Admirals Edition Naval Thread

[DuckofTindalos]

[:D]

[Brady]

I know the Japanese Built some during the war in SE Asia (Drydocks), I have a passage or two in a book about the real story regarding the bridge on the river Kuie, so of the work gangs had to "dig" one out in Indochina for a bit...

[Brady]

Do subs still shoot their entire load at any one ship or has a more realisitc aproach been worked out?

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: Knavey

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Naval bombardment? We all know, and hate, the fact that you can run BBs back and forth between bases and targets and generally blast an enemy base into oblivion with your BBs.

1) Will there be some sort of limit on where a BB (or indeed any capital ship) can resupply ammunition? It is rather ludicrous to think that a tiny island in the middle of the pacific should happen to have thousands of 16 inch shells just laying there waiting for a BB to come by and reload. Can we make "capital ship ammo" something scarce, like torpedos now perhaps...that can only be reloaded in the presence of an AE, or at a level 6 port?

2) Will shore bombardment be changed?

1) Ship resupply is being refurbished for increased realism.

2) Yes, shore bombardment has been (and is being) reworked, to hopefully make it a bit more realistic. The day of the nuclear shore bombardment is over and done with.

Plus, armed landing craft now work, and we're using the shore bombardment screen.[:D]

You know what really sucks about the change above! As an long time Allied player, I will never get to capitalize on it the old way! I have put up with nukes for years, and am just now getting to the point I could force a couple for the Allies side.

Oh well...

You've got a little while to do that yet...

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: Brady

Do subs still shoot their entire load at any one ship or has a more realisitc aproach been worked out?

That's still being worked on...

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: Brady

I know the Japanese Built some during the war in SE Asia (Drydocks), I have a passage or two in a book about the real story regarding the bridge on the river Kuie, so of the work gangs had to "dig" one out in Indochina for a bit...

But none that qualify as ARD's...

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: Brady
Also some ship types that could carry and deploy mines in the stock WiTP game could not preform this function, is this now posable? a Dual mishion type? Japanese CS class's for emample can they lay mines? or Suport midget's, and or carry float planes?

Without getting into detail, the general answer to your question(s) is yes.

A lot of attention has been paid to capturing the operational peculiarities of the IJN, especially as regards the multi-mission roles of its various combatants. The roles in which a vessel may participate, are no longer mutually exclusive, or based on a vessel’s primary ‘type’.

[Brady]

Ya I have never read anything about a Japanese mobile floating dry dock, thats not to say their was non. but, I would be suprised to find they had such a thing, the Allies did not have axcess to ship yards the way the way Japan did, she was comparatively closer to port on the whole.

[Captain Cruft]

JWE that's great, and something I long wished for.

[JamesM]

What changes are there going t be made to the automatic convoy system?  

Because it sometimes did some very dumb moves by sending convoys through enemy territory.  Also it only sends minimal quantities of supplies to each base and would choose ships with highish levels of damaged (18+).

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: BigJ62

Will there be any sharks in the game?

Naw, they'll stay in the forum.

[Brady]

JWE, TY thats just great[:)]

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: jamesm
What changes are there going t be made to the automatic convoy system?  

Because it sometimes did some very dumb moves by sending convoys through enemy territory.  Also it only sends minimal quantities of supplies to each base and would choose ships with highish levels of damaged (18+).

Many player's issues with the auto-convoy system are recognized and being addressed

Auto-convoys won't be commanded by Kent Hewitt, however, and will remain almost as dumb as me. We have tried to insure, however, that a SFO to Singapore convoy won't be routed through the Shimonoseki Straight, for example.

[Skyros]

Not sure if this is an ard but this comes from a trom on combined fleet.com.

http://www.combinedfleet.com/PB-108_t.htm


IJN Patrol Boat No. 108:
Tabular Record of Movement
© 2007 Bob Hackett, Sander Kingsepp and Peter Cundall


Late November to 3 December 1944:
Drydocked at No. 1 Floating Dock in Surabaya.

[DuckofTindalos]

It's not a mobile one, which is one an ARD is.

[Captain Cruft]

So it would just be considered as part of the repair shipyard at Soerabaja.

[DuckofTindalos]

I suppose it could be...

[MineSweeper]

Any chance that there will be more info on the sunk ship list @ date sunk or maybe what ship sunk it ?

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: MineSweeper

Any chance that there will be more info on the sunk ship list @ date sunk or maybe what ship sunk it ?

No. The problem is space on the list. We can't squeeze more text into those boxes.

(I seem to have seen this before today. Sorry I missed it, Minesweeper; been a little busy...)

[Akos Gergely]

1. Do you include some never-were ships by default into the OOB? Or at least please leave some space in the device list group to later add in somem ore naval guns etc...

2. Are CV attack numbers toned down a bit (sortie points or what it's called at the moment - so it really is ahistorical when a CV group can pound a base for days and also when a CV can launch it's VT squad for uncounted torp attacks, when in reality most CVs did not have in stock more than 36 fishes.)

3. Do you separate between warship and merchant/aux ship durability/strength? Now sometimes mercahnts are surprisingly difficult to sink, though in reality they have no real damage control etc...

4. Would surface combat reaction work a bit better to further enhance mid ocean surface combat? ALso what about air combat TF reaction?