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: Grotius

Hey Terminus, thanks again for your replies. I think you might have missed a few of my questions -- or maybe I missed the responses -- or maybe I should stop asking so many questions! At some point I know we should let you guys get back to work! But in case you missed it:
1. Is there any change to cold-weather limits on operations? I ask because I often felt it was too easy to operate in the Alaska area, notwithstanding the penalties in stock.

2. Has Patrol/Do Not Retire changed at all?

3. Has CV "one-hex" reaction changed at all?

4. Still have diminishing returns on AA for TFs of more than 15 ships?

5. Can you tell us more about the directional flak? I assume it's primarily a function of ship/plane heading; is ship/plane speed also a factor?

6. I too wanted to ask about tracking tonnage sunk by subs, or for that matter total distance traveled, fuel consumed, ammo used, etc. but it sounds like AE won't do that. Not a big deal; just would be nice -- those sort of stats that would enrich an AAR like Cuttlefish's. Is it fair to say that modders will have a way to track that sort of data?

1): Changes to the weather model fell by the way side, I'm afraid. I'd have loved to see changes to Alaskan weather myself, but it's not happening for the release version. We'd have been best off ripping down the whole weather model and starting over, but there's just no resource for it.

2+3): Not sure what you mean?

4+5): I'll have to get back to you on this one, not having had much to do with the new flak stuff.

6): No more than today, I'm afraid.[:(]
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3723
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Captain Cruft »

CV one-hex reaction is where Air Combat TFs will always move one hex towards an enemy Air Combat TF regardless of the React/Don't React setting.
User avatar
Grotius
Posts: 5842
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 5:34 pm
Location: The Imperial Palace.

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Grotius »

Thanks for those replies. Understandable about weather and tracking tonnage; they wouldn't have been my top priorities either. Imagine tracking tonnage might be moddable, anyway. Weather can be handled with house rules.

On "one-hex reaction," I just mean the situation in which an Air Combat TF automatically reacts one hex toward an enemy Air Combat TF, even if the AC TF's "Reaction" range is set to zero. Er, maybe they no longer do that? I haven't seen it in the AI game I'm playing now, but then I haven't had a CV battle yet. But I did find some 2007 posts discussing it.

Sorry I wasn't clear about my other question. I was wondering whether there was any change to the basic mechanic that asks you to choose between "Patrol/Do Not Retire" and "Retirement Allowed." I don't have any problem with how it works -- just wondering if the patrol zones and waypoints have had any ripple effects on this mechanic. (For example, many of us use the "Retirement Allowed" setting as a substitute for a waypoint for a Transport TF: form up a Transport TF in Brisbane, give it destination of Pago Pago, give it home base of San Francisco, set it to "Retirement Allowed.")

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

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Terminus »

ORIGINAL: Grotius

On "one-hex reaction," I just mean the situation in which an Air Combat TF automatically reacts one hex toward an enemy Air Combat TF, even if the AC TF's "Reaction" range is set to zero. Er, maybe they no longer do that? I haven't seen it in the AI game I'm playing now, but then I haven't had a CV battle yet. But I did find some 2007 posts discussing it.

For the moment, that's still in, as a factor of commander aggressiveness.
Sorry I wasn't clear about my other question. I was wondering whether there was any change to the basic mechanic that asks you to choose between "Patrol/Do Not Retire" and "Retirement Allowed." I don't have any problem with how it works -- just wondering if the patrol zones and waypoints have had any ripple effects on this mechanic. (For example, many of us use the "Retirement Allowed" setting as a substitute for a waypoint for a Transport TF: form up a Transport TF in Brisbane, give it destination of Pago Pago, give it home base of San Francisco, set it to "Retirement Allowed.")

The mechanism is still in, alongside the new stuff with waypoints and such. The patrol zone routine also has an option to linger at each point in the patrol zone for x number of days.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
DerJimbo
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:55 pm

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by DerJimbo »


ORIGINAL: DerJimbo

Will you be able to organize your combat vessels in subunits such as "1st Cruiser Sqn" or "3rd Destroyer Flotilla"?


