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: BTS and BTSL 5.4

 
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: BTS and BTSL 5.4 Page: <<   < prev  29 30 [31] 32 33   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 4/24/2018 2:35:18 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		That does. Will check and fix.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 901
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 4/24/2018 7:26:56 PM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline 		With the Constellation class around Pago Pago. Would you consider adding an AE and AD so that they can be rearmed?

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 902
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 4/24/2018 11:28:41 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Will Post final Modifications to BTS and BTSL once they are complete. Michael and I are looking at some tweaks. Thanks to Kitakami and DOCUP for their comments here.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 903
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 4/25/2018 5:56:42 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Got the work done.

Changes:
1. Added 1 AO, 1 AE, 1 TK, and 1 AD at Pago Pago. It is now a minor USN Fleet Base.
2. These ships are disbanded in Port so I added 8,000 Fuel (Total 16,000) and 3,000 Supply (Total 12,330). This will allow for the Allied player to load his AO, AE, and AD to help support the Fleet. Pretty much just enough for one load. The rest comes from the West Coast later.
3. Raised Pago Pago to Fort 2
4. Fixed the TT loadout on the Japanese CV/CAVs detailed by Kitakami.
5. Fixed two bad USN Squadrons that SOMEHOW allowed for 250 aircraft in each unit. Ooooppsss!
6. Deleted to two Marine 18 plane fighter squadrons and added a 48 plane unit. This follows the allowance of one 70+ USAF Fighter Wing in 1943 and in 1944. Michael felt, and I agreed, that the Marines should get the chance to have one big Fighter unit. It comes in in October 1942.
7. Michael further disabled the starting US economy.

Will load the newest files in their folders tomorrow morning.


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/25/2018 5:57:56 AM >

_____________________________



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 #: 904
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 4/25/2018 1:20:32 PM   
Cavalry Corp

 

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline 		John,

This is a reply to my earlier post concerning are a 7.9. We are playing two-day turn is played by email now in September 1943. Maybe you should ask Andreas for one of his turns so you can examine where his production is.

Sorry I have been out of circulation for a while.

The issue with torpedoes seems fine as we are now in September 43 and I see that the changes big time then.

The issue with the production of the George (and it seems other planes as well) is covered by an earlier post in this thread where Andreas gave you a very detailed reply. He is also on holiday at the moment and I was gonna ask him how many of these claims he can produce but it seems like plenty. This means effectively the allies are unable to attack in 43 unless they take some very big risks.

Is the Allied plane as production production as it seems quite low to me but this is my first game of playing allies.

The political points yes they need fixing it's a shame it cannot work for games in progress. We have decided to allow all Allied units to try and reconquer all mainland former colonial countries like Thailand Burma et cetera.



< Message edited by cavalry -- 4/25/2018 1:21:28 PM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 905
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 4/25/2018 3:23:22 PM   
John 3rd


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

I've fixed Political Points by bumping them some.

Please have him Post here when he can so I can give this serious weight and consideration. I've spoken to Michael about it as well.

Thanks for keeping me up.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Cavalry Corp)
Post #: 906
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 4/25/2018 3:36:26 PM   
Cavalry Corp

 

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline 		He did a while back here it is again.

quote:

ORIGINAL: aga2008



quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Hi Cavalry.

1. If he has George in that early, that would be over 16 months from when it should appear. WOW. He must have spent a fortune to bring it forward. Doesn't help you but I find that amazing to have it so early. We have adjusted it backwards in BTS and BTSL and will in RA. Doesn't help you in this version though.




comments based on the current version of the mod (BTSL 4.5)and without doing any math......

1) is this because the N1K2-A George upgrades from the Zero - hence you can start researching it from the getgo by converting fully built A6M2 factories directly to the George?

2) from a jap economic point of view having the George upgrade from the Zero would seem to make the Sam largely redundant (as you can get the George so much quicker) - also there seems no reason to research the N1K1-J George as it can be bypassed by going the Zero route



as I'm cavalry's opponent let me add my view on this topic:

ad 1: No research was done using the described approach (switching at zero cost from Zero research to George research). All George research started at 0. I never saw a possible switch from the A6M line to N1K line research at zero cost. But actually I can't remember with which version of RA we started so it may be that something like that was possible. Anyway - and you have to trust me on that - that was never done in this game.
If you look below, it took more than 300 days to get the first month of advancement. If I had used an existing switch it wouldn't have taken that long.

