Matrix Games Forums

[Deleted by Admins]

I agree. More people in the game equals more funds. Program it in such a way, that micromanagement still pays off.

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Basically, I think I would want the ability to simply be able to play the game more quickly, by helping me focus on the decisions I need to make, as opposed to micromanaging every variable that goes into those decisions.

And that is an entirely different game.

Why? Any game is a matter of simply moving the slider in one direction or the other. No reason that there can't be some things done to make the game more accessible to people who don't have unlimited time to put into it.

The two things I would ask for is no slots in the databases, open ended relational databases, and little or no hard coded data, put the data in the scenario files so it is available to be moded.

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

The two things I would ask for is no slots in the databases, open ended relational databases, and little or no hard coded data, put the data in the scenario files so it is available to be moded.

+1 for anti hardcoding. Modding friendly and quite easy to do. Currently, I have as little hardcoded as restricting kamikaze to Japan.

For a hyperlinked status report indicating things that need attention, what things should be in the report?
Surely idle task forces, LCUs in move mode without movement and bases low on supply.
Anything else?

ORIGINAL: RichardAckermann

For a hyperlinked status report indicating things that need attention, what things should be in the report?
Surely idle task forces, LCUs in move mode without movement and bases low on supply.
Anything else?

Enemy sightings, collisions, groundings, out of fuel, your own subs sighted, units in Strat mode with no destination or not loading on a ship. Air units that lost an aircraft or pilot last turn. Bases reaching max build-out of AF or Port (to decide whether to move construction units).

Here's a rough idea for pilot training: Set levels that you want pilots to reach and let the system automatically spit out pilots into reserves (I see LST brought this up already--here are more details). For instance, here are some possible settings:

USAAF
Pilot Profile 1: 40%; EXP 60, AIR 70, DEF 70 (standard fighter pilot; it would put 40% of pilots in training to achieve those skill levels; once achieved, they'd be put into the reserve pile)
Pilot Profile 2: 20%; EXP 60, Ground Bombing 70, DEF 70 (standard 2E or 4E bomber pilot)
Pilot Profile 3: 15%; EXP 60, Low Nav 70, DEF 70 (standard 2E skip-bombing pilot)
Pilot Profile 4: 5%; EXP 50; Recon 70 (standard recon pilot)
Etc.

Squadrons would be assigned as "TRACOM" or "regular" by the player ("regular" squadrons could still be set to training as in the current game), and the more squadrons assigned to TRACOM and the more 80 EXP pilots in TRACOM, the faster pilots get trained.

Good luck Mr. Ackermann's friend. I wish you great success in this endeavor.

Cheers,
CC

Automated pilot training was one of the first things I added, though in a more simple fashion.
Every airgroup can have a "Trainer" value set that kicks out pilots reaching the specified skill at the mission being done or trained.
This allows for active squadrons that release any expert pilots that are "produced". Together with auto replacements this works well to reduce the klickfest.
All my backarea squadrons release pilots at skill 70, so they generate a steady stream of good pilots while doing combat.
The AI also makes use of this method for rear area units.

ORIGINAL: RichardAckermann

Automated pilot training was one of the first things I added, though in a more simple fashion.
Every airgroup can have a "Trainer" value set that kicks out pilots reaching the specified skill at the mission being done or trained.
This allows for active squadrons that release any expert pilots that are "produced". Together with auto replacements this works well to reduce the klickfest.
All my backarea squadrons release pilots at skill 70, so they generate a steady stream of good pilots while doing combat.
The AI also makes use of this method for rear area units.

Excellent. Can't wait to try this.

Cheers,
CC

As the game exists, pilot training is overemphasized: sorry to be especially critical of the "Zoomies" but Naval Search means mostly that the pilot looks out the windows of his aircraft at the same time as he flies the plane, sorta like one would do when one drives a car. Meanwhile the experience of the 2000 men on an aircraft carrier or the 15000 men in an infantry division to perform myriad of completely different tasks is summarized in one experience value.

A more expansive "crew" training model in various tasks should be included for both land and naval units.

ORIGINAL: RichardAckermann

Automated pilot training was one of the first things I added, though in a more simple fashion.
Every airgroup can have a "Trainer" value set that kicks out pilots reaching the specified skill at the mission being done or trained.
This allows for active squadrons that release any expert pilots that are "produced". Together with auto replacements this works well to reduce the klickfest.
All my backarea squadrons release pilots at skill 70, so they generate a steady stream of good pilots while doing combat.
The AI also makes use of this method for rear area units.

If you are going to make pilot training realistic, you need to build in the significant casualty rates for both pilots and aircraft, plus the loss of new trainees who were scrubbed from the program because they could not progress satisfactorily. I should add that I am not sure if those things were/were not abstracted into the pilot and aircraft numbers provided with the base game.

I guess the AC losses are covered with the HI cost for pilot training. After all, some of the japanese AC appearing late in the war are pre-war training craft that "should" be ready for production right away. So since this is handled "offmap", the losses are probably factored into the cost.

I picture an in-game animated aide-de-campe. A 3d avatar with simple facial animation like this [:-]. Let's call it Alfred. Appears as a dynamic manual-tooltip-popup box combo, chanelling forum's inner knowledge and search-fu directly into the game.

ORIGINAL: Yaab

I picture an in-game animated aide-de-campe. A 3d avatar with simple facial animation like this [:-]. Let's call it Alfred. Appears as a dynamic manual-tooltip-popup box combo, chanelling forum's inner knowledge and search-fu directly into the game.

Yeah, and make it to occasionally produce a simple "Yes" and "No" statements based on your actions...

ORIGINAL: Barb

ORIGINAL: Yaab

I picture an in-game animated aide-de-campe. A 3d avatar with simple facial animation like this [:-]. Let's call it Alfred. Appears as a dynamic manual-tooltip-popup box combo, chanelling forum's inner knowledge and search-fu directly into the game.

Yeah, and make it to occasionally produce a simple "Yes" and "No" statements based on your actions...

And an 'Ask Alfred' button on every screen. [:D]

Would give an "out of memory" message every time on loading the game - no matter how much memory you have....

1. I want alternative scenario, where ships can be built not historically, but as i wanted. For example, like in game: Supremacy at Sea - WWII (any design, displacement, guns, speed, planes, etc.)
2. Alternative scenario where you can choose Allie for me, for example I want to create mod, where Japan and USSR are allies at start of war against Allies!

3. Add new TF Raider mission (BC, AMC, CL only 1 ship in TF). This TF can capture merchants ships and send to home.

4. Add filter for Pilots in pool: Light Bombers, Medium Bombers, Heavy Bombers. For Navy and Army. Same filter for Pilots of seaplane and flying boats

5. Possibility to build railways and roadways (long and expensive, but possible)

6. Possibility search device, radars, guns like planes

7. AS must also refuel and reammo SS

8. More variaties conversion of ships.

9. and many ideas, but these are only dreams...

Better AI

I for one get sick of seeing Air combat TF's with 1 CV and two DD's sailing into the teeth of enemy LBA and constantly getting destroyed.

I'd be happy if WITP-AE was just updated with better AI

ORIGINAL: trojan58

Better AI

I for one get sick of seeing Air combat TF's with 1 CV and two DD's sailing into the teeth of enemy LBA and constantly getting destroyed.

I'd be happy if WITP-AE was just updated with better AI

This is the single most difficult thing to implement, ever and forever