Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal Forum Index

Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal


 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal Forum Index -> Topics -> New Features
Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 656

PostPosted: Thu 28 Dec - 23:55 (2017)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

Hi All


I have a lot of time off at the moment so I’m trying to help Bladerunner out.


What are your top 5 thing would you like to see improved or added for the 2P version of the game or for the game in general.  


Start by going to this poll first.


http://cbfg.xooit.org/t365-Which-next-feature-for-the-2P-game.htm

Here are some other ideas I have heard.


- Being able so send invites so that you can play with a certain player.  
I know of several incidents where someone wanted to play with a certain person. But when they set up the game, someone joined it before the other person could.  


- Add PBY to San Christobal in the Guadalcanal game. Due to the limited number of bombers for the US, it is very difficult for the US to be able to scout and attack at the same time.  The US forces are out numbered by the IJN.  The only way for the US to win is to use there forces sparingly but this requires good scouting capabilities to provide intelligence.  Adding PBY to SC will provide this and is historically accurate.  


- Event Report: It would be nice to have some editing ability when communicating with other players through the Event Report. Sometime I accidentally post something when I wasn’t finished with my thought and would like to clean it up or delete it and start over.  I think the best way to do this without creating confusion is to allow a player to go back and edit or delete a message as many time as they want BUT!!! once the opposing player has opened the event report no further editing can be done.  


- Event Report: Increase the size of the message box or just being able to write more text.  For example expand it to 500 characters. 


- Post Game Communication: It would be nice to communicate with players after a game to congratulate them or ask if they want to play another game.  The best way to do this is if. Player sends a message via the Event Report.  The game sends an Alert just as it does when notifying that it’s his turn to play. But instead of a red badge with “1” it can have the letter “M” for message.  Another idea is to allow a PM through the forum if the forum allows to do it.


- Bismarck Sea need to be rebalanced. See thread here. http://cbfg.xooit.org/t421-2P-Bismarck-Sea-Rebalancing-Needed.htm#p2575


Last edited by USS Archerfish on Sat 30 Dec - 21:41 (2017); edited 4 times in total
Back to top
Publicité






PostPosted: Thu 28 Dec - 23:55 (2017)    Post subject: Publicité

PublicitéSupprimer les publicités ?
Back to top
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 312

PostPosted: Fri 29 Dec - 00:37 (2017)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

Hi Archerfish,

Sorry i was more or less "offline" during the last 2 weeks but i am back on duty again.


Last edited by larsenjp on Fri 29 Dec - 11:17 (2017); edited 1 time in total
Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 656

PostPosted: Fri 29 Dec - 01:27 (2017)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

Larsenjp


This is a Beta issue.  Please place this comment under 2.3 “Your Opinion on the new Air Search” test.  


Back to top
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 312

PostPosted: Fri 29 Dec - 11:17 (2017)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

Archerfish,

Sorry.
Done...


Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 656

PostPosted: Fri 29 Dec - 18:18 (2017)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

larsenjp wrote:
Archerfish,

Sorry.
Done...


No worries


Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 656

PostPosted: Sat 30 Dec - 04:44 (2017)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

The online game speed needs to be improved.  I just bout a new iPad so I know there are no issues on my end.  The game most of the time plays fast but sometimes it can be very slow.  I don’t if it’s because of small bug or if there is an issue with the server.  

Back to top
Bladerunner
Administrateur

Offline

Joined: 25 Jan 2016
Posts: 1,011
Localisation: France

PostPosted: Thu 1 Feb - 18:54 (2018)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

Good list, I will see what I could add in the coming versions

Back to top
currymutton
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 27 May 2016
Posts: 644

PostPosted: Mon 5 Feb - 08:20 (2018)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

Scenarioes:

1. Coral Sea: Air Reinforcement should be default on for US player, the Japanese airpower is simply too damn strong and US is too wimpy even to threathen the IJN CVBG, unless the Japan player was not fully awake

2. Midway: kinda balanced and I suggest a little more airpower for IJN to search

3. Op Watchtower: even if the Japan player is unlucky (wink), IJN is simply too powerful, the time works against the US player

4. Eastern Solomons: more search planes for US player, like in Guadalcanal

5. SZ: same as above

6. Gaudalcanal: same as  ES

7. Operation Ke: should have been included

8. Bismark Sea: US is way too overpowered and it is almost impossible for the Japan player to reach Lae. If it is not possible to be balanced, opt it out from the 2P game

9. Revenge Raids: boring, very boring, the US player is hard to lose in this one

My $.02


Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 656

PostPosted: Wed 7 Feb - 06:21 (2018)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

currymutton wrote:
Scenarioes:

