RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (Full Version)

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



Message

Chris21wen -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 10:09:02 AM)

Get the map focus working correctly whan you click on a unit of any type.



vlcz -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 10:41:27 AM)

My wishes list: -        Implement graphics with search arcs/density (as witpstaff does)-        Create an option to auto-withdraw air units when the date comes (as auto upgrading)-        Display total tonnage of TF and tonnage of biggest ship, and ideally port size needed to dock- in TF display (now only shows total when in a port)-        Allow set priority zones for Submarine patrol TFs under computer control created in a port-        Allow assignation of priority to replacement/upgrade for air groups.



myros -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 11:57:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs


quote:

ORIGINAL: myros

Non player info releated text put on a seperate timer or fixed at 0.0, so that actual needed player feedback text can be put at a readable speed without having to pause for all the other rubbish.

ie Antyhing not about a specific event or specific hex set pemanently to 0.0 delay.

M



Not sure I got that, Myros. You'll have to list out which events you want to change the way they are handled right now; things like "change all text that the player doesn't want to read to delay 0.0" can't be implemented, because different players want to read different things. Some want to read it all :D

Cheers [:D]
fbs



Sorry if I wasnt clear, anything just related to what the computer is doing in the background ie "REPAIRING SHIPS" etc all of that kind of text on it's own timer or set to 0.0 by default. It's fine that its in there just not that it should be on the same timer as "Sub sighted at X". One of those the player may want to have at a readable speed, the other is totaly irrelevant in terms of player feedback.

Or to put it in the reverse, have all text related to sightings and events on the map on their own timer instead of the 'general text' one, so that we can slow those down if wanted without slowing down everything else in the game.



tacfire -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 3:14:57 PM)

It looks like my earlier post in this thread got missed with all these new user ideas :) Lets try one more time:


quote:

ORIGINAL: tacfire

I would like to suggest adding some new hotkeys (4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0). They could be used to show more information on the game map. Some ideas:

4 = show AF size /Port size / Fort level
5 = Resource / Oil / Manpower / HI & LI factories / Refinery production levels
6 = Shipyard sizes
7 = Base's Shipping Docked Capacity
8 = Base Troop Capacity
9 = ?
0 = ?

The game currently only uses Hotkeys 1-3 for showing Terrrain, Zone Location, and Weather Forcast.




USSAmerica -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 3:38:22 PM)

"CR-31: Add a delta counter to each base that indicates by how much supply/fuel/resources/oil changed from the previous day [pad152] "

I know WitP Tracker did this, and I'm sure AE Tracker will.  [:)]



fbs -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 5:31:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tacfire

It looks like my earlier post in this thread got missed with all these new user ideas :) Lets try one more time:


quote:

ORIGINAL: tacfire

I would like to suggest adding some new hotkeys (4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0). They could be used to show more information on the game map. Some ideas:

4 = show AF size /Port size / Fort level
5 = Resource / Oil / Manpower / HI & LI factories / Refinery production levels
6 = Shipyard sizes
7 = Base's Shipping Docked Capacity
8 = Base Troop Capacity
9 = ?
0 = ?

The game currently only uses Hotkeys 1-3 for showing Terrrain, Zone Location, and Weather Forcast.





Sorry, tacfire, I wasn't sure how to summarize that in a two-liner. Please take a look at CR-34 and check if that reflects what you requested.

Thanks! [:D]
fbs



fbs -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 6:08:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vlcz

My wishes list: -        Implement graphics with search arcs/density (as witpstaff does)-        Create an option to auto-withdraw air units when the date comes (as auto upgrading)-        Display total tonnage of TF and tonnage of biggest ship, and ideally port size needed to dock- in TF display (now only shows total when in a port)-        Allow set priority zones for Submarine patrol TFs under computer control created in a port-        Allow assignation of priority to replacement/upgrade for air groups.



