Ask the Dev!

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Ask the Dev!

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 I] >> War Plan Orange: Dreadnoughts in the Pacific 1922 - 1930 >> Ask the Dev!

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Ask the Dev! - 2/5/2005 2:57:34 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

With the release of War Plan Orange drawing closer, I'd like to iron out any possible questions people might have. So post your questions here, and as I answer them I'll bundle them into the FAQ.

Before you ask, just because Mike Wood is working on the code, don't new non War in the Pacific features. What I mean is don't think a feature is going to be added for War Plan Orange that won't be in WitP (scout1's idea for a csv export thing is a good example. If the devs won't add it for WitP, then they won't add it to WPO).

So, ask away!

< Message edited by Tankerace -- 2/4/2005 6:58:35 PM >

_____________________________

Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med

Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.

Post #: 1

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/5/2005 3:09:51 AM

scout1

Posts: 2899
Joined: 8/24/2004
From: South Bend, In
Status: offline

quote:

What I mean is don't think a feature is going to be added for War Plan Orange that won't be in WitP (scout1's idea for a csv export thing is a good example. If the devs won't add it for WitP, then they won't add it to WPO).

Didn't know that they formally turned this down. Of coarse, they rarely do. If they did, would be nice to know directly

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 2

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/5/2005 3:16:07 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Well, its not that they have. Its just I want it to be clear they aren't going to add in something to War Plan Orange, and not War in the Pacific. Things that would affect both games needs to go in that thread. All Im saying is that if they did add it, I'm sure it wouldn't be only for War Plan Orange, as that would upset a great deal of regular WitP players. All I know is Mr. Frag said they weren't considering it (at least at the top of the thread), and he is more in the know than I am.

_____________________________

(in reply to scout1)

Post #: 3

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/5/2005 9:39:12 PM

33Vyper

Posts: 542
Joined: 10/20/2004
From: New Westminster BC
Status: offline

I can't remember what year they sank her but can we get the Ostfriesland on the US side? Bomber Billy didn't sink her right away...so if the US goes to war maybe they would use her. hehehehe just my way of trying to get some Germans involved in WITP

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 4

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/5/2005 9:54:27 PM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

LOL, nice try but she went down in 1921. I wanted to try and put these in, by Ostfriesland was sunk in 1921 by the Americans, and the Oldenburg was scrapped in 1921 by Japan. I looked to other German ships, and found the Nassau was scrapped by Japan in 1920. Still, since I have some time before Mike is ready, I'll see about adding in some Frenchie ships.

_____________________________

(in reply to 33Vyper)

Post #: 5

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/5/2005 10:11:39 PM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Expounding on that, I am adding in three French cruisers that were at Saigon immediately following World War I. No other French ships will be in the game.

The Dupleix class cruisers Dusaix and Dupleix, and the Edgar Quinet class cruiser Waldeck-Rousseau. In the far east at the start of the game, that gives the Allies a US Armored cruiser, 2 Protected cruisers, 3 French Armored cruisers, and a number of destroyers, submarines, and gunboats.

_____________________________

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 6

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/6/2005 10:59:27 PM

Oliver Heindorf

Posts: 1911
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Hamburg/Deutschland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 33Vyper

I can't remember what year they sank her but can we get the Ostfriesland on the US side? Bomber Billy didn't sink her right away...so if the US goes to war maybe they would use her. hehehehe just my way of trying to get some Germans involved in WITP

bereits geschehen, mein Herr.

_____________________________

(in reply to 33Vyper)

Post #: 7

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/7/2005 8:05:39 AM

pad152

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline

Question

1. Witp Plan Orange will have a different *.exe file, so Plan Orange be compatible with the Witp editor?

2. If above is yes, will there be anything we won't be able to change with the editor?

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 8

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/7/2005 8:51:35 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

1. I would assume so, or have its own editor. However, I don't know if that is for certain. Hopefully Mike will comment on this, as he is the programming guru.

2. I am not certain on this, as I am not certain what steps (if any) are being taken to make sure a WPO scenario is not played in regular War in the Pacific, beyond obvious limitations (graphics and necessary code changes). Once Mike comments, or we start putting everything together closer to release I should be able to answer in more detail.

