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: additional production report

 
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: additional production report Page: <<   < prev  20 21 [22] 23 24   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: additional production report - 10/19/2006 6:10:27 AM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline 		Can we get a date of loss filter included in the sunk ship list? As the lest gets longer as one progresses into the game the list increasingly becomes unwieldly for player utility.

Thanks

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to scott64)
Post #: 631
things I'd like 2 C improved - 10/21/2006 7:38:38 AM   
1EyedJacks


Posts: 2244
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: The Eastern Sierras
Status: offline 		1. A Plot-ible convoy system where I can select the route.
1a. In the current auto convoy system it "seems" to be able to select a port to refuel at while on it's destination. If I could select that option in a normal TF - say 114,67 it could give me a very rough plotting mechanism for convoys.
2. The ability to "pin" notes.
3. The ability to "dump" the entire text of a turn played to a txt file.
4. Limit ammo in A2A combat
5. Update the freaking manual!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
6. Better control of upgrades
7. A better weather model

That's my lucky 7 list - lol. Also - I really-really like this game - really!

_____________________________

TTFN,

Mike

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 632
RE: things I'd like 2 C improved - 10/21/2006 8:34:29 AM   
erstad

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline 		My pet peeves:
Change the victory points for air losses to 1 per engine.
Allow Allies to turn off resource/oil production after, say, 1/1/42.
Allow Allies to damage resource/oil production after, say, 3/1/42


< Message edited by erstad -- 10/21/2006 8:36:35 AM >

(in reply to 1EyedJacks)
Post #: 633
RE: things I'd like 2 C improved - 10/26/2006 10:19:13 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		Remove "Air Balance" from the mouse over information for bases.


This is intelligence that the real commanders would not have. If you don't run into the enemy aircraft by contact or recon, you wouldn't know that they're in the area.

< Message edited by bradfordkay -- 10/26/2006 10:25:40 AM >

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to erstad)
Post #: 634
RE: things I'd like 2 C improved - 10/26/2006 9:19:59 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline 		I second that... please remove Air balance....

_____________________________


(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 635
RE: things I'd like 2 C improved - 10/26/2006 11:22:12 PM   
AmiralLaurent

 

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pauk

I second that... please remove Air balance....


Fully agree with it.

I would also like to remove the airfield and port symbol displayed when an AC or a ship is there, showing it to the opponent even if it didn't fly recon or raid or anything. It should be treated the same way as the land unit symbol that is only displayed if airmen or ground troops or SIGINT actually saw something.

(in reply to pauk)
Post #: 636
RE: things I'd like 2 C improved - 10/27/2006 5:24:08 PM   
timtom


Posts: 2358
Joined: 1/29/2003
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

I would also like to remove the airfield and port symbol displayed when an AC or a ship is there, showing it to the opponent even if it didn't fly recon or raid or anything. It should be treated the same way as the land unit symbol that is only displayed if airmen or ground troops or SIGINT actually saw something.





_____________________________

Where's the Any key?


(in reply to AmiralLaurent)
Post #: 637
RE: things I'd like 2 C improved - 11/7/2006 2:51:52 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Any chance of making a base other than Bombay the alternate arrival point for SEAC - re capturing an urban hex is damn near impossible if the Japanese conquer India make it Colombo or one of the other West Coast bases please (or even Perth)

(in reply to timtom)
Post #: 638
RE: things I'd like 2 C improved - 11/7/2006 10:53:16 PM   
invernomuto


Posts: 986
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Turin, Italy
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent


quote:

ORIGINAL: pauk

I second that... please remove Air balance....


Fully agree with it.

I would also like to remove the airfield and port symbol displayed when an AC or a ship is there, showing it to the opponent even if it didn't fly recon or raid or anything. It should be treated the same way as the land unit symbol that is only displayed if airmen or ground troops or SIGINT actually saw something.


Fully agree.

