Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Da Babes Mod

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: Da Babes Mod Page: <<   < prev  11 12 13 [14] 15   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Da Babes Mod - 2/21/2010 5:16:22 AM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
Thanks Gary, thanks Herrbear. Yeah, gremlin. Gary D has the right idea, just toss in 18. We got it and will have it in the next update. Ciao.

(in reply to Herrbear)
Post #: 391
RE: Da Babes Mod - 2/21/2010 7:54:06 AM   
Mac Linehan

 

Posts: 1484
Joined: 12/19/2004
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

AH, I don't know how to ask this without possibly offending some people so I will try to say this as diplomatically as possible. I hope this is taken as just a honest question and by no means an attempt to start a firstorm.

Before I drop my bomb, I would like to say what you are talking about in this mod is very interesting to me. When I get around to playing my first PBEM, I may very well go with DBB. That ssaid I am still honoring my "No PBEM until patch 3" pledge to myselrf.

So my question: what was your motivation for Da Babes mod? Is it that there were some things not included in stock that JWE and Don Bowen thought should be included? Or is it that some things came out in play testing and initial deployment that seemed wrong and this is attempt t address those issues?

I just ask because it strikes this reader as odd to see a Mod being developed so soon after release and even more odd that that mod is being created by members of the original dev team.

You can ignore this if it opens up a can of worms that should be left closed. I understand


In developing the scenarios for the standard AE release, we had to consider a balance of historical accuracy and playability. Some folks (me! me!) want full accuracy - if's it's in the historical OOB it ought to be in the game OOB. Other people want an easier, more playable game and do not want to be bothered with handling small ships and units that have only a minor affect in the game.

The standard scenarios were developed with balance in mind. Once the game was released, we fanatics then began to create the full-on detailed mod. That's the reason the mod is named "Babes". Back in standard scenario development times, people would review my OOB requests and moan and groan about more "little baby" ships.

It is equally probable that someone will develop a less detailed mod where playability is considered over detail.


Don -

Am so gratefull that the "fanatics" took the plunge and made the mod. Many thanks for your work - no small task (to put it mildly!).

Loyalist Mac <grin>


_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 392
RE: Da Babes Mod - 2/22/2010 9:52:41 PM   
TIMJOT

 

Posts: 1822
Joined: 4/30/2001
Status: offline
This is probably a dumb question but I down loaded da babes lite mod from Roques website and as far as I can tell the art zipfile had only about 5 bitmaps each in the IJN and Allied shipsides folders. I thought there were dozens of new classes in this mod or am I missing something? Thanks in advance for any assistance.

(in reply to Mac Linehan)
Post #: 393
RE: Da Babes Mod - 2/23/2010 10:02:27 AM   
davidjruss


Posts: 235
Joined: 5/25/2002
From: Derby, England
Status: offline
Gary D , Herrbear and JWE,

re T class British Submarines and 20mm AA Guns.

According to my reference book (Warships of World war II - H.T. Lenton etc ) the T class was split into 2 groups. The First group of 22 subs ( built 39-41 ) had 1-4inch and 3 machine guns. The second group of approx 37 subs ( built 42-45) had 1-4inch , 1-20mm AA and 3 machine guns. The Database as it originally stands therefore seems correct in having no ammo for the 20mm AA at start of play Can anyone else confirm the armament ?.

DavidR

P.S. On further reading the book also states that "warning R.D.F and a single 20 mm AA were included in most war built S and T classes and added in earlier units" .

So when to upgrade ? Perhaps by the time of Pearl Harbour the T boats had been fitted with the 20 mm AA , so ammo would be needed.

Also re TIMJOT post I note that the Canadian xAP BCCS Alice Class in the scenarios do not have a picture of the vessel or details of devices on board when viewing the ship information screen.

< Message edited by DavidR -- 2/23/2010 1:37:47 PM >

(in reply to TIMJOT)
Post #: 394
RE: Da Babes Mod - 2/23/2010 2:45:13 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TIMJOT

This is probably a dumb question but I down loaded da babes lite mod from Roques website and as far as I can tell the art zipfile had only about 5 bitmaps each in the IJN and Allied shipsides folders. I thought there were dozens of new classes in this mod or am I missing something? Thanks in advance for any assistance.

Version 002 is posted in the thread titled "Da Babes Version 002" here http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2373258

A newer art file is included. A lot of the art is already in the stck art file.