In this history of the research the leftmost column is the turn number(taken from tracker). Please note that in the end just 6 turns were needed to advance N1K2 one more month. And you can do your math to find out what that cost me... :)

317 Aircraft N1K1-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 4/43 Information
345 Aircraft N1K1-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 3/43 Information
371 Aircraft N1K1-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 2/43 Information
389 Aircraft N1K1-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 1/43 Information
399 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 7/44 Information
407 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 6/44 Information
413 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 5/44 Information
421 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 4/44 Information
427 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 3/44 Information
435 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 2/44 Information
443 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 1/44 Information
449 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 12/43 Information
457 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 11/43 Information
463 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 10/43 Information
471 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 9/43 Information
477 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 8/43 Information
485 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 7/43 Information
493 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 6/43 Information
499 Aircraft N1K2-J George Aircraft R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 5/43 Information

ad 2: A7M uses Ha-43 therefore getting the engine bonus is much more difficult. In addition - the N1K1 which is the predecessor for N1K2 - comes much earlier and means you'll inherit fully repaired research facilities for N1K2 as soon as N1K1 is available. And this in turn is much earlier than for Sam. That - and not any exploitation of a possible bug in the mod - is the reason of choosing George instead of Sam.

as a bonus also see the reasearch history for Ha-45 - also valuable for Frank research ..:)

81 Engine Nakajima Ha-45 Engine R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 8/43 Information
121 Engine Nakajima Ha-45 Engine R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 7/43 Information
149 Engine Nakajima Ha-45 Engine R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 6/43 Information
177 Engine Nakajima Ha-45 Engine R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 5/43 Information
205 Engine Nakajima Ha-45 Engine R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 4/43 Information
233 Engine Nakajima Ha-45 Engine R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 3/43 Information
277 Engine Nakajima Ha-45 Engine R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 2/43 Information
315 Engine Nakajima Ha-45 Engine R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 1/43 Information
335 Engine Nakajima Ha-45 Engine R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 12/42 Information
355 Engine Nakajima Ha-45 Engine R&D Accelerated Production accelerated to 11/42 Information




Just had another look at the stats for the various navy fighters and the above strategy seems very viable - i can't see any reason to ever build/research the Sam or Jack when George is better on most stats and is CV capable. You could even make it the only navy fighter to research (other than early Zeros) and ignore J6/J7 i.e. go for pure volume of Georges and win the game before the J6/J7 could become a factor.

Having said all that i am a long long way from being knowledgeable about this game and would welcome some input on whether the above is anywhere near correct.

Thanks



(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 907
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 4/25/2018 9:49:21 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Wow. Just wow.

He threw EVERYTHING into the research of one plane.

We're exploring a HR in Kitakami and I's match of the George only being able to fly off CVs. No CVL or CVE. Makes some sense to me. That would help here some.

Gonna play with the numbers some and get back again.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Cavalry Corp)
Post #: 908
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 4/27/2018 3:25:24 PM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 862
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


We're exploring a HR in Kitakami and I's match of the George only being able to fly off CVs. No CVL or CVE. Makes some sense to me. That would help here some.


I don't think this would make any difference to research and build strategy for japan - with the George being both a CV fighter AND better than both the Sam and Jack there is no need to build anything other than the George, ever.

Best fix may be to remove the Georges "CV capable" ability.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 909
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 5/1/2018 12:44:56 PM   
Cavalry Corp

 

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline 		Agree remove George CV ability - make it just a Zero line?

(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 910
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 5/17/2018 4:03:51 AM   
BillBrown


Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline 		I am starting a BtSLite game and I seem to be missing some aircraft art for the new aircraft the Japanese have.