Yes, and No.

You can set lower level commands, although more likely something like Naval Districts within regional fleets, etc. This is just a display convenience however, there is no function for attach a complete DD squadron to a TF or any such thing. It is handy for "where's my ships"?

P.S. I looked into doing it already, don't bother to ask for it...


OK, thanks for your response. I'll be buying AE in any case, and I like everything that's been said about what will be changed/included. When I consider how many hours I've spent wrapped up in this game already, I can't imagine that I won't get hundreds of hours of additional enjoyment (if that's the right word!) out of this expansion/upgrade.

I'm certainly grateful for all the paid and unpaid time that so many individuals have put into this project and in other aspects of the game already. In 30+ years of wargaming, I don't think that I've ever seen another title that engaged the interest and passion of so many people in so many ways.

So...please take your time with AE and get it right!!
DerJimbo
User avatar
Brausepaul
Posts: 484
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 7:54 pm
Location: Braunschweig, Deutschland

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Brausepaul »

Will there be something to simulate permanent (not repairable) damage to ship units? I was thinking of subs getting battle weary after a few depth charge attacks, for example. 
pad152
Posts: 2835
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by pad152 »

MTB's PT's, barges, and Respawns

I hope Japan get's more than 5 PT/MTB in AD, Japan should always be able to build MTB's, Barges, Midgets as long as it has production. These are the types of ships that should respawn, or removed for the database and treated like the pilot pool where there is a pool of these ships and if it drops below a value more get produced.

Movement
I think these should be handled like mines where you can load a group of them up on a transport/tender ship and drop them off where you need them.

Now that mining is being reduced MTB's become even more important for forward based defense.


User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16076
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: Nomad

And I thought MRE stood for Meals Rushing to Exit. [:D]

You apparently haven't eaten them. [:(]
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Don Bowen »

ORIGINAL: Brausepaul

Will there be something to simulate permanent (not repairable) damage to ship units? I was thinking of subs getting battle weary after a few depth charge attacks, for example. 

No, you would have to scuttle it yourself.
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Don Bowen »

ORIGINAL: pad152

MTB's PT's, barges, and Respawns

I hope Japan get's more than 5 PT/MTB in AD, Japan should always be able to build MTB's, Barges, Midgets as long as it has production. These are the types of ships that should respawn, or removed for the database and treated like the pilot pool where there is a pool of these ships and if it drops below a value more get produced.

Movement
I think these should be handled like mines where you can load a group of them up on a transport/tender ship and drop them off where you need them.

Now that mining is being reduced MTB's become even more important for forward based defense.

MTBs (PTs) do not and never did respawn. The availability of PTs, and now direct MGBs, is historical for both sides. Barges auto-replace (slightly different than respawn).

Midget subs will respawn if the respawn switch is on - always to Type D Koryu. With no respawn, you get what is in the OOB.

We looked at allowing small craft to be carried on larger ships, but it did not make the cut. Cool feature, big programming problem. Movement of such craft is still simulated by supply.


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 (like several other people [;)]) that midget subs are in AE, but how about the Royal Navy's XE class midget subs?
[center]Image

Bigger boys stole my sig
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Shark7 »

A few questions:

1. Will the Japanese Protected Cruisers (IE Iwate, Asama, Izumo, etc) that were stationed in the Inland sea as training ships be in the game? I realize these were of little naval value, but they could have been pressed into service if the need arose.
2. Asama was damaged and the Japanese opted not to repair her, however, her sister ship Tokiwa was converted into a Minelayer before the war. Would the player be given this option with Asama if it is present?
3. Will units that were interned be present in the game in their early Manchuko service? IE Ning Hai and Ping Hai (later as Ioshima and Yasoshima in IJN service.)

