RE: 25 Feb1942 (Full Version)

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



Message

mogami -> RE: 25 Feb1942 (4/19/2004 3:37:15 AM)

Hi, Japanese capture Rangoon. I can't say what the AI was up to it moved a very powerfull force of surface ships into SRA (including at least 3 CA from Central Pacific (Chicago, Salt Lake City and Northampton) This force could have caused a great many problems but it entered a triangle of Japanese bases each with 54 Betty/Nell (Davao/Palau/Kendari) Also 6 IJN CV and 3 CVL were in the area. As a result this force was largely destroyed for nothing. I have had no contact with USN CV for entire game. I have no idea as to their present where abouts. Prince of Wales and Repulse also have droped out of sight. I did see the AI pay a withdraw penalty of 1300 PP. (meaning it failed to meet a withdraw deadline)

As for playing Allies. My arch rival in UV (who is now a beta tester) Admiral Dadman is going to run the Japanese in PBEM game with me as soon as new build arrives. (New build will void all save games) We'll see how well I do. I don't know what he is going to try but he is not a passive player. Without giving too much away I'll only say I'll try to buy time with the forward units to prepare to meet the Japanese at some point and put an end to their expansion. I'm not a sucidal commander. I'll try to save what I can while at the same time doing what damage I can. This means keeping airgroups in range of Japanese but getting them out before their base falls. Surface ships will operate against unprotected Japanese in Allied airspace. I think China will be a challenge for me because I don't want to lose all the supply centers that I captured as Japan. I'll just have to wait and see what can be done.

I don't want to distress any one but I think WITP is about as ready as it is going to get.
We are waiting mainly for artwork and music and such. There will be issues found once the game is released but the only way to avoid this would be another year of testing.
To test a complete scenario 15 would take at least 6 months if both players were living together doing nothing but play WITP. (I'll do it but someone is going to have to pay for the beer) So I think we will be looking at patches every 3-4 months (several months for issues to be defined and repeatable saves submitted and then several months of fixing and testing each patch) Of course players who are good at finding, and defining bugs and submitting saves will likely have spots on the Med Game testing team. ( I'm guessing, but this is how I became a tester)



ADavidB -> RE: 25 Feb1942 (4/19/2004 4:18:24 AM)

Thanks for the heads-up. It sounds as if everything is progressing nicely. I can't wait to see a pbem between you and Dadman - that ought to be a great final test for the game.

I've got to admire you folks who are giving so much time to support the development of the game. Sure, you are having fun, but you are also committing a tremendous amount of personal time to assure the rest of us that we get good value for our money.

Thanks again -

Dave Baranyi



mogami -> RE: 27Feb1942 (4/19/2004 4:55:32 AM)

Hi, Last turn I change the construction priority of CV Taiho from normal to accelerated.
Time needed dropped from 739 days to 737 (Not sure you get 2 for 1 every day but I'll keep an eye on this. ) I'll change CV Ikoma to acelerate (1203 days) Early on I did a modest expansion of my Naval Shipyards. I built every yard that was below size 10 to size 10 (This added almost 100 to my total. I did same for merchant yards and repair yards) (The largest Naval Shipyard is Maizuru at 308 Largest Merchant yard is Tokyo at 250 and largest repair yard is Tokyo 128 Tokyo began as a size 72 I spent 72,000 supply to increase it to a size 144 it has not yet finished work. I built it because I tend to keep most of the IJN here. Currently I am giving all the ships a refit. (getting them all down to 0 system damage after 2 months of heavy work and battle damage. Current status of IJN damage
2x30+ 4x20+ 1x10+ 39 ships with less then 10 system damage (not listed are transports and submarines)



mogami -> RE: 28 Feb1942 (4/19/2004 5:48:21 AM)

Hi, OK I left Ikoma on normal to make sure it only advances 1 day. It went from 1203 to 1202 so I changed it to acelerate. Taiho went from 737 to 735.
I'm sending 19 DD to Osaka to be used as Convoy escort. 8xShiratsuyu 4xHatsuharu and 7xMutsuki.
31 DD are moving towards Truk 47 remain in Tokyo

Status of units used in PI operation. They have been resting for over a month.
2nd Div (69/97) (87/100) 25 prep points for Batavia (objective changed to Noumea)
4th Div (59/95) (74/99)83 prep points for Batavia
16th Div (70/104) (85/106) 42 prep points for Port Moresby
21st Div (72/99) (84/101) 71 prep points for Batavia
38th Div (69/99) (86/101) 43 prep points for Rangoon
48th Div (70/104) (98/106) 45 prep points for Noumea
65th Bde (70/104) (82/104) 69 prep points for Port Moresby
4th Tank Rgt (56/56) (86/86) 13 prep points for Port Moresby
7th Tank Rgt (47/47) (77/77) 11 prep points for Noumea
8th Tank Rgt (95/99) (100/100) 11 prep points for Noumea


