Bug Reports and Enhancement Requests
Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
-
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 11:26 pm
- Location: a maze of twisty little passages, all different
RE: WitP Wish List
Air Missions
What about a new mission for float planes: spotting?
- Available only for float plane air units based on ships
- Air unit always stays in the same hex as the originating task force.
- Effect: higher spotting probability and higher gunfire hit probability for the originating ship (or maybe task force).
- Operates day and night with diminished effect and higher op losses at night.
This would make the F1M2 actually useful for something and model actual Japanese operations, as at Savo Island.
What about a new mission for float planes: spotting?
- Available only for float plane air units based on ships
- Air unit always stays in the same hex as the originating task force.
- Effect: higher spotting probability and higher gunfire hit probability for the originating ship (or maybe task force).
- Operates day and night with diminished effect and higher op losses at night.
This would make the F1M2 actually useful for something and model actual Japanese operations, as at Savo Island.
DON´T PANIC - IT´S ALL JUST ONES AND ZEROES!
RE: WitP Wish List
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.
You're basically just plain wrong. The United States achieved something over 80% mobilization for WWII and then began to DEMOBILIZE IN LATE 1944. If they needed carriers they would have built them. If they needed more shipyards to build more carriers they would have built them too.
The only thing in which Japan could even hope to match US production was haiku poetry.
- Monter_Trismegistos
- Posts: 1359
- Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 8:58 pm
- Location: Gdansk
RE: WitP Wish List
Spence, yup, US would built 2 new shipyards in a week time and start to build those hulls... Do you really believe in such science-fiction?
Nec Temere Nec Timide
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą
- HerzKaraya
- Posts: 195
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:26 pm
- Location: Madrid, Spain
RE: WitP Wish List
Some "wishes" for crazy modders like me,
1) any chance of setting up nations N17 and N19 as Germany and Italy, as well as creating the correspondent aleatory replacement leader and pilot list?
2) the possibility to see if there is off-map production of axis devices on the information display (now it only shows zero, even if items are build)
3) any chance of setting an end time for off-map production/replacements?
4) Chinese ground units are rebuild after being destroyed in 1 month time, any chance of seeing the same feature with Russian units, or being able to define this characteristic on a one-by-one basis?
5) any chance of setting a start date, or date of appearance, for on-map factories?
6) last but not least, how about changing the ground combat system from in-hex to hex-to-hex? (only problem would be atoll invasions)
1) any chance of setting up nations N17 and N19 as Germany and Italy, as well as creating the correspondent aleatory replacement leader and pilot list?
2) the possibility to see if there is off-map production of axis devices on the information display (now it only shows zero, even if items are build)
3) any chance of setting an end time for off-map production/replacements?
4) Chinese ground units are rebuild after being destroyed in 1 month time, any chance of seeing the same feature with Russian units, or being able to define this characteristic on a one-by-one basis?
5) any chance of setting a start date, or date of appearance, for on-map factories?
6) last but not least, how about changing the ground combat system from in-hex to hex-to-hex? (only problem would be atoll invasions)
Vista, suerte y al toro!
RE: WitP Wish List
ORIGINAL: 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.
YES!!!

- HerzKaraya
- Posts: 195
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:26 pm
- Location: Madrid, Spain
RE: WitP Wish List
One more thing in regard of ground units, currently only devices listed in slots 1 to 15 are shown on the unit info display, but devices in slots 16 to 20 are taken into account in regards of assault value, men, support, replacements, etc...
Is there a way to show all 20 devices to exactly reflect TOE?
Is there a way to show all 20 devices to exactly reflect TOE?
Vista, suerte y al toro!
RE: WitP Wish List
Naval search missions at night using radar (or not). Naval attack possible at night without submarine (or surface ship present).
-
- Posts: 347
- Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2003 3:52 am
- Location: Upstate
RE: WitP Wish List
Hi,
I wish the intel screen that lists ships that were sunk gave the date that the ships were sunk. If that messes w/ FOW then perhaps just the date the ships were reported/confirmed sunk.
Best,
I wish the intel screen that lists ships that were sunk gave the date that the ships were sunk. If that messes w/ FOW then perhaps just the date the ships were reported/confirmed sunk.
Best,
RE: WitP Wish List
I have now several hundreds of hours experience with WitP.
That should be enough to read all the screens in a glance (per screen of course).
