Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002 From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami Status: offline
USN - CVEs only: no errors found, only one comment:
- AV Kenneth Whiting, St George, Hamlin & Cumberland Sound (AV Tangier Class) are made available with the 3/43 refit, which is correct for the date, but which does not allow conversion to CVE Bogue-class. If the possibility is to be available, the Tangier 3/43 refit could perhaps be a FROM in Bind 412?
< Message edited by Kitakami -- 4/13/2020 4:26:23 PM >
Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001 From: West Yellowstone, Montana Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Kitakami
USN - CVEs only: no errors found, only one comment:
- AV Kenneth Whiting, St George, Hamlin & Cumberland Sound (AV Tangier Class) are made available with the 3/43 refit, which is correct for the date, but which does not allow conversion to CVE Bogue-class. If the possibility is to be available, the Tangier 3/43 refit could perhaps be a FROM in Bind 412?
Should also include #924 as TO class in bind 412, I think. That would let them upgrade to the proper version.
Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001 From: West Yellowstone, Montana Status: offline
It looks like both aircraft #669 and #676 need some work.
#669 is a recon aircraft with only a camera for normal range, but has guns, bombs and no camera for extended range probably should have only a camera for extended range.
#676 is a level bomber with 20mm guns, radar, mad, camera and bombs for normal range. but has 7.7mm mg, radar mad and bombs for extended range. And the bombs for extended range are larger that those for normal range. I have no idea how it should be configured.
< Message edited by Nomad -- 4/13/2020 5:50:18 PM >
Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001 From: West Yellowstone, Montana Status: offline
more work for you John
Japan aircraft #601 has wpn 1 1990 and wpn 11 as 183 both should be 1990 #655 does not have MAD for extended range #656 does not have MAD for extended range #695 has wpn 4 and 5 as 187 and wpn 14 and 15 as 182 should probably all be 187 #698 has wpn 2 as 193 and wpn 12 as 192 wpn 12 should be 193 #725 has wpn 2 as 191 and wpn 12 as 188 both should be 191 #759 has wpn 1 as 1990 and wpn 11 as 183 both shoule be 1990 #760 has wpn 1 as 1990 and wpn 11 as 183 both should be 1990 #761 has wpn 1 as 1991 and wpn 11 as 187 both should be 1991 #762 has wpn 1 as 1991 and wpn 11 as 187 both should be 1991 #763 has wpn 1 as 1991 and wpn 11 as 187 both should be 1991 #766 has wpn 1 as 188 and wpn 11 as 187 both should be 188 #767 has wpn 1 as 188 and wpn 11 as 187 both should be 188 #811 has wpn 2 as 191 and wpn 12 as 166 both should be 191 #824 has wpn 2 as 193 and wpn 12 as 192 both should be 193
Please double check to ensure this was changed....
quote:
US Mark 14 Torpedo: USN Mark 14 torpedo performance has been thoroughly researched, game tested, and subsequently modified (Using the JANAC resource of real maritime losses of Japanese ships in WW2). The stock profile is %80 dud rate from Dec 1941 through Dec 1942, dropping to %60 dud rate in Jan 1943 to Sep 1943, then becoming the standard (for all torpedoes) %10 dud rate thereafter. This has been found to be grossly overstated (and mathematically impossible). Research has shown key changes taking place Mar/April1942, and again in 1943. The new profile is:
Dec 1941-Mar 1942: %80 dud rate April – Dec 1942: %50 dud rate Jan – Sep 1943: %30 dud rate Sep 1943 on : %10 dud rate. This much more accurately conforms to historical USN Fleet boat performance, (although will still not actually reach historical Mark 14 Torpedo performance) and in-game performance has proven to be closely approximate to historical performance. Prolonged play-testing has shown that 'in-game' results now vastly more reflect historical results and outcomes
Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001 From: West Yellowstone, Montana Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: ny59giants_MatrixForum
This should have been done, too.
quote:
Japanese Aircraft: All Japanese two machine gun fighters (A5M4, KI-27b, KI-43 series) have been given a firepower bonus (Double stock Firepower).