Dec 7, 1941
Supply 3,012,728
Fuel 4,444,200

31 Jan 1942
Supply 2,025,685
Fuel 3,640,953 during first 59 days Japan used 13,614 fuel points per day more then she produced)

23 Feb 1942
Supply 2,083,520
Fuel 3,599,925 (during this 23 day period Japan used 1814 fuel points more then produced)

28 Feb 1942
supply 2,088,686 (+5,166 last 5 days)
fuel 3,698,241 ( +98,316 last 5 days)



Mike Scholl -> RE: 25 Feb1942 (4/19/2004 7:59:55 AM)

quote:


I don't want to distress any one but I think WITP is about as ready as it is going to get.
We are waiting mainly for artwork and music and such. There will be issues found once the game is released but the only way to avoid this would be another year of testing.
To test a complete scenario 15 would take at least 6 months if both players were living together doing nothing but play WITP. (I'll do it but someone is going to have to pay for the beer) So I think we will be looking at patches every 3-4 months (several months for issues to be defined and repeatable saves submitted and then several months of fixing and testing each patch) Of course players who are good at finding, and defining bugs and submitting saves will likely have spots on the Med Game testing team. ( I'm guessing, but this is how I became a tester)

If you are correct, and WITP is pretty much in "final form" for release, could you tell us
if ANYTHING has been done to bring air search in closer touch with reality? I mean in
terms of requiring a reasonable number of A/C to be committed before you "sight" every
TF in the Pacific. In UV one squadron of Mavis's could "patrol" 1.5 million square miles
and more..., with 9 planes! Have their been any improvements?



mogami -> RE: 25 Feb1942 (4/19/2004 8:19:17 AM)

Hi I have patrol groups on Marcus and Kwajalean. Palau, Guam, Saipan and yet those USN
CA went undetected all the way to Ambonia before I spotted them. (and this was by scouts from 3 CS 6 CV 3CVL.)

As reported before I have never spotted the USN CV so I don't know where they are. I've never seen POW or Repulse. (I had 6 subs in Malacca Straits and patrol aircraft out)



Mike Scholl -> RE: 25 Feb1942 (4/19/2004 8:23:50 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi I have patrol groups on Marcus and Kwajalean. Palau, Guam, Saipan and yet those USN
CA went undetected all the way to Ambonia before I spotted them. (and this was by scouts from 3 CS 6 CV 3CVL.)

So you think it HAS been improved? Any notion of how the system is changed? Are
the Number of "search planes" flying and the overall size of the search area covered
modifiers to the percentage chance to spot a TF? Any feeling at all on how the "fix"
was made?



mogami -> Patrol/spotting (4/19/2004 8:40:20 AM)

Hi, Sorry I really can't say beyond WITP using 60 mile hexes compared to 30 mile hexes in UV. I'm sure some tweeking was also done but it's not something I dwell on. Most of my early war TF's are spotted. There are a lot of aircraft in the SRA along with what feels like a horde of allied submarines. And of course when I appear in a enemy base hex I get spotted and subjected to air attacks. I can't say what percentage of enemy TF's I'm spotting. I know I'm not seeing many enemy submarines and I have a lot of ASW patrols out. The areas I find Allied TF's are sheldom open sea hexes. They are areas surrounded by Japanese airfields that have patrols out. The AI continued to send TF's to Singapore for many weeks and my groups did not see them. (I know they were there because my submarines reported them moving there)
One enemy surface TF was 60 miles from a Japanese airfield when it engaged a Japanese TF of tankers in an all sea hex. I never saw it again. (and I added at least 50 planes to the search)
But to be honest, I've been able to sneak around in UV without problems and I've been caught by other players. Bosun sailed the entire IJN force provided by scenario 19 right to Rockhampton before I ever saw it. (Rockhampton alone had over 30 aircraft on patrol )



Damien Thorn -> RE: Patrol/spotting (4/19/2004 5:58:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami
I know I'm not seeing many enemy submarines and I have a lot of ASW patrols out.