_____________________________

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 9

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/8/2005 8:43:33 AM

33Vyper

Posts: 542
Joined: 10/20/2004
From: New Westminster BC
Status: offline

quote:

bereits geschehen, mein Herr

my german is rusty.....but does that mean ... been there done that??? This is gonna drive me nuts.....what does it mean?

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 10

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/8/2005 5:35:03 PM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Already done I believe, as in she was already sunk. Or so says Altavista's babblefish

_____________________________

(in reply to 33Vyper)

Post #: 11

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/10/2005 4:06:37 AM

33Vyper

Posts: 542
Joined: 10/20/2004
From: New Westminster BC
Status: offline

okay....hmmm...how about a 1914-1918(1919) scenario where the US goes against Japan and the Germans?

call it ummmmm War Plan Schnitzel

you could ummm transfer the entire high seas fleet to some small German Island

< Message edited by 33Vyper -- 2/10/2005 2:07:12 AM >

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 12

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/16/2005 9:59:58 AM

WhoCares

Posts: 653
Joined: 7/6/2004
Status: offline

When you added the forum members as commanders, did you set (more or less) random values for all the hidden attributes or will we see just variations in the Leadership/Inspiration rating? Just a question - no need to go through the whole list

(not that important for me anyway, as commander of the HMS London Minesweeper

Edit: Link: Answered here

< Message edited by WhoCares -- 2/22/2005 11:46:31 AM >

(in reply to 33Vyper)

Post #: 13

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/16/2005 10:24:54 AM

JSS

Posts: 781
Joined: 10/15/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 33Vyper

quote:

bereits geschehen, mein Herr

my german is rusty.....but does that mean ... been there done that??? This is gonna drive me nuts.....what does it mean?

Vyper,

Here's a link to help you with such crisises! Mission accomplished!

http://dict.leo.org/

(in reply to 33Vyper)

Post #: 14

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/22/2005 5:42:48 PM

Rainerle

Posts: 463
Joined: 7/24/2002
From: Burghausen/Bavaria
Status: offline

Hi,
just two things that puzzle me:
1) Aren't most ships coal fired in that period? If so shouln't most of the 'fuel' be generated in Manchuko rather than the SRA ? (sorry if that is already done)
2) Out of pure curiosity, are there any small, puny portugese ships guarding Macau, just for chrome ?

_____________________________

Image brought to you by courtesy of Subchaser!

(in reply to JSS)

Post #: 15

RE: Ask the Dev! - 2/22/2005 9:10:52 PM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainerle

Hi,
just two things that puzzle me:
1) Aren't most ships coal fired in that period? If so shouln't most of the 'fuel' be generated in Manchuko rather than the SRA ? (sorry if that is already done)
2) Out of pure curiosity, are there any small, puny portugese ships guarding Macau, just for chrome ?

1) A good number are. I have put fuel in Manchukuo for this purpose. I left in the SRA, because in the mid-late 20s many coal ships are converted to oil (represented by increased endurance).

2) Note yet. That is not a no, but its not a yes either. (Cryptic eh?)

_____________________________

(in reply to Rainerle)

Post #: 16

RE: Ask the Dev! - 3/28/2005 6:15:29 PM

String

Posts: 2661
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Estonia
Status: offline

Will there be monitors in the game? Such as HMS Terror or HMS Erebus?

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 17

RE: Ask the Dev! - 3/29/2005 6:31:14 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Unfortunately, no. I really wanted to add them, but I deemed from a strategic perspective that they were of too shallow draft and short range to have been transferred to the Pacific. However, the large light cruisers Glorious and Courageous are in the game, and they had been designed to fulfill a similar mission.

_____________________________

(in reply to String)

Post #: 18

RE: Ask the Dev! - 4/21/2005 9:48:27 PM

WPO_FANBOY!

Posts: 42
Joined: 2/20/2005
Status: offline

don't know if this has changed but in the FAQ you stated that the time frame is:

June 6th 1922 - December 31st 1930 So why does it start on June 6th? Your birthday perhaps!

Just curious

< Message edited by WPO_FANBOY! -- 4/21/2005 9:50:34 PM >

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 19

RE: Ask the Dev! - 4/21/2005 10:07:59 PM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

LOL, no, it was just a number I grabbed. Actually though, I set it back to May 31 though. That way, roughly the large campaigns can last 4 and a half years. I figure I would rather give people longer than they'll really need, than not give them enough time.

