Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Nik Mod Campaign Question

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Nik Mod Campaign Question Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 12:18:46 PM   
LTC B

 

Posts: 34
Joined: 6/7/2002
Status: offline 		Playing a PBEM game using Nikmod 5.4 as the US and we just hit 9/42. Been a great game so far, fairly historical results, even a Midway like carrier battle last month. Problem is, as the Allies, I'm running out of fighter planes (plenty of pilots) while my able opponent's fighter strength seems to be becoming greater in the past few weeks - just lost over 153 fighters to sweeps (over 200 Tojos and about as many Zeros just over the Solomons) in a two day turn, in exchange for about 60 enemy shot down. My fighter replacements are pretty much dry as is, before these recent losses.

So, guess my question is, is this normal with Nik mod? Seems pretty excessive. Think the problem was using the PDU option? Any suggestions?



Post #: 1
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 1:06:32 PM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline 		I'm playing the AI, but I began to run out of fighters in mid-1942. I freed some up by taking some of the West Coast groups to San Francisco and disbanding them. If there are no groups of that type there, this dumps the planes into the pool. This only works with 1.801. It was eliminated in 1.802 because some people were using it to train up pilots on float planes and transports and put them in combat aircraft using this because the pilots go into the pool when disbanded this way. If you just withdraw the group the pilots go into limbo until the group returns in 60 days.

Once I got some fighters back in the pool, I converted my remaining West Coast base groups back to obsolete fighters and used the P-40Es to fill out the depleted groups in the field.

You should probably discuss this with your oponent, since some people might find it gamey. The AI doesn't care.

Bill

(in reply to LTC B)
Post #: 2
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 2:12:20 PM   
Przemcio231


Posts: 1901
Joined: 10/11/2005
From: Warsaw,Poland,EU:)
Status: offline 		I mentioned this to Nik Once... the Allied Rep Fighter numbers are definetly to low... in every campaign

_____________________________



Pinky: Hey Brain what are we goeing to do this evening?
Brain: The Usual Pinky we will try to take over the World;)

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 3
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 2:25:46 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

I'm playing the AI, but I began to run out of fighters in mid-1942. I freed some up by taking some of the West Coast groups to San Francisco and disbanding them. If there are no groups of that type there, this dumps the planes into the pool. This only works with 1.801. It was eliminated in 1.802 because some people were using it to train up pilots on float planes and transports and put them in combat aircraft using this because the pilots go into the pool when disbanded this way. If you just withdraw the group the pilots go into limbo until the group returns in 60 days.

Once I got some fighters back in the pool, I converted my remaining West Coast base groups back to obsolete fighters and used the P-40Es to fill out the depleted groups in the field.

You should probably discuss this with your oponent, since some people might find it gamey. The AI doesn't care.

Bill


Ironically most Navy pilots experienced years of float plane duty in their careers so they skinned the wrong Cat. What they should be doing is lowering starting experience across the board, lowering experience gain rates and making it impossible for experience to increase beyond a certain threshold perhaps along the lines of the following...no exp beyond 60 except through A2A kills (1 exp point each), bomb hits on a ship (1 exp point each) or hits on a base (1 exp point per say 10 hits)


_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 4
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 3:23:13 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		In spite of "Europe First" all fighter groups in the USAAF were brought to strength with P-40s and P-39s as soon as the planes were produced. The last P-36s (in the Canal Zone) were replaced by March 42. P-36s served only as courier planes and as trainers after their brief moment of "glory" at PH. P-35s disappeared completely from the inventory whenever the ones in the Philippines were killed off. The 14th, 20th and one other FG that appear on the West Coast eventually deployed to Europe but were completely filled out with P-40s/P-39s. Not sure how to deal with this though.

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 5
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 3:32:22 PM   
Przemcio231


Posts: 1901
Joined: 10/11/2005
From: Warsaw,Poland,EU:)
Status: offline 		Ron how is your A2A system Working??? did you find a cure for the Uber CAP and KB Death Star Effect???

