RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues

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: AE Naval and OOB Issues

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: AE Naval and OOB Issues

Page: << < prev 21 22 [23] 24 25 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/17/2009 7:10:36 PM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: afspret
Came across this ship a little while ago and wonder if its the game (can't check now 'cause I'm @ work)?
HMAS Doomba (ex HMS Wexford, a RN Hunt class MSW, commissioned in 1919)

Not in stock-AE. Many 'marginal' ships were intentionally left out - a time and materials kinda thing.

There is hope however. Don Bowen has sparked development of a mod we call Don's Babies (les bebes, for the francophiles amongst you) that drills down to trawlers, self-propelled fuel barges and the cut-down Wickes type banana-boat/blockade runners, like Teapa. Pretty sure Doomba is in the box, along with net tenders like Kangaroo.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to afspret)

Post #: 661

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/18/2009 4:55:29 AM

TIMJOT

Posts: 1822
Joined: 4/30/2001
Status: offline

Not sure there is a reason for this but just noticed that the USS Vestal starts the game with looks like a 1943 AA upgrade. 40mm bofors and 20mm oerlikons. The Medusa also starts with 20mm's.

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 662

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/19/2009 12:04:34 AM

Herrbear

Posts: 883
Joined: 7/26/2004
From: Glendora, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: afspret

Came across this ship a little while ago and wonder if its the game (can't check now 'cause I'm @ work)?

HMAS Doomba (ex HMS Wexford, a RN Hunt class MSW, commissioned in 1919)
1921: sold to an Aussy shipping company and used as a cruise ship
04/09/39: requisitioned by RAN and rebuilt as a MSW
06/42: re-classified as an ASW ship (or as an AA ship according to Wiki)
03/13/46: decommissioned by RAN

Armament in RAN service: 1x4in, 1x40mm, 1x20mm, 2 ea Vickers & Lewis mgs, 51 depth charges (unknown if DCTs or racks).

Speed was rated @ 16kts

Has a similar, but not exactly the same profile as HMAS Moresby.

Wiki doesn't say much about its service, but considering it was requisitioned by the RAN in Oz, I'm guessing it spent its entire service with the RAN in and/or around Aussy waters.

Doesn't seem to be in the game.

(in reply to afspret)

Post #: 663

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/19/2009 3:15:41 AM

Buck Beach

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

quote:

ORIGINAL: afspret

Came across this ship a little while ago and wonder if its the game (can't check now 'cause I'm @ work)?

HMAS Doomba (ex HMS Wexford, a RN Hunt class MSW, commissioned in 1919)
1921: sold to an Aussy shipping company and used as a cruise ship
04/09/39: requisitioned by RAN and rebuilt as a MSW
06/42: re-classified as an ASW ship (or as an AA ship according to Wiki)
03/13/46: decommissioned by RAN

Armament in RAN service: 1x4in, 1x40mm, 1x20mm, 2 ea Vickers & Lewis mgs, 51 depth charges (unknown if DCTs or racks).

Speed was rated @ 16kts

Has a similar, but not exactly the same profile as HMAS Moresby.

Wiki doesn't say much about its service, but considering it was requisitioned by the RAN in Oz, I'm guessing it spent its entire service with the RAN in and/or around Aussy waters.

Doesn't seem to be in the game.

Brum, see the last JWE Post above.

(in reply to Herrbear)

Post #: 664

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/19/2009 5:40:49 AM

Buck Beach

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

For your consideration, in reading about the air attack on Dutch Harbor 6/3 & 6/4/42 ( http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/Aleutians/USN-CN-Aleutians-1.html) , the following ships were there along with several others already listed in the game OOB:

USS Gillis AVD-12
Morlen (army transport)

Also there was one of da babies USCG Onondaga

In the same series of stories it reflects the USS Thornton AVD-11, that I also could not find in the game.

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 9/19/2009 6:13:11 AM >

(in reply to jwilkerson)

Post #: 665

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/19/2009 2:10:05 PM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
For your consideration, in reading about the air attack on Dutch Harbor 6/3 & 6/4/42 ( http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/Aleutians/USN-CN-Aleutians-1.html) , the following ships were there along with several others already listed in the game OOB:

USS Gillis AVD-12
Morlen (army transport)

Also there was one of da babies USCG Onondaga

In the same series of stories it reflects the USS Thornton AVD-11, that I also could not find in the game.

All in Da Babies.

