Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

If you like your subs sitting in enemy held ports getting bombed/depthcharged, then by all means turn on "Computer control" for your subs.  Every time I tried that in WitP, the subs headed right for a port and sat there.  Don't know if that was fixed in AE and haven't tried it to find out.

I suppose, if all else fails, that you could try AE before you comment on it.

Guess John meant while he´s playing AE he hasn´t tried to use his subs on auto ops. I haven´t tried subs on auto ops either and I won´t as IMO a human being will always be better in handling the subs than an AI routine, no matter how much improved it has been. Please don´t take this as an offense Don.

You are right, I should have said " you could try it in AE"

ORIGINAL: ChickenOfTheSea


I'm trying to figure out when "long before you came along" was with respect to Don Bowen.

No kidding.

ORIGINAL: dereck

If it would be set up where ships repaired their own damage (which ANYBODY who served on a sjip knows they could and did) any damage other than major damage could be repaired at sea and there would be no need for this unrealistic hypocracy.

IIRC Ships do repair stuff at sea....so perhaps just maybe ...all your at-sea repair stores have been used up in continuous repairs that you don't see since they occur during the turn, trying to keep your Sys below 5.

So by the time you reach an end of turn where your Sys remains a 5, the Capt. decides it time to return home to refit.

Or of course I guess that requires people to use their imagination too much.[8|]

Seems like a potentially good feature but 5 sys is too low to trigger an automatic response. I rarely operate ships over 5 but sometimes it's necessary. 10 would be a better number to justify a TF disregarding orders from above.

ORIGINAL: mjk428

Seems like a potentially good feature but 5 sys is too low to trigger an automatic response. I rarely operate ships over 5 but sometimes it's necessary. 10 would be a better number to justify a TF disregarding orders from above.

It actually is 10. The TF is probably returning due to float damage.

Zomg ze game iz br0ken !!!!!!!

ORIGINAL: ChickenOfTheSea

ORIGINAL: Who Cares

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

We just can't please everyone nor can we make everything an option.

Actually it already IS an option and has been long before you came along. It's called "auto sub ops". People that find it too difficult to click the "show all ships" icon at the top and then sort this by damage shouldn't be the ones that make YOUR policy for you or rather they shouldn't be the ones YOU try to please.

I'm trying to figure out when "long before you came along" was with respect to Don Bowen.

If you don't want the computer to make these decisions for you, just do them manually. Use waypoints or direct them each turn or whatever. That was the only option in WITP and that option is still available in AE. Then you can continue your patrols no matter how much damage or how little fuel until your ships sink, if that is what you really want.

Allow me to clarify: "long before you came along" refers to Don as a programmer on this project, meaning the original game by 2x3. Things that were there before he started changing the code.

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: Who Cares

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

We just can't please everyone nor can we make everything an option.

Actually it already IS an option and has been long before you came along. It's called "auto sub ops". People that find it too difficult to click the "show all ships" icon at the top and then sort this by damage shouldn't be the ones that make YOUR policy for you or rather they shouldn't be the ones YOU try to please.

I've read this several times and I'm still not sure what you are trying to say.

Allow me to clarify then. You said "We just can't please everyone nor can we make everything an option." in reference to this:

The way you wish it was is the way it originally was. It was changed because players complained about having to monitor their patrol TFs.

To which I responded:

People that find it too difficult to click the "show all ships" icon at the top and then sort this by damage shouldn't be the ones that make YOUR policy for you or rather they shouldn't be the ones YOU try to please.

Now what this means is simply you added a lot of code to "decide" when TFs should break off and go home, when a TF should go into port, where a TF should go after it breaks off simply because (to use your words), "players complained about having to monitor their patrol TFs". Now frankly if a person doesn't have the ability to do something as simple as clicking the "show ships" icon and then click the "sys" heading at the top to sort the ships by damage (2 total clicks per game turn) I fail to see why you felt the need to bow before these people and put in a lot of code just to please them. And frankly, I have NEVER seen anyone say this was a good thing and am curious as to who "these players" are.

Further I submit it is actually harder to monitor ones patrol TFs under this system.

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

If you like your subs sitting in enemy held ports getting bombed/depthcharged, then by all means turn on "Computer control" for your subs.  Every time I tried that in WitP, the subs headed right for a port and sat there.  Don't know if that was fixed in AE and haven't tried it to find out.

I suppose, if all else fails, that you could try AE before you comment on it.

Right, Don; I've only been playing AE since December so obviously I know nothing at all about it. I did have some subs on Computer Control early on; they headed for Hong Kong and Khota Bharu just like they did in WitP. Now maybe one of the patches fixed that, but I'm not really interested in finding out and like Castor, feel I can position my subs better than the computer can anyway.

These weren't computer control ships. They were ships on patrol.

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: mjk428

Seems like a potentially good feature but 5 sys is too low to trigger an automatic response. I rarely operate ships over 5 but sometimes it's necessary. 10 would be a better number to justify a TF disregarding orders from above.

It actually is 10. The TF is probably returning due to float damage.

Well, I just checked and found many patroling TFs with SYS between 5 and 9. And one happily patroling along with SYS damage of 17 and ENG damage of 2! [X(]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: mjk428

Seems like a potentially good feature but 5 sys is too low to trigger an automatic response. I rarely operate ships over 5 but sometimes it's necessary. 10 would be a better number to justify a TF disregarding orders from above.

It actually is 10. The TF is probably returning due to float damage.

Excellent!

Thanks.

