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: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 5:38:05 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Brady

Sloop, behind the DUKW:





That's not a sloop, Brady, it's a schooner. CHS has them included. I'm not part of the AE crew, so I have no idea aas to whether they'll be in it...

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Brady)
Post #: 271
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 5:43:19 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

We discussed that a lot, and the short and the long of it is, don't expect any big "never-weres", like lots of Taiho's and what-not. We're going to stay within realistic Japanese (and Allied) planning. With that said, we've got a huge new OOB, and some new tricks planned, courtesy of the very cool Convert-To routines.


T, what about all the Japanese ships that were planned but never constructed?

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 272
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 5:48:27 AM   
Mobeer


Posts: 662
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline 		1) Will the Japanese player be able to convert Nisshin or Mizunho to light carriers?
1a) Will the AI be able to do this?
2) Will historically sunk ships have further upgrades available in later years?
3) Will the re-incarnation of Allied cruisers continue? Will there be a limit to how many cruisers can be recreated?
4) If US carriers are not sunk, will the replacements enter service under alternative names?
5) Will replacement US carriers have airgroups?
6) Will the AI understand the difference between normal and replacement carrier air groups on US escort carriers?

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 273
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 7:53:06 AM   
Bulldog61


Posts: 1517
Joined: 7/23/2000
From: Aurora,CO
Status: offline 		actually MRE stands for Meals refusing to exit!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I'm not sure you can build Meals Ready to Eat today?



_____________________________

You can run but you'll die tired!

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 274
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 8:02:40 AM   
Nomad


Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: offline 		And I thought MRE stood for Meals Rushing to Exit.

_____________________________


(in reply to Bulldog61)
Post #: 275
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 8:25:50 AM   
Brady


Posts: 10701
Joined: 10/25/2002
From: Oregon,USA
Status: offline 		Sloop=one mast?

_____________________________





Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view

(in reply to Nomad)
Post #: 276
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 10:58:07 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		Yep.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Brady)
Post #: 277
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 11:35:54 AM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		Another pet peeve of mine:

Will CS Convoys be able to load Oil automatically ? In WitP one has to use manual convoys. Waypoints and CS Convoy able to auto-load Oil would lessen especially Japanese micromanagement. Ditto when I want to ship oil from USA to Oz.


_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 278
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 11:50:49 AM   
rockmedic109

 

Posts: 2390
Joined: 5/17/2005
From: Citrus Heights, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeKraemer

actually MRE stands for Meals refusing to exit!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I'm not sure you can build Meals Ready to Eat today?




I thought "Meal, Ready to Eat" was three lies for the price of one.

(in reply to Bulldog61)
Post #: 279
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 11:53:04 AM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		Yep...and "Meals Rejected by Ethiopians"

Also, AFAIK, pack of 4 frankfurter sausages in one MRE variation are called "Four Fingers of Death"

I have, out of curiosity, sampled few MREs, and can say that while some of it is edible, some is quite dire ****e... I prefer my Finnish army rations.

< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 12/9/2007 11:54:47 AM >

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to rockmedic109)
Post #: 280
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 12:14:46 PM   
Terminus


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

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

We discussed that a lot, and the short and the long of it is, don't expect any big "never-weres", like lots of Taiho's and what-not. We're going to stay within realistic Japanese (and Allied) planning. With that said, we've got a huge new OOB, and some new tricks planned, courtesy of the very cool Convert-To routines.


T, what about all the Japanese ships that were planned but never constructed?


Well, I can tell you that we're looking into it, obviously... The general guideline is that if steel was cut for a ship, it's most likely in the game. That's the way I've handled the ships I've done for the OOB anyway.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 281
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 12:15:09 PM   
Terminus


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

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Another pet peeve of mine:

Will CS Convoys be able to load Oil automatically ? In WitP one has to use manual convoys. Waypoints and CS Convoy able to auto-load Oil would lessen especially Japanese micromanagement. Ditto when I want to ship oil from USA to Oz.



That's being worked on.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 282
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 12:17:08 PM   
Terminus


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

ORIGINAL: Mobeer

1) Will the Japanese player be able to convert Nisshin or Mizunho to light carriers?
1a) Will the AI be able to do this?
2) Will historically sunk ships have further upgrades available in later years?
3) Will the re-incarnation of Allied cruisers continue? Will there be a limit to how many cruisers can be recreated?
4) If US carriers are not sunk, will the replacements enter service under alternative names?
5) Will replacement US carriers have airgroups?
6) Will the AI understand the difference between normal and replacement carrier air groups on US escort carriers?


