RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (Full Version)

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



Message


Yaab -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (4/1/2016 1:43:32 PM)

Can buttons "Previous" and "Next" be added to the in-game databases? Would be easier to browse through the all those aircraft or ship classes that get updated during the war.




ny59giants -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (5/24/2016 2:39:39 AM)

It would be nice if a damaged CV or BB got more than one DD as escort when the AI makes an "Escort TF." I usually have 8 DDs in my CV TF, so having 2 DDs go with the damaged CV would not hurt and in sub invested waters would be prudent.




Admiral DadMan -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (5/26/2016 7:48:28 PM)

On the Mouseover pop up at a friendly base, can the AV #s be added such as something like

Planes: 50 Support 80




cardas -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (6/23/2016 11:26:32 PM)

Any chance of getting the actual combat messages that you see in the animations logged somewhere? I'd even accept that they would be streamed directly to a file, rather than actually having an ingame log.

Two reasons as to why I'd want them, the first a gameplay reason and the other a more story-like reason. For gameplay the summary of a combat isn't very informative, amount of hits against a ships doesn't tell you much as those hits could be from any number of weapons, even MGs. The story reasons is that I like to make mini-stories (if only in my head) about ships and thus it would be nice to know which ship was responsible for damage/sinkings, information that you can't get from the combat summary either. Actually looking at every combat animation in a slow pace (so you have time to see the messages) is on the other hand tedious when you are dealing with a large amount of battles.




chemkid -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (6/24/2016 10:22:01 AM)

.




cardas -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (6/24/2016 11:19:25 AM)

Ah, yeah, thanks for the suggestion but I'm aware of the Combat Reporter. What I'd like is the more detailed messages as well though, such as:

(Bombing)
800 kg AP bomb hits BB Idaho
>>> Deck armor penetration
* Explosion Below Deck *

(Air combat)
P-39 firing at G3M2 Nell from lower front, range 2

(Naval combat)
20cm/50 3YT-II Gun hits Arend
>>> ship's side penetrated
* Severe Engine Damage *

As a minor note for Combat Reporter by the way, settings doesn't play nice on my computer. Presumably it's a locale thing but I can't save settings due to it not accepting any date I put in (regardless of how I format it). I have to edit the combatReport.properties file manually to use the program at all.




Lokasenna -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (7/1/2016 6:38:34 PM)

I've got something that's bugging the crap out of me.

When a TF is loading troops, in place of the "Unload Troops" button, can we get "Cancel loading" instead? This button exists for all other types of loading. If I want to cancel the troop load because I need to move the TF for some reason or other (or because I wanted a partial load to begin with), I need to click "unload" and then cancel the unloading.




Yaab -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (8/17/2016 4:21:32 PM)

Can a marker be added in the unit TOE screen for devices that are set to stockpile? Maybe "^" sign? When a unit lacks specific device type and devices are in the pool, the sign in TOE is "*". If you set stockpiling for this devices, the "*" sign disappears and afterwards there is no graphical representation that the device is in the pool, but is being stockpiled. Very annoying especially when you try to streamline Chinese devices or handle early war device shortages.




Admiral DadMan -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (9/8/2016 11:38:10 PM)

Recommend that AGC (Amphib Command Ship) be eligible for Support TF use.




InfiniteMonkey -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (9/16/2016 5:00:51 AM)

Okay, I'm a returning WitP player and working hard to get up to speed on the AE Japan side. Maybe bad for me to be asking for this, but... Turn 1 as Japan is a lot of work...

One thing I wish for every time I restart doing turn 1 is a ship filter for an individual class. Something on ships display perhaps that says "Show all ships of this Class". I want to be able to see where all my Fubuki(I)'s are on turn 1 to ship them off to await upgrade to Fubuki(II)'s on 1/1/42 for instance, or move all my Akasi class xAK's to a collecting point for convoy systems. I want to convert my Ansyu-C AK's to PB's, etc. You can do this to an extent by filtering ship types and sorting by endurance, speed, etc. but it is still a pain.

Oh, and actually displaying the class on lists would be nice.




Chris21wen -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (9/16/2016 7:47:25 AM)

Not sure if this is a possiblity.

I tend to set ASW ship patrols with one of the three leg set to a port. At the port I set the patrol not only to refuel but to wait three days in the hope that any damage will be repaired. This never happens as the TF never docks.

