WitP2 Wishlist

[LeeChard]

The ability to open multiple data windows for direct comparison i.e. P40E v P40N
Unit data artwork in three plan view or even 3D
Mousewheel map zoom
Tracker integrated into the game
More control over land based logistics
ETA for TF screen would make it easier to plan off map movement
Combat report filters i.e. show naval vs naval and air vs naval not bombardment or sub attacks etc.
Bigger buttons for us old guys
And of course the universal wishes, Improved AI, more scenarios, more EVERYTHING!!

[Kwik E Mart]

I remember the old days of playing VG's Pacific War. I'm not quite sure how to describe it, but when I play WiTP or AE, I don't have the same sense of conducting "operations". For instance, I decide I want to take a certain island/atoll. I may search thru the various unit screens, planning which ships, air units and LCU's would be best for the job, but once they are identified, there is no real game mechanic that links them all together (excepting TF creation and HQ assignments). IIRC, there were set amounts of time that could be allocated for ops (2 weeks, 1 week, etc). This, to me, put a "framework", if you will, around the operation. Some kind of game mechanic (other than keeping notes in a notebook) in which operations are planned and resources assigned would enhance the experience for me. Maybe have some tangible benefit or bonus for units working together in the same operation. I suppose one could say the mechanic of planning and prepping units for a target meets this need, but it still doesn't have the feel of planning and conducting an operation. Not sure if any of this is making sense, but that is something I would like to see in the next generation of this game...

[Sredni]

I'd like to see waaay way more authentic wwII pictures in background briefs and loading screens. There are literally millions of pictures in the public domain they could easily and simply add in with some sort of randomizer so you're always seeing new pictures. The same 6 pictures we see all the time in AE seem awfully familiar. I think they were the same ones used in stock witp heh.

Mouseover descriptions for all the equipment in the pools. A lot of the time I'm left scratching my head over what exactly this or that bit of equipment actually is. They could extend that to include aircraft and ships and include a brief history for how they were used and how effective they were. Down to detail like what this or that gun on a ships is used for.

Kill tallies for ships and subs like pilots have. I think it'd be neat to check a sub in 1944 and see how many hits it's gotten, and what specific sinkings it's had confirmed. Or be able to check a surface ships history and see what engagements it's taken part in and what hit's it's scored on who.

A better interface for handling pilots. I find myself spending a lot more time micromanaging pilots then someone like MacArthur or Nimitz would be doing, and a lot of that is taken up because of how clunky it is moving pilots around.

The ability as the allies to alter production somewhat. It kills me that I'm afraid to use my flying boats because even the smallest ops losses are almost impossible to keep up with the historical production. Being able to increase catalina production at the start would be a godsend.

The ability to resize or combine airgroups and LCU. Little 12 or 16 airplane fighter groups annoy the hell out of me. The tiny 3 or 4 plane groups are even worse. Or all the little artillery groups. It would simplify a LCU stack tons if you could combine smaller units together.

Better modeling of the ground war. The ability to build/improve roads and rails, and strategic bridges.

[The Gnome]

How could I forget, the one thing I always seem to be wishing for!

An intensity slider on all units for offensive combat.

Code: Select all

 |------------------------------|------------------------------|
 No                                                     Come back with
 Casualites                   Normal                     your shield or on it
 

This would let me specify how dedicated to the attack my units would be. I'd like to be able to specify the difference between a probing attack for recon, or to skirmish, or to absolutely fight to the death.

Obviously, things like commander aggressiveness, fatigue, morale, etc would figure into how well the unit executes this order.

[CaptBeefheart]

Not sure how to do it, but certainly a better land combat model. Also, a better way to move fuel and supplies by land, or at least the ability to keep supplies and fuel where you need them without leaking (a command like "hoard all existing supplies and fuel under penalty of death" or something at each base).

Regarding pilot training, maybe you could dedicate a certain number of squadrons, a certain number of instructor pilots and a certain level of aircraft replacement (i.e. low, medium or high priority) to offscreen training, while you set the skill priorities (i.e. 40% air-to-air, 10% recon, 20% NavT, 20% NavB, etc.) and exp and skill levels at which you add the pilots to the pool. This would all be managed offscreen. Anyway, gotta run, will think about this some more.

