RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread

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

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

Message

hueglin -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:03:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft quote: ORIGINAL: hueglin quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus quote: ORIGINAL: hueglin I'm wondering why there is such a jump in system requirements over the original WITP? Has there been that much change to the engine (particularly graphics)? WITP Pentium II 600 Mhz CPU (rec. 800Mhz) 128 MB RAM (rec. 256 MB) 8MB Video Graphics Card 16 BIT Color WITP-AE CPU: 2.0 Ghz minimum, 3.0 Ghz recommended Video/Graphics: 128M minimum, 256M recommended RAM: 512MB minimum, 1GB recommended Not so much in the graphics, but in the number crunching. So does that mean it will play, but very sloowly, on my 900Mhz Thinkpad with 256 MB of RAM. The main thing is to have enough memory. What with the much larger map and database the requirement will be a lot larger than the current version, which is already considerable (300mb plus IIRC). However if you can have enough RAM to prevent the executable from paging itself to death then it will work, but the execution phase will just take a long time. I played WitP for ages on an old shed of a PC with a 500MHz CPU running Windows 98. It was very slow but I could get by due to having 380mb of RAM, which was just enough to prevent constant paging. Thanks for the extra info. That's kind of what I was wondering. Will dedicated virtual memory keep it from bogging down completely? Of course some day I will get a new computer, but until then ...

Dili -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:04:26 AM)
quote: Look in the GAMES section for AE, and check the Screenshots (it's the one on the left of the third row). That's the editor that will ship with the final product. Got it :) Yes it is not strange :)

TheElf -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:05:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus quote: ORIGINAL: jcjordan I ask these here mostly because it fits in other places as well as general so trying not to have multiple posts - 2) Will the air units be like CHS/RHS where individual squadrons are represented instead of the larger group as I assume most of the OOB stuff is coming from them? 2) That's for the Air Team; at the moment it's like current stock The final Air OoB, still in production, will have squadron sized air units. The naming convention will include the parent group, so historically related Squadrons can be identified as belonging to it's group.

jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:09:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brady Coal? Japanese industry ran on coal, not oil, as WiTP would lead one to beleave, I know this was very abstracted by the Suply aspect, but most of the Coal came from China and Japan it's slef, is this modeled in the game or is this aspect still aken to how WiTP has handeled it. quote: ORIGINAL: Brady Coast Watching, is it still the same or have some of the more unrealastic aspects of it been done away with, like spoting at night, and their presence on islands they were not on, or the efect of their abailitys diminished over time , that is relative to the time of ocupation, simply put if the Japanese ocupy the island they go away after a time. These are good questions for the map thread ... but I'll say for coal, no we haven't changed the oil abstraction, we have added a new "light industry" type which Andrew can explain further in the Map thread. And probably the naval thread could comment further on the coast watcher question, but I'm not aware that we changed anything here.

jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:12:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mifune I see additional aircraft slots, will there be additional slots available across the database? Check the Air Team thread.

jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:17:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mlees Sir. What do you believe will be the most significant effect(s) of changing the map scale from 60 to 40 miles per hex? (Why was that decision made?) (1) Why 40? Well we wanted 30 or even 20 .. but Andrew made the call based on estimate of amount of work required and amount of resources available. The 40 mile map is about twice as much art and data as the 60 mile map. It took about 15 man months to key in the new PWHEX file. Making the map 30 mile hexes would have doubled this again. We would not have had the resources to get it done in the time available. (2) Effects will be similar to differences between WITP and UV relative to scale. It will make Mid-Ocean intercepts a bit tougher for subs and TFs, though we have made some offsetting changes to improve TF MOI. See the naval thread for more details. Also map is more accurate and base locations and terrain are more accurate. These are the main differences I can think of. Probably more will be discussed in the map thread.

Snowman999 -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:21:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Grotius Thanks again, Terminus. You've been very patient with all our questions. Much appreciated. I have more map-related questions; I hope Andrew starts his thread soon. :) I'll save most of them for him. But I do want to reiterate an earlier poster's wish that we'll have some sort of on-map indication of facilities present at a base, as Subchaser's map does. Proving that "to each his own" lives in WITP-AE, I HATE those on-map symbols. Make my head hurt. The simpler the map, the better, so long as the info is one level down or appears on mouse-over. With double the terrain types on the new map I think seeing the ground is going to be even more important than in stock.

jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:21:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DD696 Are we going to be provided with an editor that will edit the data for a game in progress? Or will we simply be left with 1) the endless restarting of the game with everyone being an expert on the first six months of the war, or 2) having to continue play with the data errors? Providing us with a improved editor is great, but without the ability to do so to a game in progress this improved editor is not so very much improved. I know you will bring up the PBEM argument, but can you not also consider the AI player or the PBEM player who would like to repair a game without having to restart? I constantly change scenario data and I do make mistakes doing so. Can you guarantee that the new scenarios will be free of all data errors and of errors that creep into the database due to programming problems? If not, why cannot they be repaired? Nope - no "in game editor". This is Matrix decision. Matrix has concerns about cheating etc. I think this has all been discussed before. The position has not changed. We have instead improved the security of the save file to make cheating significantly more difficult, hopefully impossible for all but the KGB and the NSA. [:D] If we make changes to the data after the release, we will try to provide an "update" capability as was done in patch 1.6 IIRC. The code is still there, I suspect we can dust it off and make it work again.

jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:24:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Snowman999 quote: ORIGINAL: Grotius Thanks again, Terminus. You've been very patient with all our questions. Much appreciated. I have more map-related questions; I hope Andrew starts his thread soon. :) I'll save most of them for him. But I do want to reiterate an earlier poster's wish that we'll have some sort of on-map indication of facilities present at a base, as Subchaser's map does. Proving that "to each his own" lives in WITP-AE, I HATE those on-map symbols. Make my head hurt. The simpler the map, the better, so long as the info is one level down or appears on mouse-over. With double the terrain types on the new map I think seeing the ground is going to be even more important than in stock. Opinions were split as well on our team. Some like yours truly wanted nothing on the map except the terrain and hexes (as an option). But others wanted words and symbols galore. Andrew has tried to use less intrusive fonts, so I like that, but there are some lines and other intrusive things that got approved. Andrew will provide more details in the map thread.

Captain Cruft -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:25:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jwilkerson (1) Why 40? Well we wanted 30 or even 20 .. but Andrew made the call based on estimate of amount of work required and amount of resources available. The 40 mile map is about twice as much art and data as the 60 mile map. It took about 15 man months to key in the new PWHEX file. Making the map 30 mile hexes would have doubled this again. We would not have had the resources to get it done in the time available. (2) Effects will be similar to differences between WITP and UV relative to scale. It will make Mid-Ocean intercepts a bit tougher for subs and TFs, though we have made some offsetting changes to improve TF MOI. See the naval thread for more details. Also map is more accurate and base locations and terrain are more accurate. These are the main differences I can think of. Probably more will be discussed in the map thread. I always wanted a smaller scale. 10 miles would probably have been best ;) However, as someone who once tried to create a map or two I am fully aware of how much work that is. Assuming that the overall area covered has not changed then a change from 60 to 40 miles per hex makes for 2.25 the number of hexes to be defined (and drawn). That is quite a lot ... Then, from looking at the screenshots, I would tend to think that this single change will actually make for more than 2.25 times the game experience. There is really an impression of space now, which to my mind there wasn't before. It was all too cramped.

jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:29:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Knavey Are the Soviets getting "the love" or is it pretty much as was for them? Kereguelen has redone the LCU OOB for the Russians, he can explain further in the land thread.

jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:31:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft This is a "Map" question but since we don't have a thread for that yet ... In the screenshots there is a variation in the way the "dot" bases are represented. On the South Pacific one they look as they do now, but on the Singapore area shots they seem to be crosses, with something of a glow around them. Is this meaningful or just different icon sets that are being tried out? Ask in the map thread. Might just be we seeing cross-eyed! [;)]

jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:33:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Apollo11 Hi all, One more thing just come to my mind (it is always like that when you wait long time for something and then there are just too many questions to ask)... [;)] Are leaders still "teleportable" (i.e. moved from one location in an instant) or they require movement by transport ships/planes during turn itself (HINT: the historic Yamamoto departure for example)? Same thing with aircraft movement from base to base (in WitP player can load/reload endlessly to avoid transport casualties because that movement is done inside turn instantly)? Leo "Apollo11" I think everything still teleports as per stock, but re-ask in the air thread to be sure about air transfers.

jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:35:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: csatahajos Ok so to put my question in a more specific form: Would it be possible to add a res. change switch for some predefinded higher res. a la Uncommon Valour or is it still limited by the engine? I'm just forcing this because if it was possible back in the old UV days then I thought perhaps it's doable...(so I'm not looking for a dynamic resolution thing, just for some predefined switches.) Joe? Adding a switch is easy. Adding a working switch is hard. This one got booted over to WITP_II ...

jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:38:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ctangus The more I read, the cooler this is... Few more questions: 1. Is any more progress expected on exterminating the synch bug? 2. Will art from some of the forum artists ship with the release? 3. Are geishas & USO Troupes modeled? 1. I'll go out on the limb (again) and say that we believe the synch bug is dead in AE. We reworked the random number handling process and thus far we have not seen any recurrence of the synch bug. As we continue testing we will be watching for it and trying to "break it". 2. Some forum artists have joined the team, but we required all new art for this project. 3. Check with Don, that is his department! [;)]

jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:39:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus quote: ORIGINAL: hueglin I'm wondering why there is such a jump in system requirements over the original WITP? Has there been that much change to the engine (particularly graphics)? WITP Pentium II 600 Mhz CPU (rec. 800Mhz) 128 MB RAM (rec. 256 MB) 8MB Video Graphics Card 16 BIT Color WITP-AE CPU: 2.0 Ghz minimum, 3.0 Ghz recommended Video/Graphics: 128M minimum, 256M recommended RAM: 512MB minimum, 1GB recommended Not so much in the graphics, but in the number crunching. Bigger map, more slots.

jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:45:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft quote: ORIGINAL: jwilkerson (1) Why 40? Well we wanted 30 or even 20 .. but Andrew made the call based on estimate of amount of work required and amount of resources available. The 40 mile map is about twice as much art and data as the 60 mile map. It took about 15 man months to key in the new PWHEX file. Making the map 30 mile hexes would have doubled this again. We would not have had the resources to get it done in the time available. (2) Effects will be similar to differences between WITP and UV relative to scale. It will make Mid-Ocean intercepts a bit tougher for subs and TFs, though we have made some offsetting changes to improve TF MOI. See the naval thread for more details. Also map is more accurate and base locations and terrain are more accurate. These are the main differences I can think of. Probably more will be discussed in the map thread. I always wanted a smaller scale. 10 miles would probably have been best ;) However, as someone who once tried to create a map or two I am fully aware of how much work that is. Assuming that the overall area covered has not changed then a change from 60 to 40 miles per hex makes for 2.25 the number of hexes to be defined (and drawn). That is quite a lot ... Then, from looking at the screenshots, I would tend to think that this single change will actually make for more than 2.25 times the game experience. There is really an impression of space now, which to my mind there wasn't before. It was all too cramped. You've nailed my driver .. I wanted that "impression of space" ... and the area the map covers has expanded a bit. So the math might peg the number of hexes at 2.5 times as many, but I'm sure Andrew can roll the statistics for us over in the map thread.

Williamb -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:47:14 AM)
Can we get real OOBs ? I mean the ones with stock WITP were so inaccurate. FOr example several Medal of Honor winners were missing from the game (such as Admiral Kidd and Captain of the USS West Virginia as well as others. And Major Deveroux is missing from Wake Isle And the USAAF in the Philipines was wrong for example here is the OFFICAL military hostory showing what planes were in the philipines. (Im sure there are other examples. http://www.army.mil/cmh/books/wwii/5-2/5-2_3.htm#p37 ... Bombers: Philipines /Hawaii B-17Ca B-17Da 35 12 B-18A 18 33 A-20Aa 0 12 A-27 9 0 B-10B 12 0 ... Fighters: P-40Ca 0 12 P-40Ba 0 87 P-40Eb 107 39 P-36A 0 14 P-26A 16 0 P-35A 52 0 .Misc. (Incl. Obsn, Cargo, etc.) 24 34 22 ... TOTAL 277 231

Terminus -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:49:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: William Amos Can we get real OOBs ? I mean the ones with stock WITP were so inaccurate. FOr example several Medal of Honor winners were missing from the game (such as Admiral Kidd and Captain of the USS West Virginia as well as others. And Major Deveroux is missing from Wake Isle And the USAAF in the Philipines was wrong for example here is the OFFICAL military hostory showing what planes were in the philipines. (Im sure there are other examples. http://www.army.mil/cmh/books/wwii/5-2/5-2_3.htm#p37 ... Bombers: Philipines /Hawaii B-17Ca B-17Da 35 12 B-18A 18 33 A-20Aa 0 12 A-27 9 0 B-10B 12 0 ... Fighters: P-40Ca 0 12 P-40Ba 0 87 P-40Eb 107 39 P-36A 0 14 P-26A 16 0 P-35A 52 0 .Misc. (Incl. Obsn, Cargo, etc.) 24 34 22 ... TOTAL 277 231 All OOB's are being totally reworked by a lot of very knowledgeable people. That's all I can say at the moment.

Don Bowen -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 2:56:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: William Amos Can we get real OOBs ? I mean the ones with stock WITP were so inaccurate. FOr example several Medal of Honor winners were missing from the game (such as Admiral Kidd and Captain of the USS West Virginia as well as others. And Major Deveroux is missing from Wake Isle And the USAAF in the Philipines was wrong for example here is the OFFICAL military hostory showing what planes were in the philipines. (Im sure there are other examples. http://www.army.mil/cmh/books/wwii/5-2/5-2_3.htm#p37 ... Bombers: Philipines /Hawaii B-17Ca B-17Da 35 12 B-18A 18 33 A-20Aa 0 12 A-27 9 0 B-10B 12 0 ... Fighters: P-40Ca 0 12 P-40Ba 0 87 P-40Eb 107 39 P-36A 0 14 P-26A 16 0 P-35A 52 0 .Misc. (Incl. Obsn, Cargo, etc.) 24 34 22 ... TOTAL 277 231 William, my cousin Jimmy was captured on Corregidor and my Daddy was with 6th Army when the Philippines were re-taken. I sat on the back porch and listened to the veterans talk before I was old enough to go to school. Fired my interest and I began studying World War II in the Pacific well over 50 years ago. I have an exhaustive library, contribute to Dr. Niehorster's site, and have two or three file drawers full of old notes, photo-copies taken from library reference works in the 1950s, and screen prints from web sites that disappeared last millennium. I'd have more if movers hadn't lost them. I am impressed with this OOB. It will never be perfect, especially as everyone has a slightly different level of detail, but it is very, very good. Don