Is it pssible to set any patrol leg based on a friendly base to dock?




cardas -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/3/2016 12:57:22 AM)

Default air groups to normal range rather than extended, please! It's such a minor thing but at the same time it's such a chore to always have to "fix" this on air groups - at least I generally prefer to avoid the extra OP losses you get from extended range.

To me this seemingly minor addition would be a major quality of life bonus.




BBfanboy -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/3/2016 2:04:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: InfiniteMonkey

Okay, I'm a returning WitP player and working hard to get up to speed on the AE Japan side. Maybe bad for me to be asking for this, but... Turn 1 as Japan is a lot of work...

One thing I wish for every time I restart doing turn 1 is a ship filter for an individual class. Something on ships display perhaps that says "Show all ships of this Class". I want to be able to see where all my Fubuki(I)'s are on turn 1 to ship them off to await upgrade to Fubuki(II)'s on 1/1/42 for instance, or move all my Akasi class xAK's to a collecting point for convoy systems. I want to convert my Ansyu-C AK's to PB's, etc. You can do this to an extent by filtering ship types and sorting by endurance, speed, etc. but it is still a pain.

Oh, and actually displaying the class on lists would be nice.

When I use the "All Ships" button at the top of the screen and sort the list by "Type" (CVs first, etc.) I find that within each type the ships pretty much line up by class - i.e. all your Fubuki I ships should be in a single section of the list. There may be the odd exception where a ship was added to the DB after most of it was complete and it would then have an index number out of sequence with the rest.




RichardAckermann -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/3/2016 5:47:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cardas
Default air groups to normal range rather than extended, please! It's such a minor thing but at the same time it's such a chore to always have to "fix" this on air groups - at least I generally prefer to avoid the extra OP losses you get from extended range.

To me this seemingly minor addition would be a major quality of life bonus.


+1. I vote for this, too.




Theages -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/4/2016 4:49:23 PM)

Some time ago, on the port view screen the "Manage ships under repair" button was added (, which in my opinion has a relatively hidden position).
In my opinion this makes the "Show Ships under repair" toggle superfluous on this screen.

When this toggle is removed and the "Manage ..." button is moved under der "Form TF" button, that would free up space.
Also, the new position would be more consistent, since it is not just some kind of filter, but leads to a new screen (like the "Form TF" button does).




Admiral DadMan -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/4/2016 5:03:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Theages

Some time ago, on the port view screen the "Manage ships under repair" button was added (, which in my opinion has a relatively hidden position).
In my opinion this makes the "Show Ships under repair" toggle superfluous on this screen.

When this toggle is removed and the "Manage ..." button is moved under der "Form TF" button, that would free up space.
Also, the new position would be more consistent, since it is not just some kind of filter, but leads to a new screen (like the "Form TF" button does).

The "Show Ships under repair" toggle is not superfluous if, for example, you have a carrier under repair and you want to move air groups off of it while it's in repair mode.




witpqs -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/4/2016 6:37:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: Theages

Some time ago, on the port view screen the "Manage ships under repair" button was added (, which in my opinion has a relatively hidden position).
In my opinion this makes the "Show Ships under repair" toggle superfluous on this screen.

When this toggle is removed and the "Manage ..." button is moved under der "Form TF" button, that would free up space.
Also, the new position would be more consistent, since it is not just some kind of filter, but leads to a new screen (like the "Form TF" button does).

The "Show Ships under repair" toggle is not superfluous if, for example, you have a carrier under repair and you want to move air groups off of it while it's in repair mode.

+1.

Not superfluous at all, even for more than moving air groups around. It is a much different display than the display for managing ship repairs.




Theages -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/4/2016 9:02:39 PM)

Moving planes off a Carrier could be added to the view accessed via right-click in repair management screen.

It is a different display, yes. But if the ship type filters were added to the manage screen, the functionality would not suffer.
There is even space enough to add the -t to xAK that have the increased troop transport capacity (currently missing from the Manage-screen).

Even if the "Show ships under repair"-toggle is not removed, the suggested new position for the Manage-button still seems better than the current.




witpqs -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/5/2016 2:06:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Theages

Moving planes off a Carrier could be added to the view accessed via right-click in repair management screen.

