Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Patch-after-next-Patch-Wishlist

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Patch-after-next-Patch-Wishlist Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Patch-after-next-Patch-Wishlist - 8/14/2002 10:43:59 PM   
Long Lance


Posts: 274
Joined: 7/31/2002
From: Ebbelwoi Country
Status: offline 		Some things I'd like for the September-Patch:

- Please don't autoassign Admirals to TFs, but autoselect the best Commander in the TF. I've seen Tanaka on boring Routine Transports too often.

- In the TF-order-Screen, I'd like to see the number of ships in the TF

- When examining a carrier, I'd like to see the numer of aircraft I still can transfer to without operations being down (Capacity+10%-total Planes on Carrier)

- I only see how many hexes a TF can move with its current fuel, but I'd like to see how many hexes the TF has to travel for her current mission, too.

- Read it already somewhere else, but a 'Rest'-Button for AGs would be important

- According to the manual, a Surface-Combat-TF with retirement-allowed-setting should run like a Bombardment TF: Run in at night, fight it out, be outside LBA-range in daylight. I often observed that it just travelled 2 hexes after Surface combat without having significant damage or fuel shortage. As a result, these TFs had been nailed by LBA. Please fix this.


As soon as I've posted it, some more things will come into my mind, but that's it for the moment
Post #: 1
Re: Patch-after-next-Patch-Wishlist - 8/14/2002 11:54:14 PM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Long Lance
[

- According to the manual, a Surface-Combat-TF with retirement-allowed-setting should run like a Bombardment TF: Run in at night, fight it out, be outside LBA-range in daylight. I often observed that it just travelled 2 hexes after Surface combat without having significant damage or fuel shortage. As a result, these TFs had been nailed by LBA. Please fix this.


[/B][/QUOTE]

We could use a save for the problem mentioned above. The save must be right before the even and ideally repeat the problem every time. Please send to [email]2by3@2by3games.com[/email]. Thanks.

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 2
Re: Re: Patch-after-next-Patch-Wishlist - 8/15/2002 12:53:15 AM   
Long Lance


Posts: 274
Joined: 7/31/2002
From: Ebbelwoi Country
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Joel Billings
[B]

Please send to [email]2by3@2by3games.com[/email]. Thanks. [/B][/QUOTE]

I'm sorry, there's no more savegame. :(
As soon as I observe this again, I will send it.

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 3
- 8/15/2002 11:35:34 AM   
strollen

 

Posts: 159
Joined: 5/18/2002
Status: offline 		Got to agree on the no autoassign for Admiral. I spend 10 minutes in a Where is Waldo search for Tanaka every few turns. I don't fault the AI's tendency to assign him to every transport or combat TF but any decent CDR can sail a fleet from Truk to Rabaul. But taking on 5 CA and 6 DD, with a fleet of 8 DD (6 carrying troops) and kicking butt that takes talent... (Battle of Tassafaronga).

- The oft menitioned pickup troops only is high on my list.
- Some form of global rest, would be great.
- Repeating an earlier request a hot key for creating a task force. (say T) would put up a dialogue box of bases with ships in them.
Select a base and you are in the task force creation dialogue screen.

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 4
Re: Patch-after-next-Patch-Wishlist - 8/15/2002 2:38:06 PM   
Antonius

 

Posts: 209
Joined: 6/6/2000
From: Saint Arnoult en Yvelines FRANCE
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Long Lance
[B](...)

- According to the manual, a Surface-Combat-TF with retirement-allowed-setting should run like a Bombardment TF: Run in at night, fight it out, be outside LBA-range in daylight. I often observed that it just travelled 2 hexes after Surface combat without having significant damage or fuel shortage. As a result, these TFs had been nailed by LBA. Please fix this.
(...) [/B][/QUOTE]

That happened to me too. I was quite upset about it but also curious: why could the AI japs run away into safety after sneaking in and pounding my bases while my ships end up near their bombardment target ?

