Okay..this might be some bad computing

[Zecke]

THANKS TO ERICK¡¡[&o]

FOR taking this surface attack seriously¡¡, because this result CANT BE DONE AGAIN, but i think wont find another combat with those results, in one of my games against the AI (1.4), playing as japan, a japan surface attack of 2 CLs and 4 DDs found a allies surface TF of 2 DDs at port moresby,(It was a bombardement surface, but the 2 bbs were sink by bettys, the AI rich port moresby with the 2 DDs left, and did the bombardement) , the result was that the japan TF couldnt not penatrate the armor of the DDs, the results were not catastrophics because the two allied DDs take off (after making the bombardement), but no hits penetration were on the allies DDs, the AI took tthe DDS like BBs,

The big problem here is that no ship can be hit by more than 100 and still firing, once a ship gets between 10-20 penetration hits is DEAD¡

THANKS AGAIN TO ERIK[&o]

[Captain Ed]

Can anyone tell me who was in command of these 2 TF`s I am trying to duplicate this battle as close as I can[:)]

[rroberson]

ORIGINAL: Captain Ed

Can anyone tell me who was in command of these 2 TF`s I am trying to duplicate this battle as close as I can[:)]

Ill take a look at that and send it to you when I get home if I still have the pre orders saved...(which Im sure I do).

[Ron Saueracker]

Another problem highlighted by this example is that some form of diminishing returns for flood and system damage (on weapons effectiveness) is missing. Weapons for some reason are not affected by things such as massive flooding which IRL, may mean a massive list, thereby hampering if not totally eliminating the ships ability to fire these weapons. Something like this would help in this case. This was brought up during UV but like the extra hit locations, was deemed too much work to incorporate at the stage of development the model was in.

[Captain Ed]

ORIGINAL: rroberson

ORIGINAL: Captain Ed

Can anyone tell me who was in command of these 2 TF`s I am trying to duplicate this battle as close as I can[:)]

Ill take a look at that and send it to you when I get home if I still have the pre orders saved...(which Im sure I do).

Thank You

[Wolfie1]

I haven't been able to reproduce anything as extreme, but the surface combat definitely seems to give some odd results, this one was a random load using the tutorial scn, day combat initial range 21000 - historically from what I know of Naval combat the BB's guns should have shredded the US CL's long before they could get into range but it ended up as a 9000 yard slogging match.

Day Time Surface Combat, near Satawal at 60,74

Japanese Ships
BB Kongo, Shell hits 10, on fire
BB Haruna, Shell hits 5
BB Nagato, Shell hits 5
DD Shimakaze, Shell hits 12, on fire, heavy damage
DD Akitsuki, Shell hits 11, on fire, heavy damage
DD Hatsuzuki, Shell hits 7, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD Wakazuki, Shell hits 5, on fire
DD Shimotsuki, Shell hits 10, on fire, heavy damage
DD Tamanami, Shell hits 4, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
CL St. Louis, Shell hits 9, on fire
CL Honolulu, Shell hits 15, on fire, heavy damage
DD Anthony, Shell hits 12, and is sunk
DD Aulick, Shell hits 3
DD Charles Ausburne, Shell hits 3
DD Charles Badger, Shell hits 2
DD Beale, Shell hits 1
DD Bell, Shell hits 8

Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree, but these results just don't feel right.

[rroberson]

ORIGINAL: Wolfie1

I haven't been able to reproduce anything as extreme, but the surface combat definitely seems to give some odd results, this one was a random load using the tutorial scn, day combat initial range 21000 - historically from what I know of Naval combat the BB's guns should have shredded the US CL's long before they could get into range but it ended up as a 9000 yard slogging match.

Day Time Surface Combat, near Satawal at 60,74

Japanese Ships
BB Kongo, Shell hits 10, on fire
BB Haruna, Shell hits 5
BB Nagato, Shell hits 5
DD Shimakaze, Shell hits 12, on fire, heavy damage
DD Akitsuki, Shell hits 11, on fire, heavy damage
DD Hatsuzuki, Shell hits 7, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD Wakazuki, Shell hits 5, on fire
DD Shimotsuki, Shell hits 10, on fire, heavy damage
DD Tamanami, Shell hits 4, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
CL St. Louis, Shell hits 9, on fire
CL Honolulu, Shell hits 15, on fire, heavy damage
DD Anthony, Shell hits 12, and is sunk
DD Aulick, Shell hits 3
DD Charles Ausburne, Shell hits 3
DD Charles Badger, Shell hits 2
DD Beale, Shell hits 1
DD Bell, Shell hits 8

Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree, but these results just don't feel right.

