|
What's happening at Port Moresby?
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 05:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:15 |
|
|
The destroyed squads in Singapore are looking a bit lopsided in the wrong direction. But hopefully they surrender soon, the Allied values just keep sinking.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 08:00
|
|
|
It still blows me away how much of a fortress Singapore is compared to reality. Maybe it needs its own mechanic, a bit like how Pearl Harbour works.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 08:53
|
|
|
Gort posted:It still blows me away how much of a fortress Singapore is compared to reality. Maybe it needs its own mechanic, a bit like how Pearl Harbour works. yeah, the odds are pretty heavily stacked against the Japanese as it is, it doesn't make any sense for things to be harder than reality.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 09:24
|
|
|
Good to finally see some of the big guys in action. Maybe we'll even see a carrier battle?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 09:44
|
|
|
Splode posted:yeah, the odds are pretty heavily stacked against the Japanese as it is, it doesn't make any sense for things to be harder than reality. Eeeeeh, there's a lot more inaccuracies in Japan's favor than the other way around. A lot more.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 10:53
|
|
|
RA Rx posted:Eeeeeh, there's a lot more inaccuracies in Japan's favor than the other way around. A lot more. For example?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 13:48
|
|
|
Gort posted:For example? Cooperation between the army and navy's the biggest historical discrepancy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 13:55
|
|
|
TildeATH posted:That's because he forgot to upgrade them. They're all biplanes right now. Those were pre-Kates, Betties upgrade from Nells.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
   Its mini heart attack time, but we get away without shots being fired.  Another massed enemy air attack smashes our planes on the ground. We do damage the attackers, but the enemy certainly come out on top here.  We put more bombs into the two battleships.  We are so close to having the better adjusted AV here. And the first unit is destroyed, which will help us.   Its so tempting to try a shock attack at Singapore, but I shall resist. For a little while longer anyway. Their Bombardment AV was down to 70, so we may finally be seeing the end of this! We lost a load of planes today, maybe we can return the favour.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
It may be time to get those carriers out of the Java Sea before those British BB's find them. Unless the bombing has sufficiently damaged them to the point of them being toothless.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
60 kg bombs won't do much, might blow off an AA gun if it hits the right place. If most of them were 250s or even some 500s then they might be hurting a bit more.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
goatface posted:60 kg bombs won't do much, might blow off an AA gun if it hits the right place. If most of them were 250s or even some 500s then they might be hurting a bit more. Is there any way to tell what bombs they were carrying? Or even make a good guess? I'm guessing no, because grog games dot tee ex tee.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
High systems damage makes it very tough to put out fires. Hopefully that is what is happening to those BBs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Is there any way to tell what bombs they were carrying? Or even make a good guess? I'm guessing no, because grog games dot tee ex tee. It only states the bomb type if it impacts the target so for all intents and purposes yes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Is there any way to tell what bombs they were carrying? Or even make a good guess? I'm guessing no, because grog games dot tee ex tee. Yes, it's in airframe description. Or in the external utility, if you don't want to wade through unresponsive UI with awful font and text contrast. E: I don't think airframes can be armed by bombs smaller than their stated loadout, except for torpedo bombers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
goatface posted:60 kg bombs won't do much, might blow off an AA gun if it hits the right place. "I say old chap, the rain's picking up again."
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
Japanese torpedos: Literally the best in the world at this time Japanese bombs: a total joke.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Is there any way to tell what bombs they were carrying? Or even make a good guess? I'm guessing no, because grog games dot tee ex tee. Yes and no. The game does show torpedos properly, but bombs are condensed into GP, AP, or other categories. It's strange because bombs, like torpedos, were constantly being tested and developed. steinrokkan posted:Yes, it's in airframe description. Or in the external utility, if you don't want to wade through unresponsive UI with awful font and text contrast. Your E: is correct, as far as I know, the game does not show the bomb that replaces the torpedo. The notable example is the G4M which will use an 800kg bomb instead of its torpedo. Also, the UI isn't unresponsive if you add some changes to the shortcut target properties. Thanks to the grog thread, I've gotten WitP to run incredibly fast on my pc, with virtually no slow-down. Text is also readable.    F: Front C: Center TR: Top Rear S: Sides R: Rear INT: Interior XT: Exterior (wings)
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Yes and no. The game does show torpedos properly, but bombs are condensed into GP, AP, or other categories. It's strange because bombs, like torpedos, were constantly being tested and developed. The single pixel strong text still hurts my eyes  compared to the Windows native interface of the external manager. Also it allows you to compare two airframes side by side, which is cool for planning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:The single pixel strong text still hurts my eyes If you don't have a giant table with aircraft data references, IJN bomb data, and multiple encyclopedias of land, air, and naval assets to constantly read and organize your forces with then, simply put, you're doing it wrong 
Jobbo_Fett fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Apr 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Also, the UI isn't unresponsive if you add some changes to the shortcut target properties. Thanks to the grog thread, I've gotten WitP to run incredibly fast on my pc, with virtually no slow-down. Text is also readable. I must have missed this in the Grog thread. Mind reposting the relevant details here?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
"F:\Matrix Games\War in the Pacific Admiral's Edition\War in the Pacific Admiral Edition.exe" -cpu4 -w -px1600 -py1000 -multiaudio -dd_sw -altFont -deepColor -archive -skipVideo
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:"F:\Matrix Games\War in the Pacific Admiral's Edition\War in the Pacific Admiral Edition.exe" -cpu4 -w -px1600 -py1000 -multiaudio -dd_sw -altFont -deepColor -archive -skipVideo Thanks, but I'm not sure if it's working. I already had it running in windowed mode, but it looks the same size as before. Any signs to look for? Grumio fucked around with this message at 09:19 on Apr 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 09:12
|
|
|
.
