RE: naval bombardment.

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: naval bombardment.

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 >> Tech Support >> RE: naval bombardment.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/12/2013 9:32:31 AM

Miller

Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Whoops. Busted?

I didn't even notice this at first, someone else on the forum pointed it out to me. Is there a legitimate way to get this unit out of China?

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 61

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/12/2013 9:42:28 AM

Puhis

Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

Isn't it impossible to transport permanently restricted units? But Hong Kong Def force start as 3 battalions. Is it possible to transport those battalions out of China, and combine them later?

(in reply to Miller)

Post #: 62

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/12/2013 9:49:56 AM

Miller

Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

Isn't it impossible to transport permanently restricted units? But Hong Kong Def force start as 3 battalions. Is it possible to transport those battalions out of China, and combine them later?

Ah, that could be the reason.

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 63

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/12/2013 9:50:11 AM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

I have no clue. Only thing I can think of is the following way. But I�m not sure it works that way?

He could have walked them to Singers. Changed a base on Sumatra to the same command. Flown out whatever could be flown out to the base on Sumatra and then disbanded the rest? The fragment flown out would then revert to the "main unit" and should be able to fill out with the stuff disbanded at Singers?

Having done that he could then possible repeat that with more Chinese perm restricted units. But I�m not sure you can change bases to restricted commands? If so I would consider it a seriously flaw in the game design. And a clear abuse of the engine. If its possible the Japanese could fly out HI perm restricted units to other locations. Quite gamey if you ask me!

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 64

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/12/2013 9:50:59 AM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

Isn't it impossible to transport permanently restricted units? But Hong Kong Def force start as 3 battalions. Is it possible to transport those battalions out of China, and combine them later?

But wouldn�t the combined unit retain the same HQ of the battalions? So the main question would still be how he got perm restricted units to Sumatra.

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 11/12/2013 10:51:28 AM >

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 65

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/12/2013 10:01:23 AM

Puhis

Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

Those battalions don't have heavy guns, so it might be possible to air transport them. But still, there a problem how to get restricted units into plane (in other words, how to change the target base's command).

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 66

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/12/2013 10:54:48 AM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

Those battalions don't have heavy guns, so it might be possible to air transport them. But still, there a problem how to get restricted units into plane (in other words, how to change the target base's command).

Restricted units, even perma restricted (white text) can be air transported from one controlled base to another controlled base. I do it all the time with the Dutch, moving their entire army to Timor.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 67

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/12/2013 11:19:56 AM

Miller

Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

Those battalions don't have heavy guns, so it might be possible to air transport them. But still, there a problem how to get restricted units into plane (in other words, how to change the target base's command).

Restricted units, even perma restricted (white text) can be air transported from one controlled base to another controlled base. I do it all the time with the Dutch, moving their entire army to Timor.

So it looks like he has changed a couple of bases to China command HQ in order to move the unit by air. I'm not even sure if it was worth paying all those PPs to do it in all honesty.....

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 68

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/12/2013 11:51:38 AM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

Those battalions don't have heavy guns, so it might be possible to air transport them. But still, there a problem how to get restricted units into plane (in other words, how to change the target base's command).

Restricted units, even perma restricted (white text) can be air transported from one controlled base to another controlled base. I do it all the time with the Dutch, moving their entire army to Timor.

So it looks like he has changed a couple of bases to China command HQ in order to move the unit by air. I'm not even sure if it was worth paying all those PPs to do it in all honesty.....

PP cost is determind by the value of the base. If you look for a small, cheap base to fly into, are ok doing a lot of walking, move only units that have no large devices, and of course if your plan is not just one unit but to move a lot of units ... so unless you have an HR for PP's to cross boundaries this could be ok. As noted, a lot of players use air to move Dutch units or to garrison nearby HI islands.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Miller)

Post #: 69

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/12/2013 11:58:24 AM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

And now I'm laughing even more ... a 6 gun unit (a few 6" and 4" guns) to take on a TF?!?? Yeah, sorry. Those guys were hunkering down in the jungle praying they wouldn't be spotted by the TF and blasted, they weren't thinking about opening fire.

I'll be willing to bet that Gary's opportunity fire has a modifier based upon odds unless being directly attacked. That little unit might fire on an unescorted transport TF ... but even a single Fletcher would be enough to scare it back into their foxholes.

(I admit that Fletchers scare the @#$%# out of me unless I have Kongo minimum to face them!

)

< Message edited by PaxMondo -- 11/12/2013 1:00:12 PM >

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 70

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/12/2013 12:11:32 PM

Puhis

Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

Those guns are not CD guns, they are infanty field guns.

Hong Kong Def force is just a regiment or garrison unit with couple big guns. It's not a big deal. However, what else is possible to move out from China just changing command of couple bases? Independent regiments for sure, also infantry brigades? Troops worth 1500-2000 AVs?

