Whats Coming Very Soon in Patch v1.20

[David Heath]

Hi Guys

Here what you can expect very soon ( next 24-72 hours ) This patch is being released before we had a chance to address all the issues we had hope to. The main reason for this is because we wanted to address the PBEM Cheats so gamers can have faith in there PBEM games.

There are also major updates to our Naval Units thanks to Ron and Rich. This patch should not effect your current PBEM games but as always please back your games up.



1. Very large bombers now take longer to repair, after being damaged.

2. Level bomber groups that fly low level missions (under 5000 feet) now a morale hit after the mission.

3. Level bombers flying low level missions now have reduced accuracy, if anti-aircraft is very heavy or there is a lot of CAP.

4. Allied level bombers, such as the B-17, B-25 and B-26 are gaining full benefit from the Norden bombsite at low altitudes. Fixed. At altitudes less than 6000 feet, the targeting bonus from the Norden are now sharply attenuated.

5. Spotting chances at long ranges for naval search missions has been increased. This may help level bombers attack Tokyo express task forces more often.

6. Skip bombing does not work as the manual describes. Fixed. Skip bombing by Allied level bombers with altitude set to 100 feet should now occur with experienced pilots.

7. There is now notification, via a message on the combat screen, for flights that attempt to skip bomb.

8. A security breach which allowed player two to see turn resolution early has been corrected.


9. A player may select to load a land based unit into a transport take force, cancel loading or choose to unload the unit repeatedly within one turn and load the entire unit, which might normally take two or three turns because the loading routine leaves 100 operation points for loading supplies. This is undesirable. Fixed. It is no longer possible to do this.

10. Left clicking on a friendly land based unit within a hex that contains more than one friendly unit, but no base, causes a pop-out to appear in which the player should select the desired unit and sometimes contains units not in that hex. Fixed. Clicking in this fashion now selects the first unit in the hex.

11. Allied anti-submarine warfare capabilities need enhancement. Fixed. Allied anti-submarine vessels should now perform better. Other Allied ships, such as transports, should now have a better chance of forcing Japanese submarines to attack while submerged by use of the deck gun.

12. The computer opponent does not garrison important bases, such as Truk and Cairns adequately. Fixed. New routines now insure that important bases have adequate combat troops.

13. Some players feel that lopsided battles between large and small task forces allow the smaller force to fire too many times. Fixed. The routines that determine order and quantity of fire have been rewritten.

14. The units load cost needs to be added to the unit data screen. Done.

15. Pilots are not being properly transferred to the new base, when there are two or more of the same aircraft at the source base and some planes are damage. Fixed. Should work, now.

16. Submarines are sometimes firing torpedoes at barges and PT boats. Fixed. They should not longer so do.

17. The list all ships list-box should now reload more quickly after the player selects a ships from within, to view.

18. In the naval combat screen, ships that have not been spotted well enough to target no longer have the name of the ship printed. Once they have been identified well enough to be targeted, the name appears. Ships which have no name printed may be hidden in fog or rain, too far away to be seen, behind another ship, behind smoke generated by destroyers or burning ships or for some other reason not engaged in combat. Note that a ship may sometimes fire and still not be spotted.

19. Increased maximum daytime naval combat range from 17,000 yards to 25000 yards.

20. Ships arriving in theater at a captured base are doing so under enemy command. Fixed. Ships due to arrive in Truk should no longer arrive, if Truk is captured. Ships arriving in Brisbane or Noumea should arrive in the other location if the assigned location is captured. If both are captured, the ships should not arrive.

21. The player is now notified by a text message on the lower left of the screen, when ships arrive in theatre, if playing against the computer or when the computer plays against itself

22. Ships mixed in with PT boats are starting combat at closer range than they should. Fixed. Large ships can no longer sneak up on an enemy fleet by hiding amonst the PT boats.

[Huskalator]

Thanks for the heads up, I'll be waiting patiently as always.

[strollen]

Excellent.

Now maybe I'll play the game more and post about B17s less.

[Nikademus]

excellent!

[DSandberg]

Looks very promising, especially regarding the level bomber issues. And here I just reinstalled UV last night in hopes of a patch coming sometime in the next few weeks ... what fortuitous timing! I can hardly wait ... thanks Matrix & 2x3!

