Wishlist thread

Carriers At War is Strategic Studies Group famed simulation of Fleet Carrier Air and Naval Operations in the Pacific from 1941 - 1945.

Moderators: Gregor_SSG, alexs

User avatar
CactusAF
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 6:11 pm

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by CactusAF »

number 1 is fix broken features.
 
number 2 is everythng else.
 
 
MarkShot
Posts: 7451
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 6:04 am

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by MarkShot »

I would like to see more hot keys for time/break/speed management. I've been playing CCAW and I find that once you have input your orders the game moves along quite a bit quicker than CAW without have to unnecessarily grab the mouse all the time. Thanks.
2021 - Resigned in writing as a 20+ year Matrix Beta and never looked back ...
User avatar
RyanCrierie
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 7:15 am
Contact:

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by RyanCrierie »

Modify the "torpedo" flag in aircraft types; so that you can have fighters carrying torpedoes; the Boeing F8B long range fighter would have carried either one torpedo in an internal bomb bay, or two torpedoes slung under the wings
User avatar
alexs
Posts: 417
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2003 3:54 pm
Location: Sydney
Contact:

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by alexs »

Just to comment on MarkShot's request - Mark if you go to the options screen, then select the "Hotkey options" - you can assign hotkeys for in game functions, which include time management ones.
MarkShot
Posts: 7451
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 6:04 am

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by MarkShot »

Thanks
2021 - Resigned in writing as a 20+ year Matrix Beta and never looked back ...
justaguy93
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:01 pm

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by justaguy93 »

For me the biggie is needed improvement in the arming of aircraft.  I have just started playing the game but when I fuel/rearm planes it doesn't seem like I choose how they will be configured.  I think it's a huge part of carrier warfare and it was a decision that the admiral was involved in.  I don't mind a lot of the abstraction in the game as too many details can bog a game down, but the whole aircraft management part of it really seems too important to automate.  Back in my board game playing days in Flat Top I know it took painfully long to ready your aircraft and if you made a mistake in that aspect of the game it could cost you huge. 

In my opinion two changes that should be possible without impractical coding changes would be:
  1.  Two buttons for arming instead of one - one to arm for anti-ship and one to arm for anti-land base operations.
  2.  As others have mentioned, realistic cycle times. 

Bottom line is if you don't have your carrier flight groups standing by and in the right configuration when you see action, it should represent a huge problem, and this is a decision you should have to make.  After all Nagumo's decision to rearm planes for a second strike against Midway airfield may have had more impact on the Pacific war than many many strategic level decisions made before and after.  Yet from what I can tell so far, we don't even have to be bothered to make such a decision.

justaguy93
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:01 pm

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by justaguy93 »

Oh and one other request, this one I'm guessing not possible with a simple patch, is some form of campaign or linked scenario mode where losses and victory levels from earlier battles can have a significant impact on the forces and difficultly of the objectives for each side in future battles.  Hmmm, do I pull out now so my damaged carrier can be ready for action one or two battles from now, or do I risk staying engaged so that my next operation has easier objectives or the enemy has less resources available to use against me.  Like say a successful operation in Coral Sea for Japan results in US forces being divided at Midway, maybe they only get two carriers for that battle instead of 3.  But maybe it costs the Japanese another CV out of action to get that victory?  It'd put a lot more importance on decisions made during a given battle and in my opinion make CAW twice the game.  But, I'm guessing this type of change is rather large from a design/coding/testing perspective.  Maybe something possible for a future add on module though?

User avatar
Hellcat_Canada
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 1:44 am
Location: Ontario, Canada

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by Hellcat_Canada »

1) I'd like to see damage to ships cause a larger reduction in speed, right now as it is damage seems to do very little.

2) More randomization of starting conditions.

User avatar
alexs
Posts: 417
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2003 3:54 pm
Location: Sydney
Contact:

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by alexs »

Hellcat,
    1) We've remodelled how damage effects a ship's speed. In the patch, each time a ship receives damage, there is a chance it will have it's speed reduced depending on a few different factors (type of ship etc). Once a ship has had it's top speed reduced, it attempts to fix the damage. The chance to fix depends on the damage control of the ship, as well as it's type. Each time the fix succeeds, the ship increases in speed 1 knot (up to the previous maximum). Each time the fix succeeds, there is also a chance that further repairs are impossible at sea - ie the ship will not be able to make any further repairs until it enters a friendly port (whereupon it continues to attempt to fix it's speed as before).

    2) We've included a random warroom selection mechanism, where you wont know the exact forces until the end of the game. We've also included a large number of variants for Coral Sea so you'll never quite know what forces the enemy has.
User avatar
Hellcat_Canada
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 1:44 am
Location: Ontario, Canada

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by Hellcat_Canada »

Excellent, thanks for the rapid reply, one last thing that I remembered...

