What is wrong with japanese radars?

What is wrong with japanese radars? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945

Message

zuikaku -> What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 11:15:25 AM)
I've read a lots of posts on this forum regarding japanese radars. So, what is wrong with them? are you sure they don't work? Are all types flawed or only type21?

Terminus -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 11:18:50 AM)
It's only the Type 13, and no, it won't work. Supposed to be Japan's only Air Search Radar, and it isn't.

zuikaku -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 4:38:20 PM)
And, what is the difference between surface and air search radar in the game? I don't know how to know which is which

Terminus -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 4:45:38 PM)
If you check their data in the editor, look at the "Penetration" data field. Any radar device with a Penetration value of 500 is an air search radar.

Sardaukar -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 4:48:15 PM)
About easiest thing to fix with editor. Switch between air serch and surface search is 500 or 0 in Penetration field. Air search=500. Surface Search =0. Works only for Radars with type "Surface Radar". tho.

zuikaku -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 5:05:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sardaukar About easiest thing to fix with editor. Switch between air serch and surface search is 500 or 0 in Penetration field. Air search=500. Surface Search =0. Works only for Radars with type "Surface Radar". tho. Yes, but that won't help me in my current game (scen 15) ,now in early '43 [:@]

DD696 -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 5:09:30 PM)
Yep. [8\|] That is why we need to have the in-game editor. Without the ability to change things such as this on the fly, the game does degenerate into a lesson in frustration......and that is why I am The InGame Editor FanBoy.

Ron Saueracker -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 7:02:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DD696 Yep. [8\|] That is why we need to have the in-game editor. Without the ability to change things such as this on the fly, the game does degenerate into a lesson in frustration......and that is why I am The InGame Editor FanBoy. You need a Fanboy Sig then![:)]

DD696 -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 7:13:35 PM)
I've requested that one be made up. RougeUSMC said he would give it a try when things settle down for him. To me this issue is the greatest drawback to playing the game. You get so many hundreds of hours put into a game only to find that some stupid little error (well, just to clarify: many stupid little errors but they are generally found one at a time: and with the new versions of CHS, and particularily RHS) jumps up and bites you, and how much time do I waste away before I have to do a restart to fix the inevitable error................... which could easily be fixed IF we had the InGame editor.

BLUESBOB -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 7:55:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DD696 Yep. [8\|] That is why we need to have the in-game editor. Without the ability to change things such as this on the fly, the game does degenerate into a lesson in frustration......and that is why I am The InGame Editor FanBoy. Having an in-game editor sure would be nice. It's certainly a real drag going six months in a game and then finding a something you'd really like to change. Right now you only have two options, grit your teeth and bare with the flaw you do not like, or correct the flaw...but start over and have to go through six months of war all over again. I don't like either of the current options.

BrucePowers -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 8:40:16 PM)
What's wrong with Japanese Radars? Bad vacuum tubes. (They didn't suck enough.[:D]) Okay, I promise I won't do that again.[:'(]

rtrapasso -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 8:44:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BrucePowers What's wrong with Japanese Radars? Bad vacuum tubes. (They didn't suck enough.[:D]) Okay, I promise I won't do that again.[:'(] [:D] [:D]

jwilkerson -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 9:30:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zuikaku quote: ORIGINAL: Sardaukar About easiest thing to fix with editor. Switch between air serch and surface search is 500 or 0 in Penetration field. Air search=500. Surface Search =0. Works only for Radars with type "Surface Radar". tho. Yes, but that won't help me in my current game (scen 15) ,now in early '43 [:@] We are considering a comprehensive database update (one day) which would include fix to Type 13 (among many items). But also as has been pointed out on the forum previously, the Type 13 was not developed until 1943 (full designation is Type 313) as a land based air search radar. It was however, so successful that it was adoped by the Fleet in Feb 1944 for ship based use. Installation on Fleet units began in Spring 1944. So you still have about a year before you would get any Type 13 radars anyway (historically speaking - that is).