But I still have problems with production screens.
Take a damaged oilpointscreen. Repair shows the Yes. What should I do? I know by experience that in this case the Yes must be visible so what you see is what you have.
Take any production screen. If you see Halt production is on. What you see is NOT what you have. It is what you get.
IMHO these problems would not exist if you stick to a system with Actions + one button (toggling ON<>Off).
In the production-screen you would have three actions: Expand, Production and Repair. Same as is.
For every production-type you still will have three buttons(On/Off).
The endresult is very much the same, with only one BIG difference. "ON" is easy to detect and means allways the same.
You don't have to think every time "what does it mean?". What you see is what you have.
I also think, if you agree that I am right, that implementation of this proposal is quite simple.
AvG
That should be enough to read all the screens in a glance (per screen of course).
But I still have problems with production screens.
Take a damaged oilpointscreen. Repair shows the Yes. What should I do? I know by experience that in this case the Yes must be visible so what you see is what you have.
Take any production screen. If you see Halt production is on. What you see is NOT what you have. It is what you get.
IMHO these problems would not exist if you stick to a system with Actions + one button (toggling ON<>Off).
In the production-screen you would have three actions: Expand, Production and Repair. Same as is.
For every production-type you still will have three buttons(On/Off).
The endresult is very much the same, with only one BIG difference. "ON" is easy to detect and means allways the same.
You don't have to think every time "what does it mean?". What you see is what you have.
I also think, if you agree that I am right, that implementation of this proposal is quite simple.
AvG
-
- Posts: 347
- Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2003 3:52 am
- Location: Upstate
RE: Combat Screen, Task Force Creation
ORIGINAL: fleetwood
Make Combat Results window large engnough to see results without scrolling.
Yes, and please pin it on the right hand side of the screen instead of putting it smack dab in the middle of the map. It would be a lot better if the combat results screen was like the land combat screen - over on one side with the hex with the action centered on the map to the left.
Thanks,
RE: Reports
I'm sure this is earlier, but even if so it's worth reinforcing. Make the locations in the reports (especially the operations report, but also sigint and combat) hot links that can be clicked to center the map on the hex.
And provide some kind of filter system for the ops report, so one doesn't have to wade through 500 sub sightings to make sure you don't miss something important.
And provide some kind of filter system for the ops report, so one doesn't have to wade through 500 sub sightings to make sure you don't miss something important.
RE: Reports
ORIGINAL: erstad
And provide some kind of filter system for the ops report, so one doesn't have to wade through 500 sub sightings to make sure you don't miss something important.
I totally agree.
RE: Wish List
On a related item, it would be nice if all the information that is displayed in the screen during processing of a turn was also available after the turn was over. Most of it ends up in the Ops Report, but some things don't. Ship sinkings when Fog of War is off is one of them.
SCW Development Team
- jwilkerson
- Posts: 8068
- Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 4:02 am
- Location: Kansas
- Contact:
RE: WitP Wish List
ORIGINAL: 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.
Hum, no voluntary shock attacks, interesting .. that will take some thought ...
Mandatory "Bonzai" attacks!! [:D]
Maybe he means Bonsai !!
Or maybe he means Banzai !!!!
Good thing he's never seen one though [:D] regardless !!!
But no voluntary shock attacks. That would certainly change things in China ... hum ...
AE Project Lead
SCW Project Lead
SCW Project Lead
RE: WitP Wish List
Correct.
Only mandatory triggered shock attacks.
Shock attack is a tactical option, not a strategic one.
Shock attack simulates a situation where a force is trying to form and retain a bridgehead, or as a last chance desperation attack.
This would really slow the pace of ground operations down.
Noticeably in Asia.[;)]
A possible change to the mechanics to change the way land combat is conducted?[8D]
Only mandatory triggered shock attacks.
Shock attack is a tactical option, not a strategic one.
Shock attack simulates a situation where a force is trying to form and retain a bridgehead, or as a last chance desperation attack.
This would really slow the pace of ground operations down.
Noticeably in Asia.[;)]
A possible change to the mechanics to change the way land combat is conducted?[8D]
- jwilkerson
- Posts: 8068
- Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 4:02 am
- Location: Kansas
- Contact:
RE: WitP Wish List
ORIGINAL: Halsey
Correct.
Only mandatory triggered shock attacks.
