE PT-109 WITH KENNEDY, J F LT(JG) COMMANDING

Give me her with her "very promising and careful commander" and I'll sail her right into Tokyo harbor. Will even put on head-to-head to make sure that Yamato, Musashi, 20 cruisers and 50 destroyers are waiting for her! :)

ADD AN OPTIONAL LIMIT TO THE NUMBER OF ORDERS YOU CAN GIVE PER DAY

PacWar had that, didn't it? I think that's very realistic. Make it "Ironman" mode.

LET THE PLAYERS RENAME THE SHIPS

So that purists can choose whatever name they want for the replacement Essex carriers.

SHOW AIR ATTACKS ON SUBMARINES ON THE COMBAT REPORT

If ship attacks show, why air attacks don't show?

HAVE A SEPARATE "TORPEDO ATTACK" MISSION FOR AIR GROUPS

So that when you select Naval Attack, that means bombs and Torpedo Attack hopefully doesn't mean bombs.

ADD A COUNTER FOR AIRCRAFTS LOST ON AIR GROUPS

You count the kills per air group, but not the losses; sometimes it's hard to find out what's going on. If you could have 4 counters for losses due to Flak, Air Combat, Destroyed on the Ground and Operational, that would be da bomb.

ADD A COUNTER FOR SHIP HITS BY AIR GROUPS

You count the air kills, so it makes sense to count the ship kills too. As one won't know if the really will really sink or not due to damage, just count how many hits this air group has claimed on enemy ships. It should be fogged, with the less experience the group has, the greater the chance of claiming a hit that didn't exist. That's quite historical, I think.

ADD A COUNTER FOR AIRCRAFTS DESTROYED AND ENEMY SHIP HITS BY SHIP

Likewise the air group kills counter, this would be of great importance on assessing the AA and ASW effectivity of ships. Likewise the air groups, it should be fogged.

Regards,
F.

(in reply to fbastos)
Post #: 92
RE: Database screens - 8/23/2004 1:08:59 AM   
fbastos


Posts: 827
Joined: 8/7/2004
Status: offline
BEACH THOSE SHIPS!

Does't make sense for a ship to always sink at harbor or at a coastal hex. Instead of sinking, run a check to have the ship beached instead - higher chance in harbor or if the ship has good speed. And make the repairs of beached ships to go slow, as they will incur in much damage when beaching.

DRYDOCKS!

A limited number of ships should be allowed to drydock on ports; that should make them immune from sinking. This could be implemented by having the port to automatically take the first so many ships (the most damaged ones) into drydocks, what makes them immune from sinking.

Regards,
F.

< Message edited by fbastos -- 8/22/2004 11:15:57 PM >

(in reply to fbastos)
Post #: 93
RE: Database screens - 8/23/2004 5:38:48 AM   
William Amos

 

Posts: 594
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Dayton Ohio
Status: offline
End of Turn AAR report.

Would like some more details. Maybe ships and squadron Commanders and Killboards for pilots in the end of turn AAR text report. Or even a tonnage for Sub Commander Kill list.

Examples

ASW attack at 134,40

Japanese Ships
SS I-21, hits 1, on fire (Lt Cmd Kowakzi) (5,000 Tonnes sunk)

Allied Ships
DD Lawrence (Lt Cmd Jones)
DD King (Lt Cmd Wilson)
DD Preston (Lt Cmd Brown)
DD Smith (Lt Cmd Marks)
DD Perkins (Lt Cmd Jackson)
DD Cushing (Cmd Hall)


Day Air attack on TF, near Bataan at 42,51

Japanese aircraft (Cmd Fubuki)
B5N Kate x 8
G4M1 Betty x 3

Allied aircraft (Col Fredricks)
P-35A x 3
P-40B Tomahawk x 1
P-40E Warhawk x 4

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N Kate: 1 damaged
G4M1 Betty: 2 destroyed

Capt Rodgers - 2 Kills (4 total)

< Message edited by William Amos -- 8/23/2004 3:48:58 AM >

(in reply to fbastos)
Post #: 94
RE: WitP Wish List - 8/23/2004 10:12:30 AM   
CobraAus


Posts: 2322
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Geelong Australia
Status: offline
I would like to see pursue TF same as pursue troops.. also bombarding TF's to retire to hex they were sent from.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kid)
Post #: 95
RE: WitP Wish List - 8/23/2004 11:41:11 AM   
Rainerle

 

Posts: 462
Joined: 7/24/2002
From: Burghausen/Bavaria
Status: offline
Let engineers at undeveloped bases assist in ship repair.
I see no reason why 30+ engineer squads should not prohibit the sinking of a ship if ordered to do so (and I would). Probably not neccesary at big harbours though.