(in reply to TIMJOT)
Post #: 395
RE: Da Babes Mod - 2/23/2010 3:26:27 PM   
davidjruss


Posts: 235
Joined: 5/25/2002
From: Derby, England
Status: offline
JWE,

Re my post - apologies - I have downloaded the newer art file ( missed this file ) and the picture of the Canadian Alice class is now viewable.

However would you please note that it appears that there are still no devices listed for this class on the ship information screen.

DavidR

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 396
RE: Da Babes Mod - 2/23/2010 4:40:11 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DavidR

JWE,

Re my post - apologies - I have downloaded the newer art file ( missed this file ) and the picture of the Canadian Alice class is now viewable.

However would you please note that it appears that there are still no devices listed for this class on the ship information screen.

DavidR


If the Canadian Alice class is the BCCS ships, they should have no devices. Just civilian coastal ships.

(in reply to davidjruss)
Post #: 397
RE: Da Babes Mod - 2/24/2010 3:07:38 AM   
TIMJOT

 

Posts: 1822
Joined: 4/30/2001
Status: offline
Thanks JWE, didnt realized you snuck all those bitmaps in with Stock. Thanks again for your help

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 398
RE: Da Babes Mod - 3/3/2010 1:34:16 PM   
drw61


Posts: 894
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: South Carolina
Status: offline
Would it be possible to get a listing of the ships added to babes lite? I want to add them to scenario 2 for more of a challenge against the AI.

Thanks, Daryl

(in reply to TIMJOT)
Post #: 399
RE: Da Babes Mod - 3/3/2010 4:47:36 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
No, not possible to do that. There are literally hundreds. But, all of the relevant Scen002 “Late Arriving” ships from ship slot 14000 to 14197 have already been incorporated. The “Enhanced Japan Scenario” ships from 14200 to 14524 can be added to Babes Lite by following a few simple steps.

Use WitploadAE and export Scen002 to .csv files. Then export Scen026 to .csv files. Open the WITPshp002.csv file and copy rows 14200 to 14524. Then open WITPshp026.csv and select rows 14200 to 14524, and hit paste. Then do a save of the csv file.

Use WitploadAE and import the csv files back into Scen026. Now you have Scen026 with the Enhanced Japan Scenario ships.

(in reply to drw61)
Post #: 400
RE: Da Babes Mod - 3/3/2010 10:56:36 PM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline
So the engine would use them in your scen by simply adding them like that? How much do you think it would change the flavor of your mod?

_____________________________


(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 401
RE: Da Babes Mod - 3/4/2010 2:58:39 AM   
drw61


Posts: 894
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: South Carolina
Status: offline
Thanks I'll give it a try
Daryl

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

No, not possible to do that. There are literally hundreds. But, all of the relevant Scen002 “Late Arriving” ships from ship slot 14000 to 14197 have already been incorporated. The “Enhanced Japan Scenario” ships from 14200 to 14524 can be added to Babes Lite by following a few simple steps.

Use WitploadAE and export Scen002 to .csv files. Then export Scen026 to .csv files. Open the WITPshp002.csv file and copy rows 14200 to 14524. Then open WITPshp026.csv and select rows 14200 to 14524, and hit paste. Then do a save of the csv file.

Use WitploadAE and import the csv files back into Scen026. Now you have Scen026 with the Enhanced Japan Scenario ships.



(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 402
RE: Da Babes Mod - 3/4/2010 5:09:56 AM   
drw61


Posts: 894
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: South Carolina
Status: offline
I'm not having any luck getting WitploadAE to work. I go to the SCEN file and select WitploadAE and a box flashes up and is gone before I can read it. Any ideas?

(in reply to drw61)
Post #: 403
RE: Da Babes Mod - 3/4/2010 5:17:38 AM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

Run it from a command window.

(in reply to drw61)
Post #: 404
RE: Da Babes Mod - 3/4/2010 5:21:41 AM   
drw61


Posts: 894
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: South Carolina
Status: offline
Thanks, will do.

Added:

I still could not get it to work, so since my dog got me up at 2:00 this morning, I just typed the changes in using the editor.

(by-the-way I have a dog for sale, very cheap )


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


Run it from a command window.



< Message edited by drw61 -- 3/4/2010 2:09:48 PM >

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 405
RE: Da Babes Mod - 3/4/2010 9:42:23 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: drw61
I still could not get it to work, so since my dog got me up at 2:00 this morning, I just typed the changes in using the editor.

