Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

AE Naval and OOB Issues [OUTDATED]

 
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 >> AE Naval and OOB Issues [OUTDATED] Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
AE Naval and OOB Issues [OUTDATED] - 7/27/2009 10:13:54 PM   
jwilkerson


Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline 		[OUTDATED]

This thread is for AE Naval and Naval OOB Issues - post away!

< Message edited by Daniele -- 11/9/2016 3:31:30 PM >

_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead
Post #: 1
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 7/28/2009 12:00:35 AM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline 		I will get the ball rolling

The original Hornet comes equiped with Helldivers rather than SBDs.

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 2
Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 12:09:14 AM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline 		There is a know issue with turning TFs around when the TF is in the process of moving from on-map to off-map or off-map to on-map (i.e. in an off-map pipe).

These TFs are shown in the off map holding boxes and are effectively moving "through the pipe" from/to the off map base.

Players have considerable ability in changing the destinations and home ports of these TFs, but there are a couple of (now) known issues.

1. A TF that is already headed from off map to an on map location may have the on map destination and/or on map home base changed with no known problems.
2. A TF that is headed off map probably can be returned to it's on-map home port using the Return To buttons on the TF screen.
3. A TF that is headed on map maybe can be returned to it's off map home port using Return To buttons.

However:

For a TF that is currently headed off map, you should NOT change the home port or destination of the TF to an on-map location (with the possible exception of the Return To buttons).

For a TF that is currently headed on map, you should NOT change destination to an off map base nor to the off map home port. Just don't don't do it.

Although some turnaround using Return To buttons may work, players are strongly advised to NOT try and turnaround any TF that is in the pipe.

This issue appears to be centered on (but not necessarily limited to) the processing using the map-click method of selecting destination and home port.

Results of turnaround while in the off-map pipes are unpredictable, and could result in the TFs (and ships in them) becoming unusable.

(edit) de fat-fingered.

< Message edited by Don Bowen -- 7/28/2009 12:19:52 AM >

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 3
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 12:30:46 AM   
bsq


Posts: 517
Joined: 1/5/2007
Status: offline 		Where is HMS Vanguard?  She was launched to commission and be in theatre ready for mid/late 45 and she was only 'slowed' down once it was realised that Downfall wouldn't happen.

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 4
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 12:34:02 AM   
Don Bowen


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

ORIGINAL: bsq

Where is HMS Vanguard?  She was launched to commission and be in theatre ready for mid/late 45 and she was only 'slowed' down once it was realised that Downfall wouldn't happen.


Vanguard was launched in November, 1944. The fastest launch to completion time for a King George V BB (some 10k tons lighter) was about 19 months**.

Using this as a guideline, the earliest possible availability for Vanguard would be mid-1946. And that in England, still needing to work up.

**Duke of York: 2/40-11/41 so very much wartime construction speed.

(in reply to bsq)
Post #: 5
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 1:40:57 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Here is a shot of the Momi Escort Class at start in Scenario 1. Note the circled part. I think it's just a typo:






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 6
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 1:44:04 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Not an issue, but I find it curious that the 4 Akatsukis are now Fubuki (III)s! Where did that come from?

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 7
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 2:40:36 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Not an issue, but I find it curious that the 4 Akatsukis are now Fubuki (III)s! Where did that come from?


Sounds like they are no longer a separate class, but are being considered 'group 3' of the Fubuki Hulls.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 8
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 2:46:27 AM   
JWE

 

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

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli
Here is a shot of the Momi Escort Class at start in Scenario 1. Note the circled part. I think it's just a typo:

Yep, that would be an error. Typo in the database. Will be corrected.

Thanks, Mike.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 9
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 8:19:53 AM   
tigercub


Posts: 2004
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: brisbane oz
Status: offline 		The CM Itsukushima was able to carry 500 small mines,although 300 larger mines was the usual complement in the game it is set to 75?
CM Yaeyama carried 185 mines in game set to 60?
CM Takashima carried 120 in game set to 20 mines.
you must have a reason for changing them?

Tiger!


< Message edited by tigercub -- 7/28/2009 9:23:42 AM >

_____________________________


You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 10
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 2:49:01 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline 		Yes. For many reasons. One of which is the same reason that 5" guns have 18 ammo instead of 320.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to tigercub)
Post #: 11
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 4:07:02 PM   
Dixie


Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline 		Shouldn't USS Boise and Marblehead (amongst other USN ships) have a withdrawl date?  They both spent time in the Med after repair work.

_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 12
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 4:14:58 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		They should. Noted.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 13
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 4:25:20 PM   
Iridium


Posts: 932
Joined: 4/1/2005
From: Jersey
Status: offline 		I noticed a few things I'm not sure about so I'll just show them and ask.

First off, I'm noticing that AAMGs are being placed under ASW weapons, this might be just aesthetics but it made me wonder. My silly additional nitpick is that the ship name line is always too close to that line above it, making it hard to read or just unpleasing to the eye.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.

"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture

(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 14
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 4:27:33 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		This is a display problem, related how the data was entered in the editor. Not sure who did that particular one, but I don't disagree with your assessment that it's not pretty.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Iridium)
Post #: 15
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 4:28:14 PM   
Iridium


Posts: 932
Joined: 4/1/2005
From: Jersey
Status: offline 		Next up is a similar issue with the AAMGs but in this case they are AA Rockets. I'm not up to snuff on the data behind these rockets but the 'AA' in the name makes me thing Anti-Air. They are also placed under ASW and have 5000 as their depth...

