RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread

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 Land 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 Land Thread

Page: << < prev 39 40 [41] 42 43 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/26/2009 11:30:10 PM

steveh11Matrix

Posts: 944
Joined: 7/30/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

No

Okay, no matter.

_____________________________

"Nature always obeys Her own laws" - Leonardo da Vinci

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 1201

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/27/2009 4:05:43 AM

mbatch729

Posts: 537
Joined: 5/23/2001
From: North Carolina
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen

Soviet Far East and Transbaikal forces have been completely reviewed. Both buildup of forces & withdrawals to the ETO are represented. Autumn Storm reinforcements arrive like ordinary reinforcements (and, btw., there are no T-34's available until 1944). Soviet Pacific Fleet is also in the AE.

Nothing hardcoded for the Soviets - with the exception of the Pacific Fleet which only appears on the map when the Soviets are activated (it is always there but 'hidden' from view).

Does this mean Soviet activation is now "random" sometime in mid 45? Or is it still August unless the garrison requirement triggers it?

_____________________________

Later,
FC3(SW) Batch
USS Iowa

(in reply to Kereguelen)

Post #: 1202

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/27/2009 12:38:55 PM

Andy Mac

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline

August unless garrison triggers it and you really really dont want to trigger it...........

(in reply to mbatch729)

Post #: 1203

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/27/2009 1:15:45 PM

CV Zuikaku

Posts: 442
Joined: 12/18/2008
From: Legrad, Croatia
Status: offline

After we finnish off resistance in China, then we'll be more than happy to trigger the Soviets and smash their pathetic navy and air force

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 1204

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/27/2009 1:29:43 PM

Fletcher

Posts: 3386
Joined: 10/26/2006
From: Jerez, Spain, EU
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CV Zuikaku

After we finnish off resistance in China, then we'll be more than happy to trigger the Soviets and smash their pathetic navy and air force

and what about their Army ?

_____________________________

WITP-AE, WITE

(in reply to CV Zuikaku)

Post #: 1205

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/27/2009 1:46:04 PM

CV Zuikaku

Posts: 442
Joined: 12/18/2008
From: Legrad, Croatia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fletcher

quote:

ORIGINAL: CV Zuikaku

After we finnish off resistance in China, then we'll be more than happy to trigger the Soviets and smash their pathetic navy and air force

and what about their Army ?

Well, army is a "bit" problematic to deal with, but I'm sure there is some way... to lure them into Korea, trap them on peninsula and starve to death

(in reply to Fletcher)

Post #: 1206

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/27/2009 1:47:42 PM

Fletcher

Posts: 3386
Joined: 10/26/2006
From: Jerez, Spain, EU
Status: offline

Of course, playing vs AI. I think this could be very complicate vs a human player

_____________________________

WITP-AE, WITE

(in reply to CV Zuikaku)

Post #: 1207

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/27/2009 1:53:23 PM

Andy Mac

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline

Uh huh........ please try it.....

(in reply to Fletcher)

Post #: 1208

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/27/2009 2:00:04 PM

CV Zuikaku

Posts: 442
Joined: 12/18/2008
From: Legrad, Croatia
Status: offline

Ofcourse , I was thinking of AI

(in reply to Fletcher)

Post #: 1209

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/27/2009 3:30:18 PM

Chad Harrison

Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CV Zuikaku

Ofcourse , I was thinking of AI

I think Andy was referencing doing that against the AI . . .

From Andy's comments in this thread and others, I think steamrolling Russia, like many other things, died with vanilla WitP.

(in reply to CV Zuikaku)

Post #: 1210

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/27/2009 3:36:22 PM

CV Zuikaku

Posts: 442
Joined: 12/18/2008
From: Legrad, Croatia
Status: offline

Well, all I was talking about was crushing russian navy and air force. not the army. But if you eliminate China, you shoul'd be able to hold the russian invasion with all those additional divisions...

