RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues

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: AE Naval and OOB Issues

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: AE Naval and OOB Issues

Page: << < prev 18 19 [20] 21 22 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 4:23:51 AM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: tigercub
But i did see Escort TF default back to surface TF after a battle.

After combat, the composition of a TF is examined and mission open to change. It might change from combat to escort, or air combat to surface combat if all carriers lost, or escort to combat if no damaged ships remain.

Don,

A different slant on this: I've seen several times where I made an escort TF to get a damaged heavy unit from Pearl to the west coast for repairs and - without combat involved - it changed to a surface combat TF enroute. Didn't catch it when it happened so no save.

If the damaged ships are below the damage threshold the TF will go back to combat. This normally occurs when the damaged ship in an escort TF sinks and the remaining escort(s) revert to regular surface combat, but the check is made every turn and crew repairs could improve the status of the damaged ship(s) over the threshold.

If you see an example that seems out of line, please post a save.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 571

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 6:14:20 AM

LTC B

Posts: 34
Joined: 6/7/2002
Status: offline

Apologize if this has been asked - but why can't the Japanese CS ships carry troops or supplies?

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 572

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 6:23:58 AM

Pascal_slith

Posts: 1651
Joined: 8/20/2003
From: back in Commiefornia
Status: offline

Please pardon an ignorant question, but what does 'WAD' stand for?

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skyland
Database corrections (sorry if already posted) :

Ship Class 771, Duguay Trouin, has Wpn 3 and Wpn 4 both on the RIGHT side. One of them should probably be on the LEFT side.

Same for 776.

Same for 2903 Gnevnyi (Wpn 7 & 8), 2915 MK Cargo (Wpn 2 & 3), 2918 KT LST (Wpn 7 & 8)

Noted. Too late for Patch 01, but ... next one.

quote:

Ship Class 2906 Fugas : Mines qty is in Armor column

WAD. Please see manual 6.6.1.3.2 Special Minelayers and 6.6.1.3.2.2 Auxiliary Minelayers.

_____________________________

So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 573

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 6:30:57 AM

tigercub

Posts: 2004
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: brisbane oz
Status: offline

Why have the ships on Escort at all if the game Will default back surface TF after a battle? sorry this does not make since to me?

Tiger!

_____________________________

You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 574

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 7:21:08 AM

Andrew Brown

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pascal
Please pardon an ignorant question, but what does 'WAD' stand for?

It means "Working As Designed".

(in reply to Pascal_slith)

Post #: 575

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 7:22:18 AM

Andrew Brown

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: tigercub

Why have the ships on Escort at all if the game Will default back surface TF after a battle? sorry this does not make since to me?

Tiger!

According to Don's comment, the TF will only revert when it doesn't have something to escort any more (either because the escorted ship is repaired, or sinks).

Andrew

(in reply to tigercub)

Post #: 576

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 8:17:21 AM

erstad

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

quote:

ORIGINAL: tigercub

Why have the ships on Escort at all if the game Will default back surface TF after a battle? sorry this does not make since to me?

Tiger!

According to Don's comment, the TF will only revert when it doesn't have something to escort any more (either because the escorted ship is repaired, or sinks).

Andrew

It also happens at initial task force creation. If you create an escort TF but only select undamaged/lightly damaged ships the engine often selects an alternate TF type for you. Not a big deal but sometimes I want the type to be escort so the ships don't take on the behavior of the other type (e.g., I don't want an SCTF because I want the minimum chance of engagement.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)

Post #: 577

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 8:55:49 AM

afspret

Posts: 851
Joined: 2/19/2004
From: Hanahan, SC
Status: offline

I know the problem with subs not automatically returning to port when they hit bingo fuel has been addressed in Patch 1, but I've noticed that several of my ASW TFs are doing the same thing. WAD or possible bug?