The Main campaign of the game lasts from May 31, 1922- December 31, 1926.
The Second campaign (not linked to the first), and the Never were campaign (with the 18" SoDaks, G3s, Kiis, etc) lasts from May 31, 1926 to December 31, 1930.

The Phase 1 Scenario is basically a shortened version of the main campaign, lasting from May 31, 1922, to Dec. 31, 1923.

I haven't finished setting an exact date for the 2 PBEM only scenarios.

And, FYI, my Birthday is February 8... Ironically, two days after the anniversary of the signing of the Washington Treaty.

_____________________________

(in reply to WPO_FANBOY!)

Post #: 20

RE: Ask the Dev! - 4/21/2005 10:19:58 PM

WPO_FANBOY!

Posts: 42
Joined: 2/20/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace
And, FYI, my Birthday is February 8... Ironically, two days after the anniversary of the signing of the Washington Treaty.

I'm curious to know what would've happened if you had been born June 27 (Two days after North Korea invaded the south in 1950) Perhaps War in Korea!!

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 21

RE: Ask the Dev! - 4/28/2005 4:24:01 PM

Huguderian

Posts: 14
Joined: 5/15/2002
From: Portugal
Status: offline

Hi,

Will be there the japanese Number 13 fast battlecruisers class in the game? 4 of them where to be build, but it was cancelled in 1923. Those babes where to be major problem to the allies! Evem more powerful than Kiis!

(in reply to WPO_FANBOY!)

Post #: 22

RE: Ask the Dev! - 4/28/2005 7:08:57 PM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Unfortuneatly no. I decided when I added in the never weres only to do those ships either laid down, or at the very least named. If I were to add the Number 13s, then for fairness I'd have to add in the Tillman projects, and the various N and G2-3 designs of England. So, I capped it at the Tosas, Amagis, and Kiis; Lexingtons, 16 and 18 inch SoDaks, and Admiral and G3 classes.

_____________________________

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 23

RE: Ask the Dev! - 5/5/2005 7:24:24 AM

Iridium

Posts: 932
Joined: 4/1/2005
From: Jersey
Status: offline

Tankerace, I was wondering, I recall seeing that you said Yamashiro had aircraft capability. By my sources I have March of 1922 for Yamashiro. Fuso had a catapult installed to the roof of her #2 gun in 1924 but had it removed after a short time. Are you working under assumtions like this may have been kept due to war? While I would find it interesting some people may find you playing even more what ifs simply fantasy. On the other hand I think this is a serious possibility. However saying all this, there are probably many other instances in which ships may have had upgrades accelerated due to war, making all of these questions kind of moot.

BTW, does Fuso class have that great pagoda style bridge after its 1925 refit in the game as in RL?...

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.

"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 24

RE: Ask the Dev! - 5/5/2005 7:39:14 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Yes, Yamashiro starts out with an aircraft capability, but until Japanese seaplanes are built (around the time all Japanese dreadnoughts are rebuilt) she only carries Sopwith Pups or GLoster Sparrowhawks.

According to my sources (I will change if there is evidence to the contrary), in 1924 Fuso had a catapult installed, for testing. I have decided not to include it, but only because Yamashiro's isn't removed in 1923 (hers was only to train future Hosho pilots).

As to Fuso refit, my sources state that she was rebuilt 1927-28 (not 1925), and that she received a heptapodal mast, not unlike Nagato and the projected Tosa and Amagi. The Pagoda would not be built around it until the 1930-33 refit (1930-35 for Yamashiro). Also, the fore funnel was retained in the 1927 refit, but it was in the 1930 refit that it was removed.

Actually, I just looked on the Conway's page, and a photo of Yamashiro in 1928 confirms this. The photo you posted is a post 1930 refit. In her final Warship appearance, Fuso looks the same as commissioning, but with a slightly more cluttered foremast. The Fit you posted is not available in War Plan Orange ( a little too modern

)

_____________________________

(in reply to Iridium)

Post #: 25

RE: Ask the Dev! - 5/5/2005 7:53:58 AM

Iridium

Posts: 932
Joined: 4/1/2005
From: Jersey
Status: offline

Yeah, I wondered about the Fuso refit...I've got great photos of her from my book: Anoatomy of the Ship: The Battleship Fuso by Janusz Skulski but don't have a scanner to post them...