Cheers,
CC

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

I remember the old days of playing VG's Pacific War. I'm not quite sure how to describe it, but when I play WiTP or AE, I don't have the same sense of conducting "operations". For instance, I decide I want to take a certain island/atoll. I may search thru the various unit screens, planning which ships, air units and LCU's would be best for the job, but once they are identified, there is no real game mechanic that links them all together (excepting TF creation and HQ assignments). IIRC, there were set amounts of time that could be allocated for ops (2 weeks, 1 week, etc). This, to me, put a "framework", if you will, around the operation. Some kind of game mechanic (other than keeping notes in a notebook) in which operations are planned and resources assigned would enhance the experience for me. Maybe have some tangible benefit or bonus for units working together in the same operation. I suppose one could say the mechanic of planning and prepping units for a target meets this need, but it still doesn't have the feel of planning and conducting an operation. Not sure if any of this is making sense, but that is something I would like to see in the next generation of this game...

You're asking for a op-plan mode for the game. You would select a target and a date and work backward from that to select and move the assets into position. It would hold slots for the various assigned HQs and assets--you might even assign it to a specific HQ. It would work more like a personal task management system than something that mandates actions at specific times, alerting you to the various things you have to do and when.

I suspect this feature would also be useful for the AI.

[jomni]

ORIGINAL: moonraker

More scenarios. Options for strating a GC in '42, '43 or '44 would be nice if the information can be gathered. Perhaps some scenarios starting with specific opertaions like Watchtower and Cartwheel or perhaps Coral Sea and Midway.

We don't need that in WITP2.
We need those NOW!!!
WITPAE lacks scenarios (most are just variations of the Grand Campaign).

[janh]

1. AI routines laid open, and scripted in a powerful, C++ like scripting language that can cross-test and manipulate all in game properties so you can really script a dynamic AI.
2. From what I gather, the pilot management is a bit of an overkill -- make it optional, automatic, or remove.  Seems to detract from the grand scale.
3. Open fighting/loss routines, so grognards can tune those as well.  Adjust land routines so that they also could handle European theater type blitz warfare...
{4. A world map...}

[crsutton]

The ability to actually get into a plane and fly it around. If it is a P39, I want to be able to use that funnel and tube device to urinate so that I don't have to get up from my computer. Is this asking for too much? [;)]

[Swenslim]

Better supply model - no british tank hordes in Burma.

[bradfordkay]

My WitP2 wish? For an unknown rich uncle to leave me enough money to quit work and devote the time necessary to truly enjoy this beast!!! 

[steamboateng]

A ring binder type manual, clearly describing the GUI (with lots of pictures) and functionality of all the various game elements: i.e Production, Supply, TF's, Unit replacements, etc., & etc.,& etc........ The binder can utilize downloadable, printed insert for rule changes, add-on scenarios, fanbased info and wiki materials. The AE manual is cheaply made, and on some topics, not clearly written.
A map which can build historic roads and rr's. Also, more muted map coloring and greater land contour detail. At present, Wiley Coyote wouldn't look too much out of place scrambling across the Great Australian Outback.
A zoom in feature for working with TF's, air squadrons, and the like. I'm old.......even my 24" monitor has me squinting at little tiny red boats plowing (actually, they kinda hop)across the Pacific. (Little tiny GRAY boats, hopping across the monitor might add a bit of navy flavor.)
Division HQ's for LCU's, with their historic commanders. This mght help to keep units more organised across the board.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: jomni

ORIGINAL: moonraker

More scenarios. Options for strating a GC in '42, '43 or '44 would be nice if the information can be gathered. Perhaps some scenarios starting with specific opertaions like Watchtower and Cartwheel or perhaps Coral Sea and Midway.

We don't need that in WITP2.
We need those NOW!!!
WITPAE lacks scenarios (most are just variations of the Grand Campaign).

Andy has done several scenarios, in addition to the ones that shipped with the game: Marianas, Downfall, Buccaneer. There hasn't been that much interest or feedback relative to the GC scenario variants. I just don't think many people like the smaller scenarios. It's been sort of surprising to me.

[bilbow]

Ability in-game to build road and rail facilites. A four-year campaign would see a lot of such activity.

Alcan highway, Burma railway come to mind quickly.

[Ametysth]

Manual.

Learning to play this game was like learning to play chess without anyone telling you how the pieces move.

