Couple of little things I just noticed....

[Sardaukar]

1. Some of my incasion AP Transport TFs changed to Cargo TFs without my input...weird. Took me some time to figure out why my invasion didn't launch...

2. USMC's level bombers do attack subs as advertized in PWHints. Very nice, couple of B-25 groups just nailed few subs.

Cheers,

M.S.

[Capt. Harlock]

1. Some of my incasion AP Transport TFs changed to Cargo TFs without my input...weird. Took me some time to figure out why my invasion didn't launch...

My guess is that, even when everything is set to Human Control, the AI has a chance of taking command of some units. Not sure whether this is a bug or an "undocumented FOW feature" -- not that there's much difference. I have noticed in one of my games that the South Pacific HQ keeps taking over North Pacific units, causing LCU's to attack at bad odds, and ships to sail away from where they're needed. And yes, both HQ's are on Human Control.

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

My guess is that, even when everything is set to Human Control, the AI has a chance of taking command of some units. Not sure whether this is a bug or an "undocumented FOW feature" -- not that there's much difference. I have noticed in one of my games that the South Pacific HQ keeps taking over North Pacific units, causing LCU's to attack at bad odds, and ships to sail away from where they're needed. And yes, both HQ's are on Human Control.

I think you are right in that. And I found the hard way to check if there is newly arrived HQ around too...which are by default on computer control. Strangely dissapearing TFs and such before I realized they were hijacked by Computer Controlled HQs . Anyhow, nothing I cannot live with...I think that PacWar is just in right scale in complexity and management...it's *very* complex game, but it's still humanly manageable. I've played it about 8 years, and even recently finding a new things about it

Cheers,

M.S.

[ancient doctor]

Well from what i have heard in several war game forums GG games seem to have several undocumented features(or bugs?) incide that it might take time to find since they cant be seen when you are a newbie.For example mobody really knows what is the logic behind the CV's air group strenghts and how they change.I have seen a small mention in a rahter old document i found in the net but nothing more.Anyway as a Jap player i have never seen a LCU attack without my orders.I have seen LCU NOT ATTACKING when i say so but never the opposite.Since i play totall human control i have not experienced a HQ to take LCUs from me.
BTW is there any chance for a new patch?Even an unofficial one?I realise it might be difficult since War in the Pacific is out but i just want to ask.

[Capt. Harlock]

For example mobody really knows what is the logic behind the CV's air group strenghts and how they change.

To the best of my knowledge, the CV air group strengths are based on the historical records. The number and type of planes per carrier changed as lessons were learned, equipment was upgraded, and the war itself changed. For instance, there were four carrier-to-carrier battles in 1942, none in 1943, and one in 1944. (The IJN carriers in the Battle of Leyte Gulf were bait and could not launch a serious strike.) Unsurprisingly, there was a lot of emphasis on dive-bombers in the early part of the war, but from late 1944 on, fighter-bombers and torpedo bombers were found more useful. Another example, as I never seem to tire of expounding, is that the change from the F4F-3 Wildcat to the F4F-4 allowed about half again as many fighters to be stowed in the hangar deck, because the -4 model had folding wings.

[cgray]

Some of my invasion AP Transport TFs changed to Cargo TFs without my input...weird.

One possibility is that something altered the air zones of control for the hex that the transport task force was in (like stopping over in port). I've had this happen when sending supplies to bases that are "behind enemy lines" -- after arriving (and sometimes before unloading supplies, very annoying) the trasport groups change to cargo. Remember, just because you have air zones over a base, this does not mean the enemy does not. It is in these contested areas of air control where I've experienced this.

Also had it happen when the Allies tried to retake Midway. The allies landed at least five groups of infantry on Midway, and though the defenders held out and drove the allies back into the sea, I had no carriers in the area so the allied carriers dominated the air. All my ships at Midway (some in port, some in transport task forces) bolted. At first I thought they had been sunk ... YIKES! All were cargo task forces when I finally found them at Wake.

