Burn baby burn

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Burn baby burn

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 >> Burn baby burn

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 10:20:48 AM

guytipton41

Posts: 351
Joined: 2/26/2011
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline

Hi Folks,

I had a Japanese DD get shot up off Balikpapan two weeks ago game time, and she limped back to Manado and disbanded. The next day the fires were down to 1. And two weeks later the fires are still 1. Is this just a long series of bad die rolls? I have a fair amount of naval support and two ADs at the port.

Cheers,
Guy

Attachment (1)

Post #: 1

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 10:21:49 AM

guytipton41

Posts: 351
Joined: 2/26/2011
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline

And this is the base.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to guytipton41)

Post #: 2

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 1:25:15 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: guytipton41

And this is the base.

I've never seen this. Not for two weeks. Your System damage is not that bad either. Fourteen random rolls that maintain Fires 1 is highly suspicious. You might try to take her off the pier for a turn and see if you can un-stick it. Your flooding should be survivable for a day in a port.

If that doesn't work maybe Michael can tweak the save. Those Fires should be out.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to guytipton41)

Post #: 3

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 2:36:08 PM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

With 85 flood damage, she is so low in the water that the water rushing over the deck should put the fire out

_____________________________

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 4

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 3:34:18 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager

With 85 flood damage, she is so low in the water that the water rushing over the deck should put the fire out

It's very bad flooding, true, but system is low for that much flooding, and it's in a port. A pretty good chance she survives a day. I've moved ships short distances with flooding in the 90s. Once a CV with 98 flooding; she survived and was fully repaired.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)

Post #: 5

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 4:15:54 PM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: guytipton41

And this is the base.

I've never seen this. Not for two weeks. Your System damage is not that bad either. Fourteen random rolls that maintain Fires 1 is highly suspicious. You might try to take her off the pier for a turn and see if you can un-stick it. Your flooding should be survivable for a day in a port.

If that doesn't work maybe Michael can tweak the save. Those Fires should be out.

Not likely to be something michaelm can easily tweek. Even if assuming it is a bug which at best is probably only a 50/50 call.

Have a look at s.14 of my ship repair 101 guide. What is at play here looks very much to be the repair manager working on the bands.

That ship is not going to sink with 1 fire irrespective of how long it remains. But the flotation damage level, especially for a Japanese ship, is in sinking territory. Hence the Repair Manager is sending all the free resources to deal with the flotation damage.

Alfred

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 6

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 4:22:28 PM

Admiral DadMan

Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Not likely to be something michaelm can easily tweek. Even if assuming it is a bug which at best is probably only a 50/50 call.

Have a look at s.14 of my ship repair 101 guide. What is at play here looks very much to be the repair manager working on the bands.

That ship is not going to sink with 1 fire irrespective of how long it remains. But the flotation damage level, especially for a Japanese ship, is in sinking territory. Hence the Repair Manager is sending all the free resources to deal with the flotation damage.

Alfred

I suppose then that the question is if any SYS/FLT/ENG damage has dropped during those turns. That would confirm what Alfred is positing.

_____________________________

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 7

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 4:28:59 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Not likely to be something michaelm can easily tweek. Even if assuming it is a bug which at best is probably only a 50/50 call.

Have a look at s.14 of my ship repair 101 guide. What is at play here looks very much to be the repair manager working on the bands.

That ship is not going to sink with 1 fire irrespective of how long it remains. But the flotation damage level, especially for a Japanese ship, is in sinking territory. Hence the Repair Manager is sending all the free resources to deal with the flotation damage.

Alfred

I thought Fires were outside the Repair Manager band passes. In their own realm as it were.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 8

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 4:37:09 PM

jwolf

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

I thought Fires were outside the Repair Manager band passes. In their own realm as it were.

That was my understanding as well -- fire takes priority over everything else, and in fact no other repairs will even be attempted if there is any fire. Is this wrong?

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 9

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 4:39:34 PM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

Yes but the resources used to douse a fire are also used to do ship repairs. It is that dual usage which makes it a 50/50 call on it being a bug and why a tweek is not necessarily an easy task.

