Moved to another Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108p3 updated 10 July

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: michaelm

I think I will suppress these '0' lines where there are no current devices and no TOE level.

Not sure if this is relevant, but I remember a note from Andy Mac that he added 0 (zero) AV Support to help the AI move air groups around. They were not in the TOE ...

The suppression is only from the point of view of showing on the screen.

[BigDuke66]

Question regarding fog of war, any chance we don't always see the names of ships be torpedoed by the player or the names of the subs attacking the players ships?
Would be nice if it somehow works like the surface combat works, seems that there the some names come up after some time when the fight took a while and the distance got closer.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: viberpol

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Has anyone noticed anything strange with LCU device upgrades or replacements with latest beta?
I have a LCU with a funny list of devices that match their TOE but have about 6 more types of devices which aren't any part of the TOE. Don't even appear anywhere on the unit's TOE path as far as I can tell.
I think the sub-units were mixed up before they recombined to make the parent LCU as I have not really noticed any issues elsewhere.

Something weird like here?
This is the 51st Div. An example of several similar divisions in my PBEM.
AFAIK it has never been formed from groups/subunits & never divided and even though it partially upgraded
(notice the + along the first INF section and none next to the second one below).
Hard to say which is which but Tracker shows the first one is 710 ('43 squad) and second 707 (old one).

ORIGINAL: michaelm
I think I will suppress these '0' lines where there are no current devices and no TOE level.

What do you actually mean by "suppressing"? [&:]
Simply removing the additional lines without "paying up" with the standard equipment will result in great imbalance as those units will loose bulk of their AVs...
Only if empty? Maybe transfer the extra squads in form of standard equipment (based on TOE) in which case it would reset itself to default after some attrition?

EDIT: Here's the printscreen I was unable to upload last time.
As mentioned, I never (according to Tracker and my memory) split this division nor created from subunits.
It seems that some divisions upgraded only partially.
Some grew in stregth, but some lost the part of it's AV (see the 16th division that magically lost 300 APs couple of turns ago; save attached in the previous post).

Yes. There are actually two different IJ Squads in that unit. Can't see where the 707 device (with no upgrade specified) came from as the unit starts with 709 (upgrading to 710).

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: michaelm

I think I will suppress these '0' lines where there are no current devices and no TOE level.

Not sure if this is relevant, but I remember a note from Andy Mac that he added 0 (zero) AV Support to help the AI move air groups around. They were not in the TOE ...

The suppression is only from the point of view of showing on the screen.

Ach, gotcha. Thanks for clarifying!

Have a good one ...

[Halsey]

Your doing a great job of enhancing this system Michael.

Any way to do something about ships gaining some actual base level experience without combat?

Anything has to be better than it is now.[:D]

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Question regarding fog of war, any chance we don't always see the names of ships be torpedoed by the player or the names of the subs attacking the players ships?
Would be nice if it somehow works like the surface combat works, seems that there the some names come up after some time when the fight took a while and the distance got closer.

I agree it would be better FOW if many times there were no names, but just FYI quite often the names are wrong=FOW.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Question regarding fog of war, any chance we don't always see the names of ships be torpedoed by the player or the names of the subs attacking the players ships?
Would be nice if it somehow works like the surface combat works, seems that there the some names come up after some time when the fight took a while and the distance got closer.

I agree it would be better FOW if many times there were no names, but just FYI quite often the names are wrong=FOW.

I always just look at the names as being an instance of a class ... due to FOW ... the current system works pretty good for me ...

[BigDuke66]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Question regarding fog of war, any chance we don't always see the names of ships be torpedoed by the player or the names of the subs attacking the players ships?
Would be nice if it somehow works like the surface combat works, seems that there the some names come up after some time when the fight took a while and the distance got closer.

I agree it would be better FOW if many times there were no names, but just FYI quite often the names are wrong=FOW.

I always just look at the names as being an instance of a class ... due to FOW ... the current system works pretty good for me ...

Thanks, didn't know that.

But what about the enemy ships listed as sunk, their names are correct aren't they?

[oldman45]

ORIGINAL: Halsey

Your doing a great job of enhancing this system Michael.

Any way to do something about ships gaining some actual base level experience without combat?

Anything has to be better than it is now.[:D]

+1, I have ships on patrol (ASW) and it would be nice if they picked up expierence from drills or something.