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 71

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/14/2013 6:41:40 AM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

Miller,
Did you found out how he did it?

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 72

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/14/2013 11:18:44 AM

Miller

Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Miller,
Did you found out how he did it?

No. He wont answer any messages I send, not even to confirm the game is over.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 73

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/14/2013 11:22:25 AM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller
No. He wont answer any messages I send, not even to confirm the game is over.

Sorry to hear that.

(in reply to Miller)

Post #: 74

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/14/2013 11:53:34 AM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Miller,
Did you found out how he did it?

No. He wont answer any messages I send, not even to confirm the game is over.

Sorry to learn that. I hope it wasn't the rough treatment he got here that led to his quitting, although I suspect as much is true.

Changing control on a base very remote from a given command in order to be able to air transport a key unit to a key strait to interdict that waterway seems pretty gamey to me.

My use of air transport to shuttle the Dutch is between bases already within the limits of legitimately controlled Dutch territory for the purpose of better concentrating their dispersed forces. I have never seen it as gamey.

I did consider once changing one of the Timor barrier islands north of Darwin to the Philippines command to be able to air transport some of that doomed garrison to a locale where I might make a better stand, but decided it was too gamey and never did it.

There is nothing wrong with dreaming up creative ways to use the game mechanics to accomplish things, one just needs to use some reason and common sense on deciding what is good play and what is abusive exploitation.

< Message edited by HansBolter -- 11/14/2013 12:54:59 PM >

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to Miller)

Post #: 75

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/20/2013 2:04:12 AM

bigred

Posts: 3599
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller
No. He wont answer any messages I send, not even to confirm the game is over.

Sorry to hear that.

Everybody makes mistakes. Mistakes in the game and on this forum. In game we learn to suck it up and keep on playing, not for ourself but for our partner.

On this forum, several times I have made a dumb comment or violated some rule and then I have had to apologize or make a retraction so I can continue to participate.

_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 76

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/21/2013 9:43:01 PM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

On this forum, several times I have made a dumb comment ...

+10

Pretty sure it coincides with 'oldtimers' ...

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to bigred)

Post #: 77

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/29/2013 11:52:52 PM

Mac Linehan

Posts: 1484
Joined: 12/19/2004
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline

Gents -

Have learned much about the mechanics of CD fire and other concepts from this thread - coming from those who would know. Always learning more about this awesome game.

Miller - hang in there, time heals all wounds. I will trust that you will be able to resume your game.

MDDgames - learn, forgive and move on. I have made more than my share of mistakes and errors, embarrassing myself on this forum. You will not meet a sharper, more knowledgeable group of folks anywhere else. We are glad to have you with us, Sir.

Phuhis - I like your new look...<grin>

Mac

< Message edited by Mac Linehan -- 11/30/2013 12:54:54 AM >

_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 78

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/30/2013 11:20:12 AM

Miller

Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mac Linehan

Gents -

Have learned much about the mechanics of CD fire and other concepts from this thread - coming from those who would know. Always learning more about this awesome game.

Miller - hang in there, time heals all wounds. I will trust that you will be able to resume your game.

MDDgames - learn, forgive and move on. I have made more than my share of mistakes and errors, embarrassing myself on this forum. You will not meet a sharper, more knowledgeable group of folks anywhere else. We are glad to have you with us, Sir.

Phuhis - I like your new look...<grin>

Mac

I'm afraid the game is over, he refuses to continue "Until this issue is fixed".

(in reply to Mac Linehan)

Post #: 79

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/30/2013 12:14:53 PM

Grollub

Posts: 6674
Joined: 10/9/2005
From: Lulea, Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

MDD,

I would take a closer look at what Symon (JWE) wrote. As I understand it they have talked about your issue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Symon
Briefly, michaelm won't respond to this because it is not a bug. Don Bowen wrote the code for the Naval Team, including this part. We all still chat.

If the guy who wrote the code tells you its not a bug its time to get out of the denial stage and move into the acceptance stage. Two developers and a myriad of very experienced players have told you repeatedly this is clearly NOT a bug. You have been given a very detailed explanation many times now. Your stubborn refusal to accept this do make you look kind of childish.

Learn from this and move on. This time Miller simply outplayed you. All things considered it was a pretty cheaply bought lesson. You lost perhaps 50 planes on the ground. So what? You have plenty more where those came from.

If you have a hard time dealing with petty non issues like this I think you will struggle even more as your game progresses. I think you will have a much more fun time playing the game if you changed your attitude towards it. The mentality that the game and everyone else is wrong while you are right will not get you far and only cause you grief. Learn from this, play on and enjoy the game instead?

