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: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes

 
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] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 12:24:39 AM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline 		Just so I get your view point right Oleg, you want all guns that could theoretically be used to be given the naval rating. You don't really care about the 155mm itself?

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 91
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 12:31:45 AM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Just so I get your view point right Oleg, you want all guns that could theoretically be used to be given the naval rating. You don't really care about the 155mm itself?


No quite the opposite. Im using the parable of IJA army guns shooting at ships to show how ridicolous current situation (with US army units) is. I'd suggest having two versions of 155 in the database: "normal" 155 to be given to field arty army units such as 144th FA Rgt, and 155 CD gun (same weapon, but in specialised CD role) to be given to specialised CD units (I notice in the database there are some specialised CD units on the West Coast equipped with 155).

NOW, there ARE actually two 155s in the database: 155mm field gun, and 155mm CD gun. I assume it is the same weapon, in two different roles.

Problem is, both 155s are classed as "naval weapons" and work like CD guns.

Thus, you get units like US army 144th Arty Rgt functioning like ship killing machines (I don't know how good they are in their intended role, as mud-digging "pure" arty).

O.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 92
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 5:50:37 AM   
Damien Thorn

 

Posts: 1107
Joined: 7/24/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

Talked with Joel. Adding routine to update saved game device file data, using key press in the game. Must update each saved game individually and only with key press (to avoid corrupting 3rd party scenarios). Update will only apply to devices. Will be in build 1.54 (already finished 1.53).

Bye...

Michael Wood




Please make it so that it only updated the devices that changed and doesn't write the entire device OoB over the scenario. That way it will work with custom scenarios where we may have changed some of the devices (assuming we didn't change one that you are updating).

(in reply to Mike Wood)
Post #: 93
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 8:19:35 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		"NOW, there ARE actually two 155s in the database: 155mm field gun, and 155mm CD gun. I assume it is the same weapon, in two different roles."

You might want to look at the database. The 155mm CD gun has greater AP capability, less soft target capability and less (substantially less) range than the 155mm field gun. I suspect that the CD gun listed in the database is a european design since, as I have mentioned before, the CD batteries at Soerabaja are using it.

Since we know for sure that the US 155mm was designed for CD work (as evidenced in earlier posts on this thread), it makes sense to create a new 155mm US CD gun in the database, one using the data of the 155mm Long Tom.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Damien Thorn)
Post #: 94
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 2:53:35 PM   
Mike Wood


Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline 		Hello...

Finished coding that bit. The option is on the in game prefs screen and adds all changes, not just devices, to the saved game. Changes are hard coded and not read from orders of battle file to avoid security issues in secure PBEM games.

Bye...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

Talked with Joel. Adding routine to update saved game device file data, using key press in the game. Must update each saved game individually and only with key press (to avoid corrupting 3rd party scenarios). Update will only apply to devices. Will be in build 1.54 (already finished 1.53).

Bye...

Michael Wood




Please make it so that it only updated the devices that changed and doesn't write the entire device OoB over the scenario. That way it will work with custom scenarios where we may have changed some of the devices (assuming we didn't change one that you are updating).


(in reply to Damien Thorn)
Post #: 95
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 3:46:49 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline 		I'm not sure I understood everything you wrote, but you rule

Now, allow me to be somewhat "unpleasant", and ask why no one thought of this before? It seemed like relatively easy to implement, and my personal opinion is "restarting because of OOB changes" was (or "is") biggest complaint regarding "customer satisfaction" (or whichever term you want to use) with this game?

O.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

Finished coding that bit. The option is on the in game prefs screen and adds all changes, not just devices, to the saved game. Changes are hard coded and not read from orders of battle file to avoid security issues in secure PBEM games.

Bye...

Michael Wood



_____________________________


(in reply to Mike Wood)
Post #: 96
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 4:48:50 PM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
quote:

Now, allow me to be somewhat "unpleasant", and ask why no one thought of this before? It seemed like relatively easy to implement, and my personal opinion is "restarting because of OOB changes" was (or "is") biggest complaint regarding "customer satisfaction" (or whichever term you want to use) with this game?


