Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: 1275psi

probably already listed

The ability to attempt a mid ocean intercept with surface task forces

Done by something like airgroup missions choices

Button: attempt to intercept enemy Task forces
Button: attempt to avoid enemy task forces (retreat option)

Anything that allows a greater chance for mid ocean intercepts!

I'll second this. It would make commerce raiding more practical out in the middle of nowhere so long as the target TF has been sighted by recon planes.

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

ORIGINAL: 1275psi

probably already listed

The ability to attempt a mid ocean intercept with surface task forces

Done by something like airgroup missions choices

Button: attempt to intercept enemy Task forces
Button: attempt to avoid enemy task forces (retreat option)

Anything that allows a greater chance for mid ocean intercepts!

I'll second this. It would make commerce raiding more practical out in the middle of nowhere so long as the target TF has been sighted by recon planes.

I would love to be able to park a CV TF about 3 hexes behind the bait, and then spring on the Surface Action TF that went after the the convoy [:D]

I would like to see the ASW and AA values of ships displayed next to each ship on the list of ships available to drop into a TF. It would make TF composition easier.

Thanks,

Gary

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

ORIGINAL: 1275psi

probably already listed

The ability to attempt a mid ocean intercept with surface task forces

Done by something like airgroup missions choices

Button: attempt to intercept enemy Task forces
Button: attempt to avoid enemy task forces (retreat option)

Anything that allows a greater chance for mid ocean intercepts!

I'll second this. It would make commerce raiding more practical out in the middle of nowhere so long as the target TF has been sighted by recon planes.

I would love to be able to park a CV TF about 3 hexes behind the bait, and then spring on the Surface Action TF that went after the the convoy [:D]

I agree! I think the ability for surface groups to intercept TFs in open ocean would give a whole new dimension of cat and mouse to the game. It might also tie up your carriers on convoy duty leaving other parts of the ocean free and clear for the enemy to do whatever he likes.

1. Japan should lose 100 PP the first time its homeland is bombed.
2. Ability to disband Land Combat Units and merge them into units in the same hex.
3. We really need to be able to destroy air units. List the aircraft as operationally destroyed and send the pilots back to the pool. This will help get rid of fragments.

Just to let everyone know I am no longer working on WITP. This thread was started a long time ago. [;)]

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress
I agree! I think the ability for surface groups to intercept TFs in open ocean would give a whole new dimension of cat and mouse to the game. It might also tie up your carriers on convoy duty leaving other parts of the ocean free and clear for the enemy to do whatever he likes.

CVs ascorting Transport Tfs are fine most of the Cvs (both sides) were busy doing it in 1943, but I am not so sure of the historical accuracy of the first one. AFAIK all surface battles were near to bases, not in the open ocean.

You know the debate about open ocean intercepts has been going on since the first day this game hit the streets. I recommend making it an option that can be turned on or off depending on the player's preference.

I would like to have an on/off repair button for ports and airfields. I hate using supplies to repair a base I know I'm going to lose. Also repairs are made before forts are built and a player can keep you from building forts by keeping your port and airfield damaged.

Undo for every action I can make. (even transferring squadrons between bases etc.). One notable exception. If the action has immediate results, thus avoiding even more gameier solutions.

I don't see a problem with open ocean intercepts provided scout planes have spotted the enemy TF. There were open ocean intercepts in the Atlantic (Bismarck, et al). A U-Boat or pocket battleship finding a TF is an open ocean intercept. There should be some chance of it provided the odds of it are sufficiently curtailed to prevent it from getting out of hand. Ships with scout planes should be able to make open ocean intercepts during the day. Obviously if there aren't a lot of enemy TFs in the area then the odds of spotting a TF should be decreased. However, the more enemy TFs in an area, the greater the chances of intercepting at least one. [8|]

ORIGINAL: Kid

You know the debate about open ocean intercepts has been going on since the first day this game hit the streets. I recommend making it an option that can be turned on or off depending on the player's preference.

A couple of simple requests to make life easier

1. In the air reinforcement screen could the HQ be shown for the air groups. It is shown in the ground reinforcement menu but not the air menu. And while your changing it it might be worth showing number of planes as well.

2. In the air group listing screen or the air unit information screen could we have a "Display all air groups with the same command" button. This would be useful for standing down all air groups in areas in which all or the majority of the command is in the same weather zone. Such as the Far East Command, Australia, DEI, SEAC, Canada, New Zealand, Home Islands, China Expeditionary Force, Kwantung, etc.

3. In the air group listing screen there is a "reinstate orders to all aircraft" button, or something similar. This sets air group orders to a set of pre-defined orders. This would be better if it kept track of a specific units orders before it was stood down and re-instates those orders.

