Everything in AE + a GUI...
I would like to see production on both sides in effect and a more flexible and intuitive construction system.
After that we can then decide how to build off that for 2.1.
WitP2 Wishlist
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.
"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture
"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
What AE needs is National Will ....
It is the only thing that explains many things such as the low morale of late war verteran units - and is especially obvious in their later subs efforts and to a lesser extent aircraft maintenance.
Strike PH , land in HAwaii or West coast and the US gets a big boost. Land near Japan and they get a big boost , Atomic bomb and soviets being active are also big penalties.
Basically as National Will reaches certain levels you get bonuses or penalties to aggression , repairs and morale. That way we can also reduce the aggresion of many Japanese commanders.
It is the only thing that explains many things such as the low morale of late war verteran units - and is especially obvious in their later subs efforts and to a lesser extent aircraft maintenance.
Strike PH , land in HAwaii or West coast and the US gets a big boost. Land near Japan and they get a big boost , Atomic bomb and soviets being active are also big penalties.
Basically as National Will reaches certain levels you get bonuses or penalties to aggression , repairs and morale. That way we can also reduce the aggresion of many Japanese commanders.
Underdog Fanboy
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
1) A manual with a larger size and a solid upgradable structure (abandon the idea to put it into the dvd box).
2) An integrated report and statistics analyzer (witpstaff,witptracker like) so to avoid java troubles and the need to switch from a desktop application to another.
3) A supertutorial section with gazillions of examples, missions and tips to better learn the rules of the game and how to play it.
4) An optional real time in game help system ( with tips or warning display both at order phase ( example: You cannot disband this unit due to xxx - Warning- destination port size less than tf capacity!) and at end turn level: (Example : Base xxx has no supply, do you want to end turn anyway?) And so on.
5) A gui improvement without twist the actual layout ( i like the actual graphic , specially the game map) with windows resizing and moving capabilities, use of hyperlinks between reports and map locations, a better way to display hex coordinates on the game map when mouse hover over an hex (like now happens with base and TF informations); use of the mouse wheel to zoom in and out from the game map (from a single hex content till the strategic map display.)
2) An integrated report and statistics analyzer (witpstaff,witptracker like) so to avoid java troubles and the need to switch from a desktop application to another.
3) A supertutorial section with gazillions of examples, missions and tips to better learn the rules of the game and how to play it.
4) An optional real time in game help system ( with tips or warning display both at order phase ( example: You cannot disband this unit due to xxx - Warning- destination port size less than tf capacity!) and at end turn level: (Example : Base xxx has no supply, do you want to end turn anyway?) And so on.
5) A gui improvement without twist the actual layout ( i like the actual graphic , specially the game map) with windows resizing and moving capabilities, use of hyperlinks between reports and map locations, a better way to display hex coordinates on the game map when mouse hover over an hex (like now happens with base and TF informations); use of the mouse wheel to zoom in and out from the game map (from a single hex content till the strategic map display.)
Three jet pilot useless things: Sky above you, airstrip behind you and half second ago.
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
* Would love to see more useful unit formations. For example:
-- Make TF's that can be disbanded into a port, then reformed, without having to select each ship over and over.
-- Allow TF's to be built by using sub units (ie TF38 = Enterprise, Essex, Yorktown + Cruiser Division 2 + Destroyer Squadron 3)
* Lose Altitude for aircraft. Aircraft altitudes should be set by the local commander depending on the mission being run. I know people like doing that, but it really just seems like a silly thing for a theater commander to worry about. We don't set sub depths do we? Also, we only get to set an altitude band for the squadron, so if I want bombers to search, perform asw, and be ready for naval attack they all use the same setting.
* Sub Patrol areas that are independent of ships.
-- Set a patrol area using a number of boundaries, and then set the number of subs you want assigned. The computer will either automatically send replacements when existing patrollers go winchester or bingo, or just send a reminder if you want to do it manually.
-- Make TF's that can be disbanded into a port, then reformed, without having to select each ship over and over.
-- Allow TF's to be built by using sub units (ie TF38 = Enterprise, Essex, Yorktown + Cruiser Division 2 + Destroyer Squadron 3)
* Lose Altitude for aircraft. Aircraft altitudes should be set by the local commander depending on the mission being run. I know people like doing that, but it really just seems like a silly thing for a theater commander to worry about. We don't set sub depths do we? Also, we only get to set an altitude band for the squadron, so if I want bombers to search, perform asw, and be ready for naval attack they all use the same setting.
* Sub Patrol areas that are independent of ships.
