Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Hope you "fix" these nuisances

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Hope you "fix" these nuisances Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Hope you "fix" these nuisances - 8/17/2000 11:10:00 AM   
Lithium

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 8/16/2000
Status: offline 		Haven't played PACWAR in ohh about 4 or 5 years until recently when I downloaded it. Wow...an amazing game I forgot how much I liked it. I prefer strategic as opposed to tactical games. Unfortunetly, the market does not reflect my opinon Really looking forward to the new game, I am hopelessly addicted to the original - which was darn near perfect. Having said that, there are a few things which irritate me highly. (1) Without a doubt the most annoying is the fact there is no aggressiveness setting on airbases. Think about it, after struggling to secure a foothold in the Solomons or Carolines, you jam 4 squads of fighters to provide CAP to help secure the fledging outpost, and then they proceed to promptly try to strafe either the Yamato, a 8 or 9 Airfield (Rabaul), or they get waxed trying to take on 4 Jap CVs whose more numerous and experienced ZEROs inflict causualties greater than the scale of the Marinana Turkey Shoot. I do understand there is a value for fighter sweeps....but only if you have better planes, better pilots, and better numbers - as Supreme Commander I think I should have some say in whether 60 some odd P39s should assault 4 JAP CVs or stay at home and at least fight on my ground. Is there some clever way around this that is not in the manual? (2) Whatever alloy PACWAR thinks the Zuiho had I assure you did not exist in 1942. It probably wont exist in 2042 either. I am assuming that a number of the reported "hits" are false, but my SBD pilots continually put DOZENS of 1000 lb bombs into this non-armored wooden Flattop and it always manages to limp back to Japan. However, it is not just the Billy Mitchells and Douhat's (Sp?) of the world that can be frustrated. I like to use my BBs aggressivly, but it is most disbelieving to watch scores of 14 inch shells seem to have similar (non)effect on the Cruisers and Destroyers which the AI likes to send vs a 5 Battleship fleet. The "critical" hit angle the game took is an excellent idea based on reality which few other games even attempted, but I really do think the non BB armor is over-represented (BBs seem about right). (3) I understand friendly fire isnt very friendly, but I get the impression that the majority of my Commanders would have better luck leading a bayonet charge than calling for firesupport. If my tone seems haughty or sacarstic, I do apologize but it is not my intent...it is just my way embellishing why those 3 things are ***annoying*** and adding a little bit of humor instead of just complaining. PACWAR was very ambitious and quite frankly I am surprised that with all to take into account, it got the vast majority of issues more or less "right" and thus be extremly playable. I assure you the the MINUTE "The Struggle Against Japan" becomes available I will buy it...keep up the good work!! [This message has been edited by Lithium (edited August 17, 2000).]

_____________________________
Post #: 1
- 8/17/2000 8:20:00 PM   
emetcalf

 

Posts: 28
Joined: 4/25/2000
From: Longview, TX, USA
Status: offline 		I'll second some of Lithium's points. Fighter groups that attack task forces with no hope of doing damage need to be fixed. This is a constant feature, especially of allied fighter groups. They go up, get slaughtered by any fighter cover, and then they break off without a chance to do damage. Hopefully the fighter sweep order will fix this by having the fighters not fly when they don't have the order. On the subject of critical hits, I've seen it both ways. I've seen Jap CVs survive a half-dozen bomb hits, and I've seen CVs crippled by one bomb that goes off. All I can say is that the hits include near misses that don't actually do any damage, but that the pilot/gunner thinks hit the target.

_____________________________


(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 2
- 8/17/2000 9:36:00 PM   
Major Tom

 

Posts: 525
Joined: 4/8/2000
From: Canada
Status: offline 		Actually, it is pretty amazing at what certain ships can take in battle, when compared with others. Sometimes a destroyer will be sunk after a few hits of 5" shells, other times it can shrugg of multiple hits of 5", 14" and a torpedoe or two. Same thing with Carriers, Battleships, and all other warships. Sometimes I think that the IJN ships are a little TOO fragile. Ever try to send the Hiyo and Junyo into combat? I am pretty sure that the plan for aircraft is to give them orders, such as CAP, Anti-Shipping, etc... I think that the friendly fire thing is a bug. You can't kill enemy commanders like that, but, only allied commanders.

