RE: Torpedo Ordnance (Full Version)

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



Message

Sheytan -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 6:24:02 AM)

Mynok,

I will conceed this, it may be that because of the desire to make the AI more combative vs WITP that I am seeing things in my game vs the AI that wouldnt take place in a PBEM game.

My experience in this was that I was attacked by betty bombers when I sent a SC TF to attack shipping at one of the Borneo ports. Although I was attacked by bettys from this port, and they employed torpedos, when I flipped sides to see IF a hq was present, the same squadron that had beat up my TF now displayed torpedos as the load out in red.

I am beginning to think my perceptions are being unfairly slanted as a result of concessions granted the AI to make the game more challenging.

At any rate you may very well be correct.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Yes, but the Japanese need those HQs for lots of other things besides torp supply. The restrictions are a lot more effective than you are giving them credit for.






michaelm75au -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 12:39:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Icedawg

I had another question related to this topic. Where are these base forces that have torpedo ordnance capabilities? The manual says there are base forces that can be used to supply torpedoes. Where are they? Or are they just limited to the allied side?


I originally was going to allow BF to supply torpedoes, but it was thought that was making it too easy for torpedo supply. It was changed to Air Hq as the source for torpedoes.

However, the BF option was left in in case there was some reason to that it may be wanted in a user scenario.



Icedawg -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 12:48:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sheytan

8/12/41

56 total HQs for IJ.
---------------------------------------------------
25 of 46 land/naval restricted. I see only perma restricted HQs here.
A number of these HQ group have command radius of 9!!!


Fragmented HQs-
---------------------------------------------------
25th army-2-5/elements 4- Fragmented.

14th army-2-3/elements 2- Fragmented.



10 AIR HQ-ALL of these have 100 torp device stores as component
---------------------------------------------------
4 restricted total/-3 perma restricted-1 can be reassigned.

6 have HQ radius of 1.

4 have HQ radius of 4. Of these, only the 1st is perma restricted. One can be reassigned.


84 reinforcement HQs
---------------------------------------------------

There are 40 Air type HQs appearing as reinforcements.


NOTES-I did not look to see how many are withdrawls in this list however if you combine the

two fragmented HQ's you get 52 at start. Assume every HQ withdraws at some point, you are

left with a additional 28 HQs with a total of 80...HQ's for IJ by wars end.


I just looked through the initial Japanese OOB and only found a total of 19 HQ's that can conceivably influence air ops at the start of the war. Most of them are useless at supporting Nell/Betty torpedo use.

I think you're counting Army, Corps and Naval HQ's. They can't help with torpedo ordnance - only Air and Command HQ's can be used.

The only command HQ's are:

General Defense (useless as it is restiricted to the Home Islands)
Kwangtung (useless as it is restricted to North Asian mainland)
China Expeditionary (useless as it is restricted to China)
5th Fleet (uselss as it is restricted to Home Islands)

4th Fleet (nearly useless - command radius 1)

SE Area Fleet - useful (command radius 4 or 5)

Combined Fleet - very useful (command radius 9)
Southern Army - very useful (command radius 9)

Grand Total For Command HQ's 4.

The only Air HQ's are

11th Air Flotilla (useless as it is restricted to either Home Islands or North Asia, I forget which)
12th Air Flotilla (useless for same reason as above)
1st Air Division (useless for same reason as above)

2nd, 3rd and 5th Air Divisions (useless as a personal house rule prevents me from assigning naval torpedo squadrons to Army commands - I'm assuming torpedo ordnance can only be drawn from the air unit's chain of command)

21st-24th Air Flotillas (nearly useless - command radius 1)

11th Air Fleet - useful (command radius 4 or 5)

Grand Total For Air HQ's 5. (If you don't follow my house rule segregating army and navy units - 8.)

So, the total is 9 (or 12 if you don't use my house rule).

If you add to this michaelM's note about supply requirements, it's going to be pretty darned hard for me to get Betty's and Nells into newly captured airfields and have them operating with torpedoes.