Any or all of these would make life simpler for people

Thanks Matrix

I'd like to see the screen where commanders are chosen to display in the main listing what the guy is best suited for. It's painful clicking through name by name looking for a commander best suited for whatever you are looking for.

Some more wishes [:D][:D]

1. An undo button, nothing worse than doing an A/C transfer and realizing it was to the wrong base.
2. The ability to turn off Auto factory upgrades for ships.
3. The ability to sort commanders by speciality, nothing worse than having to look through 10 or so commanders just to find one who can command carrier groups.
4. When using the PDU facility make it so that fighters and Fighter/Bombers can be inter-changable.
5. Designated patrol areas for submarines.
6. mid ocean intercepts.
7. Sub v Sub intercepts.
8. The ability to specify target types for airgroups, ie attack transports ignore carrier groups.
9. The ability to turn off the auto repair for airbases and ports so as to save supply.
10. A more realistic real world weather system.
11 Auto Minelaying same as auto convoys. Can designate a hex and keep laying mines until order cancelled.
12 Auto patrol for ASW groups. Pick to hexs and patrol between them.
13 Waypoints for task groups.
14.Make heavy bombers a seperate class (possibly divided into night and day sub classes)

One thing i'd like changed it the size of RN carrier airgroups later in the war, it was possible to hard code the USN airgroups to change sizes and configuration during the war, it should be possible to do the same with the RN carrier, maybe tie it in with ship Upgrades?

I know its not a major thing but hell i'm British, its matter of national pride!

I want more planes on my carriers!

Posted again just in case it gets lost in the news thread.

Witp 1 Wish List

1. A report that shows what factories are halted.
2. Some way to edit the target list for which bases are invaded by the AI, so Moders can add some varity to WITP single player campaigns
3. Adding mining operations for the AI, currently the AI does not conduct ML operations.
4. AI Sub operations, the AI keeps it's subs always in the same place during each campaigns.
5. Have the AI stop sending ships TK's to areas under enemy air control.
6. Add the messages you seen during a turn to the operations report.
7. Allow you to click on a message in the operation report to go to that location on the map.

Yikes!!! I had to go through all 16 pages to make sure this was not already suggested and I was surprised it wasn't mentioned.
I am re-reading "At Dawn We Slept" and I had forgotten how worried the US was about the large tank farm getting detroyed and the Pacific Fleet having to go back to the West Coast due to lack of fuel.
Shouldn't a base fuel supply be a separate target?? At the least, as part of port attack, a percentage of the fuel stored there get destroyed during an attack?? If the Japanese had launch a 3rd wave at PH and targeted the fuel farm, the remaining ships would have been hard pressed to do any type of patroling.
Along this line, the Japanese player leaves Palembang alone for a few months and finds 200,000 or more of Oil sitting at the peer awaiting transport when they take over the base. [X(] The ability to produce Oil is damaged to some extent when captured, but the stockpiled oil is left undamaged. [&o] The surviving engineers should be drawn and quartered for not destroying the storage facilities...[:@]
Shouldn't the amount of Oil/Resources and fuel/supply at a base be subject to damage by: enemy capturing the base; bombardment TF; and air attacks??[&:][&:]

More for the WITP II probably, but I would like to see a *major option* given the Japanese player..
When he sets a squadron of destroyers out, rather than just labelling them as "Surface Fleet", I would like to see the Japanese player given the option of "Torpedo Attack", (which would allow any confrontation to launch Long Lance torpedoes and automatically withdraw without suffering return fire !!!)..
Since Japanese destroyers carried reloads, launching the torpedoes would not automatically send them back to port, but it should NOT keep them in the area of battle since it did take time to re-load the torps..
This Long Lance attack option should (IMHO) be given the Japanese player at least until maybe 1943 when Allied radar caught up with Japanese night optic devices, (another area where they excelled.)
C'mon guys...Give this a thought.......[:D]

I haven't read through this entire list so I could be doing a repeat, but it occured to me the other day that it would be nice if both sides could work on the orders phase simultaneously. Would this be so difficult? Perhaps once the combat replay has run each side could then enter their own password thereby opening their own orders phase which would then let them create seperate orders phase files both of which would have to be plugged back into the game engine to run the next combat. Sounds simple enough to me. Just think this could save 50% of the time required to play WitP.

Presumably been suggested before, but it'd be nice if the "anchor&airfield" base symbols were subject to FoW. Without prior recon, why should player X know that player Y is operating AV-supported floatplanes out of Bongo-Bongo atoll, fx?