castor troy -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 9:36:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jwilkerson quote: ORIGINAL: zuikaku quote: ORIGINAL: Sardaukar About easiest thing to fix with editor. Switch between air serch and surface search is 500 or 0 in Penetration field. Air search=500. Surface Search =0. Works only for Radars with type "Surface Radar". tho. Yes, but that won't help me in my current game (scen 15) ,now in early '43 [:@] We are considering a comprehensive database update (one day) which would include fix to Type 13 (among many items). But also as has been pointed out on the forum previously, the Type 13 was not developed until 1943 (full designation is Type 313) as a land based air search radar. It was however, so successful that it was adoped by the Fleet in Feb 1944 for ship based use. Installation on Fleet units began in Spring 1944. So you still have about a year before you would get any Type 13 radars anyway (historically speaking - that is). within the next half year real time I will be in spring 44 in one of my PBEMs. Will the database update then be ready? [:D][:D]

PzB74 -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 11:00:13 PM)
I'm in the last days of March 44 as Japan..and I would like to see the Type 13 Radar on my ships [:'(] Also got 150 Frances naval bombers carrying 4x250kb bombs instead of torpedoes and the Taiho isn't scheduled for any in game updgrades [:(] Just closed my eyes and upgraded to V1.801 to crush the Zeke bug! [X(] Desperately need some late in game DB fixes/editor options [&o] You are my only hope Matrix One Kenobi!

Terminus -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 11:15:48 PM)
I personally think this bug is severe enough to warrant an immediate patch. Don't wait for anything else, just fix the Type 13. Come on, it'll take 13 seconds to fix it...

el cid again -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 11:26:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jwilkerson quote: ORIGINAL: zuikaku quote: ORIGINAL: Sardaukar About easiest thing to fix with editor. Switch between air serch and surface search is 500 or 0 in Penetration field. Air search=500. Surface Search =0. Works only for Radars with type "Surface Radar". tho. Yes, but that won't help me in my current game (scen 15) ,now in early '43 [:@] We are considering a comprehensive database update (one day) which would include fix to Type 13 (among many items). But also as has been pointed out on the forum previously, the Type 13 was not developed until 1943 (full designation is Type 313) as a land based air search radar. It was however, so successful that it was adoped by the Fleet in Feb 1944 for ship based use. Installation on Fleet units began in Spring 1944. So you still have about a year before you would get any Type 13 radars anyway (historically speaking - that is). This is a subject Joe and I often clash about: Joe is not telling the literal truth here (unless you read the fine print - 313 means "version 3 of type 13" - so the truth is HIDDEN in there). Type 13 radar dated from 1941, and the very first air search radars are operational in the Home Islands BEFORE the Pacific War begins (from our point of view - Dec 7 1941 - not the Japanse/Chinese point of view - which is 1937). In fact, there are a variety of DIFFERENT air search radars, and since we don't have them all, OUR GAME Type 13 has to represent the whole family - Army, Navy, early, late, you name it. What didn't happen until 1944 was quite different - the Army and Navy began to cooperate - and the Navy got to put SMALL Army air search radar on submarines - which confusingly is ALSO called "Type 13" in some listings! Different thing entirely. More generally, I am thinking about doing away with specific radar sets with historical national names. There are not enough slots to do what we are trying to do well. Japan's AI radar is very like the first British AI radar - but since we don't have enough slots (I created one and it failed to work because of code limitations) we cannot represent it - we either give Japan a better AI or none at all. I want to create air search, surface search (which includes fire control for some functions - e.g. surface attack), and aircraft radars in a generic sense - and then assign them to either side as required. That way we get more levels of radar and can fairly represent things like lower powered Japanese transmitters. FYI the great French wartime secret - spirited to Britain in 1940 - and given to the USA in 1941 - the cavity magnetron - was independently invented in Japan. There was nothing inherently wrong with Japanese physics: it is more theoretical than ours and often far more efficient in figuring things out (on a blackboard rather than in a lab) in time. What Japan did have problems with was (a) organization and cooperation (they had no monopoly - we had some of this ourselves) and (b) industrial capacity. Japan built at least 18,000 radars (and still counting) during the war. But it could have used 100,000 and could probably have made even more (consider Japan and electronics post war) - had priorities been different. Radar was not very "macho" in a Samouri sense of the term, and it lacked "spiritual virtue" which a man with field glasses had. It is clear Japanese optics were superior to ours too (pun intended) - and in 1942 more reliable (because at least when a lookout saw something his report was believed - unlike a USN radioman being ignored when he saw something on a primitive A scope). What Japanese radar lacks is priority and numbers in a timely way. The first naval set was installed before the Battle of Midway - on a battleship that didn't go to the battle at all!