I haven't looked at the reinforcement HQ's, but I suspect only a handful of the 40 Air type HQ's you found as reinforcements will be of much use - due to command restrictions and/or date of arrival. (Getting an Air HQ as a reinforcement in July of 1944 isn't going to help much.)



Icedawg -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 12:51:29 PM)

[/quote]

I can't see the abuse.
There are not that many Air or command hqs on either side, and they tend to be spread around the map.

Plus you need the supply available at the base:
for AF 4+, you 2 times (or 1 time with an air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 3, you 5 times (or 1 time with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 2, you 6 times (or 2 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 1, you 7 times (or 3 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply


[/quote]

Where did you find this stuff in the manual? I looked through section 7 very thoroughly and couldn't find anything. I also did various searches with "supply" and "torpedo" and couldn't find it. Could you give me a page number or section title.

I'm glad you let me known about it as it greatly alters my plans for my Air HQ's. Thanks.



EUBanana -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 1:11:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icedawg
I just looked through the initial Japanese OOB and only found a total of 19 HQ's that can conceivably influence air ops at the start of the war. Most of them are useless at supporting Nell/Betty torpedo use.


I think you are overestimating just how many you need... Looks like plenty to me.

quote:


4th Fleet (nearly useless - command radius 1)


So thats Rabaul or Rangoon.

quote:


SE Area Fleet - useful (command radius 4 or 5)


So thats the Gilberts covered.

quote:


Combined Fleet - very useful (command radius 9)


And the Marshalls...

quote:

Southern Army - very useful (command radius 9)


And every airbase of note in the PI...

quote:

2nd, 3rd and 5th Air Divisions (useless as a personal house rule prevents me from assigning naval torpedo squadrons to Army commands - I'm assuming torpedo ordnance can only be drawn from the air unit's chain of command)


"Personal house rules" hardly count. So this is Timor, Java, and somewhere in SOPAC.

quote:


21st-24th Air Flotillas (nearly useless - command radius 1)


...one for the Aleutians, one for Truk, one for Saipan...

quote:

11th Air Fleet - useful (command radius 4 or 5)


New Caledonia? Australia? Malaya? I'm running out of places I need one at this point...

And there are reinforcements. Really, aside from the logistic challenge of placing them all, it's not much of a limit at all. It means another unit you must carefully position, thats it.



michaelm75au -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 1:54:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Icedawg



I can't see the abuse.
There are not that many Air or command hqs on either side, and they tend to be spread around the map.

Plus you need the supply available at the base:
for AF 4+, you 2 times (or 1 time with an air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 3, you 5 times (or 1 time with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 2, you 6 times (or 2 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 1, you 7 times (or 3 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply




Where did you find this stuff in the manual? I looked through section 7 very thoroughly and couldn't find anything. I also did various searches with "supply" and "torpedo" and couldn't find it. Could you give me a page number or section title.

I'm glad you let me known about it as it greatly alters my plans for my Air HQ's. Thanks.


7.2.1.10.2.2 LAND BASED TORPEDO SUPPLY
The detailed supply needs is courtesy of me.



Icedawg -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 4:38:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm


quote:

ORIGINAL: Icedawg



I can't see the abuse.
There are not that many Air or command hqs on either side, and they tend to be spread around the map.

Plus you need the supply available at the base:
for AF 4+, you 2 times (or 1 time with an air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 3, you 5 times (or 1 time with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 2, you 6 times (or 2 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 1, you 7 times (or 3 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply




Where did you find this stuff in the manual? I looked through section 7 very thoroughly and couldn't find anything. I also did various searches with "supply" and "torpedo" and couldn't find it. Could you give me a page number or section title.

I'm glad you let me known about it as it greatly alters my plans for my Air HQ's. Thanks.


7.2.1.10.2.2 LAND BASED TORPEDO SUPPLY
The detailed supply needs is courtesy of me.


Okay, here's another "Manual writers are nincompoops!" tirade!

The detailed supply needs is courtesy of me.

Why do I not get this info in the manual?! [:@] This lack of supply requirements in the manual would have caused extremely elevated blood pressure, lots of profanity and the greying or loss of the few hairs I have left! I easily could have seen myself situating Nells/Bettys at some level 2 airfield with an Air HQ and adequate torpedo ordnance and wondering why my planes are not carrying torpedoes.