Yep that is the problem with the Allied Fighter rep rates... you are sticking with P-35's or something i think the Allied player should get enough P-40's and P-39's to upgrade all existing groups to the Middle of 1942 and enough to sustain a battle of attrition with the japs later

_____________________________



Pinky: Hey Brain what are we goeing to do this evening?
Brain: The Usual Pinky we will try to take over the World;)

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 6
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 4:29:47 PM   
Rob Brennan UK


Posts: 3685
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline 		I'm in the same boat in sept 1942. I keep the mohawks as i cannot afford 72+ P40's . I basically avoid air-air combat where i can, this includes burma where i have a shortage of hurricanes ( or will have if i engage), i miss the stock spits in june 42 badly.

One problem i find is i have lots of P39's but fighters cant upgrade to them only FB's and there aren't any/many on map that dont arrive as new groups. so i have P40 starved sqds and lots of spare P39's .. sigh. With the much lower P38 rates i don;t see how the allies can actually conduct an atritional war untill mid 43.

_____________________________

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)

(in reply to Przemcio231)
Post #: 7
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 4:56:12 PM   
LTC B

 

Posts: 34
Joined: 6/7/2002
Status: offline 		I get the impression its more than just a lack of US Production. I've managed to keep three groups and two squadrons of P-40s at about half strength, only by managing to keep planes such as the P-36 flying in less important areas. After one serious carrier engagement, I'm zero balance on F4F-4 replacements and all the Marines are flying the F4F-3.
But it seems that the Japanese production is off the charts, compounding the problem. My opponent said he's currently producing over 300 Tojos a month! Hell, at that rate, I'll be lucky to get air parity by '44!

(in reply to Rob Brennan UK)
Post #: 8
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 5:16:27 PM   
Rob Brennan UK


Posts: 3685
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline 		Thats the problem, Nik has reduced allied reinforcements to a more 'historical' level unfortunately it's easy for japan to gets its production through the roof but the allies are stuck and cannot react as they would have if japan prodeuced so many a/c IRL. (i.e send more a/c to the theatre to counter the increased japanese capacity).

I know its not possible but it would have been better IF the game managed allied replacemnets to be 100-400% greater per annum (i.e 100% parity in 41 and early 42, gradually increasing till a 5x amount in 45) as compared to what japanese production numbers are. IE Japan sticks to historical production then the allies get historical numbers but if japan cranks up the war material then the allies get more to compensate.

just my 2p

_____________________________

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)

(in reply to LTC B)
Post #: 9
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 5:48:16 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker


quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

I'm playing the AI, but I began to run out of fighters in mid-1942. I freed some up by taking some of the West Coast groups to San Francisco and disbanding them. If there are no groups of that type there, this dumps the planes into the pool. This only works with 1.801. It was eliminated in 1.802 because some people were using it to train up pilots on float planes and transports and put them in combat aircraft using this because the pilots go into the pool when disbanded this way. If you just withdraw the group the pilots go into limbo until the group returns in 60 days.

Once I got some fighters back in the pool, I converted my remaining West Coast base groups back to obsolete fighters and used the P-40Es to fill out the depleted groups in the field.

You should probably discuss this with your oponent, since some people might find it gamey. The AI doesn't care.

Bill


Ironically most Navy pilots experienced years of float plane duty in their careers so they skinned the wrong Cat. What they should be doing is lowering starting experience across the board, lowering experience gain rates and making it impossible for experience to increase beyond a certain threshold perhaps along the lines of the following...no exp beyond 60 except through A2A kills (1 exp point each), bomb hits on a ship (1 exp point each) or hits on a base (1 exp point per say 10 hits)



Prior to 1942, ALL USN pilots rotated regularly and were given experience flying everything in inventory. (This is one of the details the movie MIDWAY got right when they portray Heston's character flying the SBD "spur of the moment"....


_____________________________




(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 10
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 6:20:28 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Przemcio231

I mentioned this to Nik Once... the Allied Rep Fighter numbers are definetly to low... in every campaign



Too low???? Just look how durable your fighters are. My fighters with gun values of 12 aren´t able to take them down... Why would you want more fighters. The Hurricane is good enough to deal with every Jap plane, not to mention all those toys you get in 43....

(in reply to Przemcio231)
Post #: 11
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 7:24:57 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		In so far as US production is concerned there should be no P-26s, P-35s or P-36s in operational groups (the one's included in the game) by early in 1942. Reading the AARs, the Allied Player is pretty much consistently still using those aircraft far later than was the case. As someone mentioned there are likely to be very large numbers of P-39s in the pool but no squadrons that can upgrade to them.

