yet more BB on carrier action!

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
dasboot1960
Posts: 437
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 1:38 pm
Location: St Augustine, Florida

RE: yet more BB on carrier action!

Post by dasboot1960 »

Hello Tazo - great discourse here - I think perhaps the situation you're describing may be a function of commander ratings+multiple day turns. IRL the commander has his orders, and performs them as he sees fit (hence all the scrambled eggs on his hat) In game terms a three day turn gives him that much more time left to his 'initiative'. While a one day turn give higher higher more influence (at a less a disastrous distance) - Just a thought - I accept your point that maybe the guy should be able to be forced to stay regardless, but I wonder about effects on the other end of the spectrum
Down like a CLOWN!
User avatar
Tazo
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:31 pm
Location: Toulouse, France

RE: yet more BB on carrier action!

Post by Tazo »


I just see the patch changes (didn't spot the thread after my connection tonight !) and the Tolerance new notion is GREAT ! [&o]
Exactly what was lacking to give more precise orders about what to do when facing opposition. I gonna test this immediatly because the alchimy between tolerance, FOW and leader agressiveness/skills will take a few experiment to learn ! But this is so great ! Many thanks to the dev ! [8D][8D][8D]

TZ
There is only two kinds of operational plans, good ones and bad ones.
The good ones almost always fail under unexpected circumstances that often make the bad ones succeed.
-- Napoléon.

With AE immortality is no more a curse.
-- A lucky man.
bradfordkay
Posts: 8579
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 8:39 am
Location: Olympia, WA

RE: yet more BB on carrier action!

Post by bradfordkay »

I'm concerned about the visual sighting range rule. I agree with the idea of witholding fire until you have ascertained the target, but once combat has commenced I see no reason not to use radar controlled gunnery once the range has increased beyond visual range. If the target was worthwhile when you were firing a few minutes ago, why should it not be a valid target now?
fair winds,
Brad
User avatar
Zebedee
Posts: 535
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 11:52 am

RE: yet more BB on carrier action!

Post by Zebedee »

41. Gameplay Change: The way that surface radar is used in naval combat has been modified as follows: Visual confirmation is now required before ships will open fire, meaning that ships must close to visual range first. Also, in situations where range is increasing, if it goes beyond visual range (factoring in Detection Level) fire ceases

The factoring in of the Detection Level would seem to be the key for when range starts increasing again, perhaps making it less clearcut than you suggest bradfordkay?
Image
Mike Scholl
Posts: 6187
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 1:17 am
Location: Kansas City, MO

RE: yet more BB on carrier action!

Post by Mike Scholl »

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

I'm concerned about the visual sighting range rule. I agree with the idea of witholding fire until you have ascertained the target, but once combat has commenced I see no reason not to use radar controlled gunnery once the range has increased beyond visual range. If the target was worthwhile when you were firing a few minutes ago, why should it not be a valid target now?


I think you will find "when" to be the key factor. The US wasn't really able to start taking advantage of radar for fire direction in action until 1943..., and at that time Japan started losing most surface actions at night.
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”