_____________________________


(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 3
- 8/18/2000 10:36:00 AM   
brisd


Posts: 614
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: San Diego, CA
Status: offline 		I am currently playing a solo campaign game as the allies (in prep for the release of patch). I have played dozens of PacWar games but this has been the strangest. I played historical open and every allied BB/BC was sunk, no IJN major losses. I husbanded my pitiful forces, awaiting the onslaught and it never really came till it was too late. I saved Wake, no serious attempt to retake it. Singapore and ABDA held till 9/42. Bataan till 3/43. No major attacks against SW Pacific or South Pacific commands. And no carrier battles in 42 - period. IJN headquarters sailed the fleet from one end of their domain, visiting exotic ports. burning up precious fuel. A few interesting combat results - one betty puts a torp into Saratoga early in 42 and kills Halsey! Then the North Carolina, part of a large TF, is sunk by one sub's torp. I have seen some good action in 6/43 after the IJN let me take Guadalcanal and advance up the slot without a peep from the fleet. After I took Shortland they awoke with a mighty sortie, where I have Corsairs and SBD's waiting. I still haven't lost a single CV and the Essex's are arriving, they've lost 3 CV's so far. This month 7/43 I take the Mariana's. I should be in Tokyo in 44. Still my fav game for all its warts...

_____________________________

"I propose to fight it out on this line if it takes all summer."-Note sent with Congressman Washburne from Spotsylvania, May 11, 1864, to General Halleck. - General Ulysses S. Grant

(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 4
- 8/18/2000 7:03:00 PM   
emetcalf

 

Posts: 28
Joined: 4/25/2000
From: Longview, TX, USA
Status: offline 		On Major Tom's point, check out the stats for the Hiyo and Junyo. Their durability is less than half that of most fleet carriers. They're cheap conversions; they work fine until they have to go fast (max speed 25) or take hits. Me, I use them with the light carriers to add some dive bombers to those groups. Use them with the big boys at your own peril.

_____________________________


(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 5
- 8/19/2000 12:24:00 AM   
Major Tom

 

Posts: 525
Joined: 4/8/2000
From: Canada
Status: offline 		Actually, sometimes I find it a quite different story. While playing as the Allies I notice that it is pretty easy to sink the IJN Carriers once you get past the aircover. The USN Carriers can survive more hits than an IJN Carrier. This probably has something to do with USN aircraft carrying heavier bombs than the IJN. One thing that I have noticed is that the USNAF Air-Torpedo is set a bit too powerful. Must USN ship kills were by dive-bomber, not torpedo-bomber.

_____________________________


(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 6
- 8/19/2000 6:03:00 AM   
Owl

 

Posts: 179
Joined: 8/4/2000
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline 		Japanese damage control wasn't what you'd call state of the art for the time. Add to that ships which in some cases were converted liners (Junyo, Hiyo) and you have paper tigers. The damage control abilities seem to go somewhat hand in hand with crew skill as Zuikaku and Shokaku managed to survive some fairly serious hits. It is debatable, but the carriers at Midway would probably have survived their hits had the bombs not landed amoungst armed and fueled planes and/or ignited improperly stored ordinance. According to Conways naval weapons of WW2 the Japanese air torpedo should have considerable more kick than the American equivelant. Bombs seem about right. ------------------ (.) (.) ...V...

_____________________________

(.) (.)

...V...

(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 7
- 8/20/2000 4:19:00 AM   
Lithium

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 8/16/2000
Status: offline 		Major Tom - I have also noticed that enemy Commanders dont die during fire-support...I think you're correct here. Having a bit more control over my Aircobras would be nice, this way they'll get slaughtered with a purpose brisd - Actually that would be gripe #4 on my list, The Japanese AI is FAR too passive. I do not think that this can be fixed though, I have yet to see a formidable AI in ANY game that didnt resort to blatent cheating. IJN carriers were definetly more vunerable than the USN, the Shokaku and Zuikaku the ones surviving a fair amount of damage. Circumstance may have doomed the Akagi and Kaga (armed planes) and the Taiho and Shinano (poor damage control) as IN THEORY these should seem to be on par with the USN. As to the survivability of USN Fleet Carriers, they were definetly very high. Lexington was lost to damage control more than anything, Yorktown...already wounded...took a pounding at Midway and only died to a submarine. And the Hornet, proclaimed beyond repair at Santa Cruz still remained afloat after we "scuttled" her, only to be sunk later on by Jap destroyers. Despite this, I still contend that the Zuiho absorbs far too many SBD hits - I wasnt kidding about dozens. What this ship is to me is what the Bismark was to the Royal Navy. I have come to a similar conclusion as to the SBD as you guys, it does seem a little underpowered, but I'd attribute that it being just a bit too difficult to achieve a critical hit to every ship (except BBs). The scale I think is close to reality, just far enough away to be noticable at certain times. My TBFs never make it through the fighter cover in the early wars years so I wouldnt know about them I fear JAP torpedos, they definetly do have more kick then their American counterparts. One other thing...what is the best way to get a fleet to initate surface combat? Even with decent air patrols, I get annoyed at my admirals with high aggressive ratings allow the enemy to Bombard and land invasion forces with impunity. I'd sack them if I had the choice , but alas that option doesn't exist.