The answer is in the manual (endurance section ?): your ships will run away at full speed only if it has enough fuel/endurance. There is even a yellow box with a red warning that TFs on relatively low fuel/endurance can be unable to fulfill missions that require them to use full speed !

_____________________________

Wargamo, ergo sum

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 5
Refuel only on order - 8/15/2002 6:57:29 PM   
BPRE

 

Posts: 624
Joined: 10/16/2000
From: Stockholm,Sweden
Status: offline 		What about the annoying, IMHO, habit of TFs refueling from the base you sent them to and using up the fuel you painfully tried to assemble there for forward operations.

In some cases it's obviously necessary to refuel but a transport TF going from Noumea to Lunga for instance might use 2000 out of 15000-20000 fuel oneway and could easily return without refuelling.
If I'm trying to build up a fuel dump for offensive operations there I don't want to spend that fuel on transports going back to Noumea.

I think a player control or maybe at least a check so that no ship uses more than say, 10%, of the available fuel automatically.

Have I missed something regarding this or do you others have the same experiences?

Regards
BPRE

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 6
- 8/15/2002 11:07:07 PM   
Bernd Hesberg

 

Posts: 114
Joined: 10/11/2001
From: Germany
Status: offline 		BPRE,

I agree, it's somewhat annoying to see how the fuel is used. But that's the same for both sides. To be more specific, I don't think that one AP/AK would burn 2000 fuel on its way from Noumea to Lunga. You might have mixed that up with the endurance rating. From what I have seen (and remember), they will use approximately 200~300.
After all, you might think about two ways to deal with this problem: a strategical timing regarding your TFs arrivals and a deployment of larger amounts of fuel.

Of course, if Matrix/2by3 would do us a favor and implement a better way to control the refueling, I wouldn't reject it. :)

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 7
- 8/16/2002 12:36:37 AM   
BPRE

 

Posts: 624
Joined: 10/16/2000
From: Stockholm,Sweden
Status: offline 		Hi Bernd,

You're right about the consumption. I was at work when I wrote it and I guess my memory isn't what it should be.
It's true though that it affects both sides equally and you can live with it with some extra planning but it's so unreal to fuel at the front in cases like this.
On the other hand I get the impression that we probably should send ships back to Noumea for refuelling and base visits more often than we (or at least I) tend to do also.

/BPRE

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 8
- 8/16/2002 5:06:14 PM   
mark24

 

Posts: 171
Joined: 8/4/2002
Status: offline 		How about the ability to see port/airbase max sizes without HAVING to have a base there in the first place? For example, it was known in advance that Lunga would make a good AB. But, in game, you can't know this UNTIL you build a base.

Mark

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 9
- 8/16/2002 7:53:34 PM   
Sonny

 

Posts: 2008
Joined: 4/3/2002
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by mark24
[B]How about the ability to see port/airbase max sizes without HAVING to have a base there in the first place? For example, it was known in advance that Lunga would make a good AB. But, in game, you can't know this UNTIL you build a base.

Mark [/B][/QUOTE]

You want to ferry in a survey team by float plane and have an assessment? Sounds like too much micro-management to me.:D

Seriously, that would be nice information to have.:)

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 10
- 8/16/2002 9:14:53 PM   
chrisp

 

Posts: 74
Joined: 5/31/2002
From: Wichita, KS
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by mark24
[B]How about the ability to see port/airbase max sizes without HAVING to have a base there in the first place? For example, it was known in advance that Lunga would make a good AB. But, in game, you can't know this UNTIL you build a base.

Mark [/B][/QUOTE]

Try this -- it's a word doc I put together listing all the bases that have a value of least 1 in either category. I got the information from the scenario editor.

Chris P.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 11
- 8/16/2002 9:30:22 PM   
John Carney

 

Posts: 66
Joined: 7/1/2002
From: Tampa FL
Status: offline 		One of the positive effects of the annoying auto refuel by cargo ships, is that it forces the player to have a large forward fuel dump that he protects. Rather than all his small and medium basses be a fuel stop, which is not very realistic for this period.