el cid again -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 11:31:03 PM)
There is a utility program that switches function between 0 and 500 IN CURRENT GAMES. But I see little point - how do you know what one you will need - and on a global basis? I think we need to put both kinds of radar on most ships - and have made a major effort toward that end in RHS (excepting only US subs which don't have air search in my system, don't have surface search in Andrew's interpretation, and really need to have both - but a SHORT RANGE air search - which is what Andrew gave them - using radar that is more significant in its value against surface ships! The radar was both - but not in the game - and we have limited slots that actually work.) Going over to generic radars would allow a real SK radar - a short range air search set - which is more or less what a Type 21 is as well - call em the same thing (Short Range AS Radar?)

jwilkerson -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 11:39:02 PM)
quote: Type 13 radar dated from 1941 Negative. My source is Lacroix and Wells, Japanese Cruisers of the Pacific War pages 773-777. The Type 13 was accepted for service in August 43 ... full designation Type 313. But the Type 13 was not the first operational IJN air search radar, the Type 21(0) was. This was installed experimentally on Ise in May 42. At the same time the first experimental install of the Type 22(0) surface search radar was installed onboard the Hyuga. Installs of the 211 (the first "production model of the Type 21) were done to Shokaku, Kirishima and Kongo in Aug 42. While I agree that the Japanese did have a pre-war advantage in research in this area. They got behind in the functional realization. Allied development was much quicker. But on the narrow issue of the "Type 13" in the IJN, I must be true to my sources and insist that this did not occur until 1944. That being said, the game data should be corrected so that air search radars are air search radars !

Feinder -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 11:39:47 PM)
If there is a DB update, just how sweeping do you think it would be? Only updates to existing items? or will there be new toys that are added? Particularly among aircraft types, where the number is very limited (esp among CV capable), I'd like to see some of the redunant aircraft eliminated in favor of some new ones. Examples... For Japan, Maybe dump the Susie, nothing even uses it, correct? C5M = Ki-15, dump one? Is the SB2U Vindy actually -that- crucial? True Lex may have been equipped with them on 12-07, but I could live with the sacrifice to accuracy (just make 'em SBDs), in favor of adding another of aircraft. The Vindys make -maybe- one strike during the first week, and then are upgraded to SBDs the first time Lex touches port. All the flavors for USN & Allied aircraft. I'm not going to cry if if the RN CVs are flying TBFs instead of Avenger Is. It's the same plane, even in stats. The paint job is nice, but that's the only real difference. Again, a freed up slot. Several examples of duplicated aircraft, or where the next version is only marginally different. I understand that production rates are tied to the aircraft type (like a production jump from TBF to TBM). But again, we don't need several "copies" of the same aircraft (in the case of Avenger and Avenger I, you'd just combine the pools under one aircraft). If new aircraft are a possability, I'd think you'd look for communty feedback (or in the case of the CHS boys, they've already done a bit of the work!). But considering the availability of several "what-if" and very low production aircraft for Japan, I'd love to see some of the similar situations for the Allies. Naturally, the same opportunities for Japan, but frankly, I don't know that many classes of Japanese planes, but I'm sure the Japanese fan-boys could give some suggestions.... And any chance of doing away with respawing, and simply hard-coding the "correct" ships for the Allies. Respawing has caused no end of squawking (you're well aware of that). Regards, -F-