(in reply to jwilkerson)

Post #: 578

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 9:04:41 AM

afspret

Posts: 851
Joined: 2/19/2004
From: Hanahan, SC
Status: offline

Speaking of subs issues, I've got two @ Midway with 0 fuel (one disbanded in port & the other docked) and neither will refuel because both refuel options are greyed out. The one that is still in a TF has auto-refuel on but won't refuel that way either. Midway is still a size 1 port with a small amount of fuel, but I also have a troop and tanker TF there as well. Boats have systems damages of 13 & 20 respectively.

I also have another sub @ sea about halfway between Midway & PH in the same hex as an AG but I can't refuel that boat either because the refuel at sea button is greyed out. This boat has systems damage of 22.

(in reply to afspret)

Post #: 579

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 10:40:18 AM

tigercub

Posts: 2004
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: brisbane oz
Status: offline

IN the case i am talking about,I have am undamaged TF toop ship group moving a Div,i have a Escort TF CL and a few DDs,and a ASW TF.....We come under attack by 3 DDs,they fight a battle and withdraw (3dds) but MY Escort TF coverts to a surface TF WHY? i dont see the point.(there is no damage to anyone to talk about)

Tiger!

_____________________________

You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life

(in reply to afspret)

Post #: 580

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 12:16:30 PM

herwin

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: tigercub

IN the case i am talking about,I have am undamaged TF toop ship group moving a Div,i have a Escort TF CL and a few DDs,and a ASW TF.....We come under attack by 3 DDs,they fight a battle and withdraw (3dds) but MY Escort TF coverts to a surface TF WHY? i dont see the point.(there is no damage to anyone to talk about)

Tiger!

Escort TFs are misnamed. They're intended to be a mechanism for moving damaged ships to repair. Automatically-generated escort TFs usually have an undamaged DD or CL accompanying.

_____________________________

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 tigercub)

Post #: 581

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 12:34:36 PM

tigercub

Posts: 2004
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: brisbane oz
Status: offline

I see the light thanks Herwin,so my TF Escort should had been a surface TF all along Sweet.

Tiger!

_____________________________

You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life

(in reply to herwin)

Post #: 582

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 1:15:47 PM

John Lansford

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline

I formed two escort TF's for damaged ships transiting from Pearl to the WC. One has several damaged BB's and other ships in it plus healthy DD's, the other has lighter damaged (but still bad enough) cruisers with some healthy DD's as ASW. The BB TF remains as an escort TF, but the one with the lesser damaged ships reverts back to surface warfare. Damage levels in that one are in the 30-40 range in the three categories; the BB's have 40-50 damage.

Also, I'm getting the "enemy TF parks in friendly port" problem. A TF stopped in Davao harbor a week ago and just sat there, not bombarding or anything else, until just last turn an invasion TF showed up. While it waited a BB got torpedoed and many Dutch subs had a shot at them.

(in reply to tigercub)

Post #: 583

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/2/2009 5:15:57 PM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pascal

Please pardon an ignorant question, but what does 'WAD' stand for?

Works As Designed

(in reply to Pascal_slith)

Post #: 584

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/3/2009 3:01:13 AM

fbs

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline

Why do all Dutch submarines start scenario 001 returning to Soerabaja? I counted 10 subs at sea, and all of them are returning to base. Is that historical, or a quirk of the scenario?

This is in 1.0.1.1083, btw

Thanks!
fbs

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 585

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/3/2009 8:51:16 AM

hellfirejet

Posts: 1052
Joined: 12/16/2008
From: Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

quote:

ORIGINAL: tigercub

IN the case i am talking about,I have am undamaged TF toop ship group moving a Div,i have a Escort TF CL and a few DDs,and a ASW TF.....We come under attack by 3 DDs,they fight a battle and withdraw (3dds) but MY Escort TF coverts to a surface TF WHY? i dont see the point.(there is no damage to anyone to talk about)

Tiger!

Escort TFs are misnamed. They're intended to be a mechanism for moving damaged ships to repair. Automatically-generated escort TFs usually have an undamaged DD or CL accompanying.

Any chance on getting another new Task Force button option, ( REPAIR ) ? often I have ships I want to send to a port or ship yard for repair only,and to avoid any other task forces if possible.

_____________________________

Regards,
Graham.

