RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

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 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/7/2007 11:49:09 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigJ62

Will there be any sharks in the game?

Naw, they'll stay in the forum.

(in reply to BigJ62)

Post #: 151

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/7/2007 11:50:54 PM

Brady

Posts: 10701
Joined: 10/25/2002
From: Oregon,USA
Status: offline

JWE, TY thats just great

_____________________________

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view

(in reply to JamesM)

Post #: 152

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 12:03:57 AM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: jamesm
What changes are there going t be made to the automatic convoy system? �

Because it sometimes did some very dumb moves by sending convoys through enemy territory.� Also it only sends minimal quantities of supplies to each base and would choose ships with highish levels of damaged (18+).

Many player's issues with the auto-convoy system are recognized and being addressed

Auto-convoys won't be commanded by Kent Hewitt, however, and will remain almost as dumb as me. We have tried to insure, however, that a SFO to Singapore convoy won't be routed through the Shimonoseki Straight, for example.

(in reply to JamesM)

Post #: 153

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 12:18:34 AM

Skyros

Posts: 1570
Joined: 9/29/2000
From: Columbia SC
Status: offline

Not sure if this is an ard but this comes from a trom on combined fleet.com.

http://www.combinedfleet.com/PB-108_t.htm

IJN Patrol Boat No. 108:
Tabular Record of Movement
� 2007 Bob Hackett, Sander Kingsepp and Peter Cundall

Late November to 3 December 1944:
Drydocked at No. 1 Floating Dock in Surabaya.

_____________________________

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 154

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 12:23:29 AM

Terminus

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

It's not a mobile one, which is one an ARD is.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Skyros)

Post #: 155

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 12:25:33 AM

Captain Cruft

Posts: 3652
Joined: 3/17/2004
From: England
Status: offline

So it would just be considered as part of the repair shipyard at Soerabaja.

< Message edited by Captain Cruft -- 12/8/2007 12:26:16 AM >

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 156

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 12:28:18 AM

Terminus

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

I suppose it could be...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Captain Cruft)

Post #: 157

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 12:31:59 AM

MineSweeper

Posts: 653
Joined: 9/19/2006
From: Nags Head, NC
Status: offline

Any chance that there will be more info on the sunk ship list @ date sunk or maybe what ship sunk it ?

_____________________________

(in reply to Captain Cruft)

Post #: 158

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 12:34:07 AM

Terminus

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: MineSweeper

Any chance that there will be more info on the sunk ship list @ date sunk or maybe what ship sunk it ?

No. The problem is space on the list. We can't squeeze more text into those boxes.

(I seem to have seen this before today. Sorry I missed it, Minesweeper; been a little busy...)

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to MineSweeper)

Post #: 159

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 12:50:05 AM

Akos Gergely

Posts: 733
Joined: 4/8/2004
From: Hungary, Bp.
Status: offline

1. Do you include some never-were ships by default into the OOB? Or at least please leave some space in the device list group to later add in somem ore naval guns etc...

2. Are CV attack numbers toned down a bit (sortie points or what it's called at the moment - so it really is ahistorical when a CV group can pound a base for days and also when a CV can launch it's VT squad for uncounted torp attacks, when in reality most CVs did not have in stock more than 36 fishes.)

3. Do you separate between warship and merchant/aux ship durability/strength? Now sometimes mercahnts are surprisingly difficult to sink, though in reality they have no real damage control etc...

4. Would surface combat reaction work a bit better to further enhance mid ocean surface combat? ALso what about air combat TF reaction?

_____________________________

My blog: https://warshipprojects.com/

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 160

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 12:52:44 AM

Terminus

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: csatahajos

1. Do you include some never-were ships by default into the OOB? Or at least please leave some space in the device list group to later add in somem ore naval guns etc...

2. Are CV attack numbers toned down a bit (sortie points or what it's called at the moment - so it really is ahistorical when a CV group can pound a base for days and also when a CV can launch it's VT squad for uncounted torp attacks, when in reality most CVs did not have in stock more than 36 fishes.)

3. Do you separate between warship and merchant/aux ship durability/strength? Now sometimes mercahnts are surprisingly difficult to sink, though in reality they have no real damage control etc...

4. Would surface combat reaction work a bit better to further enhance mid ocean surface combat? ALso what about air combat TF reaction?

1. There's plenty of room in the device table for new stuff, and no more hard-coded slots, so you can basically put anything anywhere. We don't have never-weres in the basic Grand Campaign OOB.

2. That's Air Team territory.

3. No.

4. That's being looked at. Might not make it for first release, but there's always patches.

< Message edited by Terminus -- 12/8/2007 12:53:34 AM >

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Akos Gergely)

Post #: 161

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 12:57:46 AM

Mike Solli

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brady

Ya I have never read anything about a Japanese mobile floating dry dock, thats not to say their was non. but, I would be suprised to find they had such a thing, the Allies did not have axcess to ship yards the way the way Japan did, she was comparatively closer to port on the whole.