-- Set a patrol area using a number of boundaries, and then set the number of subs you want assigned. The computer will either automatically send replacements when existing patrollers go winchester or bingo, or just send a reminder if you want to do it manually.
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
There sure are a lot of good suggestions, I think I like the GUI and mission planning the best.
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
As I plan my burma offensive I've thought of a few more ground war improvements.
I'd love the ability to form Army Groups that would function effectively the same way as a Task Force. Form the Army Group in a city and add units to it, assign a general to command it and then that army group would appear as and move as a single unit. Then as units become depleted you could switch them out with other units just like you would with ships in a TF. I could make a 1st army, 2nd army, and Armored Army for my burma offensive instead of individually controlling 50 units during my offensive.
The ability to click on equipment in a ground unit and see the details for that particular piece in the pools. How many are in the pools, how many are produced each month, and during what time period it is produced. Would save a lot of time to be able to check pool levels for equipement directly from a units screen without needing to close the unit, open intelligence, and then open equipment pools.
I'd love the ability to form Army Groups that would function effectively the same way as a Task Force. Form the Army Group in a city and add units to it, assign a general to command it and then that army group would appear as and move as a single unit. Then as units become depleted you could switch them out with other units just like you would with ships in a TF. I could make a 1st army, 2nd army, and Armored Army for my burma offensive instead of individually controlling 50 units during my offensive.
The ability to click on equipment in a ground unit and see the details for that particular piece in the pools. How many are in the pools, how many are produced each month, and during what time period it is produced. Would save a lot of time to be able to check pool levels for equipement directly from a units screen without needing to close the unit, open intelligence, and then open equipment pools.
-
Adnan Meshuggi
- Posts: 532
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2001 8:00 am
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
My wishlist for WITP -2?
1.) better Land war - at the moment it is not good or realistic
2.) Production: both nations could develop new ships. Say, the US get kicked around and loose until may 42 5 carriers and 20 cruisers (including british ships). In this case, the player is allowed to "improve" his production plans. Say, the US can now build for each sunk carrier 3 new carriers. This cost production points (each day the allies get some). If you say, you drop the montanas you save production points now and every day until they start to build the ships. After this day, you get only some % of the production points.
The whole thing is difficult to handle, but i think the usa could build more cvl (say, they drop ALL cruisers and built em as cvl) or cv´s or "expensive" ships like ar or ae or as...
With this, the allied player can counter some things the japanese can do. But - you need time or heavy losses to do so. (each sunk cv gives so much points you can "order" a new essex class... including the planes
3.) Airplane_Production
First - you do not know realistic start-dates for production and how many planes per month will be "produced" (sure, they know this things, but not 3 years ahed and - the war in europe is the other factor)
You can mainpulate the production for the us
a.) by increasing the generell production numbers, say in the moment the USA produce 1000 P47 per month and now 1200
b.) by increasing the %-Numbers of the planes you recive from the generell production, say, 1000 P47 per month, 20% -> 30%
So you can bring in a maximum flexibility, but it costs "prestige" - in the end you could change all to 100% but your Victory is worth nothing cause you needed everything the usa could produce.
Same by ships.
With this, you can beat good japanese player, but you honor their superior gameplay.
4.) Groundforces:
same as 3.)
all things have delay times... if you change the production, it cost time - if you order 5 new divisions it cost time.
5.) the japanese can flexible create "new ships" (say, the japanese player realize he need much more sub-hunter, he build (costs a lot resouces) new slips and facilities, with a delay (say 150 days) the japanese can build more DE or DD...
The general idea is, that you have historical start values, but with time and the new results in the war, things change. You can´t change everything, but you should change so much, that the other side does know only a part of the whole thing.
In the moment i knew exactly how many ships the japanese can have (if he play smart) and on the other side, as the japanese, i can even say that the USS Essex can be in the fleet at Date X. That is stupid.
Maybe impossible to implement, but this would be the best thing to change the 20:20-superiority...
1.) better Land war - at the moment it is not good or realistic
2.) Production: both nations could develop new ships. Say, the US get kicked around and loose until may 42 5 carriers and 20 cruisers (including british ships). In this case, the player is allowed to "improve" his production plans. Say, the US can now build for each sunk carrier 3 new carriers. This cost production points (each day the allies get some). If you say, you drop the montanas you save production points now and every day until they start to build the ships. After this day, you get only some % of the production points.
The whole thing is difficult to handle, but i think the usa could build more cvl (say, they drop ALL cruisers and built em as cvl) or cv´s or "expensive" ships like ar or ae or as...
