Building new bases (Full Version)

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



Message

mattep74 -> Building new bases (1/7/2011 2:20:52 PM)

I didnt find it anywere in the manual and the searchfunction here didnt cooperate so i ask you direct instead. How do you build a base?

I started Downfall and got anoyed with the japanese base in indonesia and thought i should take it to avoid Singapore getting visited a few times a day(even if the japanese dont hit anything). So i landed marines in the southern end of the island with tankbrigades and engineers and thought the engineers could build a base to supply the invasion, but i never found any such button.



Schanilec -> RE: Building new bases (1/7/2011 2:25:06 PM)

On the top center of the base screen. click on Ports, Airfield and/or Forts. Percentage signs will should that the base is being contructed. Also look at the engineer units and see the types of equipment they have in thier TOE. Some are better than others for construction purposes.



Sardaukar -> RE: Building new bases (1/7/2011 2:26:35 PM)

You can only enlarge bases if there is at least dot-base. You cannot create new bases where those do not exist. This is to partly to simulate areas where base-building was impractical or even impossible.



Schanilec -> RE: Building new bases (1/7/2011 2:26:37 PM)

Sorry about my typing. 'Should' to be 'show'.



Alfred -> RE: Building new bases (1/7/2011 8:50:15 PM)

See sections 9.2.2 and 9.5 of the manual.

Alfred



mattep74 -> RE: Building new bases (1/8/2011 10:13:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

See sections 9.2.2 and 9.5 of the manual.

Alfred


Well, i got the best answer here, post nr 3. I tried and tried to understand by reading the manual and then asked



Alfred -> RE: Building new bases (1/8/2011 11:51:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mattep74


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

See sections 9.2.2 and 9.5 of the manual.

Alfred


Well, i got the best answer here, post nr 3. I tried and tried to understand by reading the manual and then asked


Not what you said in your first post. There you said you "didnt find it anywhere in the manual" and the search function "didnt cooperate". The sections of the manual you were referred to provide considerable more detail than post #3.

If you don't understand something, just identify what it is exactly which you find confusing and others will quickly attempt to explain. Don't state that it isn't in the manual when it clearly is.

Alfred



HansBolter -> RE: Building new bases (1/8/2011 1:59:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: mattep74


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

See sections 9.2.2 and 9.5 of the manual.

Alfred


Well, i got the best answer here, post nr 3. I tried and tried to understand by reading the manual and then asked


Not what you said in your first post. There you said you "didnt find it anywhere in the manual" and the search function "didnt cooperate". The sections of the manual you were referred to provide considerable more detail than post #3.

If you don't understand something, just identify what it is exactly which you find confusing and others will quickly attempt to explain. Don't state that it isn't in the manual when it clearly is.

Alfred




Actually, what he stated was that he didn't find it anywhere in the manual, which is quite different than stating that it isn't in the manual.

Chill a little, he wasn't denegrating anyone who worked on the manual!



Capt Hornblower -> RE: Building new bases (1/8/2011 11:42:17 PM)

Well, MattEP74 may not have meant to criticize the manual, but I do. The manual nowhere explicitly states that a base must be built (but only at a potential base site, indicated by a dot in the hex) by constructing a port or airfield to at least level 1.

There are numerous instances in the manual where it is quite clear that the writers/editors did not even bother to use spellcheck before sending the manuscript off to the printers. In my estimation, the most egregious example is numerous instances of floatation for flotation. There are many places in the manual where sections are taken verbatim from the Uncommon Valor manual, despite the fact that the UV sections needed editing to accurately reflect the changes to the game engine made for WITP:AE.

(My qualifications to make these comments arise from 13+ years as an editor at Merriam-Webster, Inc.)



Rainer -> RE: Building new bases (1/9/2011 2:12:40 AM)

Feel free to correct what you think needs correction and make it available here to all.[:@]

I really don't get it.
There is the most complex game about War in the Pacific ever. It comes with a very good and comprehensive manual.
The documentation is available as printed book if desired and in several forms of electronic publishing.
The whole thing is supported by a very dedicated team over a time range of nearly ten years.
And the whole support is FREE of charge.
Anybody owning a legal copy can freely download patches including elaborate notes and documentation.
Again, free of charge.

What the heck are you complaining about?!
SPELLING? Are you serious?



bradfordkay -> RE: Building new bases (1/9/2011 2:20:30 AM)

I suppose from the fact that nowhere in the manual does it talk about building new bases while it does discuss building up existing bases one should be able to infer that you cannot build any bases that are not already on the map. I guess that the manual could have made that more clear, but I'd consider that a minor complaint... 



rader -> RE: Building new bases (1/9/2011 4:10:24 AM)

Yeah, I think the manual is pretty damned good considering the scope of the game. Not 100% perfect, but well written and quite detailed. And the support for the game is top-notch! [8D]



PaxMondo -> RE: Building new bases (1/9/2011 4:57:12 AM)

Best game manual I've seen in years - way above the usual "plop" that you get.  Still reading it and getting info from it.

kudos to the team.  great job.  [&o]



Capt Hornblower -> RE: Building new bases (1/9/2011 6:38:51 AM)

Hell, yes, I'm serious about spelling. I'm sorry, but the manual editors could damn well have at least run the manuscript thru a spellchecker before publishing it. Not doing so indicates a want of attention to detail that should concern every purchaser of the game. (That said, I think the game itself shows a much greater attention to detail than does the manual.)

