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: DaBigBabes Beta errata

 
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: DaBigBabes Beta errata Page: <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 3/28/2011 2:33:46 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4443
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE


quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget
Dobadura SPS air = 1

Buna SPS air = 6

Shouldn't that be the other way round?

Beats the heck out of me. I didn't mess with Buna so it's same as it ever was. Have no idea what the numbers for Dobadura should be. It's nasty terrain so AB says low SPS. I know it had squat early on and a fighter strip and a transport strip in '43, beyond that, I'm clueless.



Uh, it's actually Dobodura...

But it had a bit more than "a fighter strip and a transport strip in '43" :

Dobodura Airfield Oro Province PNG

Location
Located to the west of Dobodura, fifteen miles south of Buna. The US Army developed a total of fifteen (or more) runways and airfields in the Dobodura area. Many wartime references simply refer to these locations as "Dobodura" and coded APO 503 in reports.

Raways Airstrip (No. 1) Single runway east of Dobodura
(No. 2) North-east of Horanda 4
(No. 3) Details unknown
Horanda 4 (No. 4, East 4, West 4, 4Y) Main airfield at Dobodura complex
(No. 5) Details unknown
(No. 6) Details unknown
Dobodura No. 7 (Kenney, Girua) American built, in use today
(No. 8) Details unknown
(No. 9) Details unknown
(No. 10) Borio Airfield runway?
Borio Airfield (No. 11) South of Borio village
North Embi Airfield (No. 12) East of Dobodura
(No. 13) Borio Airfield runway?
(No. 14) Borio Airfield runway?
North Borioa Airstrip (No. 15) North of Borio Airfield

Construction
The Allies acknowledged the need for an airfield in the Buna area, if Lae and Salamaua were attacked. As of July 1942, Theater plan "Tulsa" called for an airfield to be established for military aircraft at Buna Airfield. On July 9, a reconnaissance was planned. The next two days, a Port Moresby based RAAF Catalina was used to over fly the area. On board were six officers including Lt. Col. Bernard L. Robinson, (ranking U.S. engineer officer at Port Moresby), Lt. Col. Boyd D. Wagner (USAAF 8th Fighter Group, C. O.), Colonel Yoder and three Australian officers. Examining the terrain of the entire area, they determined that kunai plains area at Dobodura be developed as a airfield instead of Buna. Airfield construction began during early December 1943 by the US Army. > "December 1943" is a typo, should read "1942"

Wartime History
Put into operation at the height of the Battle of Buna and Gona. Cargo flown into this airfield were immediately put into battle, including artillery spotting planes, a 105mm artillery gun and and five Bren Gun Carriers used in a failed assault against Cape Endaiadere.

After the battle, it was developed into a major airbase, with storage and repair facilities, and interconnecting taxiways to adjacent airfields.

American Units based at Dobodura
3rd BG, 8th BS (A-20s) from Port Moresby April 10, 1943 - ?
3rd BG, 89th BS (A-20s) from Port Moresby May 9, 1943 - ?
3rd BG, HQ from Port Moresby May 20, 1943 - ?
3rd BG, 90th BS (B-25s) from Port Moresby May 21, 1943 - ?
3rd BG, 13th BS (B-25s) from Port Moresby May 23, 1943 - ?
22nd BG 19th BS (B-26s, B-25s) from Woodstock July 11, 1943 - ?
22nd BG, 2nd BS (B-26, B-25) Ried River Oct 9 - Dec 19, 43 Nadzab
22nd BG HQ, 33rd BS (B-25) from Australia October 15, 1943 - ?
22nd BG 408th BS (B-25) from Australia October 15, 1943 - ?
43rd BG, 63rd BS (B-24s) from Port Moresby October 29, 1943 - ?
49th FG, 7th FS, (P-40s) Port Moresby April 15 - Nov 16, 1943 to Gusap
49th FG, 8th FS (P-40s) Port Moresby April 15 - Aug 30, 1943 Tsili-Tsili
49th FG, HQ from Port Moresby March 6 - Nov 20, 1943 to Gusap
49th FG, 9th FS (P-47s) from Port Moresby - Dec 16, 1943 to Gusap
17th TRG, 17th TRS (B-25s, P-39s) from Milne Bay Nov 22, 1943 - ?
17th TRG, 82nd TRS (B-25s, P-39s) from Milne Bay Nov 22, 1943 - ?
5th FC, 418th NFS from Milne Bay Nov 22, 1943 - ?
90th BG, 319th, 320th BS (B-24s) Port Moresby Dec 1, 1943 - ?
90th BG, 321st, 400th BS (B-24s) Port Moresby Dec 1, 1943 - ?
43rd BG HQ, 64th BS (B-24s) from Port Moresby Dec 10, 1943 - ?
43rd BG HQ, 65th BS (B-24s) from Port Moresby Dec 11, 1943 - ?
8th FG, 80th FS (P-38s) from Port Moresby Dec 11, 1943 - ?
43rd BG HQ, 403rd BS (B-24s) from Port Moresby Dec 13, 1943 - ?
375th TCG HQ Port Morsby Aug 19, 1943 - Dec 19, 1943 Port Moresby
345th BG, 501st BS from Port Moresby Dec 23, 1943 - ?
58th FG HQ, 310th FS, 311th FS (P-47s) from Brisbane Dec 28, 1943 - ?
58th FG HQ, 69th FS (P-47s) from Brisbane Dec 28, 1943 - ?
345th BG, 500st BS (B-25s) from Port Moresby Jan 1, 1944 - ?
American Units based at Dobodura
6 Squadron (Beaufort) Vivigani 1944(?) - Kingaroy 1945

