1.2 Suggestions

Burch · Post by **Burch** » Tue Jun 25, 2002 10:13 pm

I like the changes in the current patches with the exception of sub minelaying. I have been away for a while so I don't know if this has been mentioned before.:rolleyes: But.. while I agree with the limiting of bases capable of loading mines on subs I think limiting it to Truk and Noumea only is too restrictive, I would like to see Rabaul and Brisbane added to the list. Particularly Brisbane as it was a rather busy sub base in 42 after the fall of Philipines, Tiltijap etc..
Burch

Huskalator · Post by **Huskalator** » Wed Jun 26, 2002 4:25 am

I think the game is close to perfect right now except for a few things:

1)Sub Chasers and Destroyers are still Japanese torpedo catchers even with their practice training maxed out.

2)I would like it if the AI were more mindful of enemy carriers. I had a scenerio where the Jap AI was sending Bombardment runs from Rabual to Port Moresby. I put a large carrier group a few hexes off Gili Gili to dissuade any more bombardments. Well the Japs didn't take a hint and kept sending them despite the carriers. I sunk 3 Jap Battleships this way.

Spooky · Post by **Spooky** » Wed Jun 26, 2002 4:31 am

Originally posted by Deep Breakfast
I think the game is close to perfect right now except for a few things:

1)Sub Chasers and Destroyers are still Japanese torpedo catchers even with their practice training maxed out.

In another post, Erik agrees with you :

Originally posted by Erik Rutins
I agree, in that as a player the one remaining area of ASW that I feel could use some tweaking is the aggressiveness and success of subs against sub-hunters of various kinds. While these subs were well-armed, relatively large ships, they did not tend to engage ASW craft to the degree that they seem to do in UV, nor with as much success.

I think that the sub vs. non-ASW and Air vs. sub combat seems about right, but even Japanese subs shouldn't go after ASW craft quite as much as they do. If they do, they should have more trouble getting good results. In any case, this is another thing for the designers/developers to decide if they want to revisit. However, from my perspective the sub vs. ASW ship concern is a valid one and should go on the eventual "tweak" list.

So maybe some tweaks are on their way for patch 1.3 (patch 1.2 is for bugs only)

Rex Bellator · Post by **Rex Bellator** » Fri Jun 28, 2002 1:55 pm

An easy fix which would help save our mouse fingers during TF creation would be have the default TF commander be the standard junior commander rather than the highest available senior commander. As the Japanese I'm now totally fed up of having RADM Tanaka automatically selected as TF commander for every single TF I create, even tiny supply convoys, and then having to go in and change him.

The way the ships are listed could be refined as well. When I click on a ship to add into a TF the list will suddenly jump to the top or bottom and then needs scrolling back to the next ship I was going to add.

Also it would be very handy for the default display of ships on lists including TF creation to be by 'ship type' IMO. I seem to view almost all lists in this format, and suppose other players do as well.

Finally (for now

) the Ships Sunk screen definitely needs splitting between Japanese & Allied vessels, again defaulting to ship type if possible.

All of the above would help the interface enormously.

ROSLEY · Post by **ROSLEY** » Fri Jun 28, 2002 3:33 pm

Rex,
Where do you live in Kent. I live in Wadhurst . Are you going any other gaming . I am just getting into UV . I have mainly been playing HPS Panzer campaigns .

CC

AlvinS · Post by **AlvinS** » Fri Jun 28, 2002 3:44 pm

I'd like to see the base screen show a percent completion (or better yet, a estimated completion date) for the next upgrade in Port Size, Airfield Size, and Fortification Level. Without that, it's difficult to determine the best distribution of Engineering assets if you are trying to build multiple bases.

I second this one. It would be helpful for planning purposes.

Also we need the ability to make a clone of ourselves to keep our significant other happy.

Mark W Carver · Post by **Mark W Carver** » Fri Jun 28, 2002 6:54 pm

I'd like to see the base screen show a percent completion (or better yet, a estimated completion date) for the next upgrade in Port Size, Airfield Size, and Fortification Level.

