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: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

 
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: Admirals Edition Naval Thread Page: <<   < prev  36 37 [38] 39 40   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 5:48:47 PM   
goodboyladdie


Posts: 3469
Joined: 11/18/2005
From: Rendlesham, Suffolk
Status: offline 		I have been using the "marvellous" search engine to try to find out the result of the internal huddle about the missing CVs if you choose no respawn at start. I have been unable to dig out the answer. Did the team ever come up with one?

_____________________________



Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1111
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 7:03:09 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline 		I'm hoping they include a non respawn scenario in AE for sure, given it is the historically accurate one. Respawn is for kids.

_____________________________





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

(in reply to goodboyladdie)
Post #: 1112
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 7:13:26 PM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		"You are correct about the need to supply the civilians in Hawaii. In fact, during the war tons of "SPAM" was shipped there for them, and believe it or not, to this day, it can be ordered at local restaurants. "

See, Termie? Hawaii is a paradise! I expect to hear of your relocation in the near future...

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1113
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 7:33:34 PM   
goodboyladdie


Posts: 3469
Joined: 11/18/2005
From: Rendlesham, Suffolk
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I'm hoping they include a non respawn scenario in AE for sure, given it is the historically accurate one. Respawn is for kids.


There is a no respawn included I think, BUT without the missing CVs, which is pretty pointless...

_____________________________



Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 1114
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 8:44:36 PM   
herwin

 

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

ORIGINAL: goodboyladdie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I'm hoping they include a non respawn scenario in AE for sure, given it is the historically accurate one. Respawn is for kids.


There is a no respawn included I think, BUT without the missing CVs, which is pretty pointless...


Come again?

You mean there will be a no-respawn scenario, but it's missing the carriers that were on the stocks by 1/1/42?

That suggests one of the first mods will be...

_____________________________

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 goodboyladdie)
Post #: 1115
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 9:18:25 PM   
Shark7


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

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

"You are correct about the need to supply the civilians in Hawaii. In fact, during the war tons of "SPAM" was shipped there for them, and believe it or not, to this day, it can be ordered at local restaurants. "

See, Termie? Hawaii is a paradise! I expect to hear of your relocation in the near future...



And if you look on the tin, it probably says packaged 12-12-41. When people no longer roam this earth, no doubt the cockroaches and SPAM will still survive.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 1116
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 10:03:47 PM   
JWE

 

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

ORIGINAL: goodboyladdie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I'm hoping they include a non respawn scenario in AE for sure, given it is the historically accurate one. Respawn is for kids.


There is a no respawn included I think, BUT without the missing CVs, which is pretty pointless...

I would like to put this particular issue to bed.

In AE, scenarios can be developed to either Spawn, or Not-Spawn, by setting a switch in the editor.

The release scenarios will Not-Spawn. There will be “replacement” of things like barges, and other ‘dinky’ things, but Spawning pertains to Carriers/Cruisers, as it was in WiTP-1.

In the release scenarios, every carrier or cruiser that was built will be in the game and will arrive at about its nominal arrival date.

(in reply to goodboyladdie)
Post #: 1117
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 10:04:11 PM   
jwilkerson


Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: goodboyladdie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I'm hoping they include a non respawn scenario in AE for sure, given it is the historically accurate one. Respawn is for kids.


There is a no respawn included I think, BUT without the missing CVs, which is pretty pointless...



I have stated numerous times, that ALL historical carriers and ONLY the HISTORICAL carriers are included in the game. People may disagree with this. But that is what the editor is for.

_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to goodboyladdie)
Post #: 1118
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 10:47:07 PM   
goodboyladdie


Posts: 3469
Joined: 11/18/2005
From: Rendlesham, Suffolk
Status: offline 		Thanks Joe and JWE. Much obliged.

_____________________________



Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 1119
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 10:54:09 PM   
Terminus


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

ORIGINAL: JWE


quote:

ORIGINAL: goodboyladdie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I'm hoping they include a non respawn scenario in AE for sure, given it is the historically accurate one. Respawn is for kids.


