Testers, throw us a bone! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

timtom -> Testers, throw us a bone! (1/31/2003 5:50:02 AM)

Is it possible that one of you alfa-testers could tell us a bit about the game, ie compared to UV and PacWar? If this is against company policy, fair enough. But it's not like I don't know who won the war!



Snigbert -> (1/31/2003 6:02:04 AM)

All testers were required to sign a non-disclosure agreement.

However, if you have specific questions feel free to post them and if we can we will answer them in a vague, non-committal manner.



Raverdave -> (1/31/2003 10:45:05 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Snigbert
[B]All testers were required to sign a non-disclosure agreement.

However, if you have specific questions feel free to post them and if we can we will answer them in a vague, non-committal manner. [/B][/QUOTE]


Ok then I'll try with this one..........how does the production work in WiTP?



siRkid -> (2/1/2003 4:52:11 AM)

Here is what I know about production in WITP.

1. It has not been programmed yet.

2. We, the testers, are still submitting ideas and there are some good ones on this board.

3. Production will be linked to resources. This will only affect Japan because Japan has to actually transport the raw materials to Japan. I know this because we are currently testing out the Automatic Transport Routines. Which, by the way, will be very different from UV. I do not know how resources tie into production so I can't tell you what effect a lack of raw materials will have.

4. We are also looking at what game preferences need to be available for the player. I will make sure that "Historical Production" (AI Controlled) and "Variable Production" (Human Control) are added to the list. Keep in mind that being on the list is no guarantee that it will make it into the game.

5. You will be able to bomb production facilities.

That’s all I can think of for now. I will try and keep you updated as things develop.

Rick



siRkid -> A few Bones (2/1/2003 5:03:23 AM)

Subs in WITP can intercept TFs that pass through the hex they are in.

The map is divided into zones that can be individually set to AI control.

There are division size units.

The Automatic Supply Routine is being re-done.

The merchant fleets on both sides are HUGE!

Aircraft SQs can be crated and loaded onto transport fleets.

The Swordfish gets a hit every now and then.;)



Raverdave -> (2/1/2003 5:09:16 AM)

Thanks for the info Kid !



Snigbert -> (2/1/2003 5:12:25 AM)

And we dont know if an A-bomb will destroy all the industry in a city, because it hasnt been coded yet either ;P



Joel Billings -> (2/1/2003 5:26:34 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Snigbert
[B]And we dont know if an A-bomb will destroy all the industry in a city, because it hasnt been coded yet either ;P [/B][/QUOTE]

Not entirely true, as the A-bomb is in the database along with the 393rd BS and in the next version there is code that handles A-bomb attacks. However, the interface code isn't written to deal with an A-bomb attack and we haven't actually run an attack, so you are right that we don't yet know just how much it will do when it hits a hex (but the combat code has been written).



Snigbert -> (2/1/2003 7:28:24 AM)

And we need a giant mushroom cloud .bmp for the background art when a bomb goes off :)

Muhahahah!

(runs off to see if Tibbits is in the pilot database for the 393 BS)



Grotius -> (2/5/2003 7:43:51 AM)

<< There are division size units. >>

Kid, what size are the smallest units? E.g., will small AA and Naval Garrison Units be in WiTP, as they are in UV? I kinda hope so, but maybe I'm crazy.

For that matter, will aircraft squadrons be the same as in UV? Again, I hope so. I think.



siRkid -> (2/5/2003 7:49:53 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Grotius
[B]<< There are division size units. >>

Kid, what size are the smallest units? E.g., will small AA and Naval Garrison Units be in WiTP, as they are in UV? I kinda hope so, but maybe I'm crazy.

For that matter, will aircraft squadrons be the same as in UV? Again, I hope so. I think. [/B][/QUOTE]

It looks like the standard size unit will be Division size. There are a bunch of smaller units. This is something the testers are going to be looking at. None of us want to use an entire division to garrison a small second-rate base.

Rick



Snigbert -> (2/5/2003 8:47:07 AM)

[B]None of us want to use an entire division to garrison a small second-rate base.[/B]

Like Canada....

*waits for someone to throw a sharp object*



siRkid -> Ground Units (2/5/2003 9:43:59 AM)

Take a look.



Bulldog61 -> (2/5/2003 10:05:25 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Snigbert
[B][B]None of us want to use an entire division to garrison a small second-rate base.[/B]

Like Canada....

*waits for someone to throw a sharp object* [/B][/QUOTE]

Sniggie Ron is going to get youuuu!!!



TIMJOT -> Re: A few Bones (2/5/2003 12:14:58 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kid
[B]Subs in WITP can intercept TFs that pass through the hex they are in.

The map is divided into zones that can be individually set to AI control.

There are division size units.

The Automatic Supply Routine is being re-done.

The merchant fleets on both sides are HUGE!

Aircraft SQs can be crated and loaded onto transport fleets.