A lack of truly competitive fighters on the part of the Allies (not that good compared to Zero) seems right for '42 but an overall lack of the more modern fighters (the ones that are sorta competitive) really doesn't feel right with history.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 12
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 7:27:20 PM   
Rob Brennan UK


Posts: 3685
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline 		The hurricane isnt the problem really. its the american planes or rather a lack of them. did the americans really have so few P40's in 1942 ? i guess so as much more intelligent people than me made the mods and they all have reduced allied replacements imo.

Unfortunately its made lop sided by japans ability to get all its future R&D factories cranking out early/mid war planes as R$D doenst matter much till 6 months before intorduction. Maybe really penalise japanses R&D if the factories are used for something else. Just throwing ideas around really and not trying to be an allied fanboy.

Anyway come late 43 the allies will have enough to hurt japan i hope . No large allied hammer in the first 2 years is probably a good thing the more i ponder it. and once the allies get hellcats and new a/c the huge number of older japanese planes won;t matter much as they all become targets

Actually the more i think about what i pondered earlier about allied production in line with japan doesn't work as it penalises japan for good production management , not a good thing. And Nikmod does prevent the commonwealth from turning china into an air theatre for the allies too early. and i do feel like im in a good defensive posture which is ok in mid 42. just have to be careful and fight over friendly territory whereever possible.

ok im rambling

_____________________________

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 13
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 9:10:12 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Przemcio231

Ron how is your A2A system Working??? did you find a cure for the Uber CAP and KB Death Star Effect???

Yep that is the problem with the Allied Fighter rep rates... you are sticking with P-35's or something i think the Allied player should get enough P-40's and P-39's to upgrade all existing groups to the Middle of 1942 and enough to sustain a battle of attrition with the japs later


Too early to say much as we are just into March 42 but the A2A is substantially less bloody. Opposing squadrons can stay in contact at the front line for weeks and still maintain well over 50% readiness if there are replacement aircraft available because the new pilots are not completely at the mercy of 90+ pilots. I've only just had my Dutch fighters emaciated but that was thanks to KB chewing them up for a week. They were holding their own vs LBA.

There is also no ability for the Allied player to keep flying anything older than P-40E/Fs in the version I'm playing as I've always thought having perpetual replacement rates for obsolete aircraft no longer in production was just plain wrong.


_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Przemcio231)
Post #: 14
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 9:16:44 PM   
Przemcio231


Posts: 1901
Joined: 10/11/2005
From: Warsaw,Poland,EU:)
Status: offline 		Ronnie my boy thats great news but did you increased the P-40 Rep Rate??

< Message edited by Przemcio231 -- 10/22/2006 9:19:08 PM >

_____________________________



Pinky: Hey Brain what are we goeing to do this evening?
Brain: The Usual Pinky we will try to take over the World;)

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 15
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 11:38:31 PM   
RevRick


Posts: 2617
Joined: 9/16/2000
From: Thomasville, GA
Status: offline 		I won't tell you what I think of the Allied production rate in the Nikmods. It borders somewhere between ludicrous and absurd, though.

_____________________________

"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 16
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/22/2006 11:51:05 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		As far as the European Theater is concerned US forces didn't enter into ground combat until Nov 42.  The B-17s got into it a bit earlier (8AF) but it is my understanding that most of the early escorts were provided by the RAF.  Kinda wonder whether a significantly large proportion of production of the '42
P-40s ended up heading West (from USA) rather than East.  It may be that the best way to figure out the P-40 thing is to investigate which squadrons/groups ended up in Europe in 1942 as opposed to trying to figure out how many (#wise) P-40s ended up in the Pacific...with active combat groups only in the Pacific during most of 42 replacement aircraft would most likely have headed that way to replace losses.  Just a thought haven't looked into it much other than to find out that the P-35/36 had no role in the war in any theater after 12/41.     

(in reply to RevRick)
Post #: 17
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/23/2006 1:02:51 AM   
mc3744


Posts: 1957
Joined: 3/9/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline 		Just when I was going to try Nik Mod out.

This seems like a real problem. Japanese fighter super production can be a problem in the stock game, if it's made worse by the Nik Mod ...

I guess I'll stick to the stock.

What about BigB? I read the changes and seemed pretty good to me.
Anybody tried that out?