Why do I have to get crucial rules here in the forum?! Why are they not spelled out in the manual?! [:@]



Icedawg -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 4:49:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icedawg
I just looked through the initial Japanese OOB and only found a total of 19 HQ's that can conceivably influence air ops at the start of the war. Most of them are useless at supporting Nell/Betty torpedo use.


I think you are overestimating just how many you need... Looks like plenty to me.



Yeah, I'm beginning to agree that there are enough, but without much room to spare. I initially hadn't recognized that the "Fleet" HQ's (4th, SE Area and Combined) were also Command HQ's. They really helped in planning my perimeter.

I think I'm going to be hard pressed though to provide Bettys/Nells for an invasion of India. There are enough to cover the historical perimeter, but beyond that, I'm not sure.

I was just trying to point out to Sheytan that there aren't nearly as many torpedo ordnance supporting HQ's as he thought (80+).

You can cover, but you can't really overlap much (in case you lose or key base or something).



donkey_roxor -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 5:16:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icedawg


I easily could have seen myself situating Nells/Bettys at some level 2 airfield with an Air HQ and adequate torpedo ordnance and wondering why my planes are not carrying torpedoes.



Aren't the supply requirements ONLY for the case when a Command HQ is supplying torpedoes? If there's an Air HQ in range, there's no supply requirement to arm planes with torpedoes, assuming the Air HQ already has torpedoes available.

Hence, in the example you give above (Air HQ available with adequate torpedo ordnance), the amount of supply there won't matter (at least for arming planes with torpedoes).

Edit: Although the way michaelm says it does sound like supply is required for BOTH the Air HQ and/or the Command HQ to supply torpedoes. I'm confused now.



EUBanana -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 5:41:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Icedawg
You can cover, but you can't really overlap much (in case you lose or key base or something).


It is true that if you zap the air HQ then you shut down a whole sectors worth of Netties, but thats almost impossible without a combination of dereliction of duty on part of the Jap player and blind luck on the part of the Allies.

In WITP you knew where the Netties were - the level 4+ airfields. If you could trash them you could advance without CVs, though it would be risky.

Now you don't know. They could be anywhere. And with a sufficient command radius, they could not be merely be anywhere, they could be everywhere. Bomb one airfield to crap and they could transfer to a nearby backup, still in range, and launch.

I really don't see how this is somehow a limit on torpedo use. There are plenty of air HQs you can use. No real shortage. You dont need Betties in the interior, and an HQ is the easiest unit to evac when things go south, being av support + supply. It's true that supply might limit their use, but really, thats a totally separate concern. Supply limits the use of everything after all, but torpedoes were supposedly worthy of a special extra ruleset to make them especially scarce.

Far as I can see it's not done that at all, it's merely given the Netties more flexibility as to where they can deploy, so it does, in fact, make them better.


That said, they do die like flies, so the changes aren't all in the Netties favour by any means. I just don't think the limited torpedo system is in practice a limit at all.



Icedawg -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 6:02:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: donkey_roxor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icedawg


I easily could have seen myself situating Nells/Bettys at some level 2 airfield with an Air HQ and adequate torpedo ordnance and wondering why my planes are not carrying torpedoes.



Aren't the supply requirements ONLY for the case when a Command HQ is supplying torpedoes? If there's an Air HQ in range, there's no supply requirement to arm planes with torpedoes, assuming the Air HQ already has torpedoes available.

Hence, in the example you give above (Air HQ available with adequate torpedo ordnance), the amount of supply there won't matter (at least for arming planes with torpedoes).

Edit: Although the way michaelm says it does sound like supply is required for BOTH the Air HQ and/or the Command HQ to supply torpedoes. I'm confused now.



I read it to mean the supply level out of which the planes were flying even when the HQ's had torpedo ordnance available.



bradfordkay -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 8:25:40 PM)

Even with Air HQs that arrive with torpedoes on hand, once those torpedoes are expended, they have to have enough supply on hand to draw more torpedoes.