[Kwik E Mart]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

I remember the old days of playing VG's Pacific War. I'm not quite sure how to describe it, but when I play WiTP or AE, I don't have the same sense of conducting "operations". For instance, I decide I want to take a certain island/atoll. I may search thru the various unit screens, planning which ships, air units and LCU's would be best for the job, but once they are identified, there is no real game mechanic that links them all together (excepting TF creation and HQ assignments). IIRC, there were set amounts of time that could be allocated for ops (2 weeks, 1 week, etc). This, to me, put a "framework", if you will, around the operation. Some kind of game mechanic (other than keeping notes in a notebook) in which operations are planned and resources assigned would enhance the experience for me. Maybe have some tangible benefit or bonus for units working together in the same operation. I suppose one could say the mechanic of planning and prepping units for a target meets this need, but it still doesn't have the feel of planning and conducting an operation. Not sure if any of this is making sense, but that is something I would like to see in the next generation of this game...

You're asking for a op-plan mode for the game. You would select a target and a date and work backward from that to select and move the assets into position. It would hold slots for the various assigned HQs and assets--you might even assign it to a specific HQ. It would work more like a personal task management system than something that mandates actions at specific times, alerting you to the various things you have to do and when.

I suspect this feature would also be useful for the AI.

Op Plan Mode....i like it....one section (for lack of better word) of the mode might be (for instance) "Island Defence Suppression"....the player would then assign TF's (most likely bombardment and covering forces) and airgroups (AF suppression, port and CD suppression, etc)....then give some tangible benefit for making these OpFor's....the HQ assigned with all the assets gets a small boost in admin and/or other skill levels....

another advantage of this might be less micromanagement of individual assets....for example, the player sets the threat level of the "Island Defense Suppression" activities....for low threat level, the computer automatically sets all TF's in that operation to "Do not retire"....for high threat level, all TF's are set to max speed or allow to retire, etc. (man, i'm really rambling now...[;)])

actually, from my very brief excursions into the AI scripts, it seems the AI does do this...didn't i see (for example) a script called "Take Port Morseby" which had assigned all the forces that the AI will use to do this? and then a date range for executing that script?

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

I remember the old days of playing VG's Pacific War. I'm not quite sure how to describe it, but when I play WiTP or AE, I don't have the same sense of conducting "operations". For instance, I decide I want to take a certain island/atoll. I may search thru the various unit screens, planning which ships, air units and LCU's would be best for the job, but once they are identified, there is no real game mechanic that links them all together (excepting TF creation and HQ assignments). IIRC, there were set amounts of time that could be allocated for ops (2 weeks, 1 week, etc). This, to me, put a "framework", if you will, around the operation. Some kind of game mechanic (other than keeping notes in a notebook) in which operations are planned and resources assigned would enhance the experience for me. Maybe have some tangible benefit or bonus for units working together in the same operation. I suppose one could say the mechanic of planning and prepping units for a target meets this need, but it still doesn't have the feel of planning and conducting an operation. Not sure if any of this is making sense, but that is something I would like to see in the next generation of this game...

You're asking for a op-plan mode for the game. You would select a target and a date and work backward from that to select and move the assets into position. It would hold slots for the various assigned HQs and assets--you might even assign it to a specific HQ. It would work more like a personal task management system than something that mandates actions at specific times, alerting you to the various things you have to do and when.

I suspect this feature would also be useful for the AI.

Op Plan Mode....i like it....one section (for lack of better word) of the mode might be (for instance) "Island Defence Suppression"....the player would then assign TF's (most likely bombardment and covering forces) and airgroups (AF suppression, port and CD suppression, etc)....then give some tangible benefit for making these OpFor's....the HQ assigned with all the assets gets a small boost in admin and/or other skill levels....

another advantage of this might be less micromanagement of individual assets....for example, the player sets the threat level of the "Island Defense Suppression" activities....for low threat level, the computer automatically sets all TF's in that operation to "Do not retire"....for high threat level, all TF's are set to max speed or allow to retire, etc. (man, i'm really rambling now...[;)])

actually, from my very brief excursions into the AI scripts, it seems the AI does do this...didn't i see (for example) a script called "Take Port Morseby" which had assigned all the forces that the AI will use to do this? and then a date range for executing that script?

I'm basically suggesting a mode for script-writing and manually filling in the details for the scripts.

[jomni]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

The ability to actually get into a plane and fly it around. [;)]

It's been done before... Pacific Storm.

Any automoation routine will be good (economic management, production, even whole theaters of operation).

[The Gnome]

Sub warfare: Would love to see the ability for subs to attack as wolfpacks.

[Swayin]

It would be great if you clicked on a sub and had access to a log of some kind that listed its "kills."