Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Playtesting RA 6.0

 
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 >> Playtesting RA 6.0 Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/18/2013 12:42:32 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		For those who have followed the Reluctant Admiral Mod, a new version (6.0) has been in the works for quite some time. The files have been sent to playtesters and interested helpers of this project. This is what was said within the email:


Greetings all.

I want to thank those who have volunteered to look through the Mod as well as the Playtesters for 6.0. JWE: I have included you do to all your dedicated work helping with this long-term project.

This is what I need from you:
1. Load the game and play several turns. See if there are issues with the very beginning. The Japanese side is most important as I am not sure if there is enough shipping for the historical lifts of Dec 7th. The Allied side has a lot more ships in it starting throughout the South Pacific and DEI. Are they TOO much or OK?
2. Look for art issues. I already know there is not a piece of art for CLV Charlotte. Am working on that... Is there anything else missing?
3. There are all sorts of conversion possibilities throughout the Allied/Japanese side. DO THEM to make sure they work. I will Post the actual conversion list on the new Thread ‘RA 6.0 Playtesting.’
4. How do the new garrison requirements in CBI work?
5. ANY other issues that crop up or you have questions on...

I want a freewheeling and open conversation. Really don’t want to HAVE to do any major corrections that should have been caught here!

While you guys are prowling around in the Mod I shall work on the special artwork made by SuluSea for the Allied/Japanese loading pages, a new scenario description, and a DETAILED history of the this alternative Mod.

Questions?

I will send a second email containing JWE’s work to slow down movement in the CBI.

GOOD LUCK and THANKS!
John



6.0 is a real pulling back of Japanese capabilities from the most recent release. It was FatR and I's view that we had gone too far for Japan. THIS new version really adds some interesting twists and turns for BOTH sides. The Allies get lots of new play things at the start and the Japanese are much closer to an actual IRL Dec 7th start.

It should be interesting to watch. Let the playing and commentary COMMENSE!


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
Post #: 1
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/18/2013 6:06:02 PM   
Adolf Galland


Posts: 43
Joined: 12/30/2012
Status: offline 		FIRST Impression

- cve shinyo is missing the 100/65mm
- 40 mm Type 3 range 5000 ?
- IJN submarine ST class build rate 22 and the STS class have Buildrate by 23, the STS have 300 tonnage the ST Class over 1000 tonnage
- to many valueless subcaser by the IJN
- ise class have not a hybrid path
- the Old IJNcruiser iwate etc... have short 20 cm guns ?
- no path for the IJN old CL cruiser to CLAA cruiser
- Furutaka and aoba class carry the old 12cm/45 we need a simpel upgrade to 100/65mm
- Kawachi class to underarmored for tonnage and year of Build... Kawachi replace the Kongo Class, better is the Kongo class replace the Kawachi class.
- Nagato class all light flak...on RS side
- France Algiere class data not correct

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 2
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/18/2013 8:02:34 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Great! Keep looking...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Adolf Galland)
Post #: 3
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/18/2013 8:42:36 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		FIXED:
1. Nagato AA Issues
2. Placed Long Lances back on Kawachi. Remember this class is built as CB--NOT BC--it is the Japanese version of the Pocket Battleship--Alaska Class.
3. 100/65 is on Shinyo. Are you sure there is an issue?
4. AA ranges set by DBB scenario.
5. Will work on Ise issues.
6. Added 3.9" to upgrades on Aoba--Furutaka.

We spoke once before about allowing a CAAA possibility for the Aoba--Furutaka Classes. Discussion was to eliminate the rear 8" turret and replace with more 3.9" AA. Any thoughts there?

What is wrong with the Algerie?


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 8/18/2013 8:46:19 PM >

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 4
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/18/2013 9:48:02 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Finishing the list shows me:
1. The old CLs do have an AA Conversion path/option.
2. The same can be said for BOTH Fuso and Ise Class to that of the FP carrying option.

