Matrix Games Forums

21) Code the Allied Air production to vary with time, rather than averaging out the aircraft per month. This produces too many aircraft earlier than available, at the expense of later in the war. However, they really don't need to worry much about later in the war either way.

22) Allow the Allied player some form of production. It should just be the Japanese players that have to address this complicated system [;)]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

I don't know if this is in here or not, but with 500+ entries I don't mind it being repeated. PLEASE FIX US SUBMARINE TORPEDOES! Yes, the Mk XIV was a major headache and deserves to be modeled in the game. But the "S-Boats" didn't use that torpedo..., it wouldn't fit their tubes. Instead they used an older and much more reliable model (I think it was the Mk X). S-Boats should NOT be lumped in with "US Submarines" for this purpose, but rather with the Brits and the Dutch. Fixing this would hardly require "rocket science". PLEASE do so....

I think that submarine dud rate is coded into the device in the editor. Just took a quick look at submarine torpedo fire routine and it uses this dud rate.

According to the editor (for scenario #15), the S-boats (class#1352) carried the "21in Mk 10 Torpedo" (dev#103). Its dud rate is set to 15.
On the other hand, the "21in Mk 14 Torpedo" (dev#96) has a dud rate of 80.

Michael

How about some means by which we can assign the units loading onto a transport task force to the ships we would like them to inhabit. The current system is roughly like the Chinese fire drill of old, and is a total FUBAR. Troops and supplies mixed up over every ship in the TF with absolutely no regard to which ship, let alone how many units could be carried and the total capacity of the TF. And I know the work around routine, but why does this need to be a work around. There isn't enough to do that the Fleet Admiral has to go down to the docks and tell the loadmasters how to do their job as well. Anyone who has been in the NAV for...oh, 15 minutes or so knows what would happen. The Admiral would tell his next in command to fire the illegitimate, mentally inept, misbegotten spawn of a female canine and put someone in there who knows how to do the job right!

Far to often as well, a TF assigned to both deliver troops to a location as replacements, and also which we may wish to pick up the units being relieved have to be jimmied along in the same fashion as loading the Transport TF to begin with. Change the Homeport, tell it to Load Only Troops and hope it will stay around long enough to pick up the unit in question, and not just take off like a stripe tookused ape. You'd think the TF was being run by FJ Fletcher.

Finally, my real pet peeve. Whoever designed this game does not know ships. They are nowhere near as fragile in real life as the game has it. The first point of system damage should no way in all that is holy knock a knot off of the ship's speed. Ships that have been out of the yard for weeks, even months, with only shipboard maintenance to take keep the beast afloat and at sea will still steam at their rated speed. It is only when a ship has major engineering casualties that the speed drops. On most of the tin cans, for example, they could reach 27-28 kts on 3/4 of the engineering plant operating (one boiler down). The old boat I was on (a finicky 1200 psi plant could do that) and most of the squadron at that time (frammed Gearings) could do the same on their 600 psi plants. If they could do that at 25 years old, why does one point drop their speed that radically. Or is system damage automatically assumed to be power plant damage - which would be an equally nonsensical mistake.

23) A graphical/on-map graphical filter for ...... just about anything
a) Ships within 1 month or late for upgrade
b) All Zero based units
c) All bases short on supply or less than some pre-determined value


Or how about just doing #1 from post 506, extractable data in csv format similar to what Michlem's tool does, except limited to information for only one player. This way you guys don't have to guess what all we could think up in terms of want's. Then it's up to us ....

There is nothing more frustrating to me than issuing orders over a period of time, then discovering a flaw or opportunity for improvement in the scenerio. If we had the ability to convert a saved game to a scenerio for editing, then I wouldn't have to repeat the many hours, days and even weeks to get back to where I had been before making an adjustment to the scenerio. I understand the fears about the potential for abuse in 2 player games, but I am certain that there is a solution that doesn't make the two mutually exclusive.

Converting a save to a scenario sounds fine.
But you do realise that you are going to lose a lot of information.
Stuff that does not exist in the scenario files.
Eg ships sunk, victory points, top pilots/kills, etc

Michael

ORIGINAL: Aawulf

There is nothing more frustrating to me than issuing orders over a period of time, then discovering a flaw or opportunity for improvement in the scenerio. If we had the ability to convert a saved game to a scenerio for editing, then I wouldn't have to repeat the many hours, days and even weeks to get back to where I had been before making an adjustment to the scenerio. I understand the fears about the potential for abuse in 2 player games, but I am certain that there is a solution that doesn't make the two mutually exclusive.