With this, the allied player can counter some things the japanese can do. But - you need time or heavy losses to do so. (each sunk cv gives so much points you can "order" a new essex class... including the planes
3.) Airplane_Production
First - you do not know realistic start-dates for production and how many planes per month will be "produced" (sure, they know this things, but not 3 years ahed and - the war in europe is the other factor)
You can mainpulate the production for the us
a.) by increasing the generell production numbers, say in the moment the USA produce 1000 P47 per month and now 1200
b.) by increasing the %-Numbers of the planes you recive from the generell production, say, 1000 P47 per month, 20% -> 30%
So you can bring in a maximum flexibility, but it costs "prestige" - in the end you could change all to 100% but your Victory is worth nothing cause you needed everything the usa could produce.
Same by ships.
With this, you can beat good japanese player, but you honor their superior gameplay.
4.) Groundforces:
same as 3.)
all things have delay times... if you change the production, it cost time - if you order 5 new divisions it cost time.
5.) the japanese can flexible create "new ships" (say, the japanese player realize he need much more sub-hunter, he build (costs a lot resouces) new slips and facilities, with a delay (say 150 days) the japanese can build more DE or DD...
The general idea is, that you have historical start values, but with time and the new results in the war, things change. You can´t change everything, but you should change so much, that the other side does know only a part of the whole thing.
In the moment i knew exactly how many ships the japanese can have (if he play smart) and on the other side, as the japanese, i can even say that the USS Essex can be in the fleet at Date X. That is stupid.
Maybe impossible to implement, but this would be the best thing to change the 20:20-superiority...
Don't tickle yourself with some moralist crap thinking we have some sort of obligation to help these people. We're there for our self-interest, and anything we do to be 'nice' should be considered a courtesy dweebespit
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
fuel draw in addition to supply draw. I hate dropping fuel into a base and then watching it get sucked right back out again the next day.
noob is as noob does
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
1)Good GUI, with no bugs. When making a turn already easily makes up to an hour, it is bloody annoying when the game refuses to open the screen for the airgroup I need or when ship screens aren't in the same orders as ships in the list on the taskforce screen. Some effort towards simplyfing the time-consuming micromanagement, such as being able to select items in bulk, form ground equivalent of task forces, and so on.
2)Better, more comprehensive manual as well.
3)The supply system that finally works without extensive micromanagement. Wouldn't it be nice for supplies at Home Islands to flow to where they needed, instead of pooling in Tokyo?
While we are at it, the supply flow through jungle and other terrain without roads shouldn't be quite so easy. But an option of building or upgrading roads would be nice.
4)A better land combat model. In particular, engagements between very large stacks tend to produce out-of-whack results, and there is no option for a cautious attack in the game after the artillery nerf.
5)Tracking of who sank whom in naval combat. If the game can track kills for individual pilots, this is surely possible.
2)Better, more comprehensive manual as well.
3)The supply system that finally works without extensive micromanagement. Wouldn't it be nice for supplies at Home Islands to flow to where they needed, instead of pooling in Tokyo?
While we are at it, the supply flow through jungle and other terrain without roads shouldn't be quite so easy. But an option of building or upgrading roads would be nice.
4)A better land combat model. In particular, engagements between very large stacks tend to produce out-of-whack results, and there is no option for a cautious attack in the game after the artillery nerf.
5)Tracking of who sank whom in naval combat. If the game can track kills for individual pilots, this is surely possible.
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.
Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
-
jwilkerson
- Posts: 8241
- Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 4:02 am
- Location: Kansas
- Contact:
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
ORIGINAL: 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!!!
Right - when all you guys with c compliers and/or paint programs are ready to get started - let me know! [:D]
(Oh and if you mis-placed your c complier, you can download a new one for free -- MS Visual Studio Express 2010 from here ... [:)]
http://www.microsoft.com/express/Downloads/Download-2010.aspx)
WITP Admiral's Edition - Project Lead
War In Spain - Project Lead
War In Spain - Project Lead
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
If its true that Allied fighters get a free fighters bounce on Jap Cap in 1944 in AE, then that would be the first thing I would removed in WITP2. [:'(]
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
If you want strategy, and tactics, and 3D animations, and piloting individual planes yourself, and forming squadrons at will, and building ships by your order, and ordering planes by batch/series....