(by-the-way I have a dog for sale, very cheap )

If you lived in SoCal, I might just take you up on that. I have two Springers, and the big dog, Abby the Hamster, is my alarm clock. Every morning, at 5:00, or whenever dawn breaks, I wake up with Abby standing on my chest, licking my face, saying 'Dad, I'm hungry and I gotta pee, and it's time to get your ass out of bed.' Like with children, one must make adjustments.

Occasionally, after a wicked, drunken, riotous evening, when I forget to do my duty, I might find Abby on my chest at 2:00 am, saying 'Dad, I'm probably hungry and that's ok, but if I don't get to pee real soon, I'm gonna make a yellow puddle on the white carpet, and you can't be pissed because it's your own damn fault.' You gotta love them. They are as smart as we are in those areas that really matter.

(in reply to drw61)
Post #: 406
RE: Da Babes Mod - 3/4/2010 9:59:41 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

Occasionally, after a wicked, drunken, riotous evening, when I forget to do my duty, ...You gotta love them. They are as smart as we are in those areas that really matter.



Sometimes smarter.... lost our 'Socks' on the 18th... stoically suffered through what turned out to be cancer, never cried, never whimpered, loyal to the end.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 407
RE: Da Babes Mod - 3/5/2010 2:49:17 AM   
scalp

 

Posts: 41
Joined: 9/25/2009
Status: offline
i m plying first lite mod pbem,after new patch before save opening game asks me if i d like to cnange game data for scenario or not.whats best thing to do? i dont really know what consequences can be.

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 408
Royal Navy Historians – help needed. - 3/9/2010 10:30:27 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

Royal Navy Historians – help needed.

For Da Big Babes, we are looking at the late war British Destroyers and their movement to the Pacific. Scenario end is set to approximate Operation Olympic.

We are looking at late-war DDs in several groups:

1. Those that were completed pre-VJ Day and were sent to the Eastern/Pacific Fleets. These will arrive at the historical dates (as best we can determine).
2. Those that were nominated for service in the Pacific but had not left (mostly working up). These will be allocated at an approximate date (using the time honored SWAG principle).
3. Those that were nearly complete on VJ day. We assume that those that could reasonably be completed between VJ day and Olympic would be sent to the Pacific. More of that SWAG stuff on completion and arrival dates.
4. Those completed but not allocated to the Pacific. Here is a major problem. The Royal Navy was concentrating the majority of it’s modern fleet in the Pacific, but at the same time had to retain some modern ships in the Home Fleet. If anyone has any sources with details of late war plans, it would be wonderful…

So, class by class:

1. V/W class. We’ve not checked the detailed records of each ship but it appears that all units of these two flotillas were in the Pacific by VJ day.
2. Z Class. With one exception (Zenith) this flotilla remained in Home Waters thru VJ day. I can find no data for planned movement of them to the Far East.
3. Ca Class. The entire flotilla was complete before war’s end and went to the Pacific.
4. Co Class. One completed before the end of the war and a couple just after. These went to the Pacific. We assume that the entire flotilla would have followed upon completion. Completion and deployment dates will be SWAGed (historical completion dates were delayed due to war’s end).
5. Ch Class. Just coming into commission at war’s end and no planned deployment data available. Again, we assume they would have gone East and will SWAG deployment dates.
6. Cr Class. The entire class was scheduled to go to the RCN. Completions began just after the war ended, with two actually going to Canada and two others to Norway. The other four were not far enough along to reasonably be available. We’re going to assume the original plans were followed and the first four became Canadian. Note that we (OK, I) got a little enthusiastic and included the entire class in “Babes Lite”.
7. Battle Class (1st Group). Only one actually went to the Pacific, with at least two more nominated. We’re looking at assuming that all eight of those completed during 1944/45 would be sent East, with SWAG deployment dates where required. Might even stretch it for one or two more.

We know that historical completion dates post VJ-day were generally much later than they would have been had the war not ended. But completion of some British units was delayed due to unavailability of equipment (mostly directors). Gets a bit tough to estimate completion dates.

Any and all data welcome, especially detailed plan data.

