Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Barrel wear and relining

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Barrel wear and relining Page: <<   < prev  25 26 [27] 28 29   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 12/30/2007 1:26:15 AM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7
We both agree that the game as packaged should be limited to things that are historically accurate. However, there are things not in the base game already that are historically accurate, for instance the loading of 16.1-inch Type 3 "Sanshikidan" incendiary shells that carried submunitions to be used in the anti-aircraft role. These shells were loaded on board Mutsu the day she blew up in port. The game itself certainly doesn't allow the use of these shells, as the big guns are not given DP capability. And I'm fine with that because sometimes we sacrifice strict historical accuracy in favor of balanced gameplay.




Actually, I'd call this totally historically accurate...., at these shells proved completely worthless when used. Though I didn't know they might have proved a factor in Mutsu's self-destruction. But no, I'm not going to suggest that one Jap BB blow up during the game just because Mutsu did. I prefer to let the player's get themselves sunk.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 781
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 12/30/2007 3:57:11 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7
We both agree that the game as packaged should be limited to things that are historically accurate. However, there are things not in the base game already that are historically accurate, for instance the loading of 16.1-inch Type 3 "Sanshikidan" incendiary shells that carried submunitions to be used in the anti-aircraft role. These shells were loaded on board Mutsu the day she blew up in port. The game itself certainly doesn't allow the use of these shells, as the big guns are not given DP capability. And I'm fine with that because sometimes we sacrifice strict historical accuracy in favor of balanced gameplay.




Actually, I'd call this totally historically accurate...., at these shells proved completely worthless when used. Though I didn't know they might have proved a factor in Mutsu's self-destruction. But no, I'm not going to suggest that one Jap BB blow up during the game just because Mutsu did. I prefer to let the player's get themselves sunk.



Hehe, well that was just me showing an instance of where we do sacrifice the strictest of historical accuracy for gameplay. We both know those shells were worthless in their intended use, and if modeled would have given an unrealistic capability to Nagato and Mutsu. So it was the right decision not to include the ability.

As far as the reason Mutsu blew, know one knows for sure...but they did test to see particular shells might have been a factor. Apparently the Mutsu incident did prompt the removal of those particular shells (at least for a time) though.

More info can be found here: http://www.combinedfleet.com/Mutsu.html as this is the TROM for Mutsu as seen posted at the Imperial Japanese Navy Page.

This has been a little off-topic, but it is an interesting read.


_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 782
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 12/30/2007 4:29:20 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		The investigation concluded that it was an industrial accident...






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 783
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 12/30/2007 4:30:07 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		But many think it was an Allied secret weapon ...






Attachment (1)

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 784
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 12/30/2007 4:30:57 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		Yes, civilized discussion is good!






Attachment (1)

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 785
Early Fighter Shortage - 12/30/2007 8:55:21 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		I haven't had time to read all the pages of content here so if I am repeating something--sorry!

I've just gotten fairly far into The First Team by Lundstrom and have been amazed to read about the acute fighter shortage that was a bane to American CVs for the first two months of the war.  Didn't know how bad those Brewsters were when it came to landing and damaging their struts either.  The book is a storehouse of information!

Anyway...will AE reflect this fighter shortage for the American CV Fleet at start? 

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 786
RE: Early Fighter Shortage - 12/30/2007 9:32:24 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		CHS certainly has, so I expect that AE will as well. (just my impression...)

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 787
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 12/30/2007 11:22:34 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs





Hey !! Where did you get that picture of me, BigB and TomLabel ??

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 788
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 12/31/2007 12:57:39 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		Game trail camera. Luckily it was strapped to a tree just above where you three made a kill.

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 789
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 12/31/2007 3:28:00 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		Sorry if its been mentioned in the previous 26 pages.

Aircraft need AV support to operate, you can go without but they quickly become damaged.

At Sea, you can operate ships from ports, as long as they are at a certain level.

I would like the Map value to represent the size of the harbour/anchorage, the represent how many ships could safely anchor in the area. The ability to resupply/service/load ships should be represented by units with "SV" support points which would represent the Civilian/Naval/Army units who performed wharf labour work and repairs.

Poor Management/Planning would see your shipping stranded in port, just as the Air Forces suffer from.

< Message edited by JeffK -- 12/31/2007 3:29:28 AM >

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 790
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 12/31/2007 8:16:21 AM   
TOMLABEL


Posts: 5116
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: Alabama - ROLL TIDE!!!!!
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs





Hey !! Where did you get that picture of me, BigB and TomLabel ??




Which one is my ugly mug?

TOMLABEL

_____________________________


Art by the Rogue-USMC

WITP Admiral's Edition: Ship & Sub Art/Base Unit Art/Map Icon Art

"If destruction be our lot - it will come from within"...Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 791
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 12/31/2007 8:22:06 AM   
TOMLABEL


Posts: 5116
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: Alabama - ROLL TIDE!!!!!
Status: offline 		Here's a guess!