_____________________________

Nec recisa recedit

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 18
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/23/2006 1:09:03 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob
Prior to 1942, ALL USN pilots rotated regularly and were given experience flying everything in inventory. (This is one of the details the movie MIDWAY got right when they portray Heston's character flying the SBD "spur of the moment"....


I think the complaints came about because Japanese players could dump their floatplane, patrol, and transport groups with high experience into the pool late in the game and get 90 experience pilots coming out of the pool to fill out fighter groups. I haven't read what Japan did with these auxillary pilots, but I know Germany did this late in the war.

There is some unreality with it because the pilot with lots of experience flying Petes doesn't have any experience hit when they transfer to Raidens. In the real world, pilots that transistioned to fighters from other aircraft had their hands full for a while.

The USAAF had a conversion program for bomber pilots who couldn't take the responsibility for a full crew, but were OK flying alone. The loss rate for these former bomber pilots was so high the program was discontinued. their reflexes were trained for throwing a heavy B-17 around and a P-47 or P-51 was just too different.

Bill

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 19
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/23/2006 1:19:11 AM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline 		Stock? Nah....I would rather put up with the reduced production rates. If playing with PDU on it may be wise to come an agreement with the IJN player not to abuse the system to much.

I am still relatively new to the game, but after looking at various AARs that use stock A2A model, it is a game killer for the IJN later in the war as attacks against heavy CAP take almost 100% losses.

(in reply to mc3744)
Post #: 20
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/23/2006 1:21:45 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

As far as the European Theater is concerned US forces didn't enter into ground combat until Nov 42. The B-17s got into it a bit earlier (8AF) but it is my understanding that most of the early escorts were provided by the RAF. Kinda wonder whether a significantly large proportion of production of the '42
P-40s ended up heading West (from USA) rather than East. It may be that the best way to figure out the P-40 thing is to investigate which squadrons/groups ended up in Europe in 1942 as opposed to trying to figure out how many (#wise) P-40s ended up in the Pacific...with active combat groups only in the Pacific during most of 42 replacement aircraft would most likely have headed that way to replace losses. Just a thought haven't looked into it much other than to find out that the P-35/36 had no role in the war in any theater after 12/41.


Quite a few P-40s ended up in North Africa. The groups destined for England usually started with P-40s or P-39s, but they all converted to a newer fighter before shipping out.

I have read that the USAAF in the Pacific lacked enough fighters to convert the P-39s to P-40s in 1942. However, there were plenty of P-40s for the groups that had them. Keeping P-40 squadrons at full strength was not a severe problem.

In the Nik Mod/CHS the replacement rate for P-40Es is definitely too low. I'm in October 1942 in my game against the AI. I have enough P-40Es to keep my frontline squadrons up to strength, but part of that is due to about half of my front line squadrons converting to P-38s. All my non-frontline units are flying P-40Bs. Even my fighter units in Hawaii are flying P-40Bs. It was June or July before I was able to convert the P-26 unit in Hawaii. That was only when I disbanded a bunch of fighter units into the pool at San Francisco.

I broke the back of the KB in July 42 with a Midway-like battle around Rabaul. (I got just as lucky as the USN did in the real battle too.) Since then, the Japanese have mostly been on the defensive and my fighters have not been under severe stress. If the Japanese were putting any serious pressure on any of my bases defended with P-40s, I would have a replacement problem.

Bill

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 21
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/23/2006 1:57:08 AM   
ctangus


Posts: 2153
Joined: 10/13/2005
From: Boston, Mass.
Status: offline 		I wouldn't dismiss Nik mod so quickly. There's very few plane replacement rates that are different than stock. (After reading this thread I wanted to check it to see if I was getting hosed in my Nik mod game. )

I just checked the replacement rates for the main '42 fighters & FBs in both Nik mod & stock. (P-39Ds, P-40Bs & Es, P-38Gs, P-400s, Hurricanes, Spits, F4F3s & F4F4s.)

The rates are mostly the same as stock. The only exceptions are:

- P-38Gs: Down from 100/month to 25. This is the only change I'd question.
- Spitfires: None in Nik-mod until mid-43 and then 20/month. 50/month in stock starting June-42. Sucks for an AFB like me, but IRL Spits didn't arrive in CBI until this time.
- Hurricane IIc (cannon-armed): None in stock - 25/month in Nik-mod.
- F4F4 - 90/month in stock, and 45/month in Nik Mod.