[Raverdave]

**** you guys react fast! Is this a good gaming company or what?

[U2]

Hi

Fantastic service as always from Matrix. This patch sounds really good just like before.
Dan

[WW2'er]

Wow! I was expecting the next patch to deal pretty much with any remaining crash bugs, not all the "tweaks" listed.

Looking forward to it. Way to go Matrix!!!

[dpstafford]

Sweet!

[Maniac]

SWEET!!! WTG matrix!!! I am really looking forward to this patch...it seems like it will make the game even more enjoyable now....if that is even possible

[Pkunzipper]

GREAT NEWS!!!

[corbulo]

I think #2 is a mistake(i play the IJN so I am not feathering my own nest). Morale should be directly related to damage inflicted versus losses suffered. After Bismark Sea morale sky-rocketed among 43rd BG because they had wrecked a IJN convoy.
I do defer to 2X3, I believe they know more about Pacific War than I do, and also about the game mechanics.

[Sonny]

Have to agree that #2 does not seem right. Without suffering damage or being harrassed by CAP there is no reason to have low morale just by flying lower than 6000 feet.

[elmo3]

Perhaps a fatigue hit would be more appropriate? Although if I were ordered to fly low through flak my morale would probably go down whether my plane was damaged or not.

[U2]

Originally posted by Sonny
Have to agree that #2 does not seem right. Without suffering damage or being harrassed by CAP there is no reason to have low morale just by flying lower than 6000 feet.

Hi

This strikes me as very strange when I read it again. If its a mission that results in sinking ships and without heavy losses why should their morale drop? Does not make sense at all. I agree with you Sonny.
Dan

[11Bravo]

Yes that sounds better.

Morale should be strongly related to enemy losses/friendly losses, and maybe weakly related to amount of flak, CAP, or very low altitude.

Fatigue should be a strong function of low altitude, flak and CAP.

Can't wait for the patch! Great job as always Matrix team!

All that, and the longer repair times would make the use of low level bombing much more selective, while preserving some of its punch.

[mariovalleemtl]

Great!

[Mike Wood]

Hello...

Below 6000 feet is not low level. Low level is 1000 to 2000 feet or so, depending on weather conditions, time of day and terrain. A mission across the Stanely owens range at tree top level at night might affect morale, or a skip bombing mission against a large surface combat task force. Stategic bomber crews were not generally trained a lot in low level flying. There are several factors involved in what a low level mission is considered to be. This new rule, along with the Norden bombsite correction, decreased accuracy when flying low level mission against resistant targets and increased repair time for large aircraft rules were the result of a number of lengthy conversations between myself, Gary, and Joel concerning the level bomber effectiveness issue that was raised on this forum. We chose, out of hand, not to increase the antiaircraft effectiveness. The numbers were correct. Based upon the question, "Why didn't the Allies sink the entire Japanese combat fleet in mid-forty-two to late fourty-three with B-17 and B-24 bombers?", we tried to include new, realistic factors that actually limited these aircraft. The decision to reduce morale for low level bombing missions by level bombers came from the general lack of training, the increased stress involved from flying into harms way at 1000 feet instead of 25,000 feet, minor damage to crews and aircraft that would not count as damage aircraft, but would affect group readiness and the increased time required to plan such a mission.

Hope You all like our changes...

Michael Wood
_________________________________________________

Originally posted by Sonny
Have to agree that #2 does not seem right. Without suffering damage or being harrassed by CAP there is no reason to have low morale just by flying lower than 6000 feet.

[U2]

Hi

Thanks for making that clear to us Mike. Just by reading #2 it does not make sense but when you tell us the reason why it seems like you have done the right thing. It sure will change the way I and others will play the game. Interesting.....
Dan

[Wilhammer]

Oh yes, this low level hvy bomber change will go a long way to solve a problem endemic to all wargaming: The desire to fight to the last man of every unit.

And what a complex, but elegant solution being provided. They could of just thrown in a 'fudge' factor, but no, they actually had to modify a few things based on logic and historical data, and make a solution founded in logic and not 'fudge'.

How very nice of you!