RE: Focus Pacific Beta

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: Focus Pacific Beta

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: Focus Pacific Beta

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 3/16/2016 11:06:52 PM

btd64

Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

Contact Gary via PM. He put his mod on hold for know, so he's available....GP

_____________________________

Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to paradigmblue)

Post #: 301

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 3/29/2016 1:34:04 AM

btd64

Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

Any word Para? Need anything from me? Let me know....GP

_____________________________

(in reply to btd64)

Post #: 302

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 3/29/2016 9:40:41 AM

paradigmblue

Posts: 784
Joined: 9/16/2014
From: Fairbanks, Alaska
Status: offline

Lack of art is still the sticking point currently.

(in reply to btd64)

Post #: 303

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 3/29/2016 12:29:50 PM

btd64

Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

Email me a list of everything you need....GP

_____________________________

(in reply to paradigmblue)

Post #: 304

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 3/31/2016 3:05:21 AM

Peever

Posts: 196
Joined: 3/17/2002
From: Minnesota
Status: offline

I started this mod a few days ago with a friend and we are having a lot of fun, although I had a very rude awakening as the Japanese player. Sending KB to Pearl was a huge mistake, at least for me, with all those new Allied Air units scattered around the Philippines, and the DEI, and those damn French at Kwangchowan. I'm curious as to what others do with KB now the the Allies have so many more aircraft all over the map.

Having the Soviets active on turn one is also a nice twist. It is so rare that I play deep enough into a game where they join and I was always the Allies in those games. Now playing as an inexperienced Japanese player I have a whole additional front to contend with. We set up some house rules though that the Soviets must stay on defense until Nov '42 to reflect conditions in Europe and no Japanese advance passed Ulan Bator & Chita since Japan had to desire or benefit to conquering deep into Russia.

I'm not sure how far we'll make it into the game due to time constraints, but it certainly is a nice twist on an old game. I just wanted to thank everyone for their contributions to this mod. Since we'll probably never get a new War in the Pacific, or at least one this complex, these mods keep the game alive and add new fun.

_____________________________

"Sergeant the Spanish bullet isn't made that will kill me," Bucky O'Neil seconds before receiving a fatal shot to the head at the battle of San Juan Hill.

(in reply to paradigmblue)

Post #: 305

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 3/31/2016 3:21:31 AM

btd64

Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

Peever, before you get to far in, I just wanted to let you know that their is another update coming. Para has most of the stuff done. I'm just trying to wrap up a few art issues....GP

< Message edited by General Patton -- 3/31/2016 3:23:05 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Peever)

Post #: 306

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 3/31/2016 7:15:34 AM

paradigmblue

Posts: 784
Joined: 9/16/2014
From: Fairbanks, Alaska
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Peever

I started this mod a few days ago with a friend and we are having a lot of fun, although I had a very rude awakening as the Japanese player. Sending KB to Pearl was a huge mistake, at least for me, with all those new Allied Air units scattered around the Philippines, and the DEI, and those damn French at Kwangchowan. I'm curious as to what others do with KB now the the Allies have so many more aircraft all over the map.

Having the Soviets active on turn one is also a nice twist. It is so rare that I play deep enough into a game where they join and I was always the Allies in those games. Now playing as an inexperienced Japanese player I have a whole additional front to contend with. We set up some house rules though that the Soviets must stay on defense until Nov '42 to reflect conditions in Europe and no Japanese advance passed Ulan Bator & Chita since Japan had to desire or benefit to conquering deep into Russia.

I'm not sure how far we'll make it into the game due to time constraints, but it certainly is a nice twist on an old game. I just wanted to thank everyone for their contributions to this mod. Since we'll probably never get a new War in the Pacific, or at least one this complex, these mods keep the game alive and add new fun.

Some Focus Pacific specific tips:

Don't be afraid to reorganize your day 1 Japanese strikes. Both Manilla and Pearl are still vulnerable on day 1 if you commit strikes to them, as the Skyrockets don't show up until day 2.

Kwangchowan is annoying but is also incredibly vulnerable to naval bombardment. The shore guns there are strong, but nothing that a couple of battleships can't handle. Damaging the airfields here will make the base much less of a thorn in your side. You'll want to take out Kwangchowan quickly, as the French have some small aircraft production facilities here that will continue to crank out aircraft unless you take it out. Luckily, you will have lots of troops in the area from your invasion of Hong Kong.

The Soviets are both very strong and very vulnerable at the same time. Their tank divisions and mechanized divisions can be very hard to take on, and their artillery is beastly, but the rail line that connects their ports to the central Soviet Union is hard to defend along its entire length. Also check out the oil production of the Soviet Union. You can pick up nearly as much oil production by isolating Sakhalin and taking the Soviet bases there as you can by taking Palembang. This carries little risk, as the Soviet Navy is not only tiny, but is also nearly defenseless against your Betties and Nells.

