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: Interface items

 
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: Interface items Page: <<   < prev  23 24 [25] 26 27   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Interface items - 4/2/2007 12:23:03 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dixie

2) The ability to rotate CV air units



Gee, wonder where that comes from...?

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 721
RE: Wish List - 4/2/2007 12:38:31 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline 		There are a number of things about how ships behave.  Some should be easiest to implement.

1) Crippled ships movement - This should be the easiest fix.  Ships with 0 movement points still make 2 hexes a day.  That's around 5 knots.  I know this is done to simplify having tows and ocean going tugs, but could this be halved to one hex a day? 

2) Ships out of fuel combat - Carriers out of fuel don't fly offensive missions, but they do fly CAP, they shouldn't be able to do this either.  Additionally, surface ships that are out of fuel fight normally.  They should have a heavy penalty if forced to fight in this state.

3) Crippled ships intercepted - Several times I have seen a task force with a crippled ship intercepted by a surface force and the next turn it is one hex away and combat shows a few shots fired by the intercepting surface force before the crippled task force runs away.  If there is a large speed difference, like 30 knots, or even 25,  vs. 0-5, the intercepting force should be able to dictate the terms of the combat.  The crippled ship should not get away.  This is exactly the major reason crippled ships were scuttled rather than attempts made to limp them back to port.  If enemy surface forces were in the area, all the escorts were at risk as well as the crippled ship. 

I know #2 and #3 should be tougher to change than #1.  And #2 is a case that shouldn't happen very often, so it would be a low priority.  However #1 should be an easy fix, and if #1 and #3 were implemented, it would reduce the gamey tactic of saving severely damaged ships that would have been scuttled in the real world.

Bill


_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 722
RE: Wish List - 4/2/2007 6:03:36 PM   
Charbroiled


Posts: 1181
Joined: 10/15/2004
From: Oregon
Status: offline 		The ability to sort HQs (ie, show all Army HQs.....show all Air HQs.....etc.)

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 723
RE: Wish List - 4/2/2007 9:23:16 PM   
Dixie


Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline 		The ability for carrier capable units to become carrier trained through time.
British units to be able to upgrade before May 1942
A manual that is actually fully correct

_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to Charbroiled)
Post #: 724
RE: Wish List - 4/2/2007 9:24:06 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		A correct manual? Are you quite mad, Master Shipbuilder?

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 725
RE: WitP Wish List - 4/7/2007 6:20:28 AM   
Halsey

 

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline 		I'd like to see the shock attack option removed from the ground combat options.

Except for atoll invasions, para drops and river crossings.
These are the only combats for shock attacks, and they should be mandatory.
Bonzai attacks should be mandatory also, though I've never seen one.

The scale of the regular land combat shouldn't support this option.

< Message edited by Halsey -- 4/7/2007 4:36:46 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to siRkid)
Post #: 726
RE: WitP Wish List - 4/7/2007 6:30:08 AM   
erstad

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline 		There's probably something like this earlier, but without a search capability...

Have the number of victory points for an aircraft loss be equal to the number of engines. Although not perfect, it would represent the fact that a 4E bomber is more expensive than a 2E bomber is more expensive than a 1E fighter.

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 727
RE: WitP Wish List - 4/14/2007 1:34:30 AM   
jimbatcs

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 4/12/2007
Status: offline 		I've been playing the game now for a few years off and on and thoroughly enjoy it. This is my first post so excuse me if the subject has already been brought up. I was wondering if there has ever been any thought to allowing players to skeletonize units or combining the assets to bring some units up to strength. Thanks.

_____________________________


(in reply to siRkid)
Post #: 728
RE: WitP Wish List - 4/17/2007 5:47:54 AM   
erstad

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline 		Here's one that would be easy for a patch.

Stop displaying the air balance. Either take it out, or if it's less work, make it always display as 0.

(in reply to jimbatcs)
Post #: 729
Combat Screen, Task Force Creation - 4/17/2007 9:41:05 PM   
fleetwood

 

Posts: 14
Joined: 3/26/2007
Status: offline 		Make Combat Results window large engnough to see results without scrolling.

Add "Form Task Force" button is some additional windows (such as ground forces window).  I always seem to have to back out of a window to form a task force.

(in reply to ATCSMike)
Post #: 730
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation - 4/18/2007 12:18:45 AM   
SireChaos

 

Posts: 710
Joined: 8/14/2006
From: Frankfurt, Germany
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fleetwood

Make Combat Results window large engnough to see results without scrolling.

Add "Form Task Force" button is some additional windows (such as ground forces window).  I always seem to have to back out of a window to form a task force.


In particular, add it to the "ships in port" window.

(in reply to fleetwood)
Post #: 731
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation - 4/18/2007 9:01:14 PM   
Oldguard1970

 

Posts: 578
Joined: 7/19/2006
From: Hiawassee, GA
Status: offline 		1.  When Loading a transport TF, I would like to see the LCU listing include the objective being prepped. 

