RE: MANUAL Question- Jap Sub Doctrine Option

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: MANUAL Question- Jap Sub Doctrine Option

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: MANUAL Question- Jap Sub Doctrine Option

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: MANUAL Question- Jap Sub Doctrine Option - 7/19/2009 3:49:26 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptDave

Looks like the main question has been answered, which pleases me as it was one of mine, as well.� I'm very glad, though, to see that the number of torpedoes fired is included now in the combat reports -- I can quit worrying about having to watch the combat animations to get that information!

We may have to change the message to something like: "A submarine encountered an enemy TF and either attacked an un-escorted, un-armed ship or engaged an un-escorted but armed ship (which may or may not have ASW capability and may or may not have been able to fire some weapon at the sub) or was engaged by escort and perhaps prevented from attacking but was not subjected to a depth charge attack". Might have to shorten that a bit.

(in reply to CaptDave)

Post #: 31

RE: MANUAL Question- Jap Sub Doctrine Option - 7/19/2009 4:31:55 PM

Nomad

Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: offline

Another possibility is that the ship was unescorted and the sub attacked on the surface. Then if the transport has any guns at all it can fire at the sub, so you should then get an attacking message.

_____________________________

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 32

RE: MANUAL Question- Jap Sub Doctrine Option - 7/19/2009 4:50:04 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nomad

Another possibility is that the ship was unescorted and the sub attacked on the surface. Then if the transport has any guns at all it can fire at the sub, so you should then get an attacking message.

There's actually a separate message if the sub attacks on the surface. Down in the combat report itself.

(in reply to Nomad)

Post #: 33

RE: MANUAL Question- Jap Sub Doctrine Option - 7/19/2009 5:48:52 PM

bradfordkay

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

Don, what about going back to the combat report: "Sub combat at xx,yy"???

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 34

RE: MANUAL Question- Jap Sub Doctrine Option - 7/19/2009 5:51:08 PM

Shark7

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nomad

Another possibility is that the ship was unescorted and the sub attacked on the surface. Then if the transport has any guns at all it can fire at the sub, so you should then get an attacking message.

I actually had a sub mortally wounded by a merchant ship that got off a lucky shot when the sub surfaced to use guns. The sub sank on the way back to Truk a few days later.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Nomad)

Post #: 35

RE: MANUAL Question- Jap Sub Doctrine Option - 7/19/2009 6:01:43 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Don, what about going back to the combat report: "Sub combat at xx,yy"???�

It stock WITP there were two messages: Sub attack ... and ASW attack .... Which you got depended on whether or not the escort detected the submarine first or the other way around. Most attacks on subs were indeed depth charge attacks by escorts.

In AE we noticed some occurrences of subs attacking on the surface, being detected by escort or armed target, and generating the "ASW attack" message. Not right, so we put in a quick check and generated the "Sub under attack" message if it was not submerged OR WAS ENGAGED BY AN ARMED TARGET. The last was not right either, and generates the "Sub under attack" message when a sub is attacking an armed target but is doing it while submerged.

It's too late to make any real changes, and if we can slip in anything it will be a simple text change to remove the work "under".

Can come back and look at this in a patch, but it really is just a heading line for the sub combat report. The meat is in the report itself.

(in reply to bradfordkay)

Post #: 36