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 409
Clueless poster needs assistance - 3/13/2010 2:07:26 PM   
ROOK4

 

Posts: 7
Joined: 5/8/2005
Status: offline
Can anyone help me? I have downloaded and unzipped the art file into "Art" anfd the rest of the files into "Scen" and nothing happens. I admit a rather limited knowledge of these types of things so any help would be appreciated.

Dave

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 410
RE: Royal Navy Historians – help needed. - 3/14/2010 6:25:44 AM   
mikemike

 

Posts: 501
Joined: 6/3/2004
From: a maze of twisty little passages, all different
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


We are looking at late-war DDs in several groups:

1. Those that were completed pre-VJ Day and were sent to the Eastern/Pacific Fleets. These will arrive at the historical dates (as best we can determine).
2. Those that were nominated for service in the Pacific but had not left (mostly working up). These will be allocated at an approximate date (using the time honored SWAG principle).
3. Those that were nearly complete on VJ day. We assume that those that could reasonably be completed between VJ day and Olympic would be sent to the Pacific. More of that SWAG stuff on completion and arrival dates.
4. Those completed but not allocated to the Pacific. Here is a major problem. The Royal Navy was concentrating the majority of it’s modern fleet in the Pacific, but at the same time had to retain some modern ships in the Home Fleet. If anyone has any sources with details of late war plans, it would be wonderful…



Sorry, no plans. But looked into Whitley, and on http://www.naval-history.net
and found the following:
(EF= Eastern Fleet, BPF= British Pacific Fleet, DF=Destroyer Flotilla)

Group 1

Eskimo, Nubian, Tartar (10th DF): EF from April 1945

Paladin, Pathfinder, Penn, Petard: EF from early 1944. Pathfinder CTL on 11 Feb 1945 off Ramree Island

Quilliam, Quadrant, Quality, Queenborough, Quiberon, Quickmatch (4th DF): BPF from 22 Nov 1944

R class (11th DF): all eight EF from Jan 1944

Saumarez: EF from 10 Mar 1945 as flotilla leader for 26th DF

T class (24th DF): all ships BPF from Feb/Mar 1945

U class (25th DF): all ships BPF from Mar 1945

Venus, Verulam, Vigilant, Virago, Volage (26th DF): EF from Mar 1945
Sioux, Algonquin of this class with RCN since early 1944

W class (27th DF): all ships BPF from Jan 1945

Battle class:
Barfleur BPF July 1945. (Planned completion date had been March 1944, Mk VI director not available. Ship commissioned on 14 Sept 1944 for first-of-class trials, director installed Nov 1944.)

Remaining in European waters were all surviving J, K; L, M, N class, eight O class, four S class, eight Z class (Zenith was nominated for Far East and modified for tropical service, but deployment was cancelled after VJ-Day)

Group 2/3:

Zenith (see above)

Ca class nominated for Far East Apr 1945 (apparently for EF), transferred Aug 1945

Co class:
Constance BPF deployment Aug 1945
Cossack BPF deployed Oct 1945
Contest BPF nominated commissioned in 1946. Waiting for gunnery director since Jan 1945.
Probably safe to assume whole Co flotilla destined for BPF.

Ch class: haven't found anything to contradict your assumption

Cr class: actually four of them were transferred to Norway in 1945/46 but have not found anything about original plans.


1942 Battle class:

Armada nominated BPF. Arrived Melbourne 24 Jan 1946. Possibly delayed by manning problems.
Hogue BPF (19th DF) Oct 1945
Flotilla also comprised Camperdown, Trafalgar, Lagos, all of which could have been in Pacific by Feb 1946
Solebay, Finisterre stayed in home waters but would have fit timeframe (ships of the class usually took about 3-4 months after completion of acceptance trials to work-up and deploy to Pacific)

1943 Battle class:
Pure conjecture, but apparently Battle class units were planned to complete about five months after launch. The original group was delayed by the director problem, later ships by post-war slowdown, but as the 1943 group used the US Mk 37 director that should have been available without delay, one might speculate that those ships might have been in the PTO 9-10 months after launch (assuming 5-6 months launch to completion, 3-4 months working-up and transfer), had they been built under continued wartime schedules. Assuming nine months, this would deliver

Agincourt Oct 1945
Aisne Feb 1946
Alamein Mar 1946
Barrosa Oct 1945
Corunna Mar 1946
Matapan Jan 1946

These are all ships lsaunched up to May 1945.

