RE: Docked tonnage in red?

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: Docked tonnage in red?

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: Docked tonnage in red?

Page: << < prev 12 13 [14] 15 16 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Docked tonnage in red? - 8/15/2009 5:34:59 PM

Kull

Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

Have you tried refueling it with an AS?

Hmmm. No, but I'll run that test shortly. FWIW, the AS will only go into a "Support" TF, not a "Replenishment", but it will load fuel so we'l see what comes of that.

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 391

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/15/2009 6:59:33 PM

pad152

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline

Sub Transport Missions

I noticed the Porpoise class subs can carry troops but, the Sargo, SeaDragon and others can't? All of them have a cargo rating but, no troop rating, which is correct?

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 392

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/15/2009 7:37:17 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152

Sub Transport Missions

I noticed the Porpoise class subs can carry troops but, the Sargo, SeaDragon and others can't? All of them have a cargo rating but, no troop rating, which is correct?

Sorry, you're going to have to give me a bit more on this one...

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 393

RE: Docked tonnage in red? - 8/15/2009 8:54:59 PM

Kull

Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

Have you tried refueling it with an AS?

Hmmm. No, but I'll run that test shortly. FWIW, the AS will only go into a "Support" TF, not a "Replenishment", but it will load fuel so we'll see what comes of that.

I used an earlier Save Game to see if the "Support" TF containing an AS (which in turn was carrying 370 Fuel) would refuel the Sub, and the answer is "No". I also tested to see if an AS could be coaxed into a Replenishment TF, and the answer to that was also "No".

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kull)

Post #: 394

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/15/2009 9:44:17 PM

pad152

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152

Sub Transport Missions

I noticed the Porpoise class subs can carry troops but, the Sargo, SeaDragon and others can't? All of them have a cargo rating but, no troop rating, which is correct?

Sorry, you're going to have to give me a bit more on this one...

Ok, lets try with pictures!

Part 1

Here's an example with the USN Perch (Peach class), it's docked but it can't load troops, also there is another TF with another sub with a transport mission at the same port (Manila port size 5) that is loading troops. See part II next post.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by pad152 -- 8/15/2009 9:56:06 PM >

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 395

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/15/2009 9:47:36 PM

pad152

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline

Part II

Same port, this is the other sub TF with a transport mission, USN Tarpon (shark class). Notice it is loading troops.

So the question is why can the Tarpon load troops and the Perch can't?

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by pad152 -- 8/15/2009 9:51:35 PM >

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 396

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/15/2009 9:57:44 PM

Don Bowen

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

Post your save, and I will take a look. Hurry please.

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 397

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/15/2009 10:09:41 PM

pad152

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline

I refuel issue also

I had a surface group out of fuel, so I sent a couple of TK's (didn't have any Oilers) and set the TF's to meet, they met but could not refuel (no Oilers, no replenish mission, ok), so I combined both the Surface TF and the Tanker TF into one Escort TF but, I still can't refuel. It sure looks other ships can refuel from tankers in transport missions, so why can't ships refuel in an escort mission?

So your just SOL? if your carrier or surface group runs out of fuel and you don't have any oilers, there are no oilers in the Indian Ocean.

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 398

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/15/2009 10:13:33 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152

I refuel issue also

I had a surface group out of fuel, so I sent a couple of TK's (didn't have any Oilers) and set the TF's to meet, they met but could not refuel (no Oilers, no replenish mission, ok), so I combined both the Surface TF and the Tanker TF into one Escort TF but, I still can't refuel. It sure looks other ships can refuel from tankers in transport missions, so why can't ships refuel in an escort mission?

So your just SOL?� if your carrier or surface group runs out of fuel and you don't have any oilers, there are no oilers in the Indian Ocean.

I assume SOL means Slightly Out of Luck?

Tankers can not refuel from their fuel cargo at sea. Don't have the fittings.

All ships are allowed to refuel other ships underway from their own bunkers - which is non-historical but the ability could not be removed for playability reasons.

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 399

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/15/2009 10:17:07 PM

pad152

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

Post your save, and I will take a look. Hurry please.

Don

Can't upload a rar or zip file, how can I get it to you? It times out if I try to send it as a txt file.

I tried to PM you with an attachment and I get file too large!

I tried again and still get file too large, the file size is 4,063 KB (scen 27 + Save game file).

