New Planes

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

New Planes

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> New Planes

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

New Planes - 12/3/2004 11:40:06 AM

Rainerle

Posts: 463
Joined: 7/24/2002
From: Burghausen/Bavaria
Status: offline

Hi,
I want to add as many new planes to my personalized WitP (vs. AI) as possible. So I wanted to create a thread where all the availible plane data, stats and artwork are combined together with a lot of discussion as to why this plane should be in, this out and so on. getting strated I will specifically ask about the Aichi E16 floatplane and the Seiran Floatbomber. Does anybody have stats, bmp.files? All comments are welcome!

_____________________________

Image brought to you by courtesy of Subchaser!

Post #: 1

RE: New Planes - 12/4/2004 8:35:05 PM

Herrbear

Posts: 883
Joined: 7/26/2004
From: Glendora, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainerle

Hi,
I want to add as many new planes to my personalized WitP (vs. AI) as possible. So I wanted to create a thread where all the availible plane data, stats and artwork are combined together with a lot of discussion as to why this plane should be in, this out and so on. getting strated I will specifically ask about the Aichi E16 floatplane and the Seiran Floatbomber. Does anybody have stats, bmp.files? All comments are welcome!

Aichi E16 - Source from Francillion - Japanese Aircraft from the Pacific War
Max Speed = 273 mph
Cruise Speed = 207 mph
Ceiling = 32810 feet
Climb = 2110 ft/sec
Manuever = ?
Durability = ?
Armor = ?
Endurance = 436
Max Load = 551 lbs
Gun Value = 12 (2x20mm Type 99 mod 2 in wings (F); 1x13mm Type 2 rear-firing (TR)
Max Rng = 1504 mi (25 hexes)
Ext Rng = 501 mi (8 hexes)
Nor Rng = 379 mi (6 hexes)

Aichi M6A Seiran - Same source
Max Speed = 295 mph
Cruise Speed = 184 mph
Ceiling = 32480 feet
Climb = 1697 ft/sec
Manuever = ?
Durability = ?
Armor = ?
Endurance = 241
Max Load = 1874 lbs ( I would show in database as 2xDevice 208 - Ext)
Gun Value = 4 (1x13mm Type 2 rear-firing (TR))
Max Rng = 739 mi (12 hexes)
Ext Rng = 246 mi (4 hexes)
Nor Rng = 185 mi (3 hexes)

(in reply to Rainerle)

Post #: 2

RE: New Planes - 12/5/2004 5:59:34 AM

ladner

Posts: 338
Joined: 8/24/2001
From: Virginia USA
Status: offline

I like the premise of this thread, does anyone have the particulars on the Nakajima G8N Renzan?

From the website warbirds

I got the following, would like if another source could verify, or even better provide graphics.

Type: Heavy Bomber
Origin: Nakajima
Crew: N/A
Allied Code Name: Rita
Models: Prototypes only
First Flight: N/A
Service Delivery: N/A
Development Termination: June 1945
Production: 4

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Powerplant:
Model: Nakajima Homare 24
Type: Air-Cooled radial
Number: Four Horsepower: 2,000 hp

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dimensions:
Wing Span: N/A
Length: N/A
Height: N/A
Wing Area: N/A
Weights:
Empty: N/A
Loaded: N/A

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Performance:
Max. Speed: 368 mph (592 kph) at 26,245 ft.
Service Ceiling: N/A
Range: 4,639 miles (7465 km)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armament:
Two 20mm cannon in powered dorsal turret.
Two 20mm cannon in powered ventral turret.
Two 20mm cannon in powered tail turret.
Two 13mm machine guns in powered nose turret.
Two 13mm machine guns in manually aimed beam positions.

Payload:
8,829 lb. (4000 kg) carried internally

(in reply to Herrbear)

Post #: 3

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 3:44:09 AM

ladner

Posts: 338
Joined: 8/24/2001
From: Virginia USA
Status: offline

Has anyone had success adding new aircraft? I saw were Tanaka added an upgrade to the Rufe in his mod. I would really like to add the G8N Renzan 'Rita' to a mod that I am working on.

<edit> forgot to add

I am interested in the particulars of adding new aircraft in terms of what devices are needed, i.e. factory, how or where do you place new graphics. When you add new aircraft are their multiple graphics like ships?

