JFB's Own A/E

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

Mike Scholl
Posts: 6187
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 1:17 am
Location: Kansas City, MO

RE: JFB's Own A/E

Post by Mike Scholl »

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez
The guy is obviously a "newbie" who has suffered frustration in his first attempt at the game...., and was trying to sound "knowledgeable" in his post of complaint.

I was composing my post for posting when your post posted.

I'll grant he is a newbie and I'll grant he is frustrated. Gees, I'm frustrated cuz I still haven't figured out the best way to load my invasion forces. But, if he has gained anything from reading this forum, he should have anticipated the type of response his post would receive. Did he really expect people to simply say, "OK" and be done with it?

Chez


Like I said, Chez..., he deserved a "smackdown" for his hubris. Just felt the experianced old timers were having a bit too much fun at his expense...
User avatar
stuman
Posts: 3945
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:59 am
Location: Elvis' Hometown

RE: JFB's Own A/E

Post by stuman »

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: stuman
I knew it !
Yeah, gosh all hemlock, Stuman. We threw the yarrow stalks, and I don't know how many times, to see if we couldn't make this an ultimate secret FB experience; but every single time, it came up K'un, Sun, K'un. Not one single solitary Ch'ien or Tui. So I ask you - what's up with those girlie men. We're looking at 8, 16, 23, 35 ... that's 8, 7, 5, 8. A good cast.

And then we tried to do the other secret FB thing - because we really had to be evil to everybody, but the the casts were all Ka'an - all 4, 5, 7. Poo!

Then we got it - don't throw against a side, throw against a jerk-pimple-troll. Holy I-ching Batman, that works! We got Chen's up the wazoo, 6s and 3s. Holy Help My Income, had the last numbers from Hong Kong and they were 06, 15, 27, 33, 39, 12. Can anyone doubt our numbers? Is there anyone out there who don't think these things come from some wicked cool background guai-loh cheat?

Shoot, I made 1.270.000 HK on the numbers. Just what did you all make?
Ch'ien or Tui


OK, maybe something to do with Feng Shui ? Hmm, further research required.
" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley

Image
User avatar
ChezDaJez
Posts: 3293
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:08 am
Location: Chehalis, WA

RE: JFB's Own A/E

Post by ChezDaJez »

I want to hear about the 'biologic action'

I believe you could probably find a lot of that just south of the border! [:D]

Chez
Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98
User avatar
ChezDaJez
Posts: 3293
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:08 am
Location: Chehalis, WA

RE: JFB's Own A/E

Post by ChezDaJez »

Understood and I agree... to a point.

Chez
Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: JFB's Own A/E

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: HHI

It was obvious that A/E was designed to satisfy the JFB crown. I don't have a real problem with this, as I think most of the really hard core WITP prefer to play the Japanese side. However, the Patch 02 Beta has really gone off the deep end. I have the following problems, which really seem outside the box.

1. U.S. pre-war battleships are utterly useless in surface battle. Although this was the case with WITP, then all suface battles were such a complete mess, it was irrelevant. However, surface battles are vastly improved and it is now relevant. Looking at the ship data base, the A/E team has really done it's homework, all looks well. Clearly, the problems have been created by the JFB crowd in the hard code experience. How did the IJN get so experienced? Shooting up junks in the China Sea, I suppose. In fact, the USN was a haven during the depression for thousands of men. The best of these went to the ships of the Battle Force. Gunnery was highly emphasized, with highly prized gunnery awards in annual competitions. Gunnery was excellent. In WW I, the USN thought it proficient in gunnery, but in service with elements of the Grand Fleet, found out it didn't match up with the RN. Things were quickly improved. Battleship range-finders were equipped with analog computers in 1918! Reconstruction was hampered during the inter-war period by lack of funding, but much was done. Granted, much that they wanted to do was not achievable, but the biggest problems were mitigated by blistering and additional armor was added to the decks, much of it STS. The weakest link remained, however, plunging fire, as engagements would be fought at much greater ranges than was possible when these ships were built. This problem could not be fully solved due to treatly limitations and weight problems, which resulted in inadequate free board. These were wet ships. However, the New Mexicos, the Tennessees and the Colorados were OK, if slow by IJN standards. All this, except the advantages of STS perhaps, are in the data base. Note that most surface battles are at night in A/E, where plunging fire is not a factor. The problem is in the experience, particularly night. Although the JFB's will point to the poor USN performance in the Slot as an example of USN night proficiency, that was not these crews. The Slot was torpedo alley, where the Long Lance was king. But I think the biggest IJN advantage was simply their binnoculars! They were far superior. None of this would necessarily apply in more open waters. These crews were very experienced. I think my father's experience was typical. He went to the New Mexico out of boot camp (then in Norfolk) in 1932 as a Seaman and left in 1941 as a Chief Gunners Mate to joint the Atlanta (whoops). Of course, I can't do anything about experience, it's JFB hard code. What I can do is use a ridiculous accuracy factor for the 16/45's and the 14/50's, which seems to help.

2. Submarines are the worst. The latest JFB change has made IJN subs undetectable by anything. Aircraft never hit them and destroyers can't find them. They now hang around major ports with complete impunity. The whole idea of the I-class sub as a first class weapon is a joke and even more preposterous as a commerce raider. Yes, the crews were excellent and the torpedo was superior. But the boat was too large, resulting in a submerged vessel that was noisy, a large Sonar target and a very limited dive depth of only 200 feet. These characteristics would not be a huge problem when attacking warships, which are generally traveling at high speed and zig-zagging. Hydrophones are almost useless and Sonar is compromised. As a commerce raider, the convoy speeds are slow, making a large, noisy boat easily detected and the limited dive depth lethal, as the boat can't get under the thermals, so necessary to avoid Sonar tracking. Most I-class boats from I-6 on carry a seaplane. Talk about noise and limited dive depth. What a farce! Unlike other JFB hard code scams, I can't find a way around this one. I tried reducing the durability from 36, I think, to 5. Very reasonable, I think, considering the limited dive depth. But, what difference does that make, when you can't attack the sub to start with. Next, I went to the DD/DE/SC data base to put late war sonar on the early DD's. What! Sonar isn't a device! We got every damn radar device known to man, but no sonar. The so-called ASW capability is nothing but the sum of the launchers on board. Since I obviously play against the Japanese A/I, the game has become much less a war game and more a game of trying to defeat the JFB hard coders. I've lost this one.

3. I love the new pilot training routines. They are a blast, although I still have no idea what the colors mean. But, somehow, I suspect that this is nothing more than another JFB scam, since they have numerous very experienced pilots to start with and can create numerous training units.



the good thing about this thread (among others) is that there are at least one or two other threads that are saying the complete opposite. AE team, you´ve done a good job I guess! [:D]
Big B
Posts: 4638
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:41 pm
Location: Cali
Contact:

RE: JFB's Own A/E

Post by Big B »

HHI,

You are obviously familiar with the editor, so try this for changing ship crew experience.
Experience as set to 0 means default, but you can enter any value you wish between 0 & 99 (and notice that day and night experience are different fields.)

Generally 55 is considered fully trained, while 70 and above would be considered very good veterans.

You can experiment with it and see if your ships perform better.

B





Image
Attachments
NewBitmapImage.jpg
NewBitmapImage.jpg (71.63 KiB) Viewed 101 times
Post Reply

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