What To Expect in the Patch

gnuseditor · Post by **gnuseditor** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 12:22 am

Matrix folks,

One very quick thing you could do for the patch is to correct a misspelling I found:

When you hold the mouse over a base, it incorrectly spells "auxiliary" as "auxillery."

Your game is SO well done ? this might seem like a small thing, but I thought you'd want to know about it.

BB56 · Post by **BB56** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 1:27 am

If easy to fix it would be nice if the
lists - such as show all bases did not revert back to the top of the list after clicking on a location etc from the list.

Actually, this would be great for all lists. After checking the status of DD Gwen, I click 'Back' then have to scroll down the list again. Talk about carpal tunnel syndrome!:D

dgaad · Post by **dgaad** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 1:41 am

I'd like to see a less time consuming way of managing bases and airgroups to reduce operational losses.

The Dilemma of Operational Losses

Wilhammer · Post by **Wilhammer** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 1:42 am

When forming another TF, it would be great if the list included any troops carried.

==========================

Also, except for the base/ship transfer dialog, where can I find easily the total number of AC on a CV?

It would be most helpful to have this on the Ship Info screen, and even better, next to the CV listed in the TF list box.

FirstPappy · Post by **FirstPappy** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 8:24 am

Can you have the bell ring twice like this (DING-DING --- DING-DING) in the start-up screen. I played Jane's 688(i) Attack Sub for so long that my mind goes blank for a few seconds waiting for that second set of bells to ring and for someone to announe your sub's name. Can you, huh, can you???

Fred98 · Post by **Fred98** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 12:17 pm

I like one ring.

To me it is the signature of this game.

But when the game loads, after the bell rings, it makes an odd "click" sound.

This is the same sound made when a player clicks switches in the options screens.

Please remove this sound.

Howard Mitchell · Post by **Howard Mitchell** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 3:53 pm

A personal plea...

Please can you change the graphics for the A6M2 and A6M3. The A6M2 was usually seen in the overall grey and black cowl scheme early in the war, and it didn't have protruding gun barrels. The A6M3s were usually land based, and so camouflaged earlier. No protruding gun barrels either!

I've obviously been playing Combat Flight Simulator 2 for far, far too long, I need a rest;)

AlvinS · Post by **AlvinS** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 3:56 pm

Here is one that I think would be helpful. Once a ground unit is selected to load on a TF it should flagged as such on any screen that the unit may be listed on.

Example: If I click on the flag to list all ground units it would show "112th Cavalry Regiment Loading TF #210"

That way when I create another TF and select "Load Trrops" I know that unit has already been selected to load. In the fray of creating multiple TF's I sometimes forget who I have already selected to load and have to go back and look at the TF's to find out.

This would just be an enhancement to an already great game.

Spooky · Post by **Spooky** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 4:16 pm

Originally posted by Howard Mitchell
A personal plea...

Please can you change the graphics for the A6M2 and A6M3. The A6M2 was usually seen in the overall grey and black cowl scheme early in the war, and it didn't have protruding gun barrels. The A6M3s were usually land based, and so camouflaged earlier. No protruding gun barrels either!

I've obviously been playing Combat Flight Simulator 2 for far, far too long, I need a rest;)

You should be able to modify all the pictures used by UV (look at the "art" subdirectory in the UV directory).

So if you have a lot of time, maybe you can create your own A6M2 & A6M3 pictures

Spooky

Howard Mitchell · Post by **Howard Mitchell** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 7:27 pm

Brilliant! Thanks spooky, they're in jptop.bmp for those sad muppets like me who like to tinker with these things.

Spooky · Post by **Spooky** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 7:50 pm

You are welcome

However, I would be glad to know from Matrix what exactly we have the legal right to change in UV since their License agreement is not very clear

Allowed or not allowed ? :
1° To do a mod with some new pictures for planes, ships ... and make it available on the web
2° To reverse engineer UV in order to create an utility allowing to change some existing airplane characteristics or to create new airplane types ... and make it available on the web
...

Paul Vebber · Post by **Paul Vebber** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 8:32 pm

We encourage modder's to knock themselves out as far as adding new graphics, sounds, scenarios, what have you.

The caveats are:

You can't try to sell them.

You have to include a copyright statement that Uncommon Valor is copyright by 2by3 games and Matrix.