You also have a lot more naval airpower at Truk and Tininan. While the allies have more and better fighters than in stock - the P-50 and Morane MS.410 both being capable early-war airframes - you have enough Zeroes with top notch pilots that you can still gain early air superiority over any theater you'd like, even if, unlike stock, you can't be strong in the air everywhere.

Despite the additional allied aircraft, nothing can touch a 6-carrier KB, even in Focus Pacific. With all of the new carriers that you get in Focus Pacific as the Japanese, you can support more invasions more aggressively, but keep an eye on both the aircraft you see from the allied carriers and their upgrades. The allied CAVs and CLVs are not a threat, even to your escort carriers, whose CAP will take their strikes apart with ease. However, once those flight-deck cruisers upgrade to CVLs, you'll probably want to be a bit more cautious.

As General Patton mentioned, I'm very close to a new update, with just some final art assets, and you may want to start over with that. While it doesn't throw a lot of new toys your way as a Japanese player, the new update improves Japanese aircraft upgrade paths and makes a lot of quality of life improvements when it comes to aviation support, especially in Manchuko.

(in reply to Peever)

Post #: 307

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 4/13/2016 5:20:46 PM

btd64

Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

Para, Did that ship side I sent you work out?....GP
This is also a BUMP

_____________________________

(in reply to paradigmblue)

Post #: 308

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 4/13/2016 6:01:47 PM

paradigmblue

Posts: 784
Joined: 9/16/2014
From: Fairbanks, Alaska
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: General Patton

Para, Did that ship side I sent you work out?....GP
This is also a BUMP

I'm having some problems with the transparency - it looks good in photoshop and the editor, but in game the battle animation throws all sorts of parts of the pink background. I'm going to have to beat my head against photoshop again to try and get it fixed.

(in reply to btd64)

Post #: 309

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 4/24/2016 4:24:40 PM

Peever

Posts: 196
Joined: 3/17/2002
From: Minnesota
Status: offline

Eagerly awaiting the new patch BUMP.

Recently I've been working on creating some new unit patch art for the Japanese and I found out that the IJAAF has their main flight training school at Hamamatsu Air Base. It's the hex SE of Nagoya. In Focus Pacific the IJAAF trainers start in Tokyo. Doesn't really matter where the units are located and it can always be moved by the player, but it would be a nice touch of history if they could start in Hamamatsu. (Location ID is #227 in the editor)

(in reply to paradigmblue)

Post #: 310

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 4/24/2016 4:37:45 PM

btd64

Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Peever

Eagerly awaiting the new patch BUMP.

Recently I've been working on creating some new unit patch art for the Japanese and I found out that the IJAAF has their main flight training school at Hamamatsu Air Base. It's the hex SE of Nagoya. In Focus Pacific the IJAAF trainers start in Tokyo. Doesn't really matter where the units are located and it can always be moved by the player, but it would be a nice touch of history if they could start in Hamamatsu. (Location ID is #227 in the editor)

Peever, Thanks for the info. I'll list it for Para as I and my soon to be FP PBEM opponent are doing a final run thru. Just got the files this morning. Give it 3 to 7 days....GP

_____________________________

(in reply to Peever)

Post #: 311

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 4/24/2016 7:31:09 PM

cardas

Posts: 184
Joined: 4/8/2016
Status: offline

Focus Pacific seems to have the same issue with some of the small Dutch vessels as RA/BTS. They all have a manuever value of thirty which doesn't jive at all with their speed/size. The classes in question are Sm.Gouv.Mar. PC/AVP/AG, Med.Gouv.Mar.PC/AVP/AG, A class, Merbaboe, Alor, Merapi, Djember, Ardjoeno and Arend. In addition Merbaboe, Alor, Merapi, Djember and Ardjoeno definitely has incorrect fuel values/endurance. As also mentioned in that thread, the cruise speed seems punishingly low and I don't understand why.
Just as I commented in the Between The Storms thread I'd add a bit more info with comparisons to other boats if it wasn't for the low postcount filter, but let's give it a try again. To prevent the filter from triggering I will write out the numbers with text, which to me makes it a bit harder to read.