Converting a save to a scenario sounds fine.
But you do realise that you are going to lose a lot of information.
Stuff that does not exist in the scenario files.
Eg ships sunk, victory points, top pilots/kills, etc

I would prefer that information be clean anyway.

I also suspect that some things would be problematic, such as converting a saved game with LCU loaded transport task forces in transit. Even with the constraints, the ability to convert a saved file to a scenerio would open new doors for scenario design and dramatically reduce the painful time sink of starting over after testing or unexpectedly discovering things that require a change to the scenario.

Moving Troops for Transport(restricted command)

1. First pick a destination for the TF, and show the command of that location.

2. If the destination is within the restricted command HQ, then show the list of LCUs that are allowed to be moved to that destination. Allow movement of LCU's withing a restricted if the source and destination are under the same command HQ.

I'm sick and tired of having to change commands HQ;s just to move LCU's within the same command.

ORIGINAL: pad152

Moving Troops for Transport(restricted command)

1. First pick a destination for the TF, and show the command of that location.

2. If the destination is within the restricted command HQ, then show the list of LCUs that are allowed to be moved to that destination. Allow movement of LCU's withing a restricted if the source and destination are under the same command HQ.

I'm sick and tired of having to change commands HQ;s just to move LCU's within the same command.

You would have to put code in to prevent the player from changing the destination while at sea. Which could cause all kinds of problems. The AI routing routines and destinations for TFs of crippled ships are two obvious places.

Hi all,

I many recent weeks/months we saw ever increasing great work of WitP artists who made fantastic new ship pictures!

Many of those even contain several versions for same ships (i.e. as war progressed the color schemes and armaments changed)!


What if the Joe and Don would change the code to allow several pictures for same ship class?


In other words something very simple can be used:

#1
If there is just one picture used for ship class - that picture would be used all the time (i.e. as it is now):

AnSidexxxx.bmp
AnShilxxxx.bmp
JnSidexxxx.bmp
JnShilxxxx.nmp

NOTE: xxxx is number corresponding to the ship class in question.

#2
If there are more than one picture used for ship class - then pictures would be used according to date added to file name:

AnSidexxxxDDMMYY.bmp
AnShilxxxxDDMMYY.bmp
JnSidexxxxDDMMYY.bmp
JnShilxxxxDDMMYY.nmp

NOTE: xxxx is number corresponding to the ship class in question.

If date is reached then the appropriate picture is used (DD = day, MM = month , YY = year)!

Simple and effective!!!


What do you think gentleman?


Leo "Apollo11"

I have a request for a ship that doesn't appear in stock but historically was in the Pacific: LST-66. The reason I'd like to see her is because my Uncle spent the war on her and survived (barely) the kamikaze hit on her.

History:

USS LST-66
LST Flotilla 11, Group 31, Division 61

The Coast Guard-manned USS LST-66 was laid down at Jeffersonville, Indiana, by the Jeffersonville Boat and Machine Company and commissioned on 12 April 1943 with a complement of 8 officers and 66 enlisted men of the U. S. Coast Guard and Coast Guard Reserve. She was sponsored by Mrs. A. D. Landwehr. Her first commanding officer was LT Howard A. White, USCG. In April 1943 she proceeded down the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers and dry-docked on 15 May 1943, at New Orleans for final inspection, painting and repairs.

On May 21, 1943, she sailed from New Orleans for Brisbane, Australia via the Panama Canal, arriving there August 1, 1943 and being assigned to LST Flotilla 7, Seventh Fleet on October 10, 1943. Her first mission was the support landing at Finschafen, New Guinea, on October 25, 1943. She was in the landing at Lee, New Guinea, on December 7, 1943, and at Cape Gloucester, New Britain on December 26, 1943. In this engagement two men were killed and seven wounded from near miss bombs during an enemy air raid. The LST-66 was officially credited with shooting down three Japanese planes.