Beyond this, things get murky. Quite a number of ships could have been completed in time but for availability of the Mk VI director, including almost all of the 1942 Battles except St. James and Vigo which were built by Fairfield, Glasgow, the slowest-building yard of the lot (most of the yards took about 12 months from laying-down to launch, but Fairfield needed 17-24 months, and that mainly in 1943, when the yard should still have worked flat-out). The 1943 Battles had no director troubles, but were caught in the end-of-war slowdown, and a total of 18 were cancelled, nine after being launched. Albuera and Belleisle were in principle laid down early enough, Albuera actually as the second 1943 Battle, but the yards took their time (Fairfield for Belleisle, so no surprise, but Albuera was built by Vickers-Armstrong Newcastle who should have done better, most other yards would have launched the ship in late 1944). Namur, Navarino, and Omdurman would have been barely possible given a very fast builder, but all the others were definitely laid down too late.

It's interesting to note that, had those ships been built by a US yard like Federal Shipbuilding, most of them would have been completed by the end of 1945, and several of them might even have been present for D-Day.



_____________________________

DON´T PANIC - IT´S ALL JUST ONES AND ZEROES!

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 411
RE: Royal Navy Historians – help needed. - 3/14/2010 4:14:55 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

Here's our preliminary workup, with lots of guessing and more than a little optimism. We did not do any Battle Group 2.



Attachment (1)

(in reply to mikemike)
Post #: 412
RE: Royal Navy Historians – help needed. - 3/14/2010 7:13:36 PM   
mikemike

 

Posts: 501
Joined: 6/3/2004
From: a maze of twisty little passages, all different
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


Here's our preliminary workup, with lots of guessing and more than a little optimism. We did not do any Battle Group 2.



Don, I went over your list, and it mostly looks fine. Bit disappointed about the Battle Group 2s, as I think at least Agincourt and Barrosa might have made it, but I couldn't find anything about the causes for their delayed commissioning. It may not have been end-of-war slowdown, as one source mentions delays because of lacking equipment.

There is the case of HMS Constance where I think there is scope for an earlier availability. Your commission date matches Whitley's, but naval-history.net says the ship was commissioned into the BPF on 6/6/45, worked up in home waters July/August 1945, and remained in home waters September - December 1945, with the remark:
(Note : Passage to Far East was delayed by manning problems.)
I think those manning problems would have been resolved earlier if the war had continued and the hostilities-only personnel had therefore not been discharged. (This may also have delayed other ships. I think a Canadian cruiser also had trouble getting a crew) HMS Constance would otherwise probably have been in the Pacific by October 1945.


_____________________________

DON´T PANIC - IT´S ALL JUST ONES AND ZEROES!

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 413
RE: Clueless poster needs assistance - 3/14/2010 7:40:35 PM   
ROOK4

 

Posts: 7
Joined: 5/8/2005
Status: offline
Never mind-I reloaded everything a second time and had no issues. Great Mod

(in reply to ROOK4)
Post #: 414
RE: Royal Navy Historians – help needed. - 3/15/2010 7:54:54 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikemike


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


Here's our preliminary workup, with lots of guessing and more than a little optimism. We did not do any Battle Group 2.



Don, I went over your list, and it mostly looks fine. Bit disappointed about the Battle Group 2s, as I think at least Agincourt and Barrosa might have made it, but I couldn't find anything about the causes for their delayed commissioning. It may not have been end-of-war slowdown, as one source mentions delays because of lacking equipment.

There is the case of HMS Constance where I think there is scope for an earlier availability. Your commission date matches Whitley's, but naval-history.net says the ship was commissioned into the BPF on 6/6/45, worked up in home waters July/August 1945, and remained in home waters September - December 1945, with the remark:
(Note : Passage to Far East was delayed by manning problems.)
I think those manning problems would have been resolved earlier if the war had continued and the hostilities-only personnel had therefore not been discharged. (This may also have delayed other ships. I think a Canadian cruiser also had trouble getting a crew) HMS Constance would otherwise probably have been in the Pacific by October 1945.




I'll take a look, but poor old JWE is ready to have me killed if I try to put in any more ships...

(in reply to mikemike)
Post #: 415
RE: Royal Navy Historians – help needed. - 3/15/2010 9:57:53 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
I'll take a look, but poor old JWE is ready to have me killed if I try to put in any more ships...