TOMLABEL




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


Art by the Rogue-USMC

WITP Admiral's Edition: Ship & Sub Art/Base Unit Art/Map Icon Art

"If destruction be our lot - it will come from within"...Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to TOMLABEL)
Post #: 792
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/31/2007 5:09:31 PM   
NormS3


Posts: 521
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: Wild and Wonderful WV, just don't drink the water
Status: offline 		Will there be the division of Essex class and Ticonderoga classes? I know that there is little need the way that the game is set up now, but adds to the flavor.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 793
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/31/2007 5:32:51 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline 		I'm positive they are.

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to NormS3)
Post #: 794
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/31/2007 7:08:57 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I'm positive they are.


Why??

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 795
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/31/2007 7:16:41 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I'm positive they are.


Why??



Gee, well maybe because of the bazillion new ship slots and new art work flying about?


_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 796
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/31/2007 9:40:26 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline 		Well, seein' as how the Ti is a few pixels bigger than the Essex, why the heck not? Instead of 3 sailors pukin off the stern of the Essex, we've got 4 sailors (and one overage reserve chief) pukin off the hanger deck of the Ti's. The overage chief is the fat redhead that's heavin' over the forward, port hangar deck opening.

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 797
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 1/1/2008 1:53:06 AM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TOMLABEL

Here's a guess!


TOMLABEL





That is cool but please tell Big B to be a bit more careful with those up-angle shots when wearing his official AE loincloth. There are kids on this forum and that is more information than I wanted to know either.

(in reply to TOMLABEL)
Post #: 798
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 1/1/2008 6:54:11 PM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline 		Suggestion: Modify the capabilties of the support Landing Craft to allow them into a Bombardment TF or create a special Amhpibious Bombardment Mission for them.  Also give them an Amphib Value.  This will allow them to perform their intended function for players that build higly coordinated Amphibious landings.

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 799
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 1/1/2008 8:14:48 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wwengr

Suggestion: Modify the capabilties of the support Landing Craft to allow them into a Bombardment TF or create a special Amhpibious Bombardment Mission for them.  Also give them an Amphib Value.  This will allow them to perform their intended function for players that build higly coordinated Amphibious landings.


Has been addressed. Not exactly this way, but you'll be happy.

(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 800
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 1/2/2008 7:34:08 AM   
Kull


Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline 		1) I'm VERY far from expert in these matters, but it does seem like respawning (at least in the case of CVs, CAs, and CLs) was a "hold-your-nose" programming solution to the duplicate name problem. But it truly smacks of "gamey", especially as implemented with the Essex Class carriers. Even a "one-day" upgrade for the existing Allied CVs (so you could move them to San Diego and turn them into their Essex-named counterparts on the historical date of arrival-in-theatre) would be vastly better than the current options. Anyway, I'm glad the team has decided to revisit the issue.

2) From everything I've read, it seems that the historical presence of German ships and subs in the Pacific is going to be omittted, because of the fact they did not operate under Japanese control. While this is undoubtedly true, it's also a fact that the WitP engine grants the Allied player a far from historical degree of centralized control over the Chinese (to include the laughable probability of joint Communist and Nationalist operations), the Dutch, and later, the Soviets.

Given the huge increase in OOB slots, surely some could be found for a very limited number of historical German units? And if the Japanese player chooses to use them in a non-historical fashion, well that seems to be a lesser crime than that of omitting the units altogether. Especially given the utterly ahistorical cooperation that is already "built-in" for the various Allied entities.

Edit: Lest the above seem overly critical, I should add that I've read every post in the AE Naval and Air threads, and what you guys have done and will do is simply amazing. I'm commenting on issues the size of nits that reside on nits.

< Message edited by Kull -- 1/2/2008 7:49:30 AM >

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 801
RE: Barrel wear and relining - 1/2/2008 11:22:48 AM   
rockmedic109

 

Posts: 2390
Joined: 5/17/2005
From: Citrus Heights, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

1) I'm VERY far from expert in these matters, but it does seem like respawning (at least in the case of CVs, CAs, and CLs) was a "hold-your-nose" programming solution to the duplicate name problem. But it truly smacks of "gamey", especially as implemented with the Essex Class carriers. Even a "one-day" upgrade for the existing Allied CVs (so you could move them to San Diego and turn them into their Essex-named counterparts on the historical date of arrival-in-theatre) would be vastly better than the current options. Anyway, I'm glad the team has decided to revisit the issue.

2) From everything I've read, it seems that the historical presence of German ships and subs in the Pacific is going to be omittted, because of the fact they did not operate under Japanese control. While this is undoubtedly true, it's also a fact that the WitP engine grants the Allied player a far from historical degree of centralized control over the Chinese (to include the laughable probability of joint Communist and Nationalist operations), the Dutch, and later, the Soviets.

