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  56 57 [58] 59 60   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/28/2009 8:36:25 PM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

After we get patch 1 out there and official I need to spend some more testing cycles on the Allied AI especially late 42/43 so if anyone has any feedback please thats probably my next AI priority - its been tested but I need to retest and see how it does


Andy, can you create a Midway scenario for people to work with?

_____________________________

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 Andy Mac)
Post #: 1711
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/29/2009 5:22:38 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

After we get patch 1 out there and official I need to spend some more testing cycles on the Allied AI especially late 42/43 so if anyone has any feedback please thats probably my next AI priority - its been tested but I need to retest and see how it does


I am in mid 43 and the only thing that bothers me is HQ's that have been withdrawn but the territory is still in friendly hands. Bases and units revert to "unknown" hq. Not sure if its a problem for logistics, at least I have not noticed any yet.

Still have a problem where a piece of a HQ was saved from Singapore but it will not fill out with support units. I have tried changing superior HQ's, moved it to a bigger base, put it on rest mode. Nothing is working. Its not listed as 224/x just RAF 224.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1712
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/29/2009 6:12:04 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		Andy - is just the patch required or a restart? I don't want to waste your time with feedback from a game in progress if it stays with the pre-patch AI after patching.

PS: I am in September '42 Allies vs AI. You are evil, evil, evil. Not the spray can stuff. The concentrate.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1713
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/29/2009 8:00:06 AM   
Andy Mac

 

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

I am not creatign scenarios I am testing the AI

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1714
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/29/2009 8:00:29 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Oldman not sure whats wnet wrong there

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1715
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/29/2009 11:23:47 AM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45
Still have a problem where a piece of a HQ was saved from Singapore but it will not fill out with support units. I have tried changing superior HQ's, moved it to a bigger base, put it on rest mode. Nothing is working. Its not listed as 224/x just RAF 224.


I can add that i have the same problem with the 223 RAF HQ. It was loaded on 2 ships and one of them got sunk leaving a fragment. The Fragment eventually correctly rename it self from X/RAF 223 into the RAF 223 HQ non the less it hasnt been able to recieve any replacement since. To add, for a short periode and that might have some thing to do with it. A 223 RAF HQ was on reinforcement scheduel for GB but vanished from list/appeared in GB but isnt physically showing. Could be that a "ghost" fragment are hiding some where in cyberspace now and since it was the "parent" part of the unit even if remaining fragment was renamed it still "acts" like a fragment. Well its a theory.

The AHF HQ was destroyed as a whole in malaya and has come back via GB and are functioning correctly.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 8/29/2009 11:26:58 AM >

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 1716
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/29/2009 3:21:24 PM   
fbs

 

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

RAAF OTU Adelaide is under Australia Command

That is inconsistent with the other "RAAF OTU" units, all of which are under RAAF Command (RAAF OTU Augusta, Sydney, Wagga, Canberra, Melbourne).

Thanks,
fbs

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 1717
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/29/2009 6:10:34 PM   
fbs

 

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

Unit "32th Australian Bn" should be "32nd Australian Bn".

Thanks,
fbs

(in reply to fbs)
Post #: 1718
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/29/2009 7:01:38 PM   
pad152

 

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline 		Seeing the AI operate B17's from level 2 airfields, seems like too much of a cheat. Heavy bombers should be limited to level 4 for even the AI. I don't mind the AI getting bonuses but, seeing it not even using the same game rules is a bit much.










(in reply to fbs)
Post #: 1719
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/29/2009 9:30:13 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152

Seeing the AI operate B17's from level 2 airfields, seems like too much of a cheat. Heavy bombers should be limited to level 4 for even the AI. I don't mind the AI getting bonuses but, seeing it not even using the same game rules is a bit much.



I tend to agree with you here!


(in reply to pad152)
Post #: 1720
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/29/2009 9:55:11 PM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach


quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152

Seeing the AI operate B17's from level 2 airfields, seems like too much of a cheat. Heavy bombers should be limited to level 4 for even the AI. I don't mind the AI getting bonuses but, seeing it not even using the same game rules is a bit much.



I tend to agree with you here!




I believe that was historical. A number of the Dutch bases in Borneo were secretly set up to facilitate bombers flying in, flying a mission, and flying out. How big was Guadalcanal when the B-17s started using it in the same way?