Ye of little faith.

If they had 'em, I'll find 'em.

(in reply to Brady)

Post #: 162

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:10:06 AM

Bliztk

Posts: 779
Joined: 4/24/2002
From: Electronic City
Status: offline

Are the proliferation of minefields modelled more correctly ?

_____________________________

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 163

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:14:21 AM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

Do DP guns have 2 ranges now? one against aircrafts another against ships? and a separate damage?

(in reply to Bliztk)

Post #: 164

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:33:44 AM

Terminus

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bliztk

Are the proliferation of minefields modelled more correctly ?

We're cutting back on what Joe W. has called MitP (Mines in the Pacific). It should be more realistic.

< Message edited by Terminus -- 12/8/2007 1:41:23 AM >

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Bliztk)

Post #: 165

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:33:58 AM

Terminus

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

Do DP guns have 2 ranges now? one against aircrafts another against ships? and a separate damage?

No.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 166

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:40:03 AM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bliztk
Are the proliferation of minefields modelled more correctly ?

Don�t know exactly what you mean by modeling �proliferation of minefields�. Mine capable craft will continue to lay, minesweepers will continue to sweep, and laid minefields, as in the present game, will continue to degrade over time.

Significant changes have been made, however, as to where and under what circumstances, a mine capable craft may rearm with mines.

(in reply to Bliztk)

Post #: 167

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:42:34 AM

LargeSlowTarget

Posts: 4443
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

quote:

ORIGINAL: Whipple

quote:

2. Pretty simply. Every port has a maximum tonnage capacity, and anything beyond that can only anchor there.

SWEETNESS!

Whipple

Does the maximum tonnage capacity increase as the port size is increased?

Capacity is dependent on port size, so yeah...

YESYESYEESSYYEESSSSYYYEEEESSSSSYIIIHHAAAA!!!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Was the variable load capacity for units worked out?

IE troops in different modes will occupy differing amounts of cargo space thus requiring greater or less transport capacity depending on mode?

It's being worked on.

That means - combat loading?!?

_____________________________

AE Mod "Bottlenecks" UPDATED 01/2022

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 168

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:44:22 AM

Terminus

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

That means - combat loading?!?

Yup...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)

Post #: 169

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:46:11 AM

Dixie

Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brady

Ya I have never read anything about a Japanese mobile floating dry dock, thats not to say their was non. but, I would be suprised to find they had such a thing, the Allies did not have axcess to ship yards the way the way Japan did, she was comparatively closer to port on the whole.

Ye of little faith. If they had 'em, I'll find 'em.

I'm certain that the only ARDs were in the service of the RN and USN

_____________________________

Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 170

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:46:40 AM

Terminus

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

He said to the JFB...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Dixie)

Post #: 171

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:52:14 AM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget
That means - combat loading?!?

Vessel loadout will be very much mission dependent. I cannot get specific, but I think you will be satisfied.

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)

Post #: 172

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:52:30 AM

Dixie

Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

He said to the ever optimistic but totally unlikely to find what he is looking for JFB...

You're right there T

_____________________________

Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 173

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:52:54 AM

Terminus

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

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Dixie)

Post #: 174

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:54:00 AM

Dixie

Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

I noticed that there is going to be distinction between transport and amphibious TFs, does this mean there will be a difference between troopships (AP) and assault transports (APA)?

_____________________________

Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to Dixie)

Post #: 175

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:54:39 AM

Terminus

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dixie

I noticed that there is going to be distinction between transport and amphibious TFs, does this mean there will be a difference between troopships (AP) and assault transports (APA)?

Hmmm, I forget...

APA's and AKA's are certainly in as ship types, rather than just class names for AP's and AK's...

< Message edited by Terminus -- 12/8/2007 1:56:16 AM >

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Dixie)

Post #: 176

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:56:53 AM

Brady

Posts: 10701
Joined: 10/25/2002
From: Oregon,USA
Status: offline

Can we still build MRE, and other Auxilry's?

Which raises the question: Can we build anything else?

_____________________________

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 177

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 1:58:02 AM

Terminus

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

I'm not sure you can build Meals Ready to Eat today?

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Brady)

Post #: 178

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 2:01:12 AM

Captain Cruft

Posts: 3652
Joined: 3/17/2004
From: England
Status: offline

So ... I take it one of the main ideas with the new loading (and unloading?) routines is to prevent the gamey abuse of using a bunch of AKs for invasions and other heinous but common activities?

On the same note, are the Japanese "landing craft" or barges still abstracted via the AP unloading rates as they vaguely are in the original?

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 179

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread - 12/8/2007 2:05:22 AM

Brady

Posts: 10701
Joined: 10/25/2002
From: Oregon,USA
Status: offline

Woop's typo...MLE

_____________________________

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view

(in reply to Captain Cruft)