Added most of these, but you'll have to help me with the ones below

"Display total tonnage of TF" - it already shows this on 1.0.1.1083c; please review
"Display tonnage of biggest ship; Display port size needed to dock" - tentatively wrote as CR-38; check the text
"Allow set priority zones for Computer Controlled Submarines" - tentatively wrote as CR-39; please check the text


Thanks! [:D]
fbs



fbs -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 6:17:09 PM)



Folks, I've changed the listing from "CR-xx" to "ZZZ-xx", where ZZZ is the area impacted by the change, to help organize them better.

Thanks!
fbs



fbs -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 6:20:03 PM)


Also, as the developers/managers/producers/coordinator/supervisors read this thread, please feel free to indicate which ones are too complex to implement in WITP-AE in the foreseeable future; the purpose is try to obtain guidance on the complexity of changes that are reasonable to request without having to re-code the game.

Thanks! [:D]
fbs



Smeulders -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 6:44:19 PM)

I'd like for allied squads in the pools to upgrade over time as well. At the moment it is possible to upgrade squads in the front line with the latest small arms, but not to do the same to troops sitting in a safe rear are base.



OldCoot -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 6:57:16 PM)

When picking ships for a TF, it would be neat if the mouseover could show the ship's tonnage.



newland -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 7:44:41 PM)

To set waypoints it would be nice just to click up to three waypoints one after the other without going through the task force screen again ("esc" ends it after 1 or 2). To do this obviously the route on screeen needs to be updated after each waypoint. But that would save a lot of unnecessary  clicks.

Also for the Allied player it should be possible to shut down a industry. (for example in Australia why not shut down some heavy industry to conserve fuel). You can hardly argue reallisticly that the Australians were not able to do that.

Thanks!



Don Bowen -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 7:56:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCoot

When picking ships for a TF, it would be neat if the mouseover could show the ship's tonnage.


Added in Beta Patch.

[image]local://upfiles/757/05D36A34666F43B09C95B35076F0B5F3.jpg[/image]



Don Bowen -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 8:01:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: newland

To set waypoints it would be nice just to click up to three waypoints one after the other without going through the task force screen again ("esc" ends it after 1 or 2). To do this obviously the route on screeen needs to be updated after each waypoint. But that would save a lot of unnecessary  clicks.



Did look at that. Original idea was to just keep setting waypoints/patrol zone boundaries until three were set or player hit escape. Lots of probems. Click one wrong hex and you have to start over, no visual representation of where the first one was when you want to set the second, some others that I don't recall right now.

There are also a couple of related features that we hoped to get in but ran out of time and did not. Did put in the patrol around feature.



OldCoot -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 8:41:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCoot

When picking ships for a TF, it would be neat if the mouseover could show the ship's tonnage.


Added in Beta Patch.


Thank you kindly! Looking forward to it.



Laxplayer -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 8:49:15 PM)

You mean your computer didn't come equipped with one? I just push this little button on the front of the tower and one slides out for me. I even have a button on my keyboard to dispense a nice frosty cold Tab! Personally, I prefer Dr. Pepper, but the button hasn't ever worked... I should probably call the computer tech to come fix it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DivePac88

Can we get a coffee cup holder please? [:D]




tacfire -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 9:37:02 PM)

fbs

I think you did a good job summarizing my idea on GUI-6. And thanks for all your work on managing this thread [8D]

Tacfire



Don Bowen -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/1/2009 10:23:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCoot

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCoot

When picking ships for a TF, it would be neat if the mouseover could show the ship's tonnage.


Added in Beta Patch.


Thank you kindly! Looking forward to it.



It's already released as part of the beta...



OldCoot -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/2/2009 1:09:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

It's already released as part of the beta...



I have had the patch installed since it came out, and have never seen the mouseover when selecting ships for TFSs. At first, I thought something went wrong with installing the patch, so I downloaded it again, and
started installing it. Then I got the attached message. Business about losing serial scared me off from finishing the install.

EDIT: I got brave and finished install - nothing!



