Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor

Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (Full Version)

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

Message

Admiral DadMan -> Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/13/2019 2:26:44 AM)
Has anyone played around with this? I think this would be cool to enable in a mod. [image]local://upfiles/5778/B3A18D30C2844722BD01EF55C006098D.jpg[/image]

Admiral DadMan -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/13/2019 2:28:39 AM)
And this: [image]local://upfiles/5778/EEB916B7D55E4C0BA1CB9B1D63918C94.jpg[/image]

BillBrown -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/13/2019 2:47:46 AM)
So how do you do that. I see that there is a CAG formation, but how do you assign the different air groups to it?

Korvar -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/13/2019 3:39:41 AM)
Woah, that's a cool feature you found. It would make transferring the whole CAG on/off the ship when coming into and out of the shipyard. Does it occupy one of the carrier's air group slots? From your screenshots the game seems to recognize it as an organizational grouping, not another squadron.

jdsrae -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/13/2019 4:18:43 AM)
That is cool. Does it only apply to CAGs or can you also make land based “Wings” and “Groups” using the same feature and give them organisation names?

Ian R -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/13/2019 5:58:21 AM)
I briefly played around with that a while back. I eventually got it to work, as in show up in the game, by assigning the CAG commander 1 aircraft so there was an air class for the unit. Do this: 1 - Open the Guadalcanal scenario in the editor and save it in a slot below #25. 2 - Un-sink the Akagi (ship #017) and park it in Rabaul (base 990 something). 3 - Go to the air groups screen and find Akagi's groups, at slots 482-484. 4 - in blank slot 481 type CAG A1 in the name field, set it to formation 10, give it 1 Claude or something with a max size of 1 put it on the Akagi, and tick the boxes for CV trained, and air group. ---- I gave it nationality IJN, no HQ. 5. Go to each of the three squadrons and enter 481 in the parent field (or maybe you can just attach them in game anyway). With a single button click you can transfer all three to Rabaul - but they stay attached to the group so it makes it easier to get them all back again. WAD. None of this was mentioned in the manual, and having on occasion opened the other side of an AI game to look around, I have seen these groups, despite there being none in the scenario data. I suspect the AI possibly gets to create these in-game to help it keep everything organised.

Ian R -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/13/2019 6:09:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jdsrae That is cool. Does it only apply to CAGs or can you also make land based “Wings” and “Groups” using the same feature and give them organisation names? I just tested it with the CAG starting ashore in Rabaul. It appears to work; it showed up as a fighter squadron with the CO's personal Claude. When I hit transfer to ship it went aboard with the squadrons.

HansBolter -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/13/2019 11:23:49 AM)
If the CAG transfers as a unit, how are fragments treated?

Ian R -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/13/2019 3:53:39 PM)
I didn't test it any further- it just seemed to be another layer of complexity that could go wrong, and not needed for the human player. But I do suspect any fragments will simply base hop until they are able to rejoin their airgroup in the usual way. I have a suspicion that this is descended from some legacy code from the original Grigsby DOS game. There, the various carrier air groups' data lines were wired to specific ship data lines where their carrier was defined. If they ever fell off the carrier (including fragments going elsewhere when a CV was damaged), the exe ran a check at the beginning of each turn and teleported them back to their original ship. Maybe the AI uses the CAG function to achieve the same result in WITP & AE. As this was not really an advertised "feature" (I have run a search of the forum and found no commentary on it), fiddling with it may provoke the law of unintended consequences. For a start, the CAG appears to use an air group slot on the carrier, reducing the available total from 5 to 4. I haven't tested this, but pre March '43, if a USN CV has a CAG unit, and 4 groups attached to it, filling the 5 slots on the CV, you might not be able to save fragments of another damaged carrier's air group.

Alfred -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/13/2019 5:56:30 PM)
Be very wary in using this "feature". The CAG "feature" is a hook for a theElf idea of implementing a doctrinal tool, one that could accommodate departure types, engagement priorities. It's development was quite low on the development totem pole priority list. In short it never really progressed; not in terms of developing the OOB to incorporate carriers having CAGs, nor testing for code bugs and unintended consequences. The idea was to have it as a "container" for other air groups, focussed on onboard USN carrier air units. In a sense a bit similar to a TF which is a container for ships but with some significant differences. Alfred

Admiral DadMan -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/13/2019 6:00:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alfred Be very wary in using this "feature". The CAG "feature" is a hook for a theElf idea of implementing a doctrinal tool, one that could accommodate departure types, engagement priorities. It's development was quite low on the development totem pole priority list. In short it never really progressed; not in terms of developing the OOB to incorporate carriers having CAGs, nor testing for code bugs and unintended consequences. The idea was to have it as a "container" for other air groups, focussed on onboard USN carrier air units. In a sense a bit similar to a TF which is a container for ships but with some significant differences. Alfred This is exactly the insight I was looking for. Thank you Alfred

Ian R -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/14/2019 9:10:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alfred Be very wary in using this "feature". quote: having on occasion opened the other side of an AI game to look around, I have seen these groups, despite there being none in the scenario data. But does the AI use it for some purpose?

