What would you want in War in the Pacific 3?

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
Rogue187
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 5:51 am

What would you want in War in the Pacific 3?

Post by Rogue187 »

Hey everyone! Since my other thread about WITP3 became a study in game balance, it made me wonder, what would you want in an updated version of the game? I'm sure other wish lists exist, but I will add mine. Please keep in mind, I have not played the game until the end, and I am still new. Also, I am not a developer and have no idea how hard any of this would be to implement. Also, try to keep away from the play balance debate if you please!

Intelligence:
-I would like to see intelligence analysis developed. It would be nice to have an "adviser" that could synthesize all the raw data and give you advice on how to proceed. I don't think the raw data should be hidden, but the AI could review the information and compile a report based on several days. It would be nice to read a summary that says something like, "Admiral, SIGINT indicates Japanese movement toward DEI" or "Sir, SIGINT indicates movement of a large fleet towards Guam." As time goes on, intelligence could improve to say, "Sir, intelligence indicates enemy CVs with BB and CA support are moving to Guadalcanal." As someone who can't play every day, reading and analyzing the raw intelligence isn't something I have time for.

-Hyperlinked hexes. When SIGINT indicates radio transmissions, it would be nice to click hex 77,109 in the report and not spend 10 minutes hunting around the map for hex 77,109.

-Radio transmission indicators. If hyperlinking doesn't work, then maybe a mark on the hex that is the old icon for radio transmission. Sometime like ((i)). I hope you know what I am talking about. Basically something that you can look at the map and see movement based on transmissions.

LCU:
-LCU automatically go into combat mode if left at a hex after a certain amount of time. I don't know how many times I forgot that the 27th Bagpipe Brigade reached its destination 3 weeks ago, is now under attack and still in Strategic Move mode. Ugh!

-Planning. Should it really take 100 days for a unit to plan for a particular hex? That seems long to me.

UI:
-More forgiving clicking! I would like for units to acknowledge when I click the hex and not the base. Its annoying when you load a supply TF from LA to Brisbane, go to click on Brisbane, but you didn't actually click the little flag and it cancelled your attempt to mark where you want to the TF to go. Sometimes it takes 3 attempts to finally click the stupid base if I get it even slightly off!

-More forgiving loading/unloading. If I add ships to a TF already loading troops, I don't want to have to unload everything then reload everything to get troops into the new ships. The game may already do this (I don't know) but at least a pop up box saying "would you like these ships to have troops loaded?"

-I am not sure when the game selects the AI for the campaign, if its when the scenario is loaded or after the first turn in played, but I would like it after the first turn. That way to could create a "master" set up with out having to go over it every time you start a new campaign.

-All the cities actually labeled. There are some that are really hard to pronounce and find. If I see a base on map and it isn't labeled, I may not give it much thought.

-Unit restrictions. If a unit comes on map early, allow it to be restricted unless the player wants to spend PP to unlock it early. Otherwise, after a certain date, allow it to move freely to show its real life activation. Same for planes. If some are to be training squadrons, let them be restricted with no option to move HQ and the pilots automatically transfer out once they are fully trained.

-Actual movement vs endurance. If a ship in a TF doesn't have the range to make it to a location, but it is with a ship that can, then don't say it doesn't have enough fuel. Especially if refueling is taken into account with TF movement to a base with fuel while en route to the destination. Basically, automatic underway replenishment for fuel.

-Fully animated battles. Probably not important for a lot of players, but I enjoy watching the battle scenes.

-Coast Guard. It would be nice if the Coast Guard ships were labeled as such. I know the Coast Guard was part of the Navy during WWII, but I'm in the Coast Guard and it just seems like we are forgotten.

Feel free to add your wishlist!

*Edited for one last addition!
User avatar
Panther Bait
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:59 pm

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

Post by Panther Bait »

I've said before (long time ago) that my biggest want is a new UI that is almost the inverse of what it is now.

Now - The current UI is very unit-focused. You click on each of your units, and you set them individually to do what you want. Unfortunately, this typically means that if you want 5 units to do the same thing, you have to repeat the same actions 5 times to get a mission built, and because the 5 units aren't really linked in any way, it is often hard to tell what is going to happen when the turn runs.