But like scenarios, you retain the distibution rights to your own work. We obviously ask that we be able to offer them for download here, but if you decide to design a scenario or offer a mod package "exclusive" to somewhere, that is your right.

Database "reverse engineer" utilities that allow people to mess with the ship and weapon characteristics that are not in the scenario editor can be problematic, becasue it could allow folks to edit the scenarios and "Cheat" with uber-weapons.

One would like to think folks would not stoop to hacking the scenario files to gain an advantage, and hopefully that doesn't become an issue, but unfortunately it likely will eventually and we will have to waste time incorporating countermeasures to make it tougher. But hastening that day along with a scenario editor is something we hope folks would refrain from...

If you find mistakes in the database, please let us know and we will do our best to correct them in a future patch.

Spooky · Post by **Spooky** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 8:37 pm

Thanks Paul for your comments

And now it is time to learn the subtilities of the scenario editor

Basement Command · Post by **Basement Command** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 8:59 pm

"1) You will have to load mines at Noumea or Truk."

If that is the case, then losing one base, albeit an important one, eliminates mine warfare as an option for one side or the other? Can that be right?

Spooky · Post by **Spooky** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 9:05 pm

Originally posted by Basement Command
"1) You will have to load mines at Noumea or Truk."

If that is the case, then losing one base, albeit an important one, eliminates mine warfare as an option for one side or the other? Can that be right?

For the Japanese player, losing Truk is fatal ... and nearly so for losing Noumea for the US so I don't think it is really a problem ...

victor semensi · Post by **victor semensi** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 9:32 pm

I'd really like to see a cloud overlay like Carriers at War or Operational Art of War.

cyberwop · Post by **cyberwop** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 9:43 pm

I would like to see ship classes listed in the TF or port display.
When I build AC TF's it would be nice to know which DD's are Clemsons and which are Bensons or Fletchers with out clicking on each individual ship to see the armourment.
Or maybe a collum for AAA values and ASW values [depth charges and sonar type]. Then you could see which ships need to go back to pearl for upgrade.

Don Bowen · Post by **Don Bowen** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 10:21 pm

************************************************
1) You will have to load mines at Noumea or Truk. There were not hordes of mine techs and you could just load them from anywhere. This will help keep mining in or near enemy base hexes as was historically done as you won't have time to lay 10's of thousands of mines everywhere.
************************************************

The Australian Navy's primary minelayer, HMAS Bungaree, operated out of Sydney 1942-1944 and laid defensive minefields along the N.E. Australian Coast/Barrier Reef area. I can find no reference to her ever having been in New Caledonian waters in the official Australian Navy History.

Bunbaree is not represented in the game (probably should be) and Brisbane could stand-in for Sydney as her base and a second mine-load port.

Don

zed · Post by **zed** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 10:42 pm

I have not found anything wrong with the game yet. I wish the scenario editor were better documented, as was said above. Also, it seems pilots are not amenable to changing around. I wish that were different.

sitkis · Post by **sitkis** » Thu Jun 06, 2002 12:26 am

One thing with the limited mine supply. I've been playing that way as a personal limitation as the Japs, but have run into a problem. Trying to lay mines far from Truk doesn't work. At least without a few extra steps.

What happens is that the ML task force will steam to within 5 (or so) hexes of the target hex, and then just sit there until they run out of fuel. This is typically the distance a bombardment TF of comparible speed would sit at before dashing in for a night attack. I'm guessing the mine layers do a similar dash, but won't if they are far from home.

For example, I want to lay a defensive mine field at Tulagi which I own. I set up the ML task force with retire and they steam away. They then sit north of Tulagi until they run out of fuel. There were no Allied carriers in the region, nor was there any allied LBA in range. Supply convoys bound for Lugin, set to retire, were steaming past the silly ML's for days wondering what the hell they were doing parked out in the middle of the ocean.

To get them to lay mines you have to set a new home port "close" to the target. In the above example I could get them to lay mines if I set Shortland as the home base after the TF had left Truk (then reset it to Truk after the mines are in .) Clearly this is a pain. Before I figured out this "fix" I had a ML task force set to strengthen the Rabual MF (that I had forgot about) sit NE of Rabual for weeks.

What To Expect in the Patch

A quickie

Re: List Display

another list request

And another thing for the patch

1) You will have to load mines at Noumea or Truk.

Re: 1) You will have to load mines at Noumea or Truk.

I want clouds

Ship classes and AAA