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: Operation SF Scenario - Radar

 
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: Operation SF Scenario - Radar Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 9/16/2014 5:16:13 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline 		Woof !! The more we do on this, the more we find to look at.

Since this is grainy and the devices are all nation-specific, we added the Brit ACO, Aus LWAW Mk-I and Mk-II, and Can SCR-602 (Brit LW) air warning radars for use in SWPac along with the US SCR-270. Testing showed that some tweaking of data parameters was necessary. Had already done radar tweaks for NavAir AA combat in the Nav context, but hadn't looked at LandAir AA combat in the Air context before and found that the model wasn't quite the same . So, back to making charts, graphs and modulo tables. At least the results will be beneficial for land radar device data in the regular scenarios .

I came up with an expression that works really well, in a practical sense, and folds in very nicely with the specific range algorithm that Elf and Michael did for the game. As both Elf and Michael have said in the past, combat algorithms are hex based (within 40nm circle). "Things" with ranges beyond that don't really go beyond that, they just have more detect chances: so if the "thing" has an 80nm range, it gets 2 chances at the apple; if "thing" has a 120nm range, it gets 3, and so on. But recursive checks have mathematical issues all their own, which tend to give more weight to long range detection. It's math. It happens. Trust me.

So ... a decent work around, to avoid the simple recursive stuff, is to divide the stated, standard, usually max, and rarely achieved, "Range" parameter, with a value that depends on the "hex" value of the range parameter. Can't say just what it is at the moment, but can say it is a <Sqrt> function. It's obviously external to the recursive, but math suggests "better" results.

Ciao. JWE

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 31
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 9/29/2014 7:07:14 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline 		Know people are waiting for this. But I'm kind of out of pocket on a special project, so I'm passing this off to the staff

It will happen, but you will get updates and notifications from either Mike Osterhaut or Matt Norton. They are my go-to guys in the SW and NE US (and Matt is good with the TX group). They speak for me.

Ciao. JWE

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 32
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 9/29/2014 8:28:03 PM   
Ol_Dog


Posts: 317
Joined: 2/23/2003
From: Southern Illinois
Status: offline 		Thanks for keeping us in the loop


_____________________________

Common Sense is an uncommon virtue.
If you think you have everything under control, you don't fully understand the situation.

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 33
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 10/5/2014 8:09:13 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline 		Digging through Palazzo and AWM54, item 721/2/11 and 703/5/52, etc .. looking for the physical makeup of various Australian echelons, particularly with respect to certain support organizations, such as AT and AAA. The Brit standard is pretty clear, and it seems that the AIF followed the standard with MG and AT units. But I am coming to the conclusion that the AA units were not folded into the Artillery Brigade command structure, but were rather held at Corps level.

Palazzo notes that a ‘standard’ Dec ’42 unit, was authorized a Lt AA Regt, but says nothing about its possible predecessors and where they may have been echeloned.

My personal take is that they weren’t “technically” subsumed in the divisional structure; a lot of AA out there, but not necessarily under divisional command. Exigencies of service might well cause them to be divisionally regimented, in the interests of efficiency. But one does not wish 48 Bofors divided up into an equivalent scale unit, if the actual AA unit, with the same 48 Bofors, is available.

I would love it if someone had some hard info on this.

Ciao. JWE


_____________________________

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

(in reply to Ol_Dog)
Post #: 34
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 10/13/2014 4:52:11 PM   
Natali

 

Posts: 103
Joined: 9/18/2012
From: Ocatillo Land
Status: offline 		I made changes to Johns OOB. Many Australin units upgrade and Australia only has 1 command HQ and it is restricted. I added training camp bases and put a command HQ in each one. They have a range of 1 and are restricted and are static and can’t move. Australian units that are need to upgrade their TOE have to go to one of the training camps, or be in range of the main command HQ in Sydney I think. The infantry evolvs ok until it goes to the jungle TOE and then it has to go to the jungle school while getting reorganized.

Bases are Atherton close to Cairns and Lowanna south of Brisbane because they were jungle schools. Armor goes to Puckapunyal that John already put in. There is Katherine for NT and Wembly for WA and Adelaide for SA and Bonegilla for Victoria.