In my examples I would say it is an intended fog of war thing (local TF comander reinterprets the orders regarding how much risk to take or whatever). It is not that the AI is "taking over" control -- I can only act as a high level commander -- the AI acts the role of the fleet command down.

I found the hard way to check if there is newly arrived HQ around too...which are by default on computer control.

From my experience the HQ's are on Full Computer Control upon arrival only when you play historical first move option. But yours is still sound advice. And those extra Prepartion Points are always useful.

[cgray]

Had this "transport TF switches to cargo" thing happen again.
Invading Nauru in June 1942 (had other objectives I was after first) when it happened. The TF refusing to land was a CL, a set of two DD's, and the AP's. I attached a couple of CA's to the TF and it sailed in just fine after that. So I would guess it is a function primarily of flak strength and air cover.

These are the things I look to do when this happens.
1) More ground based air (especially fighters to knock out the enemey air cover).
2) Carrier based air power.
3) More Flak strength in transport TF.
4) Better leadership in transport TF.

Hope this helps.

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: cgray

Had this "transport TF switches to cargo" thing happen again.
Invading Nauru in June 1942 (had other objectives I was after first) when it happened. The TF refusing to land was a CL, a set of two DD's, and the AP's. I attached a couple of CA's to the TF and it sailed in just fine after that. So I would guess it is a function primarily of flak strength and air cover.

These are the things I look to do when this happens.
1) More ground based air (especially fighters to knock out the enemey air cover).
2) Carrier based air power.
3) More Flak strength in transport TF.
4) Better leadership in transport TF.

Hope this helps.

When it did happen to me last time I had 3 carrier TFs pounding the target island, and either Turner or Barbey (both quite good amphibious commanders, there are couple more too) commanding the TF. So I guess it was either the lack of Land Based Air or lack of Flak in TF that made it happen (they were in range of Betties, but those airbases were hit by other CV TFs to reduce them). Of course they might have just missed their roll on agressiveness..I remember that PPs were just fine for the TF.

Good discoveries, cgray !

Cheers,

M.S.

[deVada]

Hi Folks !
Transport type TFs are changed automatically to Cargo TF when division(s) attempts to take the base in failed amphibous assault and evacuates.
Large number of air attacks (even unsuccesfull) or presence of i.e. 15 "single destroyered" enemy surface combat TFs could prevent a landing pretty well.

Cargo task forces also tend to avoid enemy AZOCs so the only sure way to resupply besieged base is to send an Transport TF with ROS orders. Anyway, it might stop in the middle of sea if too many enemy AZOCs are crossing on the way.

Good luck !

[Capt. Harlock]

For the first year of the war, the aircraft factory making Fulmars seems to be stuck. My guess is that it's hard-wired to produce only Commonwealth carrier fighters, and the Fulmar is the only one of those until about February 1943. However, when the Spitfire V finally shows up, the Allied player can switch over. (And considering the Spitfire V costs more than the B-17, another factory sure helps!)

[Sardaukar]

Has anyone tried (as Japanese player, of course [:D]) to use G4M Hamaki/Betty units extensively in night combat ? Since during the daytime (after P-38, F4U and F6F have arrived in numbers) they tend to be dead meat against any CAP, providing mostly free victory points to Allied.
Do they attack shipping/Task Forces at nights ? That's the most useful role for them anyway...they are rarely suited for strategic bombing...

Cheers,

M.S.

[deVada]

Hi !
In our PBEM game with Graham (he is the Emperor and it is april of 1944) he tends to use G4M bombers on night combat missions. Their activity depends somehow of their experience, but so far they have managed to put one or two bomb hits on my carriers, so it isn't the way to victory (until Okhas will be developed) and I don't care much about that.

Anyway In circumstances of allied air superiority this is the only way to hope for score, unless allies will switch some of their CAP fighters to night combat too.

As I remember, if Japanese squadron is over 90% experience, it has the ability to perform night kamikaze attacks, and that could be the wunderwaffe !
[:)]