_____________________________


Image brought to you by courtesy of Subchaser!

(in reply to CobraAus)
Post #: 96
U.S. withdrawls? - 8/23/2004 10:33:50 PM   
bstarr


Posts: 859
Joined: 8/1/2004
From: Texas, by God!
Status: offline
what about having the us withdraw a few ships from time to time. Probably more on a historical basis, rather than a random one like the brit withdrawls. I know the us turned some ships into trainers, retired several older vessels, and even sent a few ships to the atlantic. just off the top of my head, I think most, if not all, of the s class subs were retired before the end of the war, and Sara was turned into a training ship late in the war.

also, devestating losses in the pacfleet would have released more ships from the atlantic. If the yorktown, enterprise, and hornet had gone down at midway, the ranger would have probably been sent east.

I know, I know, someone's asking for the ranger now, so the next thing you know some nut will probably be begging for u-boats in the indian ocean.

(in reply to Rainerle)
Post #: 97
RE: U.S. withdrawls? - 8/23/2004 10:46:03 PM   
Tankerace


Posts: 6399
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline
US Withdraw

Not quite the same thing as bstarr suggested, but something more along the lines of what was done in the original PTO. At various points in the game, certain ship need to be withdrawn to support operations in the Atlantic, such as the Nevada, which transferred to the Atlantic in support of D Day, or the South Dakota, which after the Battle of Savo Island was sent to the Atlantic to operate with the British Home fleet with the USS Alabama.

In PTO, at a certain date, the player would receive a message "Battleship Nevada has been redeployed to the Atlantic to provide bombardment of amphibious landings."

Something along those lines would be good here, for historical reasons.

_____________________________


Designer of War Plan Orange
Producer of Carrier Force
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition

Avatar is of me with my 1918/1967 FTR Ishapore Sht LE Mk III*.

(in reply to bstarr)
Post #: 98
RE: U.S. withdrawls? - 8/24/2004 3:08:25 AM   
Beezle


Posts: 1427
Joined: 7/15/2004
Status: offline
Were you to have US withdrawls (I am not saying I am for or against them): You need at least the 1 month the Brits are given to withdraw. You might also consider allowing withdrawl to be from major bases scattered around the map (Karachi, Sydney, Pearl or SF at the least) given that the US ship might be far from any given port when you get the message.

_____________________________


Beezle - Rapidly running out of altitude, airspeed and ideas.

(in reply to Tankerace)
Post #: 99
RE: Information/Order Screens - 8/24/2004 3:09:44 AM   
Greco, Thomas A


Posts: 51
Joined: 4/23/2002
From: Irvine Ca
Status: offline
Intel Screen
Add KIA, WIA, MIA to daily and cumulative totals. Same with sunk ships.

_____________________________

"Have fun storming the castle." Miracle Max

(in reply to kkelley)
Post #: 100
RE: FIXED CD UNITS - 8/24/2004 4:11:02 AM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
Pre-war permanent CD installations still seem to be less effective than they should
be. At a time when ship to ship combat at anything but short range produced 2-5%
hits at best, these installations averaged 20-25% hits. I don't know if it's possible
to upgrade the basic accuracy, but the "fixed" CD units (Manilla Bay, Singapore,
Hawaii, the Japanese Home Islands) Ought to AT LEAST start the game 100% pre-
pared to fight and with 90 morals. It's not like they had had anything else to pre-
pare for in the last 10 years, nor were these ferro-concrete and steel entities going
to be moved anywhere. And if the accuracy figures can't be improved, you might
consider at least increasing the number of tubes available to make up for it.

And they still ought to fire FIRST at any TF attempting offensive action against the
coast they are defending. There is something inherantly WRONG about these massive
CD emplacements sitting silent while an attacker puonds away on the coastal airfields
or ports or troops they are supposed to be defending. The "mobile" CD units aren't
as big a deal...but when I see players talking about trying to invade Oahu without
even mentioning the problem of dealing with the CD unit there, I know something is
really wrong with the way the game is handling them.

