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: Manual inconsistency

 
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: Manual inconsistency Page: <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/11/2009 4:38:59 PM   
Don Bowen


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

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Got one here Don. Sailfish is out of fish but staying on patrol. What's the best mail for you?



Post it as an attachment in a thread in the test support forum.

Don

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 301
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/11/2009 4:42:50 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline 		Done

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 302
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/11/2009 5:10:32 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline 		Odd one.....ship says it's unloading but there's no data of what's unloading in the LCU screen onboard the ship




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 303
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/11/2009 6:08:11 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
We've seen one other instance of this but can't find out why. What we really need is a save just before the TF starts unloading....


(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 304
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/11/2009 6:39:26 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline 		Damn. Afraid I don't have that. I'm going start keeping 5 days worth of saves in a row from now on....sorry.

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 305
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/12/2009 1:30:59 AM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline 		While I'm sure it has already been mentioned (can't ever find a thing with the search function) the Robert L. Barnes (AO-14) is not at Guam at the start of the war. I am sure the JFB want those points for sinking her (actually she was bombed, captured and survived the war). Look here but she is reference on other sites as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Robert_L._Barnes_%28AO-14%29

She was also known as AG-27 http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-r/id3088.htm

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 306
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/12/2009 1:50:01 AM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
Very familiar with this ship. Added her to CHS. After lots of games we decided that she was not worth while. Besides it is a one-up class, with all the overhead of something really useful, artwork included.

There are lots of ships that could be included. The line has to be drawn somewhere.

(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 307
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/12/2009 4:54:55 AM   
HMS Resolution


Posts: 350
Joined: 1/10/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


Very familiar with this ship. Added her to CHS. After lots of games we decided that she was not worth while. Besides it is a one-up class, with all the overhead of something really useful, artwork included.

There are lots of ships that could be included. The line has to be drawn somewhere.


I'm still mad there's no Georgios Averoff. The Japanese need to face the awesome fury of her four 9.2" guns!

_____________________________


(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 308
RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 8/12/2009 5:32:50 AM   
pmelheck1

 

Posts: 610
Joined: 4/3/2003
From: Alabama
Status: offline 		I'm sorry if this has been posted before please forgive if so.  For the auto convoy on the brit side it shows Colombo as the source for auto convoys.  In the Colombo base screen it has an option to turn on auto convoy however Karachi the auto convoy switch is grayed out.  The ships show up for auto convoy that are in Colombo.  shouldn't Colombo and Karachi have their buttons for auto convoy reversed.  Also home port for TF's in this area is Karachi does this need to be Colombo?



_____________________________


(in reply to chesmart)
Post #: 309
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/12/2009 5:38:05 AM   
pmelheck1

 

Posts: 610
Joined: 4/3/2003
From: Alabama
Status: offline 		For down the road addition, how about a screen that you can select a conversion you want and have the screen show which ships can be converted to that class.  going through the ships one at a time looking for a hull to convert is more than a little pain.  Can it be added to WITPstaff ?

_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 310
CA Minneapolis & 4x DMS - 8/12/2009 6:09:11 AM   
fbs

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline 		Scenario 001:

Minneapolis, Hovey, Boggs, Lamberton, Chandler are all set as reinforcements, appearing in Pearl Harbor on Dec 8, 1941. Hmmm.. where do they come from? If they appear in Pearl Harbor on Dec 8, then they should be a TF nearby heading to Pearl Harbor on Dec 7. Can they be put in a TF, instead of reinforcements?

Thanks!
fbs

(in reply to pmelheck1)
Post #: 311
RE: CA Minneapolis & 4x DMS - 8/12/2009 7:58:45 AM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		Couple of issues:

1. Computer has disbanded couple of my Continuous Supply convoys going from SF to PH. Could this be because DDs in TF become eligible for upgrade?