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 12
- 8/17/2002 1:14:35 AM   
Toast Master

 

Posts: 32
Joined: 5/17/2002
From: Belcamp, Maryland
Status: offline 		What about fixing the pilot/plane allocation bugs reported by many players in several different threads? This is the only major problem with this (excellent) game as far as I can see.

Sure, there are other, minor points that could be refined, but this is the only item that borders on being a game killer. (Effective use of air assets seems to be the primary factor in deciding who wins these games. Therefore, if your planes are stuck in squadrons with no pilots (and visa versa) while your opponent has been fortunate enough to somehow avoid this bug, then it's going to be "lights out" in a hurry. :()

Could someone from Matrix let us know if/when this bug might be fixed?

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 13
- 8/17/2002 8:24:12 AM   
siRkid


Posts: 6650
Joined: 1/29/2002
From: Orland FL
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Toast Master
[B]What about fixing the pilot/plane allocation bugs reported by many players in several different threads? This is the only major problem with this (excellent) game as far as I can see. [/B][/QUOTE]

I would like to add the ability to withdraw a unit even if it is the only unit of its type in the hex. I suggest a waning message that says something like "There is no place to transfer the aircraft. If you withdraw the pilots, the aircraft will be destroyed. Do you still wish to withdraw the pilots? Yes No"

My logic - A lot of times I transfer a SQ and some damaged planes are left behind with some good pilots. Maybe the field is about to be captured, or is out of supplies or maybe I've moved the support troops but for what ever reason the damaged planes will never get repaired. I want to get the pilots back in action and clean up all the fragmented units I have scattered about. This option would solve this problem.

Rick

_____________________________

Former War in the Pacific Test Team Manager and Beta Tester for War in the East.


(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 14
- 8/17/2002 8:34:49 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by chrisp
[B]

Try this -- it's a word doc I put together listing all the bases that have a value of least 1 in either category. I got the information from the scenario editor.

Chris P. [/B][/QUOTE]

Chrisp, yer a gem, ruby - thanks!!!!

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 15
- 8/17/2002 3:09:09 PM   
mark24

 

Posts: 171
Joined: 8/4/2002
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by chrisp
[B]

Try this -- it's a word doc I put together listing all the bases that have a value of least 1 in either category. I got the information from the scenario editor.

Chris P. [/B][/QUOTE]

Chris,

Excellent stuff! Thanks, mate. :)

Mark

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 16
- 8/17/2002 3:43:28 PM   
BPRE

 

Posts: 624
Joined: 10/16/2000
From: Stockholm,Sweden
Status: offline 		Hi,

Don't forget that if you own the beach hex you can left-click on it and get this information.

I think the game works both ways in this area. As soon as the enemy has built a base on a hex you know the potential and the exact size of the present base even without any reconaissance or anything.

IMO it's not a game-breaker either way and I'm perfectly happy with the game as it is.

/BPRE

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 17
- 8/17/2002 9:27:10 PM   
TIMJOT

 

Posts: 1822
Joined: 4/30/2001
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kid
[B]

I would like to add the ability to withdraw a unit even if it is the only unit of its type in the hex. I suggest a waning message that says something like "There is no place to transfer the aircraft. If you withdraw the pilots, the aircraft will be destroyed. Do you still wish to withdraw the pilots? Yes No"

My logic - A lot of times I transfer a SQ and some damaged planes are left behind with some good pilots. Maybe the field is about to be captured, or is out of supplies or maybe I've moved the support troops but for what ever reason the damaged planes will never get repaired. I want to get the pilots back in action and clean up all the fragmented units I have scattered about. This option would solve this problem.

Rick [/B][/QUOTE]

I second that. It would be very helpful to be able to abandon those wrecks left behind. Especially becuase the game has a nasty habit of leaving your best pilots behind with the wrecks. I think it might have something to do with fatigue.

(in reply to Long Lance)
Post #: 18
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Patch-after-next-Patch-Wishlist Page: [1]
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

0.859