<t>I personally believe that the halving of Japanese asw is about right. However, there does need to be severe penalties for operating submarines in an enemy base hex.<br/>
<br/>
I think the real problem in UV is that the S boats are not modeled accurately for vulnerability. Their actual record was ...

The movie is absolutely fabulous. Strangely, I think it would be best if you have not read the books; but definitely see the first movie. There is no recap at all. The deviations from the book, although necessary I suppose, kind of bothered me.

Paul

Only aircraft at strafing altitude will attack barges (100 ft.) And then, they all attack one barge! I think they intend to fix this, but not yet.

Paul

<t>Fixing problems in UV seems to have been subject to the transcendental equation (Sin e^-x). It oscillates to one side from the other, but generally smaller and smaller errors. Great, gives us something to talk about and we eventually get there.<br/>
<br/>
However, the problems with amphibious ...

<t>David, that's amazing. That's the way it acted in 2.1, but not 2.11. I'm reporting on a game that is U.S. vs. A/I. You are, perhaps playing PBEM? If so, does the game now have certain traits that vary between type of play? Perhaps submarine commander experience is having an overwhelming effect ...

Playing #17 under 2.11. No submarine of either side has been damaged (and rarely attacked at all) by depth charge, mouse trap, or air attack, as of January, 1943. They are impervious to everything.

I thought you finally had it right with 2.1. Why? Why? Why?

Paul

Thanks, Marc. That definitely fixed it.

Paul

<t>What have I missed? True update calls a file: TrueUpdate.exe, which does not exist on my desktop nor on my Notebook, both of which are updated to V2.0 (and which updated normally for all previous attempts). Looking through the game files, I found Update-UV.exe, double clicked that, and the game ...

<t>mdiehl, I'm not at all sure it is that easy to knock out a port. Can you site an example of such an event in WWII. German ports continued to function despite more massive bombing than ever occured in the Pacific.<br/>
<br/>
Odd, the most important of these facilities doesn't seem to be discussed ...

<t>I would like to see a lot of things that are now hard coded brought into an easily accessible format using the editor. There are in UV, controversial hard coded areas that the individual should be able to (a) Fix (b) Break, depending on each persons opinion. As examples:<br/>
<br/>
(1) The whole ...

<t>You are quite right. However, a five inch gun requires a rather substantial installation such as a poured concrete base (that is what the Marine 6" guns on Wake Island had). In order to hit a ship, it must have a reasonable field of fire with significant ability to traverse and elevate. This ...

<t>Your points are valid, re bombardment vs. shore batteries, except I already pointed out that I believe transports cleverly don't anchor in range of shore batteries (They must teach that at Annapolis, or something). At Betio, casualties were heavy in the assault troops and landing craft, which is ...

<t>Funny, the only thing that Pt's were really effective at was interdicting barge traffic. As pointed out, the PT boats generally engage at 5,000 plus yards. For some reason, a 36 knot vessel is unable to close with a 12 knot vessel (although in good weather a pt boat could top 50 knots). <br/>
<br ...

<t>The damage taken by amphibious assault transports against well defended targets seems odd, almost as though the transports were modeled as going right on the beach. I've seen the Japanese transport on the reef at Wake, so that certainly did happen, but generally I think transports anchor well out ...

<t>I don't really think the main issue is whether a Corsair could, should, would fly off a carrier in 1943. The issue is whether or not aviators who are not carrier qualified could operate from a carrier, regardless of their flying capabilities otherwise. The answer is an unequivocal NO WAY. Many ...

<t>I don't know about a Jp. task force, but putting destroyers with a highly damaged U.S. carrier will do nothing to help the carrier if a sub arrives and will probably cost you a destroyer or two. In fact, I no longer put destroyers in any task forces except destroyer squadrons (all destroyers) as ...

<t>Great picture, dgaad. I think the fifties in the blisters were retained even when they went back to the bombadier's position.<br/>
<br/>
My reading suggests that these 75's would open fire around 2,000 yards and cease around 1,000 yards, firing three rounds, if all went well. The fifties would ...

<t>Well, while we are at it, you don't get any of the B-25H models, with or without the 75mm and more to the point, up to 14 .50 cal machine guns, but we do get the B-25J's, which were not accepted by the Army until December, 1943 and didn't reach the 5th Air Force until several months later, by ...

<t>In this version of Yamamoto'a Prophesy, the A/I threw most of the troops into New Guinea. In September, 1943, I took Rabaul, which I had never done before. It seems that the program can't deal with this. I have observed the following.<br/>
<br/>
Transport squadrons in Rabaul have transported two ...

<t>So how do you deal with Truk? It is the end game. I have Rabaul, only about six weeks left. Yamato, Musashi and about 3 other BB are in Truk in port. I have been bombing the port from 20,000 feet for some time with B-24's from Rabaul, but the 500 pounders don't have much effect (and they shouldn ...