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 35
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 10/21/2014 7:01:25 PM   
Natali

 

Posts: 103
Joined: 9/18/2012
From: Ocatillo Land
Status: offline 		Australian LCUs start at slot 5001. Organized so that LH Rgts have their upgrades in the next slot so people can see.
NZ LCUs start at slot 5401.There are 2 upgrade paths for Territorial Forces, and they are done.
Almost finished, except for folding in John’s Japanese and Ships.

Sam

(in reply to Natali)
Post #: 36
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 10/22/2014 1:04:16 PM   
kkoovvoo

 

Posts: 253
Joined: 10/1/2004
From: Slovakia
Status: offline 		Looking forward for this!

_____________________________


(in reply to Natali)
Post #: 37
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 10/24/2014 4:39:29 PM   
Natali

 

Posts: 103
Joined: 9/18/2012
From: Ocatillo Land
Status: offline 		HQs and Base Forces have been radically redone for the Scenario.

The US Air HQ and Support structure is as follows:

There were 7 Base Sections, which were administrative organizations, and qualify as Air HQs, but without much additional infrastructure. These were Base-1 at Darwin, Base-2 at Townsville, Base 3 at Brisbane, Base-4 at Melbourne, Base-5 at Adelaide, Base-6 at Perth, and Base-7 at Sydney, with the last (Base-7) established 19 April, 1942.

5th Air Force Service Command had 3 active Air Depot Groups during the period of interest; 4th, 12th, and 15th, all based in the Townsville area and each having 2 Repair Squadrons, a Supply Squadron and an Ordnance Coy. For game purposes, these are relocated to Townsville, Charter Towers and Brisbane, as the equivalent of base forces. These are the units which have a significant amount of Aviation Support. They are static and cannot move. This is where depleted and fatigued airgroups go to in order to rest, reform, repair and replace.

There were a number of Air Service Groups, equivalent to the ground support element of a Bombardment or Pursuit (Fighter) Group. These contain the maintenance and ordnance companies that the game calls aviation support.

Because of game constraints, the Service Groups are folded into Squadron support units. Squadrons do not get much of aviation support, so they have very short legs and will have to go back to higher to get well.

This does not work with the usual AE game concepts. It is different; very different.

Sam

(in reply to kkoovvoo)
Post #: 38
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 10/25/2014 5:18:18 AM   
Mac Linehan

 

Posts: 1484
Joined: 12/19/2004
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline 		John and the Team -

Good work, Gents!

Mac

_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to Natali)
Post #: 39
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 10/26/2014 1:32:06 PM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		This scenario may be the one that gets me into PBEM. Looking forward to seeing it complete.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mac Linehan)
Post #: 40
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 10/26/2014 2:11:44 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline 		Sam and Mo will probably freak, but when this is finished, we'll be updating Guadalcanal, DEI, and Philippines scenarios to use all the new paradigms. Lots of opportunities for PBEMs with shorter time frames and smaller maps.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 41
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 10/26/2014 4:49:49 PM   
DanSez


Posts: 1023
Joined: 2/5/2012
Status: offline 		Great news, thanks for all the labors of love.
As I have been a smaller scenario player, I have a couple of PBEM opponents I will try to lead over to the DaBabes versions. I am very happy to see the new SF alt-history game.


(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 42
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 11/7/2014 7:36:46 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline 		Almost finished. Sam wants the following noted. It will also be in the scenario documentation. So, Sam says;

US divisional units, in Australia, are very low in terms of experience. They are deployable, but if players do the usual and throw them in anyway, they will get their clock cleaned by experienced IJ combat units, and then they are gone for a while. Using the little known and even less used training paradigm, the 32nd and 41st IDs are at Camp Cable and Camp Caves, respectively, and have 80-90% readiness for their specific training location. This is where they trained for a month to two months before being released for combat ops. I think we should encourage players to do the same. Americal units are in the same condition at Noumea.

There are 3 infantry divisions in Hawaii, as of June, 1942. Units are assigned to Hawaiian Department and are temp restricted. They are there to defend the Hawaiian Islands and must not move elsewhere unless purchased. PPs are far and few between and are more use in buying out deployable Australian units initially. 27th division is also much less experienced than the 24th and 25th divisions and had a hard assignment to defend the outer islands.

There are six US divisions in the opening of the scenario, but 3 are restricted and the other 3 are very fragile. Players have 1 divisional equivalent that’s worth anything, at the cost of losing 3. It is a race against time to get them trained up enough to enter combat.