Thornton's absence in AE was an oversight; a rather odd one, since she was at PH and was credited with whacking a plane. Will try to fix.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Buck Beach)

Post #: 666

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/19/2009 4:42:39 PM

Buck Beach

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

I have just come across a new site (to me) that appears to be a rich resource for the merchant ships we discover in our readings that were in the Pacific theater but not in our game. This may be very useful in creating "da babies" mod.

http://www.armed-guard.com/

(in reply to jwilkerson)

Post #: 667

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/19/2009 5:17:40 PM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
I have just come across a new site (to me) that appears to be a rich resource for the merchant ships we discover in our readings that were in the Pacific theater but not in our game. This may be very useful in creating "da babies" mod.
http://www.armed-guard.com/

Nice site, Buck. Thank you.

Merchies (especially Brit and CW merchies) are like girlfriends; here for a while today, gone somewhere else tomorrow. Having people keep track of another thousand or so withdrawals, returns, etc would probably get them upset.

For AE, we tried to keep Kosher with the important or interesting ones that existed on opening day, but many the actual names are an abstract jumble. We tried very hard to have the size and age percentages work out, and also tried to have most of the names match up with their respective class groupings. But if "A" isn't in game, there will be a corresponding "B", that works just as well. Just one of those things we gots to live with.

Maritime Commission construction, of course, is as accurate as we can make it, especially in Da Babies.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Buck Beach)

Post #: 668

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/19/2009 8:25:18 PM

Buck Beach

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

There is something that is bugging me that I am sure you have considered, but, I would like to know how you approach it. The game has umpteen ships set to random captains with very many ships in the merchant fleet (or Army vessels) where the captains would be a ship's master and not a "line" officer (I can hear the anti-micromanagement fan boys yelling "Noooooooooooo!!!!). How do you (the game) keep the good combat line officers from being selected from running a cargo or tanker ship (or a minor warship for that matter)? Ideally, there should be a separate categories of Leader just for these ships, but, that would require more work than I think anybody would want to do. So what's your secret to keep Bull Halsey from being the master of a C2 Cargo ship? Is there something a moder can do?

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 669

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/20/2009 12:34:12 AM

stuman

Posts: 3907
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
I have just come across a new site (to me) that appears to be a rich resource for the merchant ships we discover in our readings that were in the Pacific theater but not in our game. This may be very useful in creating "da babies" mod.
http://www.armed-guard.com/

Nice site, Buck. Thank you.

Merchies (especially Brit and CW merchies) are like girlfriends; here for a while today, gone somewhere else tomorrow. Having people keep track of another thousand or so withdrawals, returns, etc would probably get them upset.

For AE, we tried to keep Kosher with the important or interesting ones that existed on opening day, but many the actual names are an abstract jumble. We tried very hard to have the size and age percentages work out, and also tried to have most of the names match up with their respective class groupings. But if "A" isn't in game, there will be a corresponding "B", that works just as well. Just one of those things we gots to live with.

Maritime Commission construction, of course, is as accurate as we can make it, especially in Da Babies.

Wait a minute. Are you implying that we do not have listed in game every last possible ship that ever floated in the Pacific Ocean from Dec 1941 through May 1946 ? Omg, the game is broken, it is unplayable !

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 670

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/20/2009 1:33:28 AM

Buck Beach

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

deleted

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 9/20/2009 4:17:44 PM >

(in reply to stuman)

Post #: 671

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/20/2009 3:52:59 PM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
There is something that is bugging me that I am sure you have considered, but, I would like to know how you approach it. The game has umpteen ships set to random captains with very many ships in the merchant fleet (or Army vessels) where the captains would be a ship's master and not a "line" officer (I can hear the anti-micromanagement fan boys yelling "Noooooooooooo!!!!). How do you (the game) keep the good combat line officers from being selected from running a cargo or tanker ship (or a minor warship for that matter)?

It's hard to keep this from happening. The assignment code "tries" to be rank conscious, and "tries" to fit aggressive leaders to larger warships, but it sometimes has a mind of its own.

quote:

Ideally, there should be a separate categories of Leader just for these ships, but, that would require more work than I think anybody would want to do.

Yes, we discussed it, but it would take more work than anyone was prepared to do; and what would happen if a merchie, with a Master, got snagged and converted to a Naval auxiliary, requiring a Naval officer in command. Woof!

quote:

So what's your secret to keep Bull Halsey from being the master of a C2 Cargo ship?

Assign him to something important very early.

quote:

Is there something a moder can do?

Unfortunately, no.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Buck Beach)

Post #: 672

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/20/2009 5:03:27 PM

Richard III

Posts: 710
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline

This seems to be the only place to post this interface question, if not feel free to move it.

Is it possible to restore the WITP Start Up Menue " yes or no Historic Sub Opps " switch for the Japanese in AE and implement that in the AI ?