1+1a): No. The Japs didn't look seriously at this.
2): Yes.
3): Respawn is still in the current master scenario.
4): No.
5+6): Not sure what you mean by these questions?


_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Mobeer)
Post #: 283
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 12:19:44 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		How about auto-disband for Sub TFs ? 

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 284
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 12:20:56 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		That's been in for a while now, as far as I know...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 285
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 12:21:24 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mobeer

1) Will the Japanese player be able to convert Nisshin or Mizunho to light carriers?
1a) Will the AI be able to do this?
2) Will historically sunk ships have further upgrades available in later years?
3) Will the re-incarnation of Allied cruisers continue? Will there be a limit to how many cruisers can be recreated?
4) If US carriers are not sunk, will the replacements enter service under alternative names?
5) Will replacement US carriers have airgroups?
6) Will the AI understand the difference between normal and replacement carrier air groups on US escort carriers?


I promise - any of these features not included will be part of RHS Level 8 - which Mifune and I redesignated today. Originally intended for a different map concept - almost all of that concept is in AE - so RHSAE will be called Level 8.
We may not need to modify the map/pwhexL files at all. But OB stuff we can and will do.

I don't know what Terminus means by "the Japs didn't look seriously at this." Any ship planned so it could be built in alternate forms was "seriously looked at." In addition, just about every major hull in the Empire was subject to full scale carrier modifications post Midway - sometimes as many as three different kinds of carriers. AFTER ALL these designs (which must be considered "seriously looking at what we can do") were done, it was decided which to implement, which were more valuable to keep in their present form. Thus Kongos were not converted - because of their value as high speed escorts - the same for most CAs - but a badly damaged CA was converted to a seaplane semi-carrier, the two least valuable battleships similiarly converted to semi-carriers - although originally not seaplane semicarriers - and eventually dual carrier/seaplane semicarriers - the uncompleted CA Ibuki was converted to a CVL and the uncompleted Shinano to a CV. For extensive information on these matters, see Japanese Cruisers of the Pacific War and Kaigun.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 12/9/2007 12:26:48 PM >

(in reply to Mobeer)
Post #: 286
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 12:27:08 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Sid, don't advertise your mod in this thread.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 287
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 12:28:42 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		I was not. On the other hand, do you expect us not to update it to the AE code base? Or to comment on how we might do that?

You are not the boss of us. You have no agreement with us. As long as our comments are germane and civil, you should regard them as advertising the value of AE - and Matrix WITP concepts in general - and be glad for the support.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 12/9/2007 12:30:34 PM >

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 288
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 12:29:41 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		You WERE advertising your mod. I certainly expect you to update your mod, but talk about it in its own thread. Thank you.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 289
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 12:34:22 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		Well - at least you are consistent in your hostility toward me and my concepts. There is no person in the Forum or related to Matrix whose requests bear less weight in my mind than you. Since you are only rarely reasonable - I don't expect reason to prevail with you. I was addressing a Forum member's concern - there was no way to do that in a different thread - and I will do that any time it is appropriate. Note I have had - and will continue to have - almost no comments on these threads.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 290
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 2:49:20 PM   
Mobeer


Posts: 662
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mobeer
5) Will replacement US carriers have airgroups?
6) Will the AI understand the difference between normal and replacement carrier air groups on US escort carriers?

5+6): Not sure what you mean by these questions?


5) When the replacement carriers appear they arrive with no airgroup. They are then incredibly easy to sink because they have only AAA to protect themselves. A human player could load land-based squadrons but the AI does not do this.

6) Some of the US escort carriers carry squadrons with R in their name that may only be used for replenishing other aircraft carriers, whilst other escort carriers carry normal squadrons. The current AI will send the carriers with replenishment squadrons into front line action. These carriers then act as in the point above, where they can launch no aircraft. It would help if either they had normal squadrons, or if operated behind normal carrier task forces.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 291
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 3:18:45 PM   
Terminus


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

ORIGINAL: Mobeer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mobeer
5) Will replacement US carriers have airgroups?
6) Will the AI understand the difference between normal and replacement carrier air groups on US escort carriers?

5+6): Not sure what you mean by these questions?