_____________________________

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 Buck Beach)
Post #: 1721
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/30/2009 4:14:25 AM   
Gary D


Posts: 164
Joined: 6/6/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		The 99th and 100th Indian Brigades posted to Colombo start scenario 6 with a morale of zero.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 1722
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/30/2009 11:32:30 AM   
sven6345789

 

Posts: 1050
Joined: 3/8/2004
From: Sandviken, Sweden
Status: offline 		probably already reported but under patch 1.083, hitting the button "toggle replacements for all units on or off" in the land unit overview, both buttons turn replacements on.
scenario 1.

< Message edited by sven6345789 -- 8/31/2009 9:52:41 AM >

_____________________________

Bougainville, November 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. It rained today.

Letter from a U.S. Marine,November 1943

(in reply to Gary D)
Post #: 1723
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 8/30/2009 4:09:46 PM   
Iron Duke


Posts: 529
Joined: 1/7/2002
From: UK
Status: offline
scn. 1
slot 5348 86th Infantry Cav Division -- suffix is Cavalry Division -- should be Division



_____________________________

"Bombers outpacing fighters - you've got to bloody well laugh!" Australian Buffalo pilot - Singapore

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1724
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 8/30/2009 6:08:51 PM   
fbs

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline 		Scenario 001, v. 1.0.1.1083, new game:

Beaverette A/C still has a very large load cost -- it should be 10, not 100.

Cheers
fbs

(in reply to Iron Duke)
Post #: 1725
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 8/30/2009 6:28:24 PM   
Blackhorse


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

ORIGINAL: Iron Duke


scn. 1
slot 5348 86th Infantry Cav Division -- suffix is Cavalry Division -- should be Division




Noted. What's causing the problem is that the Division points to the wrong TOE. It will be fixed for Patch 2.

_____________________________

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 Iron Duke)
Post #: 1726
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/30/2009 10:15:07 PM   
pad152

 

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

ORIGINAL: herwin

I believe that was historical. A number of the Dutch bases in Borneo were secretly set up to facilitate bombers flying in, flying a mission, and flying out. How big was Guadalcanal when the B-17s started using it in the same way?



If your going to allow 4 engine bombers to operate from level 2 airfields, then air field size doesn't mean anything any more. I don't know how big the airfield got on Guadalcanal, but today Honiara (Henderson Field) is the only international airport in the Solomon Islands at 7200ft long. My understanding is airfield size in WITP/AE represents more than just size but, also the facilities like fuel & bomb bunkers, repair facilities, etc.





(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 1727
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/30/2009 10:24:57 PM   
rockmedic109

 

Posts: 2390
Joined: 5/17/2005
From: Citrus Heights, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152


quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

I believe that was historical. A number of the Dutch bases in Borneo were secretly set up to facilitate bombers flying in, flying a mission, and flying out. How big was Guadalcanal when the B-17s started using it in the same way?



If your going to allow 4 engine bombers to operate from level 2 airfields, then air field size doesn't mean anything any more. I don't know how big the airfield got on Guadalcanal, but today Honiara (Henderson Field) is the only international airport in the Solomon Islands at 7200ft long. My understanding is airfield size in WITP/AE represents more than just size but, also the facilities like fuel & bomb bunkers, repair facilities, etc.






Airfield size still matters. If the size is not at least 4 + (bombload/6500), then the unit will only carry extended range load, only have normal range and suffers more Ops losses.

(in reply to pad152)
Post #: 1728
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/31/2009 6:09:06 PM   
rattovolante


Posts: 188
Joined: 8/30/2009
From: Italy
Status: offline 		(this surfaced in another thread)
In scenario 1 (possibly in the other variations too) some SNLF companies have an infantry icon instead of an amphibious infantry icon. Is this intentional?

example: identical equipment/squads, different icon:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/upfiles/32702/1306708722E5487F99417E6CF6E549DB.jpg

< Message edited by rattovolante -- 8/31/2009 6:34:06 PM >

(in reply to rockmedic109)
Post #: 1729
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/31/2009 8:28:29 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		No mistake but to late for patch 1

(in reply to rattovolante)
Post #: 1730
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 8/31/2009 9:35:59 PM   
rattovolante


Posts: 188
Joined: 8/30/2009
From: Italy
Status: offline 		a very minor one from scenario 1

unit # 4382, 51st naval guard starts first turn (dec 7) with preparation Jaluit/0, loaded on "Makin invasion" TF 15, docked at Jaluit and heading to Makin

unit # 4383, 52nd naval guard starts at Jaluit (and will stay there, the TF won't load it up), but has preparation Makin/50

I guess orders were mixed up and the TF commander loaded the wrong unit ;)

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1731
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 9/1/2009 12:01:37 AM   
Montbrun


Posts: 1498
Joined: 2/7/2001
From: Raleigh, NC, USA
Status: offline 		Unit 176 - "II Australian" is missing "Corps"

Unit 6402 - "3rd Carbiniers" - should be "Carabiniers."