So there's three 1942 fighters with less-than-stock replacement rates. On the other hand, there's one additional fighter-bomber that the allies don't have in stock. Plus, with the air combat much less bloody, the pools are depleted much slower.

(in reply to mc3744)
Post #: 22
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/23/2006 3:16:20 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ctangus

I wouldn't dismiss Nik mod so quickly. There's very few plane replacement rates that are different than stock. (After reading this thread I wanted to check it to see if I was getting hosed in my Nik mod game. )

I just checked the replacement rates for the main '42 fighters & FBs in both Nik mod & stock. (P-39Ds, P-40Bs & Es, P-38Gs, P-400s, Hurricanes, Spits, F4F3s & F4F4s.)

The rates are mostly the same as stock. The only exceptions are:

- P-38Gs: Down from 100/month to 25. This is the only change I'd question.
- Spitfires: None in Nik-mod until mid-43 and then 20/month. 50/month in stock starting June-42. Sucks for an AFB like me, but IRL Spits didn't arrive in CBI until this time.
- Hurricane IIc (cannon-armed): None in stock - 25/month in Nik-mod.
- F4F4 - 90/month in stock, and 45/month in Nik Mod.

So there's three 1942 fighters with less-than-stock replacement rates. On the other hand, there's one additional fighter-bomber that the allies don't have in stock. Plus, with the air combat much less bloody, the pools are depleted much slower.


I've been playing the CHS, which I believe is based on the Nik mod. I loaded up both the stock and CHS equivalent to Scen 15. P-40E deliveries are the same for both.

The CHS adds two P-38 types, the P-38F and P-38L. The total deliveries of the F are 30 a month and the G ammounts to 36 a month. In stock the G deliveries are 100 a month. So you are getting 34 fewer early P-38s a month, which will put more pressure on your P-40s. In the real world, P-38s did not begin to arrive in any numbers in the war zone until the very end of 1942. When Yammamoto was shot down, the P-38s used were specially sent to Guadalcanal for that mission and then sent back to rear areas as soon as they accomplished their mission.

One big difference between the two are the deliveries of LB 30s and B-17Es. Both are dramatically reduced in CHS.

This is only tangentially related, but one beef I have is that the armament of many aircraft is wrong. The TBF in every version I've seen, including stock has 1 .303 firing forward. The TBF-1 had 1 .50 firing through the propeller and all versions after that (including the 1c) had one .50 in each wing. That one doesn't have much impact on the game since there doesn't seem to be a flak supression effect from strafing. If there was, the B-25 would be a much better anti-shipping weapon. Against anything smaller than a destroyer, the array of .50s firing forward on the B-25 tended to make the crew on the target hide rather than shoot back.

In CHS both Hurricanes are wrong. The IIb has 8 .303s when it actually had 4 20mm cannons. The IId/IV has 4 20mm. The IId had a pair of 40mm guns and was used in the anti-tank role. The IV had a universal wing and was a multipurpose fighter bomber. It sometimes carried 40mm, it also was sometimes a bomb carrier. The range on the IId/IV is also way too short.

I couldn't find anything definitive on the CBI use of Hurricanes. From what I found the first ones used were IIas with 12 .303s and they were replaced by IIbs and IIcs with the 4 20mms. A couple of squadrons flew IIds and IVs.

Bill

(in reply to ctangus)
Post #: 23
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/23/2006 3:30:57 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

In CHS both Hurricanes are wrong. The IIb has 8 .303s when it actually had 4 20mm cannons. The IId/IV has 4 20mm. The IId had a pair of 40mm guns and was used in the anti-tank role. The IV had a universal wing and was a multipurpose fighter bomber. It sometimes carried 40mm, it also was sometimes a bomb carrier. The range on the IId/IV is also way too short.

I couldn't find anything definitive on the CBI use of Hurricanes. From what I found the first ones used were IIas with 12 .303s and they were replaced by IIbs and IIcs with the 4 20mms. A couple of squadrons flew IIds and IVs.

Bill


That's because CHS Hurricane II is not the cannon armed variant..that one never served in CBI, unlike Hurri IV. I could be wrong, but I think only MG-armed Hurricane II-variants served in CBI.

< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 10/23/2006 3:32:50 PM >

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 24
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/23/2006 3:52:26 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline 		IIRC Nik stated that he didn´t even touch P40 replacement rate. And when I see how hard it is to shoot Allied fighters down then there are definetely enough around.

