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: adding pilots

 
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: adding pilots Page: <<   < prev  50 51 [52] 53 54   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: adding pilots - 8/16/2009 6:56:52 PM   
langleyCV1

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 9/6/2008
From: Berkshire UK
Status: offline
Production of Hurricane IIbs for the RAF should start in december 1941 in order to ensure 488 squadron is able to change to them by January 23 1942. As took place in real life. Also they should not be given the dutch artwork.

Many thanks

MJT

(in reply to 1EyedJacks)
Post #: 1531
RE: adding pilots - 8/16/2009 7:00:42 PM   
langleyCV1

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 9/6/2008
From: Berkshire UK
Status: offline
Hurricanes IIbs for the Dutch should total 29 machines not 27 as set as this moment in time.

Many thanks

MJT

(in reply to langleyCV1)
Post #: 1532
RE: adding pilots - 8/16/2009 7:21:35 PM   
langleyCV1

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 9/6/2008
From: Berkshire UK
Status: offline
Ok one last point then I will shut up for a bit.
I just upgraded VMF111 From F3F-3 to Buffalos so far so good
But when I try to upgrade VF2 on the Lexington at Pearl Habour I find that I have in the pool 8 aircraft and used -13. Upgrades and replacements to other units turned off.
What gives!

Any Ideas

MJT

(in reply to langleyCV1)
Post #: 1533
RE: adding pilots - 8/16/2009 7:33:15 PM   
Monter_Trismegistos

 

Posts: 1359
Joined: 2/1/2005
From: Gdansk
Status: offline
Planes are released to pool with a delay?

_____________________________

Nec Temere Nec Timide
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą

(in reply to langleyCV1)
Post #: 1534
RE: adding pilots - 8/16/2009 9:00:55 PM   
langleyCV1

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 9/6/2008
From: Berkshire UK
Status: offline
Thanks for that, is that information in the manual?

MJT

(in reply to Monter_Trismegistos)
Post #: 1535
RE: adding pilots - 8/16/2009 9:48:11 PM   
KHawk

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 7/3/2004
Status: offline
Page 258 last paragraph.


KHawk

(in reply to langleyCV1)
Post #: 1536
RE: adding pilots - 8/16/2009 11:24:06 PM   
langleyCV1

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 9/6/2008
From: Berkshire UK
Status: offline
Got IT!

Many thanks.

MJT

(in reply to KHawk)
Post #: 1537
RE: adding pilots - 8/16/2009 11:52:39 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline
What is going on with pilot availability?  The manual says pilots may not be available to fly based on extreme fatigue or not enough planes for all the pilots.

Well, the first is not happening; I've got pilots with barely any fatigue on the 'no fly' list in every squadron.  It's not the second one either; in fact, I've got more flyable planes than available pilots in nearly every squadron I've looked at.  Some, such as my fighter squadrons, have only half the available pilots for flyable planes.

This is crippling my carriers; I don't dare send my CV's out of harbor with only 4-6 fighter pilots available for the entire squadron, even though there are 30+ pilots in each one!  Attack squadrons don't appear to be affected nearly as badly; my land based torpedo bombers have as many pilots as flyable planes, for example, and the attack squadrons on the CV's aren't as bad as the fighter squadrons either.

(in reply to langleyCV1)
Post #: 1538
RE: adding pilots - 8/17/2009 10:32:57 PM   
Bliztk


Posts: 779
Joined: 4/24/2002
From: Electronic City
Status: offline
Don´t know if posted yet, in Aleutians Scenario, there is no Rufe replacement pool

_____________________________


(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 1539
RE: adding pilots - 8/18/2009 3:41:57 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Here is something I noticed. I accidently off loaded five squadrons on a unoccupied base hex (1-port 0-airfield)  I reported that earlier as it probably should not be allowed (accidently or not) but then discovered that you can fly aircraft off of a base with a 0-airfield.) This did help me resolve my boo boo but probably should not be allowed either. No great shakes but perhaps in a future patch.