It works because it is a small number of well defined changes. The OOB changes in the major patches have been multiple pages worth which make doing this type of thing unrealistic.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 97
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 4:50:38 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		My understanding (and it could be wrong) is all this will do is change device stats.

i.e. the update made to Firfly manouver in old games will now have the latest stat applied to any ireflies that arrive, the extra speed of nates will now be there.

The OOB wont change in a game if you look at a reinforcement que pre and post they should be identical its only the stats of the individual squads/ guns or plans that change.

Im not clear whether the enhanced rates would apply i.e. 20/month CW Squads, 40/month Aus Squads post the update or will it still be 40/80 and if so what happens to the existing stockpiled pools

I dont see how OOB's could be updated in current without really causing problems with withdrawn aircraft sqns or chinese respawned units of units in transit from SF to Karachi.

Also lets not forget what happes to units that have already deployed and are holding a critical point in the line I would really hate to upgrade and o look the mythical 3rd NZ Div holding Lunga has just dissappeared.

Mike Wood would have to be an incredible programmer not mess up lots of PBEM's doing this update the OOB thing and I for one will be being very very carefull using it as I can see lots of areas where it could go wrong as it will be extremely complicated.

Of course Mike could be an incredible programmer and I may be worrying about nothing....

Andy

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 98
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 4:55:41 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Just re read mikes last post looks like im wrong and it will apply OOB changes as well.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 99
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 5:01:40 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline 		Please note, this is only for what will be the latest set of changes. This does not include any previous data changes, just those that will be in the next update.

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 100
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 5:04:52 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Thanks Erik that clears up all my worries I couldnt see how the thousands of little OOB tweaks from 1.0 - 1.5 could be changed.

I think Im happier that they aint as I think its a herculean task if its just any 1.6 changes then thats a lot simpler


(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 101
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 5:29:09 PM   
Charbroiled


Posts: 1181
Joined: 10/15/2004
From: Oregon
Status: offline 		My 2 cents on the 155mm issue.

IMHO, I would be less concerned about whether the 155mm could fire at ships or not, but I am concerned if the guns are replaced overnight after they were destroyed by a bombardment.

Is this the case???

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 102
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 5:34:05 PM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Charbroiled

My 2 cents on the 155mm issue.

IMHO, I would be less concerned about whether the 155mm could fire at ships or not, but I am concerned if the guns are replaced overnight after they were destroyed by a bombardment.

Is this the case???


That would be dependant on how much supply happened to be available. As Bombardment also destroys supply, it becomes an interesting puzzle ...

a) Air attack against the port & airfield to destroy the guns/sap the supply

b) Naval Bombardment when you think you have succeeded at a)

c) Finally ... invade assuming both a) & b) were successful.

From looking at AARs, a lot of people tend to skip a) & b)

(in reply to Charbroiled)
Post #: 103
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 7:11:51 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline 		Allowing battleships into "transport TFs" would be a bonus, as this is not the case at present. BBs were used for call fire support almost exclusively by USN and Allied fleets. Is this being done or considered?

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 104
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 8:06:34 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Allowing battleships into "transport TFs" would be a bonus, as this is not the case at present. BBs were used for call fire support almost exclusively by USN and Allied fleets. Is this being done or considered?

GREAT QUESTION RON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(but you have still done more to,etc,etc,etc....)LMAO.....

_____________________________




(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 105
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 8:52:23 PM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline 		As it is not a "critical" bug, it is not being considered.

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 106
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 8:58:00 PM   
medicff

 

Posts: 710
Joined: 9/11/2004
From: WPB, Florida
Status: offline 		I have been following this beta forum for the improvements, bugs and changes although I do not have time to particpate now. However, I have noticed several OOB/replacement rate changes which are very appropriate but change the balance, namely the P-38, B-17's. Any consideration of reducing the massive power of naval bombardments to more RL proportions as well.

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 107
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 9:27:50 PM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
quote:

NOW, there ARE actually two 155s in the database: 155mm field gun, and 155mm CD gun. I assume it is the same weapon, in two different roles.