(in reply to Greco, Thomas A)
Post #: 101
RE: FIXED CD UNITS - 8/24/2004 4:17:04 AM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
One other point. The Japanese have been short-changed in "fixed" CD units. The
US is shorted a pair of 16" at San Francisco (should be 4) but the Japs have been
shorted at least a half-dozen 16.1" twin-turret installations from the cancelled BB'sof the early 20's. there should be 1 turret (2 guns) on the south coast of Korea in the hex
west of Pusan, one on Tsushima Isalnd, and one on the Japanese Coast opposite (in
effect protecting the southern enterance to the Sea of Japan), a pair of turrets at Tokyo
Bay, and at least one near Osaka. There may have been some others I'm not familiar
with.

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 102
RE: U.S. withdrawls? - 8/24/2004 5:09:26 AM   
bstarr


Posts: 859
Joined: 8/1/2004
From: Texas, by God!
Status: offline
I like Tankerace's idea of withdrawls along historical lines; however, they would probably need to be more like "1 BB needed to support DDay landings in the Atlantic". That way if the Nevada is has been turned into a house for fishies off the coast of Guam you still have to withdraw something. Also, it saves you from having to withdraw a ship that may be active in a fleet while another similar vessel may be sitting at Pearl looking for something to do. You would also need the same month time limit to comply, but, given the ability to pick and choose which ships to send, you wouldn't really need but one harbor to release the ship (San Fran, I assume).

(in reply to Beezle)
Post #: 103
RE: U.S. withdrawls? - 8/24/2004 5:16:59 AM   
Tankerace


Posts: 6399
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline
Exactly. I was using the Specific ship idea to merely show how another game did it. Of course. Of course, in case the BB of choice is somewhere in the middle of nowhere, it might be advisable to have it where you can withdraw any BB, and it can just sail to SF and then to NY on its own, hidden accord. Then, like the British withdraw, it can be placed back in the reinforcement pool for arrival at a later date.

_____________________________


Designer of War Plan Orange
Producer of Carrier Force
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition

Avatar is of me with my 1918/1967 FTR Ishapore Sht LE Mk III*.

(in reply to bstarr)
Post #: 104
RE: Information/Order Screens - 8/24/2004 5:32:31 AM   
Halsey


Posts: 4932
Joined: 2/7/2004
From: Indianapolis Indiana USA
Status: offline
In addition to fixing pursuit:

Have LCU's pay movement cost to enter a hex from off of a road or rail hex. As it is now a unit can jump on to a mountain/jungle hex in one turn from a road/rail hex.

Fix defensive land bombardment to happen before the assault phase. As it is set up now the disruption from defensive artillery attacks occur after land assaults. Hence no disruption on the attackers before combat resolution.

How about an interdiction attack for aircraft? Results would subtract movement points from a LCU according to the hex type it is in.



< Message edited by Halsey -- 8/23/2004 9:35:36 PM >


_____________________________

AE WITP Land Air Bitmap downloads

https://sites.google.com/site/aewitplandairartwork/home/ae-witp-bitmap-downloads

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 105
RE: Information/Order Screens - 8/24/2004 2:10:36 PM   
django

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 8/18/2004
From: Germany
Status: offline
a german manual would be fine

so best greatings from Germany :-)

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 106
RE: Information/Order Screens - 8/24/2004 4:52:40 PM   
Charles_22


Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline
I know at least a coupple of us have mentioned this before in another thread, but it may not help unless it oges here, so here goes. I would like a toggle to click off the spawning which goes on for some of the Allied ships.

(in reply to django)
Post #: 107
RE: WitP Wish List - 8/24/2004 9:13:40 PM   
Toro


Posts: 578
Joined: 4/9/2002
From: 16 miles southeast of Hell (Michigan, i.e.), US
Status: offline
Operational Report: append newly arrived units to the bottom of this report. That would be nice...

(in reply to Kid)
Post #: 108
RE: Database - 8/24/2004 11:22:39 PM   
SpitfireIX


Posts: 264
Joined: 1/9/2003
From: Fort Wayne IN USA
Status: offline
How about allowing the Allied player to modify old DDs the way he can with large AKs? This would be more historical; in the Scenario 15 OOB, several DDs that saw action early in the war, but were not taken in hand for conversion to APDs or DMs or DMSs until late 1942, don't appear until 1943.

