Page 37 of 43
RE: Interface items
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 9:23 pm
by DuckofTindalos
ORIGINAL: Dixie
2) The ability to rotate CV air units
Gee, wonder where that comes from...?[;)][:D]
RE: Wish List
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 9:38 pm
by wdolson
There are a number of things about how ships behave. Some should be easiest to implement.
1) Crippled ships movement - This should be the easiest fix. Ships with 0 movement points still make 2 hexes a day. That's around 5 knots. I know this is done to simplify having tows and ocean going tugs, but could this be halved to one hex a day?
2) Ships out of fuel combat - Carriers out of fuel don't fly offensive missions, but they do fly CAP, they shouldn't be able to do this either. Additionally, surface ships that are out of fuel fight normally. They should have a heavy penalty if forced to fight in this state.
3) Crippled ships intercepted - Several times I have seen a task force with a crippled ship intercepted by a surface force and the next turn it is one hex away and combat shows a few shots fired by the intercepting surface force before the crippled task force runs away. If there is a large speed difference, like 30 knots, or even 25, vs. 0-5, the intercepting force should be able to dictate the terms of the combat. The crippled ship should not get away. This is exactly the major reason crippled ships were scuttled rather than attempts made to limp them back to port. If enemy surface forces were in the area, all the escorts were at risk as well as the crippled ship.
I know #2 and #3 should be tougher to change than #1. And #2 is a case that shouldn't happen very often, so it would be a low priority. However #1 should be an easy fix, and if #1 and #3 were implemented, it would reduce the gamey tactic of saving severely damaged ships that would have been scuttled in the real world.
Bill
RE: Wish List
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:03 pm
by Charbroiled
The ability to sort HQs (ie, show all Army HQs.....show all Air HQs.....etc.)
RE: Wish List
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:23 pm
by Dixie
The ability for carrier capable units to become carrier trained through time.
British units to be able to upgrade before May 1942
A manual that is actually fully correct [:'(]
RE: Wish List
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:24 pm
by DuckofTindalos
A correct manual? Are you quite mad, Master Shipbuilder?
RE: WitP Wish List
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:20 am
by Halsey
I'd like to see the shock attack option removed from the ground combat options.
Except for atoll invasions, para drops and river crossings.
These are the only combats for shock attacks, and they should be mandatory.
Bonzai attacks should be mandatory also, though I've never seen one.[;)]
The scale of the regular land combat shouldn't support this option.
RE: WitP Wish List
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:30 am
by erstad
There's probably something like this earlier, but without a search capability...
Have the number of victory points for an aircraft loss be equal to the number of engines. Although not perfect, it would represent the fact that a 4E bomber is more expensive than a 2E bomber is more expensive than a 1E fighter.
RE: WitP Wish List
Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:34 pm
by jimbatcs
I've been playing the game now for a few years off and on and thoroughly enjoy it. This is my first post so excuse me if the subject has already been brought up. I was wondering if there has ever been any thought to allowing players to skeletonize units or combining the assets to bring some units up to strength. Thanks.
RE: WitP Wish List
Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:47 am
by erstad
Here's one that would be easy for a patch.
Stop displaying the air balance. Either take it out, or if it's less work, make it always display as 0.
Combat Screen, Task Force Creation
Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 6:41 pm
by fleetwood
Make Combat Results window large engnough to see results without scrolling.
Add "Form Task Force" button is some additional windows (such as ground forces window). I always seem to have to back out of a window to form a task force.
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation
Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:18 pm
by SireChaos
ORIGINAL: fleetwood
Make Combat Results window large engnough to see results without scrolling.
Add "Form Task Force" button is some additional windows (such as ground forces window). I always seem to have to back out of a window to form a task force.
In particular, add it to the "ships in port" window.
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 6:01 pm
by Oldguard1970
1. When Loading a transport TF, I would like to see the LCU listing include the objective being prepped.
2. On the "display LCU screen", I would like to see the objective listed as well. (Hmmm... which units are preparing for ...?)
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:37 pm
by JoePirulo
I would like that USN/Australian CL don´t respawn as stated in the manual. Or correct the manual (but I think this is very difficult to do ...) [:)]
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 10:08 pm
by Dixie
ORIGINAL: JoePirulo
I would like that USN/Australian CL don´t respawn as stated in the manual. Or correct the manual (but I think this is very difficult to do ...) [:)]
I've been wondering about this recently. I can understand the logic for the US cruiser respawn, but why do the RAN respawn. The Aussies lost 3 cruisers(Canberra, Hobart & Sydney) during the war, and only received Shropshire as a replacement for Canberra, and she's already in the reinforcement list.
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:35 am
by MineSweeper
I do not understand the logic of USN CV, CA and CL respawns....IMO, the US should only get the respawns that were built and no more....pet peave of mine is this issue and I like RHS for this reason.[:)]
The US only lost 4 CVs in the war and these should be the only ones that should respawn (limit of 4)....no more......the US was under a maxium ship building program and they could not build anymore CVs than what was produce - that is why they built CVLs (not enough large shipways to build the CVs......CAs and CLs respawns should be more limited as well......[;)]
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:39 pm
by Feinder
Actually, the US -did- build a "Canberra II", a Baltimore class. It was CA-70.
And are you sure HMAS Hobart went down? According to Wiki, she was present at the surrender in Tokyo Bay...?
That being said, I -hate- respawn. I'd rather there be no respawn, and just get the ships as reinforcements (and I think there are a few mods for this, you just have to keep any "respawns" tied up at San Francisco".
-F-
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2007 3:07 pm
by Charbroiled
I'm not sure if this can be implemented in the game is it is currently programed, so figured it would be better on the "Wish List"
When creating TF, I would like to have the "ship type" sorting buttons that are available when viewing the port screen.
Also, would like to see stats for individual ships that are pertinent to the type of TF being created. Example: If creating an ASW TF, show the Anti-sub value for the ships.....when creating a SF TF, show the gun value, AA value, and ASW vaue of the ships available. I know you can "right click" on a specific ship to get most of this info, but it would be nice to see all of the ships at once in order to compare.
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation
Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 3:24 am
by erstad
On the subject of task force creation, how about a "ships available for upgrade" filter? Very annoying to look at Truk, see a dozen ships that need upgrade, try to remember the names, form a TF to head home, recheck Truk, oops, missed some, etc.
Transport aircraft in China
Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 6:03 am
by TAIL GUNNER
Maybe this has been brought up before...but I'm not about to read this entire thread to find out.[:o]
As Japs, I transferred some transport aircraft to China Command. However, they're unable to transfer troops from one Japanese occupied base in China to another......only supplies.
RE: device slots
Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 6:11 am
by Jo van der Pluym
That the devices slots above 555 can have production and working pools