(in reply to Cavalry Corp)
Post #: 911
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 6/7/2018 10:04:17 PM   
Falken


Posts: 242
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: ON, Canada
Status: offline 		Hi John,

Kitakami and I are also playing BTSL in our game, and I remember him/you mentioning that your current game with him includes a new update? Do you know when that would be uploaded to your website.

If i'm wrong... apologies.... Just thought I remembered that you guys had a few more fixes...

Thanks John. I'm also glad to hear that you heard from him. Glad he's ok

(in reply to BillBrown)
Post #: 912
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 7/1/2018 7:47:12 PM   
Falken


Posts: 242
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: ON, Canada
Status: offline 		Hi John.

Just a slide bump :).....

Although my game is also not going on right now, just wanted to know if you saw my question above on the update that you had mentioned a while back. I might have read it wrong, but I thought you had found a few things that needed tightening up in your early part of your last game.

Thanks John. If there is none, that's ok too :),,,,, just wanted to make sure...

Much appreciated

Dave...

(in reply to Falken)
Post #: 913
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 8/10/2018 10:35:56 AM   
Edward75


Posts: 194
Joined: 4/16/2010
From: St. Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline 		Mod BtS. PBEM. Japan side.
1. Base Babeldaob. On base there is HQn 3rd Fleet with 193+ Nav support. But when you click on base, they are not displayed. Only 27 from 3rd Base Force.



2. Starnally! During Ground attack my combat eng units not reduce fortifications, but this happens very rarely.
There are a lot of such cases. In stock scenary this was not happens. ALWAYS times attack of fortifications have decreased.

Ground combat at Alor Star (49,73)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 23393 troops, 222 guns, 79 vehicles, Assault Value = 736

Defending force 6241 troops, 54 guns, 32 vehicles, Assault Value = 216

Japanese adjusted assault: 421

Allied adjusted defense: 65

Japanese assault odds: 6 to 1 (fort level 1)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Alor Star !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1364 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 140 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 12 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled

Allied ground losses:
2474 casualties reported
Squads: 72 destroyed, 58 disabled
Non Combat: 107 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 18 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 35 (35 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 23 (23 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units retreated 4

Defeated Allied Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
41st Infantry Regiment
112th Infantry Regiment
55th Engineer Regiment
5th Recon Regiment
5th Engineer Regiment
144th Infantry Regiment
11th Infantry Regiment
91st Naval Guard Unit
5th Field Artillery Regiment
25th Army
55th Mountain Gun Regiment
15th Army
21st Medium Field Artillery Battalion

Defending units:
6th Indian Brigade
15th Indian Brigade
109th RAF Adv Base Force
137/155th Field Regiment

< Message edited by Edward75 -- 8/10/2018 10:39:30 AM >

(in reply to Falken)
Post #: 914
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 8/14/2018 6:04:26 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Sorry I have not been checking in on the thread. Life issues.

That is an interesting Posting. Will check my game with the same units and see what it shows. Thanks for the Posting.

I have not Posted that update and need to. Sorry about that Falken.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Edward75)
Post #: 915
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/3/2018 8:00:44 AM   
Edward75


Posts: 194
Joined: 4/16/2010
From: St. Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline 		Very strange bug!
At beginning of game, I pointed out at one Air factory to create B5N1 Kate planes - 20 pcs. I did not pay attention, but when all plants were repaired, I looked and saw that instead of B5N1 Kate, was B5N2 Kate being built there. I thought that when I gave order I made a mistake and pressed wrong button, although this never happened.
OK. I took another factory in Gifu and assigned B5N1 Kate again - (2) x0 - January 4, 1942. And what did I see next turn?! On January 5, 1942, factory in Gifu automatically changed again to B5N2 Kate.
How is this possible? In stock scenarios, I built this plane many times and such a bug never existed.



I want to build these planes - B5N1 Kate! I have a lot of engines for them in pool.
But I can not!