No, one is the 155mm GPF (M1917A1 french with usa mods & M1918MI us licence built) and the other is the 155mm Long Tom (M1).

Both are CD capable. Both were used in that role. The M1 had a better range but didn't come in until later in the war from what I have seen.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 108
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 9:50:20 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		after loading and sailing the transport TF, rondevous with a surface combat TF, change the transport type to escort and transfer the BB in......you now have BB escorts.

_____________________________


(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 109
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 10:00:55 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Both are CD capable. Both were used in that role.


Were they used in that role by army field artillery units? You know, almost anything from light machine gun to Exocet and Harpoon missiles is "CD capable". If you don't make distinction between specialised application of any particular weapon you get skewed results.

But was it used in that role and is the field arty ability to sink dozens of ships realistic?

Other issue may be that field arty may be unusable in its intended role if equipped with "naval guns" (I don't know how much "naval guns" participate in land combat).

O.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 110
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 10:33:19 PM   
Bradley7735


Posts: 2073
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

after loading and sailing the transport TF, rondevous with a surface combat TF, change the transport type to escort and transfer the BB in......you now have BB escorts.


I didn't think Escort TF's could unload. So, with BB's in the escort task force, you can't change back to transport TF. So, you can't have BB's in the same TF that is unloading. Hence, the BB in direct fire while unloading isn't possible.

(unless escort TF can unload)

_____________________________

The older I get, the better I was.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 111
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 11:00:57 PM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Both are CD capable. Both were used in that role.


Were they used in that role by army field artillery units? You know, almost anything from light machine gun to Exocet and Harpoon missiles is "CD capable". If you don't make distinction between specialised application of any particular weapon you get skewed results.

But was it used in that role and is the field arty ability to sink dozens of ships realistic?

Other issue may be that field arty may be unusable in its intended role if equipped with "naval guns" (I don't know how much "naval guns" participate in land combat).

O.


Units equipped 155mms: 301st FA (Philippine Army), 86th FA (Philippine Scouts), the 91st Coast Artillery (Philippine Scouts) and the 92nd CA (Philippine Scouts). (notice 2 FA units and 2 CD units - same gun)

Only the 86th is represented as a separate unit in the OOB, the other 21 guns are rolled up into the Corregidor defences.

The ones at Bataan were definitely used as Field Artillery against Japan.

You'll also find them in more exotic places like the Panama canal hence the term "Panama mount" (a faster rail system to allow the gun to traverse over a wider arc.

< Message edited by Mr.Frag -- 6/14/2005 11:01:25 PM >

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 112
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 11:14:51 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735


I didn't think Escort TF's could unload. So, with BB's in the escort task force, you can't change back to transport TF. So, you can't have BB's in the same TF that is unloading. Hence, the BB in direct fire while unloading isn't possible.

(unless escort TF can unload)


I havn't done it in a while so i may be wrong about the "escort TF" part but there is a way to merge a TF with BB's in it into a transport TF. I'll check it out when i get home.

_____________________________


(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 113
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 11:30:26 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Both are CD capable. Both were used in that role.


Were they used in that role by army field artillery units? You know, almost anything from light machine gun to Exocet and Harpoon missiles is "CD capable". If you don't make distinction between specialised application of any particular weapon you get skewed results.

But was it used in that role and is the field arty ability to sink dozens of ships realistic?

Other issue may be that field arty may be unusable in its intended role if equipped with "naval guns" (I don't know how much "naval guns" participate in land combat).

O.

Oleg....I offered at least 2 threads showing the use of the American 155's as coast defense was both SOP and common practice..Please look at those threads before making wrongful assumptions..It is NOT the same as making it seem anybody with a slingshot might be considered "coast defense"..The guns in question were used BOTH for coast defense and field artillery....
Please also note,(on those threads),that while special mounts were available,the mounts themselves (and emplacements) were only an added luxury-IF AVAILABLE,and that the types of mounts used were NOT of themselves a consideration,(except for accuracies' sake,maybe)..
Once you have studied the threads I offered,and other available and HISTORICAL sources, one might ask,what you fail to understand??