Bye

_____________________________


(in reply to AmiralLaurent)
Post #: 639
A NEW REPORT ! - 11/11/2006 12:10:45 PM   
saj42


Posts: 1125
Joined: 4/19/2005
From: Somerset, England
Status: offline 		This is aimed mainly for Japan rather than Allies.......
Could we have a PRODUCTION REPORT - available as button at top of screen and txt file, to aid the average Japanese player to manage industry and production better (we already got sigint and cbt - why not production?)

content to include:
  • HI produced in turn
  • HI consumed in turn
  • Factory expansions / repairs in turn
  • Factories that autoconvert
  • Engines produced by type / used by type
  • Aircraft produced by type
  • Armament pts produced / used
  • Vehicle pts produced / used
  • Shipyard pts (Naval/Merchant) produced / used
  • Ground units arrived (with location)
  • Air units arrived (with location)
  • Ships arrived (with location)

I'm assuming the variables are stored during a turn - cos the Intel screen shows the end of turn status - so pulling the info together shouldn't be too complicated. Obviously only the last 3 points are useful to Allied player.

Over to Don and Joe

from a fledgling JFB - I still like the AFB toys but now I'm looking for a challenge

< Message edited by Tallyho! -- 11/11/2006 12:14:20 PM >

_____________________________


Banner by rogueusmc

(in reply to invernomuto)
Post #: 640
AOs - 11/11/2006 12:38:30 PM   
PetrOs

 

Posts: 260
Joined: 11/11/2006
Status: offline 		Actually (in 1.801), I am missing the feature of converting tankers to AOs. Usually it was widely possible, as the main change in the ship itself was to install the fuel pipes and extra pumps for feeding the ships. It would be helpful to allow the conversion of TKs into AOs in Osaka bzw San Francisco same way as AK->AE/AR/AD/etc...  As especially as a japanese player is very limited on AOs, and if most are lost or damaged, there are barely replacements.

Also, sometimes even usual tankers were used for ship refuel. They usually had a simple pump+pipe for autonomous cargo discharge in ports, so giving the pipe to the refuelled ship would solve the problem. However, the refuel rate was usually much lower... Maybe it would be useful to allow tankers in refuel formations? Just with some refuel rate penalty?

(in reply to kayjay)
Post #: 641
RE: AOs - 11/11/2006 1:40:27 PM   
PetrOs

 

Posts: 260
Joined: 11/11/2006
Status: offline 		And yeah, yet another thing that disturbs me
Where is the soviet pacific fleet and soviet merchant navy?
2 Heavy cruisers, a few dozens of destroyers, DEs, PTs, subs, MSWs and other ships.. Im (being a russian historian) really missing it. When soviets are not active, they can just sit in a base without option to make a TF. However when soviets are activated, it would allow a realistic soviet landing operation series at Curiles and Sachalin.


(in reply to PetrOs)
Post #: 642
RE: AOs - 11/12/2006 9:57:28 AM   
buzzz123

 

Posts: 78
Joined: 9/14/2006
From: ile Maurice
Status: offline 		how about including an end date in AC availability - especially for Allies it is iritating having useless obsolete AC still being produced long after they are being used (eg. Buffalo, etc). Once an AC has upgraded we should no longer recieve the old model in the pool - the same production line cannot be used for both at once! eg. When B24J bcomes available the B24D should no longer be arriving, etc.

(in reply to PetrOs)
Post #: 643
RE: AOs - 11/12/2006 9:00:05 PM   
Oldsweat

 

Posts: 79
Joined: 4/23/2005
Status: offline 		1) Impose operational and movement penalties on land units stacked past threshold densities dependant on terrain. Some of the land deathstar juggernauts that are currently possible exceed even first world war troop densities. After a certain point they just start getting in each other's way and crater the transportation network.

2) Permit units to destroy non-mobile equipment. It's a bit absurd to get stuck somewhere because the sound detectors can't be moved by air or submarine.

3) Permit air interdiction of supply lines and transportation networks.

4) At the expense of adding yet another dimension, permit units to enjoy a rail movement advantage only if they are loaded aboard a train unit. I envision this as working like a land version of an AP and, like an AP, capable of being destroyed by hostile action.

Otherwise, pretty much what everyone else has been saying.

(in reply to buzzz123)
Post #: 644
RE: AOs - 11/15/2006 5:58:35 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline 		1) I would plead for an on/off toggle to repair air fields, and ports (seperately) so we may spend our supply as we need to.

2) a Facilities Demolition toggle of some sort would be great such as;
Destroy/Disable Port
Destroy/Disable hvy industry
etc.

3) Give us some control of supply between land hexes, the ability to send more or less supply where we think we want it.