2.  On the "display LCU screen", I would like to see the objective listed as well.  (Hmmm... which units are preparing for ...?)


(in reply to SireChaos)
Post #: 732
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation - 4/18/2007 10:37:14 PM   
JoePirulo

 

Posts: 59
Joined: 11/2/2006
Status: offline 		I would like that USN/Australian CL don´t respawn as stated in the manual. Or correct the manual (but I think this is very difficult to do ...)

(in reply to Oldguard1970)
Post #: 733
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation - 4/19/2007 1:08:01 AM   
Dixie


Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JoePirulo

I would like that USN/Australian CL don´t respawn as stated in the manual. Or correct the manual (but I think this is very difficult to do ...)


I've been wondering about this recently. I can understand the logic for the US cruiser respawn, but why do the RAN respawn. The Aussies lost 3 cruisers(Canberra, Hobart & Sydney) during the war, and only received Shropshire as a replacement for Canberra, and she's already in the reinforcement list.

_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to JoePirulo)
Post #: 734
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation - 4/19/2007 3:35:17 AM   
MineSweeper


Posts: 653
Joined: 9/19/2006
From: Nags Head, NC
Status: offline 		I do not understand the logic of USN CV, CA and CL respawns....IMO, the US should only get the respawns that were built and no more....pet peave of mine is this issue and I like RHS for this reason.

The US only lost 4 CVs in the war and these should be the only ones that should respawn (limit of 4)....no more......the US was under a maxium ship building program and they could not build anymore CVs than what was produce - that is why they built CVLs (not enough large shipways to build the CVs......CAs and CLs respawns should be more limited as well......

< Message edited by MineSweeper -- 4/19/2007 5:34:54 AM >

_____________________________





(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 735
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation - 4/26/2007 12:39:46 AM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		Actually, the US -did- build a "Canberra II", a Baltimore class. It was CA-70.

And are you sure HMAS Hobart went down? According to Wiki, she was present at the surrender in Tokyo Bay...?

That being said, I -hate- respawn. I'd rather there be no respawn, and just get the ships as reinforcements (and I think there are a few mods for this, you just have to keep any "respawns" tied up at San Francisco".

-F-

< Message edited by Feinder -- 4/26/2007 12:48:34 AM >

_____________________________

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


(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 736
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation - 4/30/2007 6:07:20 PM   
Charbroiled


Posts: 1181
Joined: 10/15/2004
From: Oregon
Status: offline 		I'm not sure if this can be implemented in the game is it is currently programed, so figured it would be better on the "Wish List"

When creating TF, I would like to have the "ship type" sorting buttons that are available when viewing the port screen.

Also, would like to see stats for individual ships that are pertinent to the type of TF being created. Example: If creating an ASW TF, show the Anti-sub value for the ships.....when creating a SF TF, show the gun value, AA value, and ASW vaue of the ships available. I know you can "right click" on a specific ship to get most of this info, but it would be nice to see all of the ships at once in order to compare.

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 737
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation - 5/1/2007 6:24:20 AM   
erstad

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline 		On the subject of task force creation, how about a "ships available for upgrade" filter? Very annoying to look at Truk, see a dozen ships that need upgrade, try to remember the names, form a TF to head home, recheck Truk, oops, missed some, etc.

(in reply to Charbroiled)
Post #: 738
Transport aircraft in China - 5/2/2007 9:03:35 AM   
TAIL GUNNER

 

Posts: 1152
Joined: 4/27/2005
From: Los Osos, CA
Status: offline 		Maybe this has been brought up before...but I'm not about to read this entire thread to find out.

As Japs, I transferred some transport aircraft to China Command.  However, they're unable to transfer troops from one Japanese occupied base in China to another......only supplies.

_____________________________

"If you want peace, prepare for war."

(in reply to erstad)
Post #: 739
RE: device slots - 5/2/2007 9:11:09 AM   
Jo van der Pluym


Posts: 834
Joined: 10/28/2000
From: Valkenburg Lb, Netherlands
Status: offline 		That the devices slots above 555 can have production and working pools

_____________________________

Greetings from the Netherlands

Jo van der Pluym
CrazyDutch

(in reply to TAIL GUNNER)
Post #: 740
RE: WitP Wish List - 5/6/2007 11:00:39 PM   
mikemike

 

Posts: 501
Joined: 6/3/2004
From: a maze of twisty little passages, all different
Status: offline 		Air Missions

What about a new mission for float planes: spotting?
- Available only for float plane air units based on ships
- Air unit always stays in the same hex as the originating task force.
- Effect: higher spotting probability and higher gunfire hit probability for the originating ship (or maybe task force).
- Operates day and night with diminished effect and higher op losses at night.

This would make the F1M2 actually useful for something and model actual Japanese operations, as at Savo Island.

_____________________________

DON´T PANIC - IT´S ALL JUST ONES AND ZEROES!

