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: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day

 
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 >> The War Room >> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/12/2006 7:17:01 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		There's a burned out lightbulb that needs to be changed.......



_____________________________


(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 31
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/12/2006 9:39:55 PM   
niceguy2005


Posts: 12523
Joined: 7/4/2005
From: Super secret hidden base
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nail78

Well that does pose a good question why would I withdraw? Is that good usage of my political points too keep the ships in the Indian Ocean? I am playing the 43 campaign and it would put me in the hole political point wise. How often in the campaign will Sir Winston ask for ships be sent back too the homefront?


Hi Nail, welcome to the game.

I think this choice if highly situational. Mr. Churchil apparently is highly whimsical and wants varying types of ships back and it has little to do with what is going on in your war. Early in the game I send back pretty much everything except CVs. I hold on to those if at all possible. Later in the war I will hold on to ships if I think I have the PP to pay for them. I find DDs run in short supply, probably because I manage to get a lot of them sunk fighting it out with the Japs in the DEI. Therefore, I try to hold on to those. I also try to hang on to the BBs as I like to save them for shore bombardment for later in the game. Still, I send a lot of the ships back early on because i would much rather spend the PP saving dutch units, aircraft from PI, changing leaders or activating Oz and NZ units.

(in reply to Nail78)
Post #: 32
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/13/2006 1:03:11 AM   
Nail78

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 12/15/2005
Status: offline 		I tend too agree with Amiral. I believe that PP points would be much rather well spent drawing troops from Australia and even Canada than keeping a few ships. Especially this month because the Admiralty is requesting a CLAA & 2 DD's. Without giving away too much of what is in store for me, is the Imperial Navy much of a force in the Indian Ocean in 1943? I am midway through July 43 and the only thing I have seen of the Jap navy so far is 1 submarine sighting.

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 33
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/13/2006 7:14:13 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		You should always worry when you haven't sighted the Japanese carriers for some time. Where are they? How will they mess up my plans?

In those times, I make sure not to send any important naval forces into contested areas, unless I feel that these forces have a reasonable chance against a group of six Japanese carriers. If I have seen the enemy carriers recently, then I can adjust my operations around their location...

EDIT: I have never started a 1943 scenario. I have no idea as to whether the IJN has enough fuel, pilots, or aircraft to be of much threat then, though I know that they do still have a great deal of strength (numbers of capital ships).

I do not like to send any British destroyers back under the Withdrawal routine, as there aren't enough of them to start with. I'm with the others in that during the early game, I return any capital ships that are requested, preferring to use my PP for unit movements. Later on is when I start trying to weigh the advantages or disadvantages of keeping them. You can go into negative PPs by refusing to withdraw ships, but you will not be able to change any leaders or the HQ to which any unit reports when you don't have enough PPs.

< Message edited by bradfordkay -- 1/13/2006 7:17:03 AM >

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Nail78)
Post #: 34
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/13/2006 4:06:00 PM   
EUBanana


Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nail78

I tend too agree with Amiral. I believe that PP points would be much rather well spent drawing troops from Australia and even Canada than keeping a few ships. Especially this month because the Admiralty is requesting a CLAA & 2 DD's. Without giving away too much of what is in store for me, is the Imperial Navy much of a force in the Indian Ocean in 1943? I am midway through July 43 and the only thing I have seen of the Jap navy so far is 1 submarine sighting.


Well, its not like you have to keep the RN in the Indian Ocean twiddling its thumbs...

I've got Ramilles in with all the Pearl veterans in my big bombardment force, and fairly soon will have Revenge teamed up with Idaho in another bombardment force when they two of them get out of Seattle.

_____________________________


(in reply to Nail78)
Post #: 35
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/13/2006 7:04:33 PM   
Nail78

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 12/15/2005
Status: offline 		I noticed the icons for ground units have different color's what does that mean? For instance The Allies have a light green, a dark almost olive green colored icon. The Japanese ground forces are Dark Red and then there is a Pink colored one? The Chinenese forces have some Yellow colored icons, and a lot of tan colred ones.

(in reply to EUBanana)
Post #: 36
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/13/2006 7:06:12 PM   
EUBanana


Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nail78

I noticed the icons for ground units have different color's what does that mean? For instance The Allies have a light green, a dark almost olive green colored icon. The Japanese ground forces are Dark Red and then there is a Pink colored one? The Chinenese forces have some Yellow colored icons, and a lot of tan colred ones.


Its just nationality I think. I noticed it can even blend sometimes, I reinforced China with some RAF HQ units and their colour changed to a sort of greeny-yellow.