It is a different display, yes. But if the ship type filters were added to the manage screen, the functionality would not suffer.
There is even space enough to add the -t to xAK that have the increased troop transport capacity (currently missing from the Manage-screen).

Even if the "Show ships under repair"-toggle is not removed, the suggested new position for the Manage-button still seems better than the current.


I think learning where that button is presently is the easiest course of action. Disagree with you on the view in manage being better, it's far more crowded due to its different purpose.




LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/5/2016 4:44:39 PM)

Ship Repair Management Screen :

1. Add ship class filters
2. Filters to hide / show ships by repair type, e.g hiding ships in "ready" repair or showing only ships under "pierside repairs".




Marshall -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/7/2016 4:51:23 PM)

Can we please!!!! have a maximum time to conquer a Atoll back in the game, we used to have the 3 day rule, perhaps we can do a 2 week rule.
It is past any realism to have a 3 month battle with over 35000 troops and over a 1000 tanks on a 6 km2 sized atoll fighting for 2 months.


[&o][&o]
[&o][&o]




witpqs -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/7/2016 8:10:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall

Can we please!!!! have a maximum time to conquer a Atoll back in the game, we used to have the 3 day rule, perhaps we can do a 2 week rule.
It is past any realism to have a 3 month battle with over 35000 troops and over a 1000 tanks on a 6 km2 sized atoll fighting for 2 months.


[&o][&o]
[&o][&o]


There has never been any such rule. [&:]

Stacking limit penalties already seem to rule out the example you give.




cardas -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/7/2016 11:46:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Disagree with you on the view in manage being better, it's far more crowded due to its different purpose.


Indeed, I wouldn't want to be without the "Show ships under repair" display. I find myself using it more often than the dedicated "Manage ships under repair" display, although both are useful.




Admiral DadMan -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/15/2016 9:14:03 PM)

Can "ESC" be altered to NOT close/exit the program? Sometimes I just want to get through to the end, and the last ESC function call exits the program. Frustrating.




Marshall -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/16/2016 12:42:47 PM)

Actually there was a 3 day rule in the old game, 3 days to conquer. Atoll or your forces where wiped out and surrendered.
The example i gave of troops and tanks is actually taking place in my PBEM game with admiral dadman as we speak.
Wake island , over 2 months of combat over 40.000 troops and over a 1000 tanks, 300 plus artillery.
Stacking limits do not prdvent these battles, it just consumes a hige amount of supplies.

I am not asking for the 3 day rule, but a max time and number of troops a cording to atoll size does help in this.
We are now approaching the 3 rd month of combat on wake, i killed so many tanks and allied soldiers, i should be able to walk from wake to saipan over the burned out hulls.

2 months in the surf of wake with 35000 troops and a 1000 tanks, thats not realistic, these troops get a cold, trench rot and the tanks start to rust by now.




Admiral DadMan -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/16/2016 2:46:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall

Actually there was a 3 day rule in the old game, 3 days to conquer. Atoll or your forces where wiped out and surrendered.
The example i gave of troops and tanks is actually taking place in my PBEM game with admiral dadman as we speak.
Wake island , over 2 months of combat over 40.000 troops and over a 1000 tanks, 300 plus artillery.
Stacking limits do not prdvent these battles, it just consumes a hige amount of supplies.

I am not asking for the 3 day rule, but a max time and number of troops a cording to atoll size does help in this.
We are now approaching the 3 rd month of combat on wake, i killed so many tanks and allied soldiers, i should be able to walk from wake to saipan over the burned out hulls.

2 months in the surf of wake with 35000 troops and a 1000 tanks, thats not realistic, these troops get a cold, trench rot and the tanks start to rust by now.


it wasn't 1000 tanks. 500 maybe...

Don't know what you're complaining about. They're well supplied, yet poorly led/managed. If anything, the atoll should've sunk under the weight of all the crap the fell off the decks of my landing craft...

AND the number of VP it's cost me trying to untangle this mess will keep you in tea and kippers for a while...




Marshall -> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta & UI Suggestions (11/17/2016 9:00:08 AM)

I am happy with the VP's and the delay it causes you Dadman, but i just think its a little bit silly such numbers of troops on a 6km2 Island for 2 months and over 500 tanks.

perhaps more penalties should be applied to prevent such a situation, besides heavy supply usage.





Page: <<   < prev  5 6 7 8 [9]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.640625