Are the country and time period modifies for ASW editable with the editor? It has always been a sore point with me since they cut the Japanese ASW to 1/2 of the US (above and beyond the differences in equipement, which I'm fine with).



mogami -> 1 Mar 1942 (4/19/2004 6:31:34 PM)

Hi, Everything is editable. If you want 500 IJN replacement pilots of 90 experiance per month edit.
If you want Japanese tanks to be Pz-V edit
If you want Japan to produce 25,000 aircraft per month edit
If you want midget subs edit
If you want 10 Zuikaku CV in Dec 41 edit.


But the problem is not IJN ASW. I can't sink what I don't see. (USN submarine made mistake of being spotted by the 19 DD I was sending to Osaka.)

Air war stats (not much happening in the air)
A2A 90-12
DOG 672-5
AA 23-196
Ops 144-116
Total 929-329
Sortie 167,213-46,438

4 More DD assinged to convoy escort 2xShiratsuyu and 1xMutsuki and 1xHatsuharu (another 5 Mutsuki will be assigned when they finish their yard period.)(will make 28 DD assigned to escort)
The 12 APD will also be used as escorts.
There are 138 PC/PG
Total non MSW escort 178
10knt MSW will be used for Port protection. 19x20knt MSW assigned as escorts
10xML will be assigned to Escort.
Total ASW ships assigned to escort convoy 198

Standard TF escort will be something like 2-3 DD 3-6 PC/PG 1xMSW 1xML



Rendova -> RE: 1 Mar 1942 (4/19/2004 7:11:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Everything is editable. If you want 500 IJN replacement pilots of 90 experiance per month edit.
If you want Japanese tanks to be Pz-V edit
If you want Japan to produce 25,000 aircraft per month edit
If you want midget subs edit
If you want 10 Zuikaku CV in Dec 41 edit.




Can you edit
1) update paths for a/c?
2)Replacment rates for a/c?
3)Upgrade paths for ships?

Thanks for the info



Mr.Frag -> RE: 1 Mar 1942 (4/19/2004 7:22:36 PM)

quote:

Can you edit
1) update paths for a/c?
2)Replacment rates for a/c?
3)Upgrade paths for ships?


1) yes - including special paths for units that did not follow the normal path
3) yes - including adding additional paths. Each upgrade has a class entry with a date. Want more, add more classes.

2 production) You can alter rates and pool size of allied aircraft. You can alter starting factory sizes and pools for japan. You can not directly alter japan's production because that is controlled by getting resources to the factories to get things built.

2 non-prod) japan is like allies here, standard pool and rates.



Joel Billings -> RE: 25 Feb1942 (4/19/2004 7:48:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi I have patrol groups on Marcus and Kwajalean. Palau, Guam, Saipan and yet those USN
CA went undetected all the way to Ambonia before I spotted them. (and this was by scouts from 3 CS 6 CV 3CVL.)

So you think it HAS been improved? Any notion of how the system is changed? Are
the Number of "search planes" flying and the overall size of the search area covered
modifiers to the percentage chance to spot a TF? Any feeling at all on how the "fix"
was made?


It was changed over a month ago. The number of planes flying has always been a factor. We added additional "long range" checks that makes it harder to find units further out. I can't remember how exactly this was done, but the impact had been noticed by most of the testers and they seemed happy with the changes.



Mike Scholl -> RE: 25 Feb1942 (4/19/2004 7:50:39 PM)

ALRIGHT! Thanks for the confirmation Joel.



mogami -> WITP status (4/19/2004 8:11:38 PM)

Hi, I'll be as blunt as I can. I enjoy playing this game. If it was something I found on the shelf and brought home and played as is I would not be posting problems on the forum. (Many of UV's bugs never bothered me before they were posted and I paid more attention. I always just worked around them since bug reporting (and the idea they could be fixed) was something I had never considered when I bought a computer game. Some games I bought had problems that resulted in the program being taken off my harddrive and other games I just played around the problem.
WITP is fun to play. I've not encountered a problem that would result in me starting a game over or getting mad and quit playing.
Of course there will be changes. When the program goes from having 20 players testing to several hundred, problems never before encountered will emerge. Hopefully upgrades will not void games in progress. Prehaps players should allow a grace period where they only play shorter scenarios in PBEM. I'll still begin long campaigns because I like them. (And someone has to play them to discover problems)
Maybe Joel should have a poll to find out how long to allow for testing. (I really think the game following the current plan will be out in less then 60 days)
Will someone buy it and then complain? You can bet on it. Will someone buy it and after playing it make it their all time favorite wargame? You can bet on it. More then complain I think. Within 120 days of release there will be 20 or 30 complete edited Campaigns done by persons who bought the game. I think many of the items requested by this forum will be done by the forum readers themselves. (groups of players that agree on changes can make them and share the files)
There will be someone who spends several hundred hours and does a Japan-Russia war of 1904. Someone will set up the Pacific in 1931. (does the date shown in the game actually matter that much?)
In short, once you get your paws on WITP you might not do anything but WITP. (Players will carry printouts to work to plan for when they get home to make their PBEM turn)
The game requires a commitment in time to play the complete war that no other computer game has ever demanded. But players have devoted just as much time to playing games that did not require it.
The more time you spend planning the better the results will be. (and the less likely of wild events occuring)
Unlike UV there will be very few games decided by the results of 1 turn. Even a complete disaster in WITP can be overcome. (I recommend you prepare to suffer a number of disasters in the 1667 turns of scenario 15)