But the spelling is just one issue in the manual. There are many problems with the organization, and many more with the writing itself. As I said, some of the problems go back to Uncommon Valor, and that these have still not been addressed I find sad.

I'm a bit surprised that you guys seem so uncritical about the manual when most of the people on this forum are so anal about everything else.



YankeeAirRat -> RE: Building new bases (1/9/2011 9:00:00 AM)

That is probably cause for as long as we have been running on Greg Grisby's games, the manuals have been more of a reference then they have been completely useful. I mean when I first bought UV way back in 2001 in a boxed form from the Navy Exchange in Norfolk, VA. The only manual that was included along with a simple map was the tutorial. It took me looking at the PDF version on my computer, and using the forum to understand some of the features in a that game. Then when I bough WiTP in 2005, again I had to use the forum more then included PDF manual again cause of undocumented features were included or commands/screens/options that were coded out tween writing of the manual and the program going gold. If you look at even the big name companies like Microsoft, Apple, Sun Microsystms, etc all have a point where the designers due a thing called "Hmm, this is awesome we are going to make this work." and then during the Alpha and Beta stages they realize the cool/awesomeness gets coded back out cause it isn't working the way the designers wanted it to do.

I would also say this; we are very, very, very, lucky that Matrix has decided to even print a manual. Simply cause of the costs involved in printing a large 100+ page manual. Again to cite the big name guys like EA, Microsoft, Bioware, etc; most of them have phased out a large printed manual in most of thier games in exchange for a PDF or DOC file. Why? Costs and easy of correcting typos, grammar issues, and making re-writes tween Beta and Gold phases. For a small company like Matrix, which really just facilitates publishing of a game for small game designers, they don't have the staff on hand to sit there and properly screen manuals and other written documentation for grammar and spelling errors. I would also say that in my 30+ yrs of playing computer games (or using computer software) I have seen the big name guys have had engrish (or other translation errors), grammar, and spelling errors both in the documentation or in the game itself.

If you're that angry and annoyed about it. Why not get ahold of michealm or someone else from the volunteers that produced this version of WiTP and volunteer to preform a spelling, grammar, and feature edit of the manual for future purchasers of this game.



LeeChard -> RE: Building new bases (1/10/2011 5:48:10 PM)

If there is a nit, someone will pick it[8|]



marky -> RE: Building new bases (1/10/2011 6:07:49 PM)

is it just me or does base expansion take ALOT longer now.

was playing the GC scen and mundas 0 size af is literally going up 1 percent a day. was this intentionally put into the gc scen? i didnt see any notes about it when i started it.

bit short on support but got lots of supplies and engineers.

shouldnt take 3 odd months just to build a fighter strip [:D]



Iridium -> RE: Building new bases (1/10/2011 7:20:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: marky

is it just me or does base expansion take ALOT longer now.

was playing the GC scen and mundas 0 size af is literally going up 1 percent a day. was this intentionally put into the gc scen? i didnt see any notes about it when i started it.

bit short on support but got lots of supplies and engineers.

shouldnt take 3 odd months just to build a fighter strip [:D]



If you only have 3 guys and one shovel building an airstrip...yeah, it'd take every bit of 3 months. Then they're probably dead tired after that time.



marky -> RE: Building new bases (1/10/2011 7:38:07 PM)

[:D]

ya but theres like 100 engineer vehicles there, maybe 3 seperate seabee units, plus base units. Port moresby has a fraction of this and its expanding much faster, and its at a higher level. is it the weather or something? [&:]

it didnt take that long to build a fighter strip in real life, far as i remember anyway[&:]



Skyros -> RE: Building new bases (1/10/2011 8:17:17 PM)

4.2.3 OTHER HEX INFORMATION
Bases: Bases are marked by an Allied or Japanese base symbol (refer to Section 4.2.8 Map
Icons for the specific associated map symbol), or as potential bases by a dot in a land hex. Only
hexes with one of these symbols can ever contain a base. No more than one base can be in
any hex, although the base may contain both a port and an airfield. Bases are always controlled
either by the Allies or Japanese. Either side that owns it can build up potential bases.
Units: Friendly units appear on the map, as well as, friendly minefields and any enemy units
or minefields that have been detected. However, unspotted enemy units won’t appear until
detected, and depending on the Fog of War setting specified, even when spotted information
may prove erroneous or utterly false.

Page 41 of the manual.



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Building new bases (1/10/2011 8:28:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: marky

[:D]

ya but theres like 100 engineer vehicles there, maybe 3 seperate seabee units, plus base units. Port moresby has a fraction of this and its expanding much faster, and its at a higher level. is it the weather or something? [&:]

it didnt take that long to build a fighter strip in real life, far as i remember anyway[&:]



A situation like PM is about leverage. It's easier to make something bigger than to make it the first time.