The gist of it is that determining exactly what the maneuver value for the small boats should be is difficult as I don't see an entirely clear standard there. Take the Thronycroft HDML (which I think should be spelled Thornycroft?) as an example, it has a lower maneuver value than the Active PC despite being both smaller and faster so it's a bit of a mystery. Potentially some kind of hull shape consideration comes into play, but that's not info that you can easily find about obscure ships. Anyway if we then look at one of the Dutch vessels, the Ardjoeno class, then from the info I've found it's slightly slower and slightly larger than the Thornycroft, but at the same time it is also faster and smaller than the Active. Who knows what maneuver value it should have? Not thirty at least.
Moving on to the fuel/cruise speed issue but lets keep the Ardjoeno as an example. From what I've found it's supposed to have a diesel engine. It has a very large fuel load of one hundred twenty while only somehow making six hundred nm. So in other words it gets five endurance per fuel unit. The larger diesel powered Active gets twenty endurance for the same price while doing four knots more (six vs ten) with a fuel load of two hundred. The more similar sized Thornycroft gets roughly forty endurance per fuel unit at two knots more (six vs eight), although it only has fuel load of twelve. Only Dutch ships cruises at six knots as far as I know (I haven't checked it that throughoutly) and means they only make one hex per phase. Apart from that, only the Japanese midget subs and floating docks goes as slow or slower. At seven knots you should already get two hexes instead and even then only very few ships cruise at that speed, among them the Admiralty HDML along with some of the small landings ships (e.g. LCVP and the Japanese 1Xm Type landing crafts). That just underlines what kind of outliers these Dutch ships are at the moment.

I could give you some suggestions for some more reasonable values, but you might have your own ideas of what they should be.

(in reply to btd64)

Post #: 312

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 4/24/2016 8:28:31 PM

Peever

Posts: 196
Joined: 3/17/2002
From: Minnesota
Status: offline

Many mods are based off one of the versions of the "Da Babes" database changes so that is why you see the problem across multiple mods. One of the features of "Da Babes" is that it adds in all kinds of smaller boats and some are meant to be abstractions of real boats. That might explain some differences between real world boats and in the game?

Looking at some of the small Dutch boats you talk about are in stock like the Sm.Gouv.Mar.PC. I see its a slow 12kts max/6kts Cruise patrol craft with a maneuver of 30. I do agree that the cruise speeds seems slow in comparison to other ships. The USN Active PC cruises at 10 with a max of 13.

Have you looked at the Naval OOB issues thread on the main part of the AE forums. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2179183
Perhaps the Dutch boats have been covered in there? Some of the issues you are talking about would need to be changed in the stock database however I'm not sure if they would ever be officially changed at this point in the games life.

I'm not too sure on if the issues with the Dutch boats are related to "Da Babes" mods or go all the way back to the games original release. I highly suggest going through the Naval thread if you haven't already and post your suggestions there.

(in reply to cardas)

Post #: 313

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 4/24/2016 9:10:11 PM

cardas

Posts: 184
Joined: 4/8/2016
Status: offline

Indeed, it does seem to go all the way back to the stock scenario. But as you said, it's unclear as to whether any changes to that would really happen any more so it feels a bit more fruitful to point it out to those who are still actively modding the game. Still, I will take your suggestion and post about it in the Naval OOB thread as well.

(in reply to Peever)

Post #: 314

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 4/25/2016 7:52:51 AM

paradigmblue

Posts: 784
Joined: 9/16/2014
From: Fairbanks, Alaska
Status: offline

If you have suggested tweaks for the cruise speed, fuel, endurance and maneuver for each class, please post those values. Patton and I will take a look and adjust as long as they don't look out of line with comparable ships.

(in reply to cardas)

Post #: 315

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 4/25/2016 1:06:01 PM

cardas

Posts: 184
Joined: 4/8/2016
Status: offline

Sent an email about it to Patton.

(in reply to paradigmblue)

Post #: 316

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 4/25/2016 1:29:49 PM

btd64

Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

Bruce, Good morning and look at your Email.

....GP

_____________________________

(in reply to cardas)

Post #: 317

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 4/28/2016 7:19:38 PM

ny59giants

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

Recon - At work, so if these ideas are covered, disregard. A chutai of 9 recon Kates that can divide into 3x3 to go on KB (two on KB and other with Min-KB). Maybe another chutai becoming available in early 42. Upgradable to a Jill recon plane. So as not to give Japan another aircraft factory to use, make them come in as straight replacement per month (somebody might crank up production and then convert factory to something else) at like 3 to 6 each. For the Allies, have you checked the number of air and CV based airframes that are produced? I cranked up the Americans and adjusted some of the CW numbers for RA and BTS (see lates versions). Maybe have the Americans get a limited number of B-17s that are recon models only in '42 to reflect the fact that without numerous F4s, a few planes were used in this role. Since the Americans build the long range B-19s in this mod, there should be some recon plane that get reach out about half that distance or more.

< Message edited by ny59giants -- 4/28/2016 7:21:55 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to btd64)

Post #: 318

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 5/6/2016 9:31:49 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

Hey Guys,

Hos about an update on the status?

I suspended my game that was started on the original release hoping a "ready fro public consumption" version would be ready soon.