If these have been addressed earlier and I simply did not see it, my apologies.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
Splinterhead
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 11:45 pm
Location: Lenoir City, TN

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Splinterhead »

Dixie,

Stupid question time, but were XEs used in the Pacific?
What's a REAL liney?
User avatar
Dixie
Posts: 10303
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:14 pm
Location: UK

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Dixie »

ORIGINAL: Splinterhead

Dixie,

Stupid question time, but were XEs used in the Pacific?
What's a REAL liney?

They were present and were used for a few small scale operations, but there was always the possibility that other stuff could have been done with them.

XE1 & XE3 were used to cripple Takao in Singapore, there were plans to mine Myoko as well but they couldn't find her (Operation Struggle)
XE4 was used to cut telephone cables from Saigon (Operation Sabre)
XE5 was used to cut cables near Hong Kong (Operation Foil)

I realise that the last two are outside of the scope of WitP, but I'd like the chance to carry out sneaky raids on Jap shipping in port


A liney is an RAF term, it's a term mostly used when someone is debating doing something which probably goes against better judgement (sliding down a hanger roof in a drip tray for example [:D])
[center]Image

Bigger boys stole my sig
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Don Bowen »

ORIGINAL: Dixie

I noticed (like several other people [;)]) that midget subs are in AE, but how about the Royal Navy's XE class midget subs?

No, not at this time.

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

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Terminus »

ORIGINAL: Shark7

A few questions:

1. Will the Japanese Protected Cruisers (IE Iwate, Asama, Izumo, etc) that were stationed in the Inland sea as training ships be in the game? I realize these were of little naval value, but they could have been pressed into service if the need arose.
2. Asama was damaged and the Japanese opted not to repair her, however, her sister ship Tokiwa was converted into a Minelayer before the war. Would the player be given this option with Asama if it is present?
3. Will units that were interned be present in the game in their early Manchuko service? IE Ning Hai and Ping Hai (later as Ioshima and Yasoshima in IJN service.)

If these have been addressed earlier and I simply did not see it, my apologies.

OOB is still not completely finished, so no comment for now.
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: Shark7

A few questions:

That’s mostly an OOB, or scenario design question but, as you mention, several of the Japanese War-I relics were converted to an operational use: minelayers, coastal defense gunships, and the like. Our OOBeings are very aware of these vessels, and are scourging the artists daily to make them up.

The whole idea of the ‘convert-to’ routines is to allow just these sorts of things to happen. The general answer to your question(s) is yes, but their specific form, configuration and mission will be at the (limited) option of IJNGHQ.
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Shark7

A few questions:

That’s mostly an OOB, or scenario design question but, as you mention, several of the Japanese War-I relics were converted to an operational use: minelayers, coastal defense gunships, and the like. Our OOBeings are very aware of these vessels, and are scourging the artists daily to make them up.

The whole idea of the ‘convert-to’ routines is to allow just these sorts of things to happen. The general answer to your question(s) is yes, but their specific form, configuration and mission will be at the (limited) option of IJNGHQ.

That answered my question well enough. I just like the idea of sending the relics out on one more mission. [:D]

Now I just have to be patient.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
pad152
Posts: 2835
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by pad152 »

Request for New ship Type Sub-AV, a sub with AV support for float planes

A few times in 1942 Japan used subs to refuel the larger Float Planes (Mavis/Emilys) at the French Frigate shoals to bomb Pearl Harbor at night! You really can't do this with an AV ship it would be spotted before pulling off the attack.

User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: Admirals Edition Naval Thread

Post by Don Bowen »

ORIGINAL: pad152

Request for New ship Type Sub-AV, a sub with AV support for float planes

A few times in 1942 Japan used subs to refuel the larger Float Planes (Mavis/Emilys) at the French Frigate shoals to bomb Pearl Harbor at night! You really can't do this with an AV ship it would be spotted before pulling off the attack.



No, not at this time.
Post Reply

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