Without that, it's difficult to determine the best distribution of Engineering assets if you are trying to build multiple bases.

Maybe an estimated percentage of what has been completed, but the estimated time for completion can be really hard to nail down to due differing factors.

Engineers (squads/vehicles) first and foremost at a base will be used to repair any damage done to their bases (runways, airfield services, and ports). Than and only than will any remaining engineer that has not been used for repair, will be used to increase an airfield, port or fortification.

If your the Americans, and the Japs are pounding Port Morseby with daily bombing raids, all your engineers could be used just to repair any damage that is being done by bomb damage, thus there could be none used to increase your bases for that day, thus throwing off the completion schedule.

Also, I'm not sure, but I think it should, weather should play a factor in engineer construction (repairs and increases to bases). It would be really hard for engineers to do any construction if it's base is under a thundershower or raining.

Rex Bellator · Post by **Rex Bellator** » Fri Jun 28, 2002 8:15 pm

I'm in Tonbridge - I'll mail you with details as soon as I have my emails working again (I'm currently changing to ADSL and it's been a mare!). Hopefully we'll be able to arrange a few beers and UV chat session soon.

I've been playing computer war games for a long time, and have done Tobruk & Normandy of the HPS series, I even played the grand campaign of Normandy by email until my buddy and I retired due to Overlord Overload

Capt Cliff · Post by **Capt Cliff** » Fri Jun 28, 2002 8:49 pm

1) SHOW THE WEATHER! Everyones playing daily turns right? Then display the weather fronts and their intensity! It allows carrier TF's to hide in a storm front or advance behind them!

2) Tone down aircraft vs. land units! The game behaves as if the infantry units go outside and look up and wave during an air raid!

3) The AI must micronmanage the way we do! It must set LRCAP over TF's, add escorts to transport TF's, resupply it's bases, set way points,...

4) Add a logistics command structure and list out what bases should be supplyed and assign a priority to each base, and supply the command with assets, ships and escorts. Turn it on and forget it. Everone has cruise control on their cars right?

5) Allow engineers to improve the jungle trails in New Guinea.

6) Allow replenishment TF's to act automatically, like the follow button. Assign the replenishee and the replenisher targets, each other and forget them. When their through you get a message that they are done refueling!

7) Be able to assign enemy TF;s as targets for LB air and Air Combat TF's.

worr · Post by **worr** » Sat Jul 06, 2002 7:35 pm

Wouldn't it be nice also to have the current weather? And not just the forecasted weather? And not just the region's current weather...but the current weather at each airport.

Worr, out

Gustaf · Post by **Gustaf** » Sat Jul 06, 2002 7:57 pm

No biggie but.....

I'd like to suggest mouse wheel scroll support. The majority of programs today support it... but then again I'm no programmer so I don't know what's involved

All I know is that I'm a lazy mouse user and I hate having to click on those little window arrow buttons.... especially in hi-res mode.

Gus

Maniac · Post by **Maniac** » Sun Jul 07, 2002 1:04 am

Originally posted by worr
Wouldn't it be nice also to have the current weather? And not just the forecasted weather? And not just the region's current weather...but the current weather at each airport.

I agree with you on that one worr and also with Capt Cliff about seeing the weather...I know its kind of a picky thing to be asking for but hey it would alow u to have different aproaches to things and new strategies for the game

TheProfessional · Post by **TheProfessional** » Sun Jul 07, 2002 1:54 am

Has anyone heard when the next patch/fix will be released? It's been kinda of quiet since v1.11.

Skunkworks features or redesigns maybe (crossing my fingers still)??

snowman · Post by **snowman** » Mon Jul 08, 2002 4:30 am

Weather systems moving around on the map.