Shock attack is a tactical option, not a strategic one.
Shock attack simulates a situation where a force is trying to form and retain a bridgehead, or as a last chance desperation attack.
This would really slow the pace of ground operations down.
Noticeably in Asia.[;)]
A possible change to the mechanics to change the way land combat is conducted?[8D]
I'm not sure I can think through all the ramifications of this in my little ole head.
I can certainly see that it would reduce offensive potential for both sides in China - and that has been something we've been after since day one. But it would do the same everywhere else too. So one concern is - would this be too much of a "boon" to the defender regardless?
So, trying to chip away at this a little bit, what if we allowed voluntary Shock Attack in Bases where the attacker has all units above 50 prep points for that base. This would be saying this is a major "Planned" attack.
But out in the field, some people are seeing that "field forts" (i.e. non-base forts) are more problematic to defeat - and without the shock attack to increase your firepower, I could see the possibility of a WWI like feel to the game where defensive lines are unassailable. But, I figure you've thought about this more than I have, so tell me more!!
[:D]
AE Project Lead
SCW Project Lead
SCW Project Lead
RE: WitP Wish List
The shock attack is the primary DEFENSIVE weapon for China. Without it there is no chance for defending China whatsoever.
The shock attack is the primary defensive technique for defending other locations. For example Clark Field in the PI. You defend the PI by massing at Clark and whenever Japan enters with an insufficient force you drive him out. Without the shock attack Japan can step into the hex with half the force he currently needs and the allies are defensless.
The shock attack is the primary defensive technique for defending other locations. For example Clark Field in the PI. You defend the PI by massing at Clark and whenever Japan enters with an insufficient force you drive him out. Without the shock attack Japan can step into the hex with half the force he currently needs and the allies are defensless.
RE: WitP Wish List
So you are saying that the shock attack is a defensive option?
Cite me some historical instances for this will ya, please?
I'd be extremely interested to learn more about them.
Bases are defended from adjacent hexes.
It is easier and faster to entrench outside a base hex, anyway.
Combat should be a slugfest on this scale.
Time consuming and costly in terms of men, material and supplies.
I could see a modification for this combat option though.
In addition to the already stated mandatory shock attacks.
Include units in bases to have the shock option.
To overcome the fortification levels, and kick out oposing troops.
Plus put a cap on the entrenchment levels for units outside of base hexes.
Say three levels max.
Plus do away with the pursue option completely.
It's complete nonsense to even include this option with the scale of land combat given in this game.
Cite me some historical instances for this will ya, please?
I'd be extremely interested to learn more about them.
Bases are defended from adjacent hexes.
It is easier and faster to entrench outside a base hex, anyway.
Combat should be a slugfest on this scale.
Time consuming and costly in terms of men, material and supplies.
I could see a modification for this combat option though.
In addition to the already stated mandatory shock attacks.
Include units in bases to have the shock option.
To overcome the fortification levels, and kick out oposing troops.
Plus put a cap on the entrenchment levels for units outside of base hexes.
Say three levels max.
Plus do away with the pursue option completely.
It's complete nonsense to even include this option with the scale of land combat given in this game.
RE: WitP Wish List
We both know that WITP ground combat is not terribly historical.
In the game the shock attack is of great defensive importance. At Clark Field for example, once Japan digs into that hex its over for the allies. The shock attack is the only defensive hope.
If you realy want historical examples I would argue that its fairly standard doctrine to counterattack bridgheads in the period before they become well established.
But again its WITP and you're arguing for a major major change.
In the game the shock attack is of great defensive importance. At Clark Field for example, once Japan digs into that hex its over for the allies. The shock attack is the only defensive hope.
If you realy want historical examples I would argue that its fairly standard doctrine to counterattack bridgheads in the period before they become well established.
But again its WITP and you're arguing for a major major change.
One old one new
Old - Please put in a no fly option where an enemy base can be tagged as a no fly zone. Players setting up a large cap on a base near to your airfields can effectively make you stop flying Naval Attack missions in that whole area by placing one TF in that port.
New - When selecting a partial unit (Land or Air), can you show the location of the parent unit to make it easer to bring the two together?
New - When selecting a partial unit (Land or Air), can you show the location of the parent unit to make it easer to bring the two together?
Former War in the Pacific Test Team Manager and Beta Tester for War in the East.

