TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs

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 >> TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 2:21:00 PM

dereck

Posts: 2800
Joined: 9/7/2004
From: Romulus, MI
Status: offline

I am tired of having my task forces terminate their patrols simply because they have 5 SYS points of damage and because someone decided (for ME) that they can't 1. repair their damage at sea (which US - and any Navy could and DID) and 2. they have to return to port.

Is there any way I can keep the ships at sea until I decide they need to be repaired or is this just some more unrealistic stuff I have to deal with?

_____________________________

PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)

Post #: 1

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 2:45:00 PM

Who Cares

Posts: 67
Joined: 2/2/2010
Status: offline

Just unrealistic stuff you have to deal with. Even more annoying is the TF will put itself into port thus prohibiting you from at least replacing the "damaged" ships with others to resume its patrol. So then you get the pleasure that Nimitz and Yamamoto both had of trying to figure out what sub or ASW patrol isn't on station. I mean it would be silly for a subordinate to do that when the supreme has nothing better to do than deal with these exciting details.

(in reply to dereck)

Post #: 2

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 3:20:06 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: dereck

I am tired of having my task forces terminate their patrols simply because they have 5 SYS points of damage and because someone decided (for ME) that they can't 1. repair their damage at sea (which US - and any Navy could and DID) and 2. they have to return to port.

Is there any way I can keep the ships at sea until I decide they need to be repaired or is this just some more unrealistic stuff I have to deal with?

The way you wish it was is the way it originally was. It was changed because players complained about having to monitor their patrol TFs.

We just can't please everyone nor can we make everything an option.

PO1 US Navy (1962-1969)
US Naval Weapons Depot, Yorktown VA (1962)
US Naval Missile Facility, Dam Neck VA (1963)
Coast Guard Barracks, Baltimore Shipyards (1963-1964)
USS Norton Sound AVM-1 (1964-1966)
US Naval Weapons Depot, Concord CA (1966-1967)
USS Richmond K Turner DLG-20 (1967-1969)

(in reply to dereck)

Post #: 3

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 3:20:52 PM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

If they didn't go back, people would be bitching about TFs with heavily damaged ships still on patrol.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Who Cares)

Post #: 4

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 3:28:34 PM

dereck

Posts: 2800
Joined: 9/7/2004
From: Romulus, MI
Status: offline

If it would be set up where ships repaired their own damage (which ANYBODY who served on a sjip knows they could and did) any damage other than major damage could be repaired at sea and there would be no need for this unrealistic hypocracy.

This game is so detailed in some repects and then things like this which is in efect not realistic.

I should have stuck with the old WITP.

_____________________________

PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 5

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 3:47:02 PM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

If they didn't go back, people would be bitching about TFs with heavily damaged ships still on patrol.

guess that�s the time when there will be a request for a toggle "terminate patrol when reaching x sys, y flt, z eng damage".

We can�t have everything but I would like it.

_____________________________

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 6

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 3:48:53 PM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dereck

If it would be set up where ships repaired their own damage (which ANYBODY who served on a sjip knows they could and did) any damage other than major damage could be repaired at sea and there would be no need for this unrealistic hypocracy.

This game is so detailed in some repects and then things like this which is in efect not realistic.

I should have stuck with the old WITP.

is this single "feature" enough to really stick with WITP? With the recent "events" I guess still noone would call me a fanboy of WITP over AE, even though I�ve got my problems in some aspects with AE. Still, in total I wouldn�t change AE for WITP.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 3/30/2010 3:49:13 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to dereck)

Post #: 7

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 3:49:00 PM

Who Cares

Posts: 67
Joined: 2/2/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

We just can't please everyone nor can we make everything an option.

Actually it already IS an option and has been long before you came along. It's called "auto sub ops". People that find it too difficult to click the "show all ships" icon at the top and then sort this by damage shouldn't be the ones that make YOUR policy for you or rather they shouldn't be the ones YOU try to please.

