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: New ships and manpower

 
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: New ships and manpower Page: <<   < prev  26 27 [28] 29 30   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: New ships and manpower - 1/3/2008 11:30:31 AM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

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? 


If you want surface actions other than at landing beaches and bases, you will probably have to accept that the game engine will manoeuvre your TFs tactically. Currently, you have patrol reaction (where a SAG on patrol will intercept SACs attacking bases), and changes to the TF track in reaction to nearby TFs. We complain about that already, but it's the only way to get tactical responses in the game.

If you want it bad; you'll get it bad.

Nonetheless, something of the sort is probably necessary. So please comment on the following:

ATFs:
1. Should manoeuvre tactically to launch and recover airstrikes. This means they will slow down to allow the carriers to steam into the wind for landings and take-offs. Basically this can be modelled as the ATF not advancing during the launch or recovery periods, but still paying full speed fuel costs.
2. Should manoeuvre tactically to approach targets during periods of visibility. (If beyond 200 nm, they should approach to about that distance.)
3. Should manoeuvre tactically during air attack.
4. Should manoeuvre tactically to maintain a distance of at least 200 nm from known enemy SAG locations at dusk or periods when aircraft are grounded.
5. Should avoid accidentally engaging enemy coastal defences at any time.

SAGs:
1. On patrol, should react to SAGs attacking local bases.
2. When on patrol or in distant support of TFs, should maintain a distance of about 200 nm from spotted ATFs during periods of visibility.
3. When on patrol or in distant support of TFs, should attempt to engage spotted ATFs during periods when aircraft are grounded.
4. When on patrol or in distant support of TFs, should react towards spotted enemy TFs of inferior strength.
5. When on patrol or in distant support of TFs, should react away from spotted enemy TFs of superior strength.
6. Should avoid accidentally engaging enemy coastal defences at any time.

Implementation probably involves scoring the hexes around each TF based on the listed factors, the presence of land, the presence of enemy and friendly aircraft, the accessibility of the hex, and the next way point of the TF. The TF then moves to the most attractive hex. Think of the TF as a robot--what should it do?
1. It can react reflexively--for example, to launch and recover aircraft and receive air attacks.
2. It can react based on what has worked in the past. This would involve fine-tuning during alpha testing to generate the necessary payoff matrices. Look at actor-critic systems as a way of doing this.
3. It can react based on short-term plans. Again, this would involve fine-tuning, but it should be a lot easier than developing a chess-playing programme. The important element is a payoff estimate for each possible plan.
4. It can act based on long-term plans--basically following the player's orders. The payoff for doing that should depend on whether the player designates the mission as critical or desirable, and what the exact mission is.

Reflexive actions should take priority. The remaining three can be weighted (perhaps 0.3, 0,3, 0.4) to get scores for each destination hex within range of the TF. The TF then moves to the most desirable destination hex.

< Message edited by herwin -- 1/3/2008 11:44:57 AM >


_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 811
RE: New ships and manpower - 1/3/2008 1:18:33 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

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?



That's in AE and has been discussed. There will be classes (I think they begin annually). You can pull pilots out of operational units to become flight instructors. The more high quality instructors you have, the larger and better students you'll get.

Check out the air thread. I think it's in there.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 812
RE: New ships and manpower - 1/3/2008 1:52:47 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
Freeboy, check the Air War Thread starting page 8 around post #234.  The serious discussion on flight instructors begins there.

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 813
Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 12:25:18 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
Any hope of seeing subs used for bombardment attacks? Just reading about Japanese shelling of Midway in January and February of '42...

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Hortlund)
Post #: 814
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 12:27:29 AM   
Don Bowen


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Any hope of seeing subs used for bombardment attacks? Just reading about Japanese shelling of Midway in January and February of '42...


Don't think so. It would require a new type of TF (submarine bombardment) and it was neither used that much nor that effective.



(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 815
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 12:29:36 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Any hope of seeing subs used for bombardment attacks? Just reading about Japanese shelling of Midway in January and February of '42...


Don't think so. It would require a new type of TF (submarine bombardment) and it was neither used that much nor that effective.






But it would be fun....

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 816
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 12:40:08 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
It would cause no damage, given the scale of the map and the dialing back of the bombardment routines.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 817
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 12:44:43 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

It would cause no damage, given the scale of the map and the dialing back of the bombardment routines.



