Matrix Games Forums

Land based units 5.2.3

Units embarked on transports in a TF do not show up on this screen. If the unit is partailly embarked then the part still ashore shows up.

- I want to know the current weather DURING the turn (after the orders phase, when all the AI goes down)

- I want to be able to transfer individual pilots to other squadrons ( in order to mix aces and greenhorns, or to create an elite squadron ).

- I want to see air post-sortie reports, it would help to know whether a squadron was grounded due to weather, or because they failed the morale check, or because the airfield was too damaged.

- I want to see tonnage sunk by individual submarines, hey fighterboys gets their tally. mariners should get too (any mariners for that matter)

- If you select a ship from the 'ship' screen you should be able to see where it's located.. maybe i'm retarded but i can't see this anywhere. This applies to Task forces too

e.g. I go to the TF list, to check on my many-many-many ASW TFs, and see that a couple are low on ASW ammo, so i want to see where they are so i can replace them with a second-line ASW TF. If i click the TF i can't see where it is, no highlights or anything - besides the report screen covers the hex board -- it should be movable -- So i can click "return to port" but now i have to spend 5 minutes going through my TFs on the map trying to figure out which TF i just sent home (i had 20 active ASW TFs at the time).

- You should be able to view ALL planned paths at once.. It's really annoying to try to schedule a rendez-vouz in the middle of an ocean having to memorize the Coordinates. A TF should have a red, thin, line from it's origin showing its intended path on the map even when NOT selected.

- The game should warn you if you overstock a carrier. AT LEAST if that carrier is in an Air Combat TF.

- This game SERIOUSLY needs a better reporting/information management system. OK blah blah realism FoW, but i'm a gamer with a life, i can't go from base to base to TF to TF figuring out what is running low on what etc.. I want a non-combat report sheet showing stuff like this:

7/12/44 : Palau requires more supplies
7/12/44 : Wake reports shortage of fuel
7/12/44 : TF1001 Is running low on fuel
7/12/44 : TF1011 Arrives at Pearl Harbor
7/12/44 : TF1102 Is almost out of AAA ammo
7/12/44 : Midway Airfield is understaffed.
7/12/44 : 113th USMC Bn reports planning complete for Tokyo
7/12/44 : SS Gato arrives at Wake, unloading supplies.

Then you should be able to click the name of the place or TF or whatever and it would jump there.

- An Air group should have a link to the carrier/AF it is stationed on. Currently it is in white, and you have to memorize and exit screen, then find the AF or TF etc.

- Same goes for ships and whatever.

- As a matter of fact, there should be a lot more "relationship links" on the info screens in this game.

- When i create a TF, i want to be able to FILTER between ships (you can only filter in the report screens).

- I want to be able to see a status listing similar to the TF listing one for individual ships. Where it shows Fuel, Ammo, Cargo, Skills, Damage etc etc. now i have to go find to the individual ship to figure this out.

- I want to be able to see more info on the TF info screen, similar to the TF listing. (as mentioned above).


For instance:
I want to form a TF with the best AAA boats, and the best ASW boats at a base.
- I go to the base, click "form new TF", select my mission, and done.
- Next screen i see the boats available, And i WANT to see their AAA, ASW, Main Gun, Ammo, etc. If i currently want to see this, i have to CANCEL my TF creation, go to the ship screen and memorize what ships are good and then start over.

- PERCENTAGE signs by numbers that represent a percentage, and other similarities

- Ability to see how much aviation support a ground unit contributes with.

- Ability to see how much aviation support a Plane Squadron requires

I think in the end, it all boils down to the report system and "relationship links".

I find it really hard to keep track of everything that's happening, even in the tutorial, and I think this can be enhanced.

People on the forums have talked about keeping paper notes, etc., but there was a useful feature that I remember from the Talonsoft Napoleonic series, which helped ensure that all the main action was responded to:
This was a proactive feature whereby a main event summary list would be presented before each orders phase. This list would detail important events such as units arriving at their destination, HQ units moving out of range of their subordinate units, units coming under attack, etc. There was then the ability to click on any indivdual item to be taken to that unit's order/status screen.

Whilst WitP does have control mechanisms built in, such as lists of naval, air, or ground units, they require the player to seek and activate them, or click on each unit's icon in each hex to find out about command status, supply status, morale status, etc. Even in the little tutorial I've missed a TF for a couple of turns that required attention, and it just becomes a bit of a drag - I can't imagine what the full campaign is like in terms of keeping on top of things!
The important event screen would automatically alert the player to TFs running out of endurance, or land units running out of supplies, etc.