The first thing those engineers do when they get to a (0) dot hex is clear trees and undergrowth, make a place to sleep, eat, and use the latrine. They find water or dig a well. They establish a perimeter, maybe build some bunkers. They secure their supplies. They establish comms. Set up a sick-bay. THEN they start on the air strip. At PM all that early stuff is built; there's a base at the base. To build a parallel runway to the first is much faster than starting with jungle.



marky -> RE: Building new bases (1/10/2011 8:44:06 PM)

indeed but the manual says its harder to go from 4-5 than 0-1 right? [&:]

it shouldnt take 90 days to build a fighter strip, that just doesnt make any sense, i mean how long was it in RL from when they took the airfields or started building em till they had a functioning airstrip that could at least take fighters?

need to bring in better labor [:D]



Skyros -> RE: Building new bases (1/10/2011 8:50:58 PM)

9.4.2 Base Construction and Repair
Once a port or airfield reaches its SPS, the cost of additional construction increases significantly,
You should consider halting construction or else risk consuming large quantities of supplies
for possibly little benefit. In addition to the normal costs, it takes 10 times longer than normal
to increase a current size 0 airfield with a SPS of zero to a size of 1. These size zero locations
were very unsuitable for airfields (such as Wau, which was built on the side of a mountain).

Pg 215.



marky -> RE: Building new bases (1/10/2011 8:57:01 PM)

ahh, so its the scenario then. in the grand campaign the SPS of the port and airfield are higher. ty skyros [:D]



Schanilec -> RE: Building new bases (1/10/2011 9:02:26 PM)

I suppose it depends on who is building the base/airfield. Take Henderson Field. The Japanese were there in early May. When the marines landing on 7 August the airfield was not quite complete. That's three months. An at that it was not really hacked out of jungle. Mostly kunia grass, brush and coconut palms. And include what the Moose mentioned. Plus leveling, compacting and surfacing the ground.

My thoughts anyway.



marky -> RE: Building new bases (1/10/2011 9:05:46 PM)

they musta been too busy drinkin the sake and building a shrine to Benzaiten [:D]



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Building new bases (1/11/2011 12:10:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Schanilec

I suppose it depends on who is building the base/airfield. Take Henderson Field. The Japanese were there in early May. When the marines landing on 7 August the airfield was not quite complete. That's three months. An at that it was not really hacked out of jungle. Mostly kunia grass, brush and coconut palms. And include what the Moose mentioned. Plus leveling, compacting and surfacing the ground.

My thoughts anyway.


In RL I think the micro-terrain was a huge factor. We have 40-miles hexes of the same terrain, with no elevation. Even a slight ridge, maybe 15-20 feet, running along or across the runway's path was going to need to be removed. (I'm no pilot, but I "think" landing uphill or downhill is a Bad Thing.) Millions of yards of dirt and coral to be moved sometimes. Seabees were busy, and there were a lot of them.



marky -> RE: Building new bases (1/11/2011 12:37:03 AM)

true [:D]



Bradley7735 -> RE: Building new bases (1/11/2011 1:01:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: marky

indeed but the manual says its harder to go from 4-5 than 0-1 right? [&:]

it shouldnt take 90 days to build a fighter strip, that just doesnt make any sense, i mean how long was it in RL from when they took the airfields or started building em till they had a functioning airstrip that could at least take fighters?

need to bring in better labor [:D]




I don't know if this was fixed or not, but I noticed this a while back. If I put a gazillion engineers at an SPS (0) airfield base and started construction, I would see about 1% increase each day. But, when it got to 10% completed, the airbase went to 1. After that, it was easy to increase it to 2 and 3. I think my 2nd point is correct per the manual, but my first point may be a bug. I haven't tried to build a base at SPS 0 for over a year, so I don't know if this still happens.

bc



oldman45 -> RE: Building new bases (1/11/2011 4:53:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: marky

[:D]

ya but theres like 100 engineer vehicles there, maybe 3 seperate seabee units, plus base units. Port moresby has a fraction of this and its expanding much faster, and its at a higher level. is it the weather or something? [&:]

it didnt take that long to build a fighter strip in real life, far as i remember anyway[&:]



A situation like PM is about leverage. It's easier to make something bigger than to make it the first time.

The first thing those engineers do when they get to a (0) dot hex is clear trees and undergrowth, make a place to sleep, eat, and use the latrine. They find water or dig a well. They establish a perimeter, maybe build some bunkers. They secure their supplies. They establish comms. Set up a sick-bay. THEN they start on the air strip. At PM all that early stuff is built; there's a base at the base. To build a parallel runway to the first is much faster than starting with jungle.


You forgot the most important thing Bullwinkle, they have to build the chiefs club before anything else. Just like Kings Bay in 79, the clubs were done before most of the rest of the buildings were started. [;)]



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.53125