I think this is in my corrections above, not all of the extended weapons were changed, just the normal range ones. These are supposed to use the 1990 and 1991 MGs, but the effect of these have not been doubled, they are the same as the stock ones.
< Message edited by Nomad -- 4/14/2020 9:11:20 PM >
Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001 From: West Yellowstone, Montana Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: ny59giants_MatrixForum
Please double check to ensure this was changed....
quote:
US Mark 14 Torpedo: USN Mark 14 torpedo performance has been thoroughly researched, game tested, and subsequently modified (Using the JANAC resource of real maritime losses of Japanese ships in WW2). The stock profile is %80 dud rate from Dec 1941 through Dec 1942, dropping to %60 dud rate in Jan 1943 to Sep 1943, then becoming the standard (for all torpedoes) %10 dud rate thereafter. This has been found to be grossly overstated (and mathematically impossible). Research has shown key changes taking place Mar/April1942, and again in 1943. The new profile is:
Dec 1941-Mar 1942: %80 dud rate April – Dec 1942: %50 dud rate Jan – Sep 1943: %30 dud rate Sep 1943 on : %10 dud rate. This much more accurately conforms to historical USN Fleet boat performance, (although will still not actually reach historical Mark 14 Torpedo performance) and in-game performance has proven to be closely approximate to historical performance. Prolonged play-testing has shown that 'in-game' results now vastly more reflect historical results and outcomes
Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002 From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami Status: offline
- BB Mississippi begins the game in the (315) 1/42 configuration. Is that correct? If so, perhaps the date should be changed to 12/41? - BB Idaho & New Mexico begin the game in the (317) 1/42 configuration. Is that correct? If so, perhaps the date should be changed to 12/41? - Bind 501 (BB New Mexico-class) has 319 as a FROM class, but no ship ever upgrades to it. - Bind 502 (BB New Mexico-class) has 322 & 324 as FROM classes, and 329 as TO class, but no ship ever upgrades to any of them. - Bind 503 (BB Colorado-class) has 338 as a FROM class, but no ship ever upgrades to it. The other parts of the bind don't make sense either.
Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010 From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Kitakami
quote:
ORIGINAL: Nomad
I think so, but I need a dance partner.
If you don't mind playing the Empire of the Rising Sun, I am game. I can't gather the strength to do a Japanese turn 1 right now.
Hey, you two among some others, did a great job finding stuff. I on the other hand did not. I was very sick the last couple of weeks and was able to just do the little I did. Now that I'm on the correct meds I shall endevor to do my best in testing. I do have a partner at least. Happy testing....GP
Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002 From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami Status: offline
I don't think I have played any of you. I am but of midling ability. I would like to try the Allies for a change, and don't mind either Heavy orr Light.
Will take a look at USN cruisers now. Will post whether I find something or not.
Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002 From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami Status: offline
USN Heavy Cruisers:
- Being somewhat obnoxious, if the New Orleans-class was originally named the Astoria-class, and the name was changed only after the Astoria was sunk at Savo Island, perhaps the class name should be Astoria? - Just confirming that CA Oregon City is the only one of the Oregon City-class heavy cruisers that is present in the game?
Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002 From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami Status: offline
USN Light Cruisers:
- Bind 410 (CL Omaha -> CLAA Omaha) has FROM class 407, and TO class 926. Perhaps it should also have 408 class as FROM, so CL Richmond can also be converted to a CLAA? - CL Atlanta II, Duluth, Topeka, Oklahoma City enter on April '44 with the 4/44 refit. Perhaps it should be the 4/45 refit?
Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002 From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami Status: offline
USN Anti-Aircraft Cruisers:
- CLAA Atlanta enters on Apr 15 '42, in the 12/41 configuration. Should it be the 4/42 refit? - CLAA Tucson enters on Apr 4 '45, in the 5/45 refit. Should it be the 1/44 refit?
Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: BTS Play-Testing 
RE: BTS Play-Testing - 
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