Alfred -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/15/2019 5:29:48 PM)
Not really. There is basic CAG logic in the code and sometimes the devs found that old pre-AE, dormant and unused code in AE, would unintentionally be called up by the AI. A good example of this was the "bugs" associated with Soviet activation which resulted from the supressed, in AE, of classical WITP's AI control zones. In AE the AI does not require the creation of CAGs to keep track of air units. Most definitely what theElf had in mind, which far exceeds the basic CAG logic, was not implemented for either the human or the computer player. The issue of the treatment of fragments which has been raised in this thread would be one of the smaller kinks that would need dev testing. Of far greater importance are the impact on replacements leader relationships operational efficiency multitasking resizing Plenty of traps for the unwary modder. This all before trying to implement what theElf had in mind which amounts to a far higher degree of additional complexity. And before anyone asks, the answer is no, I won't go into any further details. Alfred

Admiral DadMan -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/15/2019 7:52:43 PM)
Yeah, beyond the "cool feature!" part of it, I'm going to let this sleeping dog lie. I'd rather not introduce "bugs and unintended consequences" into a game with a mod that has so many moving parts to begin with. Thank you again, Alfred.

btd64 -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/15/2019 8:31:40 PM)
Couldn't of said it better myself....GP

TheElf -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/20/2019 8:39:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alfred Not really. There is basic CAG logic in the code and sometimes the devs found that old pre-AE, dormant and unused code in AE, would unintentionally be called up by the AI. A good example of this was the "bugs" associated with Soviet activation which resulted from the supressed, in AE, of classical WITP's AI control zones. In AE the AI does not require the creation of CAGs to keep track of air units. Most definitely what theElf had in mind, which far exceeds the basic CAG logic, was not implemented for either the human or the computer player. The issue of the treatment of fragments which has been raised in this thread would be one of the smaller kinks that would need dev testing. Of far greater importance are the impact on replacements leader relationships operational efficiency multitasking resizing Plenty of traps for the unwary modder. This all before trying to implement what theElf had in mind which amounts to a far higher degree of additional complexity. And before anyone asks, the answer is no, I won't go into any further details. Alfred [sm=sad-1361.gif]

USSAmerica -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/20/2019 8:59:24 PM)
Hi Ian! [sm=00000436.gif]

TheElf -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/20/2019 9:06:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: USSAmerica Hi Ian! [sm=00000436.gif] Hi there!

Chickenboy -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/20/2019 10:16:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: USSAmerica Hi Ian! [sm=00000436.gif] [sm=00000734.gif] [sm=Cool-049.gif]

Zorch -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/20/2019 10:58:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: USSAmerica Hi Ian! [sm=00000436.gif] [sm=00000734.gif] [sm=Cool-049.gif] Tick...tick... [image]local://upfiles/34241/24EE19D0AD1D4DF2949894B5D17892EE.jpg[/image]

Admiral DadMan -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/20/2019 11:12:42 PM)
Thread hijacking confirmed

rustysi -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/20/2019 11:14:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zorch quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: USSAmerica Hi Ian! [sm=00000436.gif] [sm=00000734.gif] [sm=Cool-049.gif] Tick...tick... [image]local://upfiles/34241/24EE19D0AD1D4DF2949894B5D17892EE.jpg[/image] Happy Birthday honey.[sm=00000959.gif]

TheElf -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/20/2019 11:17:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan Thread hijacking confirmed Disregard...

rustysi -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/20/2019 11:19:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheElf quote: ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan Thread hijacking confirmed Disregard... Uh-oh.[:D]

Korvar -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/20/2019 11:21:58 PM)
I think that's more than an "Uh-oh" ... that's a Ruh-roh

Admiral DadMan -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/20/2019 11:31:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Korvar I think that's more than an "Uh-oh" ... that's a Ruh-roh [:D]

AW1Steve -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/21/2019 5:11:14 AM)
So I've got to ask......Elf, what did you have in mind? [:D]

BillBrown -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/21/2019 5:28:45 AM)
Disregarding.

durnedwolf -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/21/2019 9:27:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheElf quote: ORIGINAL: USSAmerica Hi Ian! [sm=00000436.gif] Hi there! Hey Ian - are you still @ China Lake? I'm just up the hill in Bishop. Just sending a big hello to another desert rat. [:D]

TheElf -> RE: Using the "Air Group" Function in the Editor (6/22/2019 1:53:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AW1Steve So I've got to ask......Elf, what did you have in mind? [:D] Ugh, its a long answer. Mind if I put it off til tomorrow? Alfred basically has it but there was a lot more to it. Lots of unrealized potential. I actually looked at my notes from that time period, could have been cool. About a 6 page design document. We just didn't have the time to fit it into the schedule... I am actually surprised Michaelm even put the hooks in. Not sure when that happened!?

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.734375