[image]local://upfiles/30876/67410B11460D4D7C9819AEAB8D8601BB.jpg[/image]



Don Bowen -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/2/2009 2:07:05 AM)


There is an on/off control for the mouseover. Some folks like it, some don't.



OldCoot -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/2/2009 2:20:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


There is an on/off control for the mouseover. Some folks like it, some don't.


Gotcha! Thanks much for your time and trouble!



fbs -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/3/2009 2:15:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Smeulders

I'd like for allied squads in the pools to upgrade over time as well. At the moment it is possible to upgrade squads in the front line with the latest small arms, but not to do the same to troops sitting in a safe rear are base.



You sure about that, Smeulders? That would multiply the production of squads. Say that you build 100 Inf Sqd (43) per month, so you're adding so many to the pool; if you add to that upgrades from pool Inf Sqd (39), you'll get way more than 100 squads per month...

Cheers!
fbs



Smeulders -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/3/2009 2:41:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs


quote:

ORIGINAL: Smeulders

I'd like for allied squads in the pools to upgrade over time as well. At the moment it is possible to upgrade squads in the front line with the latest small arms, but not to do the same to troops sitting in a safe rear are base.



You sure about that, Smeulders? That would multiply the production of squads. Say that you build 100 Inf Sqd (43) per month, so you're adding so many to the pool; if you add to that upgrades from pool Inf Sqd (39), you'll get way more than 100 squads per month...

Cheers!
fbs


It is my understanding that there is an "end time" on squad production in AE. In many (I actually think all) cases this means that you will stop producing the previous squad when the "upgraded" squad start becoming available. The upgrade of squads in the pool would then only be an update in training and weaponry for soldiers mobilized earlier, but not yet sent to on-map units, the actual production would stay whatever the production rate for the most recent squad is. The effect would be that a player isn't punished for husbanding his forces carefully, as squads that remain in the pool when an update comes along are now lost.

(Though there are exeptions, Aus and NZ militia upgrade to regular infantry, but there is an overlap in production, in this case the upgrade of squads in pool would have to start later, when Militia production is stopped)



fbs -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/3/2009 3:16:19 PM)

Help me understanding this better. Say that you have in the pool

100 USA Rifle Sqd (1939)

Now the rifle sqd upgrades to 1942, and 50 are produced; you'll have in the pool

100 USA Rifle Sqd (1939)
50 USA Rifle Sqd (1942)

With your change, how would pool look like after those 50 USA Rifle Sqd (1942) are built?

Cheers!
fbs



Smeulders -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/3/2009 5:40:57 PM)

There would be 150 USA Rifle Sqd 42'. 



fbs -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/3/2009 5:51:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Smeulders

There would be 150 USA Rifle Sqd 42'. 




Understood; summarizing it that way. That's for squads only, right -- not for equipment.

Cheers [:D]
fbs



Smeulders -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/3/2009 6:05:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs


quote:

ORIGINAL: Smeulders

There would be 150 USA Rifle Sqd 42'. 




Understood; summarizing it that way. That's for squads only, right -- not for equipment.

Cheers :mrgreen:
fbs


Of course, can't make a Sherman tank out of one of those 'Improvised AFVs'. The only thing I'm asking is that units in the pool have the same possibility to upgrade as those in LCUs



Mynok -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/3/2009 6:35:08 PM)


Actually, it seems to me that upgrading a squad shouldn't return a squad to the pool. It's not like you are gaining men.



Smeulders -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/3/2009 6:38:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Actually, it seems to me that upgrading a squad shouldn't return a squad to the pool. It's not like you are gaining men.


You aren't, a squad is taken out of the pool first, then the squads that were already in the LCU are sent to the pool. You end up with the same number of squads, only with more of the upgraded variety.



fbs -> RE: List of User Requested Gameplay Changes (9/3/2009 8:33:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Actually, it seems to me that upgrading a squad shouldn't return a squad to the pool. It's not like you are gaining men.



If you're playing the Japs, they don't... the upgraded infantry/engineering squads go back as manpower instead of to the pool [:D]

fbs



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.625