Everything in this post is my opinion and not a statement by Matrix or 2by3. I'd buy WITP this instant and be happy. I know it is only going to improve as a result of the input gathered after release.



Damien Thorn -> RE: WITP status (4/19/2004 8:47:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami
(Players will carry printouts to work to plan for when they get home to make their PBEM turn)


Already done that for UV. [:D]



mogami -> 2 Mar 1942 (4/19/2004 8:52:03 PM)

Hi, I forgot to mention Japan captured Singapore. Japanese plans are being overhauled as it appears Java might fall without the extra units (Only Batavia remains) And the Division slated for Singapore is no longer required.



Rendova -> RE: 1 Mar 1942 (4/19/2004 8:56:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

Can you edit
1) update paths for a/c?
2)Replacment rates for a/c?
3)Upgrade paths for ships?


1) yes - including special paths for units that did not follow the normal path
3) yes - including adding additional paths. Each upgrade has a class entry with a date. Want more, add more classes.

2 production) You can alter rates and pool size of allied aircraft. You can alter starting factory sizes and pools for japan. You can not directly alter japan's production because that is controlled by getting resources to the factories to get things built.

2 non-prod) japan is like allies here, standard pool and rates.



Thanks



mogami -> RE: 7 Mar 1942 (4/20/2004 1:34:02 AM)

OK 91 turns in 7 days equals 13 turns per day. (I've not played it 24 hours per day and I've done at least another 20 turns of testing specific events)



sven6345789 -> escorts (4/20/2004 11:04:04 AM)

Hi Mogami, you said you send your DD'S etc. to Osaka for escort duty. Is that the port where Resource convoys are formed?
Why put ML's on escort duty???



Rainerle -> RE: escorts (4/20/2004 1:16:04 PM)

One last question:
When I use the Editor to edit the 4th Yamato Class Ship in early 45, which name should it get ??? (AFAIK it was never named?)[8|]



mogami -> RE: escorts (4/20/2004 2:47:36 PM)

Hi, Yes Osaka is the port I use for supply. (Other ports also produce supply but Osaka is where the auto system operates from)
ML have depth charges. When the convoy moves through a choke point (area enemy submarines like to hang out) The ML lays mines behind the convoy.) My TF will not be back through for a while and mines degrade over time but mean while I'll leave a little present for the next enemy sub.



mogami -> RE: escorts (4/20/2004 2:49:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainerle

One last question:
When I use the Editor to edit the 4th Yamato Class Ship in early 45, which name should it get ??? (AFAIK it was never named?)[8|]


Hi, I don't know. How do you say extragavent waste of resource in Japanese?



Speedysteve -> RE: escorts (4/20/2004 3:16:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainerle

One last question:
When I use the Editor to edit the 4th Yamato Class Ship in early 45, which name should it get ??? (AFAIK it was never named?)[8|]


Hi, I don't know. How do you say extragavent waste of resource in Japanese?


Banzai? [;)]



Rainerle -> RE: escorts (4/20/2004 3:18:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, I don't know. How do you say extragavent waste of resource in Japanese?


The IJA and IJN schism ??[:D]



mogami -> RE: escorts (4/20/2004 3:58:30 PM)

Hi, This thread is finished. I have a new build that voids it. Anyone want to guess what the new build version number is? (I had been testing Alpha 7.70)



Dunkamoto -> RE: escorts (4/20/2004 4:08:39 PM)

8



Pier5 -> RE: escorts (4/20/2004 4:17:56 PM)

Beta 1.0 !!!!!!

Pier5



Mike Scholl -> RE: escorts (4/20/2004 5:22:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pier5

Beta 1.0 !!!!!!

Pier5

Let us pray that your assumption is correct.



mogami -> RE: escorts (4/20/2004 5:41:53 PM)

Hi, Just this once I'll grant your prayer but don't make it a habit.



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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.640625