This game already exists: it's called Pacific Storm!
http://pacificstormallies.cdvusa.com/content/screenshots
Too bad the people who made that game didn't care a bit about the historical aspects of the game, or the gameplay aspects, or making the game run properly. [8|]
Believe me, this is not an endorsement. In my view, and really by just about any standards, WITP is ten times better than Pacific Storm, because it works, it works historically, and it works as a game. People who knew what they were doing made the game, and the level of detail they put into it is amazing. Are there issues? Sure. But it's nothing comparatively to the kind of problems all too common in other "historical" games.
This game already exists: it's called Pacific Storm!
http://pacificstormallies.cdvusa.com/content/screenshots
Too bad the people who made that game didn't care a bit about the historical aspects of the game, or the gameplay aspects, or making the game run properly. [8|]
Believe me, this is not an endorsement. In my view, and really by just about any standards, WITP is ten times better than Pacific Storm, because it works, it works historically, and it works as a game. People who knew what they were doing made the game, and the level of detail they put into it is amazing. Are there issues? Sure. But it's nothing comparatively to the kind of problems all too common in other "historical" games.
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
ORIGINAL: 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!!!
Right - when all you guys with c compliers and/or paint programs are ready to get started - let me know! [:D]
(Oh and if you mis-placed your c complier, you can download a new one for free -- MS Visual Studio Express 2010 from here ... [:)]
http://www.microsoft.com/express/Downloads/Download-2010.aspx)
I've coded C for 10 years, and would be glad to help. Are you serious, or just trying to make a point?
As an aside, I don't think anyone was criticizing WiTP 1, but that we like it so much we want to see a 2.
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
Easier pilot selection:
A. Where a player can select several pilots at once for transferring. Example I want 4 level 60+ exp Air skill pilots for my front line squadron
B. Where a player can select a max - min training level and one or more skills - Example I want to cross train Naval Search and ASW skills I first train pilots in Naval Search in one squadron - after reaching a certain level - lets say 60 then I want to transfer that pilot to a squadron training in ASW. To find suitable pilots I would like to set my pilot search to Min Naval skill of 60 and max ASW skill of 60, and return only the pilots that match that criteria.
C. Automatic Graduation when a Pilot reaches a certain level - say 60 in Ground Bombardment that pilot is moved out of the squadron and a new pilot is added to the squadron. Ideally implemented with #2 above.
D. Pilot sort on min or max skills - and returning only those that met that criteria. Multiple skills would be even better.
Senior Ranked Commander Keeps his job:
Currently in the game when the game in when a division is split you get the original commander in charge on one part and in general two lower level leaders in command of the other two parts. Example Major General Bob is in command of the unit. It is then split Part A - Major General Bob, Part B Brigadier General Fred Part C Colonel Ralph; commanding respectively In some cases when the unit is recombined Col Ralph is now in charge of the Division and Major General Bob is sent to the unemployment pool.
Permanent Task Force Organizations
For a certain amount of political points, a permanent Task Force Command would be created. It would be created in the port. It would then be available for assignment to any task force at that port. Alternate would be the replacement of a Junior TF Commander by a more Senior Commander at no political point cost. The big change for me would be the assignment of some of the less desirable admirals to convoy commands. I do not use automatic leader assignment by the way.
A. Where a player can select several pilots at once for transferring. Example I want 4 level 60+ exp Air skill pilots for my front line squadron
B. Where a player can select a max - min training level and one or more skills - Example I want to cross train Naval Search and ASW skills I first train pilots in Naval Search in one squadron - after reaching a certain level - lets say 60 then I want to transfer that pilot to a squadron training in ASW. To find suitable pilots I would like to set my pilot search to Min Naval skill of 60 and max ASW skill of 60, and return only the pilots that match that criteria.
C. Automatic Graduation when a Pilot reaches a certain level - say 60 in Ground Bombardment that pilot is moved out of the squadron and a new pilot is added to the squadron. Ideally implemented with #2 above.
D. Pilot sort on min or max skills - and returning only those that met that criteria. Multiple skills would be even better.
Senior Ranked Commander Keeps his job:
Currently in the game when the game in when a division is split you get the original commander in charge on one part and in general two lower level leaders in command of the other two parts. Example Major General Bob is in command of the unit. It is then split Part A - Major General Bob, Part B Brigadier General Fred Part C Colonel Ralph; commanding respectively In some cases when the unit is recombined Col Ralph is now in charge of the Division and Major General Bob is sent to the unemployment pool.
Permanent Task Force Organizations
For a certain amount of political points, a permanent Task Force Command would be created. It would be created in the port. It would then be available for assignment to any task force at that port. Alternate would be the replacement of a Junior TF Commander by a more Senior Commander at no political point cost. The big change for me would be the assignment of some of the less desirable admirals to convoy commands. I do not use automatic leader assignment by the way.
