Admirals Edition Naval Thread

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Terminus »

ORIGINAL: csatahajos

1. Do you include some never-were ships by default into the OOB? Or at least please leave some space in the device list group to later add in somem ore naval guns etc...

2. Are CV attack numbers toned down a bit (sortie points or what it's called at the moment - so it really is ahistorical when a CV group can pound a base for days and also when a CV can launch it's VT squad for uncounted torp attacks, when in reality most CVs did not have in stock more than 36 fishes.)

3. Do you separate between warship and merchant/aux ship durability/strength? Now sometimes mercahnts are surprisingly difficult to sink, though in reality they have no real damage control etc...

4. Would surface combat reaction work a bit better to further enhance mid ocean surface combat? ALso what about air combat TF reaction?

1. There's plenty of room in the device table for new stuff, and no more hard-coded slots, so you can basically put anything anywhere. We don't have never-weres in the basic Grand Campaign OOB.

2. That's Air Team territory.

3. No.

4. That's being looked at. Might not make it for first release, but there's always patches.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16080
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Mike Solli »

ORIGINAL: Brady

Ya I have never read anything about a Japanese mobile floating dry dock, thats not to say their was non. but, I would be suprised to find they had such a thing, the Allies did not have axcess to ship yards the way the way Japan did, she was comparatively closer to port on the whole.

Ye of little faith. [:-] If they had 'em, I'll find 'em. [:D]
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
Bliztk
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 am
Location: Electronic City

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Bliztk »

Are the proliferation of minefields modelled more correctly ?


Image
Dili
Posts: 4742
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:33 pm

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Dili »

Do DP guns have 2 ranges now? one against aircrafts another against ships?  and a separate damage?
 
 
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Terminus »

ORIGINAL: Bliztk

Are the proliferation of minefields modelled more correctly ?



We're cutting back on what Joe W. has called MitP (Mines in the Pacific). It should be more realistic.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Terminus »

ORIGINAL: Dili

Do DP guns have 2 ranges now? one against aircrafts another against ships? and a separate damage?


No.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by JWE »

ORIGINAL: Bliztk
Are the proliferation of minefields modelled more correctly ?
Don’t know exactly what you mean by modeling ‘proliferation of minefields’. Mine capable craft will continue to lay, minesweepers will continue to sweep, and laid minefields, as in the present game, will continue to degrade over time.

Significant changes have been made, however, as to where and under what circumstances, a mine capable craft may rearm with mines.
User avatar
LargeSlowTarget
Posts: 4913
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by LargeSlowTarget »

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

ORIGINAL: Whipple





SWEETNESS!

Whipple

Does the maximum tonnage capacity increase as the port size is increased?

Capacity is dependent on port size, so yeah...

YESYESYEESSYYEESSSSYYYEEEESSSSSYIIIHHAAAA!!!!
ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: treespider

Was the variable load capacity for units worked out?

IE troops in different modes will occupy differing amounts of cargo space thus requiring greater or less transport capacity depending on mode?

It's being worked on.

That means - combat loading?!?
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Terminus »

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

That means - combat loading?!?

Yup...[:)]
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Dixie
Posts: 10303
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:14 pm
Location: UK

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Dixie »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

ORIGINAL: Brady

Ya I have never read anything about a Japanese mobile floating dry dock, thats not to say their was non. but, I would be suprised to find they had such a thing, the Allies did not have axcess to ship yards the way the way Japan did, she was comparatively closer to port on the whole.

Ye of little faith. [:-] If they had 'em, I'll find 'em. [:D]

I'm certain that the only ARDs were in the service of the RN and USN [;)]
[center]Image

Bigger boys stole my sig
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Terminus »

He said to the JFB...[:D]
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by JWE »

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget
That means - combat loading?!?
Vessel loadout will be very much mission dependent. I cannot get specific, but I think you will be satisfied.
User avatar
Dixie
Posts: 10303
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:14 pm
Location: UK

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Dixie »

ORIGINAL: Terminus

He said to the [font="Times New Roman"]ever optimistic but totally unlikely to find what he is looking for[/font] JFB...[:D]

You're right there T [;)]
[center]Image

Bigger boys stole my sig
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Terminus »

[:D]
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Dixie
Posts: 10303
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:14 pm
Location: UK

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Dixie »

I noticed that there is going to be distinction between transport and amphibious TFs, does this mean there will be a difference between troopships (AP) and assault transports (APA)?
[center]Image

Bigger boys stole my sig
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Terminus »

ORIGINAL: Dixie

I noticed that there is going to be distinction between transport and amphibious TFs, does this mean there will be a difference between troopships (AP) and assault transports (APA)?

Hmmm, I forget...[&:] APA's and AKA's are certainly in as ship types, rather than just class names for AP's and AK's...
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Brady »

Can we still build MRE, and other Auxilry's?
 
 Which raises the question: Can we build anything else?
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Terminus »

I'm not sure you can build Meals Ready to Eat today?[:'(]
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3725
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Captain Cruft »

So ... I take it one of the main ideas with the new loading (and unloading?) routines is to prevent the gamey abuse of using a bunch of AKs for invasions and other heinous but common activities?

On the same note, are the Japanese "landing craft" or barges still abstracted via the AP unloading rates as they vaguely are in the original?
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Brady »

Woop's typo...MLE
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”