Not in the early war. Japanese destroyers and surface groups should...ahem....own the allies...I also dont see any torpedo hits on the allied ships...a sure sign of trouble.

[Halsey]

In all the turns I've played, I've never seens anything like this. So because of one instance this is going to get an examination?

What about known issues getting the same treatment.
ASW attack routine.
New naval air seach routine.
AI supply movement.
CAP coordination.
Eng delberate attack routine.

Or should I be blaming Ron, instead of GG and his preconceived assumption on how the Pacific War should be.[;)]

[Mr.Frag]

Here's what I get running this puppy: (based on ending Allied turn and running Japan)

Day Time Surface Combat, near Balikpapan at 31,64


Allied aircraft
no flights


Allied aircraft losses
SOC-3 Seagull: 9 destroyed

Japanese Ships
CS Chiyoda
BB Nagato, Shell hits 28, on fire
BB Mutsu, Shell hits 6
BB Fuso, Shell hits 8
BB Yamashiro, Shell hits 8
BB Ise, Shell hits 8
BB Hyuga, Shell hits 7
DD Mikazuki
DD Sawakaze, Shell hits 3, on fire
DD Yakaze, Shell hits 14, and is sunk
DD Yukaze, Shell hits 10, on fire, heavy damage
DD Wakatake, Shell hits 11, and is sunk
DD Kuretake, Shell hits 1
DD Sanae, Shell hits 4, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
CL Marblehead, Shell hits 78, and is sunk
CL Boise, Shell hits 64, and is sunk
DD Barker, Shell hits 25, and is sunk
DD Bulmer, Shell hits 4, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Paul Jones, Shell hits 16, and is sunk
DD Parrott, Shell hits 13, and is sunk
DD Stewart, Shell hits 26, and is sunk

Based on what I saw, I would suspect the BB's had already blown most of their ammo loadout before showing up which really makes them CL's with lots of armor. Even then, as you see above looking at the ship damage levels, there was only 1 real hit from the Allies that caused any real damage.

I'd suggest you guys make a copy of your saves and reinstall in case you have something glitched.

[scout1]

This game does not present historical results thanks to the fanboyism of those damn betas.

Interesting quote from the Moderator [;)]

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: Halsey
In all the turns I've played, I've never seens anything like this. So because of one instance this is going to get an examination?

The remote chance that it was not a rare occurrence is what got it a look, since having all surface combat screwed up when CLs are involved is a pretty major issue. So far, in my testing and in Frag's testing with the saves provided by Nomad and Rob, we get normal results, nothing like what they saw. Unless we can duplicate, we will have to mark it down to some kind of freak occurrence or some corruption in either of the players' installation.

What about known issues getting the same treatment.
ASW attack routine.
New naval air seach routine.
AI supply movement.
CAP coordination.
Eng delberate attack routine.

I'll let Frag or Mike respond to these, I'm not sure where each issue stands (examined, duplicated, scheduled for a tweak, etc.). I can say that adding the upgrades feature consumed a LOT of time in all areas, so I wouldn't be surprised if more fixes had made it into 1.5 had that not been a top request.

Or should I be blaming Ron, instead of GG and his preconceived assumption on how the Pacific War should be.[;)]

Personally, I'd rather not make any of this about Gary or Ron or anything like that. Everyone has an opinion and certain assumptions about how the war should be and how any game should be designed.

The game stands as a benchmark that has not been surpassed and both testers and fans (and detractors [;)]) have made contributions since release that have improved it. We appreciate everyone's effort and involvement in this project. War in the Pacific will continue to improve, but the process for a game of this complexity of getting past individual reports to actually duplicate reported issues, confirm that they are system flaws rather than player mistakes, make adjustments and test them enough to make sure they create no new problems is grueling and at times overwhelming to all involved. There's a reason why very few games of this complexity are made and also why it takes more time than expected to make adjustments, tweaks and fixes.

