UV 2.30 patch is now in test

[Bulldog61]

Originally posted by SoulBlazer
Well, there better not BE another one.....I agree that it's time to move on to WITP after this patch is released.

I think as features are developed for WITP they are retro-fitted into UV. Rest assurred WITP playtesting goes on. The game is sweet even in the alpha version.

[Mr.Frag]

At this time the patch does not invalidate saves and we hope and will try hard to keep it that way. There are no guarantees however as we go through the testing process.

If ya break it, ya break it, these changes instead of being a little patch are in the catagory of a major overhaul and a fair number of folks will probably want to restart under these rules as they are staggering in their implications.

Personally, I'd rather conceed a game vs delay out a patch and waste your resources trying to make the upgrade seemless. Perhaps you should pop up a poll on the issue. While being extremists by nature, we understand reality. Thats why we play wargames instead of silly RTS stuff

People who want both can probably just dub a copy of UV into a different directory and maintain a separate unpatched 2.20 for purposes of finishing off current games.

[brisd]

Joel,

Thanks for a great patch listing and contiued support for UV. I smelled smoke drifting down from Encinitas from all those key strokes but I guess the rain yesterday put out the fire

[Sonny]

Originally posted by Joel Billings
At this time the patch does not invalidate saves and we hope and will try hard to keep it that way. There are no guarantees however as we go through the testing process.

By the way, we appreciate the praise, but we'd appreciate it even more if you tell your friends that don't yet have UV. Thanks for all your support.

Joel

Unfortunately, because of the time I spend on UV I have no friends.

[pasternakski]

Originally posted by iceboy
hehe...sorry i had to get that off my chest :rolleyes:

Well, and I agree with what you say. The support for this game (and the interesting way that support has now evolved into design refinement for WITP) is gratifying. The only thing about patches is that they tend to derail the trolley of games already underway, but what the hey - when the game improves, we all benefit. I think back on some of the "dark times" when it was obvious that there was something drastically wrong with the current version of the game and compare that to recent times, where it has been more a matter of fine-tuning an already smoothly running machine and count my fifty bucks (and hundreds of hours) as well spent.

Besides, I get the chance to post on these forums and trot out my particular brand of chauvinistic idiocy (while hiding my true identity behind a pseudonym). Not to mention meeting friendly, intelligent people with no prejudices and always a positive, insightful, well-considered comment to make on nearly every subject imaginable ... where else would you get the remarkable value presented by the "Bismarck" thread?

But that's another story.

[SoulBlazer]

Hey, some of us play both wargames AND RTS games.

I just went out and bought C&C Generals, as a matter of fact......

[crsutton]

Thanks for your efforts.

[pasternakski]

Originally posted by SoulBlazer
Hey, some of us play ... RTS games.

Good luck with that. Just keep 'em on your side of the fence, okay?

[SoulBlazer]

Are you kidding? C&C are some of my favorite games, I enjoy romping my roomie in a game of Counter Strike now and then, System Shock 2 and Elite Force are games I still play a few times a year, and nothing beats a hard day at work like playing a Contra game.

Besides, they have the advantage of being able to play them when you only have 15. Really can't do that with a wargame.

[jcjordan]

Joel/Matrix

Something I would like to see in a future patch, definitely in WITP would be how the AI handles damaged ships. As it stands now if a ship is badly damaged it immediately sends it to a home base(Truk/Noemea). If the ship has alot of flooding it ends up sinking before it gets to port even when there is a large port closer. It would be better if you could have the AI send it to the nearest port to have the flooding brought under control then have it sent to home base. In all the battles I've done vs the AI IJN most of the ships sunk have been done this way & if it's AP, then there ends up being little in the way of offensive measures the AI could do so the game becomes one sided & boring as I can take any base at anytime with my assets.
Also an upgrade in the AI where it won't send AP TF into the frying pan to be sunk by me without some kind of escort be it air or ships. This is what leads to the first problem of ships sinking on the way home.