In the months to come, the callow youths of the 37th division are supposed to deploy to Fiji, and are actually in a TF on 26 May, 1942. But since this is an Op SF scenario, they are sitting at SD, loaded up, but with no place to go. They also have very low experience.

The 43rd division comes into play in Oct, 1942. They are not quite as inexperienced, but nothing to write home about. Then there are the 1st and 2nd Marine Divisions that slowly phase into NZ from April to Oct, 1942. Contrary to popular opinion, these were not elite. They were a mix of ‘the old breed’ and mostly volunteers. Experience is good enough to go into combat, but it is not all that good. They must learn by doing.

I think I parsed this out fairly well. It’s what we all do in a CPX. Do not know how this translates into the stock game. Do not care. What you see is what there is.


_____________________________

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

(in reply to DanSez)
Post #: 43
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 11/15/2014 3:38:06 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline 		Well, I sure put my foot in it this time. The scenario is very far off the usual GC scale. One can think of it as a separate game that just happens to use the WiTP-AE engine and map. I made a joke about having to have a manual for these scenarios because of all the changes, and got my head handed to me. Yes; these guys are so off scale that a manual is necessary and guess who gets to write it?

There’s an Allied Forces section and an Imperial Japan section. It’s broken down into 5 parts for each side:

Operational Orders and Victory Conditions:
HQs and Chain of Command:
LCU OOBs and Implications:
Naval OOBs and implications:
Air OOBs and Implications:

Each part has details about how its components work. There are a lot of things in there that some people would consider house rules, but they are not. They are scenario rules.

Have about 20 pages of the Allies done. A PITA but kinda fun.


_____________________________

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

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 44
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 11/16/2014 6:17:18 AM   
Mac Linehan

 

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

Am looking forward to this one!

Deeply appreciate your willingness to write the manual; a historically accurate hard core CPX at it's best!

Mac

< Message edited by Mac Linehan -- 11/16/2014 7:19:53 AM >

_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 45
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 11/28/2014 11:40:21 PM   
SigUp

 

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline 		How big will the map be for this scenario? Full size or limited to a certain area?

(in reply to Mac Linehan)
Post #: 46
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 11/29/2014 1:08:18 AM   
Mac Linehan

 

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

Am looking forward to this (now that's an understatement...<grin>).

As for updating the other Babes small scenarios - you have a Professional Team that is doing it right.

This is incredible. I do love the big campaign games, but sometimes I just want to play a fast moving grainy scenario, where I don't have to spend hours on a turn - and get right into combat.

A "Well Done" to you all, Gents.

Mac

< Message edited by Mac Linehan -- 11/29/2014 2:09:01 AM >

_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to SigUp)
Post #: 47
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 11/29/2014 2:34:36 PM   
Symon


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

ORIGINAL: SigUp
How big will the map be for this scenario? Full size or limited to a certain area?

This is the playing field; limited to the red rectangle.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

(in reply to SigUp)
Post #: 48
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 11/29/2014 3:17:01 PM   
Symon


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

ORIGINAL: Mac Linehan
John -
This is incredible. I do love the big campaign games, but sometimes I just want to play a fast moving grainy scenario, where I don't have to spend hours on a turn - and get right into combat.
Mac

Well Mac, this has become the eggplant that ate Chicago. With all the changes and tweaks and bears (oh my!!) it has become the flagship for a completely new game paradigm, within the AE game system. The extra time it’s taking is so we can dot every ‘t’ and cross every ‘i’ and make sure it all finally works within the AE engine parameters.

Think of it as a separate game type, but using the AE computer engine. That’s why we needed to make a manual; it’s a separate game and needs separate rules. Oh, well.

We’re getting totally involved in the Op SF scenario details because we will migrate all the other Babes small-map scenarios to this paradigm: Guadalcanal, PI, DEI, and a couple others we have on the horizon.

Thanks for waiting. I’ll have a scen file with the Air/Land OOBs posted, within a week, for review. All I gotta do is instantiate the Nav stuff, and complete the manual.

This is a “tactics-III” level, computer driven, board game derivative, of the WiTP-AE game system.