In both cases of AAMGs and AA Rockets they exist in more than just the shown examples.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.

"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture

(in reply to Iridium)
Post #: 16
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 4:30:37 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		It's definitely a display problem with the in-game database display routine. We'll look at it.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Iridium)
Post #: 17
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 7/28/2009 4:32:25 PM   
EnricoR

 

Posts: 21
Joined: 2/20/2007
From: Frankfurt (Oder), Germany
Status: offline 		CA Oregon City is in scen 1 a Baltimore class but she was leadship of her class and the ETA is wrong too, it is 16 March 1945 in game but her commissioning was on 16 February 1946.

CL Fargo has the wrong picture, in AE she looks like a Cleveland class but she has only one stack and her fire control equipment was at other locations.

Atlanta an Oakland classes: their 5in/38 Mk 12 EBR have an armor rating of 31, other classes with this weapon has only 5.

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 18
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 4:33:14 PM   
Iridium


Posts: 932
Joined: 4/1/2005
From: Jersey
Status: offline 		Lastly I noticed that Taiho has a DP battery of 12.7cm guns. I could be wrong but I was under the impression that it had received a battery of 10cm guns that the Akitsuki class have instead.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.

"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture

(in reply to Iridium)
Post #: 19
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 4:42:34 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		I can only explain that by saying I came to the Taiho after adding that gun to all the other IJN carriers before it, and just kept rolling... RATS!!!

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Iridium)
Post #: 20
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 7/28/2009 4:44:10 PM   
JWE

 

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

ORIGINAL: EnricoR
CA Oregon City is in scen 1 a Baltimore class but she was leadship of her class and the ETA is wrong too, it is 16 March 1945 in game but her commissioning was on 16 February 1946.

Database typo, should be Oregon City Class # 406

quote:

CL Fargo has the wrong picture, in AE she looks like a Cleveland class but she has only one stack and her fire control equipment was at other locations.

Nope, Fargo uses the Cleveland image. Correctly listed as a Cleveland 42 Design, but no separate image.

quote:

Atlanta an Oakland classes: their 5in/38 Mk 12 EBR have an armor rating of 31, other classes with this weapon has only 5.

We'll look into it.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to EnricoR)
Post #: 21
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 4:45:21 PM   
Iridium


Posts: 932
Joined: 4/1/2005
From: Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I can only explain that by saying I came to the Taiho after adding that gun to all the other IJN carriers before it, and just kept rolling... RATS!!!


If I had stayed quiet about it the Taiho would probably have a better AA rating anyhow...The 10cm guns might have better ballistics but lack a certain punch that the larger caliber DPs do.

Never knew Terminus was a JFB.

_____________________________

Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.

"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 22
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 4:45:40 PM   
JWE

 

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

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I can only explain that by saying I came to the Taiho after adding that gun to all the other IJN carriers before it, and just kept rolling... RATS!!!

Ah, well ... ok, it's in the punch-list.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 23
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 4:56:58 PM   
Mike Solli


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

ORIGINAL: Terminus

This is a display problem, related how the data was entered in the editor. Not sure who did that particular one, but I don't disagree with your assessment that it's not pretty.


Uhhhhhh.......yeah sure.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 24
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 4:58:00 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Not mine. I did IJN carriers and subs.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 25
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 5:10:11 PM   
pad152

 

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline 		Campaign file 2

Carrier Ibuki (023) - has no airgroups?

Carrier Taiyo (024) - has multiple airgroups some that belong to the Chuyo and Kaiyo!

Carrier Kaiyo (028) - has missing air group that's on the Taiyo!

Carrier Chuyo (026) - has mission air group that's on the Taiyo!

Carrier Copahee(3056) - Air Group (2221) at "0" max aircraft!

CS (035 - 038) - Air groups show both float planes and carrier planes?

< Message edited by pad152 -- 7/28/2009 5:18:44 PM >

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 26
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 5:44:17 PM   
pad152

 

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline 		Not sure how to fix the air groups on the CS (Mizuzo, Nssin, etc.) How do I assign the carrier planes to the upgraded ship class?

Example:
Mizuzo (035) CS class 1876 - air groups (574, 575 - float planes)
Mizuzo (035) CVL class 1879 - air groups (758, 759 - Carrrier planes)


< Message edited by pad152 -- 7/28/2009 5:47:34 PM >

(in reply to pad152)
Post #: 27
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 5:50:26 PM   
hellfirejet


Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline 		While using the editor, I noticed that the tonnage listed for all ships is Standard tonnage,and not full load, as they would be at time of war,this would increase the ships tonnage by between 4 - 8 thousand tons on average ?

_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to pad152)
Post #: 28
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 5:52:21 PM   
Don Bowen


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

ORIGINAL: pad152

Not sure how to fix the air groups on the CS (Mizuzo, Nssin, etc.) How do I assign the carrier planes to the upgraded ship class?

Example:
Mizuzo (035) CS class 1876 - air groups (574, 575 - float planes)
Mizuzo (035) CVL class 1879 - air groups (758, 759 - Carrrier planes)



All this should be taken care of in the stock scenario. Airgroups switch when the ship converts to carrier.

(in reply to pad152)
Post #: 29
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 7/28/2009 6:01:56 PM   
chesmart


Posts: 908
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Malta
Status: offline 		Fuso and Yamashiro use the bitmaps of ise and hyuga when the upgrade

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> AE Naval and OOB Issues [OUTDATED] Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   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

0.719