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 1211

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/27/2009 3:44:30 PM

Fletcher

Posts: 3386
Joined: 10/26/2006
From: Jerez, Spain, EU
Status: offline

I don�t know but about another post I think China in AE will be a strong task for japanese... and ever If you get it, you will need too much time.. IMHO of course

_____________________________

WITP-AE, WITE

(in reply to CV Zuikaku)

Post #: 1212

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/27/2009 10:08:11 PM

Blackhorse

Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chad Harrison

quote:

ORIGINAL: CV Zuikaku

Ofcourse , I was thinking of AI

I think Andy was referencing doing that against the AI . . .

From Andy's comments in this thread and others, I think steamrolling Russia, like many other things, died with vanilla WitP.

We're cautiously optimistic that steamrolling *China* vs the AI will also have passed away . . .

_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 1213

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/27/2009 11:17:13 PM

Chad Harrison

Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse

We're cautiously optimistic that steamrolling *China* vs the AI will also have passed away . . .

With all the new hexside control rules, supply requirements, slower movement speeds, higher garrison needs for both sides and so on, I think China is going to be a new beast indeed. I am very curious to see what surprises have been coded into the AI.

(in reply to Blackhorse)

Post #: 1214

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 3/18/2009 8:09:31 PM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

In this device upgrade path Device X > Device Y > Device Z if an LCU is not upgraded when there are Device Y in pool can it go from Device X to Z directly?

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 1215

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 3/18/2009 8:24:41 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chad Harrison

quote:

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse

We're cautiously optimistic that steamrolling *China* vs the AI will also have passed away . . .

With all the new hexside control rules, supply requirements, slower movement speeds, higher garrison needs for both sides and so on, I think China is going to be a new beast indeed. I am very curious to see what surprises have been coded into the AI.

There is a lot more to land combat now than just tossing everything in a stack and marching down the rail line to the next base. Maneuver and tac-air play large roles now.

_____________________________

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 1216

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 3/26/2009 5:33:51 PM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

Does AFV/Vehicle based weapons have a benefit in combat when an LCU is in travel mode over those that are not? I mean SP guns, SP AAA, tank vs an AT gun and such.

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 1217

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 3/26/2009 5:43:46 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

Why would they? Not sure what you mean by "travel mode". Strategic mode is basically entrained or crated up awaiting loading on a ship. Very vulnerable to any attacks as most of their equipment isnt available.

Movement mode is a road march formation and as such is exposed to air attack (more vulnerable than combat mode). The main effect of air attacks on units in this mode is to put them in combat mode. In other words, slow their advance (or retreat).

The "vulnerability to attack" isnt based on if they are armored or not. That is used to see what effect a weapon has on a given device. Armored units in road columns are just as exposed as any other unit (maybe more so actually in real life but not in the game) would be.

_____________________________

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 1218

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 3/26/2009 8:15:04 PM

spence

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

In Vanilla a tank was a tank was a tank. IJA tanks with 2 mm of tinfoil armor and a short barrel 37mm gun were the equal of a T-34/85 or JSII. Still so? Not so?

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 1219

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 3/26/2009 9:58:46 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

I doubt that was the case. AFVs have armor ratings, AT weaps have armor penetration ratings. A 500lb bomb hitting a Type 2 or a JS-III, whats the difference? Either way you have a dead crew and a big paperweight.

_____________________________

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 1220

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 3/26/2009 10:47:34 PM

Gunner98

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline

Ah but a 500Lb near miss on a JSII..... Oh wait.. wrong thread

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 1221

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 3/26/2009 11:09:53 PM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

quote:

The "vulnerability to attack" isnt based on if they are armored or not. That is used to see what effect a weapon has on a given device. Armored units in road columns are just as exposed as any other unit (maybe more so actually in real life but not in the game) would be.

The point i am making, is that AA SP and Tanks have better chances of reaction in Movement mode(thanks for correction) than an AT gun or AA gun that needs to be setup. AA SP specially is made specially to protect forces in movement. I should not have had refered SP guns(artillery) above since they need to have setup communication lines, FO's etc.

