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: Between the Storms

 
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: Between the Storms Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Between the Storms - 6/23/2014 4:12:44 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		We were talking about Sea Gladiators for the HMAS CLV Melbourne. Does anyone have a Mod with them in use?


_____________________________



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 #: 31
RE: Between the Storms - 6/23/2014 4:30:15 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Here is a first crack at the G.6 Japanese CLV:






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 #: 32
RE: Between the Storms - 6/23/2014 10:54:20 AM   
wdolson

 

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

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

True, she does suck up some TTs and bombs that would prob screw up the Dec 7 results.


You could delay the Pennsylvania, but put the Utah back in.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 33
RE: Between the Storms - 6/23/2014 1:08:21 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		That is a good thought as well.

Back to work on the G.6. If it carries 38 planes then what should the mix be? Figure two elevators for the shortened deck. Should we go 21 Zero and 18 Kate? 24 Z and 15 K? 27 Z and 12 K? or a balanced Air Group of 15 Z, 12 V, and 12 K?


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 34
RE: Between the Storms - 6/23/2014 1:16:08 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		It should be similar to Allied types. If the Allies cannot carry torpedoes, neither should G6. If you go with torpedoes, then the number of Kates should be two full strikes worth, IMO. Make sure they have enough torpedo carts.

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 35
RE: Between the Storms - 6/23/2014 1:22:45 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		I think it should somehow be a mix that shows why the future CVLs had the load they had. With that in mind, I see arguments for any and all of the above. But if we consider the loadout of G.6 a learning step, then I'd vote for either 27 Zeroes and 12 Kates, or the balanced air group of 15 Zeroes, 12 Vals, and 12 Kates, although I favor the first.


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 36
RE: Between the Storms - 6/23/2014 1:28:24 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		If you continue with the concept of 2 CV and a CVL, then the 27 Zero and 12 Kates goes with her role being TF CAP provider and possible ASW platform. Another possibility would be 27 Zero, 9 Kates, and 3 recon.

_____________________________


(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 37
RE: Between the Storms - 6/23/2014 1:57:27 PM   
JuanG


Posts: 906
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

It should be similar to Allied types. If the Allies cannot carry torpedoes, neither should G6. If you go with torpedoes, then the number of Kates should be two full strikes worth, IMO. Make sure they have enough torpedo carts.


I would say 27 Zeros and 12 Kates, with 24 torpedoes would be fair. I don't think they need to parallel the Allied CVLs directly, especially considering how much more powerful the SBD's are compared to the IJN DB's. Not to mention all those CVE's the allies get from late '42 onwards come with 24 torpedoes too.

_____________________________


Coral Sea HDM
AltWNT Scenarios

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 38
RE: Between the Storms - 6/23/2014 2:25:29 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		My 'gut' feeling leans in the direction of the F--TB Group with then adding the Vals once the conversion occurs. The SBDs reflect the American use of them as Scouts as well as their favored 'delivery' package. The Kates fit the same role within Japan. Though I do have to say that Kitakami's point carries some serious weight with it being an intermediate design. Shouldn't it then have an intermediate air group? Keep tossing out ideas team!

I've been busy. Here comes a HOSTE of screenshots...


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to JuanG)
Post #: 39
G.6 Conversion - 6/23/2014 2:28:48 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Here is the G.6 Conversion. The ship still reflects her Mogami 'roots' but makes a jump in the Soryu's direction. Not quite Soryu's Air Group but still substantial.





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 #: 40
HMS Vindictive - 6/23/2014 2:34:01 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		The British didn't believe in the CLV Hybrid idea so their design reflects that. Decided to make the Exeter-Class THREE ships with Exeter and then two CAV's being built as allowed by the London Treaty. Time period is much more right for their building so this made sense to me. The Brits see them more as AMC Killers so they keep the 8" guns and Torps while flying a modest air group:






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 #: 41
HMAS Melbourne - 6/23/2014 2:36:05 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		..and here is their conversion creating a fairly useful CVL...





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 #: 42
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/23/2014 2:38:12 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Query: The Vindictive is British and the Melbourne Australian. Does this mean I need to create them as TWO sets of classes? I need a Brit Class and then an Aussie Class or can I just click the class slot and make the ship Aussie?