Started a new game of AndyMac's Ironman Ported to Babes (scen 40) in the meantime.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 319

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 5/7/2016 5:50:35 AM

paradigmblue

Posts: 784
Joined: 9/16/2014
From: Fairbanks, Alaska
Status: offline

Sorry for all the delays. Work has kept me from spending the time on this that I've wanted to, and more recently I've been having some computer problems that have brought things to a standstill. Next week however I'm taking some time off work, and finishing up Focus Pacific is a top priority.

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 320

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 5/11/2016 2:29:18 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I've downloaded all the Focus files and have started a game as Japs against the Allied AI and I've found two Jap xAK's that
have identical names. I'm converting them to AKE's and found them in the list of ships under repair. I'm thinking that maybe
they should have different names. I'm talking about the ships in the yellow box in the image.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

If we're all created in the image of god then why aren't we all invisible?

(in reply to paradigmblue)

Post #: 321

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 5/11/2016 2:39:06 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Found another pair with identical names.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

If we're all created in the image of god then why aren't we all invisible?

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 322

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 5/11/2016 2:56:20 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I've started a new Focus Pacific game as the Japs against the Allied AI and looking around just now
I found out that I had only a single AKE in the entire fleet so I thought I'd convert some xAK's to AKE's and
I used tracker to find which ones can convert so now I'm going through the ships alphabetically and I'm
wondering how many AKE's is enough. I'm thinking about three dozen. Anybody have an opinion?

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

If we're all created in the image of god then why aren't we all invisible?

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 323

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 5/11/2016 3:11:40 PM

btd64

Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

I only build them as Carrier support. Maybe 10 to 12. As large as I can afford....GP

_____________________________

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 324

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 5/12/2016 4:21:22 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

There's a problem I found with the Aki Maru. There's two of them, both xAK's and only one of them really exists I'm guessing because of what happened. I was working with TF 202 which had one of the Aki Maru's in it and I disbanded it from the TF to start it on the conversion process to make it an AKE. But when I clicked on the anchor to get a list of the ships the Aki Maru wasn't one of them. Completely missing.

So I went to the global list of ships and that's when I found the problem The other Aki Maru was at Hiroshima and it worked fine and
it's converting to an AKE as we speak.

I've discovered that once you click on the button to commit to the conversion the ship is put in the shipyard but you can move that bad
boy pierside instead and the conversion will still proceed. Cool.

_____________________________

If we're all created in the image of god then why aren't we all invisible?

(in reply to paradigmblue)

Post #: 325

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 5/14/2016 3:27:09 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Brian and I started a PBEM scenario #75 which is a tiny mod of the FP franchise and I've just received moves from him and
I watched the combat replay and I then did a save game to slot 4 and then used that in Tracker to update my stats. In the
"alerts" tab there's some verbage about some TF's being out of fuel but I've looked at those locations and only one of them
had anything in it and it wasn't one of the TF's in the Tracker list Those TF's I guess don't have any ship art or there's a bug
in the scenario, which would be my guess. I hope this doesn't mean we have to fix the scenario and do a restart because it
took me two days to do the Jap turn one moves.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 5/14/2016 3:29:45 AM >

_____________________________

If we're all created in the image of god then why aren't we all invisible?

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 326

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 5/14/2016 5:35:56 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

More clues in the mystery uncovered in the panel above. These are supposedly the "delayed TF's" that you can get to from the
global list of TF's by the button "show delayed TF's ". Pretty nifty I think. Some of those delayed TF's have a hefty delay.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

If we're all created in the image of god then why aren't we all invisible?

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 327

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 5/14/2016 7:50:32 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Now I've found a different problem. The individual ship display says that there's no FP aboard but a look at the
naval planes display says there's 2 FP's aboard and it's in the red to indicate that maybe it doesn't have room
for two ;planes or maybe it's not aircraft capable entirely. I don't know which.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

If we're all created in the image of god then why aren't we all invisible?

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 328

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 5/15/2016 2:40:35 AM

paradigmblue

Posts: 784
Joined: 9/16/2014
From: Fairbanks, Alaska
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

More clues in the mystery uncovered in the panel above. These are supposedly the "delayed TF's" that you can get to from the
global list of TF's by the button "show delayed TF's ". Pretty nifty I think. Some of those delayed TF's have a hefty delay.

You are correct- most of those are delayed TFs representing an expanded Wolfepack Monsoon German sub group. Most of these subs appear in these delayed TFs in 1943.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 329

RE: Focus Pacific Beta - 5/15/2016 2:43:10 AM

paradigmblue

Posts: 784
Joined: 9/16/2014
From: Fairbanks, Alaska
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

Now I've found a different problem. The individual ship display says that there's no FP aboard but a look at the
naval planes display says there's 2 FP's aboard and it's in the red to indicate that maybe it doesn't have room
for two ;planes or maybe it's not aircraft capable entirely. I don't know which.

This looks like an error that persisted from the original Ironman scenario - the Kitakami Class cruisers do not accommodate float planes. I've now fixed the error.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 330