_____________________________


(in reply to Nail78)
Post #: 37
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/13/2006 7:09:41 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		The brighter the color, the more troops there are. Allies are green, Japan is red. And China gets their own color, yellow. There is some "strangeness" in the colors in China. You occasionally get a Chinese stack that's green (bad rice I guess). I actually think it has to do with the HQ of some of the units in the stack. But it doesn't really hurt anything, so I haven't bothered testing to see what's making it do it.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to EUBanana)
Post #: 38
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/13/2006 7:35:05 PM   
dtravel


Posts: 4533
Joined: 7/7/2004
Status: offline 		Some Chinese units start the war assigned to SEAC. They show up on the map as green.

_____________________________

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 Feinder)
Post #: 39
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/13/2006 7:38:23 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

The brighter the color, the more troops there are. Allies are green, Japan is red. And China gets their own color, yellow. There is some "strangeness" in the colors in China. You occasionally get a Chinese stack that's green (bad rice I guess). I actually think it has to do with the HQ of some of the units in the stack. But it doesn't really hurt anything, so I haven't bothered testing to see what's making it do it.

-F-


I thought it was the other way around - the more there are, the darker it gets. It works this way for mines and airfields, i am sure (but it might work opposite for troops).

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 40
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/13/2006 7:50:25 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
It gets brighter and darker with more units. It fades and gets lighter for less.

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 41
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/13/2006 7:54:04 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


It gets brighter and darker with more units. It fades and gets lighter for less.


????
How can it get brighter and darker at the same time????

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 42
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/15/2006 5:25:26 AM   
Nail78

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 12/15/2005
Status: offline 		Is there a way too assign waypoints too a task force?

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 43
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/15/2006 7:12:29 AM   
alfrake

 

Posts: 70
Joined: 9/6/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nail78
Is there a way too assign waypoints too a task force?

Not really. You can change their home port to the final destination, set retirement allowed, and set an intermediate waypoint. That's it.
Paying attention to "patrol" vs "retirement allowed" is important.

Usually there isn't need for more than that. If your ships are sailing through dangerous waters, you probably should be paying attention to them every turn.

(in reply to Nail78)
Post #: 44
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/15/2006 7:23:13 AM   
niceguy2005


Posts: 12523
Joined: 7/4/2005
From: Super secret hidden base
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nail78

Is there a way too assign waypoints too a task force?


Shhhhh. Sore subject, but alfrake's answer is correct.

(in reply to Nail78)
Post #: 45
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/15/2006 9:33:15 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		I always put my supply TFs on "Do not Unload" when I use the WITP waypoint system. As explained by alfrake - set the final destination as your home port, set it to retirement allowed and then set your TFs destination to a location that gives you the safe route you're looking for. You can make multiple waypoints by tracking the TF and giving it a new destination as you approach the original.

The reason I put it on "Do not Unload" is personal - when it reaches the "destination" (waypoint) you will see the TF listed as unloading. If this is the middle of the ocean, seeing that activity listed is bothersome to me. While I have never actually seen the supplies truly being thrown overboard (i.e., the amount of supplies on the ship decreasing), I just hate to see my TF screen listing it...

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to niceguy2005)
Post #: 46
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/16/2006 2:23:28 AM   
Nail78

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 12/15/2005
Status: offline 		Does Australia generate any supplies and Fuel or does one have too bring in supplies and fuel from India or the United States?

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 47
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/16/2006 3:26:57 AM   
moses

 

Posts: 2252
Joined: 7/7/2002
Status: offline 		Yes but not enough for offensive operations. I send a convoy from big convoy from India to Austrailia right away and then use those AK's in the Pacific. There are more transports in India thenyou can use. They only present extra targets to Japan if Japan should turn that way.

Then you should start sending convoys from the US carrying oil, fuel and supplies. Its very easy to fill Austrailia to the brim so no need to overdo it.

I like to set 3 tankers loading oil in San Diego. Set them on do not unload and just leave them there till totally filled. It may take a few days or several weeks depending on how much oil is sitting around. I do the same with 20 or so AK's with supply and 20 or so TK with fuel. When all three convoys are full I combine them (transfer command),add a few escorts, and set them off to Austrailia.

Of course all the numbers above can be freely changed but if you try to load too many oil tankers you will be waiting a long time.

As these guys move toward Austrailia I will detach a transport here or there to supply some small base. I give these guys a new home base so that after they unload they all regroup at a single spot for the trip home.



< Message edited by moses -- 1/16/2006 3:28:04 AM >

(in reply to Nail78)
Post #: 48
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/16/2006 3:52:06 AM   
alfrake

 

Posts: 70
Joined: 9/6/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nail78
Does Australia generate any supplies and Fuel or does one have too bring in supplies and fuel from India or the United States?

You can figure this out by looking at the bases in Australia. Some have Resources centers to produce resources and I believe there is a little oil around somewhere. They also have heavy industry in many places.