Japanese Missions Against Dobodura
December 12, 1942 - October 9, 1943 (partial list)

Post War Scapping
At one point after the war, there were over a thousand wrecks at this strip. Most were destroyed in the early scrap drives, and it has not been used as an airfield since the war.

Today
Some of the airfiled area is bing replanted with oil palm since the mid-1990's. OPIC (Oil Palm Industries Corporation) is lending money to individual developers to plant oil palm in the area. The land is mostly kunai, and there are no official land claims so some portions of the base have been replanted at various times. No plam grows on the old airstrips, as the highly compacted earth and bitumen is still present from the war, making any planting difficult, even today.

John Douglas reports:
"The main Dobodura complex had eleven strips, most interconnected for taxiing purposes. One of these, Girua Airport, is still in use today as the Provincial Airstrip. Another [ Horanda 4E ] is sealed but overgrown while the rest have reverted to kunai. There are a lot of revetments in this area and scraps of airplanes, concrete, etc."

Contribute Information
Do you have photos or additional information to add?

Last Updated
January 5, 2011

Source: http://www.pacificwrecks.com/airfields/png/dobodura/index.html



< Message edited by LargeSlowTarget -- 3/28/2011 2:34:44 PM >

_____________________________

AE Mod "Bottlenecks" UPDATED 01/2022

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 391
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 3/28/2011 3:00:50 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline 		Maybe we got a bit too excited about adding DobOdura as a base. The satellite shows the old strips pretty well in the valley along the stream, but from the airport, it's all of 11.2 statute miles to bee-yoo-tee-ful downtown Buna. Since it's only 1/4 of a hex away, maybe it should just be part of the Buna complex. Oh well, heigh ho.

[ed] Just for fun, here's the game map and a Google rotated to fit. PM, kokoda and Buna are white spots on the Google, Airport at Dobodura is the red spot. Most everything is between the red spot and Buna.





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by JWE -- 3/28/2011 3:43:16 PM >

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 392
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 3/28/2011 5:01:57 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4443
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline 		I know Dobodura is rather close to Buna and that the map location does not accurately represents the location, but for the sake of "operational possibilities" I would simply assume that Buna is in the lower part of its hex and the Dobodura complex sprawled the upper part of its hex.

There was no "Buna complex", just a small fighter strip and a dummy strip in Japanese hands, while there were numerous Allied airstrips around Buna (not just at Dobodura) which played an important logistical role during the Buna campaign. I think for this reason it is justified to seperate Buna and Dobodura, even if that means to compromise regarding map art and distances.

I think the bigger problem is not the location on the map, but player hindsight. The Japanese did not discover the suitability of the Dobodura plains for airfield construction - the Japanese AE player will know it and go for it...

_____________________________

AE Mod "Bottlenecks" UPDATED 01/2022

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 393
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 3/28/2011 5:13:03 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

I know Dobodura is rather close to Buna and that the map location does not accurately represents the location, but for the sake of "operational possibilities" I would simply assume that Buna is in the lower part of its hex and the Dobodura complex sprawled the upper part of its hex.

