Matrix Games Forums

Ah, thank you 2!

Since the Japanese only get MSWs respawned, will they be the only ships this applies to?  Or is there yet another feature of AE I'm unaware of.......

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Since the Japanese only get MSWs respawned, will they be the only ships this applies to?  Or is there yet another feature of AE I'm unaware of.......

I don't believe there will be any Japanese ships with " II" names in the standard scenarios. That would be up to scenario designers.

Rename has nothing to do with respawn. Respawn ships do not have their names changed to " II".

The one and only purpose of this feature is to let the player handle cases where two ships on the board might have the same name (except for II). That is, Yorktown and Yorktown II both in service at the same time.

Ahh, thanks Don.

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Since the Japanese only get MSWs respawned, will they be the only ships this applies to?  Or is there yet another feature of AE I'm unaware of.......

I don't believe there will be any Japanese ships with " II" names in the standard scenarios. That would be up to scenario designers.

Rename has nothing to do with respawn. Respawn ships do not have their names changed to " II".

The one and only purpose of this feature is to let the player handle cases where two ships on the board might have the same name (except for II). That is, Yorktown and Yorktown II both in service at the same time.

Darn, I though I would be able to end up with Nomad 1, Nomad 2, Nomad 3 , . . . Nomad 99999 [:D]

You, sir, are evil! 

I think I would be trying to climb through the wires to throttle you if in a PBEM i received the report "PBY Catalina has spotted Nomad 4413"... [;)]

I imagine this has been touched on before, but the search function and I are not meshing well: for vessels that are normally lost early on, such as Arizona, are there a suite of upgrades to accomodate their survival?
 
On another front, in a current stock game, the battleship that starts in Seattle (don't remember the name just now) is slated for a radar set. No matter how long she sits in the yards, the radar never seems to show up (due to the learning curve on the game, I've replayed the first year of campaign several times) despite the resource pull showing them as available and in the pool. While I'm not sure just how effective radar is in the game, it would be nice to have the thing, just on general principles. Is this just an isolated problem of my own, or a known problem that has been addressed in AE?
 
Finally, has the AI's kleptomania been dealt with? I have yet to have a submarine reach full repair before the AI has hijacked the thing and sent it into the heart of the enemy's ASW effort. Same deal with supply ships, there is nothing quite like planning the logisitcs for an operation to discover that the AI has decided that the ships, and their supplies, are desperatly needed in some backwater base that it reaches by routing them through the heaviest possible concentration of hostile assets. Perhaps base supply priorities and waypoints will ameliorate this one? One thing I would have like to have seen would be the ability to establish (and disestablish) selective exclusion zones per Harpoon II.

AE Team:
 
On one of the screen shots posted back in May, AEss-439, USS Nevada has the 5in/25 Mk 10 and .5 Cal with an asterisk in the range. What is the significance of this asterisk? Does it denote flat range or slant angle range for antiaircraft fire?
 
Thanks,
Pete

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

You, sir, are evil! 

I think I would be trying to climb through the wires to throttle you if in a PBEM i received the report "PBY Catalina has spotted Nomad 4413"... [;)]

I think by far worse would be to see the Essex in 3 or 4 different places in the same turn. ie naming them all the same.

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

You, sir, are evil! 

I think I would be trying to climb through the wires to throttle you if in a PBEM i received the report "PBY Catalina has spotted Nomad 4413"... [;)]

I think by far worse would be to see the Essex in 3 or 4 different places in the same turn. ie naming them all the same.

That is what I was getting at... by giving all ships the same name, you totally confuse your opponent with ship sightings...

Better yet, start naming all your DDs after CVs and do the reverse for your CVs...[:D]

Yeah, That’s the ticket!

Actually this was done to get around all the whiney respawn problems. Ships will slide off the ways when they did. If they were named after a ship that was sunk irl, but not in game, a player has the opportunity to rename them to something else.

You may only rename an appropriate ship in the reinforcement queue. Once she shows up, that’s who she is, for now and ever, Amen.

I think the OOB'ings were pretty good about identifying the duplicates.

Are OOB'ings like alien beings? [:D]

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Are OOB'ings like alien beings? [:D]

Don't know, but 1 of them is from Roswell, NM, 1 of them says he's from Mars, 1 is from the People's Republic of California, and the rest are from Texas.

Your call, dude.

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Are OOB'ings like alien beings? [:D]

Don't know, but 1 of them is from Roswell, NM, 1 of them says he's from Mars, 1 is from the People's Republic of California, and the rest are from Texas.

Your call, dude.

Yep, they're aliens. [:D]

Hi, can we get a list of new criticall hits? Do we now have a gun director hits which makes ship's fire more innaccurate?

And another question: since we can now hunt down enemy subs with our own ones- do we have specialized "sub asw" TFs now? how are we going to make our subs to hunt down enemy's ones?

ORIGINAL: CV Zuikaku

And another question: since we can now hunt down enemy subs with our own ones- do we have specialized "sub asw" TFs now? how are we going to make our subs to hunt down enemy's ones?

Happens automatically, but rarely. Just put them on normal "Sub Patrol" missions.

ORIGINAL: CV Zuikaku

Hi, can we get a list of new criticall hits? Do we now have a gun director hits which makes ship's fire more innaccurate?

No.

Thanks for the answer, Terminus! I thought about using I-boats to compensate Japanese lack of dedicated ASW boats [;)]