Dream UI - My dream UI would be generally mission/target based. You select a target and a mission type, and the game gives you a list of all the possible units that can contribute to that goal. You then select the units you want and select Done. The UI would use drag-n-drop mechanics (including regular windows multi-select options), not clicking tiny little buttons.

For example, if I want an air strike on Rabaul next turn, I right-click on the Rabaul hex and select airstrike from the popup mission list. I get a dialog with lists of valid air units (escort and bombers) and drag-and-drop boxes that show units assigned to the strike, possibly including separate boxes for escorts versus strike units. Even better would be if the mission dialog box had qualifiers like "only fly if assigned bombers are below XX fatigue" or "repeat every third day" or "scrub mission if no escorts show up" or "use rally point to increase coordination at the cost of range". There could still be plenty of die rolls as to whether units show up/get lost/fragment/etc. But setting up some basic tolerances for the mission would cut way down on the micromanagement of trying to suppress a base without having to click on every unit involved every turn.

The mission box concept could extend to Task Forces where some units are assigned as ASW screen, some as close escorts (AA or ASuW) and other units as the main body. There could be different tolerances (and effectiveness) based on which basket each ship is in.

Mike
When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard
User avatar
geofflambert
Posts: 14887
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:18 pm
Location: St. Louis

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

Post by geofflambert »

Repeat after me: There is War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition. There is only War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition. There are no other games than War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition. Nothing came before War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition and nothing will follow War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition.

User avatar
GI Jive
Posts: 171
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 7:53 pm

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

Post by GI Jive »

It would be nice to have recon type LCUs that can be landed by sub without being detected by the enemy (or at least have a high probability of going undetected). Force Z, Alamo Scouts, 5217th Recon Bn, Navy UDTs all were able to provide intel that air reconnaissance could not. It would also allow a player to get target details without telegraphing his intention (again, providing the landing went undetected). It would also be great to click on a location and access a comprehensive location specific intel summary. It would also make life easier if you could view all of the ships in a port with a filter "Show only ships needing repair." This would allow you to scroll through the group & make repairs without having to return to the full list or having to click past lots of vessels that have no deficiencies.

Tom
User avatar
Mark VII
Posts: 1837
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 6:41 am
Location: Brentwood,TN

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

Post by Mark VII »

Gunnery Sergeant Hartman would make us chant...."This is my War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition. There are many others like it, but this one is mine. My War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. Without me, my War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition is useless. Without my War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition, I am useless. I must play my War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition true. I must play better than my enemy, who is trying to kill me. I must launch a Carrier strike before he does. I will."

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

Repeat after me: There is War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition. There is only War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition. There are no other games than War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition. Nothing came before War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition and nothing will follow War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition.
Image
User avatar
BillBrown
Posts: 2335
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 3:55 am

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

Post by BillBrown »

ORIGINAL: GI Jive

It would be nice to have recon type LCUs that can be landed by sub without being detected by the enemy (or at least have a high probability of going undetected). Force Z, Alamo Scouts, 5217th Recon Bn, Navy UDTs all were able to provide intel that air reconnaissance could not. It would also allow a player to get target details without telegraphing his intention (again, providing the landing went undetected). It would also be great to click on a location and access a comprehensive location specific intel summary. It would also make life easier if you could view all of the ships in a port with a filter "Show only ships needing repair." This would allow you to scroll through the group & make repairs without having to return to the full list or having to click past lots of vessels that have no deficiencies.

Tom

The last part is all ready included. In the show ships in port display click on the manage ship repair button.
User avatar
AW1Steve
Posts: 14509
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:32 am
Location: Mordor Illlinois

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

Post by AW1Steve »

An ability to courts martial or execute a commanding officer to motivate others! [:D]
Rogue187
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 5:51 am

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

Post by Rogue187 »

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

Repeat after me: There is War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition. There is only War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition. There are no other games than War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition. Nothing came before War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition and nothing will follow War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition.

