RE: Known Issue - off map turnarounds
Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:22 am
Besides, if you don't like it - edit it! I'm going to. [8D]
Steve.
Steve.
What's your Strategy?
https://forums.matrixgames.com:443/
ORIGINAL: spence
It sorta devolves to an OOB issue because of the game mechanics since HMS Repulse and HMS Prince of Wales are conveniently hanging their posteriors out for the Nipponese to bite during the first turn of the historical scenario and the Allied Player has no choices to make but simply gets to watch while the Nells/Bettys put enough torpedoes into each to insure that neither can possibly figure into the Japanese Players calculations for the rest of the battles of Malaya or the DEI. BTW the same sense of ahistoricality (must be a new word invented by me[;)]) is the air cover (inadequate) that the TF gets. Does allowing the Allied Player to make his own choices with these two ships totally unbalance the game?
ORIGINAL: bsq
ORIGINAL: JWE
Have to make compromises. Not seen as issue. Sorry.
Not really a compromise is it - so far I have lost the two ships before 10 Dec 41 on each time I have fired up the scenario. Now I am not RADM Phillips, I know what aeroplanes and their torpedoes can do to my shiny battlewaggons and I can see the bigger picture, but as they get detected and therefore attacked every single time on 7 Dec 41 what can I do...
If the Japanese get me every time, the person making the upgrades wasted their time and effort as the 'historical' first turn manages consistently to do what the Japanese did not...
I can accept the PH lottery, but this is not a lottery, it's pointless.
(Edit - Of course if naval search really is that good, then I am looking forward to any Sigint reports that allow me to arrange a little surprise for the IJN carriers in early/mid 42)
ORIGINAL: Speedy
Hi Whipple,
The Rear 14" Guns have reduced from 6 to 5. Can AE distinguish between Barrel loss vs Turret loss then?
The game parameter called "Tonnage" has nothing whatsoever to do with GRT. The Tonan Whaler "tonnage" parameter is correct.ORIGINAL: Roko
ship class 2135 Tonan Whaler tonnage looks incorrect ( 13340 )
it should be ~17549 GRT
Made my head hurt too, pal. Problem was that "tonnage" generates other things, like DUR, economy construction costs, all those other Nifty WiTP things. Warships were simple, you can always find a standard tonnage for them, so they are "relatively related". But GRT has no relationship whatever to displacement, so a 10k GRT Liberty would have the same costs, etc, as a heavy cruiser. Woof !!ORIGINAL: Mike Solli
The different types of tons has always made my head hurt. I'll take your word for that part of the game. [:D]
ORIGINAL: JWE
Made my head hurt too, pal. Problem was that "tonnage" generates other things, like DUR, economy construction costs, all those other Nifty WiTP things. Warships were simple, you can always find a standard tonnage for them, so they are "relatively related". But GRT has no relationship whatever to displacement, so a 10k GRT Liberty would have the same costs, etc, as a heavy cruiser. Woof !!ORIGINAL: Mike Solli
The different types of tons has always made my head hurt. I'll take your word for that part of the game. [:D]
Had to find a way to express auxiliary "tonnage" in similar terms as warship 'standard tonnage', taking all the different program uses of the 'tonnage' parameter into account.
Well ... finally figured it out - after much scotch - it sounds technical, guess it is technical, but the heavy duty ship pukes will know where it's coming from if it's expressed as:
Dspl Lt' + [(DwT-fl) - (DwT-net)] +/- (block differential multiplier) +/- (prismatic differential multiplier) +/- (outa John's butt factor to make it fit on the curve)
Dspl-Lt' is how she displaces utterly, and totally empty. The last factor is rather small and only applies to a few specialized ships, so modders need not freak.

Yes it does. It is not listed under Takao "Class", it is listed under Maya "Class".ORIGINAL: Iridium
So I'm looking at the Japanese CA upgrades and I noticed that Takao doesn't get it's center 8" turret removed and replaced by 2 dual 12.7cm DP guns late war...think it was somewhere in it's '44 refit off hand. I'd have to check a source that has been since stored in boxes since I moved...[:(]
ORIGINAL: JWE
Yes it does. It is not listed under Takao "Class", it is listed under Maya "Class".ORIGINAL: Iridium
So I'm looking at the Japanese CA upgrades and I noticed that Takao doesn't get it's center 8" turret removed and replaced by 2 dual 12.7cm DP guns late war...think it was somewhere in it's '44 refit off hand. I'd have to check a source that has been since stored in boxes since I moved...[:(]
No, NOT silly you. Keep them coming. We never know if we did a stupid typo or not, unless we have to look at it.ORIGINAL: Iridium
Ah, silly me...[:D]
Easy to fix. Will do so. Thanks.ORIGINAL: DBS
Very minor typos - Ship #1470 has no space between Ansyu and Maru. Ditto 1483, 1389.
3179 should be Ramillies.
ORIGINAL: Bladess
Question on Ship repair. BB Maryland is my most damaged shp at Pearl. Port Damage is 0. No other ships have been assigned for repairs
With keeping the ship ready it estimates 157/132/69/65 days depending on priority. Pierside is 132/60/47/40, Repair Ship is 166/88/71/55.
All those seem reasonable, but when I put it in the shipyard I am getting 328/327/326 days to repair.
14.3.2 says " Ships may be repaired and will consume repair capacity, in the following decreasing order: 1) Shipyard Repair, 2) Repair Ship Repair, 3) Pierside Repair, and 4) Readiness Repair "
So I thought the shipyard was the best choise to repair a badly cripples ship. But it is coming out the worsest by far. The other choises seem to make sence.
The Maryland is 32K tonnage and that should fit per 14.3.2.1 for Pearls repair yard of size 72. Maryland is Flood 85 (56 major), System 41, Eng 10
I put BB Colorado into the Seattle Shipyard and it will be repaired faster as I expected.