1. Coral Sea: Air Reinforcement should be default on for US player, the Japanese airpower is simply too damn strong and US is too wimpy even to threathen the IJN CVBG, unless the Japan player was not fully awake

2. Midway: kinda balanced and I suggest a little more airpower for IJN to search

3. Op Watchtower: even if the Japan player is unlucky (wink), IJN is simply too powerful, the time works against the US player

4. Eastern Solomons: more search planes for US player, like in Guadalcanal

5. SZ: same as above 

6. Gaudalcanal: same as  ES

7. Operation Ke: should have been included

8. Bismark Sea: US is way too overpowered and it is almost impossible for the Japan player to reach Lae. If it is not possible to be balanced, opt it out from the 2P game

9. Revenge Raids: boring, very boring, the US player is hard to lose in this one

My $.02




My reply to Curry.

1. Yes agree!  Or just start the B-17 and P-39 in PM


2. Really?  The IJN has plenty of planes.


3. Yes I agree whole heartedly!  This was a cake walk for the US historically.  Now it’s a brutal struggle.  Japanese surface fleet is way too powerful. As IJN I can build 3 full TF and just park them on Guadalcanal.  Game over. One full BB TF is enough. 


4. Yes, I absolutely agree!  I’ve been saying this for a while now.  Need PBY on Santa Cruz.


5. Agree. (Plus B-17 and PBYs we’re performing searches out of Guadalcanal  from this battle and onward). See PBY in History forum. 


6. Agree


7. What should have been included?


8. Yes agree.  US way too powerful but historically accurate.  The best way to balance this is to add the Gasmata airfield. It was still in use at the time of the battle.  It will allow the IJN to use more aircraft to provide CAP for the TRS TF.  Plus medium bomber can threaten PM. I think it would add more dynamics to the battle.  Other option is to cut US bombers by 25% or more. 


9.  Yes, very restrictive for the US.


Back to top
Bladerunner
Administrateur

Offline

Joined: 25 Jan 2016
Posts: 1,011
Localisation: France

PostPosted: Fri 23 Feb - 16:41 (2018)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

For the visibility of messages, I have designed it simply like this
Unread messages are shown in a small bubble




Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 656

PostPosted: Fri 23 Feb - 18:04 (2018)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

Okay

Back to top
Bladerunner
Administrateur

Offline

Joined: 25 Jan 2016
Posts: 1,011
Localisation: France

PostPosted: Sat 24 Feb - 10:20 (2018)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

The message length has been increased to 200 chars
and the ability to edit a message not yet read




Back to top
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 312

PostPosted: Sat 24 Feb - 14:56 (2018)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

Nice. Okay

BTW, i was wondering about the level of intelligence players have in the game.
I think this should be less.

As an example, i think that the higher level of intelligence about an enemy TF should give the exact number and types of ships but maybe not their name and not their current value (if they have been damaged).

The same when getting information about damages from a surface battle: players should only have information about light damages, heavy damages, on fire etc. things that can be seen from outside but no information as e.g. 1 turret destroyed out of 3 etc. Detailed information should be given only to the owner.

More or less the same for planes losses after air battle; players should know exactly their own losses but should have only indications about enemy losses (to be determined how to do this but generally the trend was to increase the enemy losses, a phenomenon well known as overclaim; overclaim was heavy on every theaters of WW2 but it was especially high regarding the Japanese who were really very optimistic).

Finally it means that players should also have limited information during the game when accessing to the victory panel, and especially the details. They should have the details of their own losses but only limited information about enemy losses. Maybe the panel should provide information about the points but no more details regarding the enemy losses (e.g. the player is awarded 12 points because of planes losses suffered by the enemy but no details about types and number of planes within types that were destroyed; the same for ships).

My 2 cents of course. Wink


Back to top
Bladerunner
Administrateur

Offline

Joined: 25 Jan 2016
Posts: 1,011
Localisation: France

PostPosted: Sat 24 Feb - 15:30 (2018)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game Reply with quote

This could be good to have such a fog if war on the losses which will be removed at the end of the game
You pilots could exaggerate their claim and you may get a big surprise at the end


I note the idea for later, later, later ....


Back to top
Contenu Sponsorisé






PostPosted: Today at 10:24 (2018)    Post subject: 2P Wish List - How to Improve 2P Game

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal Forum Index -> Topics -> New Features All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  

Index | Administration Panel | Create own nforum | Free support forum | Free forums directory | Report a violation | Conditions générales d'utilisation
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group