Page 3 of 4

RE: 1 Mar 1942

Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 4:11 pm
by Rendova
ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Everything is editable. If you want 500 IJN replacement pilots of 90 experiance per month edit.
If you want Japanese tanks to be Pz-V edit
If you want Japan to produce 25,000 aircraft per month edit
If you want midget subs edit
If you want 10 Zuikaku CV in Dec 41 edit.


Can you edit
1) update paths for a/c?
2)Replacment rates for a/c?
3)Upgrade paths for ships?

Thanks for the info

RE: 1 Mar 1942

Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 4:22 pm
by Mr.Frag
Can you edit
1) update paths for a/c?
2)Replacment rates for a/c?
3)Upgrade paths for ships?

1) yes - including special paths for units that did not follow the normal path
3) yes - including adding additional paths. Each upgrade has a class entry with a date. Want more, add more classes.

2 production) You can alter rates and pool size of allied aircraft. You can alter starting factory sizes and pools for japan. You can not directly alter japan's production because that is controlled by getting resources to the factories to get things built.

2 non-prod) japan is like allies here, standard pool and rates.

RE: 25 Feb1942

Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 4:48 pm
by Joel Billings
ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl
ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi I have patrol groups on Marcus and Kwajalean. Palau, Guam, Saipan and yet those USN
CA went undetected all the way to Ambonia before I spotted them. (and this was by scouts from 3 CS 6 CV 3CVL.)
So you think it HAS been improved? Any notion of how the system is changed? Are
the Number of "search planes" flying and the overall size of the search area covered
modifiers to the percentage chance to spot a TF? Any feeling at all on how the "fix"
was made?

It was changed over a month ago. The number of planes flying has always been a factor. We added additional "long range" checks that makes it harder to find units further out. I can't remember how exactly this was done, but the impact had been noticed by most of the testers and they seemed happy with the changes.

RE: 25 Feb1942

Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 4:50 pm
by Mike Scholl
ALRIGHT! Thanks for the confirmation Joel.

WITP status

Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 5:11 pm
by mogami
Hi, I'll be as blunt as I can. I enjoy playing this game. If it was something I found on the shelf and brought home and played as is I would not be posting problems on the forum. (Many of UV's bugs never bothered me before they were posted and I paid more attention. I always just worked around them since bug reporting (and the idea they could be fixed) was something I had never considered when I bought a computer game. Some games I bought had problems that resulted in the program being taken off my harddrive and other games I just played around the problem.
WITP is fun to play. I've not encountered a problem that would result in me starting a game over or getting mad and quit playing.
Of course there will be changes. When the program goes from having 20 players testing to several hundred, problems never before encountered will emerge. Hopefully upgrades will not void games in progress. Prehaps players should allow a grace period where they only play shorter scenarios in PBEM. I'll still begin long campaigns because I like them. (And someone has to play them to discover problems)
Maybe Joel should have a poll to find out how long to allow for testing. (I really think the game following the current plan will be out in less then 60 days)
Will someone buy it and then complain? You can bet on it. Will someone buy it and after playing it make it their all time favorite wargame? You can bet on it. More then complain I think. Within 120 days of release there will be 20 or 30 complete edited Campaigns done by persons who bought the game. I think many of the items requested by this forum will be done by the forum readers themselves. (groups of players that agree on changes can make them and share the files)
There will be someone who spends several hundred hours and does a Japan-Russia war of 1904. Someone will set up the Pacific in 1931. (does the date shown in the game actually matter that much?)
In short, once you get your paws on WITP you might not do anything but WITP. (Players will carry printouts to work to plan for when they get home to make their PBEM turn)
The game requires a commitment in time to play the complete war that no other computer game has ever demanded. But players have devoted just as much time to playing games that did not require it.
The more time you spend planning the better the results will be. (and the less likely of wild events occuring)
Unlike UV there will be very few games decided by the results of 1 turn. Even a complete disaster in WITP can be overcome. (I recommend you prepare to suffer a number of disasters in the 1667 turns of scenario 15)

Everything in this post is my opinion and not a statement by Matrix or 2by3. I'd buy WITP this instant and be happy. I know it is only going to improve as a result of the input gathered after release.