Sure would be nice to be able to duck into one when I'm getting my butt kicked. :rolleyes:

Mike

Crocky · Post by **Crocky** » Mon Jul 08, 2002 8:54 am

Gimme something to kill Allied medium and heavy bombers with......maybe a couple of hundred FW 190s on lend lease from Germany

msaario · Post by **msaario** » Mon Jul 08, 2002 11:37 am

There should be a greater difference between an experienced pilot (90+) and a mediocre one (60-70's). My best Zero pilots haven't even mustered 8 kills in four months of constant fighting, on the contrary, most of the top pilots have been killed or wounded already. The Jap air losses started to rise in Sep/Oct 42 after the US had made the landings in Guadalcanal and received lots of reinforcements (P38 etc). Now, my Tainan regiment is comprised of replacement with a few surviving top pilots in their ranks. The guys with 90+ exp should really k i c k a s s. Now they are too easily killed.

--Mikko

zed · Post by **zed** » Mon Jul 08, 2002 4:59 pm

Originally posted by tiger claw
Air attack on Zuikaku with 4 B-25 & 3 B-17,
i had 41 zeros on cap at 6,000 ft got through that with no loss {me 1 Zero }and then attacked my CV at 1,000 ft scored 8 hits on zuikaku , this TF had 15 ships.
The flak should have murded them with out even talking about the cap. a B17 at a 1,000 ft is a very big target! please this needs to be fixed it just wrecked my day and maybe my campain.
from what i know B17s did not sink any thing biger than a DD in the 2ww,if they were lucky to hit them at all.
{I do think this is making the game unplayerable}
Keep up the good work best war game ever made!

I had Hudsons go the same thing to my carrier, although I did not have much in the say of AA fire. 16 hudsons managed to evade 8 zeros and score 6 hits on the carrier(shoho) and 2 hits on the destoyer, w/o loss of a hudson. I know the zero was a lousy interceptor, but against Hudsons?

ladner · Post by **ladner** » Tue Jul 09, 2002 6:26 am

The AI definitely could use some tweaks. It seems to be overly aggressive in pursing Gilli Gilli as the Japenese especially in the long campaigns, if I'm correct this does not result in the auto victory. If the right mix of LBA is set up you can have a field day blasting hapless transport TFs. The AI should be made more mindful of LBA.

Now for something non-AI related. ASW needs to be modified. Currently the USN is useless against IJN I-boats. Historically, the IJN sub-arm was relegated to transport duties of supplies to far flung bases as a result of the poor performance during the first year of the war. At least this is what I've read in Ronald Spector's Eagle Against the Sun, the American War with Japan. If someone can provide me with a historical evidence to the contrary I'm willing to concede the point. If folks are concerned about this unbalancing the game I would suggest improvements or tweaks in making the IJA more robust for Adachi's 18th Army endured hardship that I think few of the allied forces save maybe the Aussies and some Marine units could handle and were still full of fight. Also, I would recommended tweaking the movement rates of IJA forces to allow "Jungle Blitzkrieg" which would make Buna to PM a more viable strategy and would actually allow the recreation of the fighting along the Kokoda trail. Plus the IJA are not lugging those 105s and 25 pdrs., geesh that must have been pure hell over the Owen Stanely Mountains. Also, does anyone know if motorized assests affect movement rates? It seems odd to me that the Aussie "Motorized" Brigade covers a blazing 30 miles a day on paved roads. Good thing they are not Krauts, Guderian would have had them strung up.

Raverdave · Post by **Raverdave** » Tue Jul 09, 2002 8:38 am

And while we are at it, Japanese infantry should be allowed to attack during the night.....this was something that they did alot to varying degrees of success.

worr · Post by **worr** » Thu Jul 11, 2002 3:44 pm

Well, AFAIC, AI tweaks can wait. They aren't show stoppers.

I didn't mentioned....but attacks on ships at port under their cap...needs a different routing. Seems there should be a "no port" attack feature on planes inderdicting shipping on the seas.

Worr, out

1.2 Suggestions

Undo 1 thing from 1.1

TF creation tweaks & ship lists

Re: Base Construction Status

Cavalry Corps

v1.2 or whatever the next release is supposed to be

Pilot experience

Re: stop the super bombers!!

1.2 suggestion