The Wake
-
Chris21wen
- Posts: 7705
- Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: Cottesmore, Rutland
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
I originally screwed up and pasted this in WitP when it was supposed to go here.
I do wish you could do something about this.
I've got a large number of LCU that were originnally part of various withdrawn HQs. i.e. Burma Corp etc. In game terms there might not be any effect on them being part of an organistaion that no longer exists but militarily it would be a no no.
This is only part of the problem really as the whole way the game deals with the command structure is wrong. Why should an LCU unit 3000 odd miles away from its HQ suffer no penalties. I know any command HQ will do but militarily it will only do so if it is attached (even temporarily), otherwise the response to 'can I have supplies please' would likely be akin to .... off.
In a game of this size it should be a major part of the game, after all we do have individual pilots!
I know its an old chestnut but I can still wish, but it's probably too late.
I do wish you could do something about this.
I've got a large number of LCU that were originnally part of various withdrawn HQs. i.e. Burma Corp etc. In game terms there might not be any effect on them being part of an organistaion that no longer exists but militarily it would be a no no.
This is only part of the problem really as the whole way the game deals with the command structure is wrong. Why should an LCU unit 3000 odd miles away from its HQ suffer no penalties. I know any command HQ will do but militarily it will only do so if it is attached (even temporarily), otherwise the response to 'can I have supplies please' would likely be akin to .... off.
In a game of this size it should be a major part of the game, after all we do have individual pilots!
I know its an old chestnut but I can still wish, but it's probably too late.
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
A selection that allows to "motivate" non or underpreforming commanders. The ability to change out commaders is excellent, but wouldn't it be fun to allow choices such as 1) shoot (My favorite!) 2) demote 3) permanetly assign to supply duty @ (your choice of unpleasant duty stations) 3) permanently retire 4) shoot! (Yes I know I said that one twice, but I really,really like it!). [:D]
But in all seriousness, thanks for a great game and your continous support.[&o][&o][&o] I really wish that I could help, but I'm pretty useless mucking around with computers! [8|]
But in all seriousness, thanks for a great game and your continous support.[&o][&o][&o] I really wish that I could help, but I'm pretty useless mucking around with computers! [8|]
-
mike scholl 1
- Posts: 1265
- Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:20 pm
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
ORIGINAL: AW1Steve
A selection that allows to "motivate" non or underperforming commanders. The ability to change out commanders is excellent, but wouldn't it be fun to allow choices such as 1) shoot (My favorite!) 2) demote 3) permanetly assign to supply duty @ (your choice of unpleasant duty stations) 3) permanently retire 4) shoot! (Yes I know I said that one twice, but I really,really like it!). [:D]
Should read "demote to private, assign to the infantry" if you want to motivate them. [:D]
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1
ORIGINAL: AW1Steve
A selection that allows to "motivate" non or underperforming commanders. The ability to change out commanders is excellent, but wouldn't it be fun to allow choices such as 1) shoot (My favorite!) 2) demote 3) permanetly assign to supply duty @ (your choice of unpleasant duty stations) 3) permanently retire 4) shoot! (Yes I know I said that one twice, but I really,really like it!). [:D]
Should read "demote to private, assign to the infantry" if you want to motivate them. [:D]
Yeah,but shooting them would motivate them more. And save money too![:D]
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
1. more things should be automated if the player wants it - pilot management comes to mind first and foremost, but having the AI handle other aspects of the game would also come in handy, but of course this should be optional
2. more tooltips should be included...when I hover my mouse over an option in the game, there should be a little box popping up explaining the thing to me, or if it's grayed out there should be an explanation why I can't click on it. There's already quite a lot of these in the game, but every little thing should be included.
3. tutorial and/or a regularly updated manual which included the myriad of little details and things we now have to pick up from the forums
2. more tooltips should be included...when I hover my mouse over an option in the game, there should be a little box popping up explaining the thing to me, or if it's grayed out there should be an explanation why I can't click on it. There's already quite a lot of these in the game, but every little thing should be included.
3. tutorial and/or a regularly updated manual which included the myriad of little details and things we now have to pick up from the forums
RE: WitP2 Wishlist
Please have a globe as a map and not a flat one. For absolute precision WITP2 should be played out on a 3d globe with the absolute correct distances and without distortions.
I also would like to see original Japanese nicknames for their aircraft rather than using allied reporting names.
I also would like to see original Japanese nicknames for their aircraft rather than using allied reporting names.