(in reply to Gunner98)

Post #: 1222

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 3/27/2009 12:56:29 AM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

Well let me put your mind at ease then. In WitP, the land combat model had VERY little to do with anything resembling reality. AE isnt a whole lot better. There is a game called "Steel Panthers World at War" you could probably check out if you want to get into individual tank vs AT gun data. This isnt going to be the place for it. Now or in the future.

_____________________________

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 1223

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 3/27/2009 2:12:08 AM

Blackhorse

Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

In Vanilla a tank was a tank was a tank. IJA tanks with 2 mm of tinfoil armor and a short barrel 37mm gun were the equal of a T-34/85 or JSII. Still so? Not so?

Not so . . . much.

Here's what I *think* happens:

Land combat has a (artillery) bombardment phase, a everyone-fire-at-each-other phase, and an 'assault' phase, if one was ordered.

Tank units won't fire in bombardment. In the 'fire' phase, their strength is based on the penetration value of the main gun (vs other armored targets) or a combined value of the main gun and any machine guns (vs 'soft targets'). Tanks with thicker armor have a better chance of surviving if other tanks/guns shoot at them.

When the dust settles after all that shooting, and the odds are calculated for an assault, *all* surviving AFVs have a base assault value of 1, regardless of their size. In this one respect, a Marmon-Herrington is the equivalent of a Pershing tank.

_____________________________

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 1224

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/2/2009 9:47:33 PM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

Does LCU commanders can be taken off from scenario like LCU's ?

(in reply to Blackhorse)

Post #: 1225

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/2/2009 10:14:17 PM

undercovergeek

Posts: 1526
Joined: 11/21/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

in chs i think there are a number of indian brigades at about 1000 pp, john3rd is famous for moving them as garrisons for the south pacific, in vanilla they were anything from 1700 to 2000 pp - is their value set at the lowest in AE so the JFBs can ship em out to more useful hotspots

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 1226

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/3/2009 3:54:20 AM

Blackhorse

Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

Does LCU commanders can be taken off from scenario like LCU's ?

Sorry, I don't understand the question.

Can you re-phrase it?

_____________________________

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 1227

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/3/2009 4:03:47 AM

Blackhorse

Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

in chs i think there are a number of indian brigades at about 1000 pp, john3rd is famous for moving them as garrisons for the south pacific, in vanilla they were anything from 1700 to 2000 pp - is their value set at the lowest in AE so the JFBs can ship em out to more useful hotspots

PP is SAIEW, still based on unit size.

The Japanese have five "India National Army" regiments that arrive in mid-43. Their Assault Value is either 72 (x2 regiments) or 48 (x3 regiments) so the PP cost should be fairly small.

I find it ironic to see a combat regiment named "Gandhi" (the 2nd INA Regiment).

_____________________________

(in reply to undercovergeek)

Post #: 1228

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/3/2009 4:28:07 AM

matt.buttsworth

Posts: 886
Joined: 5/26/2001
From: Weimar, Germany
Status: offline

Invincible Cities.

Has anything been done to stop a player massing troops in a city with supply or heavy industry and resources and then holding out indefinitely in a totally ahistorical situation?

Matthew Buttsworth

(in reply to Blackhorse)

Post #: 1229

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/3/2009 6:24:37 AM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: matt.buttsworth

Invincible Cities.

Has anything been done to stop a player massing troops in a city with supply or heavy industry and resources and then holding out indefinitely in a totally ahistorical situation?

Matthew Buttsworth

Why would there be? If a player puts everything he has into a single hex and the opposing player isnt smart enough to put enough troops to hold him there and then bomb him until his supplies run out then why should anything be put in to help him?

Heavy industry can be bombed also you know. Bombing ports/airfields will destroy supply. But the biggest thing is its a prison camp. By-pass it and leave it. Thats what I usually do with Manila/Bataan. Makes a nice air training academy.

_____________________________

(in reply to matt.buttsworth)

Post #: 1230