_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Bliztk)
Post #: 1540
RE: adding pilots - 8/18/2009 6:14:46 PM   
Howard Mitchell


Posts: 449
Joined: 6/3/2002
From: Blighty
Status: offline
The B-29-1 Superfortress is shown as having 3x0.5" MGs and 1x20mm cannon as tail armament, rather than 2x0.5" MGs and 1x20mm cannon.



The original B-29 tail armament was 2x0.5" MGs and 1x20mm cannon, but the cannon was often removed as its shells followed a different trajectory to the MGs, and firing the three guns together was not effective as the computer only calculated for the MGs. It was recommended that the gunner only fire the cannon when the target was close (not more than 600 yards). The cannon feed mechanism also tended to jam. (Info from William Wolf's book on the B-29).

Often a third 0.5" was added in the cannon's place, and AE shows the later B-29s as having 3x0.5" MG only.

_____________________________

While the battles the British fight may differ in the widest possible ways, they invariably have two common characteristics – they are always fought uphill and always at the junction of two or more map sheets.

General Sir William Slim

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 1541
RE: adding pilots - 8/18/2009 8:38:06 PM   
bsq


Posts: 517
Joined: 1/5/2007
Status: offline
Some Air Leader issues:

Keith Park - should be an Air Marshal (promoted in 1941 when he took over at Malta). His stats (IMO) are too low. He was considered one of the greatest Air Commanders ever produced by the RAF (even though he was a New Zealander), yet he rates (much) lower than Curtis LeMay. At the very least his Air Skill should be on par with LeMay and his Skill and Inspiration should be much higher.



(in reply to Howard Mitchell)
Post #: 1542
RE: AE Air Issues and Air OOB Issues - 8/18/2009 9:55:47 PM   
mikemike

 

Posts: 501
Joined: 6/3/2004
From: a maze of twisty little passages, all different
Status: offline
In the Coral Sea scenario, the 3rd BG/89th BS (Air Group 3667) upgrades to aircraft type 270, which doesn't exist. The message in the Operations Report is "3rd BG/89th BS has an invalid upgrade from A-20A Havoc to # 270". This error also exists in the Aleutian Scenario, where the unit isn't active.

< Message edited by mikemike -- 8/18/2009 9:57:40 PM >


_____________________________

DON´T PANIC - IT´S ALL JUST ONES AND ZEROES!

(in reply to TheElf)
Post #: 1543
RE: adding pilots - 8/19/2009 9:06:07 PM   
invernomuto


Posts: 986
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Turin, Italy
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

What is going on with pilot availability?  The manual says pilots may not be available to fly based on extreme fatigue or not enough planes for all the pilots.

Well, the first is not happening; I've got pilots with barely any fatigue on the 'no fly' list in every squadron.  It's not the second one either; in fact, I've got more flyable planes than available pilots in nearly every squadron I've looked at.  Some, such as my fighter squadrons, have only half the available pilots for flyable planes.

This is crippling my carriers; I don't dare send my CV's out of harbor with only 4-6 fighter pilots available for the entire squadron, even though there are 30+ pilots in each one!  Attack squadrons don't appear to be affected nearly as badly; my land based torpedo bombers have as many pilots as flyable planes, for example, and the attack squadrons on the CV's aren't as bad as the fighter squadrons either.



True, there is definitely something strange. Here are some screenshots.
This air unit has an average fatigue of ZERO and 26 serviceable aricrafts. Some pilots are listed in black and not avaliable for flying according to the manual.
Why?






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 1544
RE: adding pilots - 8/19/2009 9:07:44 PM   
invernomuto


Posts: 986
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Turin, Italy
Status: offline
Here is the air unit screenshot




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to invernomuto)
Post #: 1545
RE: Swordfish II - 8/19/2009 11:36:30 PM   
timtom


Posts: 2358
Joined: 1/29/2003
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

Sasebo Ku S-1 and Kawai Det are the Claudes that do not upgrade.



quote:

ORIGINAL: fcam1387

Yamada-Det S-2
Saesbo KU S-1
3rd Hicotai IMAF


All WAD.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

A general query on the A-29. It has no replacements coming in online yet more than a few units with the blighters in. Assuem it's intentional etc? Sheesh it's tough being Allies at game start....so few replacements........