Ron Saueracker -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 11:51:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Feinder If there is a DB update, just how sweeping�do you think it would be?� Only updates to existing items? or will there be new toys that are added? Particularly among aircraft types, where the number is very limited (esp among CV capable), I'd like to see some of the redunant aircraft eliminated in favor of some new ones.� Examples... For Japan, Maybe dump the Susie, nothing even uses it, correct? C5M = Ki-15, dump one? Is the SB2U Vindy actually -that- crucial?� True Lex may have been equipped with them on 12-07, but I could live with the sacrifice to accuracy (just make 'em SBDs), in favor of adding another of aircraft.� The Vindys make -maybe- one strike during the first week, and then are upgraded to SBDs the first time Lex touches port. All the flavors for USN & Allied aircraft.� I'm not going to cry if if the RN CVs are flying TBFs instead of Avenger Is.� It's the same plane, even in stats.� The paint job is nice, but that's the only real difference.� Again, a freed up slot.� Several examples of duplicated aircraft, or where the next version is only marginally different.� I understand that production rates are tied to the aircraft type (like a production jump from TBF to TBM).� But again, we don't need several "copies" of the same aircraft (in the case of Avenger and Avenger I, you'd just combine the pools under one aircraft). If new aircraft are a possability, I'd think you'd look for communty feedback (or in the case of the CHS boys, they've already done a bit of the work!).� But considering the availability of several "what-if" and very low production aircraft for Japan, I'd love to see some of the similar situations for the Allies. Naturally, the same opportunities for Japan, but frankly, I don't know that many classes of Japanese planes, but I'm sure the Japanese fan-boys could give some suggestions.... And any chance of doing away with respawing, and simply hard-coding the "correct" ships for the Allies. Respawing has caused no end of squawking (you're well aware of that). Regards, -F- I like how you snuck that in![;)]

jwilkerson -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/13/2006 11:53:46 PM)
quote: If there is a DB update, just how sweeping do you think it would be? Don't really know - we haven't thought far enough into that yet - but we do know that there are quite a few items "on the list" (the WITP Wish List that is) that require DB changes. We have avoided that so far since of course restarts would be required. But given the number of things that need to be fixed (like single leaders pointing to multiple units) a DB update seems inevitable at some point.

dtravel -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/14/2006 1:53:16 AM)
[image]http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/3842/ninja6tk.gif[/image] Make the database bigger.

Terminus -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/14/2006 2:00:12 AM)
Who was that masked man?

dtravel -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/14/2006 2:05:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Who was that masked man? I think it was Captain Obvious.

Terminus -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/14/2006 2:10:29 AM)
And his sidekick, Sarcasmo-Boy...[;)]

dtravel -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/14/2006 2:15:37 AM)
[image]http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/7529/iconwhistle0vn.gif[/image]

spence -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/14/2006 2:36:25 AM)
I'm not sure but it seems to me that some ships, designated as ASW ships, at the beginning of the war had either no echo ranging sonar and perhaps not even a hydrophone. They were entirely dependent on lookouts for submarine detection and WAGs for anti-submarine attack. Just in case any of the team has nothing to do and has a few extra slots maybe we could get some differentiation in the ASW capabilities of ASW ships other than the number of charges they drop.

Sardaukar -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/14/2006 1:52:13 PM)
Didn't michealm indeed make an utility that allows one to fix "Type 13" radar in ongoing games ? Or is my memory faulty ? Problem was that radar in Oi and Kitikami cruisers was wrongly designated as surface search when it really was air search.

Terminus -> RE: What is wrong with japanese radars? (6/14/2006 1:54:08 PM)
He did... Can't find it anymore, but he did...

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

8.421875