< Message edited by pad152 -- 8/15/2009 10:49:18 PM >

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 400

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/15/2009 11:20:48 PM

Kull

Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152

Can't upload a rar or zip file, how can I get it to you? It times out if I try to send it as a txt file.

I tried to PM you with an attachment and I get file too large!

I tried again and still get file too large, the file size is 4,063 KB (scen 27 + Save game file).

The normal pws save game file is only @ 840, and zipping it doesn't shrink it much more. If your zip file is 4063, you're probably including files that aren't required.

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 401

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/15/2009 11:34:06 PM

Kull

Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline

This is an edited version of a post in the "Glug, glug, glug, in the Aleutians AAR" thread. In two recent cases, I saw a sub with 20 sys damage refuel in port and then return to Patrol while elsewhere a sub on Patrol took some pretty heavy damage from an ASW attack and also stayed on Patrol. I know these are issues involving subs (which is bad enough), but don't know for sure if the same problems affect surface vessels (although it seems likely, unless the issue of "damage awareness" is being altered by the Patrol Algorithm)

Sending a sub out on Patrol with 20 sys damage is not a good idea, IMO, and if the AI is also doing this (which I'm certain it is), the long term effect on their naval asets is going to be quite detrimental. You can fix low levels of damage fairly quickly, but the larger it gets, the more likely it is to cause OTHER categories of damage that will take a lot longer to repair. And in the case of submarines, it will make them much more susceptible to ASW attacks. If the sub is ALREADY at 30+ damage, the number of hits required to sink it would only damage a healthier vessel. And why do I say "30+" damage? Well, take a look at this sub which survived an ASW assault three turns ago and yet still remains on Patrol!

I don't know what level of Damage is considered to be "enough" to mandate a return to Port for repairs, but if surface vessels are also continuing to operate "normally" with damage of 37 sys and 32 float, that's going to give the human player an enormous advantage over the long term, since by definition those vessels can withstand much less punishment in combat. Initially the AI may have an advantage insofar as they'll have more operational assets early in the game (i.e the AI's ships are still out there "working" instead of repairing in port), but that is going to shift quickly and dramatically in the other direction.

I would urge the Devs to take a harder look at the issue of "acceptable" operational damage.

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 402

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 12:32:57 AM

RyanCrierie

Posts: 1461
Joined: 10/14/2005
Status: offline

It appears that Device 1687 "53cm Type 95 Torp" is actually the Mod 1 variant of the Type 95. Suggest renaming to "53cm T95 Mod 1 Torp" to be accurate

There was also a Mod 2 of this, available from 1944 onwards, with a 1,200 lb warhead and ranges of 8,000 yd at 45-47 kts and 6,000 yd at 49-51 kts

_____________________________

My Website with cool bits and pieces!

(in reply to Kull)

Post #: 403

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 12:36:21 AM

pad152

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152

Can't upload a rar or zip file, how can I get it to you? It times out if I try to send it as a txt file.

I tried to PM you with an attachment and I get file too large!

I tried again and still get file too large, the file size is 4,063 KB (scen 27 + Save game file).

The normal pws save game file is only @ 840, and zipping it doesn't shrink it much more. If your zip file is 4063, you're probably including files that aren't required.

It's a custom scenario, so you need both the save game file and the scenario files, other wise it won't load!

(in reply to Kull)

Post #: 404

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 12:42:26 AM

jwilkerson

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

Do not need to send scenario files with a save. All relevant scenario data is first copied to the save file when the game is started and he subsequently read from the save file. The scenario files are only referenced when a new game is started - same as WITP.

_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 405

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 12:44:08 AM

jwilkerson

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

This being said, we really need to focus on "stock AE" at this point - so please don't send us custom scenario issues yet - let us get through patch 02 please.

_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to jwilkerson)

Post #: 406

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 3:39:26 AM

fbs

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

Scenario 001:

You guys sure about La Triomphant not being under Free French Command? She is under New Zealand Command at this moment.

Thanks

fbs

(in reply to jwilkerson)

Post #: 407

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 3:55:58 AM

Chad Harrison

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

Sorry if this has been already asked, but . . .

Page 108 of the manual says that small craft can be returned to the pool to simulate moving between bases. Is this implemented?

I am having a bear of a time figuring out how to do this. Granted, I am trying with PT's, but I assume they can be withdrawn. While saying that it is possible, the manual does not say how to do this.

Thanks in advance.