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 673

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/20/2009 6:47:11 PM

Sonny II

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

No.

(in reply to Richard III)

Post #: 674

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/20/2009 8:57:34 PM

Richard III

Posts: 710
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline

Thanks.

(in reply to Sonny II)

Post #: 675

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/21/2009 4:02:56 PM

Buck Beach

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

Whoa now!!!! You guys have made the Erie Class PG's (790 & 791) tough little cookies. Their Durability is at 9 (more than the DDS of the period) with a Belt Armor of 90 (greater than the CLs and some CAs) and the are armed with some kick ass guns. I sure want more of these little fellas around!

Well I have shown my ignorance again, looks like she did carry the big sticks (6"ers). Did she really have that kind of Armor and Durability?

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 9/21/2009 4:17:32 PM >

(in reply to jwilkerson)

Post #: 676

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/21/2009 4:21:17 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

Whoa now!!!! You guys have made the Erie Class PG's (790 & 791) tough little cookies. Their Durability is at 9 (more than the DDS of the period) with a Belt Armor of 90 (greater than the CLs and some CAs) and the are armed with some kick ass guns. I sure want more of these little fellas around!

Well I have shown my ignorance again, looks like she did carry the big sticks (6"ers). Did she really have that kind of Armor and Durability?

Hey Buck those rum runners didn't mess around - called for serious firepower!

(in reply to Buck Beach)

Post #: 677

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/21/2009 4:36:29 PM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
Whoa now!!!! You guys have made the Erie Class PG's (790 & 791) tough little cookies. Their Durability is at 9 (more than the DDS of the period) with a Belt Armor of 90 (greater than the CLs and some CAs) and the are armed with some kick ass guns. I sure want more of these little fellas around!

Well I have shown my ignorance again, looks like she did carry the big sticks (6"ers). Did she really have that kind of Armor and Durability?

Hey Buck those rum runners didn't mess around - called for serious firepower!

Durn tootin. Needed some kick ass naval rifles to keep those guys at a distance so they couldn't breathe on you.

Armor is not right - don't know where that came from - maybe a cut & paste artifact. Will try to fix.

She did displace more than a Benson or Benham, and 9 is 'technically' right from the math, but, yeah, 8 would probably be better. Will try to fix that too.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 678

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/21/2009 4:37:18 PM

herwin

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

Whoa now!!!! You guys have made the Erie Class PG's (790 & 791) tough little cookies. Their Durability is at 9 (more than the DDS of the period) with a Belt Armor of 90 (greater than the CLs and some CAs) and the are armed with some kick ass guns. I sure want more of these little fellas around!

Well I have shown my ignorance again, looks like she did carry the big sticks (6"ers). Did she really have that kind of Armor and Durability?

Hey Buck those rum runners didn't mess around - called for serious firepower!

They did have a 3.5" belt, and 12400 SHP. The design was the basis for the Treasury cutters.

_____________________________

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 witpqs)

Post #: 679

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/21/2009 4:41:11 PM

herwin

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
Whoa now!!!! You guys have made the Erie Class PG's (790 & 791) tough little cookies. Their Durability is at 9 (more than the DDS of the period) with a Belt Armor of 90 (greater than the CLs and some CAs) and the are armed with some kick ass guns. I sure want more of these little fellas around!

Well I have shown my ignorance again, looks like she did carry the big sticks (6"ers). Did she really have that kind of Armor and Durability?

Hey Buck those rum runners didn't mess around - called for serious firepower!

Durn tootin. Needed some kick ass naval rifles to keep those guys at a distance so they couldn't breathe on you.

Armor is not right - don't know where that came from - maybe a cut & paste artifact. Will try to fix.

She did displace more than a Benson or Benham, and 9 is 'technically' right from the math, but, yeah, 8 would probably be better. Will try to fix that too.

They installed the armour belt between the launch in 1936 and the beginning of the war. Wartime pictures of this class show it.

_____________________________

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 680

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/21/2009 4:58:04 PM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
Whoa now!!!! You guys have made the Erie Class PG's (790 & 791) tough little cookies. Their Durability is at 9 (more than the DDS of the period) with a Belt Armor of 90 (greater than the CLs and some CAs) and the are armed with some kick ass guns. I sure want more of these little fellas around!

Well I have shown my ignorance again, looks like she did carry the big sticks (6"ers). Did she really have that kind of Armor and Durability?