< Message edited by ladner -- 12/6/2004 1:45:38 AM >

(in reply to ladner)

Post #: 4

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 4:00:08 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Lol, you forget, for War PLan Orange I have added entirely new planes. Sopwith Camels, Snipes, Cuckoos, Bristol Fighters, Vought VE-7s, Boeing F4Bs, etc.

New plane graphics are added to the plane_side and top.bmps, and to add a/c, you need speed, endurance, climbrate, max load, and stuff carried.

_____________________________

Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med

Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.

(in reply to ladner)

Post #: 5

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 4:05:19 AM

ladner

Posts: 338
Joined: 8/24/2001
From: Virginia USA
Status: offline

Tankerace - stand corrected and very embarrassed espeically after all of your help. I guess I always just associate your work with ships, especially with all of the graphics that you have done. Looking forward to your mod.

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 6

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 4:40:56 AM

Bodhi

Posts: 1267
Joined: 8/26/2003
From: Japan
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Lol, you forget, for War PLan Orange I have added entirely new planes. Sopwith Camels, Snipes, Cuckoos, Bristol Fighters, Vought VE-7s, Boeing F4Bs, etc.

What planes have you added for Japan?

Also how have you handled the aircraft production side for Japan, and what data did you use to decide the replacement rate of aircraft and when new squadrons become available?

_____________________________

Bodhi

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 7

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 5:13:20 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bodhi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Lol, you forget, for War PLan Orange I have added entirely new planes. Sopwith Camels, Snipes, Cuckoos, Bristol Fighters, Vought VE-7s, Boeing F4Bs, etc.

What planes have you added for Japan?

Also how have you handled the aircraft production side for Japan, and what data did you use to decide the replacement rate of aircraft and when new squadrons become available?

So far the Mitsubishi 1MF Carrier Fighters (2 versions), Nakajima A1N Carrier Fighter, Mitsubishi B1M Torpedo Bombers (2 versions), Heinkel HD25 float scout, KDA-2 float scout, Mitsubishi C1M carrier scout.

During the 1920s, the Japanese army airforce virtually didn't exist (except flying a few liscense built Sopwith aircraft for tests. The IJNAF, used a small assortment of planes, but like planes of the USN was tied to scouting for the battleship.

IJAF Fighter squadrons (The few there are) will fly the Mitsubishe 1MF1, which is basically a copy of the Sopwith Pup. There is evidence suggesting that Japan used flying boats in this time, but I can find no definative information on squadrons or numbers. The few I have found only 15 or 20 examples were built, and used for tests.

Production is off in the mod, and the replacement rate is fairly low. This is because 1) Aircraft were seen more as a nuissance than a viable weapon, and 2) by the time that aircraft will become in heavy combat, you'll have enough spares that the low rate will not be a problem.

Take the USAS. In the 1920s, its max strength was less than 300 planes. The RAF and IJAF/IJNAF faired little better. In the USMC, their entire air size was less than 1,200 men, ground crew included. And, at one point in the 20s, there were less than 40 fighters in the whole of the navy. So, with the replacement rates, you will actually get more planes than were manufactured, but still nothing on the scale of regular War in the Pacific.

< Message edited by Tankerace -- 12/5/2004 9:16:13 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Bodhi)

Post #: 8

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 5:37:08 AM

Bodhi

Posts: 1267
Joined: 8/26/2003
From: Japan
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Production is off in the mod, and the replacement rate is fairly low. This is because 1) Aircraft were seen more as a nuissance than a viable weapon, and 2) by the time that aircraft will become in heavy combat, you'll have enough spares that the low rate will not be a problem.

So I take it that the air arm's significance will be greatly reduced, and aircraft will be reduced to acting as short-range spotters for task forces?

_____________________________

Bodhi

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 9

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 5:44:37 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Pretty much. In the 1920s, aircraft weren't really long legged enough to have a significant effect on naval outcomes.

However, in the later scenarios (1926-29) aircraft are more potent, although again no where near what they were in the '40s. In the '20s aircraft and carriers were nothing but "expesive experiments".

