RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (4/27/2008 2:50:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

I know it's been said before that there's no provision to keep track of how successful a particular sub is in sinking ships, but is it possible on the Ships Sunk screen to put "sunk by 21" torpedo by USS xxx" or something like that?



Some improvements have been made on the sunk ships report.




Alikchi2 -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/1/2008 9:48:05 AM)

Did you guys consider simulating the December 44 Japan earthquake somehow? I know it's unlikely, but just throwing that out there - it had big strategic impact, and it seems like one of the few timed events in this game that is immutable.



Andy Mac -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/1/2008 9:58:35 AM)

Ummm no sorry did not get modelled



Flying Tiger -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/2/2008 3:02:25 AM)

Any chance of a 'date sunk' line being added in the sunl ships report?



Flying Tiger -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/2/2008 3:03:26 AM)

errrr... maybe 'sunK ships' would make more sense?!!



jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/2/2008 3:58:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flying Tiger

Any chance of a 'date sunk' line being added in the sunl ships report?


Nope, sorry, no "date sunk" line ... [;)]


However, we did add a date sunk column!!! [:D]

I've been wanting this one for eons myself ... thanks Don! [&o]



Flying Tiger -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/2/2008 4:22:07 AM)

Thanks. i guess a column will do the job!!



siRkid -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/2/2008 7:23:52 PM)

I hope I'm not breaking any rules but the Date Sunk can be filtered. Sunk last turn, last month, all.



iley -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/3/2008 4:56:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: doc smith

Second that! I've been in wargaming since the 70s - I have a copy of early Strategy & Tactics board games from that time, beginning with their USN game (a VERY early and VERY generalized war in the Pacific). Been hooked ever since.

Peace,
Doc Smith


Doc Smith:

I have USN tucked away in a closet myself. Started wargaming in the mid-60s. Have a copy of SPI's monster game War in the Pacific. Actually set it up and played it for about a year and a half back in the 70s.

Iley



Bliztk -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/13/2008 12:13:47 AM)

One question, how is the monsoon going to be handled ?

It stopped all operations on CBI theather for several months each year, and both sides planned their operations on the dry season.



jerrylt2008 -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/13/2008 8:46:19 PM)

Hello All,

I only want to know one thing................When can we get it?

Thanks.



wild_Willie2 -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/14/2008 2:58:46 PM)

Patience....

I think that it will take at least another 5-6 months before they can even consider testing the game...

If we are REALY lucky, maybe christmas



akdreemer -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/15/2008 10:11:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: iley


quote:

ORIGINAL: doc smith

Second that! I've been in wargaming since the 70s - I have a copy of early Strategy & Tactics board games from that time, beginning with their USN game (a VERY early and VERY generalized war in the Pacific). Been hooked ever since.

Peace,
Doc Smith


Doc Smith:

I have USN tucked away in a closet myself. Started wargaming in the mid-60s. Have a copy of SPI's monster game War in the Pacific. Actually set it up and played it for about a year and a half back in the 70s.

Iley


WOW!! someone actually played SSI's War in the Pacific...[X(]

Cheers



Charbroiled -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/15/2008 5:27:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior


quote:

ORIGINAL: iley


quote:

ORIGINAL: doc smith

Second that! I've been in wargaming since the 70s - I have a copy of early Strategy & Tactics board games from that time, beginning with their USN game (a VERY early and VERY generalized war in the Pacific). Been hooked ever since.

Peace,
Doc Smith


Doc Smith:

I have USN tucked away in a closet myself. Started wargaming in the mid-60s. Have a copy of SPI's monster game War in the Pacific. Actually set it up and played it for about a year and a half back in the 70s.

Iley


WOW!! someone actually played SSI's War in the Pacific...[X(]

Cheers


I think a lot of us have played it...the question is: Has someone actually finished it?[&o]



doc smith -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/16/2008 6:55:25 AM)

Not SSI, SPI. Big difference. SPI "defined" wargaming with its superlative historical and playable approach to gaming combats. Avalon Hill, it's primary rival, stressed playability.



bradfordkay -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/16/2008 7:31:09 AM)

One area where AH had it over SPI was in production values. Few SPI games had the visual appeal of an Avalon Hill game. I think that this helped place AH games in more stores, and thus introduced more of us to wargaming.