2. When having Human controlled supply convoy from waypoints, SF -> PH -> Pago Pago? (don't remember exactly which island it was) -> Suva -> Brisbane, first leg went fine and TF got to Brisbane. I had ticked "Return same route" "Yes". To my surprise, TF did not backtrack from Waypoint 3 (Suva), but plotted course immediately to PH (Waypoint 1)! This of course would have taken it straight into middle of Japanese territory.


_____________________________

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


(in reply to fbs)
Post #: 312
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/12/2009 12:08:37 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline 		Seems odd......TAN 2 has 906 fuel onboard here and yet can't load anymore despote having a 1500 capacity..........




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 313
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/12/2009 12:10:28 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline 		And here's TAN 2 up close and she's showing as being 1500 full of fuel which doesn't make sense..........




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 314
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/12/2009 12:16:09 PM   
Iridium


Posts: 932
Joined: 4/1/2005
From: Jersey
Status: offline 		TAN 2 might be a mixed cargo AO. She might carry 906 tons of fuel and the rest solid freight. or not........

That is strange, keep the save from before it loaded the cargo and give it to the Tech section?

< Message edited by Iridium -- 8/12/2009 12:17:25 PM >

_____________________________

Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.

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

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 315
national home bases - 8/12/2009 1:01:37 PM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1941
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline 		The manual states that ships may be withdrawn at "National Home Bases". A search of the manual did not list these bases. Is there a list somewhere?

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 316
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/12/2009 1:22:40 PM   
Gilbert


Posts: 243
Joined: 8/8/2009
From: Hendaye, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HMS Resolution



I'm still mad there's no Georgios Averoff. The Japanese need to face the awesome fury of her four 9.2" guns!


Agreed. She would be a good target for our Kanbaku pilots and enhance their Dive Bombing skills

Gilbert

_____________________________

UMI YUKABA
"If I go away to sea, I shall return a corpse awash, if duty calls me to the mountain, a verdant will be my pall, thus for the sake of the Emperor, I will not die peacefully at home...."

(in reply to HMS Resolution)
Post #: 317
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/12/2009 1:46:59 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		One more issue. When home base of your submarines is captured, your subs home port seems to revert to San Francisco. This is very annoying, especially if your subs are operating around Java etc. If you do not happen to notice it for couple of turns (like I who uses "Patrol around target"), your subs are travelling towards SF, soon out of fuel, then getting sys damage every turn and finally sinking because of that damage.

I think subs should revert to nearest major port when their home base is captured, not to SF.

_____________________________

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


(in reply to Gilbert)
Post #: 318
RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/12/2009 1:54:05 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline 		It's more annoying when you deploy a new sub that appeared at the Panama Canal, and forget to change its home port.  Having a sub return to Balbao is not good...

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 319
RE: CA Minneapolis & 4x DMS - 8/12/2009 2:07:04 PM   
Don Bowen


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

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Couple of issues:

1. Computer has disbanded couple of my Continuous Supply convoys going from SF to PH. Could this be because DDs in TF become eligible for upgrade?

2. When having Human controlled supply convoy from waypoints, SF -> PH -> Pago Pago? (don't remember exactly which island it was) -> Suva -> Brisbane, first leg went fine and TF got to Brisbane. I had ticked "Return same route" "Yes". To my surprise, TF did not backtrack from Waypoint 3 (Suva), but plotted course immediately to PH (Waypoint 1)! This of course would have taken it straight into middle of Japanese territory.



CS Convoys will auto disband based on damage to ships in the TF. They will not shed the damaged ships and continue as that might unbalance the TF (no escorts, etc). All the ships will remain assigned to auto convoy and will be used to create new TFs when required.

Need a save for the waypoint issue. Please post it in the Tech Support Forum.

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 320
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/12/2009 2:50:53 PM   
Montbrun


Posts: 1498
Joined: 2/7/2001
From: Raleigh, NC, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

And here's TAN 2 up close and she's showing as being 1500 full of fuel which doesn't make sense..........





Turn on "Remain on Station" and it will fill - I've had it happen a couple of times.