Oh, I forgot to mention another Japanese plane is the GLoster Sparrowhawk. Purchased before the war, they are designed as carrier capable planes to be launched from the Hosho. However, by the time the Hosho goes into service in January 1923, the Mitsubishi 1MF will replace it.

_____________________________

(in reply to Bodhi)

Post #: 10

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 7:53:01 AM

Bodhi

Posts: 1267
Joined: 8/26/2003
From: Japan
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Pretty much. In the 1920s, aircraft weren't really long legged enough to have a significant effect on naval outcomes.

However, in the later scenarios (1926-29) aircraft are more potent, although again no where near what they were in the '40s. In the '20s aircraft and carriers were nothing but "expesive experiments".

Any comments on gameplay in your mod? WitP simulates the interaction between the three services, but it seems that the air service will be greatly reduced in importance/effect in your mod. In this case there doesn't seem to much need to hold bases just for their ability to accommodate airbases.

What's the main goal of Japan in your mod, to capture the resources/oil to feed their production? Or simply to engage the US Pacific fleet in the decisive engagement?

_____________________________

Bodhi

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 11

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 8:48:57 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

As Japan, have 3 possibilities. You can take the SRA for resources (the strike south policy). You can take the US bases in the central Pacific to stop/delay the US blockade. Or, instead of letting the US chooose the time and place of the inevitable Jutland style battle, you can force it. If you wait too long for a Jutland, the chance of success goes down, as elements of the U.S. Atlantic fleet arrive, aswell as the British fleet. If you smash the Pacific Fleet early on, then you can easily keep your supply lines open, as your fleet will be stronger. Then, you are free to ravage the Pacific as you see fit.

_____________________________

(in reply to Bodhi)

Post #: 12

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 10:03:40 AM

Bodhi

Posts: 1267
Joined: 8/26/2003
From: Japan
Status: offline

Getting a bit off topic for the thread, but I'm interested to hear how your mod works.

What are the victory conditions for the mod?

Have you modified the AI scenario files to give the AI new objectives now that there's not as much need to occupy Pacific islands for air bases?

What happens if there's a "Jutland/Tsushima" type large naval battle at the start? It seems the whole mod is geared up to encouraging a Jutland/Tsushima type battle. Is this a fair assesment, and, if so, how do you feel about the ability of WitP to accurately handle such a battle?

Is the game basically over with the winner of the battle triumphant, or is there a way for either side to recover from such a loss? How are you handling new ship arrival dates, what schedules and ships are you using?

_____________________________

Bodhi

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 13

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 10:21:56 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bodhi

Getting a bit off topic for the thread, but I'm interested to hear how your mod works.

What are the victory conditions for the mod?

The Same as in regular WitP, take as much territory as you can. For the US, this means holding the PI, DEI, and Malay. For the Japanese, this means taking them. The PI will be worth more VPs, because with no Pearl Harbor, the US commander really has no excuse for letting them go without a fight. Being worth more, if the Japanese player can gain all these areas (Which will take longer due to no accelorated movement, and little amphibious stuff) and destroy the US Pacific Fleet, he then has to hold them. Later in the Game, the balance of the US Atlantic Fleet, plus the British Grand Fleet come in to play. I have this spaced out enough, to give the Japanese two options.

Force a Jutland, gather as much resources as you can, and then pick at the second blockade of US and British ships,

Do nothing, which will result in a defeat,

or Tackle the US Fleet, fortify any gains, and then force a second Jutland when the British and US Atlantic Fleet arrive.

quote:

Have you modified the AI scenario files to give the AI new objectives now that there's not as much need to occupy Pacific islands for air bases?

Not as yet. I am playtesting, to see how the AI does. The Japanese player, surprisingly, can follow a pretty much historical path. In addition, the more bases the Japanese take (even if the AI thinks its for planes) will slow the US fleet getting to the Philippines, allowing them to be taken.

quote:

What happens if there's a "Jutland/Tsushima" type large naval battle at the start? It seems the whole mod is geared up to encouraging a Jutland/Tsushima type battle. Is this a fair assesment, and, if so, how do you feel about the ability of WitP to accurately handle such a battle?