War in the Pacific was released in July of 2004 and the list of fixes and player requested new features has been constantly growing. I've personally played three years of the campaign and countless small scenarios without any major issues and with a lot of fun, as have many, many other players. While some issues do remain and each new update always adds a few new ones while fixing a few dozen, looking at the forest instead of the trees things look pretty good. I can't really compare this to anyone else's title because there's nothing else out there like this. Some of the huge publishers and development studios create games that are in their way far more complex, but they also have dozens if not hundreds of people on the team whereas we have only a few.

The most valuable input for us, the testing team and Mike is based on hard facts. Quantifiable comparisons, repeatable save files with instructions and so on make the process of improvement possible. While we do listen to general impressions and anecdotes, it's difficult to act on such reports precisely within such a large and complex simulation without having precise information.

Regards,

- Erik

[rroberson]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Here's what I get running this puppy: (based on ending Allied turn and running Japan)

Day Time Surface Combat, near Balikpapan at 31,64


Allied aircraft
no flights


Allied aircraft losses
SOC-3 Seagull: 9 destroyed

Japanese Ships
CS Chiyoda
BB Nagato, Shell hits 28, on fire
BB Mutsu, Shell hits 6
BB Fuso, Shell hits 8
BB Yamashiro, Shell hits 8
BB Ise, Shell hits 8
BB Hyuga, Shell hits 7
DD Mikazuki
DD Sawakaze, Shell hits 3, on fire
DD Yakaze, Shell hits 14, and is sunk
DD Yukaze, Shell hits 10, on fire, heavy damage
DD Wakatake, Shell hits 11, and is sunk
DD Kuretake, Shell hits 1
DD Sanae, Shell hits 4, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
CL Marblehead, Shell hits 78, and is sunk
CL Boise, Shell hits 64, and is sunk
DD Barker, Shell hits 25, and is sunk
DD Bulmer, Shell hits 4, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Paul Jones, Shell hits 16, and is sunk
DD Parrott, Shell hits 13, and is sunk
DD Stewart, Shell hits 26, and is sunk

Based on what I saw, I would suspect the BB's had already blown most of their ammo loadout before showing up which really makes them CL's with lots of armor. Even then, as you see above looking at the ship damage levels, there was only 1 real hit from the Allies that caused any real damage.

I'd suggest you guys make a copy of your saves and reinstall in case you have something glitched.

okay

I will do a clean install tonite (wipe, install, patch). And restart with Nomad. Thanks...like I said I have been learly of playing anything because of this.

That battle group had expended one night's of ammo prior to its battle with Nomad (they hit a US airbase enroute with a bombardment).

[rroberson]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

ORIGINAL: Halsey
In all the turns I've played, I've never seens anything like this. So because of one instance this is going to get an examination?

The remote chance that it was not a rare occurrence is what got it a look, since having all surface combat screwed up when CLs are involved is a pretty major issue. So far, in my testing and in Frag's testing with the saves provided by Nomad and Rob, we get normal results, nothing like what they saw. Unless we can duplicate, we will have to mark it down to some kind of freak occurrence or some corruption in either of the players' installation.

What about known issues getting the same treatment.
ASW attack routine.
New naval air seach routine.
AI supply movement.
CAP coordination.
Eng delberate attack routine.

I'll let Frag or Mike respond to these, I'm not sure where each issue stands (examined, duplicated, scheduled for a tweak, etc.). I can say that adding the upgrades feature consumed a LOT of time in all areas, so I wouldn't be surprised if more fixes had made it into 1.5 had that not been a top request.

Or should I be blaming Ron, instead of GG and his preconceived assumption on how the Pacific War should be.[;)]

Personally, I'd rather not make any of this about Gary or Ron or anything like that. Everyone has an opinion and certain assumptions about how the war should be and how any game should be designed.

The game stands as a benchmark that has not been surpassed and both testers and fans (and detractors [;)]) have made contributions since release that have improved it. We appreciate everyone's effort and involvement in this project. War in the Pacific will continue to improve, but the process for a game of this complexity of getting past individual reports to actually duplicate reported issues, confirm that they are system flaws rather than player mistakes, make adjustments and test them enough to make sure they create no new problems is grueling and at times overwhelming to all involved. There's a reason why very few games of this complexity are made and also why it takes more time than expected to make adjustments, tweaks and fixes.