Dili -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/17/2008 12:05:22 AM)

So Alaskan Warrior are you trying to bring Cavour to the Pacific? :)  If UK was defeated in Battle of Britain and contained by submarine operations and operation Felix successfully took Gibraltar maybe Italian and German Warships could went to Pacific... maybe US  would fight them in Atlantic tough i doubt it. With a strech in credulity that might be an interesting what if.



Alikchi2 -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/17/2008 5:17:09 AM)

I'm not sure how the A-Bomb system works in original WitP, so this might be an erroneous (or stupid) question, but does WitP cut off at two A-Bombs, or will you include the historically available future weapons for late 45 and through 46?

Info:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/67.pdf



HansBolter -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/19/2008 9:16:19 PM)

I know this is coming too late to ever have a hope of getting adopted but I thought it couldn't hurt to plant a bug of an idea for the future. One of the things lacking in the game is a set of planning tools. The player could use a set of map overlays that can be toggled.

What I am envisioning is the ability to call up large graphic numbers depicting air base, port and fort sizes for the bases visible on the screen. large bright red numbers that fill the hexes and are easily legible would be a great help in assessing any given area. Allowing the player to toggle these one and off, say with the F keys, F1=Air Field Size, F2=Port Size, F3=Fort Size, would go a long way toward facilitating planning. As it stands now the player has to click on each base on the screen (or hover the mouse over it) to assess it's size. By the time he has examined every base on the screen he most likely forgot the size of the first three he examined............

More, better and more flexible graphics would go a long way toward reducing the "burden" in a game this large and complex!



castor troy -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/20/2008 12:40:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alikchi

I'm not sure how the A-Bomb system works in original WitP, so this might be an erroneous (or stupid) question, but does WitP cut off at two A-Bombs, or will you include the historically available future weapons for late 45 and through 46?

Info:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/67.pdf



even in stock you get 1 A-bomb every second? month after the first is available. So you can drop more than two in the game but it makes it harder to win for the Allied as they need a higher point ratio if they drop more than 2 bombs.



Monter_Trismegistos -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/20/2008 1:09:01 PM)

Is there any possibility to remove from database Mitscher(as CV commander) and put instead later Mitscher (as CV TF commander)?



Bogo Mil -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/21/2008 7:17:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
As to the AI, we continue to struggle along, the frustrating part is trying to get the AI to do what you want. But I guess in the end AIs always do what THEY want, eh?
[:D]

Then you should be careful and don't make it too smart. It might take over the world and sell us to the extraterrestrials [sm=scared0008.gif]

Sorry, could not resist. Here my questions:
Will the industry still have only two states - working and damaged - or do you introduce something like "light damage" (stops production, but is much faster and cheaper to repair)? I think this could simulate the complete disruption of the economy. After substantial airstrikes or ground combat in an area, the production was often shut down (almost) completely, but a lot recovered very fast.

On the screenshots I see a lot of clouds in all air combat. Will we see always the same cloud, or will there be some visual representation of the real weather? This would be some nice eye candy for the spartanic wargamers [8D]



Alikchi2 -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/22/2008 9:23:03 PM)

Can I ask how much work was put into the non-Grand Campaign scenarios from the original WitP? For instance, 42 and 43. Their OOBs needed a very thorough overhaul the last time I checked. Has this been accomplished?



Terminus -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/22/2008 9:38:14 PM)

As you say, the overhaul needed would be HUGE, so the 42 and 43 start campaign games won't be in the initial release.

The plan for initial release is one grand campaign (scen 15 today), one grand campaign that's better for the Japs, and 4 smaller ones.



HansBolter -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/22/2008 11:47:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: doc smith

Not SSI, SPI. Big difference. SPI "defined" wargaming with its superlative historical and playable approach to gaming combats. Avalon Hill, it's primary rival, stressed playability.



While I certainly don't want to denigrate SPI, the manner in which they cranked out the magazine games with almost no proofreading of the rules and charts they threw together led my buddies and I to create a moniker for them "SPI Madness" becasue that is what it was when you spent hours reading rules that were so badly written and contradictory they were almost incomprehensible and finally got ready to play the game only to find some essential chart like the CRT was omitted from the printing........pack it all back in the ziplock bag and hope the next issue has the 5 pages of eratta necessary to make the game playable.

AH games were more polished and profesional products by far.