Grumio fucked around with this message at 09:26 on Apr 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 09:18
|
|
|
Feel for me, for speed of updates I run it at the same resolution you see in the images - so I have a tiny box in the middle of my screen. On the plus side, I don't have to resized every image I take. Quick question for my sleep addled brain. I need to put the KB with naval engineers to get them to resupply torps right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 11:04
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:Feel for me, for speed of updates I run it at the same resolution you see in the images - so I have a tiny box in the middle of my screen. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 11:14 on Apr 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 11:12
|
|
|
Grumio posted:Thanks, but I'm not sure if it's working. I already had it running in windowed mode, but it looks the same size as before. Any signs to look for? To be honest, the windowed mode size doesn't appear to want to change. I'm just too lazy to take it out of the line, and/or hope that it does stat to magically works. It should still be lightyears faster than stock though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 11:56
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:Feel for me, for speed of updates I run it at the same resolution you see in the images - so I have a tiny box in the middle of my screen. I didn't know off the top of my head, but the from the Manual, page 165: 7.2.1.10.1 CARRIER-BASED ORDNANCE Carrier-based aircraft require ordnance in order to complete missions. The ordnance carried is reflected in the Max Sorties value shown on the ship display. Each strike or escort mission executed by the Air Groups on the ship will use up some sorties. Once the sortie value is zero, the groups cannot execute offensive missions. The Max Sorties can be replenished at an appropriate sized base. 7.2.1.10.2.1 SHIP BASED TORPEDO SUPPLY TBs will expend torpedo ordnance in the same manner as Max Sorties is expended. TBs will either expend torpedo or Max Sorties, not both. Once all torpedoes have been expended, then bombs will be used. 7.2.1.10.2.2 LAND BASED TORPEDO SUPPLY On land, torpedoes are supplied from Air HQs or appropriate Base Forces that carry a “Torpedo Ordnance” device. The Air HQ or BF expends supply at the base to “purchase” torpedoes that are stored in the Air HQ or BF. Each Air HQ or BF can have a torpedo level set. This represents the number of torpedoes that the unit will automatically try to maintain. Command HQs can directly supply torpedoes to groups by expending supply. It does not need to keep a torpedo reserve. When a group is ordered to attack ships, the group checks for any BF or HQ in the same base. If one is found, a number of torpedoes equal to the planes flying are expended from the BF or HQ. And resupply rules (page 212) 9.3.3.2 CARGO AND FUEL HANDLING This is the total amount of “over the pier” and “thru the pipe” load/unload that can be done in a port of that size. The cargo handling and fueling limits are Daily values, the others limits are constant. Rearming and Loading Troops consumes cargo capacity, as does loading supplies, resources, fuel in barrels, and aircraft. Refueling and loading ships with oil or fuel (other than in barrels) consumes fueling capacity. Once the daily cargo/fuel limits are reached, no more cargo handling/fueling can take place that day. Cargo limit can be increased by Naval Support (extra stevedoring) but not fuel limits. Undocked TFs can load/unload cargo at any port, but can only refuel if the port is size 5 or larger (as smaller ports do not have equipment to support it). Rearm Level uses a rearm cost for each device aboard a ship. For Mines, ASW devices and Torpedoes, the load cost is used (this is usually the weight of the weapon). For guns (Naval, DP, flak), double the effect (as load cost does not reflect the size of ammo) Aircraft Sorties has a flat cost of 500. Note the large jump at a level 7 port, which basically insures that torpedoes, most mines, and Battleship size guns cannot be rearmed at smaller ports. Rearm Limit is applied to each device on a ship being rearmed. Depending on the load cost of each weapon and the adjusted capability of the port, some or all of the weapons may not be rearmed. A medium sized port might be able to rearm cruiser guns and smaller, but not BB guns, torpedoes, or mines. Naval Support Adjustments for: »» Cargo Handling = plus 10 for each undamaged Naval Support Device Present. »» Rearm Level = plus 5 for each undamaged Naval Support Device Present. »» Repairs = 100 undamaged Naval Support Devices(NS) approximately equals an AR, 50 NS approximately equals a tender. so perhaps you'd just got them in too small a port and they're overwhelming the resupply/rearm capacity? Grumio fucked around with this message at 13:24 on Apr 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 13:14
|
|
|
I know it's been said but good lord that's obtuse grognardy and extreme analysis retentive
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