War in the Pacific was released in July of 2004 and the list of fixes and player requested new features has been constantly growing. I've personally played three years of the campaign and countless small scenarios without any major issues and with a lot of fun, as have many, many other players. While some issues do remain and each new update always adds a few new ones while fixing a few dozen, looking at the forest instead of the trees things look pretty good. I can't really compare this to anyone else's title because there's nothing else out there like this. Some of the huge publishers and development studios create games that are in their way far more complex, but they also have dozens if not hundreds of people on the team whereas we have only a few.

The most valuable input for us, the testing team and Mike is based on hard facts. Quantifiable comparisons, repeatable save files with instructions and so on make the process of improvement possible. While we do listen to general impressions and anecdotes, it's difficult to act on such reports precisely within such a large and complex simulation without having precise information.

Regards,

- Erik

Well I hope you don't consider me a detractor [:)]

I still think this is best strategic wargame (and the game of my dreams) I have ever played.

If I never play another turn (fat chance) I have already more then gotten my money's worth out of her. My reasoning for pointing this extreme event out ...is like that carrier issue I had last year...I want to make sure all the gliches are out of WITP so me and the rest of its fanbase can continue to play it in the years to come...

Thanks again for your time and quick action...IM going to take Frag's suggestion of reinstalling the game...and twisting Nomad's arm to restart a new 1.5 game...

[Nomad]

Question for you Frag, how many rounds did you see? When we ran it we both saw about 40 or more rounds of combat.

The allied TF was commanded by the captain of either the Boise or Marblehead. I am not sure which one, but it makes little difference I think.

[Halsey]

Wasn't trying to start anything.
Just wondered how a one shot episode get's a special treatment.[;)]

[Mr.Frag]

Question for you Frag, how many rounds did you see? When we ran it we both saw about 40 or more rounds of combat.

Lots of rounds, brought about by the poor Allied boys having nowhere to retire to, but nothing on the order of 40. Perhaps that's what happened, it got stuck and just kept cycling until everything was sunk.

If you both want to mail me your wp.prfs file so I can take a look through them for anything odd.

Well I hope you don't consider me a detractor

Certainly not Rob, you are an object lesson in how to learn from your mistakes and get better. Don't think anyone will top the number of creative ways you have invented to loose your cvs [;)]

[rroberson]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Certainly not Rob, you are an object lesson in how to learn from your mistakes and get better. Don't think anyone will top the number of creative ways you have invented to loose your cvs [;)]

I'm nothing if not entertaining [:'(]

[Captain Ed]

Admiral Halsey settles into his cabin onboard the USS Boise,
contemplating what twist of fate brought him to this backwater port called Balikpapan to take command of this dimintutive force of Cruiser`s and Destroyer`s he really thought that practical joke back in Annapolis had been forgotten. Well might as well make the most of it. It seems the war has stopped since he arrived not really sure what is expected of him well maybe tomorrow will be better.[8D]

[Captain Ed]

Capt Tanaka has retired to his cabin on board the Nagato penning a letter to his wife. He wonders why the Emperor himself chose him for this mission over so many other capable commanders to put such a powerful force of Battleships under him was an honor he hope`s to justify. Tomorrow perhaps will be the day of his destiny if only the Gods will look favorably on him, he knows not what he faces. He lights a candle on the small shrine next to his table and retires for the night.[8D]

[Captain Ed]

The morning brings shouts of ships spotted Halsey leaps out of bed having had one to many bourbon`s the night before and rushes to the bridge. His exec hands him a coffee
and calmly say`s looks like were in for a bad day Admiral.
The enemy was at 22000 yards when the first shells arrived incredibly accurate the range began dropping 19000, 15000, 12000, all the while a furious exchange of gunfire.
The Admiral ordered torpedoes at 8000 yards but by then most of his ships were burning wrecks nonetheless the Nagato was struck by a torpedoand the Fuso also took one. The range began to open 13000 18000 25000 the enemy appeared to be retiring meanwhile the admiral noticed water lapping at his slippers and decided to transfer his flag to the Marbelhead just as she was hit by a flurry of 14 and 16 inch shells from 31000 yards a parting salvoe from the enemy doomed his last command.