Now, for michalem's chart:

Plus you need the supply available at the base:
for AF 4+, you 2 times (or 1 time with an air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 3, you 5 times (or 1 time with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 2, you 6 times (or 2 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 1, you 7 times (or 3 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply


Is this supply level requirement for the base with the HQ, or the base with the torpedo bombers?



donkey_roxor -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 8:43:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Even with Air HQs that arrive with torpedoes on hand, once those torpedoes are expended, they have to have enough supply on hand to draw more torpedoes.



Yes, this is clearly true. The question was whether an Air HQ, with currently available torpedoes, need supply on hand in order to equip planes with the currently available torpedoes. I did not think so, but michaelm's post and chart seem to imply that it might.

So, the question: if an Air HQ already has torpedoes, does it need additional supply to equip planes with those torpedoes?

quote:



Plus you need the supply available at the base:
for AF 4+, you 2 times (or 1 time with an air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 3, you 5 times (or 1 time with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 2, you 6 times (or 2 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 1, you 7 times (or 3 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply



Now for this supply chart. The only way to get torpedoes is through an Air HQ, a Command HQ, or through a BF with the appropriate torpedo ordnance. In the chart above, are the different multipliers for HQ versus BF? For example, in an AF 4+, is the 2 times multiplier for BF?



Mynok -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/24/2009 11:14:57 PM)


quote:

4th Fleet (nearly useless - command radius 1)

SE Area Fleet - useful (command radius 4 or 5)

Combined Fleet - very useful (command radius 9)


Any Japanese stupid enough to use these for Betty bases instead of the naval repair assistance that they are, deserves what he will receive. 4th fleet goes to Truk. SE Fleet to Rabaul and Combined stays in the home islands.

quote:

Southern Army - very useful (command radius 9)


Right, so you can base a bunch of Bettys in Malaya or Sumatra....the Philippines? (Why anyone would move it there is beyond me). I tend to put this one in Bangkok or Singapore so I can reinforce air groups.

quote:


2nd, 3rd and 5th Air Divisions (useless as a personal house rule prevents me from assigning naval torpedo squadrons to Army commands - I'm assuming torpedo ordnance can only be drawn from the air unit's chain of command)


Useful.

quote:


21st-24th Air Flotillas (nearly useless - command radius 1)


You are going to want these on your primary bases so you can get coordinated strikes. Same for the Army air divisions. You aren't going to set these up worrying about how Betties will get torps from them.

quote:


11th Air Fleet - useful (command radius 4 or 5)


11th Air Fleet for Rabaul. Of course, no one expects Betties at Rabaul, right? [8|]

quote:


If you add to this michaelM's note about supply requirements, it's going to be pretty darned hard for me to get Betty's and Nells into newly captured airfields and have them operating with torpedoes.


And it will be even harder keeping it supplied unless you put the effort into building the port. Which will take time. Far easier to put the Betties in their logical locations where they will be up to speed much more quickly.

Putting Betties at tiny bases might be an emergency choice, but it isn't a sustainable option.



michaelm75au -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 11:13:51 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: donkey_roxor

quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Even with Air HQs that arrive with torpedoes on hand, once those torpedoes are expended, they have to have enough supply on hand to draw more torpedoes.



Yes, this is clearly true. The question was whether an Air HQ, with currently available torpedoes, need supply on hand in order to equip planes with the currently available torpedoes. I did not think so, but michaelm's post and chart seem to imply that it might.

So, the question: if an Air HQ already has torpedoes, does it need additional supply to equip planes with those torpedoes?

quote:



Plus you need the supply available at the base:
for AF 4+, you 2 times (or 1 time with an air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 3, you 5 times (or 1 time with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 2, you 6 times (or 2 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 1, you 7 times (or 3 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply



Now for this supply chart. The only way to get torpedoes is through an Air HQ, a Command HQ, or through a BF with the appropriate torpedo ordnance. In the chart above, are the different multipliers for HQ versus BF? For example, in an AF 4+, is the 2 times multiplier for BF?