  New landings at Ambon and whatever that base is next to it.  drat Dutch subs and their working torpedoes.   The Enemy reopen the road to Hankow. Most of the Chinese strength is now in or around the city. Our own losses are horrendous.  Owch, that was a bad hit in China, but we've done a lot of damage there, so we are about due some.  I so want to believe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
Grumio posted:Rules And then flip over to page 284 to see the ship rearmament table. The tl;dr is to rearm torpedo sorties, you need a size 7 port without finagling. The good news is Batavia can be built up to that level if the AI didn't do it already. The bad news is if the AI didn't expand the port to 7, it'll take a while for you to do it yourself. So what can you do in the meantime? I'm not familiar with the Japanese OOB (I've only played the Allies), but if you have any AE or AKE support ships, fill one of them up with supply and have them dock at the port. Alternatively, look into your base forces and naval HQ units for "Naval Support" squads. The table says you need 160 naval support to rearm torpedo sorties, but it also says each naval support squad provides 5 "points" of that, so 32 squads. Why couldn't they just divide everything by 5?  There were some questions about where those feared Betties have been. Arming air groups with torpedoes is its own small mess which is one of the reasons I like playing the Allies: their land-based anti shipping planes primarily use bombs. Basically, you need to find a base force or air HQ unit that has the "Torpedo Ordinance" device and stick it in the same hex as your bomber group. For the cases of air HQs, you can have it as far away as its command radius, but that's still usually 5 hexes or less. Also, I think you manually have to tell that unit to magically transmute supply into torpedoes every time it runs low/out. bunnyofdoom posted:I know it's been said but good lord that's obtuse grognardy and extreme analysis retentive This game's rules make the current edition of D&D's feel sensible and well-organized by comparison 
Slippery42 fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Apr 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Slippery42 posted:This game's rules make the current edition of D&D's feel sensible and well-organized by comparison At least it's not 3.5/Pathfinder. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
What are the chances the Revenge actually sunk? Could the bombing have done enough to keep them from stopping the flooding?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
Duckaerobics posted:What are the chances the Revenge actually sunk? Could the bombing have done enough to keep them from stopping the flooding? Depends on a lot of stuff, really. Did any of the bombs kill damage crews, did they start any fires - what about electrical systems? - flooding, etc. Also on the types and sizes of bombs used. That being said, they seemed to be hounded quite a bit, and I'd be surprised if either the Revenge or the Resolution didn't sink.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
Slippery42 posted:And then flip over to page 284 to see the ship rearmament table. The tl;dr is to rearm torpedo sorties, you need a size 7 port without finagling. The good news is Batavia can be built up to that level This is why you take Surabaya, the better Javan port ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Slippery42 posted:There were some questions about where those feared Betties have been. Arming air groups with torpedoes is its own small mess which is one of the reasons I like playing the Allies: their land-based anti shipping planes primarily use bombs. Basically, you need to find a base force or air HQ unit that has the "Torpedo Ordinance" device and stick it in the same hex as your bomber group. For the cases of air HQs, you can have it as far away as its command radius, but that's still usually 5 hexes or less. Also, I think you manually have to tell that unit to magically transmute supply into torpedoes every time it runs low/out. The Betties and Nells (which are basically the same airframe) would be making attacks even without torpedoes. I guess they haven't been making an appearance because Grey has failed to capture forward bases that could be used to launch twin engine attacks, or because he has neglected land based air force management.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:The Betties and Nells (which are basically the same airframe) would be making attacks even without torpedoes. I guess they haven't been making an appearance because Grey has failed to capture forward bases that could be used to launch twin engine attacks, or because he has neglected land based air force management. The LBA are all still biplanes.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
Man the AI is stupid.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 01:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:15 |
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Man the AI is stupid. This is why I've never been able to push a singleplayer game much into 1943. It's just SO GODAMNED DUMB. (The AI, I mean.)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 01:42
|
|