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 8

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 3:51:18 PM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Who Cares

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

We just can't please everyone nor can we make everything an option.

Actually it already IS an option and has been long before you came along. It's called "auto sub ops". People that find it too difficult to click the "show all ships" icon at the top and then sort this by damage shouldn't be the ones that make YOUR policy for you or rather they shouldn't be the ones YOU try to please.

Guess Dereck wasn�t just talking about subs, was he?

And I would rather check every single sub each day than to use auto sub ops. NEVER ever have the AI doing something for you like handling your subs.

_____________________________

(in reply to Who Cares)

Post #: 9

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 4:12:35 PM

Who Cares

Posts: 67
Joined: 2/2/2010
Status: offline

I agree. Anything under computer control is evil. Especially the computer deciding to take ships off their patrol and put them in port. I have had annoying things happen when subs were heading home to refuel (going to a "closer" port - one that had no fuel - and staying there), damaged ships breaking off from their assigned port/target to go to where it "feels" it should go ect.

Which is exactly my point. I don't WANT the computer doing these things "for me".

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 10

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 4:20:33 PM

Dili

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

I think the 5 SYS should be changed to 8 or so. A no there are things not fixable at sea.

(in reply to Who Cares)

Post #: 11

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 5:08:19 PM

Buck Beach

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dereck

If it would be set up where ships repaired their own damage (which ANYBODY who served on a sjip knows they could and did) any damage other than major damage could be repaired at sea and there would be no need for this unrealistic hypocracy.

This game is so detailed in some repects and then things like this which is in efect not realistic.

I should have stuck with the old WITP.

No disrespect intended, but, what is keeping you from firing up the old game and setting AE aside. If it makes you happier, why not do it.

(in reply to dereck)

Post #: 12

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 5:12:11 PM

Nomad

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

If I am not mistaken these actions are listed in the ops report.

_____________________________

(in reply to Buck Beach)

Post #: 13

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 5:14:44 PM

John Lansford

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

If you like your subs sitting in enemy held ports getting bombed/depthcharged, then by all means turn on "Computer control" for your subs. Every time I tried that in WitP, the subs headed right for a port and sat there. Don't know if that was fixed in AE and haven't tried it to find out.

(in reply to Buck Beach)

Post #: 14

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 5:28:15 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: dereck

...

I should have stuck with the old WITP.

Agreed

(in reply to dereck)

Post #: 15

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 5:29:23 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Who Cares

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

We just can't please everyone nor can we make everything an option.

Actually it already IS an option and has been long before you came along. It's called "auto sub ops". People that find it too difficult to click the "show all ships" icon at the top and then sort this by damage shouldn't be the ones that make YOUR policy for you or rather they shouldn't be the ones YOU try to please.

I've read this several times and I'm still not sure what you are trying to say.

(in reply to Who Cares)

Post #: 16

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 5:30:13 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

If you like your subs sitting in enemy held ports getting bombed/depthcharged, then by all means turn on "Computer control" for your subs.� Every time I tried that in WitP, the subs headed right for a port and sat there.� Don't know if that was fixed in AE and haven't tried it to find out.

I suppose, if all else fails, that you could try AE before you comment on it.

(in reply to John Lansford)

Post #: 17

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 6:20:41 PM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

If you like your subs sitting in enemy held ports getting bombed/depthcharged, then by all means turn on "Computer control" for your subs.� Every time I tried that in WitP, the subs headed right for a port and sat there.� Don't know if that was fixed in AE and haven't tried it to find out.

I suppose, if all else fails, that you could try AE before you comment on it.

Guess John meant while he�s playing AE he hasn�t tried to use his subs on auto ops. I haven�t tried subs on auto ops either and I won�t as IMO a human being will always be better in handling the subs than an AI routine, no matter how much improved it has been. Please don�t take this as an offense Don.