On January 19, 1944, the LST-66 was engaged in landing first support forces at Saidor, New Guinea. On completion of this mission she was ordered to join Group 21, Division 41, LST Flotilla 7 as of 1 February 1944. From then until August 1944 she was engaged in the following operations:

9 March 1944: first assault landing, Seeadler Harbor, Admiralty Islands
23 April 1944: first support landing, Tanah Merah Bay, New Guinea
16 May 1944: first support landing, Aitape, New Guinea
19 May 1944: first support landing, Wakde Island, Dutch New Guinea
8 June 1944: first reinforcement landing, Biak Island, Schouten Islands
16 July 1944: first reinforcement landing, Noemfoor Island
30 July 1944: first assault landing; Cape Sansapor, Dutch New Guinea
After the Sansapor landing and, returning with reinforcements, the LST-66 was dry-docked at Alexishafen, New Guinea, from 20 - 23 August 1944, and on the completion of repairs participated in the first reinforcement landing on the south coast of Morotai, in the Moluccas. On 20 October 1944, she participated in the assault landing on Leyte, Philippine Islands. On 12 November 1944, following the landing a Japanese suicide plane crashed on the boat deck, starboard side aft, killing eight men and wounding 14 of the gun crews.

On 11 January 1945, the LST landed a part of the first reinforcements at Lingayen Gulf, Luzon, Philippine Islands, one of the Army troops being wounded during the landing by artillery fire. On 5 March 1945, an Army enlisted man fell overboard from an LCM being towed by the LST-66 and was lost at sea. On March 10, 1945, she participated in the first assault landing at Zamboanga, Mindanao, and on completion of the mission, returned to Leyte, being dry-docked for repairs on 19 - 20 March 1945. From March to June 1945 she was employed in transporting troops equipment and supplies from rear bases being evacuated in the Solomons and New Guinea to the forward areas in the Philippines. In July 1945 she participated in the first support landing at Balikpapan, Borneo, Netherland East Indies, the last engagement of the war.

During August and September, 1945, she was again employed in transporting troops, equipment and supplies from rear areas in the New Guinea area to forward areas in the Philippines, being dry-docked from 15 - 18 September 1945, for hull repairs and returning to transport troops and equipment from Morotai to Leyte. She then sailed to Zamboanga, arriving on 9 October 1945.

On 11 October 1945 she departed Zamboanga for Morotai, arriving there on 14 October. For the next few weeks she continued to sail between Zamboanga, Morotai, Leyte and other ports in the Philippines until she received orders to return state-side. She departed Manila on 7 November 1945 for San Francisco, via Guam, Eniwetok, and Pearl Harbor, arriving at San Francisco on 19 December 1945, reporting to Commandant, 12th Naval District, for disposal. She was decommissioned and her Coast Guard crew removed at Mare Island, California on 26 March 1946.

The USS LST-66 earned nine battle stars and the Navy Unit Commendation for her service during World War II.

24) How about some means of assigning experienced pilots in the pool directly rather than let the AI pass them out. Nothing worse than seeing your small pool of experienced flyboys being sent to flush out a transport squadron instead of the front line fighter squadron ....

Fix this!

Allied Ships
DD Cushing, Torpedo hits 5, on fire, heavy damage
AP American Legion
DD Meade
Aircraft Attacking:
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 14000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 13000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 13000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 14000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 13000 feet
9 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 13000 feet

ORIGINAL: scout1

24) How about some means of assigning experienced pilots in the pool directly rather than let the AI pass them out. Nothing worse than seeing your small pool of experienced flyboys being sent to flush out a transport squadron instead of the front line fighter squadron ....

Or have separate pools for different pilot types.

ORIGINAL: dtravel

Fix this!

Allied Ships
DD Cushing, Torpedo hits 5, on fire, heavy damage
AP American Legion
DD Meade
Aircraft Attacking:
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 14000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 13000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 13000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 14000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 13000 feet
9 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 13000 feet

A fix for this has been coded and tested and will be included in the next release.

We worked on this after someone else asked us politely.

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: dtravel

Fix this!

Allied Ships
DD Cushing, Torpedo hits 5, on fire, heavy damage
AP American Legion
DD Meade
Aircraft Attacking:
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 14000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 13000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 13000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 14000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 13000 feet
9 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 13000 feet

A fix for this has been coded and tested and will be included in the next release.

We worked on this after someone else asked us politely.

Sorry if I'm sounding frustrated, but I was politely reporting this more than 18 months ago.

WitP Wishlist lose its sticky? [&:]

25) This one is specific to ship repair, but should carryover to a bunch of other things. Would like some alternate/additional means of tracking ships in port for repair. Right now a player needs to check EACH port to see how the ship repairs are doing. A semi-offline tool would be nice to scan through the various ships/ports and then I need only visit those of interest.

26) Since IJN ship construction has different phases
- cost to accelerate varies
- is free or not free (time dependent)
- can be halted/not halted
- etc ....

How about color coding them for easy scanning reference.