Perhaps I'm missing the point of the game in terms of the attention to detail and proactivity required, or perhaps I've missed something in the manual, but I do feel it's a bit onerous in a game to have to assess each unit's health/progress myself. Commanding officers would normally be fed this information (whether it be enemy contact, low supplies, or whatever) by their subordinate units.

Just a thought - I believe it would increase the palayability of the game, especially for people like me, who have poor memories and for whom the idea of keeping paper notes for a computer game is an anathema!

R

8/23/2004 4:19:09 PM

In my opinion aircraft ASW missions are entirely too weak.(Historically the aircraft was the greatest threat to subs,and in WITP the planes only seem to attack maybe 1 out of every 20 sightings,and only hit maybe 1/10th of the attacks..(They don't even report subs as the "sighting!"..)
I would like to see these planes given more "beef" over subs,or just delegate a percentage of squadrons to do ASW missions rather than tie up whole squadrons on a near useless mission..[&:]

I completely agree with Mike Scholl's last post on chrome. Do not worry about chrome! Worry about fixing bugs that have been in the data storage system since PacWar.

Mike

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

The game rewards players for putting unrealistic numbers of ships into ASW TFs. To eliminate some of the gaminess that seems to be arising here, place a limit on the number of ships in a single ASW TF that may actually attack a submarine in a single action. More than a few (three or four?) ships prosecuting the same submarine contact would only get in each other's way....

Not a bad idea at all. And by increasing the number that can participate as the War
moves along you could reflect gradually increasing abilities as well. Count all the ASW
assets "defensively" (as in if a successful submarine attack is made), but limit the #
that can count offensively (as in sinking the sub). Could be a simple solution to both
sides mounting unrealistic "Hunter-Killer" groups in the early war.

I dont know if this has been posted but here is my idea :

Due to bad weather periods, plane missions are often canceld due to bad weather. Thats realistic and full OK.
But why I am able to re-base those planes to another base if they cant even fly a combat mission ?

the game should not allow relocating bases for an airgroup if the airfield has been cloes due to bad weather. ( making it more realistic ) bad weather is bad weahter, no matter what ind of mission you flew.

Poopi wrote:

" This game SERIOUSLY needs a better reporting/information management system...

Then you should be able to click the name of the place or TF or whatever and it would jump there."

Absolutely right! BIG second from me on this.

" This game SERIOUSLY needs a better reporting/information management system...

Then you should be able to click the name of the place or TF or whatever and it would jump there."

Absolutely right! BIG second from me on this.

I have UV and enjoy it, but apparently WitP didn't apparently improve the reporting/information mangement system even though the scale of the game dramatically increased. I wholeheartedly agree with this sediment.

Another information feature that would be beneficial would be to allow the player to set a threshold for various categories (supply, damage level, etc .....) and then have a report at the beginning of the turn identify units/bases that are below/above this threshold. Would make for an easier method of identifying situations that need to be addresses, rather than going through even single unit individually. If you added another layer of complexity, these units/bases could actually be highlighted on the map. With the above suggestion, one click away.

American withdrawal: I'd love to see withdrawal of US naval units along the lines of what is already in place with the Brits. In fact, for all my ignorance of game design and programming, I don't understand why this hasn't been implimented from the start; it doesn't seem materially different, and why shouldn't the USN give up units for Europe when the RN has to. I suspect GG et al already have the necessary data in their OOB files.

Even better would be tagging ground units for withdrawal, fx the USMC raider battalions got absorbed into the 6th marine division, the USMC defence battalions became artillery battalions ect.

Hi, this is about the in-game pop-up which appears when I hover the mouse over enemy bases/icons.
a) Identify enemy ground units with name in the pop-up box when identified:
Something like:

INF 23rd Rifle Div
INF 25th Rifle Div
INF unknown
ENG unknown
AA 23rd Heavy AA Rgt
25000 Infantry 400 Guns 200 Vehicles

Identification would be ripping off a badge from some dead soldier who has no further use for it.

b) Please add more intel on what type of planes are at a base:
Bombers what kind ?
Fighters brand new or obsolete ?
auxiliary ? Well what patrol or torpedobombers ?

Respectfully

I would like to be able to sort by country while I'm an allied player. This is mostly just for curiosity's sake; in fact, the one screen I'd find it most useful would be the "ships sunk" page.


It would also be interesting to have more variety in the aks and aps. I've actually found reference to a class of japanese ap that was armed with 6 inch guns [X(]. this one example would be very important in landings, but there are also references to some remarkably fast jap aps and aks; they would come in very handy throughout the game.