_____________________________


(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 8
- 8/20/2000 4:20:00 AM   
showboat1


Posts: 1885
Joined: 7/28/2000
From: Atoka, TN
Status: offline 		Interesting thing about warships is that some of them live charmed lives. The Enterprise survived 4 of the 5 major carrier v carrier battles. She was hit both at Eastern Solomons and Santa Cruz and made it through. Meanwhile Lexington, Yorktown, Hornet, and Wasp were sunk. All were good ships, had great crews, but lacked a magic charm of being in the right place at the right time. Meanwhile Saratoga was practically a "torpedo catcher" early on in the war. Zuikaku was quite charmed until sent out as a decoy. Shokaku had her guts blown out at Santa Cruz (6 to 8 1000 pounders depending on who you believe) and lived. Zuiho was quite a charmed little ship and made it until Leyte Gulf. South Dakota had all kinds a trouble early on by being hit at Santa Cruz and then meeting near disaster at Second Guadalcanal with am electrical failure, while Washington had no problem taking on the IJN forces by herself. Bottom line, its war and wierd things happen. My grandfather knew a man who saw an 800 kg bomb BOUNCE on Enterprise's flight deck in '45. (Told you she was charmed) I like the fact that anything can and probably will happen. Oh yeah, Owl, good point about Midway. Akagi at least wouldn't have been badly damaged and Soryu and Kaga would have had a chance despite severe damage.

_____________________________

SF3C B. B. New USS North Carolina BB-55 - Permission is granted to go ashore for the last shore leave. (1926-2003)

(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 9
- 8/20/2000 11:55:00 AM   
brisd


Posts: 614
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: San Diego, CA
Status: offline 		showboat1 - good summary of the lucky and unlucky ships in PacWar. Zuikaku and her sister were tough ships and their damage control teams were superb, saving them both several times despite severe damage. The USN developed the best damage control teams and applied the leasons learned (Lexington at Coral Sea as an example). Yes some ships are lucky. In my current game the South Dakota and Indiana got blasted by the Yamato and Musashi, after defeating a cruiser squadron in a previous battle, both taking numerous 18" hits plus many 14" from accompaning Kongo class BB's. Both limped away with around 88% damage. Indiana is now sitting in the yards in San Diego (NASCO?) but South Dakota is still on her way to Seattle after taking ANOTHER torp from a sub, just bounced off, thought she was gone. In battles, both surface and air, I have yet to sink a IJN BB but caught a Kongo class in port during an airraid and took her down. Still no CV losses by the allies (3 CVE's yes) and it is 10/43. Lucky fleet I have Really looking forward to a new War in Pacific that has crew values, that way ships that survive can become veteran and those amatuer crews (Shinano, Taiho) will suffer.

_____________________________

"I propose to fight it out on this line if it takes all summer."-Note sent with Congressman Washburne from Spotsylvania, May 11, 1864, to General Halleck. - General Ulysses S. Grant

(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 10
- 9/8/2000 11:28:00 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		the penetration formula indeed does need to be looked at. I just recently reaquired the game from the underdogs site (latest 'official' patch too) and just started a new game and witnessed the attack on Pearl Harbor. the worst culprit is the torpedo routines. ships, especially battleships can take ridiculous #'s of torpedoes and remain afloat. Figure this is because their warheads are always compared to the armor rating of the ship which greatly squashes the chance for penetrating damage (rarely are any severe ******* marks shown unless one is using Type 93 surface launched torps) unfortunately found out that its hardly restricted to torps either. For some strange random reason , several bomber groups chose to attack the subs of the base....4 250kg hits were scored against the subs, not ONE penetrated to cause serious damage and none of the subs were sunk. also out of 6 bomb hits on CL's present, only two penetrated to cause decent damage. even the 500kg bombs made little impression. i had never played with the last official patch before and had hoped it had been addressed but i was wrong. Hopefully this new update will address it!

_____________________________


(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 11
- 9/10/2000 2:16:00 AM   
Blackhorse


Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Lithium: One other thing...what is the best way to get a fleet to initate surface combat? Even with decent air patrols, I get annoyed at my admirals with high aggressive ratings allow the enemy to Bombard and land invasion forces with impunity. I'd sack them if I had the choice , but alas that option doesn't exist.
Do you have a reaction range set for your surface combat TFs? If you want a TF to defend the same base where it is based, set the reaction range to 'zero.' Too often I've missed an intercept because my TF had a reaction range and didn't "react" to an attack on its own home port! In the Aleutians, I've had task forces miss intercepts even with reaction ranges of zero, but I'm guessing that has something to do with the weather.