From what I can tell Miller is a highly experienced and skilled player. Use the opportunity you have been given to learn from him instead of wasting time on the forum trying to change the game.

Good luck!

It seems your opponent didn't listen to this excellent advice

_____________________________

�Not mastering metaphores is like cooking pasta when the train is delayed"

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 80

RE: naval bombardment. - 12/1/2013 1:18:32 AM

MDDgames

Posts: 90
Joined: 7/6/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller
No. He wont answer any messages I send, not even to confirm the game is over.

Sorry to hear that.

Actually, I answered every one of his mails.

As for the China unit on Java, I combine the 2 Bns to form the unit (the 3rd was killed), Flew them to Miri, and then flew them to Java. Then I turned on reinforcements and thats all there was to it. And I told Miller that also.

I noticed that not 1 regular Jap player has said they think its working as designed, only people that regularly play allies. What a surprise.

God forbid that something should slow down the allied advance (like mines or shore guns that actually fire).

quote:

I hope it wasn't the rough treatment he got here that led to his quitting, although I suspect as much is true.

LOL. I have said it a few times now, I guess people cant comprehend what they read. so I will say it one more time.

Michaels is the only opinion that matters on this issue.

Hope that was clear enough. The rest of you, I could care less what you think. And until michael says its working as designed, then I consider the game broken.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 81

RE: naval bombardment. - 12/1/2013 2:29:12 AM

CaptDave

Posts: 659
Joined: 6/21/2002
From: Federal Way, WA
Status: offline

I've kept quiet until now, but I've reached my limit. Michael's opinion is NOT the only one that matters; it's up to the original designers to decide whether the game is working as designed. They have said several times in this thread that it is.

Furthermore, if you're the only player that can't accept it the way it is, then you're not going to be high on the priority list for getting your issue "fixed." Software maintenance is all about prioritization, and you, sir, do not have the clout to change that.

This entire thread you have come across as a spoiled brat, convinced that yours is the only player's opinion that matters and that if the only developer maintaining the program doesn't kowtow to your conceit then the game is broken. I would highly recommend that you learn some etiquette if you want to receive any respect from the denizens of this game.

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 82

RE: naval bombardment. - 12/1/2013 8:11:36 AM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames
I noticed that not 1 regular Jap player has said they think its working as designed, only people that regularly play allies. What a surprise.

I think I can explain this.

MichaelM owns a basement located under a demolished hut in the Australian outback. There the truly experienced Japanese PBEM players are kept. They are allowed a single post per month to reply to requests in the opponents wanted section. The rest of the time they are forced to practice tortorous mental strenght techniques and yoga to prevent them from collapsing into devastated "its borked" whiners at the first sight of adverse circumstances. If you don�t believe me ask Miller, he is one of those really experienced IJ players but was able to escape a couple of months ago.

Btw, did you know the moonlandings are fake?

_____________________________

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 83

RE: naval bombardment. - 12/1/2013 8:25:04 AM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames
Michaels is the only opinion that matters on this issue.
Hope that was clear enough. The rest of you, I could care less what you think. And until michael says its working as designed, then I consider the game broken.

From what I could deduct from Symons (JWE) reply to you he and michealm have communicated about your perceived bug.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Symon
Briefly, michaelm won't respond to this because it is not a bug. Don Bowen wrote the code for the Naval Team, including this part. We all still chat.

Now if the guy who wrote the actual game code for this tells you its not a bug then its not a bug. Couldn�t be clearer.

Man up and simply admit you have been outplayed and want to surrender instead of using this as a way out.

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 84

RE: naval bombardment. - 12/1/2013 9:48:30 AM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

I would like to add my two cents to the DP guns discussion.

As an Allied player, who loves to restart the grand campaign, I use the British DDs in Hong Kong at the start of the war to pound the Canton airfield. Why? Well, I am paranoid that the Japanese light bombers stationed there will kill my light industry in China. I also vector B-17s from Clark Field and Chinese DB-3s from Kweyiang in order to suppress the Canton airfield. Anyway, I made those DD bombing runs dozens of times with the bombing range set to 5 for the first week of the war. Now, as the Japanese players may know, there is this Canton Special Naval BF which is stuffed to the gills with DP guns (an Allied spy known as Tracker identified 28 DP guns in this unit). I can say from my experience that for every 10 bombing runs by the DDs, they were engaged by the DP guns on 2-3 occasions, so the chance to be engaged by DP guns was 20-30%. The DP fire was ineffective (no hits on DDs). It was only the combination of Canton minefield and undetected midget subs that wore those DDs after some time. So, three unarmored DDs on a river with lousy guns against 28 Japanese DP guns.

Now, the bombing runs were performed during night phase so I reckon the DP gun crews were asleep 70% of the time.