What a wuss. I am sweetness and light and the soul of accommodation. Just now, I'm having some tapas and a lomo and am feeling pretty darn good. Right now, I'm about 200 km SSE (half South) of Puerto Monnt, Chile, and maybe 230 km due S of San Carlos de Bariloche, Argentina, ( actually maybe 20 km from the Argintine border, just west of Feutaleufu, Chile), and just got back from riding a bloody horse to a bloody colmado for some more coffee and Marlboro Blancos.

So here we are riding along (and these are real horses) and we're crossing a flat spot on the Feutaleufu, when Mariah, form the estancia next door, who's leading this disreputable pack, whacks her horse with her pic, drops down left (like you would think a Commanche might do), and reaches into the river and grabs a 3 pound salmon by the tail !! Frikkin woof !! Sushi tonite !! This is a whole other world down here. It's 2010 and you could think yourself into the American SouthWest, but with mountains, greenery, and grocery stores, and people who speak Spanish, and it ain't likely to change any time soon.

Hate to be so long winded, but things that happened 'back then', should be considered in 'back then' terms. Am learning just what 'back then' really means.

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 416
RE: Royal Navy Historians – help needed. - 3/15/2010 10:54:43 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
I'll take a look, but poor old JWE is ready to have me killed if I try to put in any more ships...

What a wuss. I am sweetness and light and the soul of accommodation. Just now, I'm having some tapas and a lomo and am feeling pretty darn good. Right now, I'm about 200 km SSE (half South) of Puerto Monnt, Chile, and maybe 230 km due S of San Carlos de Bariloche, Argentina, ( actually maybe 20 km from the Argintine border, just west of Feutaleufu, Chile), and just got back from riding a bloody horse to a bloody colmado for some more coffee and Marlboro Blancos.

So here we are riding along (and these are real horses) and we're crossing a flat spot on the Feutaleufu, when Mariah, form the estancia next door, who's leading this disreputable pack, whacks her horse with her pic, drops down left (like you would think a Commanche might do), and reaches into the river and grabs a 3 pound salmon by the tail !! Frikkin woof !! Sushi tonite !! This is a whole other world down here. It's 2010 and you could think yourself into the American SouthWest, but with mountains, greenery, and grocery stores, and people who speak Spanish, and it ain't likely to change any time soon.

Hate to be so long winded, but things that happened 'back then', should be considered in 'back then' terms. Am learning just what 'back then' really means.


Sounds wonderful. Do you need an assistant?

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 417
RE: Royal Navy Historians – help needed. - 3/15/2010 11:56:00 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
Sounds wonderful. Do you need an assistant?

Doing a white water rafting trip on the Futaleufu, with Bio Bio Expeditions, out of Trukee, CA. Assistant animals, hot tub denizens, wine bar dwellers, and left paddles, are sorely needed. This is my third trip with these folks, and it is a whole different world.

Now, that does sorta bring to mind some of the opening day TO&Es. I have learned (by doing it) that in many circumstances, horses are better than vehicles for getting from here to there. Perhaps they aren’t so great in the attack mode, but maybe them as thought horses had a place on the modern battlefield weren’t quite as stupid as the puerile, late 20th century, wargamers thought.

There was places I could ride (on a good horse), that I couldn’t get through on a M113. Boy, I’m learning all about horses, all over again. And lovin it.

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 418
RE: Royal Navy Historians – help needed. - 3/15/2010 11:56:20 PM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

I'll take a look, but poor old JWE is ready to have me killed if I try to put in any more ships...


Dare I ask - did HMAS Doomba get in?

Andrew

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 419
RE: Royal Navy Historians – help needed. - 3/16/2010 12:42:11 AM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown
Dare I ask - did HMAS Doomba get in?
Andrew

Believe so, Andrew. And HMAS Australia is in an opening day TF that brings her to her POE pretty much when she hits town. Trying to do good with you cobbers. Think we are about there.

We did rape the bases, a bit. We added Camp Pendleton (I had to or I would have had to been shot, with a big bore gun) and Bremerton (I had to or my keester just wouldn't have slammed shut because of the big bore shotgun inserted therein).

Love it how the map roads just happen to work perfectly, Andrew. Woof ! An amazimgly good job !!

< Message edited by JWE -- 3/16/2010 12:58:01 AM >

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 420
Page:   <<   < prev  11 12 13 [14] 15   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: Da Babes Mod Page: <<   < prev  11 12 13 [14] 15   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

1.531