Ciao. John

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Mac Linehan)
Post #: 49
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 11/29/2014 5:53:35 PM   
berto


Posts: 20708
Joined: 3/13/2002
From: metro Chicago, Illinois, USA
Status: offline
After I have finished some must-do programming and graphics work (Real Soon Now), after we release our first stand-alone game in the revived Campaign Series (Q1 2015?), I will finally have sufficient ongoing free time for some sustained WITP:AE game play. This new series of small-map scenarios will help make that possible. Can't wait!

_____________________________

Campaign Series Legion https://cslegion.com/
Campaign Series Lead Coder https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tt.asp?forumid=1515
Panzer Campaigns, Panzer Battles, Civil War Battles Lead Coder https://wargameds.com

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 50
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 11/29/2014 7:32:02 PM   
Mac Linehan

 

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

ORIGINAL: Symon


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mac Linehan
John -
This is incredible. I do love the big campaign games, but sometimes I just want to play a fast moving grainy scenario, where I don't have to spend hours on a turn - and get right into combat.
Mac

Well Mac, this has become the eggplant that ate Chicago. With all the changes and tweaks and bears (oh my!!) it has become the flagship for a completely new game paradigm, within the AE game system. The extra time it’s taking is so we can dot every ‘t’ and cross every ‘i’ and make sure it all finally works within the AE engine parameters.

Think of it as a separate game type, but using the AE computer engine. That’s why we needed to make a manual; it’s a separate game and needs separate rules. Oh, well.

We’re getting totally involved in the Op SF scenario details because we will migrate all the other Babes small-map scenarios to this paradigm: Guadalcanal, PI, DEI, and a couple others we have on the horizon.

Thanks for waiting. I’ll have a scen file with the Air/Land OOBs posted, within a week, for review. All I gotta do is instantiate the Nav stuff, and complete the manual.

This is a “tactics-III” level, computer driven, board game derivative, of the WiTP-AE game system.

Ciao. John


John -

This is music to my ears; and to many others.

What is so awesome is that not only will your Team do a professional job (and none of us could really see any of you settling for anything less), but many of the original members of the AE Team, who know the ins and outs of the AE engine (Don comes to mind), are, I suspect, part of this project.

Plus, you have an entirely separate group of knowledge military professionals who will playtest and whose input will help to shape the final product.

It's gonna be good.

Babes started a whole new step towards gritty and realism; this, I would venture to say, is the next generation.

Mac




< Message edited by Mac Linehan -- 11/29/2014 8:34:43 PM >

_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 51
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 11/29/2014 7:35:07 PM   
berto


Posts: 20708
Joined: 3/13/2002
From: metro Chicago, Illinois, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mac Linehan

This is music to my ears; and to many others.

+1

WITP:AE as I always hoped it would be.

_____________________________

Campaign Series Legion https://cslegion.com/
Campaign Series Lead Coder https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tt.asp?forumid=1515
Panzer Campaigns, Panzer Battles, Civil War Battles Lead Coder https://wargameds.com

(in reply to Mac Linehan)
Post #: 52
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 12/2/2014 3:15:55 PM   
Symon


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

ORIGINAL: Mac Linehan
This is music to my ears; and to many others.

@Mac, @Berto, you guys are gonna love this (or maybe hate it, I dunno).
Have copies of the weekly status sheets of US Naval aviation that shows every squadron (USN and USMC), where they were and what planes they were flying and how many of each they had in inventory. Was very surprised as to how many front line Marine squadrons flew SB2Us, F2As, and F4F-3s into the December 1942 time period. The weekly’s show the upgrade history and who was in training and with what planes and when they were good enough to deploy and what planes they got when they did. Woof !!

Builds and pools are treated totally different in these scens. Planes are available in scenario defined groups and are limited. So a player is going to have to judiciously select airgroups for upgrade. One can slowly trick out a few rear area squadrons with front line machines, but at the expense of combat squadron replacements.

Idea is to fight out the combat squadrons and then rotate them with a (limited) number of prepared front line squadrons. Sound familiar?

Ooohh. This is getting so sweet.

@Berto, the weekly’s go all the way back, so they are relevant for the PI scenario work.


_____________________________

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

(in reply to Mac Linehan)
Post #: 53
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 12/2/2014 8:43:06 PM   
berto


Posts: 20708
Joined: 3/13/2002
From: metro Chicago, Illinois, USA
Status: offline
Man, if you ever make a '44-'45 Liberation of the Philippines scenario, I will be absolutely, positively giddy with excitement!