(in reply to rattovolante)
Post #: 1732
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 9/1/2009 10:41:09 PM   
medicff

 

Posts: 710
Joined: 9/11/2004
From: WPB, Florida
Status: offline 		AI uses CV tf as ramming/bombard/sc tf clearing force???

Hey Andy, don't know if your dept or programing but AI send its CV's into Bali Base hex (not near) and ran into PT boats and AMc on station there.

Were they just trying to move thru?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat, near Balikpapan at 64,97, Range 30,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CV Hiryu
CV Soryu
CV Zuikaku
CA Tone
CA Chikuma
CL Oi
DD Arashi
DD Hagikaze
DD Asashio
DD Oshio

Allied Ships
MTB 7
MTB 8
MTB 9
MTB 11
MTB 12
MTB 26
MTB 27



Maximum visibility in Clear Conditions: 30,000 yards
Range closes to 29,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 29,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 29,000 yards
Both TF attempt to withdraw!
Range increases to 30,000 yards...
Both Task Forces evade combat


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat, near Balikpapan at 64,97, Range 30,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CV Akagi
DD Arashio
DD Akatsuki
DD Okikaze

Allied Ships
AMc MMS D



Maximum visibility in Clear Conditions: 30,000 yards
Range closes to 29,000 yards...
Range closes to 25,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 25,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 25,000 yards
Both TF attempt to withdraw!
Range increases to 30,000 yards...
Range increases to 30,000 yards...
Both Task Forces evade combat



(in reply to Montbrun)
Post #: 1733
RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance - 9/1/2009 11:36:38 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		I adjusted this in the patch I hope
Post #: 1734
RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance - 9/2/2009 12:51:50 AM   
scott64


Posts: 4019
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		Jap AI taking bases and throwing the defender out. The Japs move on and leave a unit not destroyed nearby. The allies move back to retake the base. This has happened more than once.

_____________________________

Lucky for you, tonight it's just me


Any ship can be a minesweeper..once !! :)

http://suspenseandmystery.blogspot.com/

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1735
RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance - 9/2/2009 2:43:42 AM   
medicff

 

Posts: 710
Joined: 9/11/2004
From: WPB, Florida
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

I adjusted this in the patch I hope


Probably , I patched over the stock GC scenario 2 so I did not get the AI changes.


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1736
RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance - 9/2/2009 12:58:51 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline 		I still have an AI surface warfare TF sitting in Davao harbor.  It arrived a week ago and just sat there, not bombarding or anything else, until an invasion TF showed up and began unloading.  During that time the TF (a BB, CA and 2 DD's) had the BB torpedoed by a PBY, Dutch subs fired numerous torpedoes at them, and I ran a surface TF in there to shake them up.

I also pulled all the Allied LCU's in the area to Davao when it was obvious that -something- was going to happen there soon.  Now there's three infantry units dug in there instead of the one the AI was expecting, and the TF is STILL not bombarding!

(BTW this is with the beta patch installed)

(in reply to medicff)
Post #: 1737
RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance - 9/2/2009 2:18:32 PM   
EasilyConfused

 

Posts: 110
Joined: 6/11/2005
Status: offline 		The Beaverette A/C has a load cost of 100.  I suspect it's a typo and should read 10, in line with the other armo(u)red cars.

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 1738
RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance - 9/2/2009 3:46:43 PM   
fbs

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline 		Scenario 1, 1.0.1.1083:

Unit 5907 "Madion Base Force" should be "Madioen Base Force"
Unit 5908 "Loemafjang Base Force" should be "Loemadjang Base Force"
Unit 5916 "Den Passer Base Force" should be "Den Passar Base Force"

Cheers!
fbs

ps: I can't believe I'm reviewing the spelling of all units named after places, to make sure they match the spelling of the place... hahahah

< Message edited by fbs -- 9/2/2009 4:22:20 PM >

(in reply to EasilyConfused)
Post #: 1739
Page:   <<   < prev  56 57 [58] 59 60   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread Page: <<   < prev  56 57 [58] 59 60   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

0.844