Matrix Games Forums

To add to that, they shouldn't be able to see my OOB. The computer should have the same FOW restrictions we face.
 
In my previous games I've never had a good enough start to send my carriers back for refits and not to fix big huge holes in them.
 
Within 2 turns of sending 3 back, Japanese starting sailing south of Rabul and Shortland after refusing to send anything larger then a barge out for atleast a month. 
 
Anyhow, the AI atleast on normal should have full FOW effects as a human player would, in all aspects of the game.

Please provide the players with real time reporting of operational losses in the combat reports and on the map for transports instead of forcing us to data mine by going to the intel report to see how many operational losses we took each turn and then having to examine every last squadron on the map while attempting to remember how many planes each had before the losses occurred in order to figure out which squadrons suffered losses and how many each suffered.

hi everybody,

i dont know if some of you know the great air combat series "Dogfight" on History channel and espacialy the parts about the battle of guadalcanal between marine wildcats and japanese zeros from rabaul.

it seems that the wildcat-pilots had a poor preformance against the zero until midway and then a very good killratio against the zero as they found out the weakness of the zero (no armor and no self sealing tanks) and as they begun to turn and face attacking zeros to use the wildcats superior armor, self sealing tanks and armament or to use the thach weave if attacked by zeros.

by the end of the guadalcanal-campaign, the cactus-airforce had a killratio of 4:1 against the japanese. although not all victims were zeros and some of them were vals, kates, bettys and oscars, the zeros were not able to disturb the marine wildcats shooting down the escorted japanese bombers. in the series dogfight you can perfectly see that all the wildcat pilots immediately turned around and faced attacking zeros and oscars and most of the time with success.

some japanese zero aces like saburo sakai reported that it was damnd hard for them to shoot down marine wildcats at guadalcanal even when the marines were outnumberd by the zeros.

so i go with hans here (and not only because i am from germany too[;)]) that it was madness to put such elite fighter pilots in such flying coffins, espacialy with the poor japanese pilot training system.
[/align]

Hehe join the discussion in the General section Bigbaba. The party is in "Flying Torches". Everyone sort of agreed to take the party in the other thread (s)[:D]

I'd just like to re-iterate the need to re-examine sys damage. Frustrating to have a big ship at sea for 5 days, and having to bench it for 5 to 6 times that amount.

An option to keep the TF together instead of having to disband it would be nice as well. Especially when your basing two different types of task forces at the same port. You have to either log which ships were in the group, or make multiple groups to quickly look at the class and then transfer it into the real group. All that work because you want to knock off sys damage faster while keeping them in port to avoid system damage.

Whole process is rather tedious.

Wondering if we can expect some kind of response or a quick update from the team... [&:]

especially curious to get a hazy adumbration when this game will become available.

Pretty helpful would be the option to plot the course of your TFs manually (e.g. by waypoints) rather than have to relay on the fixed track given from the game engine!

ORIGINAL: RGIJN

Pretty helpful would be the option to plot the course of your TFs manually (e.g. by waypoints) rather than have to relay on the fixed track given from the game engine!

Aye. I think this is a feature in the upcoming WitP Adm Edition.

Attack aircraft on naval search should be subject to interception by fighters flying CAP.

As it is now, attack aircraft on naval search will even hit aircraft carriers with 100 fighters on CAP with a free pass. No interception at all.

Are they never intercepted at all? Could have sworn there was a chance any plane flying into an area that has cap could be shot down.

I've just been informed (on the WitP forum) that the presence of Allied radar doesn't negate an IJN Long Lance attack in WitP, so that feature could be incorporated in CF.

In fact, many TF features found in WitP should be added to CF; I have no objection to UV becoming like WitP as long as its scope doesn't dramatically increase.

Aww, com on Joe don't ya wanna get carpal tunnel like the rest of us.....WitP is THE MOST click intensive game I have ever played which is saying a lot considering it is not a "real time clickfest".

I don't want to go all the way HB, but one WitP player -- who does UV in between PBEM turns -- said he missed all the WitP TF options.

Re click-fests: Waterloo, Napoleon's Last Battle, was a real-time trauma if you played the entire battle; too many things to do and places to be all at the same time, just like a real battle.

Are they never intercepted at all? Could have sworn there was a chance any plane flying into an area that has cap could be shot down.