_____________________________

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 18

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 6:33:45 PM

ChickenOfTheSea

Posts: 579
Joined: 6/7/2008
From: Virginia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Who Cares

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

We just can't please everyone nor can we make everything an option.

Actually it already IS an option and has been long before you came along. It's called "auto sub ops". People that find it too difficult to click the "show all ships" icon at the top and then sort this by damage shouldn't be the ones that make YOUR policy for you or rather they shouldn't be the ones YOU try to please.

I'm trying to figure out when "long before you came along" was with respect to Don Bowen.

If you don't want the computer to make these decisions for you, just do them manually. Use waypoints or direct them each turn or whatever. That was the only option in WITP and that option is still available in AE. Then you can continue your patrols no matter how much damage or how little fuel until your ships sink, if that is what you really want.

_____________________________

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice, there is. - Manfred Eigen

(in reply to Who Cares)

Post #: 19

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 6:37:26 PM

tanksone

Posts: 390
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: St Paul, Mn.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dereck

I am tired of having my task forces terminate their patrols simply because they have 5 SYS points of damage and because someone decided (for ME) that they can't 1. repair their damage at sea (which US - and any Navy could and DID) and 2. they have to return to port.

Is there any way I can keep the ships at sea until I decide they need to be repaired or is this just some more unrealistic stuff I have to deal with?

Hi, can't say I've seen this happening with sub or surface TF's that are using way points to patrol. Either way Don, you and the devs did a heck of a great job.

(in reply to dereck)

Post #: 20

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 7:10:40 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

If you like your subs sitting in enemy held ports getting bombed/depthcharged, then by all means turn on "Computer control" for your subs.� Every time I tried that in WitP, the subs headed right for a port and sat there.� Don't know if that was fixed in AE and haven't tried it to find out.

I suppose, if all else fails, that you could try AE before you comment on it.

Guess John meant while he�s playing AE he hasn�t tried to use his subs on auto ops. I haven�t tried subs on auto ops either and I won�t as IMO a human being will always be better in handling the subs than an AI routine, no matter how much improved it has been. Please don�t take this as an offense Don.

You are right, I should have said " you could try it in AE"

< Message edited by Don Bowen -- 3/30/2010 9:19:39 PM >

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 21

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 7:11:35 PM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChickenOfTheSea

I'm trying to figure out when "long before you came along" was with respect to Don Bowen.

No kidding.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to ChickenOfTheSea)

Post #: 22

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 8:00:00 PM

treespider

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: dereck

If it would be set up where ships repaired their own damage (which ANYBODY who served on a sjip knows they could and did) any damage other than major damage could be repaired at sea and there would be no need for this unrealistic hypocracy.

IIRC Ships do repair stuff at sea....so perhaps just maybe ...all your at-sea repair stores have been used up in continuous repairs that you don't see since they occur during the turn, trying to keep your Sys below 5.

So by the time you reach an end of turn where your Sys remains a 5, the Capt. decides it time to return home to refit.

Or of course I guess that requires people to use their imagination too much.

< Message edited by treespider -- 3/30/2010 8:02:50 PM >

_____________________________

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 dereck)

Post #: 23

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 8:57:05 PM

mjk428

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline

Seems like a potentially good feature but 5 sys is too low to trigger an automatic response. I rarely operate ships over 5 but sometimes it's necessary. 10 would be a better number to justify a TF disregarding orders from above.

< Message edited by mjk428 -- 3/30/2010 8:58:06 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to treespider)

Post #: 24

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 9:19:46 PM

Don Bowen

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

Seems like a potentially good feature but 5 sys is too low to trigger an automatic response. I rarely operate ships over 5 but sometimes it's necessary. 10 would be a better number to justify a TF disregarding orders from above.

It actually is 10. The TF is probably returning due to float damage.

(in reply to mjk428)

Post #: 25

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 9:21:23 PM

Grfin Zeppelin

Posts: 1515
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

Zomg ze game iz br0ken !!!!!!!