With that said my game collection (numbering somewhere in the several hundreds dating back to the mid 70s) probably contains more SPI titles than AH titles. [:D]



Kull -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/23/2008 3:47:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

However, we did add a date sunk column!!! [:D]

I've been wanting this one for eons myself ... thanks Don! [&o]


THANK you!!! Especially with FoW, it was a complete nightmare trying to determine if a damaged enemy ship was sunk or saved. Hmmmm. Speaking of which, since it's probably safe to assume that the ship shows up in the "Sunk list" with the actual sink date, is there any indicator that it's a "new arrival" on the list? Because FoW adds a time delay to most appearances. If new arrivals can't be marked on the list, having this info appear in the daily intel report would be nice. Something to the effect that "Intelligence reports that enemy ship x was sunk on date y near location z".



jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/23/2008 5:46:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

THANK you!!! Especially with FoW, it was a complete nightmare trying to determine if a damaged enemy ship was sunk or saved. Hmmmm. Speaking of which, since it's probably safe to assume that the ship shows up in the "Sunk list" with the actual sink date, is there any indicator that it's a "new arrival" on the list? Because FoW adds a time delay to most appearances. If new arrivals can't be marked on the list, having this info appear in the daily intel report would be nice. Something to the effect that "Intelligence reports that enemy ship x was sunk on date y near location z".


Given my job of overseeing the project and since I have not written code for AE myself in over a year - I don't know much more about how things work in AE than you do! [;)] But hopefully I know more about what we've done and what we have not done!!! The FOW may prevent a sunk ship from appearing on the list for a while, but once it does appear, it will have the real sunk date. Turned out (and I remember this from my stock coding) there was already a "sunk date" field in the relevant data structure, it just was not used. Now we are using it. So we can stuff the date in there when the ship is sunk... Then once the FOW releases the ship to appear on the sunk ship list - it will have the correct date.




rockmedic109 -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/23/2008 6:21:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

THANK you!!! Especially with FoW, it was a complete nightmare trying to determine if a damaged enemy ship was sunk or saved. Hmmmm. Speaking of which, since it's probably safe to assume that the ship shows up in the "Sunk list" with the actual sink date, is there any indicator that it's a "new arrival" on the list? Because FoW adds a time delay to most appearances. If new arrivals can't be marked on the list, having this info appear in the daily intel report would be nice. Something to the effect that "Intelligence reports that enemy ship x was sunk on date y near location z".


Given my job of overseeing the project and since I have not written code for AE myself in over a year - I don't know much more about how things work in AE than you do! [;)] But hopefully I know more about what we've done and what we have not done!!! The FOW may prevent a sunk ship from appearing on the list for a while, but once it does appear, it will have the real sunk date. Turned out (and I remember this from my stock coding) there was already a "sunk date" field in the relevant data structure, it just was not used. Now we are using it. So we can stuff the date in there when the ship is sunk... Then once the FOW releases the ship to appear on the sunk ship list - it will have the correct date.





YES! <Doing a happy dance while my wife looks on thinking I have finally succumbed to early dementia>

Can the sunk list be listed by date?



bradfordkay -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/23/2008 9:24:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

THANK you!!! Especially with FoW, it was a complete nightmare trying to determine if a damaged enemy ship was sunk or saved. Hmmmm. Speaking of which, since it's probably safe to assume that the ship shows up in the "Sunk list" with the actual sink date, is there any indicator that it's a "new arrival" on the list? Because FoW adds a time delay to most appearances. If new arrivals can't be marked on the list, having this info appear in the daily intel report would be nice. Something to the effect that "Intelligence reports that enemy ship x was sunk on date y near location z".


Given my job of overseeing the project and since I have not written code for AE myself in over a year - I don't know much more about how things work in AE than you do! [;)] But hopefully I know more about what we've done and what we have not done!!! The FOW may prevent a sunk ship from appearing on the list for a while, but once it does appear, it will have the real sunk date. Turned out (and I remember this from my stock coding) there was already a "sunk date" field in the relevant data structure, it just was not used. Now we are using it. So we can stuff the date in there when the ship is sunk... Then once the FOW releases the ship to appear on the sunk ship list - it will have the correct date.




I'm guessing that your answer to Kull's question is that there is at no time any indication that a new listing has appeared on the "sunk ships" list - just that when it does appear it will show the actual date of sinking.



jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (5/23/2008 3:13:52 PM)

Right, until the new listing appears - it has not appeared!
[:)]



Page: <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.046875