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 5
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/18/2013 10:44:24 PM   
Adolf Galland


Posts: 43
Joined: 12/30/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

FIXED:
1. Nagato AA Issues
2. Placed Long Lances back on Kawachi. Remember this class is built as CB--NOT BC--it is the Japanese version of the Pocket Battleship--Alaska Class.
3. 100/65 is on Shinyo. Are you sure there is an issue?
4. AA ranges set by DBB scenario.
5. Will work on Ise issues.
6. Added 3.9" to upgrades on Aoba--Furutaka.

We spoke once before about allowing a CAAA possibility for the Aoba--Furutaka Classes. Discussion was to eliminate the rear 8" turret and replace with more 3.9" AA. Any thoughts there?

What is wrong with the Algerie?




Kawachi Class endurance 8000... Deutschland Klasse 21.500 sm by 10 kn.
i think for a pocketbattelship is the endurance by the Kawachi class very short.

quote:

We spoke once before about allowing a CAAA possibility for the Aoba--Furutaka Classes. Discussion was to eliminate the rear 8" turret and replace with more 3.9" AA. Any thoughts there?


my idea is a heavy AA Cruiser all 20 cm Turret replace by 100/65mm the example (Atlanta Class)
a mid 44 refit ? a possible refit a path for defence player, offensive player can hold the 8" guns....

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 6
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/18/2013 10:52:43 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		You mean...like THIS! Just created this based on a tentative design I found on the web. Raised tonnage by 300 and lowered speed from 33 to 31.







Attachment (1)

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 7
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/18/2013 11:07:25 PM   
Adolf Galland


Posts: 43
Joined: 12/30/2012
Status: offline
quote:

What is wrong with the Algerie?


for a 12000 tonnage cruiser is she extremely good armored durabilty is 37...

durabilty 50 - 60 is realistic

(in reply to Adolf Galland)
Post #: 8
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/18/2013 11:11:42 PM   
Adolf Galland


Posts: 43
Joined: 12/30/2012
Status: offline
quote:

You mean...like THIS! Just created this based on a tentative design I found on the web. Raised tonnage by 300 and lowered speed from 33 to 31.



yes this refit is nice ... ;)

(in reply to Adolf Galland)
Post #: 9
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 12:34:55 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline 		Does the new map go into the art folder? I am not a computer whiz here.

< Message edited by DOCUP -- 8/19/2013 1:10:35 AM >

(in reply to Adolf Galland)
Post #: 10
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 1:33:16 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		I KNOW what you are talking about!

Just bumped up the 'Creating a Mod Folder' Thread I made a while ago for people doing an install. It is in the War Room. Should help...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 11
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 2:13:33 AM   
Cpt Sherwood

 

Posts: 837
Joined: 12/1/2005
From: A Very Nice Place in the USA
Status: offline 		Deleted

< Message edited by Cpt Sherwood -- 8/19/2013 8:22:59 AM >

_____________________________

“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 12
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 2:19:32 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Fixed: Same production rate as the B-25J1---15 planes/month.

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Cpt Sherwood)
Post #: 13
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 7:47:31 AM   
Skyland


Posts: 280
Joined: 2/8/2007
From: France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Adolf Galland

quote:

What is wrong with the Algerie?


for a 12000 tonnage cruiser is she extremely good armored durabilty is 37...

durabilty 50 - 60 is realistic


A value between 42 to 44 is more realistic if we compare to London class CA.
My 37 may be a little bit low.

John what is your opinion ?

_____________________________

War Options 1941 mod : https://sites.google.com/site/waroptionswitpaemod/

(in reply to Adolf Galland)
Post #: 14
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 2:52:32 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		I concur. Will get into the files this morning and raise it. What do you think works?


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Skyland)
Post #: 15
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 2:53:37 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		The Algerie was kinda flimsy. They had no tonnage for armour at all.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 16
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 3:08:15 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Do you have a suggestion Mr. Terminus?


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 17
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 3:34:04 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Skyland
quote:

ORIGINAL: Adolf Galland
quote:

What is wrong with the Algerie?

for a 12000 tonnage cruiser is she extremely good armored durabilty is 37...

durabilty 50 - 60 is realistic

A value between 42 to 44 is more realistic if we compare to London class CA.
My 37 may be a little bit low.

John what is your opinion ?