_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 12
- 9/11/2000 5:15:00 AM   
norsemanjs

 

Posts: 145
Joined: 5/11/2000
From: Enderlin, ND, USA
Status: offline 		As long as we're telling old war stories. I recently sent The South Dakota, Washington, and North Carolina along with about 5 cruisers and a couple DD's to hopefully intercept what I thought might be a landing against Rabaul which I control, Well it was a landing alright and the Yamato and Musashi were along to soften up the Aussies who were holding on by their fingernails. There were also about 7 Jap carriers which had totally squashed all my land based air. (No US carriers in theatre). The result admiral Leary surprised the BB's and one Yamato I think was sunk after a horrible pummeling and the Musashi and a CA took serious damage. The US casualties the South Dakota had about 50% damage and the Wash & NC were untouched a couple of the allied cruisers took minor damage. Can you believe that! The landing turned back and the Aussies were reinforced by the Americal division on the following turn. The Jap carriers were never touched and kept pounding my airfields and merchant shipping. The best way I've found to get a good old fashioned surface battle is to send a task force into a spot where you think there's going to be a landing or bombardment. Make sure you have a commander who is fairly aggressive. What a great game. Norseman

_____________________________


(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 13
- 9/18/2000 8:10:00 AM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		I had to put all my ac in China on training missions cause they killed 3 of my leaders in 3 weeks. I never killer good allied leaders but seem to have a lot of luck killing Frank Jack. Has anyone ever got Kitikami and/or Oi in a fight? Kitikami sank a BB while escorting a supply run down the slot I was surprised and I didn't have Tanaka in command (I do not know where he went to) My fighters on Espirtu Santo will not leave Suva alone I think I am training more US pilots then the AI. Since the day I first bought PacWar for $80 it has consumed more of my time and retained more of my interest then any other computer game ever. I have never played against another human sadly and long for the game I do. Needless to say I am as excited as a kid on the night before Christmas about a new GG Pacific War game. Somebody pinch me. ------------------ I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction! [This message has been edited by Mogami (edited September 17, 2000).]

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 14
- 9/18/2000 8:56:00 AM   
norsemanjs

 

Posts: 145
Joined: 5/11/2000
From: Enderlin, ND, USA
Status: offline 		I have gotten Oi in a surface fight. If she survives to close the range all those torpedoes can wreak havoc on any ship. The last time I recall she put 3 torpedoes into the Pensacola and it wasn't pretty! Norseman

_____________________________


(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 15
- 9/18/2000 11:44:00 PM   
RevRick


Posts: 2617
Joined: 9/16/2000
From: Thomasville, GA
Status: offline 		Oi and Kitikami are definitely two ships I absolutely hate to see in a pointblank night action - unless I happen to get the jump on them and have a bigugly something to take some of their sting out - 40 long lances - EGAD!!! The rarest event I have seen is catching an IJN CV TF with a SAG composed of four "fast" BB's. Surprised the jumpin' Jehosaphat out of me - not to mention whoever was commanding the IJN TF. Prime Nuisance - Umpty gazillion plane airstrikes ignoring perfectly good fighting ships to sink merchies at anchor. I know the old saw about logistics winning campaigns - but merchies aren't going to sink your carriers and transports - unless they sneak up on one and blow up. This may be a repeat, but I have been waiting for this game for a long time. Will we get to have a realistic land combat simulation - or will it remain the abstract machine in the current PW? God Bless; Rev. Rick ------------------ tincanman

_____________________________

"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer

(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 16
- 9/19/2000 10:59:00 AM   
norsemanjs

 

Posts: 145
Joined: 5/11/2000
From: Enderlin, ND, USA
Status: offline 		Many have asked for some changes to land combat resolution. I'm afraid we aren't likely to see it until "The Struggle" comes out. Anything major just isn't likely to happen, the patch will likely be just that with a few tidbits to hold us over. I certainly am looking forward to the patch and positively drooling over "The Struggle". Norseman

_____________________________


(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 17
- 9/21/2000 9:26:00 PM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		War in the Pacific is going to put the much beloved Pac War in the closet. I don't see myself playing Pac War (the game I play the most) after "Struggle" comes out. So I hope they don't put to much effort into the patch, just fix some of those pesky bugs so I have something to do intill november (although it looks like SPWaW is going to be filling up some space in my day) ------------------ I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 18
- 9/21/2000 11:01:00 PM   
Svar

 

Posts: 381
Joined: 9/7/2000
From: China Lake, Ca
Status: offline 		Mogami, Take a look at http://www.matrixgames.com/products.asp Note the release date for WitP.

_____________________________


(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 19
- 9/22/2000 6:59:00 AM   
norsemanjs

 

Posts: 145
Joined: 5/11/2000
From: Enderlin, ND, USA
Status: offline 		Unfortunately Spring 2001 sounds more realistic than November 2000. I (like all the rest of you) want this now. But, reality sets in as the massive task in front of these programmers takes shape. It will take time and we will be patiently, and at times impatiently, waiting. Norseman

_____________________________


(in reply to Lithium)
Post #: 20
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Hope you "fix" these nuisances Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.328