...but it would still be fun.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 818
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 1:26:04 AM   
trojan58


Posts: 266
Joined: 8/8/2004
From: bendigo, Victoria, Australia
Status: offline
Actually a Sub Recon mission would be more use. Allow subs to perform recon on bases to show defences/minefields/etc especially prior to an invasion

_____________________________

There are two types of ships in the world

Submarines and Targets

D.B.F

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 819
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 3:22:02 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider
...but it would still be fun.


Japanese submarines shelled Sydney and Newcastle during the war. Didn't do any significant damage, though.

Some info here:

www.ozatwar.com/japsubs/japsshell01.htm

Andrew

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 820
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 3:41:36 AM   
Reg


Posts: 2787
Joined: 5/26/2000
From: NSW, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown


quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider
...but it would still be fun.


Japanese submarines shelled Sydney and Newcastle during the war. Didn't do any significant damage, though.

Some info here:

www.ozatwar.com/japsubs/japsshell01.htm

Andrew


.... and stirred up quite a hornets nest amongst the defenders despite the insignificant damage.


_____________________________

Cheers,
Reg.

(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 821
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 4:02:59 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
Well my only point was it would be more fun lobbing a few pointless shells landward with the outside chance of blowing up an ammo bunker ( a few supply points), rather than the sitting there waiting to be pummeled by Allied ASW.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Reg)
Post #: 822
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 4:32:49 AM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline
Well....just close your eyes and pretend....

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 823
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 11:17:43 AM   
Sonny II

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown


quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider
...but it would still be fun.


Japanese submarines shelled Sydney and Newcastle during the war. Didn't do any significant damage, though.

Some info here:

www.ozatwar.com/japsubs/japsshell01.htm

Andrew



My Japanese is a little rusty but from what I've read, commander Hanabusa said - "That was fun."


(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 824
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 2:32:59 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

It would cause no damage, given the scale of the map and the dialing back of the bombardment routines.



...but it would still be fun.


And if we included it, can you just imagine the whining about the lack of effectiveness of submarine bombardment...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 825
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 4:27:48 PM   
rockmedic109

 

Posts: 2390
Joined: 5/17/2005
From: Citrus Heights, CA
Status: offline
Shortly after Pearl Harbor, a Japanese submarine shelled Kahalui on the northern shore of Maui.  I think the target was a whale oil factory.  There is a restaurant on Maui {Very Good one} called Mama's Fish House.  The men's restroom has a copy {probably reprint} of the local newspaper regarding the attack.  No damage done, but I would guess the local fear level was heightened quite a bit.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 826
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 5:11:33 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
And let's not forget the extensive damage done to the amusement park on the pier in 1941...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to rockmedic109)
Post #: 827
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 5:23:29 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And let's not forget the extensive damage done to the amusement park on the pier in 1941...


My point exactly!

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 828
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 5:46:03 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline
More interesting is the number of cargo ships sunk or damaged off the US west coast by Japanese subs (27 I think).   So much for strict adherence to the Japanese Sub doctrine.

http://www.usmm.org/pacific.html#anchor444903

Closer review shows the damage was from all sources.

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 1/4/2008 5:50:01 PM >

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 829
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 6:46:00 PM   
Mike Scholl

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

More interesting is the number of cargo ships sunk or damaged off the US west coast by Japanese subs (27 I think).   So much for strict adherence to the Japanese Sub doctrine.

http://www.usmm.org/pacific.html#anchor444903

Closer review shows the damage was from all sources. And that Japanese Submarine success was minimal. Only THREE of those 27 ships were sunk by IJN subs---pretty pitifull when compared to what the U-Boats were doing on the East Coast at the same time.


(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 830
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 7:52:38 PM   
Apollo11


Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And let's not forget the extensive damage done to the amusement park on the pier in 1941...


Hmmm... wasn't that German U-boot and not Japanese submarine?


Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________



Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 831
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/4/2008 7:58:16 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
No, but Vincent Price DID play a German naval officer on board the I-boat...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 832
RE: New ships and manpower - 1/4/2008 8:01:57 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
It was a Japanese I-boat (remember the quote "Hurrywoood" in reference to the naked woman clinging to the periscope from the beginning of the flic?) but I think they had a "Duty Nazi" aboard as an observer.

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 833
RE: 1941 and Soviets - 1/5/2008 9:41:39 AM   
highblooded

 

Posts: 67
Joined: 5/27/2004
Status: offline
Hello,

It has been awhile since I have seen the show but it may have been a Uboat 'sold' to the IJN.