_____________________________



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 #: 43
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/23/2014 2:38:49 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		That is it for the moment. I'll sit and await commentary!


_____________________________



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 #: 44
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/23/2014 3:03:58 PM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		Take a look at the turret armor values on the Vindictive.

I don't think you can convert from one country to another. This was brought up years ago over the AKV conversions from merchants.



_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 45
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/23/2014 3:26:58 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

My 'gut' feeling leans in the direction of the F--TB Group with then adding the Vals once the conversion occurs. The SBDs reflect the American use of them as Scouts as well as their favored 'delivery' package. The Kates fit the same role within Japan. Though I do have to say that Kitakami's point carries some serious weight with it being an intermediate design. Shouldn't it then have an intermediate air group? Keep tossing out ideas team!


Would it make sense to shrink the strike aircraft (DB/TB) number by 3 to allow that 3rd group be a recon type aircraft?? These would be for both sides.

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 46
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/23/2014 3:29:19 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Take a look at the turret armor values on the Vindictive.

I don't think you can convert from one country to another. This was brought up years ago over the AKV conversions from merchants.




Good catch. Will fix.

Yaaaaa...I thought I might need to do the Exeter CAV as TWO nationalities...


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 47
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/23/2014 3:49:00 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Thinking on the Brit/Aussie CAVs, perhaps they could start with Buffaloes instead of Sea Gladiators?


_____________________________



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 #: 48
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/23/2014 4:11:57 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Just sent a query off to Juan regarding his ship art for Amagi and Constitution. Have gotten some art but thought I'd make an art work request for anyone who might like to take crack at some of these models.


_____________________________



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 #: 49
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/23/2014 4:12:18 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		The British Buff wasn't carrier capable.

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 50
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/23/2014 4:23:32 PM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		Besides, the Gladiators would look good in the game!

_____________________________


(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 51
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/23/2014 4:56:01 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Agreed but we need to model them. REPEAT: Has anyone used them in a Mod and may we see your version of them?


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 52
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/23/2014 10:21:55 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		SuluSea---are you out there? We have need of your SKILLS!

_____________________________



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 #: 53
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/23/2014 11:04:48 PM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline 		The Sea Gladiator was included in stock in the original WitP. Many pointed out that it was never used in the Pacific, so it got removed in AE. You could look up the specs in WitP and compare with the specs for aircraft that are in both games. You could then tweak the values to be inline with AE. It would be a start.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 54
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/24/2014 1:22:33 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		Thanks, I want to put the Gladiator in my game and was just winging the stats, I forgot they were in WitP.

_____________________________


(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 55
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/24/2014 1:41:57 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline 		What about Lend Lease CV AC for the Ozzies?

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 56
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/24/2014 8:12:32 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Maybe a 12 plane British fighter training group in the UK coming on Jan 42. That actually means 36 pilots, but as my PBEM game in April 44 shows, the British fighter pilot pool has very few trained pilots.

_____________________________


(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 57
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/24/2014 1:50:50 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Red Lancer is back on board to do any new aircraft art. That is a GREAT development.

I'm all for putting the Sea Gladiator in but we can always shift to the Lend-Lease concept without issue. America sends a shipment of 25-50 former USN Buffalos over to Australia just before the war breaks out so the Aussies start with a full Squadron and pool to handle early losses. Makes some sense.

Michael and John are writing back-and-forth working on RA presently and they appear to be doing great work,

I have about an hour before work so we hope get all the new ship's names in place and begin the location discussion.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 58
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/24/2014 1:51:19 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Maybe a 12 plane British fighter training group in the UK coming on Jan 42. That actually means 36 pilots, but as my PBEM game in April 44 shows, the British fighter pilot pool has very few trained pilots.


Sounds Good to me.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 59
RE: HMAS Melbourne - 6/24/2014 1:52:06 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Thanks, I want to put the Gladiator in my game and was just winging the stats, I forgot they were in WitP.



Do you still have WITP? If so could you Post a screenshot of these planes here and I'll copy it into AE.

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: Between the Storms Page: <<   < prev  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

0.906