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction! Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller

(in reply to herwin)

Post #: 586

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/3/2009 10:01:21 AM

Dixie

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

This isn't an issue as such, more of a question. Is there a reason that HMS Belfast doesn't turn up for the Brits in 1945? She was on her way out East on VJ Day and was in the South China sea in August.

_____________________________

Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to hellfirejet)

Post #: 587

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/3/2009 12:08:15 PM

John Lansford

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: afspret

Speaking of subs issues, I've got two @ Midway with 0 fuel (one disbanded in port & the other docked) and neither will refuel because both refuel options are greyed out.� The one that is still in a TF has auto-refuel on but won't refuel that way either.� Midway is still a size 1 port with�a small amount of fuel, but I also have a troop and tanker TF there as well.� Boats have systems damages of 13 & 20�respectively.

I also have another sub @ sea about halfway between Midway & PH in the same hex as an AG but I can't refuel that boat either because the refuel at sea button is greyed out.� This boat has systems damage of 22.

afspret,

I don't believe subs are allowed to "refuel at sea" under any circumstances. They must refuel from a port, so if Midway does not have sufficient fuel, it won't matter how many tankers/transports you've got in the harbor, they won't refuel from anyone. I have had that problem too before the first patch, subs running out of fuel on the high seas, and I'd divert ships to meet them. They wouldn't refuel then either.

(in reply to afspret)

Post #: 588

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/3/2009 3:05:31 PM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dixie
This isn't an issue as such, more of a question.� Is there a reason that HMS Belfast doesn't turn up for the Brits in 1945?� She was on her way out East on VJ Day and was in the South China sea in August.

Good question, since Jamaica shows up about the same time. Brain fart perhaps?

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Dixie)

Post #: 589

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/3/2009 4:56:57 PM

Dixie

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dixie
This isn't an issue as such, more of a question.� Is there a reason that HMS Belfast doesn't turn up for the Brits in 1945?� She was on her way out East on VJ Day and was in the South China sea in August.

Good question, since Jamaica shows up about the same time. Brain fart perhaps?

I wouldn't like to imply anything

I was curious as there are plenty of ships arriving after her but wasn't sure if there was a special reason she wasn't there.

_____________________________

Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 590

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/3/2009 11:14:54 PM

fbs

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline

Scenario 1, 1.0.1.1083:

Task Forces 434 and 435 are PT boat TFs, and start the scenario with reaction range 6; should be 1.

Thanks!
fbs

(in reply to Dixie)

Post #: 591

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/5/2009 4:09:18 PM

Dobey455

Posts: 445
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

Hi guys,

Just a tiny, tiny issue for you, the Australia class CA's have all their light AA assigned to the RS of the ship (I think its the 20mm mounts). This only seems to be until the first upgrade, the upgraded model is correct.

Noticed in Scen 1 and 2, running Beta Patch.

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 592

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/5/2009 5:50:35 PM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dobey
Hi guys,

Just a tiny, tiny issue for you, the Australia class CA's have all their light AA assigned to the RS of the ship (I think its the 20mm mounts). This only seems to be until the first upgrade, the upgraded model is correct.

Noticed in Scen 1 and 2, running Beta Patch.

Too late for patch-1, but noted.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Dobey455)

Post #: 593

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/6/2009 10:39:27 PM

Bliztk

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

SCEN 1

Ship 14070 Ha-232 has a delay of 460230. February has only 28 days in 1946 (and every other year )

_____________________________

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 594

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/7/2009 1:46:31 AM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

AFDB-2 cannot move out of the port of Portland.

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 595

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/7/2009 4:11:22 AM

erstad

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline

On the ship screen, the "only show ships with pending upgrades" button also shows ships whose only "upgrade" is a conversion. It would be nice if it only showed upgrades. One generally wants all the upgrades, but not all the conversions, and the more conversions pending the harder it is to find the one or two ships that missed their upgrades.

Interestingly enough, there are five buttons at the bottom of the screen and room for six (two rows of three), so we could even add a "Show ships with available conversions"!