4) and a patch to the system damage routine so that the first 10 points of sys damage does not change a ships' speed potential



B

< Message edited by Big B -- 11/16/2006 3:30:12 AM >

(in reply to Oldsweat)
Post #: 645
RE: withdraw - 11/23/2006 12:57:11 AM   
Jo van der Pluym


Posts: 834
Joined: 10/28/2000
From: Valkenburg Lb, Netherlands
Status: offline 		Here some wishes for a next update

1. The possibility to withdraw and/or disband of LCU's.
2. The possibility to and/or disband ships.
3. More equipment, location, leader, airplane etc slots.
4. More LCU icons. Example a icon for Marines LCUs


_____________________________

Greetings from the Netherlands

Jo van der Pluym
CrazyDutch

(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 646
RE: withdraw - 11/28/2006 11:58:22 AM   
Bahnsteig

 

Posts: 70
Joined: 8/18/2004
From: Croatia\Germany
Status: offline 		I don't like the possibility to rebuild whole units from a fragment of the former unit with help of sub evacuations.

And that opp-loss kills the pilot together with the plane which happens very often playing the japanese.
I loose more exp. pilots that way than due combat in the first 6 mon.

It would be nice to have a possibility to set the ammount of supply for a base which should be stored there.
So it wouldn't happen that jap player cannot upgrade planes in japan because there is no base with 20000 supplypoints and cities like Gumma cannot inc. production while 10000 supplypoints are missing.

And a list on the first page to see which changes can be done :) I was too lazy to read all 22 sites

(in reply to Jo van der Pluym)
Post #: 647
RE: withdraw - 12/13/2006 2:05:45 PM   
Ursa MAior

 

Posts: 1416
Joined: 4/20/2005
From: Hungary, EU
Status: offline 		More FOW!

No detailed infos on pilots units etc participating in air to air, air to sea attacks.

x +1 th to no air balance and to selectable repairs.

Fix land combat please.

Thanks.



_____________________________


Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Bahnsteig)
Post #: 648
RE: withdraw - 12/14/2006 3:13:59 AM   
ctangus


Posts: 2153
Joined: 10/13/2005
From: Boston, Mass.
Status: offline 		In the ship reinforcement screen, I'd like to be able to see the class of the ship, as well as its in-game AA & ASW rating. (I can always look the class up in the database, but that's a pain.)

In the ground reinforcement screen, I'd like to see the unit's load cost, just like I would if I clicked on a unit that was already in the game. Again, I can find a similiar unit & estimate it, but would prefer not to have to go to that trouble.

(in reply to Ursa MAior)
Post #: 649
RE: withdraw - 12/23/2006 5:45:18 AM   
samthesham

 

Posts: 187
Joined: 9/5/2004
Status: offline 		I would like an "intelligence penalty" for putting more than 2 CV's in one TF, or maybe one hex. I would say if more tha 4+CV's are in one hex, then that side would run a 50% risk, per turn, of having their TF exposed. the penalty might be greater for the Japs because of superior intelligence.

I would like to be able to use the arrow keys to scroll down leader lists! PLEASE!

I would like to be able to define a replenishment TF as a home port.

 

(in reply to ctangus)
Post #: 650
RE: withdraw - 12/23/2006 8:10:44 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: samthesham

I would like an "intelligence penalty" for putting more than 2 CV's in one TF, or maybe one hex. I would say if more tha 4+CV's are in one hex, then that side would run a 50% risk, per turn, of having their TF exposed. the penalty might be greater for the Japs because of superior intelligence.


Not quite sure I understand this.

The larger the task force, the more likely you are to be spotted by search aircraft and subs. In the real world, US task groups in the last 2 years of the war usually consisted of 4 carriers. Often times these task groups would all be in a space that would fit inside a hex.

quote:


I would like to be able to use the arrow keys to scroll down leader lists! PLEASE!

I would like to be able to define a replenishment TF as a home port.


These would be nice.

Bill

(in reply to samthesham)
Post #: 651
RE: withdraw - 12/23/2006 8:31:35 AM   
samthesham

 

Posts: 187
Joined: 9/5/2004
Status: offline 		The US pretty much knew where KB was due to the radio traffic, etc associated with each carrier. In the game, you often have no clue. Historically, carriers often (not always of course) ran around in smaller groups. In the game, the tendency appears to put CV's in larger groups on average than was historically the case. This may encourage more historical deployment. Maybe 4 is not the right number. Maybe 5 or 6.