[Bulldog61]

Originally posted by jcjordan
Joel/Matrix

Something I would like to see in a future patch, definitely in WITP would be how the AI handles damaged ships. As it stands now if a ship is badly damaged it immediately sends it to a home base(Truk/Noemea). If the ship has alot of flooding it ends up sinking before it gets to port even when there is a large port closer. It would be better if you could have the AI send it to the nearest port to have the flooding brought under control then have it sent to home base. In all the battles I've done vs the AI IJN most of the ships sunk have been done this way & if it's AP, then there ends up being little in the way of offensive measures the AI could do so the game becomes one sided & boring as I can take any base at anytime with my assets.
Also an upgrade in the AI where it won't send AP TF into the frying pan to be sunk by me without some kind of escort be it air or ships. This is what leads to the first problem of ships sinking on the way home.

Good point I've observed the same thing!

[Hard Sarge]

Strange, in my games, the AI sends most of it's damage ships to Shortland (thinking to stop the flooding ?) and then later sends them back to Truk

of course, since I hammer the Port most of them never really get any repairs done, but have seen a number of them slip away and sail back to Truk

HARD_Sarge

[Admiral DadMan]

Shuttle convoys still divert to bases in need instead of keeping their shuttle runs.

[wobbly]

Speaking of AI. i can't help thinking that it wont be able to keep up with the changes being made:

will carriers go into base hexes, will AI use info of ships in harbour, do I really care I'm playing PBEM... the list goes on.

[denisonh]

Originally posted by jcjordan
Joel/Matrix

Something I would like to see in a future patch, definitely in WITP would be how the AI handles damaged ships. As it stands now if a ship is badly damaged it immediately sends it to a home base(Truk/Noemea). If the ship has alot of flooding it ends up sinking before it gets to port even when there is a large port closer. It would be better if you could have the AI send it to the nearest port to have the flooding brought under control then have it sent to home base. In all the battles I've done vs the AI IJN most of the ships sunk have been done this way & if it's AP, then there ends up being little in the way of offensive measures the AI could do so the game becomes one sided & boring as I can take any base at anytime with my assets.
Also an upgrade in the AI where it won't send AP TF into the frying pan to be sunk by me without some kind of escort be it air or ships. This is what leads to the first problem of ships sinking on the way home.

Easy solution: play PBEM:D

[Joel Billings]

Originally posted by wobbly
Speaking of AI. i can't help thinking that it wont be able to keep up with the changes being made:

will carriers go into base hexes, will AI use info of ships in harbour, do I really care I'm playing PBEM... the list goes on.

In many cases Gary had the AI playing more realistically than the rules. He had AI carriers trying to avoid coastal hexes of all kinds. No guarantees given all the changes, but Gary thinks they will only help the AI vs a human, not hurt it.

Joel

[Krec]

ah yes, the old carrier hugging the coast trick, never really thought much of it . of course give a human an inch and he'll take a mile. my problem is i tend to hope my opponent will also try to play a realistic game, but we all know the jap player will run that carrier force down the slot first chance he gets . carriers leading the way hugging every island they find then parking that CV TF right into the habor hex at GC. if my shore batteries ever would fire on the sucker and sink those carriers maybe they would stay away from the coast like in real life. oh well i think we are going in the right direction. matrix you guys are awesome!! keep up the good work.

[Grotius]

Well, there is one existing downside to running IJN CVs through coastal hexes: Coastwatchers. For the IJN, there's much less chance of being spotted if you take to the high seas instead.

[Admiral DadMan]

Originally posted by Grotius
For the IJN, there's much less chance of being spotted if you take to the high seas instead.

And that's what they did historically

[mogami]

Hi, I avoid coastal hexes as much as possible as IJN. (For every TF) Sometimes I have to drive the TF's by selecting hex and do not retire one day and then setting a new hex the next day.
(My CV use the creep up method to avoid coastal hexes and then when ready made one long move (hopefully in bad weather)
To arrive in their op area. I don't think I've ever ran a CV TF (IJN or USN) down the slot. (I'm too afraid of detection/mines/subs)