_____________________________

Campaign Series Legion https://cslegion.com/
Campaign Series Lead Coder https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tt.asp?forumid=1515
Panzer Campaigns, Panzer Battles, Civil War Battles Lead Coder https://wargameds.com

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 54
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 12/3/2014 3:33:28 AM   
Don Bowen


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

ORIGINAL: Symon

@Mac, @Berto, you guys are gonna love this (or maybe hate it, I dunno).
Have copies of the weekly status sheets of US Naval aviation that shows every squadron (USN and USMC), where they were and what planes they were flying and how many of each they had in inventory. Was very surprised as to how many front line Marine squadrons flew SB2Us, F2As, and F4F-3s into the December 1942 time period. The weekly’s show the upgrade history and who was in training and with what planes and when they were good enough to deploy and what planes they got when they did. Woof !!

Builds and pools are treated totally different in these scens. Planes are available in scenario defined groups and are limited. So a player is going to have to judiciously select airgroups for upgrade. One can slowly trick out a few rear area squadrons with front line machines, but at the expense of combat squadron replacements.

Idea is to fight out the combat squadrons and then rotate them with a (limited) number of prepared front line squadrons. Sound familiar?

Ooohh. This is getting so sweet.

@Berto, the weekly’s go all the way back, so they are relevant for the PI scenario work.



Wow John - weekly squadron strengths and locations!!!!! Am I reading it correctly, these are not the bi-weekly Locations of Naval Aircraft? I'd love to have them, are they in a format you could send????

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 55
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 12/3/2014 3:47:00 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline 		We used it during development of AE:

http://www.history.navy.mil/a-record/ww-ii/loc-ac/loc-ac.htm

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 56
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 12/3/2014 12:36:39 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline 		Might be some confusion on my part. I have he stuff in the link but it does not cover every week and starts in February, 1942. Thought (and still hope) John might have found something that is truly weekly and covers the entire war.

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 57
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 12/3/2014 12:54:28 PM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline 		It has some holes in it, but that's the only record I've seen. If there is something better, I'd like to see it too.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 58
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 12/3/2014 4:11:34 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline 		Well howdy Don. Oh, heavens. I guess they are bi-weekly. We’ve been referring to them as ‘the weeklys’ for so long I guess the name just stuck. Yep, it’s the Locations of US Naval Aircraft. Sorry bout that.

But hey, now I got you guys here, you are the perfect people to help answer this question.

I got all the PatRon (VP) in Pac Theater as of the scenario opening day, as well as all VP that entered the theater by March ’43 (end date). There weren’t that many, at all. Seems Navy deployed PatRons as detachments of divisions (usually 4 planes).

For example, on June 4, ’41, PatWing 2 comprised CPW-2 (consolidated squadron), VP-13, 23, 24, 44, 51, all at Pearl Harbor. But most are given as OOB components at Midway, including VP-51 which was primarily in Alaska, and VP-22 which was merged with PI survivors to become VP-101 in Australia on 12 April, ’42. Notwithstanding Midway, several of the same VP are identified and located on Noumea, Johnston, and Palmyra, at the same time. And I do believe CPW-2 was the collection of the squadron “remainders” after deployment (the math works out) … Sigh …

So PatRons really are PatDivs. This can be done by OOB listing every PatRon as PatDivs. This is the most flexible because each can have a varying number of planes, but it doesn’t allow for rebuilding a squadron under the parent-child routines.

Or, one can give VP a “max split” of 3, and make the OOB have ‘dets’ with a parent unit and force everything into a cookie cutter max size.

It is a quandary because whatever paradigm is chosen will become a standard and be impressed across all of our small map scenarios. Know that grogs are gonna play these, but don’t want to break their bones by requiring obscure knowledge of this kinda stuff.

Ya’lls thoughts and input will be highly appreciated. Ciao. JWE


_____________________________

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

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 59
RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar - 12/3/2014 8:14:20 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline 		I arrive a bit late here...sorry...
Have been reading this thread and got really interested in the overall concept behind this new vision of the game.

There's one thing i don't understand (or didn't realize while reading through the thread)... what does "SF" stand for?

Thanks in advance... i know i'm gonna love this...even if i won't be able to play it untill i'll finish my DBB-C games against Obvert (which, btw, once again has showed me how great DBB scenarios are!)

Thanks for the effort guys


(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: Operation SF Scenario - Radar Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   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

2.016