RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (Full Version)

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



Message

Erik Rutins -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/4/2009 4:47:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
There are no 'decrease' buttons there, only the increase buttons. Will decrease buttons appear when above some minimum level?


Yep.



Cathartes -> RE: Aden Look (2/4/2009 6:03:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Helldiver

Greetings, Cathartes.

In post # 208, the Aden RN Base Force shows a "Garrison Unit (0) x1." What's the significance? Purpose? Are these actual troops or a representation of some value native to some static base forces?

I do not remember seeing this in stock. If I've missed a previous post on this, sorry. My mind is in a haze of new info...

Regards,
Helldiver

If Andy and Bill are reading, they would be the most qualified to answer this one, but I'm guessing it relates to the fact that if this unit was attacked, it could retreat and then be mobile to avoid destruction(code thing). Not that it would be--it's in Aden, but others of its ilk in other bases would function accordingly.



Bogo Mil -> RE: Aden Look (2/4/2009 6:46:32 PM)

Garrision unit* (0)x1 means there is one intact "garrision unit*" and zero demaged ones. I guess the "garrision unit" is the same as the "static facility squad*" in RHS - an artificial tool to make a unit without large CD gun static (the * denotes a static device).

Such units become mobile, if all static devices are damaged. This can hardly happen in Aden - Japan can not attack, thus the only way to damage devices would be prolonged starvation. I don't think any Allied player will starve Aden deliberatly just to unlock this base force. I'd consider this highly gamey.



jrcar -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/4/2009 7:23:21 PM)

Mike Naval support and engineers is only effective if the unit is in combat mode. Aviation support works in any mode.

Changing to and from strategic mode takes a couple of days depending on the unit, but in strategic mode they can use railways, and can be in "Transport" rather than "Ampibious" Taskforces. Transport TF pack more in, and they suffer less disruption druing unloading.

This is one huge change that I will explain in a bit more detail soon.

You can do everyhting in combat mode using amphib TF's but you will suffer because of it.

Cheers

Rob

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrcar

Ok I'll post some screen shots of interesting new units.

The first are "Shipping Regiments".

The Naval support helps in unloading.

The engineers in building ports/aflds.

This one is in a restricted command, I can pay PP's to move it out like in stock, as the "Attached to" is in yellow text.

If the "Attached to" was in white text then I can never move them (This applies to airgroups as well).

This feature helps to tie units down that historically didn't move, while allowing those that did, or realistically could have, to move into a different theatre.



[image]local://upfiles/6237/550F12E8590944B489BE513AC4FDD077.jpg[/image]


Does the operations mode affect this unit's ability of the naval support or engineers to do their thing?

quote:



Attachment (1)



jrcar -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/4/2009 7:24:36 PM)

No , I meant that I had started loading cargo TF to move them, and moving ships to locations where there are resources and oil to be moved by sea.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrcar

Started getting resources and oil moving.


You can move resources and oil manually?! [X(]




jrcar -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/4/2009 7:29:21 PM)

Yes, sort of. The Ships in the TF will take it in turns to load/unload. This is all handled "under the hood", although it is more efficient if the human player does it. So if you don't exceed the docking limitis you will be fine, if you do the AI will load ships in turn, but this isn't as efficient if you had just docked the maximum.

So the penalty is the not all the ships in the TF will load as quickly as you would like!

This is the key thing to watch, and why ports are so much more important in AE.


quote:

ORIGINAL: cantona2

To add to Grotius' question, do overstacked ports also recevie overstacked penalties?




timtom -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/4/2009 8:02:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panther Bait

In AE, when a unit is removed temporarily and then returned to action, like the PBY squadron shown above, will it keep the old, experienced pilots? Or will it come in with new pilots at basic green-pilot levels of experience?

Mike



The replacement units have to be rebuild from scratch - otherwise there wouldn't be much point to this design feature [:)]



Guest -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/4/2009 8:03:53 PM)

Fighters (or airplanes)have two mode: using drop tanks and no using.
I have a question: what meaning in this case extended and normal radius?
My english isn't good, sorry.



jrcar -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/4/2009 8:13:42 PM)

Normal radius they can have more time for combat.

Extended range means less combat time, creates higher fatigue and a higher chance of being lost, and running out of fuel because of it.

Cheers

Rob

quote:

ORIGINAL: Guest

Fighters (or airplanes)have two mode: using drop tanks and no using.
I have a question: what meaning in this case extended and normal radius?
My english isn't good, sorry.




RevRick -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/4/2009 8:33:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrcar

Normal radius they can have more time for combat.

Extended range means less combat time, creates higher fatigue and a higher chance of being lost, and running out of fuel because of it.

Cheers

Rob

quote:

ORIGINAL: Guest

Fighters (or airplanes)have two mode: using drop tanks and no using.
I have a question: what meaning in this case extended and normal radius?
My english isn't good, sorry.




Hokay.... If you send them up on LRCAP over your own base with drop tanks on, does that extend the loiter time on station CAP - hence more time to make attacks on incoming raids?