Okey dokey, found her design specs in the pile of old notes. All fixed. Maybe show up in patch-2. They was kick ass. 1" over deck general, 2-3" over magazines, 4" tower, 3.5" belt, she was 2340 trial on a 2000 std design, but then the Bensons trialed out about 8-10% over design too, so yeah, 8 is a good one. I see from the notes where we had the deck armor tweak set up, but I guess it just didn't get done, so the original cut & paste is still in there.

I guess it's true: memory is the second thing to go when ya get old.

< Message edited by JWE -- 9/21/2009 5:28:02 PM >

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Buck Beach)

Post #: 681

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/21/2009 8:18:16 PM

Montbrun

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
Whoa now!!!! You guys have made the Erie Class PG's (790 & 791) tough little cookies. Their Durability is at 9 (more than the DDS of the period) with a Belt Armor of 90 (greater than the CLs and some CAs) and the are armed with some kick ass guns. I sure want more of these little fellas around!

Well I have shown my ignorance again, looks like she did carry the big sticks (6"ers). Did she really have that kind of Armor and Durability?

Okey dokey, found her design specs in the pile of old notes. All fixed. Maybe show up in patch-2. They was kick ass. 1" over deck general, 2-3" over magazines, 4" tower, 3.5" belt, she was 2340 trial on a 2000 std design, but then the Bensons trialed out about 8-10% over design too, so yeah, 8 is a good one. I see from the notes where we had the deck armor tweak set up, but I guess it just didn't get done, so the original cut & paste is still in there.

I guess it's true: memory is the second thing to go when ya get old.

But they have medication now to take care of the first thing - better living through chemistry...

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 682

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/22/2009 3:11:39 PM

Buck Beach

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

Nosing around I found a reference that the Kane (ship 4110) was an APD when she participated in the "Assault on Kiska, 15 August 1943". http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/Aleutians/USN-CN-Aleutians-A.html This conversion was also shown in her "Wikipedia" entry (for what it is worth).

In the game it shows the apparent upgrade at 4/43 but to another DD LR (715). Maybe this should be to a 724 Clemson APD

The above may be all wet, seems like any conversion would be my choice. People who don't know what they are doing should leave well enough alone, especially old tired minded farts such as myself. I am bumbling my way through the Editor and admit to being confused with the functions and field descriptions. What I need to do is wait until you folks get through at least another patch to ask questions and get explanations. Sorry for the confusion.

Posted before reading JWE's explaination below.

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 9/22/2009 4:19:41 PM >

(in reply to jwilkerson)

Post #: 683

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/22/2009 3:57:10 PM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
Nosing around I found a reference that the Kane (ship 4110) was an APD when she participated in the "Assault on Kiska, 15 August 1943". http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/Aleutians/USN-CN-Aleutians-A.html This conversion was also shown in her "Wikipedia" entry (for what it is worth).

In the game it shows the apparent upgrade at 4/43 but to another DD LR (715). Maybe this should be to a 724 Clemson APD

Clemsons that begin as DDs follow the DD upgrade path. However, they may convert to other types which, in turn, follow their own upgrade paths. They may convert to APD, AVD, DMS, or DM. So all you need do is convert the Kane to an APD.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Buck Beach)

Post #: 684

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/22/2009 4:38:33 PM

Buck Beach

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

JWE, will there be some sort of manual or instructions for the Editor? I am enjoying it very much but am too slow to think some of the things through without trying to connect the dots step by step. Sorry if this has been asked before.

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 685

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/22/2009 4:57:27 PM

Cavalry Corp

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline

Ships in grey

I was wondeing how a grey ship in repair can stop repair and be added to TF to move it ??

I have North Carolina in Noumea but cannot allocate it to a TF ?

Cav

(in reply to Buck Beach)

Post #: 686

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/22/2009 5:03:49 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

Ships in grey

I was wondeing how a grey ship in repair can stop repair and be added to TF to move it ??

I have North Carolina in Noumea but cannot allocate it to a TF ?

Cav

Change the repair mode to "Readiness" and then a mouse-over of the ship will tell you how many days you have to wait for it to be ready.

(in reply to Cavalry Corp)

Post #: 687

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/22/2009 5:19:41 PM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
JWE, will there be some sort of manual or instructions for the Editor? I am enjoying it very much but am too slow to think some of the things through without trying to connect the dots step by step. Sorry if this has been asked before.

Just guessing, but you might try the WITP AE-Editor. pdf in the Manuals folder.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Buck Beach)

Post #: 688

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/22/2009 5:54:04 PM

Buck Beach

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
JWE, will there be some sort of manual or instructions for the Editor? I am enjoying it very much but am too slow to think some of the things through without trying to connect the dots step by step. Sorry if this has been asked before.

Just guessing, but you might try the WITP AE-Editor. pdf in the Manuals folder.