I would also like to have the "radio transmissions detected" hexes marked in the map when you load your turn that would help a hell of a lot.

< Message edited by samthesham -- 12/23/2006 8:42:55 AM >

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 652
RE: withdraw - 12/24/2006 3:32:10 AM   
Halsey

 

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline 		Rename the Variable Weather option to "Constant Thunderstorms".

Or you could fix the model.

_____________________________


(in reply to samthesham)
Post #: 653
RE: withdraw - 12/24/2006 4:03:20 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Halsey

Rename the Variable Weather option to "Constant Thunderstorms".

Or you could fix the model.


I've seen people complain about this, but I haven't seen it. Does it rain at inconvenient times sometimes? Definitely. I've seen the weather go into patterns where it will rain a lot in an area for a week or two then clear off. I've also seen the weather be perfectly clear in the same area for weeks at a time.

In my experience, the game modeled real world weather patterns quite well. I don't know if something is different in PBEM. I've only played against the AI.

Bill

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 654
RE: withdraw - 12/24/2006 4:26:43 AM   
Halsey

 

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline 		I've seen it go for months.
With only 2-3 days per month at partly cloudy and never clear.

AI?
What's that?
I haven't played against the AI in almost two years.

_____________________________


(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 655
RE: withdraw - 12/24/2006 5:31:40 AM   
SgtSwanson


Posts: 212
Joined: 5/15/2005
From: Long Branch, NJ
Status: offline 		How about fixing the Chain of Command model and linking it to the Objectives.
And fix the airbases so that 2E & 4E bomers aren't allowed to use LvL 1 airfields at all.  Or have it where they start using an airfield that is one LvL lower than what they need.  Example: If a B-17 needs a LvL 5 field to keep losses down, then the smallest field they can even use would be a LvL 4.

_____________________________

Sgt Swanson
87-93 5/502 Inf. Berlin Bde
93-95 2/502 Inf. 101st Airborne Div.
Freedom is never free!!

Patch of the Week: 6th Infantry Division

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 656
FoW - 12/25/2006 5:54:00 PM   
scout1


Posts: 2899
Joined: 8/24/2004
From: South Bend, In
Status: offline 		The info screen has a (variable) delay in showing ships sunk so that the other player doesn't have instant Intel. Same should be true for aircraft losses. Shouldn't be able to instantly show actuals, but perhaps only estimates that are eventually updated after some (variable) delay.

(in reply to SgtSwanson)
Post #: 657
RE: FoW - 12/28/2006 12:53:39 AM   
scout1


Posts: 2899
Joined: 8/24/2004
From: South Bend, In
Status: offline 		One other item, could you PLEASE change the default for ALL air units to do NOT accept replacements. This way, the IJN is not depleted of experienced pilots in the first 4 days of operation (in case GHQ forgets to change the setting and finds the best of the best flying transport aircraft full of ...... instead of going to combat units) ....

(in reply to scout1)
Post #: 658
RE: FoW - 12/28/2006 3:15:46 AM   
wworld7


Posts: 1727
Joined: 2/25/2003
From: The Nutmeg State
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: scout1

One other item, could you PLEASE change the default for ALL air units to do NOT accept replacements. This way, the IJN is not depleted of experienced pilots in the first 4 days of operation (in case GHQ forgets to change the setting and finds the best of the best flying transport aircraft full of ...... instead of going to combat units) ....


I have a checklist that that I use before I start every game. Items like this are covered (replacements OFF) . So no forgetting is possible.

Flipper

(in reply to scout1)
Post #: 659
RE: FoW - 12/28/2006 3:33:29 PM   
Javakamp


Posts: 172
Joined: 2/17/2004
From: Lakeland, FL.
Status: offline 		I would like option to suppress all messages, graphics, and map scrolls during the turn processing. This could help speed up the turns.

This could be supplemented by a multi-level combat repot. The 1st page would just list all of the action, (i.e. Air attack on Rabal, or Surface combat near Manila). Then the player could click on the action to be taken to the detailed report. There could be filters on the 1st screen to show only Air vs. Air, Air vs. Ship, Ship vs. Ship ect.

Filters on the choose leaders screen would also be great.

(in reply to wworld7)
Post #: 660
Page:   <<   < prev  20 21 [22] 23 24   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: additional production report Page: <<   < prev  20 21 [22] 23 24   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

1.547