5) When the replacement carriers appear they arrive with no airgroup. They are then incredibly easy to sink because they have only AAA to protect themselves. A human player could load land-based squadrons but the AI does not do this.

6) Some of the US escort carriers carry squadrons with R in their name that may only be used for replenishing other aircraft carriers, whilst other escort carriers carry normal squadrons. The current AI will send the carriers with replenishment squadrons into front line action. These carriers then act as in the point above, where they can launch no aircraft. It would help if either they had normal squadrons, or if operated behind normal carrier task forces.


Okay, that's AI-related then. We're working on it.

But replacement carriers (I suspect you mean respawned carriers) DO arrive with their air groups.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Mobeer)
Post #: 292
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 3:26:05 PM   
Hortlund


Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline 		Can you include a fatigue-variable for ship crews?

Right now a ship can remain at sea month after month with only a one-day resupply in port now and then. Can we add crew fatigue, and have that only diminish when the ship is disbanded in a port?

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 293
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 3:29:23 PM   
Terminus


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

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Can you include a fatigue-variable for ship crews?

Right now a ship can remain at sea month after month with only a one-day resupply in port now and then. Can we add crew fatigue, and have that only diminish when the ship is disbanded in a port?


Problem would be that we'd have to include a whole series of routines for what causes fatigue and how much, and how long it takes to lose it again. It's not a bad idea, we've certainly considered it, and it's not off the table for a patch, but don't expect it for the initial release.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Hortlund)
Post #: 294
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 3:57:37 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		I've forgotten what designation they have now but has some ability to carry something/do something been given to the USS Langley and the other "regular" American seaplane tenders?

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 295
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 4:24:10 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		That's OOB work, and still in progress...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 296
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 4:30:35 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

I've forgotten what designation they have now but has some ability to carry something/do something been given to the USS Langley and the other "regular" American seaplane tenders?


Not quite sure what you mean, can you be more specific in your question??



(in reply to spence)
Post #: 297
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 4:36:41 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: spence
I've forgotten what designation they have now but has some ability to carry something/do something been given to the USS Langley and the other "regular" American seaplane tenders?

What we can say is that auxiliary vessels, like AVs, aren’t limited to their primary roles. The kinds of “stuff” a ship can carry has been expanded, so that troops, ammunition, supply, fuel, planes, etc .. are no longer mutually exclusive. Realistic AV relief/resupply missions are now quite feasible. The actual scope of what a Langley might carry/accommodate is, of course, an OOB question. But she, and the other AVs will be able to do much more than just gas up a PatRon.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 298
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 4:38:50 PM   
spence

 

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

USS LANGLEY was sunk while carrying some ready to fly P-40s (uncrated and assembled) to Java. She had half a flightdeck but could neither launch nor recover a/c. However once those P-40s had made it to a port and been unloaded they would have been just waiting for a pilot to take off and head into combat.

USS TANGIER was carrying troops and supplies during the abortive relief attempt for Wake Island.

As far as I recall both these ships have a capacity of 0 in WitP. They can not carry anything. You can't even set up one in some lonely lagoon servicing a flight of seaplanes because they can't carry any supplies for the seaplanes to use. While they were not as operationally useful as the IJN CSs they were more useful IRL than they are in the game.

Question answered. Thank you JWE

< Message edited by spence -- 12/9/2007 4:40:22 PM >

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 299
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/9/2007 5:09:01 PM   
Grotius


Posts: 5798
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline 		Hey Terminus, thanks again for your replies. I think you might have missed a few of my questions -- or maybe I missed the responses -- or maybe I should stop asking so many questions! At some point I know we should let you guys get back to work! But in case you missed it:

quote:

1. Is there any change to cold-weather limits on operations? I ask because I often felt it was too easy to operate in the Alaska area, notwithstanding the penalties in stock.

2. Has Patrol/Do Not Retire changed at all?

3. Has CV "one-hex" reaction changed at all?

4. Still have diminishing returns on AA for TFs of more than 15 ships?

5. Can you tell us more about the directional flak? I assume it's primarily a function of ship/plane heading; is ship/plane speed also a factor?

6. I too wanted to ask about tracking tonnage sunk by subs, or for that matter total distance traveled, fuel consumed, ammo used, etc. but it sounds like AE won't do that. Not a big deal; just would be nice -- those sort of stats that would enrich an AAR like Cuttlefish's. Is it fair to say that modders will have a way to track that sort of data?

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 300
Page:   <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   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

0.798