Well..yes. 41st BG didn't actually deploy overseas until autumn of '43.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs

19th BG/32nd BS and 19th BG/32nd BS Det are both in San Francisco - just combine them
7th BG/9th BS and 7th BG/9th BS Det are both in San Francisco (should the main unit be in Pearl Harbor?)



In both cases the detachments upgrade to the LB-30.

quote:

ORIGINAL: langleyCV1

The Buffalo MK1 was armed with 4x0.5 machine guns in AE. However re-reading Bloody Shambles and Buffalos over Singapore, it would appear a number of Buffalos were using 0.303 brownings as wing guns. This was due to problems with the 0.5 machine guns jamming after a rounds being fired.

MJT


We only get to pick one gun suite per a/c. Generally we've gone with the "factory" version rather than any of the any number of field mods.

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

All four of my USN CV's have many more pilots for their fighter squadrons than are currently flying. I've got one squadron that has 30+ pilots but only 3 men are listed as available for flying (names are white, everyone else's is black). The manual says their names going black means they've got excess fatigue or very low experience, but neither is applicable in any of these squadrons. I've got pilots with 11 fatigue and 70 experience flying, while there are more experienced pilots with 0 fatigue listed as black.

I've docked their ships at Pearl, I've put them on "training/rest", I've tried everything, but only a small group of pilots remain available for flying. What is going on here?



"Blacklisted" pilots should be tapped to fly missions regardless. Being "blacklisted" does not mean that the pilot isn't available to fly come the execution of the turn.

quote:

ORIGINAL: P.Hausser

Will Pilot pool limit be so high so that the game will not ever reach the death limit, and start to purge pilots from both sides at will ?


I believe so, yes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: langleyCV1

Production of Hurricane IIbs for the RAF should start in december 1941 in order to ensure 488 squadron is able to change to them by January 23 1942. As took place in real life. Also they should not be given the dutch artwork.

Many thanks

MJT


quote:

ORIGINAL: langleyCV1

Hurricanes IIbs for the Dutch should total 29 machines not 27 as set as this moment in time.

Many thanks

MJT


Post #1439 this thread ->

quote:

ORIGINAL: langleyCV1

Now I would like to point out that 488 Sqn RNZAF upgrades to Hurricanes which it should do, But why are they the Dutch artwork version?



Deliberately set up that way (long story), but you question has caused me to rethink it...fiddle, fiddle...right, sorted - from patch 1 anyway :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Howard Mitchell

The B-29-1 Superfortress is shown as having 3x0.5" MGs and 1x20mm cannon as tail armament, rather than 2x0.5" MGs and 1x20mm cannon.

The original B-29 tail armament was 2x0.5" MGs and 1x20mm cannon, but the cannon was often removed as its shells followed a different trajectory to the MGs, and firing the three guns together was not effective as the computer only calculated for the MGs. It was recommended that the gunner only fire the cannon when the target was close (not more than 600 yards). The cannon feed mechanism also tended to jam. (Info from William Wolf's book on the B-29).

Often a third 0.5" was added in the cannon's place, and AE shows the later B-29s as having 3x0.5" MG only.




ANTZ!

quote:

ORIGINAL: bsq

Some Air Leader issues:

Keith Park - should be an Air Marshal (promoted in 1941 when he took over at Malta). His stats (IMO) are too low. He was considered one of the greatest Air Commanders ever produced by the RAF (even though he was a New Zealander), yet he rates (much) lower than Curtis LeMay. At the very least his Air Skill should be on par with LeMay and his Skill and Inspiration should be much higher.



Ground Team's headache








_____________________________

Where's the Any key?