Think of it this way. Maybe there is a kid reading this. And in 20 years when they grow up they will be a developer. They will think back to their childhood and say "I remember all the fun I had playing AE. Maybe I will do a remake, but make it a little better." The rest of us will be dead or too old to care. But maybe WITP3: Virtual Reality Edition will be created for the next generation!
Zorch
Posts: 7087
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:21 pm

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

Post by Zorch »

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

Repeat after me: There is War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition. There is only War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition. There are no other games than War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition. Nothing came before War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition and nothing will follow War in the Pacific - Admiral's Edition.
In the beginning the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and then there was WitP:AE, and it was good. [:D]
User avatar
reg113
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2002 10:42 pm
Location: MS, USA

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

Post by reg113 »

[:D]
"Life's a b***h, then you die."
Insano
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Joplin, Missouri

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

Post by Insano »

The single greatest thing that could be done for this game is changing the orders entry format from IGOUGO to WEGO. Both players could work on their turns simultaneously and then the orders files would be read by the engine to resolve the turn, create the animation movie, combat reports, etc. This could also better leave open options for having more than 2 players.
pnzrgnral
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 3:23 pm
Location: El Paso, AR

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

Post by pnzrgnral »

Cupholders.
Rangers Lead The Way!
Sua Sponte
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 18315
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

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

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: pnzrgnral

Cupholders.
A cups for the Japanese, B cups for the British, C cups for the Canadians and D cups for the Americans?
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
Zorch
Posts: 7087
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:21 pm

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

Post by Zorch »

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: pnzrgnral

Cupholders.
A cups for the Japanese, B cups for the British, C cups for the Canadians and D cups for the Americans?
A cuppa tea for the Limeys?
User avatar
GI Jive
Posts: 171
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 7:53 pm

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

Post by GI Jive »

The last part is all ready included. In the show ships in port display click on the manage ship repair button.


Summonagun! I thought I was up on the repair function but I never knew the "better way" was staring me in the face all this time. Thanks for the info. Game life just got easier.

Tom
spence
Posts: 5409
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 6:56 am
Location: Vancouver, Washington

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

Post by spence »

-Coast Guard. It would be nice if the Coast Guard ships were labeled as such. I know the Coast Guard was part of the Navy during WWII, but I'm in the Coast Guard and it just seems like we are forgotten.

Semper Paratus mate.

The Coast Guard was more than just part of the Navy in WW2 (and all the other wars). It was a professional force in its own right with arguably more experience at war than the US Navy: because of its law enforcement authority it had conducted active naval operations through the 20s and until 1933 in its enforcement of Prohibition. Unlike the US Navy it had a cadre of experienced mid grade officers and petty officers who knew what they were doing in a wide variety of circumstances that were likely to be encountered in real world situations. The USCG had already started manning navy amphibious ships and had already started practicing landings on hostile beaches with both the Marines and US Army before Pearl Harbor. While the US Navy sailed hither thither and yon over miles of empty ocean, the USCG escorted the convoys to England where the real fighting was taking place. Two of the first U-boats sunk in the Atlantic by US forces were sunk by CG cutters (Thetis and Icarus). As the war progressed the Navy took advantage of CG expertise in ASW manning many of the new DEs and PFs with Coasties.

The Coast Guard did not do the "glorious" jobs of the carriers and their aviators, the cruisers and destroyers, and the submarines. The CG pretty much got stuck doing all the routine and tedious tasks that needed doing.
cardas
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 1:01 pm

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

Post by cardas »

Also, try to keep away from the play balance debate if you please!
Damn, I was all ready to go ranting about this and that! :) Guess you are talking mainly about the interface then which is, without a doubt, an area that could be improved upon. Designing a good UI is a difficult thing to though.

Here's a few I can think of, I'm sure there's plenty more.

LCU:
-Combat potential. The game does a lousy job in communicating how good the ground units actually are. It mainly shows the AV values, a very crude indicator at best on how well LCUs stack up against each other in combat. Someone who's played a bit learns how good different LCUs are by experience but for a new player this is a big pitfall.

Japanese economy:
-The WitPTracker is used by a lot of people to get a hold of the Japanese economy, even very experienced Japanese players. I think that speaks volumes on how the difficulties on getting an oversight of the economy ingame. You'd need something like the tracker at a minimum.

-Aircraft/engine research/construction is an area where the consequences of your actions are only felt far in the future, but knowing that basically requires a spreadsheet to plan your priorities. You'd need some way in the game to relatively easily see how things will evolve. Just like with AV I think this part of the game is a potential trap for new players due to how it is presented.