Guest -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/4/2009 8:39:20 PM)

What is better: normal radius and drop tanks or extended radius whithout drop tanks?
Pilots have many abilities. Is possible to create specialised fighter gruop for sweep attack or escort bombers? If "yes" - I think that allied player will be it strong prefered than japnesse.



PeteG662 -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/4/2009 9:22:17 PM)

Guest,

Normal radius would appear to be better since it may also impact loadout for weapons.

You can probably create a specialised group for sweeping in AE by training. In Witp it is not the same with training so that would mean any generic fighter unit could sweep. Obviously the better pilots mean better results. Japanese can do this as well as allied forces so it boils down to how you handle your forces overall.




Guest -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/4/2009 9:51:59 PM)

Yes, but allied player have many more pilots and this same can do it easy. Japnesse player won't keep specialised group in this case. I think that comanders at war don't know abilities theirs pilots so accurate.
Is some method to increase japanesse pilots training program?
-----------------------------------------------------
Sorry for my English again.



wild_Willie2 -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/4/2009 9:57:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Guest

Yes, but allied player have many more pilots and this same can do it easy. Japnesse player won't keep specialised group in this case. I think that comanders at war don't know abilities theirs pilots so accurate.
Is some method to increase japanesse pilots training program?
-----------------------------------------------------
Sorry for my English again.



You want more trained Japanese pilots ALREADY? [X(][X(][X(][X(][X(]

Let's first see how the training system functions in AE before we start to cry bloody murder [:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]



witpqs -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/4/2009 9:57:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrcar

Mike Naval support and engineers is only effective if the unit is in combat mode. Aviation support works in any mode.


Why should Aviation support work in any mode?



Guest -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/5/2009 12:07:38 AM)

quote:

Normal radius would appear to be better since it may also impact loadout for weapons.

Not for fighter guns amunition.
quote:

Extended range means less combat time, creates higher fatigue and a higher chance of being lost, and running out of fuel because of it.

Does Zero pilot take higher fatigue after 262 miles but when Zero has drop tanks after 436? Ridiculous.



Andy Mac -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/5/2009 12:10:35 AM)

Beacause it was to hard to make it not work from an AI perspective.

Av Support is tricky because the AI needs to have minimum levels even when transiting and it would have required a whole new set of triggers - basically in the to hard camp for to little return



PeteG662 -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/5/2009 12:49:40 AM)

Guest,

Everything is a supposition at this time until we all get to experience AE.




jrcar -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/5/2009 1:27:36 AM)

I can't answer that, I've never compared. I tend to use drop tanks at longer range, but I have no evidence for or against it, sorry.

In part I use drop tanks at longer range as they are escorting Naval Strike packages, and I usually can't confirm what range it will be at.

I use drop tanks on Army aircraft mainly to help ferry things around. I tend to use stuff historically, so the default range of the Oscar is almost always sufficient, or I have the escorts closer, and the bombers further back. In AE escorts from closer bases are much more reliable (except for severe weather) than stock.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Guest

What is better: normal radius and drop tanks or extended radius whithout drop tanks?
Pilots have many abilities. Is possible to create specialised fighter gruop for sweep attack or escort bombers? If "yes" - I think that allied player will be it strong prefered than japnesse.




jrcar -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/5/2009 1:29:23 AM)

If I recall correct fatigue is dependant on the total distance covered. It doesn't matter if they do or don't have tanks, 12 hexes cause X fatigue (plus if they fight at the end).


quote:

ORIGINAL: Guest

quote:

Normal radius would appear to be better since it may also impact loadout for weapons.

Not for fighter guns amunition.
quote:

Extended range means less combat time, creates higher fatigue and a higher chance of being lost, and running out of fuel because of it.

Does Zero pilot take higher fatigue after 262 miles but when Zero has drop tanks after 436? Ridiculous.





jrcar -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/5/2009 1:37:25 AM)

Beyond Andy's comment that it was needed for the AI, I think it is the right call anyway, as there are lots of incidents historically when airsupport was done "on the move" from the back of the truck.

I don't know of any inceidents where ships where don this way (thats what AR, AE,AS are for).

Engineering requires planning and preperation and isn't done on the move. Units step forward and deploy.


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrcar

Mike Naval support and engineers is only effective if the unit is in combat mode. Aviation support works in any mode.


Why should Aviation support work in any mode?




Blackhorse -> RE: Aden Look (2/5/2009 1:43:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cathartes


quote:

ORIGINAL: Helldiver

Greetings, Cathartes.

In post # 208, the Aden RN Base Force shows a "Garrison Unit (0) x1." What's the significance? Purpose? Are these actual troops or a representation of some value native to some static base forces?

I do not remember seeing this in stock. If I've missed a previous post on this, sorry. My mind is in a haze of new info...

Regards,
Helldiver

If Andy and Bill are reading, they would be the most qualified to answer this one, but I'm guessing it relates to the fact that if this unit was attacked, it could retreat and then be mobile to avoid destruction(code thing). Not that it would be--it's in Aden, but others of its ilk in other bases would function accordingly.