(in reply to siRkid)
Post #: 741
RE: WitP Wish List - 5/7/2007 12:47:16 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

The US only lost 4 CVs in the war and these should be the only ones that should respawn (limit of 4)....no more......the US was under a maxium ship building program and they could not build anymore CVs than what was produce - that is why they built CVLs (not enough large shipways to build the CVs......CAs and CLs respawns should be more limited as well.


You're basically just plain wrong.  The United States achieved something over 80% mobilization for WWII and then began to DEMOBILIZE IN LATE 1944.  If they needed carriers they would have built them.  If they needed more shipyards to build more carriers they would have built them too.

The only thing in which Japan could even hope to match US production was haiku poetry. 

(in reply to mikemike)
Post #: 742
RE: WitP Wish List - 5/7/2007 11:51:14 AM   
Monter_Trismegistos

 

Posts: 1359
Joined: 2/1/2005
From: Gdansk
Status: offline 		Spence, yup, US would built 2 new shipyards in a week time and start to build those hulls... Do you really believe in such science-fiction?


_____________________________

Nec Temere Nec Timide
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 743
RE: WitP Wish List - 5/13/2007 7:22:16 PM   
HerzKaraya


Posts: 195
Joined: 1/19/2005
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline 		Some "wishes" for crazy modders like me,
1) any chance of setting up nations N17 and N19 as Germany and Italy, as well as creating the correspondent aleatory replacement leader and pilot list? 
2) the possibility to see if there is off-map production of axis devices on the information display (now it only shows zero, even if items are build)
3) any chance of setting an end time for off-map production/replacements?
4) Chinese ground units are rebuild after being destroyed in 1 month time, any chance of seeing the same feature with Russian units, or being able to define this characteristic on a one-by-one basis?
5) any chance of setting a start date, or date of appearance, for on-map factories?
6) last but not least, how about changing the ground combat system from in-hex to hex-to-hex? (only problem would be atoll invasions)

_____________________________

Vista, suerte y al toro!

(in reply to Monter_Trismegistos)
Post #: 744
RE: WitP Wish List - 5/13/2007 7:41:54 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: erstad

Here's one that would be easy for a patch.

Stop displaying the air balance. Either take it out, or if it's less work, make it always display as 0.



YES!!!

_____________________________


(in reply to erstad)
Post #: 745
RE: WitP Wish List - 5/16/2007 6:27:17 PM   
HerzKaraya


Posts: 195
Joined: 1/19/2005
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline 		One more thing in regard of ground units, currently only devices listed in slots 1 to 15 are shown on the unit info display, but devices in slots 16 to 20 are taken into account in regards of assault value, men, support, replacements, etc...

Is there a way to show all 20 devices to exactly reflect TOE?

_____________________________

Vista, suerte y al toro!

(in reply to pauk)
Post #: 746
RE: WitP Wish List - 5/17/2007 1:00:07 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		Naval search missions at night using radar (or not). Naval attack possible at night without submarine (or surface ship present).


(in reply to HerzKaraya)
Post #: 747
RE: WitP Wish List - 6/1/2007 11:55:04 PM   
Procrustes

 

Posts: 633
Joined: 3/30/2003
From: Upstate
Status: offline 		Hi,

I wish the intel screen that lists ships that were sunk gave the date that the ships were sunk.  If that messes w/ FOW then perhaps just the date the ships were reported/confirmed sunk.

Best,


(in reply to spence)
Post #: 748
RE: WitP Wish List - 6/2/2007 5:18:13 PM   
AvG

 

Posts: 83
Joined: 5/4/2005
From: The Netherlands
Status: offline 		I have now several hundreds of hours experience with WitP.
That should be enough to read all the screens in a glance (per screen of course).
But I still have problems with production screens.
Take a damaged oilpointscreen. Repair shows the Yes. What should I do? I know by experience that in this case the Yes must be visible so what you see is what you have.
Take any production screen. If you see Halt production is on. What you see is NOT what you have. It is what you get.
IMHO these problems would not exist if you stick to a system with Actions + one button (toggling ON<>Off).
In the production-screen you would have three actions: Expand, Production and Repair. Same as is.
For every production-type you still will have three buttons(On/Off).
The endresult is very much the same, with only one BIG difference. "ON" is easy to detect and means allways the same.
You don't have to think every time "what does it mean?". What you see is what you have.

I also think, if you agree that I am right, that implementation of this proposal is quite simple.
AvG





(in reply to Procrustes)
Post #: 749
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation - 6/4/2007 11:15:58 PM   
Procrustes

 

Posts: 633
Joined: 3/30/2003
From: Upstate
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fleetwood

Make Combat Results window large engnough to see results without scrolling.



Yes, and please pin it on the right hand side of the screen instead of putting it smack dab in the middle of the map. It would be a lot better if the combat results screen was like the land combat screen - over on one side with the hex with the action centered on the map to the left.

Thanks,

(in reply to fleetwood)
Post #: 750
Page:   <<   < prev  23 24 [25] 26 27   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Interface items Page: <<   < prev  23 24 [25] 26 27   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

3.594