Burn baby burn

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
guytipton41
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:01 am
Location: Houston, TX

Burn baby burn

Post by guytipton41 »

Hi Folks,

I had a Japanese DD get shot up off Balikpapan two weeks ago game time, and she limped back to Manado and disbanded. The next day the fires were down to 1. And two weeks later the fires are still 1. Is this just a long series of bad die rolls? I have a fair amount of naval support and two ADs at the port.

Cheers,
Guy

Image
Attachments
BurningDD.jpg
BurningDD.jpg (98.96 KiB) Viewed 302 times
User avatar
guytipton41
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:01 am
Location: Houston, TX

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by guytipton41 »

And this is the base.

Image
Attachments
NavalSup.jpg
NavalSup.jpg (111.86 KiB) Viewed 302 times
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: guytipton41

And this is the base.

I've never seen this. Not for two weeks. Your System damage is not that bad either. Fourteen random rolls that maintain Fires 1 is highly suspicious. You might try to take her off the pier for a turn and see if you can un-stick it. Your flooding should be survivable for a day in a port.

If that doesn't work maybe Michael can tweak the save. Those Fires should be out.
The Moose
User avatar
Fallschirmjager
Posts: 3555
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:46 am
Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by Fallschirmjager »

With 85 flood damage, she is so low in the water that the water rushing over the deck should put the fire out [:D]
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager

With 85 flood damage, she is so low in the water that the water rushing over the deck should put the fire out [:D]

It's very bad flooding, true, but system is low for that much flooding, and it's in a port. A pretty good chance she survives a day. I've moved ships short distances with flooding in the 90s. Once a CV with 98 flooding; she survived and was fully repaired.
The Moose
Alfred
Posts: 6683
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:56 am

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by Alfred »

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: guytipton41

And this is the base.

I've never seen this. Not for two weeks. Your System damage is not that bad either. Fourteen random rolls that maintain Fires 1 is highly suspicious. You might try to take her off the pier for a turn and see if you can un-stick it. Your flooding should be survivable for a day in a port.

If that doesn't work maybe Michael can tweak the save. Those Fires should be out.

Not likely to be something michaelm can easily tweek. Even if assuming it is a bug which at best is probably only a 50/50 call.

Have a look at s.14 of my ship repair 101 guide. What is at play here looks very much to be the repair manager working on the bands.

That ship is not going to sink with 1 fire irrespective of how long it remains. But the flotation damage level, especially for a Japanese ship, is in sinking territory. Hence the Repair Manager is sending all the free resources to deal with the flotation damage.

Alfred
User avatar
Admiral DadMan
Posts: 3405
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by Admiral DadMan »

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Not likely to be something michaelm can easily tweek. Even if assuming it is a bug which at best is probably only a 50/50 call.

Have a look at s.14 of my ship repair 101 guide. What is at play here looks very much to be the repair manager working on the bands.

That ship is not going to sink with 1 fire irrespective of how long it remains. But the flotation damage level, especially for a Japanese ship, is in sinking territory. Hence the Repair Manager is sending all the free resources to deal with the flotation damage.

Alfred
I suppose then that the question is if any SYS/FLT/ENG damage has dropped during those turns. That would confirm what Alfred is positing.
Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:
Image
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Not likely to be something michaelm can easily tweek. Even if assuming it is a bug which at best is probably only a 50/50 call.

Have a look at s.14 of my ship repair 101 guide. What is at play here looks very much to be the repair manager working on the bands.

That ship is not going to sink with 1 fire irrespective of how long it remains. But the flotation damage level, especially for a Japanese ship, is in sinking territory. Hence the Repair Manager is sending all the free resources to deal with the flotation damage.

Alfred

I thought Fires were outside the Repair Manager band passes. In their own realm as it were.
The Moose
jwolf
Posts: 2493
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 4:02 pm

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by jwolf »

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

I thought Fires were outside the Repair Manager band passes. In their own realm as it were.

That was my understanding as well -- fire takes priority over everything else, and in fact no other repairs will even be attempted if there is any fire. Is this wrong?
Alfred
Posts: 6683
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:56 am

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by Alfred »

Yes but the resources used to douse a fire are also used to do ship repairs.&nbsp; It is that dual usage which makes it a 50/50 call on it being a bug and why a tweek is not necessarily an easy task.
&nbsp;
Alfred
User avatar
Fallschirmjager
Posts: 3555
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:46 am
Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by Fallschirmjager »

I thought damage was tackled as fires first and always.
In fact, I thought until fires were 0 that no other repair could take place.
Am I wrong about this?
Alfred
Posts: 6683
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:56 am

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by Alfred »

An 85 (70 major) flotation is a real threat.&nbsp; A 1 fire is not.
&nbsp;
Alfred
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: Alfred

An 85 (70 major) flotation is a real threat.  A 1 fire is not.

Alfred

True. But what tweaked me was a fire of 1 for two weeks. It is still causing system damage as long as it burns. It was the duration that seemed weird.
The Moose
User avatar
Revthought
Posts: 523
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 5:42 pm
Location: San Diego (Lives in Indianapolis)

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by Revthought »

Maybe use her to roast marshmallows? Or a good old fashioned fire ship. Light her ablaze and ram her into something. ;)

Sorry, all I can offer you are bad jokes.
Playing at war is a far better vocation than making people fight in them.
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20415
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by BBfanboy »

Since a ship with a fire cannot dock and use base naval support to help with damage control, putting it into a TF (with another ship to help with the flooding) might allow the crew to deal with that smoldering fire in the toke room and then disband again.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 10642
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by PaxMondo »

I've had this before and yes I had to fiddle with the ship in and out of TF's. Eventually I have saved the ships.

If JWE was still around here, he would (likely) label it a memory leak issue and it may well be. I do know that since he brought that up that I no longer run AE with Tracker and Reporter both open and I haven't had the issue since. Prior, I had seen it maybe 3 times(?).

Pax
User avatar
guytipton41
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:01 am
Location: Houston, TX

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by guytipton41 »

Hi Folks,

I'll try putting her in a TF with an AD and see if that shakes something loose. Thanx for all the info.

Cheers,
Guy
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by Lowpe »

I have seen this before, & I believe Pax is correct...
User avatar
guytipton41
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:01 am
Location: Houston, TX

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by guytipton41 »

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

I've had this before and yes I had to fiddle with the ship in and out of TF's. Eventually I have saved the ships.

If JWE was still around here, he would (likely) label it a memory leak issue and it may well be. I do know that since he brought that up that I no longer run AE with Tracker and Reporter both open and I haven't had the issue since. Prior, I had seen it maybe 3 times(?).



Hi Pax,

Not using Tracker or Reporter this game. It's a Dec 8 Grand Campaign with Millersan as the allies. And he's damned aggressive - and lucky. A DMS out of PH sunk two AOs on Dec 11 after they spent two days refueling each other (120 NM per day?) as best I can tell. He claims he was just looking for subs.

Cheers,
Guy
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17648
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Burn baby burn

Post by John 3rd »

ORIGINAL: Revthought

Maybe use her to roast marshmallows? Or a good old fashioned fire ship. Light her ablaze and ram her into something. ;)

Sorry, all I can offer you are bad jokes.

Bet is one of those smoldering mattress fires!
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
Post Reply

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