I found it quite annoying that the background music cuts out duing the attack animations can this function be removed or toggled?
OldBoney
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 8:32 pm

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by OldBoney »

I believe the present scoring system for ships awards points in proportion to the damage inflicted. In this scheme two cruisers at 50% damage are equal to one CA sunk. Shouldn't the sunk ship be worth more?

From a strategic point of view the sunk ship is gone while the damaged ships can be repaired for another day. I know that since you can't target individual ships this is beyond the player's control. Still it looks funny to me to see a bunch of nickle and dime hits on several ships out score a sinking.
User avatar
alexs
Posts: 417
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2003 3:54 pm
Location: Sydney
Contact:

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by alexs »

Hellcat - Yes, we added an option to the options screen to toggle that functionality.

OldBoney - The points given for damaging a ship is based on the % of damage to the ship multiplied by 1/2 the total victory points for the ship. It's only when you sink the ship that you get full 100% of the vps. So if you dont sink the ship, the best you can get for it is a little less than 50% of the ships worth. The actual vp worth of a ship is based on it's ship class, and it's displacement. So in theory, the situation you describe may be possible, but is unlikely to occur often.


User avatar
RyanCrierie
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 7:15 am
Contact:

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by RyanCrierie »

An addenum to the

"Modify the "torpedo" flag in aircraft types; so that you can have fighters carrying torpedoes; the Boeing F8B long range fighter would have carried either one torpedo in an internal bomb bay, or two torpedoes slung under the wings"

Request.

Apparently there were some aircraft which could carry MULTIPLE torpedoes. The TB2D SKYPIRATE could apparently carry four torpedoes in maximum overload condition; two in the internal bomb bay; and two slung under the wings [X(]

User avatar
RyanCrierie
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 7:15 am
Contact:

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by RyanCrierie »

The new "shift" paint blobs of terrain on the map making screen is highly useful; but I miss the "bug/feature" of v1.00 where you could literally paint the terrain over the map texture; which made making an accurate map very easy.

Image

Reconstructed picture of how the "bug/feature" was in v1.00
MarkShot
Posts: 7451
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 6:04 am

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by MarkShot »

I like that the SPACE key breaks. I would love to see a single key like the SPACE key function as a run/break toggle.

As mentioned before, once you enter your orders in CAW, you really shouldn't need the mouse all that much. However, you do due to lack of hot keys.

In this area CCAW is more ergomic having hotkeys for pretty much everything.

When I previously raised this, I was told that CAW allows the user to map keys. True; except that many functions are simply not mappable to begin with.

Thanks.
2021 - Resigned in writing as a 20+ year Matrix Beta and never looked back ...
User avatar
alexs
Posts: 417
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2003 3:54 pm
Location: Sydney
Contact:

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by alexs »

Hi Mark,

I've designed the hotkey system to be expandable (depending on the key function). If you give me a few examples of hotkeys you'd like to see i'll give you an idea of how feasible they are to implement.

MarkShot
Posts: 7451
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 6:04 am

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by MarkShot »

ORIGINAL: alexs

Hi Mark,

I've designed the hotkey system to be expandable (depending on the key function). If you give me a few examples of hotkeys you'd like to see i'll give you an idea of how feasible they are to implement.


Alex,

The key definitions I would like to see:

(1) A key for each of the run commands like: Run5, Run1H, RunNxtH, ...

(2) A break/run toggle key. When in break mode and pressed, it would resume whatever was the last run mode in effect.

Granted I will still be using my mouse, but I would need it far less. Also, many of us have programmable mice. I would probably put such a toggle key right on to a mouse button.

Thanks.
2021 - Resigned in writing as a 20+ year Matrix Beta and never looked back ...
User avatar
alexs
Posts: 417
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2003 3:54 pm
Location: Sydney
Contact:

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by alexs »

Mark,
1) Each of the run command already exist in the hotkey binding combobox. They are labelled "Run", "Run 5 minutes" etc.
2) Not sure about this as it may lead to non-intuitive behaviours. Say for instance, if you ran 1 hour, used this 'toggle break' button after 30 mins, and then hit it again, would a whole hour run or only the last half an hour? We'd also need to show the user with some sort of graphic.

2) is probably not a huge problem if you set the run / break hotkeys to be close to eachother.


MarkShot
Posts: 7451
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 6:04 am

RE: Wishlist thread

Post by MarkShot »

Alex,

I will check those bindings again. Perhaps, I missed them.
2021 - Resigned in writing as a 20+ year Matrix Beta and never looked back ...
geofactor
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:12 am

RE: @Admin - Wishlist

Post by geofactor »

just curious.......did panther games make the game 1830 for the PC?......be nice to see a multiplayer version
take it like a mannequin!
Post Reply

Return to “Carriers At War”