_____________________________

(in reply to mjk428)

Post #: 26

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 11:09:38 PM

Who Cares

Posts: 67
Joined: 2/2/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChickenOfTheSea

quote:

ORIGINAL: Who Cares

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

We just can't please everyone nor can we make everything an option.

Actually it already IS an option and has been long before you came along. It's called "auto sub ops". People that find it too difficult to click the "show all ships" icon at the top and then sort this by damage shouldn't be the ones that make YOUR policy for you or rather they shouldn't be the ones YOU try to please.

I'm trying to figure out when "long before you came along" was with respect to Don Bowen.

If you don't want the computer to make these decisions for you, just do them manually. Use waypoints or direct them each turn or whatever. That was the only option in WITP and that option is still available in AE. Then you can continue your patrols no matter how much damage or how little fuel until your ships sink, if that is what you really want.

Allow me to clarify: "long before you came along" refers to Don as a programmer on this project, meaning the original game by 2x3. Things that were there before he started changing the code.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Who Cares

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

We just can't please everyone nor can we make everything an option.

Actually it already IS an option and has been long before you came along. It's called "auto sub ops". People that find it too difficult to click the "show all ships" icon at the top and then sort this by damage shouldn't be the ones that make YOUR policy for you or rather they shouldn't be the ones YOU try to please.

I've read this several times and I'm still not sure what you are trying to say.

Allow me to clarify then. You said "We just can't please everyone nor can we make everything an option." in reference to this:

quote:

The way you wish it was is the way it originally was. It was changed because players complained about having to monitor their patrol TFs.

To which I responded:

quote:

People that find it too difficult to click the "show all ships" icon at the top and then sort this by damage shouldn't be the ones that make YOUR policy for you or rather they shouldn't be the ones YOU try to please.

Now what this means is simply you added a lot of code to "decide" when TFs should break off and go home, when a TF should go into port, where a TF should go after it breaks off simply because (to use your words), "players complained about having to monitor their patrol TFs". Now frankly if a person doesn't have the ability to do something as simple as clicking the "show ships" icon and then click the "sys" heading at the top to sort the ships by damage (2 total clicks per game turn) I fail to see why you felt the need to bow before these people and put in a lot of code just to please them. And frankly, I have NEVER seen anyone say this was a good thing and am curious as to who "these players" are.

Further I submit it is actually harder to monitor ones patrol TFs under this system.

< Message edited by Who Cares -- 3/30/2010 11:13:05 PM >

(in reply to ChickenOfTheSea)

Post #: 27

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 11:18:54 PM

John Lansford

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

If you like your subs sitting in enemy held ports getting bombed/depthcharged, then by all means turn on "Computer control" for your subs.� Every time I tried that in WitP, the subs headed right for a port and sat there.� Don't know if that was fixed in AE and haven't tried it to find out.

I suppose, if all else fails, that you could try AE before you comment on it.

Right, Don; I've only been playing AE since December so obviously I know nothing at all about it. I did have some subs on Computer Control early on; they headed for Hong Kong and Khota Bharu just like they did in WitP. Now maybe one of the patches fixed that, but I'm not really interested in finding out and like Castor, feel I can position my subs better than the computer can anyway.

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 28

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/30/2010 11:28:41 PM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

These weren't computer control ships. They were ships on patrol.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to John Lansford)

Post #: 29

RE: TF Terminating Patrol for Repairs - 3/31/2010 2:05:41 AM

pompack

Posts: 2582
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

Seems like a potentially good feature but 5 sys is too low to trigger an automatic response. I rarely operate ships over 5 but sometimes it's necessary. 10 would be a better number to justify a TF disregarding orders from above.

It actually is 10. The TF is probably returning due to float damage.

Well, I just checked and found many patroling TFs with SYS between 5 and 9. And one happily patroling along with SYS damage of 17 and ENG damage of 2!