_____________________________

"I know Japanese. He is very bad. And tricky. But we Americans too smart. We catch him and give him hell."

--Benny Sablan, crewman, USS Enterprise 12/7/41

(in reply to ATCSMike)
Post #: 109
RE: WitP Wish List - 8/25/2004 3:16:07 AM   
Kid


Posts: 6626
Joined: 1/29/2002
From: Orland FL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Toro

Operational Report: append newly arrived units to the bottom of this report. That would be nice...



Repeat.......

_____________________________

Former War in the Pacific Test Team Manager and currently testing War in the East.


(in reply to Toro)
Post #: 110
RE: WitP Wish List - 8/25/2004 3:18:56 AM   
Kid


Posts: 6626
Joined: 1/29/2002
From: Orland FL
Status: offline
quote:

Fix defensive land bombardment to happen before the assault phase. As it is set up now the disruption from defensive artillery attacks occur after land assaults. Hence no disruption on the attackers before combat resolution.


If you select to bombard, that is not a defensive bombardment. Watch the combat animation and you will see text describing defensive bombardment taking place.

_____________________________

Former War in the Pacific Test Team Manager and currently testing War in the East.


(in reply to Kid)
Post #: 111
RE: WitP Wish List - 8/25/2004 5:03:50 AM   
dtravel


Posts: 4533
Joined: 7/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kid

quote:

Fix defensive land bombardment to happen before the assault phase. As it is set up now the disruption from defensive artillery attacks occur after land assaults. Hence no disruption on the attackers before combat resolution.


If you select to bombard, that is not a defensive bombardment. Watch the combat animation and you will see text describing defensive bombardment taking place.




What I see in the ground combat animation is all the attacker's units fire a bombardment, then all the attacker's units conduct their deliberate/shock attack. I have never yet seen the defender's units fire before that deliberate/shock attack is conducted and resolved. If the defender's are set to make a Bombardment attack of their own, that happens in a separate animation and resolution (assuming they survived the previous attack), which always takes place second.

_____________________________

This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.

"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy

Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.


(in reply to Kid)
Post #: 112
RE: FIXED CD UNITS - 8/25/2004 11:40:42 AM   
Rainerle

 

Posts: 462
Joined: 7/24/2002
From: Burghausen/Bavaria
Status: offline
Hi,

The detection levels of fixed CD units should decrease very slowly (if at all). That way I would not have to recon Singapore to find out that those CD's are still at the same place they have been 7 days ago. And it would really help in avoiding serious blunders (talking from bad experience)

_____________________________


Image brought to you by courtesy of Subchaser!

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 113
RE: WitP Wish List - 8/25/2004 2:42:07 PM   
Halsey


Posts: 4932
Joined: 2/7/2004
From: Indianapolis Indiana USA
Status: offline
What I've seen, when a base is attacked by Japanese shock attack is the allied bombardment happens after the attack takes place. Am I missing something during the execution phase?

_____________________________

AE WITP Land Air Bitmap downloads

https://sites.google.com/site/aewitplandairartwork/home/ae-witp-bitmap-downloads

(in reply to Kid)
Post #: 114
RE: WitP Wish List - 8/25/2004 2:47:27 PM   
Kid


Posts: 6626
Joined: 1/29/2002
From: Orland FL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Halsey

What I've seen, when a base is attacked by Japanese shock attack is the allied bombardment happens after the attack takes place. Am I missing something during the execution phase?



I do not want to start a debate in the whis list thread. I'll look into this and se what the sequence is and post in another thread.

_____________________________

Former War in the Pacific Test Team Manager and currently testing War in the East.


(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 115
RE: WitP Wish List - 8/25/2004 6:01:39 PM   
RevRick


Posts: 2540
Joined: 9/16/2000
From: Dontblinkyoullmissit, GA
Status: offline
Haven't seen this but...
Could we get the listing and designators for the USN AK to AKA since they had a higher full speed than the Merchant Marine AK. Would be helpful to those of us who have to plan for an invasion with short supplies.

_____________________________

"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer

(in reply to Kid)
Post #: 116
RE: WitP Wish List - 8/25/2004 6:37:19 PM   
William Amos

 

Posts: 594
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Dayton Ohio
Status: offline
Change recon reports

I feel that the recon phase of this game is really broken.

Someone tell me what is up with recon (non naval) searches ? These pilots have to be the dumbest in the entire game.