There is a no respawn included I think, BUT without the missing CVs, which is pretty pointless...

I would like to put this particular issue to bed.




You're probably not that lucky, John... It's only been said about 11 million times and apparently it hasn't registered yet...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 1120
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 10:56:54 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		will there be a respawn scenario in AE?

_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 1121
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 10:58:11 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Go have your brain lipo'ed...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 1122
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 11:57:42 PM   
JWE

 

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

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

will there be a respawn scenario in AE?


Ain't gonna put you to bed, Nik. You're probably too hairy.

Really like your dog, though.

I've got a springer spaniel - Abby the Hamster. She has the same facial expressions. I'll shoot you some pix. Ciao.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 1123
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/28/2008 11:59:35 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		I doubt your dog's as dumb as Nik's, John... At least I hope not...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 1124
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/29/2008 9:15:31 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		Something just occurred to me that you folks might want to watch out for in testing.

You have made overhauls in the loading routines so that only so many ships (or tons of ships or something) can load at one time. You have also overhauled various resource sites.

Having seen in current WITP how long it takes to load at smaller ports presents the possibility for mismatches in places that produce a lot of resources or oil. For example, a base just might produce oil at a rate faster than it is possible to load up the oil to carry it away!

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 1125
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/29/2008 10:46:35 AM   
goodboyladdie


Posts: 3469
Joined: 11/18/2005
From: Rendlesham, Suffolk
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus


quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE


quote:

ORIGINAL: goodboyladdie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I'm hoping they include a non respawn scenario in AE for sure, given it is the historically accurate one. Respawn is for kids.


There is a no respawn included I think, BUT without the missing CVs, which is pretty pointless...

I would like to put this particular issue to bed.




You're probably not that lucky, John... It's only been said about 11 million times and apparently it hasn't registered yet...


Be fair T, I did say that I had not been able to find the result of the team huddle on the subject. I was wondering whether there should be a summary posted or maybe an FAQ sticky to stop people like me bothering the busy team with stuff they have already answered...


_____________________________



Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 1126
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/29/2008 1:03:45 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Not aiming at you in particular, GBL... Just putting it out there...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to goodboyladdie)
Post #: 1127
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/29/2008 1:29:14 PM   
Andrew Brown


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

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Something just occurred to me that you folks might want to watch out for in testing.

You have made overhauls in the loading routines so that only so many ships (or tons of ships or something) can load at one time. You have also overhauled various resource sites.

Having seen in current WITP how long it takes to load at smaller ports presents the possibility for mismatches in places that produce a lot of resources or oil. For example, a base just might produce oil at a rate faster than it is possible to load up the oil to carry it away!


Good point. That is definitely something to watch for.

Andrew

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1128
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/29/2008 1:37:16 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		It's probably in here somewhere but has Allied SIGINT been changed in any way. Practically none of the present SIGINT is information pertaining to the movement of Japanese ships. IRL that type of information was obtainable early on and "easily" obtainable from 1943 on. Many many Japanese ships, merchant and naval, were sunk as a direct result of operations initiated in response to SIGINT.

(in reply to goodboyladdie)
Post #: 1129
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/29/2008 5:14:45 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

Ain't gonna put you to bed, Nik. You're probably too hairy.

Really like your dog, though.

I've got a springer spaniel - Abby the Hamster. She has the same facial expressions. I'll shoot you some pix. Ciao.








Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 1130
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 2/29/2008 5:15:49 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Dumb as a Yugo full of anvils, but strangely lovable...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 1131
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 3/1/2008 2:33:18 AM   
pad152

 

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline
quote:


I would like to put this particular issue to bed.

In AE, scenarios can be developed to either Spawn, or Not-Spawn, by setting a switch in the editor.

The release scenarios will Not-Spawn. There will be “replacement” of things like barges, and other ‘dinky’ things, but Spawning pertains to Carriers/Cruisers, as it was in WiTP-1.

In the release scenarios, every carrier or cruiser that was built will be in the game and will arrive at about its nominal arrival date.