[CaptDave]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Question regarding fog of war, any chance we don't always see the names of ships be torpedoed by the player or the names of the subs attacking the players ships?
Would be nice if it somehow works like the surface combat works, seems that there the some names come up after some time when the fight took a while and the distance got closer.

I agree it would be better FOW if many times there were no names, but just FYI quite often the names are wrong=FOW.

I always just look at the names as being an instance of a class ... due to FOW ... the current system works pretty good for me ...

It's actually pretty realistic to know at least the class of a ship, or something close. IRL the sub commanders needed this information to determine the ship's mast height so they could judge distances and speeds correctly (or let the TDC do it).

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: witpqs



I agree it would be better FOW if many times there were no names, but just FYI quite often the names are wrong=FOW.

I always just look at the names as being an instance of a class ... due to FOW ... the current system works pretty good for me ...

Thanks, didn't know that.

But what about the enemy ships listed as sunk, their names are correct aren't they?

No, FOW defintely prevails there. I get messages all the time about "CA Houston incorrectly declared sunk", particularly when you sink it the second time. [;)]

Even then, FOW is in play and it still might not be the Houston, but another in her class.

[BigDuke66]

Nice to hear, but how far goes this FoW?
I just had a lucky incident were a sub hit the Akagi with one torpedo some hexes off the coast of Japan and later it's listed as sunk near Osaka, so on what can I depend:
-A CV sunk
-Only a sunk ship of whatever type
-Or even nothing sunk at all

Sorry for hijacking the thread for my question, maybe the moderator should move this to a new thread.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Nice to hear, but how far goes this FoW?
I just had a lucky incident were a sub hit the Akagi with one torpedo some hexes off the coast of Japan and later it's listed as sunk near Osaka, so on what can I depend:
-A CV sunk
-Only a sunk ship of whatever type
-Or even nothing sunk at all

Sorry for hijacking the thread for my question, maybe the moderator should move this to a new thread.

All are possible. A ship may or may not be sunk and it may or may not be a carrier and it may or may not be a specific ship. You can depend on the data as much as a World War II commander could.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Nice to hear, but how far goes this FoW?
I just had a lucky incident were a sub hit the Akagi with one torpedo some hexes off the coast of Japan and later it's listed as sunk near Osaka, so on what can I depend:
-A CV sunk
-Only a sunk ship of whatever type
-Or even nothing sunk at all

Sorry for hijacking the thread for my question, maybe the moderator should move this to a new thread.

In addition to what Dan said: you can be pretty sure it wasn't the Big E that you hit. [:D]

Other than that, take it with a grain of salt. Particularly any mentioning of sinkings ...

[BigDuke66]

And I was so happy to revenge the loss of the Enterprise. [:(]

Well well I just can't stop asking:
Sunken ships have an impact on the score so when I may or may not have sunk something how trustful is score especially regarding the automatic victory calculation?

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

I also wonder if the centering on a base when clicking thru air units could also be changed, when I go thru TFs, LCUs or industry the screen isn't centering would be nice if that would work for air units too.

Which menu are you referring to? Can't seem to see any difference, but most likely haven't chosen your key sequence.[:D]

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

And I was so happy to revenge the loss of the Enterprise. [:(]

Well well I just can't stop asking:
Sunken ships have an impact on the score so when I may or may not have sunk something how trustful is score especially regarding the automatic victory calculation?

In a current AI test game I have going looking at Allied Ships sunk on the Info screen:

From the IJ side: 152 ships / 2885 VP's
From the Allied side: 230 ships / 3781 VP's

That's loading up the same save, just switching sides. So, the IJ has sunk a lot more ships (smaller ones) than they know about... almost 80 ships and 900 VP's. I can tell you that in the IJ op notes, that each turn one or two more allied ships are reported sunk from previous turns. So, this gap is closing ....

So, what you see on your info screen still has FOW ...

I think the FOW is more pronounced for IJ as their intel power is lower. But this is just my perception ...

[BigDuke66]

@PaxMondo
Thanks, really nice to see that FoW runs so deep.

@michaelm
Well simply mark a hex with a base and click thru the things lined up at the bottom, when I click on a TF, LCU or industry the screen isn't centering but when clicking on an air group the screen centers on the hex the unit is in.

[invernomuto]

Any ETA for the official patch? There will be some new beta or this version will become the official patch?
Thanks in advance,
bye.

[michaelm75au]

Beta updated - there are changes in this to better handle devices on LCUs. This will combine multiples in the list under one entry if below TOE, and/or add the excess back into the pool. Thus making them available to other units during the next turn.