< Message edited by Yaab -- 12/1/2013 10:48:48 AM >

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 85

RE: naval bombardment. - 12/1/2013 10:46:55 AM

MDDgames

Posts: 90
Joined: 7/6/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

I would like to add my two cents to the DP guns discussion.

As an Allied player, who loves to restart the grand campaign, I use the British DDs in Hong Kong at the start of the war to pound the Canton airfield. Why? Well, I am paranoid that the Japanese light bombers stationed there will kill my light industry in China. I also vector B-17s from Clark Field and Chinese DB-3s from Kweyiang in order to suppress the Canton airfield. Anyway, I made those DD bombing runs dozens of times with the bombing range set to 5 for the first week of the war. Now, as the Japanese players may know, there is this Canton Special Naval BF which is stuffed to the gills with DP guns (an Allied spy known as Tracker identified 28 DP guns in this unit). I can say from my experience that for every 10 bombing runs by the DDs, they were engaged by the DP guns on 2-3 occasions, so the chance to be engaged by DP guns was 20-30%. The DP fire was ineffective (no hits on DDs). It was only the combination of Canton minefield and undetected midget subs that wore those DDs after some time. So, three unarmored DDs on a river with lousy guns against 28 Japanese DP guns.

Now, the bombing runs were performed during night phase so I reckon the DP gun crews were asleep 70% of the time.

Yeah, I know what Dons opinion is. I know what Elfs opinions were also, and THAT didnt stop Michael from fixing it even though it was working as HE wanted also.

Give me 1 example in history where shore guns didnt fire in 1943 at bombarding ships (either side, any theater). I am unaware of any, so please educate me. Otherwise, Michael, please fix this....

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 86

RE: naval bombardment. - 12/1/2013 12:24:33 PM

Miller

Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

No, sorry MDDgames, but you didn't reply to all my emails. I asked whether you wanted the game to continue and got a two week silence in reply. I then sent one final and (admittedly) insulting message that finally roused you into a reply. Regarding that CD unit at Merak, I never even bothered to mention that to you at any time, so how could you have told me how you got it there? You never did because I never asked.

Bottom line is this, the tide was beginning to turn and you wanted out. This (non) issue with CD units was just a smokescreen to get out of the game.

You have had your answer, yet you seem to think that only Michael's word is gospel. How I would love him to come on here and confirm things one way or another........

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 87

RE: naval bombardment. - 12/1/2013 12:41:32 PM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

By the way, do DP guns use direct or indirect fire? Are they positioned on coast lines like CD guns, or are they employed somewhere to the rear (i.e close to an airfield)? Since they can shoot at ships and aircraft, they could sit closer to the middle of the hex, guarding airfield installations.

< Message edited by Yaab -- 12/1/2013 2:29:59 PM >

(in reply to Miller)

Post #: 88

RE: naval bombardment. - 12/1/2013 1:28:55 PM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

How I would love him to come on here and confirm things one way or another........

Actually, better this way. As John said, the original dev team still all talk (as we all know. Sheesh, I even see Ian lurking here once in a while). The dev responsible for this alogrithm has replied, but this person didn't like the answer.

You know, I gotta a 4yo. When I say "no" he runs to his momma hoping that she will give a "better" answer. Mom and I are on the same page though ... kinda like the dev team.

< Message edited by PaxMondo -- 12/1/2013 2:32:36 PM >

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Miller)

Post #: 89

RE: naval bombardment. - 12/1/2013 4:35:18 PM

MDDgames

Posts: 90
Joined: 7/6/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

How I would love him to come on here and confirm things one way or another........

Actually, better this way. As John said, the original dev team still all talk (as we all know. Sheesh, I even see Ian lurking here once in a while). The dev responsible for this alogrithm has replied, but this person didn't like the answer.

You know, I gotta a 4yo. When I say "no" he runs to his momma hoping that she will give a "better" answer. Mom and I are on the same page though ... kinda like the dev team.

quote:

Give me 1 example in history where shore guns didnt fire in 1943 at bombarding ships (either side, any theater). I am unaware of any, so please educate me. Otherwise, Michael, please fix this....

I noticed you didnt answer THIS:

Give me 1 example in history where shore guns didnt fire in 1943 at bombarding ships (either side, any theater). I am unaware of any, so please educate me. Otherwise, Michael, please fix this....

Why not? Could it be because it never happened in history maybe? So the "game design" is nothing but Dons/JWEs whim and has nothing to do with history. At least lets set the record straight on this. Don/JWE are AFBs and didnt want anything to slow down the allied advance. No other explanation for this AND the fact that there are nearly as many minesweepers in the game as mines....

So, unless you can answer the question of when in HISTORY did shore guns not return fire at a bombarding TF, then really, you have nothing to say on the matter. And again, Michaels is the ONLY opinion that matters.

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 90