ORIGINAL: pompack

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: mjk428

Seems like a potentially good feature but 5 sys is too low to trigger an automatic response. I rarely operate ships over 5 but sometimes it's necessary. 10 would be a better number to justify a TF disregarding orders from above.

It actually is 10. The TF is probably returning due to float damage.

Well, I just checked and found many patroling TFs with SYS between 5 and 9. And one happily patroling along with SYS damage of 17 and ENG damage of 2! [X(]

I get the feeling that the TF or ship commander has a lot to do with it. I have found subs with very aggressive commanders still at sea with 20-30 damage and I have to send them home.

ORIGINAL: Who Cares

Now what this means is simply you added a lot of code to "decide" when TFs should break off and go home, when a TF should go into port, where a TF should go after it breaks off simply because (to use your words), "players complained about having to monitor their patrol TFs". Now frankly if a person doesn't have the ability to do something as simple as clicking the "show ships" icon and then click the "sys" heading at the top to sort the ships by damage (2 total clicks per game turn) I fail to see why you felt the need to bow before these people and put in a lot of code just to please them. And frankly, I have NEVER seen anyone say this was a good thing and am curious as to who "these players" are.

/raises hand.

I think it's a good thing. I think my sub commanders should decide to go home for repairs before their submarines sink, without me having to check up on them every day. I think that's reasonable behaviour.

ORIGINAL: Mark Weston

ORIGINAL: Who Cares

Now what this means is simply you added a lot of code to "decide" when TFs should break off and go home, when a TF should go into port, where a TF should go after it breaks off simply because (to use your words), "players complained about having to monitor their patrol TFs". Now frankly if a person doesn't have the ability to do something as simple as clicking the "show ships" icon and then click the "sys" heading at the top to sort the ships by damage (2 total clicks per game turn) I fail to see why you felt the need to bow before these people and put in a lot of code just to please them. And frankly, I have NEVER seen anyone say this was a good thing and am curious as to who "these players" are.

/raises hand.

I think it's a good thing. I think my sub commanders should decide to go home for repairs before their submarines sink, without me having to check up on them every day. I think that's reasonable behaviour.

+1 .. It's called CHOICE , you can still do things the old way if you prefer whocares , but theres a LOT of micro management in AE thats now much more flexible e.g sub patrol zones (which i love) .. If you want to do it all manually go ahead , but don't deny this option to the rest of us.

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: mjk428

Seems like a potentially good feature but 5 sys is too low to trigger an automatic response. I rarely operate ships over 5 but sometimes it's necessary. 10 would be a better number to justify a TF disregarding orders from above.

It actually is 10. The TF is probably returning due to float damage.

That is plain FALSE. I consistently have had task forces terminate patrols with LESS THAN 5 SYS damage (some even with only 2 AND NO FLOAT DAMAGE or major damage - just regular SYS damage). It's ridiculous enough that a ship can be at sea one day and end up with 1-2 SYS damage and then have this happening.

ORIGINAL: dereck

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: mjk428

Seems like a potentially good feature but 5 sys is too low to trigger an automatic response. I rarely operate ships over 5 but sometimes it's necessary. 10 would be a better number to justify a TF disregarding orders from above.

It actually is 10. The TF is probably returning due to float damage.

That is plain FALSE. I consistently have had task forces terminate patrols with LESS THAN 5 SYS damage (some even with only 2 AND NO FLOAT DAMAGE or major damage - just regular SYS damage). It's ridiculous enough that a ship can be at sea one day and end up with 1-2 SYS damage and then have this happening.

I believe that you are completely incorrect. I have looked at the code and I can verify what it says. Perhaps you are misunderstanding or misrepresenting the situation.

If you think you have a different condition, please submit a save.

Long time troll Don. Thanks for being kind but this one isn't worth your time.

ORIGINAL: dereck

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: mjk428

Seems like a potentially good feature but 5 sys is too low to trigger an automatic response. I rarely operate ships over 5 but sometimes it's necessary. 10 would be a better number to justify a TF disregarding orders from above.

It actually is 10. The TF is probably returning due to float damage.

That is plain FALSE. I consistently have had task forces terminate patrols with LESS THAN 5 SYS damage (some even with only 2 AND NO FLOAT DAMAGE or major damage - just regular SYS damage). It's ridiculous enough that a ship can be at sea one day and end up with 1-2 SYS damage and then have this happening.

hmm, have never seen this so far. [&:] Are your TFs turning back to homeport due to 1 or 2 sys damage or are you referring to "sub TF132 TERMINATES patrol due to damage"? This message shows up in the op report and doesn´t mean your sub has been out somewhere in the ocean but it was at it´s homeport for replenishment and due to damage (can even be very low sys damage) terminates it´s patrol and disbands into port.

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Long time troll Don. Thanks for being kind but this one isn't worth your time.

Mynok, could you please stop the name calling? No matter if you agree with the op or not, there´s no reason to start the name calling again. As far as I can see, dereck hasn´t done it, so no reason for you to do it.

There are two separate damage checks for Sub Patrol TFs. Basically, a sub on patrol will stay out until it has significant damage levels while a sub that is at it's home port will not go out again if it has more than minor damage.

1. A TF on patrol will terminate patrol and return to port when any damage category reaches 25.

2. A TF that has returned to port for fuel will terminate patrol if system damage is 10 or there is engine or float damage. These TFs will disband for repairs.

If a player sees a TF disband and then sees damage levels less than 10, it may be that some considerable amount of sys damage was repaired after disbanding. This would especially be true for a TF that disbanded in the first phase of a turn, and into a major port.

Again, if someone has a different event - post a "before" save in the Tech Support forum.