I also have an idea that might work on making China a little harder to knock out - what if there were "area activated" units - like the militia units jap recieves if the allies invade the indochina border hexes. These units would appear only if certain places were captured; if it worked out it would simulate the way the Japanese got more bogged down the further into china they went. (Then again, it might just create a supply drain on the allies.) Anyway, it's something to think about.


ps. and i'd like to add one more lobby for a screen that lists ground loses. [:)]

I'd like to see revised surface combat routines. Disengagement rules seem fine, but the combats seem to suffer from a problem of fixation on a couple of ships while the rest are left untouched...

I wrote this idea in another thread (tm.asp?m=704587&mpage=3)

The superior force should have something of a "pairing up" of targets, such ship targets this, such ship targets the other, etc, from most dangerous to less dangerous. Once the damage is clearly too much for a ship to stand, or the AI thinks so, the ship targetting it shifts fire to the next on the list. Historically many ships were left almost dead on the water to shift fire to more important and evident targets, even while they were not actually sinking at the moment...so this should cover it.

the inferior force should target mostly the most dangerous enemy assets, concentrating fire on them (was quite funny to see to of the japanese CAs firing at my cruisers, and one of them to one of my DDs while there were two full-size Battleships throwing 14 and 15 inch stuff all around the place!) with some random-dice-the-roll throws to see if they happen to fire at anything else instead (should be unlikely but could happen).

If both forces are equal, rules are like that of the superior force.

That way if you have superior ships you cover the whole enemy line with fire (which was the usual thing to do, because I agree that in very confusing combats like Savo Island each ship fired mostly at will, however that was a full feet engagement while in an attack against a convoy there should be no such heavy confusion), and shift targets when the targetted enemy is clearly dying or no longer a threat... which is my tho only major complaints about the surfacte combat routine at this moment, after this couple of combats.

If you are in disadvantage, your ships concentrate on the most dangerous enemy assets...if you have four CAs and you're fighting 2 BBs, all four should be firing at the big ships (unless the random dice says otherwise-but this should be rare)!!

Hi Guys,

How about we split this thread into separate parts Land, Air, Ship, Base and Production - this way it would be easier to keep on top of what has been suggested already.

1) Pilots - I would like to see us be able to create and disband squadrons at will. This should cost Political Points. The reason for this is that if you give us the ability to decide if Midway happens or not then you should give us control over the decisions that were made historicaly as a result of midway. This would also resolve the pilot training numbers issue giving both sides the ability to manage rear area training squadrons. Play balance would be maintained by PP. We have control over forming task forces - why not squadrons?

2 Squadron disbanding - I would like to see the ability to return pilots to the pool. Perhaps this could be limited to squadrons in the important bases.

Base information:

When you click the mouse on an enemy base (or dot), I'd like to see more than just the victory points and current build. I'd like to see if the base is an atoll, if it's temperate or malaria. In the case of a "dot" base, you can't see the SPS of it. That's probably the most important info to see. Why invade a dot of (0/0). but a dot of (3/3) is worth invading (especially if it's undefended)

(if there is a way to see this, I haven't figured it out)
bc

I don't know if it has been said, but I would like ships to have a fatigue rating like troops and A/C.

if not posted before...add to the Sunk Sips Screen the column Date of Sinking

hallo

mal ein Wunsch auf deutsch
im TaskForce Kampfscreen würde ich gerne selbst bestimmen
auf welche feindlichen Schiffe geschossen wird.
evtl. sollten Prioritäten angegeben werden, erst Zerstörer dann Transportschiffe angreifen oder so ähnlich.

WayPoints für eine TaskForce wären auch nicht schlecht, hat aber schonmal jemand geschrieben

gruss bayern

ORIGINAL: bayern

hallo

mal ein Wunsch auf deutsch
im TaskForce Kampfscreen würde ich gerne selbst bestimmen
auf welche feindlichen Schiffe geschossen wird.
evtl. sollten Prioritäten angegeben werden, erst Zerstörer dann Transportschiffe angreifen oder so ähnlich.

WayPoints für eine TaskForce wären auch nicht schlecht, hat aber schonmal jemand geschrieben

gruss bayern

Translation:
Hi
I´d like to choost what ships to attack in hte combat screen. Evtl there should be given priorities what ships to attack.
I´d also like to see waypoints for my TFs

ORIGINAL: rogueusmc

I don't know if it has been said, but I would like ships to have a fatigue rating like troops and A/C.

System damage takes care of this. Troops loaded onboard will become disrupted if they stay at sea too long.