[\quote]


Will you be able to select which ships either re-spawn or get replacement with the editor?



< Message edited by pad152 -- 3/1/2008 2:34:31 AM >

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 1132
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 3/1/2008 2:40:52 AM   
Terminus


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

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to pad152)
Post #: 1133
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 3/1/2008 3:39:17 AM   
JWE

 

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

ORIGINAL: pad152
Will you be able to select which ships either re-spawn or get replacement with the editor?


Terminus is being a little bit "brief" (reminds me of Leonard "Pith" Carnell). Is true, No is the answer, but .. Spawn/Not-Spawn is a "scenario" switch. If you set Spawn, it happens just like WiTP-1 .. no changes, no options, no nothin ... Nothing Different, i.e., Nothing Different. So if you set Spawn "on" for a scenario, you can expect the game to respond just like WiTP-1; Nothing Different. Same as it ever was, i.e., Nothing Different.

Upon mature thought, and reconsideration, I don't know why I just didn't let Termie's "No", sit still. Pretty much says it all.

Sorry, T.

Ciao.


< Message edited by JWE -- 3/1/2008 5:09:16 AM >

(in reply to pad152)
Post #: 1134
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 3/1/2008 1:07:49 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Don't apologize. You're Naval Team boss, you can do what you want...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 1135
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 3/2/2008 7:58:28 PM   
Ron Saueracker


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

In the release scenarios, every carrier or cruiser that was built will be in the game and will arrive at about its nominal arrival date.


This sounds like a non respawn approach to me. Thanks.

_____________________________





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

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 1136
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 3/2/2008 9:12:01 PM   
mark24

 

Posts: 171
Joined: 8/4/2002
Status: offline 		Hi all,

Excuse me for being dim, but in a non-respawn scenario, what would the Lexington (for example) be called if the original wasn't sunk?

Mark

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 1137
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 3/2/2008 9:21:33 PM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		Well, she was laid down as the USS Cabot, so my guess is that this would be her name.

Now, does anyone know why the Hancock and Ticonderoga hulls exchanged names?

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to mark24)
Post #: 1138
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 3/3/2008 2:10:55 AM   
sven6345789

 

Posts: 1050
Joined: 3/8/2004
From: Sandviken, Sweden
Status: offline 		Essex Carriers (originally planned name)
CV-9:Essex
CV-10:Yorktown (Bon Homme Richard)
CV-11:Intrepid
CV-12:Hornet (Kearsarge)
CV-13:Franklin
CV-14:Ticonderoga
CV-15:Randolph
CV-16:Lexington (Cabot)
CV-17:Bunker Hill
CV-18:Wasp (Oriskany)
CV-19:Hancock
CV-20:Bennington
CV-31: Bon Homme Richard (so actually, this name would exist twice)
CV-38: Shangri La
further ships which did not see action in WW2 (but could if the war lasts until march 1946): CV-21 (Boxer), CV-36 (Antietam), CV 39 (Lake Champlain)
completed in 1945 and 1946: CV-32 (Leyte), CV-33 (Kearsarge), CV-37 (Princeton), CV-40 (Tarawa), CV-45 (Valley Forge), CV-47 (Philippine Sea)
final ship: CV-34 (Oriskany), completed in 1950
I could not find information why the hulls of Ticonderoga and Hancock exchanged names.

< Message edited by sven6345789 -- 3/3/2008 2:22:11 AM >

_____________________________

Bougainville, November 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. It rained today.

Letter from a U.S. Marine,November 1943

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 1139
RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 3/3/2008 2:41:54 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline 		Well on that note I guess you could use the names of the planned but never completed ones in the case of Bon Homme Richard etc so as to not repeat names. Originally Cabot was an Essex, then when it was renamed a CVL became Cabot. So the CVL that became Cabot would also need a different name.

One problem leads right into another...

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to sven6345789)
Post #: 1140
Page:   <<   < prev  36 37 [38] 39 40   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread Page: <<   < prev  36 37 [38] 39 40   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

0.893