Ian R -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 3:07:16 AM)
WITP-AE CPU: 2.0 Ghz minimum, 3.0 Ghz recommended Video/Graphics: 128M minimum, 256M recommended RAM: 512MB minimum, 1GB recommended Well that puts me out, unless I buy a new computer.

Don Bowen -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 3:16:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ian R WITP-AE CPU: 2.0 Ghz minimum, 3.0 Ghz recommended Video/Graphics: 128M minimum, 256M recommended RAM: 512MB minimum, 1GB recommended Well that puts me out, unless I buy a new computer. Sorry, but AE is a more-of-everything release. Smaller map scale means a lot more hexes, more units, move aircraft and ships, more features. It all adds up to more CPU cycles, more memory, more calculations, more, more, more. Christmas is coming, try dropping a few hints. If that doesn't work, wait until the after Christmas sales. PCs continue to get faster, better featured, and cheaper. The top end machine of a couple of years ago is a middling system today. Also, the rule that a wonderful new feature or significant price reduction will be announced immediately after one buys a system is still in effect.

Grotius -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 3:23:44 AM)
quote: I HATE those on-map symbols. Make my head hurt. The simpler the map, the better While I do like Subchaser's map symbols, I do agree that too much info makes my head hurt too. I don't want a lot of malaria lines or control-zone lines or HQ borders or whatnot. I just liked seeing oil and resources at a base on Subchaser's map -- his use of those little colored dots was pretty unobtrusive. Dots I like; lines I don't. :)

klhbekool -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 3:24:17 AM)
Looks like I'll have do a little memory upgrade. I can't wait for AE to come out Give us a little demo for Christmas---if not then send Lauren Conrad, what am I saying send both you can send LC wearing nothing but an AE t-shirt. I probably have gone too far but its my Christmas wish.

Ian R -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 3:40:47 AM)
But I can wait awhile because in one of the other threads patches were mentioned [:'(]

Brady -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 3:46:13 AM)
I know we cant ask specific questions, but: [img]http://www.myphotodrive.com//uploads/686_absent1.jpg[/img] Was: Name This...(462) SBC ,With VMO-151, Pictured Patroling off American Samoa for Sub's in Early 42, acording to Image source

Big B -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 4:18:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: William Amos Can we get real OOBs ? I mean the ones with stock WITP were so inaccurate.... ... Bombers: Philipines /Hawaii B-17Ca B-17Da 35 12 B-18A 18 33 A-20Aa 0 12 A-27 9 0 B-10B 12 0 ... Fighters: P-40Ca 0 12 P-40Ba 0 87 P-40Eb 107 39 P-36A 0 14 P-26A 16 0 P-35A 52 0 .Misc. (Incl. Obsn, Cargo, etc.) 24 34 22 ... TOTAL 277 231 Hi, time to come out and say hello. Well, I did the aircraft generally for the USA (for a very distinguished member of this community), all those types were accounted for. I can't speak for the finalized OOB - so we'll see. B

Nomad -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 4:29:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ian R WITP-AE CPU: 2.0 Ghz minimum, 3.0 Ghz recommended Video/Graphics: 128M minimum, 256M recommended RAM: 512MB minimum, 1GB recommended Well that puts me out, unless I buy a new computer. It's a good thing I traded in my old abacus for a new computer. [:D]

MineSweeper -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 4:39:48 AM)
Any new Weather related changes ?...Typhoons....Monsoons.

Reg -> RE: Admiral's Edition General Thread (12/8/2007 4:41:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jwilkerson (1) Why 40? Well we wanted 30 or even 20 .. but Andrew made the call based on estimate of amount of work required and amount of resources available. The 40 mile map is about twice as much art and data as the 60 mile map. It took about 15 man months to key in the new PWHEX file. Making the map 30 mile hexes would have doubled this again. We would not have had the resources to get it done in the time available. With the decrease in hex size and corresponding increase in the number of hexes, is there be sort of zoom function planned (apart from the existing mini-map)?? Or will that require a reworking of the UI which you have already stated that you are not going to touch??

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.078125