There was no "Buna complex", just a small fighter strip and a dummy strip in Japanese hands, while there were numerous Allied airstrips around Buna (not just at Dobodura) which played an important logistical role during the Buna campaign. I think for this reason it is justified to seperate Buna and Dobodura, even if that means to compromise regarding map art and distances.

I think the bigger problem is not the location on the map, but player hindsight. The Japanese did not discover the suitability of the Dobodura plains for airfield construction - the Japanese AE player will know it and go for it...



I do the same treatment/reasoning when I add a Ketchikan,Alaska Coast Guard port/base in separating it from Annette Island location.

Buck

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 394
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 3/29/2011 8:00:47 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline 		The new Subic Bay base's (file wpl 28B) units should have their Future Objectives reset to Subic Bay 99. Any other new units (?) should have their's also checked and reset accordingly.

Buck

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 3/29/2011 8:05:38 PM >

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 395
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 3/30/2011 2:25:47 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline 		Scenario 28

I can see no difference in the stats between Device 1572 Mk9 Gun and the Device 1573 Mk7 Gun. Should there be?

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 396
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 3/30/2011 5:10:37 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline 		I suppose. Mk 9 was 430 pounds heavier and was the waterproof version for sub use. It did have a teensy bit more twist to the rifling than the Mk 7, but the basic gun was the basic gun.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 397
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 3/30/2011 7:56:18 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline 		Apropos of nothing at all; was talking to Dawn Gerrells, mom's health care coordinator, and it turns out her dad was chief engineer for Litton/Ingalls updates back in the late 60s and 70s. Every single hull tweak, every single new installation, and every single moved bulkhead for a modified compartment. And he's got all his blueprints and can remember every ship mod, by name. WOOF !!!

He's a real-live honest to gosh naval architect and SNAME member. Think it's time to get some more porterhouse steaks and have this fellow over to spin some yarns.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 398
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 3/31/2011 7:06:21 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline 		Agronne ID 2453 class xAPs.  These were Design 1024 Hog Island troopships I think they should be APs accordingly.  They are armed like as APs, whereas xAPs were armed much lighter if at all on 12/07/1941 (I think).

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 399
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/1/2011 2:47:55 AM   
dwg

 

Posts: 319
Joined: 1/22/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
Agronne ID 2453 class xAPs.  These were Design 1024 Hog Island troopships I think they should be APs accordingly. 


For anyone trying to google it, that should be Argonne, rather than Agronne.

(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 400
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/3/2011 6:51:59 PM   
Bradley7735


Posts: 2073
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline 		Hi Don and John,

I don't know if this has been found or not. Sorry, I haven't checked all the errata pages.

Ship 12450 is American Leader
Ship 12221 is Am. Leader

Same class, same arrival date. This is in Scenario 27. I'm not sure if it's in the other babes scenarios, and I did not upgrade my scenario's with the latest from John's posts in the last couple of weeks.

Thanks, Brad

_____________________________

The older I get, the better I was.

(in reply to dwg)
Post #: 401
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/4/2011 1:31:50 AM   
noguaranteeofsanity


Posts: 257
Joined: 11/24/2009
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline 		LCUs 5444, 5445 and 5446 have duplicated names, with the 2052nd, 3052nd and 4052nd Port Construction Battalions already active in slots 5440, 5441 and 5442.  Looks like they should be named the 2054th, 3054th and 4054th instead.

(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 402
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/4/2011 4:53:59 AM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dwg


quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
Agronne ID 2453 class xAPs.  These were Design 1024 Hog Island troopships I think they should be APs accordingly. 


For anyone trying to google it, that should be Argonne, rather than Agronne.



Whoops!!

(in reply to dwg)
Post #: 403
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/4/2011 1:25:04 PM   
JWE

 

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

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735
Ship 12450 is American Leader
Ship 12221 is Am. Leader

Yep. Seems to be so in all the scens. Will rename 12221 to something else. Thanks.
quote:

ORIGINAL: noguaranteeofsanity
LCUs 5444, 5445 and 5446 have duplicated names, with the 2052nd, 3052nd and 4052nd Port Construction Battalions already active in slots 5440, 5441 and 5442. Looks like they should be named the 2054th, 3054th and 4054th instead.