(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 1546
RE: Swordfish II - 8/20/2009 12:12:43 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: timtom

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

All four of my USN CV's have many more pilots for their fighter squadrons than are currently flying. I've got one squadron that has 30+ pilots but only 3 men are listed as available for flying (names are white, everyone else's is black). The manual says their names going black means they've got excess fatigue or very low experience, but neither is applicable in any of these squadrons. I've got pilots with 11 fatigue and 70 experience flying, while there are more experienced pilots with 0 fatigue listed as black.

I've docked their ships at Pearl, I've put them on "training/rest", I've tried everything, but only a small group of pilots remain available for flying. What is going on here?



"Blacklisted" pilots should be tapped to fly missions regardless. Being "blacklisted" does not mean that the pilot isn't available to fly come the execution of the turn.


Well - what does it mean when the pilot is displayed in black text?

(in reply to timtom)
Post #: 1547
RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread - 8/20/2009 4:23:52 PM   
R8J


Posts: 238
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: Shelby County, Tennessee
Status: offline
Scenario 2

Slots 423 and 424, F4F-3 Wildcat and F4F-3P Wildcat. Has drop tank ranges. No drop tank assigned.

_____________________________

Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.

Who Dares Wins.

You smell like dead bunnies.

(in reply to Hipper)
Post #: 1548
RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread - 8/20/2009 8:33:58 PM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline
Does WitP AE Staff work for the non-campaign scenarios?

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to R8J)
Post #: 1549
RE: Swordfish II - 8/21/2009 9:42:27 PM   
timtom


Posts: 2358
Joined: 1/29/2003
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: timtom

"Blacklisted" pilots should be tapped to fly missions regardless. Being "blacklisted" does not mean that the pilot isn't available to fly come the execution of the turn.


Well - what does it mean when the pilot is displayed in black text?


That a pilot's not currently assigned an a/c. This does not prevent him from being assigned one during turn execution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: R8J

Scenario 2

Slots 423 and 424, F4F-3 Wildcat and F4F-3P Wildcat. Has drop tank ranges. No drop tank assigned.


Thanks Robert - already reported though :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

Does WitP AE Staff work for the non-campaign scenarios?


That would be a question for Woos on the WitPStaff thread on the Tech sub-forum.




_____________________________

Where's the Any key?


(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1550
Carrier Aircraft Not Being Replaced! - 8/21/2009 9:57:22 PM   
bsq


Posts: 517
Joined: 1/5/2007
Status: offline
I currently have my USN carriers denuded of aircraft, but they are not being replaced, even when docking at places like PH and Sydney where there is 200k+ supply. Checking the pools, production etc against the aircraft types concerned there is nothing in the pool and no production - OK, so I upgrade - but I cannot because there is no pool or production for the aircraft type that the unit will upgrade to. If I can't get the upgrade path to show F4F-4, then I may as well cede the whole of the Central/South Pacific to the AI.

So is this dead end intentional?? If the upgrade is linear with no option to alter the path like there is WITP then the allied player is stuffed until 1943 when the Hellcats come on line. It seems as though you have one chance at a Midway type encounter and then you have used up all your carrier aircraft and then have to wait for the Essex etc.

Is my only option to disband/withdraw my VF, VS and VB Sqns and lay my carriers up for 60 days? Have I missed a trick on the production front. The window of production for some of these aircraft types seems very narrow!

At the moment I am using the limited number of less effective VM Sqns to bolster the CVW's, but surely this is not as intended.

Of course at the moment I am benefiting from the bug that has provided 72 Corsairs on Lex, Sara, Yorktown and Hornet, but once they are gone it's back to PH for my carriers.

< Message edited by bsq -- 8/21/2009 10:04:13 PM >

(in reply to timtom)
Post #: 1551
RE: Carrier Aircraft Not Being Replaced! - 8/21/2009 11:38:01 PM   
Mynok


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

If you didn't select player defined upgrades then yes, you are stuck to the historical path. And the F4Fs were historically in very short supply.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to bsq)
Post #: 1552
RE: Carrier Aircraft Not Being Replaced! - 8/22/2009 1:30:28 AM   
EasilyConfused

 

Posts: 110
Joined: 6/11/2005
Status: offline
A minor error I just noticed, apologies if it has already been reported.  Air Group entry 3831 (407th BG/633th BS) has 122 ready aircraft instead of 12.  Now that I type this, it occurs to me that it should be 633rd not 633th as well, but that's not terribly important.