You need a supply of torpedoes PLUS the supply requirements listed.
One without the other means can't use torpedoes.
BFs only supply the torpedoes. If no HQ, then you need to use the higher supply rates.



EUBanana -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 12:07:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok
And it will be even harder keeping it supplied unless you put the effort into building the port. Which will take time. Far easier to put the Betties in their logical locations where they will be up to speed much more quickly.

Putting Betties at tiny bases might be an emergency choice, but it isn't a sustainable option.


It doesn't have to be - consider 11th air fleet being parked in Port Moresby. You can now base torpedoes out of Lae, Buna, Port Moresby or Milne Bay.

Suppose the Allies want to attack Port Moresby using LBA to suppress the airfields from Australia, without carriers.

Good luck!

Is this more or less torps than WITP?



treespider -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 12:46:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana


Is this more or less torps than WITP?



Guess we might want to try playing it and finding out...rather than running around like Chicken Little, screaming "The sky is falling."



Sheytan -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 1:15:33 PM)

LOL! Well perhaps some of the problems related to perception is the AI isnt bound apparently to the same rules as a PBEM game would be no? That may be causing some of the confusion.

I agree though, I will see what people have to say after they have been into a campaign game pbem for awhile. I was initally disappointed but I think the AI is doing stuff we couldnt.

Anyway im enjoying the game very much even if betty mania is a pet peeve of mine.

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider


quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana


Is this more or less torps than WITP?



Guess we might want to try playing it and finding out...rather than running around like Chicken Little, screaming "The sky is falling."




Dili -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 2:03:23 PM)

I never understood why the torpedos were restricted by base size.IRL Torpedos were restricted by pilot training and torpedo manufacture. Torpedos were dozens of times more expensive to make than a bomb and that put a big restriction in its use. Squadrons were specifically trained for torpedo attack and if not the results were dismal and not economically sustainable. Germans and Italians had specific bomber squadrons for Torpedo attack
Italians even going to the point of renaming their bomber squadrons "aerotorpedo squadron" when converted.
Unfortunately there is no Torpedo training/ability in Game and neither Torpedo production like for mines.

This cost of Torpedos also aplies obviously for ship and submarines ones.



michaelm75au -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 2:41:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

I never understood why the torpedos were restricted by base size.IRL Torpedos were restricted by pilot training and torpedo manufacture. Torpedos were dozens of times more expensive to make than a bomb and that put a big restriction in its use. Squadrons were specifically trained for torpedo attack and if not the results were dismal and not economically sustainable. Germans and Italians had specific bomber squadrons for Torpedo attack
Italians even going to the point of renaming their bomber squadrons "aerotorpedo squadron" when converted.
Unfortunately there is no Torpedo training/ability in Game and neither Torpedo production like for mines.

This cost of Torpedos also aplies obviously for ship and submarines ones.


To train in torpedo bombing, put the torpedo-equipped group on training with a secondary mission of naval attack.
To improve low level skills, set the altitude to 100' with the appropriate secondary mission and it will train in the low level bombing.



Dili -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 5:42:20 PM)

Thanks. My issue is that conflation of Torpedo attack and Naval attack training. Crews for Torpedo attack should be few since specific training was required and was expensive.



Mynok -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 7:34:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

Suppose the Allies want to attack Port Moresby using LBA to suppress the airfields from Australia, without carriers.

Good luck!


What does this have to do with torps? If I have PM, the only thing that will be based there is ground units to defend it. Everything else will be on the backside where the danger of bombardment is far less. If I never load a single torp on a single Betty it will still require CV support to take PM back.



dasboot1960 -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 9:31:28 PM)

Had to pitch in. All hail the clear-headed TREE SPIDER(unless of course the sky fell on him) I'm frequently amused by all the hand-wringing and complaining about WHAT WILL BE, with so little refernce to WHAT IS, all because of WHAT WAS BEFORE. I'm PBEM ing as the allies, believe me, I'll whine if I have to................Betties(Netties, I like that) are dangerous things. They have been in every pacific game I've ever played that differentiated types. But I've never heard the same guy whining about IJ torpedo bombers AND US 4E bombers in the same breath..........I know what I'm gonna try and do about em....................I'll shut up if I can just get another turn today.