But then look at the US bases, especially the central US. They produce instant supplies (the X/Y number after supplies) which nothing in Australia does. (very few bases do anywhere). The US produces effectively infinite supplies as its difficult to ship it out as fast as its produced.

So yes, you need to send supplies and fuel to Australia. Doing so is pretty easy, early India convoys can dump so much in Australia there won't be any problem for a long time. Its also often beneficial to send oil and resources, at least oil.

(in reply to Nail78)
Post #: 49
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/16/2006 7:32:31 AM   
Nail78

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 12/15/2005
Status: offline 		So not only should I be sending supplies and fuel but also oil and resources for Australia?

(in reply to alfrake)
Post #: 50
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/16/2006 12:42:46 PM   
Dino


Posts: 1032
Joined: 11/14/2005
From: Serbia
Status: offline 		Oil will help them produce their own supplies and fuel... They have enough resources, but if your AKs have nothing better to do, why not.

< Message edited by Dino -- 1/16/2006 12:43:16 PM >

(in reply to Nail78)
Post #: 51
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/16/2006 4:08:22 PM   
moses

 

Posts: 2252
Joined: 7/7/2002
Status: offline 		No need to send too much supply and fuel. Just gives Japane too much incentive to try and capture Austrailia!!!! I mean it would be sweet to capture a base with 900,000 fuel and supply. Oil should be sent as it is available. Theres not as much free oil as you would think in the US but you might as well send it. Resourses are of little to no value as far as sending them to Austrailia. Oil is the limiting factor.

(in reply to Dino)
Post #: 52
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/16/2006 6:55:36 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		I send oil from LA to Sydney via Suva. Oil generates quite lot of fuel and supply in Oz, so is most cost-effective to transport.

(in reply to moses)
Post #: 53
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/17/2006 4:46:40 PM   
Nail78

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 12/15/2005
Status: offline 		If a submarine runs out of torpedo's will it automatically return too base too rearm, or do I need too check the weapons status on each sub out there?

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 54
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/17/2006 10:19:52 PM   
dtravel


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

ORIGINAL: Nail78

If a submarine runs out of torpedo's will it automatically return too base too rearm, or do I need too check the weapons status on each sub out there?


4/25/2005 v1.50

Bugs Fixed:

1) Submarines on human control were not returning to port, when Winchester or Bingo. Fixed. Submarines now return to port when they have exhausted torpedoes or have fuel reserves less than the distance to home base x 1.5, when on a patrol mission. Submarines on other missions automatically return to port, when mission is complete, but no test is made to see if they have enough fuel to accomplish mission. This should be ascertained by player, when setting mission. Also, submarines in task forces of more than one submarine only have the submarine with the lowest number in the database checked.


_____________________________

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 Nail78)
Post #: 55
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/22/2006 6:12:46 PM   
Nail78

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 12/15/2005
Status: offline 		What is a good rule of thumb for pulling ships off the high seas to repair the sys damage occured form normal operations? 10% 15% ????

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 56
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/22/2006 6:55:45 PM   
moses

 

Posts: 2252
Joined: 7/7/2002
Status: offline 		I like to keep combat ships under 10%. On occasion you have to go over that but in general I think about getting them to port about that time. Once in port I prefer to get them back down to 2 or less before sending a fleet back out.

Subs I gennerally establish a few safe bases where my subs operate from. Then I send subs on missions only after they return to zero system damage. The stay out on mission unitl out of fuel or torpedoes then return to base. Disband. Wait for system damage zero.

Trasnports I don't care as much and will continue to operate them as long as I need them. Usually I have plenty of these so I will still try to ret them if the get into the teens.

Of course there is no rule here and others will have completely different ideas on this.

(in reply to Nail78)
Post #: 57
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/23/2006 6:15:33 AM   
Nail78

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 12/15/2005
Status: offline 		As a follow up question if a ship in a task force docked at a port with repair facilities, will it repair or does the TF need too be disbanded first in order for the ship too repair?

(in reply to moses)
Post #: 58
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/23/2006 6:22:17 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		Ships that are not disbanded will repair down to 5 system damage. To bring system damage below 5, you must disband the ships.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Nail78)
Post #: 59
RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day - 1/23/2006 3:24:16 PM   
Dino


Posts: 1032
Joined: 11/14/2005
From: Serbia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Ships that are not disbanded will repair down to 5 system damage. To bring system damage below 5, you must disband the ships.


Actually, i think this rule only applies to ports without repair facilities. The ports with repair shipyards will repair even ships in a docked TF down to 0 sys. I'v seen this happening quite often with my CS convoys, as they get repared while loading/unloading.

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> The War Room >> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   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

1.500