Yep. Should be 2054th, 3054th and 4054th . Thanks.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
Agronne ID 2453 class xAPs. I think they should be APs accordingly.

Tough call, but don't think so. Built as Army troop transports. Didn't have the integral landing craft or other facilities to qualify as an A. They weren't suited for the A mission, so they eventually converted to something else. One of them (Chaumont?, Chateau Thierry?) got Weilins for Higgins boats just before Sicily, but only in place of lifeboat davits, nothing on the main deck, and never got any Higgins boats to go with. Think they are more like well armed USATs than APs. Could go either way, but I would keep as xAP.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 404
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/4/2011 4:56:58 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE
quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
Agronne ID 2453 class xAPs. I think they should be APs accordingly.

Tough call, but don't think so. Built as Army troop transports. Didn't have the integral landing craft or other facilities to qualify as an A. They weren't suited for the A mission, so they eventually converted to something else. One of them (Chaumont?, Chateau Thierry?) got Weilins for Higgins boats just before Sicily, but only in place of lifeboat davits, nothing on the main deck, and never got any Higgins boats to go with. Think they are more like well armed USATs than APs. Could go either way, but I would keep as xAP.



I hear you. Then back to xAP it is.

Buck

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 405
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/4/2011 8:24:20 PM   
Pascal_slith


Posts: 1651
Joined: 8/20/2003
From: back in Commiefornia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

Apropos of nothing at all; was talking to Dawn Gerrells, mom's health care coordinator, and it turns out her dad was chief engineer for Litton/Ingalls updates back in the late 60s and 70s. Every single hull tweak, every single new installation, and every single moved bulkhead for a modified compartment. And he's got all his blueprints and can remember every ship mod, by name. WOOF !!!

He's a real-live honest to gosh naval architect and SNAME member. Think it's time to get some more porterhouse steaks and have this fellow over to spin some yarns.


How's about a BBQ at Dana Point Harbor with him?

_____________________________

So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(


(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 406
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/7/2011 5:09:19 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline 		For those that care about such things. Link:http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ships/logs/AK/ak17-Pearl.html

This report shows that the SS Diamond Head and the SS Klipfontain (aka Clipfontaine) was at Pearl during the attack. They are in the game but not there. It also reflects the SS Permanente that's not in the game that was a 9606 ton cargo freighter.

Buck

Whoops, I just reread the post and I might have conveyed a wrong impression. It was not to imply the dev's don't care, only there are some issues more important than others and changing the ship locations and adding one more ship to all the freighters already in the data base is not such a biggy. This was to those such as myself who like all this type of additional information they can get.

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 4/7/2011 5:27:54 PM >

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 407
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/7/2011 7:30:07 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline 		No, Sir, Klipfontein wasn't there. Not even anywhere close. And was totally unarmed until taken in hand at SF, so unlikely, in any case, to be shooting at airplanes no matter where she was. Think your site's "believed to be .." eventually turned out as " .. but was found to be someone else after further review".

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 408
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/8/2011 12:28:52 AM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

No, Sir, Klipfontein wasn't there. Not even anywhere close. And was totally unarmed until taken in hand at SF, so unlikely, in any case, to be shooting at airplanes no matter where she was. Think your site's "believed to be .." eventually turned out as " .. but was found to be someone else after further review".

quote:

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ships/logs/AK/ak17-Pearl.html


OK John, I know better than to "mess with Mother Nature". It seemed feasible due to the normal reliability of the source of the information. Of course I'm now focusing on the "believed to be" as you pointed out.
Her reported armament wasn't questioned because of her being a Dutch registered ship that could of very likely been armed as of that date. What ever freighter/ship was there and battling obviously was a foreign ship due to that fact.

Hey you mind sharing your source of location of the SS Klipfontein ("Not anywhere close")? Love to research such items.

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 4/8/2011 12:30:45 AM >

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 409
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/8/2011 1:17:01 AM   
Local Yokel


Posts: 1494
Joined: 2/4/2007
From: Somerset, U.K.
Status: offline 		Buck, a point to bear in mind is that during the Japanese attack USS Vega was tied up at Berth 31A in Honolulu Harbor, which is quite separate from Pearl.

Had the civilian and military facilities shared the same location, it would undoubtedly have facilitated the Japanese pre-attack reconnaissance. Apart from their agent on Oahu, this included a visit by a number of IJN officers aboard a Japanese steamer (possibly Tatsuta Maru, but I fear my memory is playing me false). The steamer in question put in to Honolulu, so the value of the exercise is open to question.