Well, according to this book in 1924 her forward superstructure gained a certain amount of it's WWII look. Also the forward funnel gained a curved cap, I guess they were concerned about smoke blowing into the tower while stationary...

this book doesn't go into too much detail about the catapult except that it was there.Then they apparently used captive balloons

not that I'm suggesting that they be added...too little gain for the effort.

I guess as a side not to delving into this book I'll ask about the Anti-torpedo net equipment. This wasn't removed till '26-'27, I guess I'd wonder if it was worth even thinking of when concerning the model. My guess is no, never was too sure how effective those things were.

_____________________________

Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.

"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 26

RE: Ask the Dev! - 5/5/2005 7:55:09 AM

Iridium

Posts: 932
Joined: 4/1/2005
From: Jersey
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iridium

Yeah, I wondered about the Fuso refit...I've got great photos of her from my book: Anoatomy of the Ship: The Battleship Fuso by Janusz Skulski but don't have a scanner to post them...

Well, according to this book in 1924 her forward superstructure gained a certain amount of it's WWII look. Also the forward funnel gained a curved cap, I guess they were concerned about smoke blowing into the tower while stationary...

This book doesn't go into too much detail about the catapult except that it was there.Then they apparently used captive balloonsnot that I'm suggesting that they be added...too little gain for the effort.

I guess as a side note to delving into this book I'll ask about the Anti-torpedo net equipment. This wasn't removed till '26-'27, I guess I'd wonder if it was worth even thinking of when concerning the model. My guess is no, never was too sure how effective those things were.

Edit: Bah, spelling...

Arghh...I've had too much beer, don't mind me...

< Message edited by Iridium -- 5/5/2005 7:56:18 AM >

_____________________________

Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.

"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture

(in reply to Iridium)

Post #: 27

RE: Ask the Dev! - 5/5/2005 8:11:53 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Hehehehehe.

Actually, I don't know that much about Japanese Torpedo nets, but in Jutland: The German Perspective it talked several times about large ships (I think Seydlitz in particular) have her nets torn away, and then the ship would have to stop, while in a fight, to have the nets hauled in so they wouldn't foul the propellor. The general consensus was that while they *could* explode a torpedo before it hit the hull, they actually stood a bigger chance of fouling the ship than saving it.

On the Fuso, yeah, its a blend of WW2 and WWI. The foremast is close to its WW2 look, but not quite, and it still has 2 Funnels, plus a tripod mainmast. Of more significant damage, her turrets were increased to a 43 degree elevation, giving a 38,000 yard maximum range.

_____________________________

(in reply to Iridium)

Post #: 28

RE: Ask the Dev! - 5/18/2005 3:36:09 PM

Huguderian

Posts: 14
Joined: 5/15/2002
From: Portugal
Status: offline

Ok I understand that.

So it will have Kaga and Tosa as battleships; the Amagi, Akagi, Atago, Takao as battlecuisers and from the Kii class the first two planned battleships (Kii, Owari). I am asking if you wont convert Kaga and Akagi to Carriers and assume that Amagi was not wrecked by natural causes.

Thanks

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 29

RE: Ask the Dev! - 5/18/2005 10:18:00 PM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

None of the BB/BC to CV conversions are in War Plan Orange. WPO assumes that because the Washington Treaty was not signed, the aircraft carrier was not forced on the navies of the world, and thus takes a more leisurely development. The Lexingtons, Kiis, Amagis, Tosas, and Courageous class ships all are in WPO as designed, i.e. in the original roles.

While it is possible that one or more of the battleship hulls may have been converted to a carrier, all actual instances (with the exception of COurageous and Glorious) were the direct result of the Washington Treaty. As such, like everything else related to tghe treaty, it is negated.

As to Amagi, I have lengthened her build time, to where she is one of the later arriving of her class, to assume that although she was wrecked, she is salvagable, especially with a war situation brewing.

The only carriers in WPO are: The Furious, Argus, and Vindictive for the Brits, although in later scenarios Vindictive is a seaplane carrying cruiser; the Hosho class for Japan, consiting of the Hosho and Shokaku (cancelled in 1922), with two additional units built in the later scenarios, and the Langley and Liner conversion class for the US. The US (along with Japan) planned that in the event of war, liners or other large, fast ships would be converted. This is represented by 2 additional Hoshos, and 2 faster Langley's for each side.

_____________________________

(in reply to Huguderian)

Post #: 30