(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 321
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/12/2009 2:55:34 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
Mouseover here.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Montbrun)
Post #: 322
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/12/2009 3:30:08 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline 		Yup and it says 906 fuel and the rest oil. Wasn't clear to me but WAD

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 323
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/12/2009 4:07:42 PM   
Don Bowen


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

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Yup and it says 906 fuel and the rest oil. Wasn't clear to me but WAD


It's just a matter of room on the screens. We'd have to double the size of the screen to put all the data on it, and then the background would be completely obscured. Lots of stuff in mouse overs.

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 324
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/12/2009 11:16:32 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		And another thing...

Sub patrols do not seem to work. System works per se, but results are very deadly to one's subs. I use "Patrol around target" since it is quickest way to set sub patrols. Following problems:

1. Subs stay too long in their patrol area, running out of fuel and gathering massive sys damage.
2. Subs returning to patrol area despite being damaged. I do not think that subs should return to patrol automatically if having 20 sys damage etc.
3. Repeated surface attacks...often lot of damage to subs. Even worse, daylight surface attacks against armed ships.
4. Resetting home base to SF after base is captured -> subs trying to return there -> subs running out of fuel -> subs sinking because of accumulated sys damage.

I have now played 8 Dec campaign to end of May 42. Just checked and noticed that about half of my subs out on patrol sport quite heavy damage, caused by one or another reason. I think this makes submarine war quite unplayable and I have lost my "suspension of disbelief". I am quite fed up with subs running out of fuel 10 hexes before home port etc.



_____________________________

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


(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 325
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/12/2009 11:29:47 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Submarine warfare is not "unplayable" at all.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 326
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/12/2009 11:50:45 PM   
Battleline


Posts: 426
Joined: 10/5/2006
Status: offline 		Japanese Homing Torpedoes at PH
Every time I run the game with historical first turn or read an AAR in this forum, it seems that all battleships are being hit by torpedoes.
As we know, the historical setup that some battleships, such as the Tennessee and Maryland were moored inboard other battleships (which historically protected them from torpedo strikes, but wedged them in when the outboard ships sank) and Arizona was somewhat protected by Vestal. Also, the Pennsylvania was in drydock.
Is there any way to represent this historical setup?
It seems to be a punch below the belt to have a surprise attack with shallow running torpedoes AND homing qualities!
Thanks,
Battleline


Overall, this seems to be an excellent game which should provide years of entertainment.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 327
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/13/2009 12:20:18 AM   
Don Bowen


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

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

4. Resetting home base to SF after base is captured -> subs trying to return there -> subs running out of fuel -> subs sinking because of accumulated sys damage.


From which base, and which scenario, please. There is code to try and find a nearby base of sufficient size and/or sufficient support units, with San Francisco is the default. Returning to San Francisco means the routine could not find anything else suitable.

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 328
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/13/2009 1:13:30 AM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Battleline

Japanese Homing Torpedoes at PH
Every time I run the game with historical first turn or read an AAR in this forum, it seems that all battleships are being hit by torpedoes.
As we know, the historical setup that some battleships, such as the Tennessee and Maryland were moored inboard other battleships (which historically protected them from torpedo strikes, but wedged them in when the outboard ships sank) and Arizona was somewhat protected by Vestal. Also, the Pennsylvania was in drydock.
Is there any way to represent this historical setup?
It seems to be a punch below the belt to have a surprise attack with shallow running torpedoes AND homing qualities!
Thanks,
Battleline



Play the December 8th start....

(in reply to Battleline)
Post #: 329
RE: Manual inconsistency - 8/13/2009 3:13:42 AM   
Sonny II

 

Posts: 2878
Joined: 1/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

4. Resetting home base to SF after base is captured -> subs trying to return there -> subs running out of fuel -> subs sinking because of accumulated sys damage.


From which base, and which scenario, please. There is code to try and find a nearby base of sufficient size and/or sufficient support units, with San Francisco is the default. Returning to San Francisco means the routine could not find anything else suitable.


Scen 1 when Manila falls.

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 330
Page:   <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Manual inconsistency Page: <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   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

0.672