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 596

RE: Help Please, I may have a game breaker problem - 9/7/2009 2:15:59 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Grognerd

quote:

��Playing scenario 2 Japanses AI - unpatched. Watched for several weeks ships appearing to be going in and out of Baker Is. Always heading NW. Kept getting intel about attack at Canton (from around march to April 42).
Finally changed sides to see what was going on as I knew some CV's were there. Several TF including a bombard group (the lead) CV group and AK invasion group) were set to move to Canton but appeared stuck in the NE hex above Baker Island. Judging from the fuel they were stuck there about a month. I did not want to change sides to spoil the suprise but eventually knew something was amiss.
Is this related to a fix in the patch? Or something else.

I patched the game, Played both sides and reset the stuck Japanese fleets (went back to early April as far as I could go) to go to truk for re-fueling and such. Now it's May 18 '42 and the fleet just re-appeared stuck in the same place (one hex N-E of Baker Is.) Now I change side to redirect the fleets around the "bad hex" and the game won't let me select any of the fleets as Japanese player! Now I can't re-direct them. Three fleet carriers are in the stuck along with several major ampib units. Went back to April�27th as far back as I can and still can't select! Any body out there have any ideas? or which save games should/could I post?

Post a current save in the tech support forum.

Post #: 597

RE: AE Naval and OOB Issues - 9/7/2009 5:17:12 PM

JWE

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: erstad
On the ship screen, the "only show ships with pending upgrades" button also shows ships whose only "upgrade" is a conversion. It would be nice if it only showed upgrades. One generally wants all the upgrades, but not all the conversions, and the more conversions pending the harder it is to find the one or two ships that missed their upgrades.

Interestingly enough, there are five buttons at the bottom of the screen and room for six (two rows of three), so we could even add a "Show ships with available conversions"!

The �pending� note only shows upgrades/conversions that are available RIGHT NOW. If it�s �42 you will not see either upgrades or conversions available in �43. If the �upgrade� button doesn�t show, it means there�s no upgrade scheduled AT THAT TIME. If only conversions show, it means only conversions are available.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to erstad)

Post #: 598

RE: Help Please, I may have a game breaker problem - 9/7/2009 7:17:08 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Grognerd

quote:

��Playing scenario 2 Japanses AI - unpatched. Watched for several weeks ships appearing to be going in and out of Baker Is. Always heading NW. Kept getting intel about attack at Canton (from around march to April 42).
Finally changed sides to see what was going on as I knew some CV's were there. Several TF including a bombard group (the lead) CV group and AK invasion group) were set to move to Canton but appeared stuck in the NE hex above Baker Island. Judging from the fuel they were stuck there about a month. I did not want to change sides to spoil the suprise but eventually knew something was amiss.
Is this related to a fix in the patch? Or something else.

I patched the game, Played both sides and reset the stuck Japanese fleets (went back to early April as far as I could go) to go to truk for re-fueling and such. Now it's May 18 '42 and the fleet just re-appeared stuck in the same place (one hex N-E of Baker Is.) Now I change side to redirect the fleets around the "bad hex" and the game won't let me select any of the fleets as Japanese player! Now I can't re-direct them. Three fleet carriers are in the stuck along with several major ampib units. Went back to April�27th as far back as I can and still can't select! Any body out there have any ideas? or which save games should/could I post?

Post a current save in the tech support forum.

OK, there is actually no (current) bug here. If you look in your Japanese operations report you will see "TF 304 slows down to allow following TF 20 to catch up". TF 20 is at Guam, loading. It actually should complete loading but does not due to a disrelated bug, now solved.

TF 304 is oscillating 9 hexes away from it's destination (Canton Island). This is because the slow following TF 20 has forced TF 304 to slow down to 1 hex per phase and the need for a bombardment TF to stand off 12-hours max speed steaming from the target until night. It moves one hex toward Canton each night, one hex back each day. That will continue until TF 20 catches up. And all the other following TFs are linked to TF 304 in lock step.

Cancel load on TF 20 and wait for it to catch up.

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 599