Of course it´s off when the Japanese player ramps up his fighter production to 600 planes per month. That´s "stupid" in stock or in any mod, when playing PBEM. Well, the AI doesn´t complain....

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 25
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/23/2006 4:14:34 PM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1829
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

In CHS both Hurricanes are wrong. The IIb has 8 .303s when it actually had 4 20mm cannons. The IId/IV has 4 20mm. The IId had a pair of 40mm guns and was used in the anti-tank role. The IV had a universal wing and was a multipurpose fighter bomber. It sometimes carried 40mm, it also was sometimes a bomb carrier. The range on the IId/IV is also way too short.

I couldn't find anything definitive on the CBI use of Hurricanes. From what I found the first ones used were IIas with 12 .303s and they were replaced by IIbs and IIcs with the 4 20mms. A couple of squadrons flew IIds and IVs.

Bill


That's because CHS Hurricane II is not the cannon armed variant..that one never served in CBI, unlike Hurri IV. I could be wrong, but I think only MG-armed Hurricane II-variants served in CBI.


CHS is wrong in this regard. There were both Hurricane Mk.IIb (12x .303cal MG) and Mk.IIc (4x 20mm Cannon) employed in the CBI (and later the Mk.IId/IV as a single-purpose ground-attack plane). Only the Mk.IIa (with 8x .303cal MG) was not found in the CBI [until April 1941 all three versions had been named Mk.IIa regardless of their actual gun configuration; the letter described the planes' wing-configuration, not the gun-configuration].

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 26
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/23/2006 4:16:43 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		I stand corrected then. Maybe Andrew Brown can renew the interest to CHS and make corrections to 2.09 in future...

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 27
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/23/2006 4:30:27 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rob Brennan UK

The hurricane isnt the problem really. its the american planes or rather a lack of them. did the americans really have so few P40's in 1942 ? i guess so as much more intelligent people than me made the mods and they all have reduced allied replacements imo.

Unfortunately its made lop sided by japans ability to get all its future R&D factories cranking out early/mid war planes as R$D doenst matter much till 6 months before intorduction. Maybe really penalise japanses R&D if the factories are used for something else. Just throwing ideas around really and not trying to be an allied fanboy.

Anyway come late 43 the allies will have enough to hurt japan i hope . No large allied hammer in the first 2 years is probably a good thing the more i ponder it. and once the allies get hellcats and new a/c the huge number of older japanese planes won;t matter much as they all become targets

Actually the more i think about what i pondered earlier about allied production in line with japan doesn't work as it penalises japan for good production management , not a good thing. And Nikmod does prevent the commonwealth from turning china into an air theatre for the allies too early. and i do feel like im in a good defensive posture which is ok in mid 42. just have to be careful and fight over friendly territory whereever possible.

ok im rambling


Try 8.0. Fighter production was scrubbed a bit for Allies. (more fighters for 1943 Allies including later version P-40's) Japanese online aircraft production was tweaked. 8.0 sees a drastic reduction in RD factories. 8.0b is less extreme but still consolidates alot of the mini-factories and eliminates the free Oscar to Tony factory upgrade. Judging by the decible level of the screams, i'd say its having the intended effect.



_____________________________


(in reply to Rob Brennan UK)
Post #: 28
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/23/2006 5:10:22 PM   
Rob Brennan UK


Posts: 3685
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline 		Thinks Nik , unfortunately we started on version 5.0 iirc and the database is unchangeable once started i believe. So your saying that the japanese cannot abuse fighter production too much in ver 8.0 ? thats a marvelous idea. The only thing that worries me a bit is late war japanese fighter production would be hit badly ( that 300 plane Frank factory springs to mind ). Is that potentially a problem ?

I think a general house rule of leave R&D factories alone untill the planes are available, then if you want to change em over go crazy . I was thoroughly enjoying my nikmod game till events curtailed it a lot .

_____________________________

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 29
RE: Nik Mod Campaign Question - 10/23/2006 5:29:11 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:


So your saying that the japanese cannot abuse fighter production too much in ver 8.0 ?


Options are certainly more limited, and changes come with greater costs, even in 8.0b (i've had few takers so far with 8.0)



_____________________________


(in reply to Rob Brennan UK)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Nik Mod Campaign Question Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.906