RE: WITP status

Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 5:47 pm
by Damien Thorn
ORIGINAL: Mogami
(Players will carry printouts to work to plan for when they get home to make their PBEM turn)

Already done that for UV. [:D]

2 Mar 1942

Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 5:52 pm
by mogami
Hi, I forgot to mention Japan captured Singapore. Japanese plans are being overhauled as it appears Java might fall without the extra units (Only Batavia remains) And the Division slated for Singapore is no longer required.

RE: 1 Mar 1942

Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 5:56 pm
by Rendova
ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Can you edit
1) update paths for a/c?
2)Replacment rates for a/c?
3)Upgrade paths for ships?

1) yes - including special paths for units that did not follow the normal path
3) yes - including adding additional paths. Each upgrade has a class entry with a date. Want more, add more classes.

2 production) You can alter rates and pool size of allied aircraft. You can alter starting factory sizes and pools for japan. You can not directly alter japan's production because that is controlled by getting resources to the factories to get things built.

2 non-prod) japan is like allies here, standard pool and rates.


Thanks

RE: 7 Mar 1942

Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 10:34 pm
by mogami
OK 91 turns in 7 days equals 13 turns per day. (I've not played it 24 hours per day and I've done at least another 20 turns of testing specific events)

escorts

Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 8:04 am
by sven6345789
Hi Mogami, you said you send your DD'S etc. to Osaka for escort duty. Is that the port where Resource convoys are formed?
Why put ML's on escort duty???

RE: escorts

Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 10:16 am
by Rainerle
One last question:
When I use the Editor to edit the 4th Yamato Class Ship in early 45, which name should it get ??? (AFAIK it was never named?)[8|]

RE: escorts

Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 11:47 am
by mogami
Hi, Yes Osaka is the port I use for supply. (Other ports also produce supply but Osaka is where the auto system operates from)
ML have depth charges. When the convoy moves through a choke point (area enemy submarines like to hang out) The ML lays mines behind the convoy.) My TF will not be back through for a while and mines degrade over time but mean while I'll leave a little present for the next enemy sub.

RE: escorts

Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 11:49 am
by mogami
ORIGINAL: Rainerle

One last question:
When I use the Editor to edit the 4th Yamato Class Ship in early 45, which name should it get ??? (AFAIK it was never named?)[8|]

Hi, I don't know. How do you say extragavent waste of resource in Japanese?

RE: escorts

Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 12:16 pm
by Speedysteve
ORIGINAL: Mogami
ORIGINAL: Rainerle

One last question:
When I use the Editor to edit the 4th Yamato Class Ship in early 45, which name should it get ??? (AFAIK it was never named?)[8|]

Hi, I don't know. How do you say extragavent waste of resource in Japanese?

Banzai? [;)]

RE: escorts

Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 12:18 pm
by Rainerle
ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, I don't know. How do you say extragavent waste of resource in Japanese?

The IJA and IJN schism ??[:D]

RE: escorts

Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 12:58 pm
by mogami
Hi, This thread is finished. I have a new build that voids it. Anyone want to guess what the new build version number is? (I had been testing Alpha 7.70)

RE: escorts

Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 1:08 pm
by Dunkamoto
8

RE: escorts

Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 1:17 pm
by Pier5
Beta 1.0 !!!!!!

Pier5

RE: escorts

Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 2:22 pm
by Mike Scholl
ORIGINAL: Pier5

Beta 1.0 !!!!!!

Pier5
Let us pray that your assumption is correct.

RE: escorts

Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 2:41 pm
by mogami
Hi, Just this once I'll grant your prayer but don't make it a habit.