I went through on test game and let the deciede their own targets. They ONLY flew over places my bombers and fighters had ALREADY hit !. They tag along on bombing runs. I finally in restart gave orders to each one to check out OTHER targets. My bombers can tell me what is in the hexes I bomb my recon needs to check out other areas.

And for the life of me why did you enter their reports into real time game ? Since you cant jump in and effect what happens during the turn is NO NEED to hear their reports during the battles. I swear every time I hear those damn Japanese recon pilots clicking their cameras I want to scream "Damn Japanese Tourists !!!"

Added to this is the reverse that IMPORTANT data is left out !. Yeah might hear a "Main body" report and or sighting of ships. But I feel there is a part of the game that is missing.

For example. In my first start I heard a "main body" report during the real time replay of the turn. Then it went on to that camera clicking.

It wasnt till AFTER the report I saw what caused that "Main body" report when I checked out the post turn operations report.

Aparently a PBY spotted the Rujuho CVL TF heading towards the Phillipine isles. That PBY got JUMPED by its CAP and damaged. Another PBY spotted a Japanese TF and got hit by flack from it and damaged. Also have seen ASW warfare carried out by planes and ONLY listed in the operational report screen.

I would have NEVER known this if I hadnt check operational reports. TO me that was a CRITICAL report that didnt get to me. I got all those STUPID "CLICK CLICK CLICK" area recon of sites I ALREADY KNEW were gonna take place. And valuable recon didnt get back to me or was breifly skimmed over.

I woud have ENJOYED seeing a Combat report of my PBY getting jumped by the Claudes of that Japanese CAP. To see that PBY under attack would have had me SEARCHING for that Japanese carrier group.

Recon is just completely backwards in this game. Useless "CLICK CLICK CLICK" of ALREADY targeted sites should have been moved to reports only and useful action like spotting enemy taskforces and air combat between recon planes and fighters shoud have been put IN. Need to fix this part of the game.

Simply remove the recon flights over sites. the can be placed in the operational report screen.

ADD IN ship sighings that result in COMBAT. Like seeing a naval search combat screen when they get attacked by enemy planes or ships.

(in reply to RevRick)
Post #: 117
RE: WitP Wish List - 8/25/2004 7:52:31 PM   
strawbuk


Posts: 289
Joined: 4/30/2004
From: London via Glos
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: William Amos

Change recon reports

Someone tell me what is up with recon (non naval) searches ? These pilots have to be the dumbest in the entire game.

I went through on test game and let the deciede their own targets. They ONLY flew over places my bombers and fighters had ALREADY hit !. They tag along on bombing runs. I finally in restart gave orders to each one to check out OTHER targets. My bombers can tell me what is in the hexes I bomb my recon needs to check out other areas.


Valid concerns maybe - but

a. for non naval searches why are you not telling them what to watch?

b. if you don''t tell them a target, Bomb Damage Assessment missions are entirely legitimate, certainly 'real' but what they do for the game I know not? May be helps determines whether AI controlled aircraft revist a target? Some beta will know...

_____________________________



Twinkle twinkle PBY
Seeking Kido Bu-tai
Flying o' the sea so high
An ill-omen in the sky
Twinkle twinkle PBY
Pointing out who's next to fry

(in reply to William Amos)
Post #: 118
RE: WitP Wish List - 8/25/2004 8:42:44 PM   
captskillet


Posts: 2489
Joined: 3/1/2003
From: Louisiana & the 2007 Nat Champ LSU Fightin' Tigers
Status: offline
The ability to prioritize which ships your ports/repair facilities "fix" first such as a Midway type situation where everything went into getting the Yorktown ready for Midway.

_____________________________

"Git thar fust with the most men" - Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest


(in reply to Kid)
Post #: 119
RE: WitP Wish List - 8/25/2004 8:46:55 PM   
Beezle


Posts: 1427
Joined: 7/15/2004
Status: offline
quote:

"fix" first


a) Can't you undock anything you don't want fixed?
b) I thought (except for the repair yard points) it didn't matter anyhow. That every ship had a chance of repair independent of how many other ships were being repaired in that port.

Basically you can't do a Rush Job like the Yorktown here, even with priorities.

_____________________________


Beezle - Rapidly running out of altitude, airspeed and ideas.

(in reply to captskillet)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Database screens Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   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

0.758