Alfred

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 10

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 4:39:45 PM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

I thought damage was tackled as fires first and always.
In fact, I thought until fires were 0 that no other repair could take place.
Am I wrong about this?

< Message edited by Fallschirmjager -- 3/10/2016 4:50:48 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 11

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 4:43:35 PM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

An 85 (70 major) flotation is a real threat. A 1 fire is not.

Alfred

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)

Post #: 12

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 5:42:58 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

An 85 (70 major) flotation is a real threat.� A 1 fire is not.

Alfred

True. But what tweaked me was a fire of 1 for two weeks. It is still causing system damage as long as it burns. It was the duration that seemed weird.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 13

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/10/2016 6:28:09 PM

Revthought

Posts: 523
Joined: 1/14/2009
From: San Diego (Lives in Indianapolis)
Status: offline

Maybe use her to roast marshmallows? Or a good old fashioned fire ship. Light her ablaze and ram her into something. ;)

Sorry, all I can offer you are bad jokes.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 14

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/11/2016 1:57:05 AM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

Since a ship with a fire cannot dock and use base naval support to help with damage control, putting it into a TF (with another ship to help with the flooding) might allow the crew to deal with that smoldering fire in the toke room and then disband again.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Revthought)

Post #: 15

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/11/2016 4:23:40 AM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

I've had this before and yes I had to fiddle with the ship in and out of TF's. Eventually I have saved the ships.

If JWE was still around here, he would (likely) label it a memory leak issue and it may well be. I do know that since he brought that up that I no longer run AE with Tracker and Reporter both open and I haven't had the issue since. Prior, I had seen it maybe 3 times(?).

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 16

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/11/2016 12:55:46 PM

guytipton41

Posts: 351
Joined: 2/26/2011
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline

Hi Folks,

I'll try putting her in a TF with an AD and see if that shakes something loose. Thanx for all the info.

Cheers,
Guy

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 17

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/11/2016 6:11:27 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

I have seen this before, & I believe Pax is correct...

(in reply to guytipton41)

Post #: 18

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/11/2016 10:59:11 PM

guytipton41

Posts: 351
Joined: 2/26/2011
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

I've had this before and yes I had to fiddle with the ship in and out of TF's. Eventually I have saved the ships.

If JWE was still around here, he would (likely) label it a memory leak issue and it may well be. I do know that since he brought that up that I no longer run AE with Tracker and Reporter both open and I haven't had the issue since. Prior, I had seen it maybe 3 times(?).

Hi Pax,

Not using Tracker or Reporter this game. It's a Dec 8 Grand Campaign with Millersan as the allies. And he's damned aggressive - and lucky. A DMS out of PH sunk two AOs on Dec 11 after they spent two days refueling each other (120 NM per day?) as best I can tell. He claims he was just looking for subs.

Cheers,
Guy

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 19

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/14/2016 12:16:00 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Revthought

Maybe use her to roast marshmallows? Or a good old fashioned fire ship. Light her ablaze and ram her into something. ;)

Sorry, all I can offer you are bad jokes.

Bet is one of those smoldering mattress fires!

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Revthought)

Post #: 20

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/14/2016 12:34:07 PM

guytipton41

Posts: 351
Joined: 2/26/2011
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline

Hi Folks,

Thanx for all the replies, even the smart-axx ones. I put the DD into a TF disbanded it the next day and viola! Fire is out. Also knocked off the 11 points of non-major float damage. I'll never know if was 'kicking' the system or a better die roll.

Cheers,
Guy

Ps. Could it have been a display issue where the DD was actually being repaired but the "display record" wasn't?

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 21

RE: Burn baby burn - 3/14/2016 2:18:21 PM

oaltinyay

Posts: 593
Joined: 12/20/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager

I thought damage was tackled as fires first and always.
In fact, I thought until fires were 0 that no other repair could take place.
Am I wrong about this?

no you are right

_____________________________

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)

Post #: 22