Neverthless, one interesting point that emerges from your link is the report of Assistant Port Director N.T.S. Aloha Tower, further down the page:

"At this time the SS Jaegersfontain was off the entrance of Honolulu Harbor attempting to enter the harbor. As the net was closed it was necessary for them to wait for an approved entry. While preparations were being made for this entry another formation of planes approached the harbor and apparently intended to bomb the Jaegersfontain. All during this time the U.S.S. Vega was firing on this formation, with their bursts sufficiently close to obviously throw them off their mark. "

This, incidentally, may supply the answer as to the correct identity of the Dutchman misidentified as Klipfontein (surely a motor ship rather than a steamer?). But what I find interesting is that the approaches to Honolulu, a civilian port, were gated. For me the significance lies in the fact that part of the assumed purpose of the Japanese reconnaissance mission was to assess the feasibility of the planned attack by Type A midget submarines. If the entrance to the civilian harbour was observed by the IJN officers to be gated, it surely must have occurred to them that there was an even higher probability of the channel into Pearl being similarly gated.

Notwithstanding the likelihood of their submarines encountering this obstacle (and potentially sounding the alarm in advance of 1st Air Fleet's strike), the midget attack went ahead, even though the midget submarines were in no way adequately equipped to penetrate a defended anchorage (unlike later British X craft).

As it turned out, the Japanese were favoured by extraordinary luck, in that the gate defences at Pearl remained open from about 0450 to 0840, 45 minutes after the air attack commenced! Had this not been the case, the sight of a midget entangled in the gate might have proved to be an alarm bell less easily disregarded than Ward's encounter with an inbound midget.

On the subject of those B-type Hog Islanders, it was Chateau Thierry that received Welin davits. St Mihiel, participant in the Attu operation, seems to have been equipped with double-deck boat handling facilities, but unclear from the photograph I have seen what kind of boats they were.

_____________________________




(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 410
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/8/2011 1:43:53 AM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline 		Thank you LY

Buck

(in reply to Local Yokel)
Post #: 411
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/18/2011 12:00:33 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline 		Using beta K8 exe file - a number of Japanese Divisions start broken down into regimental elements. The elements use IJA Hy Inf Sqd 41. The parent uses IJA Std Inf Sqd. When the elements recombine their Hy Inf Sqd devices are sent to the pool but not replaced by the Std Ind Sqd and the divisions lose about 300 AV.

_____________________________

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 Buck Beach)
Post #: 412
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/18/2011 3:20:38 PM   
JWE

 

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

ORIGINAL: treespider
Using beta K8 exe file - a number of Japanese Divisions start broken down into regimental elements. The elements use IJA Hy Inf Sqd 41. The parent uses IJA Std Inf Sqd. When the elements recombine their Hy Inf Sqd devices are sent to the pool but not replaced by the Std Ind Sqd and the divisions lose about 300 AV.

Darn. If it ain't one thing, it's another. I know michaelm has been fixing burps in the upgrade loops. Seems like it's peeling an onion, or playing whack the mole. If you have a save, might be worthwhile to send it to him, help him chase down that darn mole.

I see where you mean. Not too many places, but enough to be a pita. Thought I caught them all, but obviously didn't. Fixed them in the Scen028 Master and have a changelog. Give me a shout if you want either one.

Ciao.

btw, had fun at Irwin, but it rained, and when it rains in the desert it freakin rains. woof !!

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 413
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/18/2011 4:18:19 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline 		Ok, it's a blivet and not a burp. Michaelm is fixing the burps and in consequence, is unmasking the blivets. He has a good handle on update/upgrade but there are some residual LCUs with various devices that aren't in the update/upgrade path of corresponding devices in a parent and so it's a question of either allowing "doubling" (very bad) or zeroing out the disconnect and eventually refilling with TOE devices (not good, but better than 900# gorillas).

Std (707) and Hy (709) Inf are unrelated by upgrade paths, so having one will not get you the other because there's no internal pointer that says they are related. So the fix has to be in initial data. Groin. Anyway, give me a shout, and I'll give you the tweak.