No, at most it will say, plane ¨X¨ damaged by flak. ¨Yorktown reported hit¨....for example. CAP does not effect these missions.

Did we ever mention the inability of CAP to protect air transports from being intercepted over the base that they're protecting?

I'd like to retract this as my CAP did splash enemy ac before they got to the C-47s.

I've just been informed (on the WitP forum) that the presence of Allied radar doesn't negate an IJN Long Lance attack in WitP, so that feature could be incorporated in CF.

In fact, many TF features found in WitP should be added to CF; I have no objection to UV becoming like WitP as long as its scope doesn't dramatically increase.

It certainly does in UV.

12) Rewrote naval combat code to allow for surprise attacks. Combat Japanese task forces that have ships mounting the Long Lance torpedo will now try to sneak up and surprise attack with a volley from every able ship, then retire to reload, before normal combat occurs. Combat Japanese task forces that do not contain ships with the Long Lance torpedo and combat Allied task forces may also make surprise attacks, gaining a free round of combat, firing limited shots, before normal combat occurs. To make a gun surprise attack, the side attacking must make skill rolls to properly line up the ships and coordinate fire, and radar or spotting rolls, while the other side fails the radar or spotting rolls. To make a Long Lance attack, the Allied side must either fail a radar or spotting roll or fail a skill roll (required to turn into the torpedoes) and the Japanese side must make skill rolls to line up the ships in proper formation and coordinate the attack. Surprise attacks can be devastating for the surprised task force sometimes and sometimes of little value, depending on a lot of skill rolling.

ORIGINAL: Ike99

I've just been informed (on the WitP forum) that the presence of Allied radar doesn't negate an IJN Long Lance attack in WitP, so that feature could be incorporated in CF.

In fact, many TF features found in WitP should be added to CF; I have no objection to UV becoming like WitP as long as its scope doesn't dramatically increase.

It certainly does in UV.

12) Rewrote naval combat code to allow for surprise attacks. Combat Japanese task forces that have ships mounting the Long Lance torpedo will now try to sneak up and surprise attack with a volley from every able ship, then retire to reload, before normal combat occurs. Combat Japanese task forces that do not contain ships with the Long Lance torpedo and combat Allied task forces may also make surprise attacks, gaining a free round of combat, firing limited shots, before normal combat occurs. To make a gun surprise attack, the side attacking must make skill rolls to properly line up the ships and coordinate fire, and radar or spotting rolls, while the other side fails the radar or spotting rolls. To make a Long Lance attack, the Allied side must either fail a radar or spotting roll or fail a skill roll (required to turn into the torpedoes) and the Japanese side must make skill rolls to line up the ships in proper formation and coordinate the attack. Surprise attacks can be devastating for the surprised task force sometimes and sometimes of little value, depending on a lot of skill rolling.

No way, we been down this road a few times but just because the allies were in disarray at Savo doesn't mean the code should be written up that way for the whole conflict.

The United States Navy was pushing the envelope and learning things daily about radar. Japanese surface shipping didn't sneak up at Savo and couldn't sneak up on the USN anytime going forward. I think you're confusing dissaray on the Allies part as sneaking up. Since were speaking on hypotheticals, an argument could be made that the Allies should get some info on Japanese shipping since the japanese codes were broke and some info on movement was being read.[:)]

Would it be possible for DEs/DDs to be used strictly as ASW?  I was thinking along the lines of  a TF with an ASW assignment set to follow a task group with a different task and if an enemy submarine is spotted in a hex nearby the ASW group sails to the area and engages.

Just a thought.

ORIGINAL: Ike99

I've just been informed (on the WitP forum) that the presence of Allied radar doesn't negate an IJN Long Lance attack in WitP, so that feature could be incorporated in CF.

In fact, many TF features found in WitP should be added to CF; I have no objection to UV becoming like WitP as long as its scope doesn't dramatically increase.

It certainly does in UV.

That's the whole point, Ike. I've already suggested some type of graded die roll that would decrease -- not negate -- the chance of a LL over time depending on crew experience, wx, ship position, etc. But if it works well in WitP, it should be able to work in UV/CF.

That's the whole point, Ike. I've already suggested some type of graded die roll that would decrease -- not negate -- the chance of a LL over time depending on crew experience, wx, ship position, etc. But if it works well in WitP, it should be able to work in UV/CF.

So it would seem I wasn´t so wrong after all.