EUBanana -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 9:36:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dasboot
whining about IJ torpedo bombers AND US 4E bombers in the same breath...


I dunno, if you look in another thread you will find me at least whining about 4E bombers as well. [;)]

And I'm not whining about Betties per se. They aren't as good as they were in WITP. I know mine have done bugger all so far with me playing the Japs.

What I am stating, though, is that this idea that the torpedo ordnance in some what limits them, is false.



dasboot1960 -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 9:58:41 PM)

Hi EUB. I couldn't get my longtime opponent to play the previous (perhaps he read the forums too much). So I really can't compare, but I've got a feeling I disagree. The IJ still must move those HQs and all that supply just to launch a mission carrying torpedoes, that seems demanding if not 'limiting'. In the actual war, I'd bet there were instances where planes were staged into small spartan fields with inadequate support carrying, their torpedoes with them. I don't think this is modelled in the game at all. I know the IJ staged H8Ks into the french frigate shoals to recon PH before midway (refuelled from sub I think), they could've just as easily brought some torps(in game terms, while it was still a GREEN DOT)........Sounds like you're playing so perhaps we can agree on this - better the imperfect you can play today than the perfect(which is impossible anyway)



Yamato hugger -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 10:04:48 PM)

As has already been pointed out that you so skillfully missed is that the fragments do NOTHING for your torpedoes. Only the PARENT has the loads.



EUBanana -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 10:04:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dasboot

Hi EUB. I couldn't get my longtime opponent to play the previous (perhaps he read the forums too much). So I really can't compare, but I've got a feeling I disagree. The IJ still must move those HQs and all that supply just to launch a mission carrying torpedoes, that seems demanding if not 'limiting'. In the actual war, I'd bet there were instances where planes were staged into small spartan fields with inadequate support carrying, their torpedoes with them. I don't think this is modelled in the game at all. I know the IJ staged H8Ks into the french frigate shoals to recon PH before midway (refuelled from sub I think), they could've just as easily brought some torps(in game terms, while it was still a GREEN DOT)........Sounds like you're playing so perhaps we can agree on this - better the imperfect you can play today than the perfect(which is impossible anyway)


Oh, the game is far better than WITP, IMHO.

And I'm not really bothered about the Netties. But when the game was in development there was quite a bit of hype about the limited torpedoes.



Sheytan -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (8/25/2009 11:56:38 PM)

Huh? Are you implying im willfully ignoring this? I wasnt aware when I originally posted my comments that that needed to be the case. Please refrain from making assumptions about what I think...or dont think, just as I prefer not to put words in your mouth..as well.

[:-]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

As has already been pointed out that you so skillfully missed is that the fragments do NOTHING for your torpedoes. Only the PARENT has the loads.




kwcampbell -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (9/13/2009 1:58:13 AM)

How DO we add torpedo ordnance to base forces in the editor? I've been playing around with a little modding... would like to add a few torpedo depots here and there. There's a device for this, but I think it's meant for carriers, doesn't seem to work on a base force.

None of the HQs that allow this have a device for it. I've toyed around withing turning a few base forces into Air HQs with a radius of one, but I think this will give further advantages with regards to the number of air groups that can be supported at the base etc., and I don't really want that if I can avoid it.



PaxMondo -> RE: Torpedo Ordnance (12/3/2009 8:00:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

A Command Hq (with sufficient supply) can act as an Air Hq for torpedo supply purposes if no Air Hq is in range.


Plus you need the supply available at the base:
for AF 4+, you 2 times (or 1 time with an air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 3, you 5 times (or 1 time with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 2, you 6 times (or 2 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 1, you 7 times (or 3 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply




In the GUAD scenario, my Emily's are not able to arm TORPS at Truk. I have 3 HQ's plus 17K supplies against a requirement of 3.7K at a 7(4) air base. Based upon the above, I should be able to arm TORPS correct? What am I missing here?

Thanks.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.984375