Ciao.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 414
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/18/2011 5:45:15 PM   
Omat


Posts: 2414
Joined: 8/18/2004
Status: offline 		Hello

Some leader will never be accessible in game because they where wrong flaged e.g.:
Leader 14051 Sprague, Thomas L. He is a Radm but flaged as „05 - Ship“. Because that there are never Radm selctable for ship`s (highest Rang is Captain) and leader which are are flaged as „05 -ship“ could never selected as a Task force commander I suggest to re flaged him as a „04 – Task Force“

The same problem for e.g. McMorris, Chas H.; Number 12359. In Scenario 28 he is Right now he is classified as "type: 05-ship". So if u remove him (maybe by accident) he seems not to be accessible because he has a rank of an Rear Admiral.
Would it be better to give him the "type 04 Task Force" or "Type 01 Headquarters" like Leader Mitscher, Marc A?
Mitscher`s Number is 12510 and he is used as a ship commander but is internal a Task Force leader.
In WW2 McMorris was a ship Commander, Task force Commander and Chief of Staff of the Pacific Fleet.

There are also some Leader which have the same Problem
Number:
9009
9010
9311
10158
12359
14051
14052

P.S. I did not look at the axis side.

I suggest simply to reflaged them all to type “04 - Task Force"

Maybe Leader 16376 Erskine should be reflaged as “02 – Large Ground Unit”

Omat

_____________________________

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts."
Bertrand Russell

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 415
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/18/2011 5:52:55 PM   
treespider


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

ORIGINAL: JWE

Ok, it's a blivet and not a burp. Michaelm is fixing the burps and in consequence, is unmasking the blivets. He has a good handle on update/upgrade but there are some residual LCUs with various devices that aren't in the update/upgrade path of corresponding devices in a parent and so it's a question of either allowing "doubling" (very bad) or zeroing out the disconnect and eventually refilling with TOE devices (not good, but better than 900# gorillas).

Std (707) and Hy (709) Inf are unrelated by upgrade paths, so having one will not get you the other because there's no internal pointer that says they are related. So the fix has to be in initial data. Groin. Anyway, give me a shout, and I'll give you the tweak.

Ciao.



Had already sent him the save and figured as much when I sent it...so do you change the sub unit to 707 or the parent to 709 or is it another option?

_____________________________

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 #: 416
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/18/2011 8:18:47 PM   
JWE

 

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

ORIGINAL: treespider
Had already sent him the save and figured as much when I sent it...so do you change the sub unit to 707 or the parent to 709 or is it another option?

Depends. I think the divisions are right, and they are on a TOE in any case, so the sub units go to what is in the Div. For the most part it's change the sub to 707. Just fyi.

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 417
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/18/2011 10:19:04 PM   
treespider


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

ORIGINAL: JWE


quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider
Had already sent him the save and figured as much when I sent it...so do you change the sub unit to 707 or the parent to 709 or is it another option?

Depends. I think the divisions are right, and they are on a TOE in any case, so the sub units go to what is in the Div. For the most part it's change the sub to 707. Just fyi.


Alternatively - I assume the Hy Inf Sqd are supposed to represent a temporary beefing of the units for the initial invasion cycle - you could create a new TO&E that utilizes the Hy Inf sqd for the parent that "upgrades" in 6 months to the "Std Inf Sqd" TO&E to which the parent is currently assigned.

_____________________________

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 #: 418
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/19/2011 1:42:08 AM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline 		Nope. Don't represent anything other than a blivet. Have no intention of doing anything other than fixing it.

You, of course, may do as you please. Ciao.

ps. welcome to Homicide, Spidey.

< Message edited by JWE -- 4/19/2011 2:02:45 AM >

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 419
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata - 4/19/2011 12:45:44 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4443
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735
Ship 12450 is American Leader
Ship 12221 is Am. Leader

Yep. Seems to be so in all the scens. Will rename 12221 to something else. Thanks.


Which name did you chose? I can't seem to find a C1-B which is eligible but not in the DBB database already...

Edit: Think I found one: "Alcoa Pathfinder" - torpedoed and lost off Mozambique 1942

Source: http://shipbuildinghistory.com/history/merchantships/wwii/c1cargoships.htm

< Message edited by LargeSlowTarget -- 4/19/2011 12:53:11 PM >

_____________________________

AE Mod "Bottlenecks" UPDATED 01/2022

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 420
Page:   <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata Page: <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   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

1.031