The game's warship tonnages are all expressed in "standard" tonnage. So Algerie should be 10,000 (10,160 tonnes). Warship durability is calculated as somewhere between 3.85 and 4 x game tonnage/1000. So Algerie should be somewhere around 39 or 40. That will make her consistent with all the other CAs.

Ciao. JWE

_____________________________

Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.

(in reply to Skyland)
Post #: 18
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 3:59:48 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Thanks John!


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 19
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 8:04:51 PM   
Cpt Sherwood

 

Posts: 837
Joined: 12/1/2005
From: A Very Nice Place in the USA
Status: offline 		The 3 USN and 2 USM training air units do not have the trainer box checked. They are just regular air units with the word training in the name field. The USN ones are set as CV Trained and the USM are set as Replenishment and CV trained.

_____________________________

“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 20
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 8:38:27 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		GREAT Note!

Will work on that now.

Fixed the Algerie and gave her a 40.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Cpt Sherwood)
Post #: 21
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 8:41:53 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Do they need to be marked as Trainer? I deleted the Replenishment from the Marine units.

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 22
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 8:54:04 PM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline 		Is there suppose to be 2 Port Moresby CD units for the Aussie's?

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 23
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 8:59:04 PM   
Cpt Sherwood

 

Posts: 837
Joined: 12/1/2005
From: A Very Nice Place in the USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Do they need to be marked as Trainer? I deleted the Replenishment from the Marine units.


If they are going to operate as training units like the USA ones do, then yes.

_____________________________

“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 24
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 11:33:50 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		OK. Fixed.

Will check on the two PM CD units...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Cpt Sherwood)
Post #: 25
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/19/2013 11:48:24 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Fixed the PM CD units. Moved the new one to Horn Island.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 26
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/20/2013 1:07:00 AM   
Cpt Sherwood

 

Posts: 837
Joined: 12/1/2005
From: A Very Nice Place in the USA
Status: offline 		TF 407 starting at Darwin ends up being an Air TF. It has some AP and xAPs in it with troops loaded. Not sure what will happen with it.

_____________________________

“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 27
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/20/2013 1:09:04 AM   
Cpt Sherwood

 

Posts: 837
Joined: 12/1/2005
From: A Very Nice Place in the USA
Status: offline 		Force Z now has 1 BB and 2xBC to be slaughtered on a historical start?

KB-2 TF 18 is an air TF but only has 3 DDs in it.

< Message edited by Cpt Sherwood -- 8/20/2013 3:00:08 AM >

_____________________________

“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca

(in reply to Cpt Sherwood)
Post #: 28
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/20/2013 3:19:14 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline 		TF 407 will unload. I checked it. Minneapolis has no fuel at PH on Dec 6th. Its a small thing

The free French ships are nice. Those PGs and such will be very useful in the game. A lot of surface assets in the DEI at the beginning. The mini KB at Babelbaob is a nice counter to the surface assets. I don't think much will escape PI with 3 CVEs being in the area.

I noticed an AO being in Midways hex on Dec 8th. Is that suppose to go there. Looks like easy pray if someone wants to send up a few bombers or a few ships that way. I don't know much about the Jap OOB.

But so far nice feel nice to see some different ships. I'd kinda like to see some German surface ships pop into the game. Nice to have a what if with the Graf Spree. Did you push the US CBs back due to the French BCs coming into the AO in 42?

(in reply to Cpt Sherwood)
Post #: 29
RE: Playtesting RA 6.0 - 8/20/2013 3:45:22 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline 		I have several ships using the same ship art. Ie Le Hardi and a few more I'll have to look and see which ones. I need to start writing stuff down when I see it. This could just be me where I have messed around with my art files.

Is it just me or does it seem out of place that you have a good size French fleet at Noumea with only a small inf detachment at the base. Wouldn't it seem right to have atleast a base force of some type present?

The Oz CD units. Was the 6" MKV in a fixed position or was it somewhat mobile?

So far looks pretty good.

< Message edited by DOCUP -- 8/20/2013 3:48:58 AM >

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> Playtesting RA 6.0 Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   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

2.656