< Message edited by m10bob -- 6/14/2005 11:31:53 PM >

_____________________________




(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 114
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 11:35:16 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		This thread is threatening to get too long.

Oleg, am I to understand that what you want is in essence:

any gun(device), regardless of whether or not it "could" be used as a CD gun, should not have the same effectiveness as a dedicated CD gun (dedicated defined as, crews trained, guns positioned to fire on ships etc)

Army weapon = non CD, should fire on troops, maybe ships (reduced effectiveness)
Naval weapon = guns placed ideally for CD work. can fire on troops and ships @ full effectiveness.



_____________________________


(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 115
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 11:37:58 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Units equipped 155mms: 301st FA (Philippine Army), 86th FA (Philippine Scouts), the 91st Coast Artillery (Philippine Scouts) and the 92nd CA (Philippine Scouts). (notice 2 FA units and 2 CD units - same gun)

Only the 86th is represented as a separate unit in the OOB, the other 21 guns are rolled up into the Corregidor defences.

The ones at Bataan were definitely used as Field Artillery against Japan.

You'll also find them in more exotic places like the Panama canal hence the term "Panama mount" (a faster rail system to allow the gun to traverse over a wider arc.


There are more units equipped with 155mm gun in the OOB, some of then certainly unsuited for CD role.

O.


_____________________________


(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 116
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 11:38:48 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

This thread is threatening to get too long.

Oleg, am I to understand that what you want is in essence:

any gun(device), regardless of whether or not it "could" be used as a CD gun, should not have the same effectiveness as a dedicated CD gun (dedicated defined as, crews trained, guns positioned to fire on ships etc)

Army weapon = non CD, should fire on troops, maybe ships (reduced effectiveness)
Naval weapon = guns placed ideally for CD work. can fire on troops and ships @ full effectiveness.



In essence yes.

O.



_____________________________


(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 117
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 11:44:20 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

In essence yes.



Sounds reasonable given the level of abstraction in the game. Are you still going to use your BetaTester Fanboy club membership card as fuel for the fireplace?


_____________________________


(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 118
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 11:45:43 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Both are CD capable. Both were used in that role.


Were they used in that role by army field artillery units? You know, almost anything from light machine gun to Exocet and Harpoon missiles is "CD capable". If you don't make distinction between specialised application of any particular weapon you get skewed results.

But was it used in that role and is the field arty ability to sink dozens of ships realistic?

Other issue may be that field arty may be unusable in its intended role if equipped with "naval guns" (I don't know how much "naval guns" participate in land combat).

O.

Oleg....I offered at least 2 threads showing the use of the American 155's as coast defense was both SOP and common practice..


What's "SOP"?

"Common practice"? Yes it was common practice for dedicated CD units. Was it "common practice" for army field arty regiments, like 144th FA, to engage shipping in dedicated CD role, with fantastic effectiveness? No it wasn't.

You know, I find Brady's arguments regarding kaitens, midget subs, various suicide boats etc. - usually just amusing (or even ridicolous), but faced with this logic in the Allied fanboy club, I really wonder why don't we have various stupid suicide stuff in IJN aresenal as per Brady's requests?

After all, its use was "common practice", wasn't it?

Then, we must allow for ridicolous situations like massed IJ army suicide boats sinking 30 APs and shattering invasion forces by the coast of Okinawa in 45. Why, their commander was aggressive and clever...

That's what we have here - US army field arty units killing 30 APs just because they happen to posses the same tube (notice - same tube, not even the 100% same weapon) as some of their CD buddies (in specialised CD units etc.).

O.

_____________________________


(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 119
RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes - 6/14/2005 11:47:48 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

In essence yes.



Sounds reasonable given the level of abstraction in the game. Are you still going to use your BetaTester Fanboy club membership card as fuel for the fireplace?



I burned it already, by the page 2 of this thread

If this issue is resolved in sensible manner Ill have to apply for the new one...

O.


_____________________________


(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Significance of v1.52 OOB changes Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   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