The Swordfish gets a hit every now and then.;) [/B][/QUOTE]



Hello Kid,

Thanks for the info. Every little morsel helps. One question and one suggestion though. Im just curious with the HUGE merchant fleets and all. Has there been any thought of having some sort of captured shipping mechanism. Perhaps if a player captures a port with shipping in it there is a CHANCE that some portion may be captured and put into that players force pool. Instead of it all being automatically destroyed. I believed the Japanese historically captured significant amount of shipping in China and the DEI IIRC.

I think Division standard unit size is ok, if you can break each down to regimental units if a player chooses. Anything smaller might get out of hand IMHO.

Thanks again for the glimpse:)



rcwkent -> (2/5/2003 12:32:27 PM)

Thanks Kid and Joel.



Raverdave -> Re: Re: A few Bones (2/5/2003 3:52:46 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by TIMJOT
[B]
I think Division standard unit size is ok, if you can break each down to regimental units if a player chooses. Anything smaller might get out of hand IMHO.

Thanks again for the glimpse:) [/B][/QUOTE]

I totally agree with this.....there are going to be times when you will need to break Divisions done to Regimental/Brigade level.



fcooke -> (2/5/2003 5:19:36 PM)

Curious - How is the 38th division attached to Rabaul? Shouldn't it be attached to an HQ? I know there was an early bug in UV with units getting attached to the bases in Oz.



siRkid -> Re: Re: A few Bones (2/5/2003 6:07:35 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by TIMJOT
[B]Hello Kid,

Thanks for the info. Every little morsel helps. One question and one suggestion though. Im just curious with the HUGE merchant fleets and all. Has there been any thought of having some sort of captured shipping mechanism. Perhaps if a player captures a port with shipping in it there is a CHANCE that some portion may be captured and put into that players force pool. Instead of it all being automatically destroyed. I believed the Japanese historically captured significant amount of shipping in China and the DEI IIRC.

I think Division standard unit size is ok, if you can break each down to regimental units if a player chooses. Anything smaller might get out of hand IMHO.

Thanks again for the glimpse:) [/B][/QUOTE]

Right now ships are not captured; however, one of the testers has made that request.

Rcik



TIMJOT -> Re: Re: Re: A few Bones (2/5/2003 9:44:07 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kid
[B]Right now ships are not captured; however, one of the testers has made that request.

Rcik [/B][/QUOTE]

If it is implemented I think it should only pertain to merchant shipping in that I think it would be EXTREMLEY rare for a military ship to be captured intact. I know historically some gunboats and even one USN DD were put into IJN service, but it really isnt significant enough to add into the game. It might cause totally unrealistic results such as captured BBs and CVs.



loader6 -> (2/5/2003 10:06:18 PM)

Thanks for the info guys. I like the division sized units with some smaller ones added. And thank you for allowing planes to be loaded on transports.



siRkid -> Quiz (2/6/2003 12:20:41 AM)

Did anyone catch the bug in the graphic I posted?



U2 -> Re: Quiz (2/6/2003 12:23:20 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kid
[B]Did anyone catch the bug in the graphic I posted? [/B][/QUOTE]

you mean the units attached to Rabaul?:)



siRkid -> Re: Re: Quiz (2/6/2003 12:28:53 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by U2
[B]you mean the units attached to Rabaul?:) [/B][/QUOTE]

lol not testers allowed. Good catch but thats not the one I was thinking of.



U2 -> Re: Re: Re: Quiz (2/6/2003 12:31:23 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kid
[B]lol not testers allowed. Good catch but thats not the one I was thinking of. [/B][/QUOTE]

what!? no fun for me eh:D Well I know the other one too but I'll be quiet

Dan



Weathersfield -> (2/6/2003 12:48:23 AM)

Are you talking about the 6th Air Div having a load cost of 0? I saw that but I dont know all the particulars.



Feinder -> (2/6/2003 1:36:33 AM)

Kid,

Do you know if aircraft production will be "country specific"? For example, in the old PacWar game, you could simply scrap the production of many of the Commonwealth aircraft, in favor of the better US ones. Will WitP compell you to build aircraft of the appropriate country? (I certainly think it should).

Thanks for the info thus far guys!
-F-



Snigbert -> (2/6/2003 1:52:33 AM)

Perhaps if a warship is in drydock it would be captured when the base is captured? It would be kind of neat to capture an American carrier and use it for the glory of the IJN. :)



loader6 -> (2/6/2003 2:34:55 AM)

I've got two guesses.

1. The 38th DIV has tankettes but at the top is shows vehicles as 0.

2. the 8th CST Gun RGT has a load cost about 3.5 times the 38th DIV (81,312 vs 23,599). This may be intentional though if they have some really big guns, but I'm not sure.



Grotius -> (2/6/2003 3:20:10 AM)

Yes, my guess is the same as one of loader6's: the enormous load size of the CD regiment at Rabaul.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.96875