< Message edited by Edward75 -- 11/3/2018 9:42:20 AM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 916
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/3/2018 10:59:54 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edward75

Very strange bug!
At beginning of game, I pointed out at one Air factory to create B5N1 Kate planes - 20 pcs. I did not pay attention, but when all plants were repaired, I looked and saw that instead of B5N1 Kate, was B5N2 Kate being built there. I thought that when I gave order I made a mistake and pressed wrong button, although this never happened.
OK. I took another factory in Gifu and assigned B5N1 Kate again - (2) x0 - January 4, 1942. And what did I see next turn?! On January 5, 1942, factory in Gifu automatically changed again to B5N2 Kate.
How is this possible? In stock scenarios, I built this plane many times and such a bug never existed.



I want to build these planes - B5N1 Kate! I have a lot of engines for them in pool.
But I can not!



There is no bug here. The program is executing exactly what you ordered it to do, to upgrade that factory to the B5N2 Kate.

Before automatically assuming that there is a bug when you don't get the expected outcome, it pays to actually look at what is displayed on the screen. There is no such thing as a meaningless setting, every setting has a specific outcome associated with that setting. What exactly do you think the yellow "Upgd" setting means? If you don't know then first find out before shutting off your deductive process otherwise you will never properly learn how this game plays. Whenever anyone thinks they have come across a bug the default response should be to throw out the idea of a program bug and instead assume the error lies with the operator, not the program. Repeat the checking loop until the operator mistake is found.

Alfred

(in reply to Edward75)
Post #: 917
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/3/2018 11:35:49 AM   
Edward75


Posts: 194
Joined: 4/16/2010
From: St. Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline 		If it's my mistake, then I'm sorry. It’s just that I didn’t change in stock scenarios.
Is my mistake here too?
Sometimes there is no badge who shoots at whom or no ships at all, in this case CL Eendracht



Night Time Surface Combat, near Batoe-eilanden at 42,83, Range 6,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CL Suzuya
CL Tone, Shell hits 2
DD Mazabuki, Shell hits 2

Allied Ships
BB Prince of Wales, Shell hits 7, Torpedo hits 1
CL Eendracht, Shell hits 1
DD Stewart, Shell hits 1
DD Piet Hein, Shell hits 1
DD Kortenaer
DD Evertsen, Shell hits 1, heavy fires

Low visibility due to Rain with 96% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Rain and 96% moonlight: 6,000 yards
Range closes to 17,000 yards...



Night Time Surface Combat, near Batoe-eilanden at 42,82, Range 6,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CL Suzuya
CL Tone
DD Mazabuki, Shell hits 2, on fire

Allied Ships
CL Eendracht, Shell hits 7, heavy fires
DD Stewart

Low visibility due to Rain with 96% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Rain and 96% moonlight: 6,000 yards
Range closes to 10,000 yards...

< Message edited by Edward75 -- 11/3/2018 11:36:56 AM >

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 918
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/3/2018 11:40:39 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline 		Check to see if this mod requires it's own set of art files to be used.

Alfred

(in reply to Edward75)
Post #: 919
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/3/2018 3:27:55 PM   
Anachro


Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline 		CL Eendracht doesnt't yet have art in the files on John's website. In fact, there are a number of ships missing art which I categorized and sent to John. You can find a lot of this missing art in the various ship art mods in this forum. I compiled all the art that exists for missing ships and sent them to John. I compiled the list below.

Missing Art Found

Dunkurque Class
BC Dunkurque
BC Strasbourg

Bretagne Class
BB Lorraine

Algerie Class
CA Algerie

Jeanne d’Arc Class
CL Jeanne d’Arc

Suffren Class
CA Suffren

Duquesne Class
CA Duquesne
CA Tourville

Le Fier Class (Should be classed TBs?)
DD Le Fier
DD L’Agile

Le Hardi Class (Set to use same bitmap as Le Fier, but different)
DD Bison II
DD Mameluck
DD Le Casque
DD Le Hardi

Chamois Class
KV Annamite
KV Gazelle
KV Commandant Duboc
KV Chevreuil
KV La Gracieuse
KV La Moqueuse

Surcouf Class
SS Surcouf
SS Bouvier

CH 101 Class
SC Commandant Bourdais

< Message edited by Anachro -- 11/3/2018 3:32:50 PM >

_____________________________

"Now excuse me while I go polish my balls ..." - BBfanboy

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 920
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/3/2018 3:31:50 PM   
Anachro


Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline 		Still Missing Art

French Ships
BB Jean Bart
AKV Bearn
PG Tahure
PG Francis Garnier
KV Marne
YP DG Crayssac
YP DG Frezouls
AM Octant
AM Astrolabe
AMc Paul Bert
AMc Beryl
AMC Oiseaux des iles
AS Jules Verne
AV Commandant Teste
AG Amiral de Beaumont (Admiral?)