Chad

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 408

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 4:37:24 AM

jwilkerson

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

Press the "return to pool" button. For me this shows up with the vessel is disbanded into the port.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 409

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 5:30:49 AM

Chad Harrison

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

Thanks Joe.

The trick I was missing was that the ship had to be disbanded. I was trying it with ships in TF's. I knew I was missing something obvious

Thanks for the quick reply.

Chad

(in reply to jwilkerson)

Post #: 410

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 5:33:01 AM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs

Scenario 001:

You guys sure about La Triomphant not being under Free French Command? She is under New Zealand Command at this moment.

Thanks
fbs

Moderately sure, but there are a couple of French guys on the forum that might have better data.

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 411

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 9:48:15 AM

Monter_Trismegistos

Posts: 1359
Joined: 2/1/2005
From: Gdansk
Status: offline

Why you call it La Triomphant instead of Le Triomphant?

_____________________________

Nec Temere Nec Timide
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 412

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 10:05:42 AM

Reg

Posts: 2787
Joined: 5/26/2000
From: NSW, Australia
Status: offline

HMAS Ipswich is incorrectly spelt Ipswitch on scenarios 1, 2, 4 and 6.

http://www.navy.gov.au/HMAS_Ipswich_(I)

_____________________________

Cheers,
Reg.

(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!

(in reply to Monter_Trismegistos)

Post #: 413

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 1:11:58 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

Why you call it La Triomphant instead of Le Triomphant?

A mistreek?

(in reply to Monter_Trismegistos)

Post #: 414

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 1:22:59 PM

Gilbert

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs

Scenario 001:

You guys sure about La Triomphant not being under Free French Command? She is under New Zealand Command at this moment.

Thanks
fbs

Moderately sure, but there are a couple of French guys on the forum that might have better data.

Le Triomphant (French ships are boys or girls depending on their name "La Gloire"-"Le Triomphant") under Free French Command in 1941 was detached to British Eastern Fleet at the beginning of the war against Japan. In fact, British Eastern Fleet Command assigned "Le Triomphant" to Australian Command for the remainder of 1941 and to ABDA on beginning of 1942. But she never went ot DEI and was recalled to Noumea, as Free French Command feared a naval operation from Vichy naval forces, with some Japan support to retake New Caledonia territory. Staying there for a few weeks, she was reassigned to Australian/New Zealand Command until her return to Middle Sea in 12/1943.

Hope this helps

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 Don Bowen)

Post #: 415

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 1:41:43 PM

John Lansford

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline

I've got several AS support ships in various harbors around the map to resupply my subs, but I thought that they could also assist in repairing them too. They all have supplies on board, but when I disband and put the sub into port to repair, shouldn't I be getting a "repair ship" option or is that just for the AR support ships? I guess this also applies to AD and AGx types too.

(in reply to Gilbert)

Post #: 416

RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 8/16/2009 2:01:30 PM

P.Hausser

Posts: 416
Joined: 8/16/2009
Status: offline

Any tample`s were I can see what a PB is ect ?

(in reply to chesmart)

Post #: 417

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/16/2009 2:38:34 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

I've got several AS support ships in various harbors around the map to resupply my subs, but I thought that they could also assist in repairing them too.� They all have supplies on board, but when I disband and put the sub into port to repair, shouldn't I be getting a "repair ship" option or is that just for the AR support ships?� I guess this also applies to AD and AGx types too.

Tenders are not classified as repair ships but will assist in the repair of ships of the appropriate types. You do not need to do anything, they just do it.

(in reply to John Lansford)

Post #: 418

RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds - 8/17/2009 2:45:26 AM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: P.Hausser

Any tample`s were I can see what a PB is ect ?

The manual says they are Patrol Boats. Used for ASW mostly.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to P.Hausser)

Post #: 419

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 8/17/2009 9:14:44 AM

John Lansford

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

I've got several AS support ships in various harbors around the map to resupply my subs, but I thought that they could also assist in repairing them too.� They all have supplies on board, but when I disband and put the sub into port to repair, shouldn't I be getting a "repair ship" option or is that just for the AR support ships?� I guess this also applies to AD and AGx types too.

Tenders are not classified as repair ships but will assist in the repair of ships of the appropriate types. You do not need to do anything, they just do it.

Will they perform this automatic repair assist whether they have supplies on board or not? Also does it have to be in a TF or can it be disbanded to function, and how damaged can one be and still work? I've got one in Surabaya with 70+ system damage right now.

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 420