On a side note the 'Grant' Tank(actually a 'Priest' with wooden top, gun and turret mockup) is still around(with a white pink and yellow interior from the 'paint shop' scene) I have ridden in it and my Father(good friend of the owner-who has provided many movies with military vehicles) was the 'commander' during an Airshow where they crushed 2 cars with it.

BTW, Thanks to all of the AE workerbees for this great upcoming release(I just found out about this yesterday-and have been reading everypost since) I tremble with anticipation.


My only request ATM on the naval side would be to figure out a way to include the Soviet Naval Forces( I did notice that you had mentioned that they will not be included- but Please Please Please bring them in with some sort of neutrality trigger)

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 834
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/5/2008 3:38:08 PM   
Halsey

 

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: trojan

Actually a Sub Recon mission would be more use. Allow subs to perform recon on bases to show defences/minefields/etc especially prior to an invasion


bump...


_____________________________


(in reply to trojan58)
Post #: 835
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/5/2008 7:42:44 PM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Halsey


quote:

ORIGINAL: trojan

Actually a Sub Recon mission would be more use. Allow subs to perform recon on bases to show defences/minefields/etc especially prior to an invasion


bump...



That was (and is) a major submarine mission. Another that needs to be modelled is coastal or littoral defence.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 836
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/5/2008 8:13:22 PM   
Mike Scholl

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin
That was (and is) a major submarine mission. Another that needs to be modelled is coastal or littoral defence.



The second is in AE. With "Patrol Zone" settings you can designate a sub to move up and down a coast during it's turns.

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 837
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/5/2008 9:55:40 PM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl


quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin
That was (and is) a major submarine mission. Another that needs to be modelled is coastal or littoral defence.



The second is in AE. With "Patrol Zone" settings you can designate a sub to move up and down a coast during it's turns.



You've been reading Hughes.

The intelligence gathering mission should provide up-to-date localisation on the base and base assets. It might provide up-to-date ship tracks. Nothing more.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 838
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/6/2008 12:44:05 AM   
Dixie


Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline
I didn't notice an answer to this question (well several questions) in here, sorry if it's already been asked/answered.

We've been told that ships now have a withdrawl date attached to them rather than the current monthly withdraw ship routine:

1) Am I correct in assuming that this applies to all ships which are in the game, or just British? And not just warships?
2) Can the withdrawl be cancelled with a PP penalty?
3) What about ships which were sunk before they could be withdrawn (IRL i.e. HMS Cornwall, PoW etc)?
4) And what about ships sunk in game, is there any penalty associated with a ship being sunk and therefore unavailable for withdrawl?
5) What about carrier air groups? Some RN carriers were in the area on a couple of occasions with different airgroups assigned. Do the airgroups get changed to the ones which were present on each arrival?


< Message edited by Dixie -- 1/6/2008 12:45:21 AM >


_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 839
RE: Submarine Bombardments - 1/6/2008 2:02:43 AM   
Don Bowen


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dixie

I didn't notice an answer to this question (well several questions) in here, sorry if it's already been asked/answered.

We've been told that ships now have a withdrawl date attached to them rather than the current monthly withdraw ship routine:

1) Am I correct in assuming that this applies to all ships which are in the game, or just British? And not just warships?


Everything that's wet on the bottom and full of seamen.


quote:



2) Can the withdrawl be cancelled with a PP penalty?


Yes, but you can't afford it for long - it's a daily PP cost.


quote:



3) What about ships which were sunk before they could be withdrawn (IRL i.e. HMS Cornwall, PoW etc)?


You are off the hook. Simply transfering the withdrawal to another ship was discussed but not implemented. What other ship? What happens if too many ships are sunk? How to possibly figure force balance between Atlantic and Pacific with different ships being sunk?


quote:




4) And what about ships sunk in game, is there any penalty associated with a ship being sunk and therefore unavailable for withdrawl?


No, once sunk it is out of play, out of calculations.


quote:




5) What about carrier air groups? Some RN carriers were in the area on a couple of occasions with different airgroups assigned. Do the airgroups get
changed to the ones which were present on each arrival?


No (at least I don't think so). Swapping out air groups to try and follow historical changes would be a nightmare. Carrier air groups can be transfered and withdrawn, but that is another issue. A carrier withdraws with what it has aboard and returns with the same groups.





(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 840
Page:   <<   < prev  26 27 [28] 29 30   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: New ships and manpower Page: <<   < prev  26 27 [28] 29 30   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

1.031