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 

Next Priority Surface Ships
Goto page: <  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  >
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal Forum Index -> Topics -> New Features
Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Online

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 566

PostPosted: Sat 6 Oct - 14:36 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

Regarding this problem about managing ships damages after surface battles, i would suggest the following rules:
- AA: i don't think such damages should force a ship to withdraw
- oil leaks; to be discussed but to this point i do not think this should force the ship to withdraw
- turrets: i think that one turret disabled should be OK but the ship should be forced to withdraw if more 2 or more turrets are disabled
- structural damages: the ship should be forced to withdraw, whatever the other damages
- propulsion damages: same, the ship should be forced to withdraw

Then i think that such ships should be put into a dedicated detached TF/TG together with some escorting ships (number to be defined but at least one or two depending on the number of damaged ships) and sent back rearwards, i.e. Rabaul for the Japanese and Espiritu Santo for the US/Allied.
Maybe using "black" TF should be a solution even if the player will totally lose control of the ships. Plus the fact that some ships should be repaired, especially the ones suffering propulsion damages since propulsion may be restored; in this case, forcing the ship to withdraw should be reconsidered...
My 2 cents as usual... Wink



 


Back to top
Publicité






PostPosted: Sat 6 Oct - 14:36 (2018)    Post subject: Publicité

PublicitéSupprimer les publicités ?
Back to top
Bladerunner
Administrateur

Offline

Joined: 25 Jan 2016
Posts: 1,278
Localisation: France

PostPosted: Mon 8 Oct - 22:25 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

This change may also be a good thing for the AI behavior preventing it to expose its damage ships 

We may try the mandatory withdraw if heavily damaged ships
Using the black mark on TF.


This black TF have the disadvantage to be completely escaping player’s control, they can’t merge and may be easy preys


Back to top
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Online

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 566

PostPosted: Tue 9 Oct - 19:47 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

Yes, fully agree, behavior of black TFs is sometimes strange but i think it is the best and simplest solution.
Maybe an option should be to improve the moves of these black TF by putting some basic rules on it e.g. general direction towards rear main bases (i.e. Rabaul or Espiritu Santo) but still preserving safety of the ships (i.e. no move towards an enemy TF).


Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 823

PostPosted: Tue 16 Oct - 06:52 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

Here is my 2 cents


Regarding this problem about managing ships damages after surface battles, i would suggest the following rules:
- AA: i don't think such damages should force a ship to withdraw
Agree

- oil leaks; to be discussed but to this point i do not think this should force the ship to withdraw
Agree

- turrets: i think that one turret disabled should be OK but the ship should be forced to withdraw if more 2 or more turrets are disabled
I think they should retreat if they loose more than half. 

- structural damages: the ship should be forced to withdraw, whatever the other damages
It depends on how you define structural damage.  If it’s damage above deck no.  If it’s hull integrity then yes. 

- propulsion damages: same, the ship should be forced to withdraw
I’m not sure if this is really needed.  Players tend to detach ships with damaged propulsion’s. 


Ships should also leave if they loose more than their 2/3 their hull value. 


My main concern is the withdraw. If it’s automatic can the ga,e be programmed so that it takes the least valuable ship with it as a escort.  Ideally I would still like to have control over movement. It there a way you can still control the ship as long as you move int in the direction of Rubal or Santos?


Back to top
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Online

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 566

PostPosted: Tue 16 Oct - 18:08 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

I agree it depends how you define structural damages but it seems to me that this is serious damages with the ships generally sinking upon receiving another hit. So i'd say the ship should be force to withdraw. I understand it more or less as a critical hit but maybe i am wrong and in this is case it would be irrelevant to force a ship to withdraw because of it.


I agree about putting a limit to loss of hull values. 


Back to top
Bladerunner
Administrateur

Offline

Joined: 25 Jan 2016
Posts: 1,278
Localisation: France

PostPosted: Tue 16 Oct - 20:53 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

Suppose you have a cruiser which has received two torpedo hits.

As an admiral will you take the risl to lose the ship or remove it from the battle field


For the moment, the ship is heavily damaged when it has lost half its life point (3 hits on a South Dakota class)


Back to top
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Online

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 566

PostPosted: Tue 16 Oct - 23:04 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

How the 3 hits are defined?
Because i think that a South Dakota BB may easily sustain 3 hits from DDs 127mm guns; but maybe less easilty from BBs 356mm or 406mm guns...


Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 823

PostPosted: Wed 17 Oct - 02:58 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

Larsenjp, He’s talking about the ship’s Life Points on the upper right corner and not actual hit by shells.


By the way, You must always talk about US guns in “Inches”😁


Back to top
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Online

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 566

PostPosted: Wed 17 Oct - 13:03 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

Archer,
OK, so i guess this is behind.
Yes i know well about the damned imperial unit system but you know that the international unit ststem is metric... Wink


Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 823

PostPosted: Wed 17 Oct - 17:25 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

larsenjp wrote:
Archer,
OK, so i guess this is behind.
Yes i know well about the damned imperial unit system but you know that the international unit ststem is metric... Wink




LoL! Very Happy


Back to top
Bladerunner
Administrateur

Offline

Joined: 25 Jan 2016
Posts: 1,278
Localisation: France

PostPosted: Wed 17 Oct - 21:27 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

a gun looks bigger in metric system :-)


Retiring rule is like this.

Ok for you ?







Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 823

PostPosted: Thu 18 Oct - 08:11 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

👍

Back to top
currymutton
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 27 May 2016
Posts: 723

PostPosted: Wed 24 Oct - 10:45 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

Current beta has a problem getting the wrong ship to escort the withdrawing ship. Once i have a BB in perfect health escorting a burning CA away, and in the end, you know, the BB is forced outside the game without any chance of return

Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 823

PostPosted: Wed 24 Oct - 17:37 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

Yeah I would be pretty upset with that Curry. 


I wonder if players can be given an option to choose an escort.  An alert pops ups telling the player the following. “Ship has received heavy damage and must return for replairs.  Please select an escort.”  Or another option is to program the game to select the a ship with the lowest value.  I would prefer a choice. 


Back to top
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Online

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 566

PostPosted: Wed 24 Oct - 18:21 (2018)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships Reply with quote

Yes i agree.

The same with withdrawing TRS, same option should be great...


Back to top
Contenu Sponsorisé






PostPosted: Today at 16:36 (2019)    Post subject: Next Priority Surface Ships

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
Goto page: <  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  >
Page 4 of 5

 
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