Dutch Ships
CL Eendracht

Australia Ships
AS Albatross


_____________________________

"Now excuse me while I go polish my balls ..." - BBfanboy

(in reply to Anachro)
Post #: 921
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/3/2018 3:32:41 PM   
John 3rd


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

I've got all the French artwork and it SHOULD be on the site. Let me look around and we'll fix this. Will Post when done.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Anachro)
Post #: 922
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/3/2018 3:33:18 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		We are far enough into our game to ask if you have found other issues. I have a small list for the Japanese.


_____________________________



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 #: 923
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/3/2018 3:37:33 PM   
Anachro


Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline 		Too many Japanese ships, troops, and planes. Your mod actually makes things difficult for the Allies and I don't like that!

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 924
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/3/2018 3:43:00 PM   
Edward75


Posts: 194
Joined: 4/16/2010
From: St. Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline 		I not have still Art for Japanese CA Niitaka, CVL Kushiro (G. 6 Class), Planes: G5N Liz, G8N Rita

(in reply to Anachro)
Post #: 925
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/3/2018 4:00:11 PM   
Anachro


Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline 		Yup, can confirm that the Liz and G. 6 class art is still missing. I'm aware of the Liz from John's bombing campaigns in China. Hopefully, someone in the community can make some nice art for the G. 6 Class.

(in reply to Edward75)
Post #: 926
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/4/2018 7:24:09 AM   
Edward75


Posts: 194
Joined: 4/16/2010
From: St. Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline 		I don't like empty Art. I want to replace at least SA on any CA Art, CVL on any CVL Art. Liz on Betty for example. How to do it?

(in reply to Anachro)
Post #: 927
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/17/2018 5:51:25 AM   
Edward75


Posts: 194
Joined: 4/16/2010
From: St. Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline

BC Chesapeake

(in reply to Edward75)
Post #: 928
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 11/22/2018 1:02:36 PM   
Anachro


Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Morning Sean.

I've got all the French artwork and it SHOULD be on the site. Let me look around and we'll fix this. Will Post when done.



I'd love artwork for the pre-CV CVL G.6's too. It's a bit eerie bombing empty space in a combat replay. Maybe that's why I kept missing them.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 929
RE: Treaty 3.0 - 12/2/2018 11:25:56 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		GOOD POINT. You weren't supposed to notice that.

Evidently both AARs have been going back-and-forth regarding the G.6 Class of Hybrid Cruiser. Michael Posted an excellent layout of deck armor and I thought we'd start with that:

Let me bring the facts from Editor on the inability to penetrate the G.6 CVL with some bombs.

Belt - Deck - Tower:

G.6 CLV = 140 - 60 - 100
G.6 CV (conversion) = 140 - 60 - 25

Shokaku CVs = 165 - 60 - 25

Akagi Class = 250 - 57 - 25


Indomitable Class = 112 - 75 - 0

Lexington Class = 128 - 50 -50

Yorktown = 100 - 37 - 100

Bombs:
1000 lb SAP = 117mm (penetration)
1000 lb GP = 58mm
500 lb GP = 37mm

250kg SAP = 71mm
800kg SAP = 174mm

*Note*
When you look at the armored deck value (75) of the Brit CV you see the 250kg (71) is not enough to penetrate.

The 1000 lb GP value is 58, so unable to penetrate the deck of the G.6 (60).

Am, I wrong here?



< Message edited by John 3rd -- 12/2/2018 11:26:58 PM >

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Anachro)
Post #: 930
Page:   <<   < prev  29 30 [31] 32 33   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 Page: <<   < prev  29 30 [31] 32 33   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

1.297