Airgroups:
-Why, oh why does airgroups default to flying at extended range instead of normal range? I'm not interested in eating the additional operational losses involved in flying at extended range so every single time I have to change it. Turn 1 is especially bad.

-Training of your pilots involves more clicks than it probably should. The training aspect as such is perhaps not bad as you have to weight whether it's worth keeping back the airgroup for training or if you need to commit it to combat now. It's keeping track of the experience/skills of your groups and switching the training focus and switching out pilots that I think is a bit of a chore.

Combat reports:
-Give me the combat messages you get in the combat animations in a reviewable text report. The combat summary shows the number of hits on a ship, but not what hit it. Quite a large difference between 10 hits from a large calibre gun and 10 hits from a machinegun.

-Show me the location of the combat reports on a strategic map.

ORIGINAL: Rogue187
-Planning. Should it really take 100 days for a unit to plan for a particular hex? That seems long to me.
Agreed that it sounds like a very long time. I believe this is a deliberated attempt to reduce the operational tempo though. Even with this long prep time much of the combat cadence in the game is probably higher than it really ought if compared to reality.
ORIGINAL: Rogue187
-All the cities actually labeled. There are some that are really hard to pronounce and find. If I see a base on map and it isn't labeled, I may not give it much thought.
Here I'll disagree with you. Labelling all bases on the map would lead to a horrendously cluttered map in some areas.
ORIGINAL: Insano
The single greatest thing that could be done for this game is changing the orders entry format from IGOUGO to WEGO. Both players could work on their turns simultaneously and then the orders files would be read by the engine to resolve the turn, create the animation movie, combat reports, etc. This could also better leave open options for having more than 2 players.
Definitely. I've always thought it would be neat to have one player per nation on the Allied side and one for the Japanese army, one for the navy. Would probably be more neat to read it in an AAR than to be involved in one though.
RichardAckermann
Posts: 271
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2015 12:07 pm

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

Post by RichardAckermann »

This thread is pure gold!
So many good ideas. I love it.
spence
Posts: 5409
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 6:56 am
Location: Vancouver, Washington

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

Post by spence »

Some stuff for WitP3:
(relating to the "air emphasis" perhaps

Withdrawals:
1) Right now failure to withdraw a pair of obsolete biplanes on time costs an exorbitant number of Political Points whereas early withdrawal of those same biplanes but not their potentially trained pilots before the assigned date grants the player some exorbitant number of Political Points. It seems it would be more appropriate if both the penalty and the "reward" applied to the number of planes AND pilots withdrawn.
2) And then there's ships: one is penalized some amount for not withdrawing a ship by some particular date but there is no reward for withdrawing it early in spite of the fact that in general that involves at least several times as many men and most likely a "real warship" as withdrawing the same obsolete biplanes mentioned above.

Training ships: As things stand pilots can be trained "to brush their teeth 3 times a day" and gain experience doing it but a ship can be spend a whole year at sea continuously and gain no crew experience whatsoever. In particular this seems that this applies most particularly to small Allied combatants which mostly perform ASW/escort type missions. Given hindsight the Japanese have the ability to emphasize and improve on their historically accurate lack of emphasis/training/equipment for ASW but the Allies who historically sank about 1000 enemy submarines (German, Italian and Japanese) during the war are stuck with the same bunch of bumbling fools for 4 years.
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

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

Post by rustysi »

-The WitPTracker is used by a lot of people to get a hold of the Japanese economy, even very experienced Japanese players. I think that speaks volumes on how the difficulties on getting an oversight of the economy ingame. You'd need something like the tracker at a minimum.

I never use tracker, and I have no problem.
Training ships: As things stand pilots can be trained "to brush their teeth 3 times a day" and gain experience doing it but a ship can be spend a whole year at sea continuously and gain no crew experience whatsoever. In particular this seems that this applies most particularly to small Allied combatants which mostly perform ASW/escort type missions. Given hindsight the Japanese have the ability to emphasize and improve on their historically accurate lack of emphasis/training/equipment for ASW but the Allies who historically sank about 1000 enemy submarines (German, Italian and Japanese) during the war are stuck with the same bunch of bumbling fools for 4 years.

This is just not true. All ships will 'train' to a certain crew level just by being 'at sea'. For Japan that level is 45, other nations have their own national level IIRC. To go beyond that 'training' level requires combat.
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
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”