Cathartes is correct. In AE there are two (2) ways to make a unit stay at its assigned base.

1. Designate the unit as "static" in the editor. If forced to retreat, this unit will be eliminated. Used primarily for large, fixed, coastal defenses (Singapore, Bataan, Pearl Harbor, etc.)
2. Add a "static" device. A "garrison" is a static device with no combat power -- just a nail to hold the unit in place. If the garrison devices are all destroyed, the unit can move. For the US, I use this to help represent the largest base forces (Pearl Harbor, San Francisco,
Los Angeles) and the multi-division training centers (Ft Lewis, Ft. Ord, Camp Luis Obispo, Camp White/Adiar).

For off-map bases it doesn't matter which approach you use.



Dili -> RE: Aden Look (2/5/2009 2:30:17 AM)

Will be there any problem in using drop tanks in bombers? i am thinking of giving that to bombers to simulate bomb bay extra tanks, i guess a problem could be that drop tanks weight doesn't cut into bomb load.



Jorm -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/5/2009 3:47:07 AM)


[/quote]

Hokay.... If you send them up on LRCAP over your own base with drop tanks on, does that extend the loiter time on station CAP - hence more time to make attacks on incoming raids?

[/quote]


Interesting question, Was this ever done in real life ? or is it just simpler to land and refuel more often to ensure sufficicnt fuel for interceptions. etc.

I actually wonder if the game mechanics are as developed for this as you suspect.
Can any one comment on the actual game mechanics for CAP ie what variables affect the number fo aircraft that actually intercept a raid etc ?
This may be in the manaul for Witp but its not handy.


cheers
Jorm







jrcar -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/5/2009 5:03:17 AM)

I suspect that it would a bad idea. Loiter time is not explicitly modelled. So just setting them to CAp over a base means that a couple will be up when the enemy comes, and others will scrable as available.

If they had drop tanks they would perform worse.


I think the variables are RADAR/Sound equipment/observers (this determines how far out a raid is detected), the number assigned to CAP, the number performing other missions (In A unit can actually perform several missions at the same time), presence of an airHQ I think also helps.

Cheers

Rob

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorm




Hokay.... If you send them up on LRCAP over your own base with drop tanks on, does that extend the loiter time on station CAP - hence more time to make attacks on incoming raids?




Interesting question, Was this ever done in real life ? or is it just simpler to land and refuel more often to ensure sufficicnt fuel for interceptions. etc.

I actually wonder if the game mechanics are as developed for this as you suspect.
Can any one comment on the actual game mechanics for CAP ie what variables affect the number fo aircraft that actually intercept a raid etc ?
This may be in the manaul for Witp but its not handy.


cheers
Jorm









Guest -> RE: WITP AE AAR Feb 09 Cathartes-JRCAR (Jap) (2/5/2009 8:49:35 AM)

quote:

Everything is a supposition at this time until we all get to experience AE.

It is possible to anticipate many things earlier than patch 2.4 (for example).
In my opinion normal range it's range without drop tanks and extended with them.
If:
quote:

Extended range means less combat time

Zero has extended radius about 65 miles and with drop tanks about 109 miles. This difference where from?



Mike Solli -> RE: Aden Look (2/5/2009 3:08:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

Will be there any problem in using drop tanks in bombers? i am thinking of giving that to bombers to simulate bomb bay extra tanks, i guess a problem could be that drop tanks weight doesn't cut into bomb load.


Historically, Avengers would carry an internal drop tank that filled half of the bomb bay. The remaining half was available for bombs, 2x 500lb, I believe.

Edit: I don't believe it was a drop tank.



vettim89 -> RE: Aden Look (2/5/2009 3:31:19 PM)

I think there is some confusion on the part of those of us that are on the outside looking in as far as drop tanks. We know that you have the option to use them or not but why? If using drop tnaks does not affect performance, fatigue, or any other factor other than increasing range, why would you not use them. Have I missed something here?



Kereguelen -> RE: Aden Look (2/5/2009 4:04:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

I think there is some confusion on the part of those of us that are on the outside looking in as far as drop tanks. We know that you have the option to use them or not but why? If using drop tnaks does not affect performance, fatigue, or any other factor other than increasing range, why would you not use them. Have I missed something here?


It eats up supply to use them.



Cathartes -> RE: Aden Look (2/5/2009 4:36:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

I think there is some confusion on the part of those of us that are on the outside looking in as far as drop tanks. We know that you have the option to use them or not but why? If using drop tnaks does not affect performance, fatigue, or any other factor other than increasing range, why would you not use them. Have I missed something here?


If players goes drop-tank crazy, they will not only eat up supply, but they will push pilots and machines closer to the limits. If you're carrying drop tanks, you're typically flying farther and longer, accruing more fatigue for man and machine. As a consequence combat effectiveness will suffer, ops losses will be higher. Extended range is not a freebie. This is the design as I understand it, and testing continues.



Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.453125