Given the huge increase in OOB slots, surely some could be found for a very limited number of historical German units? And if the Japanese player chooses to use them in a non-historical fashion, well that seems to be a lesser crime than that of omitting the units altogether. Especially given the utterly ahistorical cooperation that is already "built-in" for the various Allied entities.

Edit: Lest the above seem overly critical, I should add that I've read every post in the AE Naval and Air threads, and what you guys have done and will do is simply amazing. I'm commenting on issues the size of nits that reside on nits.


It seems like we are going to get both respawn and non-respawn scenarios, so the issue is not a major one. The only question will be what form the non-respawn scenarios take. Yes, I too am glad they looked at this. Even more happy for both {respawn and non-respawn} versions.

The allied player is not the only one that benefits from more control than historical fact. The Japanese get far more cooperation from IJN and IJA than was ever the case. Personally, I tend to keep Dutch fighting in DEI, the British in Burma/India; and limit mixing units from different nationalities. I even move U.S. AKs in India to the west coast. But then, I play against the AI.

I am sure that new, user created scenarios will be making appearances very shortly after AE hits the market.

< Message edited by rockmedic109 -- 1/2/2008 11:25:12 AM >

(in reply to Kull)
Post #: 802
New ships and manpower - 1/2/2008 4:50:15 PM   
Rainerle

 

Posts: 463
Joined: 7/24/2002
From: Burghausen/Bavaria
Status: offline 		Hi,
sorry if that has been posted before but are there plans to tie the availability of new ships to a decrease in the manpower pool or maybe even a special navy personal pool from which to draw manpower for the ships?

_____________________________


Image brought to you by courtesy of Subchaser!

(in reply to rockmedic109)
Post #: 803
RE: New ships and manpower - 1/2/2008 5:08:36 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		No.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Rainerle)
Post #: 804
RE: New ships and manpower - 1/2/2008 7:18:29 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainerle

Hi,
sorry if that has been posted before but are there plans to tie the availability of new ships to a decrease in the manpower pool or maybe even a special navy personal pool from which to draw manpower for the ships?


That would mean modelling crew factors (an excellent and simple to add idea IMO)!


_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Rainerle)
Post #: 805
RE: New ships and manpower - 1/2/2008 9:00:41 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainerle

Hi,
sorry if that has been posted before but are there plans to tie the availability of new ships to a decrease in the manpower pool or maybe even a special navy personal pool from which to draw manpower for the ships?


That would mean modelling crew factors (an excellent and simple to add idea IMO)!



First rule of Programming: Everything is easy for someone that doesn't have to do it himself.



(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 806
RE: New ships and manpower - 1/3/2008 12:05:15 AM   
Sonny II

 

Posts: 2878
Joined: 1/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainerle

Hi,
sorry if that has been posted before but are there plans to tie the availability of new ships to a decrease in the manpower pool or maybe even a special navy personal pool from which to draw manpower for the ships?


That would mean modelling crew factors (an excellent and simple to add idea IMO)!



First rule of Programming: Everything is easy for someone that doesn't have to do it himself.






The second rule is: No matter what you give them, they want more.

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 807
RE: New ships and manpower - 1/3/2008 12:35:15 AM   
rockmedic109

 

Posts: 2390
Joined: 5/17/2005
From: Citrus Heights, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sonny II


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainerle

Hi,
sorry if that has been posted before but are there plans to tie the availability of new ships to a decrease in the manpower pool or maybe even a special navy personal pool from which to draw manpower for the ships?


That would mean modelling crew factors (an excellent and simple to add idea IMO)!



First rule of Programming: Everything is easy for someone that doesn't have to do it himself.






The second rule is: No matter what you give them, they want more.



The second rule is certainly true with WITP. We have been lucky in that we keep getting more!

(in reply to Sonny II)
Post #: 808
RE: New ships and manpower - 1/3/2008 12:58:48 AM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

That would mean modelling crew factors (an excellent and simple to add idea IMO)!



First rule of Programming: Everything is easy for someone that doesn't have to do it himself.



Third rule is - so long as you give them something new to whine about, they will be happy.

Sauracker, you old fart, you - long time no talk, buddy. How do you like goat ? learned the Greek alphabet yet ? you been to the temple ruins ? ever get over to the Turkish Ionian coast ? PM me - we gotta chat. Ciao.

< Message edited by JWE -- 1/3/2008 1:01:01 AM >

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 809
RE: New ships and manpower - 1/3/2008 1:35:46 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		two ?'s from an old time witp player
A. can the japs build a flight school, givingthem better and more late war pilots as an option?
B. Does the surface combat still use the same "we do not really have surface action" rutines?
my old bitch about needing to be able to run down slow tf's etc and other surface action upgrades? 

< Message edited by freeboy -- 1/3/2008 1:36:24 AM >

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 810
Page:   <<   < prev  25 26 [27] 28 29   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Barrel wear and relining Page: <<   < prev  25 26 [27] 28 29   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.609