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 1553
RE: Carrier Aircraft Not Being Replaced! - 8/22/2009 3:49:06 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
The P-36A Mohawk is shown as a 'Float Fighter'!!!

(in reply to EasilyConfused)
Post #: 1554
RE: Carrier Aircraft Not Being Replaced! - 8/22/2009 5:16:33 AM   
Chad Harrison


Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline
Did a search, but didnt see any results.

For Scen 1, the PBJ-1H (459) is listed as having avail dates from 10/44 to 1/43. Screenshot below.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1555
RE: Carrier Aircraft Not Being Replaced! - 8/22/2009 10:54:35 AM   
RyanCrierie


Posts: 1461
Joined: 10/14/2005
Status: offline
Aircraft 492 SO3C-2 Seamew doesn't have the FLOAT CAPABLE toggle on, even though it's a floatplane.

_____________________________


(in reply to Chad Harrison)
Post #: 1556
RE: Carrier Aircraft Not Being Replaced! - 8/22/2009 6:50:16 PM   
ussdefiant

 

Posts: 60
Joined: 6/18/2009
Status: offline
A problem in Scenario 2, the Tony starts production in 11/42, but their engines don't start until 2/43.

(in reply to RyanCrierie)
Post #: 1557
RE: Carrier Aircraft Not Being Replaced! - 8/22/2009 7:50:53 PM   
langleyCV1

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 9/6/2008
From: Berkshire UK
Status: offline
Can Anyone see VP9 in Scenario 1 or has it been missed!

MJT

(in reply to ussdefiant)
Post #: 1558
RE: Carrier Aircraft Not Being Replaced! - 8/22/2009 8:13:10 PM   
langleyCV1

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 9/6/2008
From: Berkshire UK
Status: offline
Sorry My mistake it became VP12 not sure if this served in the Pacific.

MJT

(in reply to langleyCV1)
Post #: 1559
RE: Carrier Aircraft Not Being Replaced! - 8/22/2009 10:07:28 PM   
timtom


Posts: 2358
Joined: 1/29/2003
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bsq

I currently have my USN carriers denuded of aircraft, but they are not being replaced, even when docking at places like PH and Sydney where there is 200k+ supply. Checking the pools, production etc against the aircraft types concerned there is nothing in the pool and no production - OK, so I upgrade - but I cannot because there is no pool or production for the aircraft type that the unit will upgrade to. If I can't get the upgrade path to show F4F-4, then I may as well cede the whole of the Central/South Pacific to the AI.

So is this dead end intentional?? If the upgrade is linear with no option to alter the path like there is WITP then the allied player is stuffed until 1943 when the Hellcats come on line. It seems as though you have one chance at a Midway type encounter and then you have used up all your carrier aircraft and then have to wait for the Essex etc.

Is my only option to disband/withdraw my VF, VS and VB Sqns and lay my carriers up for 60 days? Have I missed a trick on the production front. The window of production for some of these aircraft types seems very narrow!

At the moment I am using the limited number of less effective VM Sqns to bolster the CVW's, but surely this is not as intended.

Of course at the moment I am benefiting from the bug that has provided 72 Corsairs on Lex, Sara, Yorktown and Hornet, but once they are gone it's back to PH for my carriers.


What's the game date?
PDU or NPDU?
How many VF, VB, VT have you lost?
Did you upgrade USMC units at first opportunity?
Have you "downgraded" any USMC units?
How, in general, have you operated your CV's?


_____________________________

Where's the Any key?


(in reply to bsq)
Post #: 1560
Page:   <<   < prev  50 51 [52] 53 54   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: adding pilots Page: <<   < prev  50 51 [52] 53 54   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

1.969