The reason the mod is geared that way is that is what naval planners predicted. Even up until 1941 Japanese planners envisioned a massive battle between dreadnoughts. If it happens at the start, and the US wins, then Japan must attempt to run the blockade. If Japan can inflict serious enough damage on the US fleet, then all is not lost. War in the Pacific can not handle it 100% as well as what was predicted in history. However, considering the real Jutland saw only 5 capital ships sunk, I do believe it can do a reasonable job. And, if it can't, I am sure if WPO is a success then I can push the devs for tweaks to allow it to better simulate a Jutland.

Is the game basically over with the winner of the battle triumphant, or is there a way for either side to recover from such a loss? How are you handling new ship arrival dates, what schedules and ships are you using?

If the United States is the winner of the grand show down, then the naval war for Japan turns into a series of blockade runs, in which it tries to get around the US fleet, to at least take one or two bases to get supplies. In addition, for the US to have a tight blockade, that would bring it in range of air attack. On ship arrival dates the US receives some reinforcements straight away, and then receives more in 1923. They will have to wait 2 years (1925 for the 1st campaign, 1927-28 for the second) to start receiving massive amounts of ships. This not only gives the Japanese a chance, but alsa reflects Britain and America holding back, making sure the other wouldn't try anything. In 1922 and 23, Britain will send a limited number of ships to protect India, as well as a few to bolster New Zealand and Australia. For Japan, arrivals are typically when a ship was commissioned, or a logical guess as to when it would be commissioned. However, one must note than Japan is not going to get a ton of capital ship arrivals.

In 1923, they receive the Hosho, and battleship Tosa (launched in 1921). In 1924, they get the Kaga and Shokaku (cancelled Hosho). Then, in 1926-28 (after the first campaign) they receive the Amagis and 2 more (as yet unamed) Hoshos.

Japans best bet to win is to take Wake and Guam, and then fight a delaying action there while they occupy the Philippines. If Japan can conserve her battleships (roughly the same number as the Americans at the start), she can win. Or, if she can force a Jutland early, destroy the US navy, then fall back and repair, it will stand a better chance.

The US needs to either Force a battle early in hopes of destroying the IJN, or at least stop the Japanese from getting the SRA while it awaits reinforcements. The Japanese need to force the battle early, so that in the later stages of the campaign the combined weight of the US and British fleets won't crush the IJN.

Hope those answer your questions. If you don't mind, Im going to repost in the WPO FAQ thread, as I am sure others are wondering the same thing.

_____________________________

(in reply to Bodhi)

Post #: 14

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 10:25:44 AM

Bodhi

Posts: 1267
Joined: 8/26/2003
From: Japan
Status: offline

Thanks for the answers. I just saw that thread and reposted some of these questions over there. I'm sure they'll be of interest to people who may not come by here.

_____________________________

Bodhi

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 15

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 10:45:07 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

LOL. Your welcome. I answered those questions too. Hope I answered them fully. If not, or you have any more, don't hesitate to ask.

_____________________________

(in reply to Bodhi)

Post #: 16

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 11:40:33 AM

Rainerle

Posts: 463
Joined: 7/24/2002
From: Burghausen/Bavaria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

In addition, for the US to have a tight blockade, that would bring it in range of air attack.

Hi,
is the risk of air attack not rather low in your mod ?

edit: btw thanks very much for the plane stats !

< Message edited by Rainerle -- 12/6/2004 10:41:20 AM >

_____________________________

Image brought to you by courtesy of Subchaser!

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 17

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 10:01:56 PM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

It is low, but you have to understand that Warships don't have anti torpedo bulges. That's why I have upped the values of the the torpedoes. One good torpedo hit can blow a predreadnought all to hell (Think Pomern at Jutland). The risk of attack is low, but battleships can't shrug off torpedoes as in WW2.

_____________________________

(in reply to Rainerle)

Post #: 18

RE: New Planes - 12/6/2004 10:56:41 PM

ladner

Posts: 338
Joined: 8/24/2001
From: Virginia USA
Status: offline

Ok back on topic...does anyone have graphics for the G8N Renzan 'Rita' ?

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 19

RE: New Planes - 12/7/2004 3:49:32 PM

rhohltjr

Posts: 536
Joined: 4/27/2000
From: When I play pacific wargames, I expect smarter AI.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ladner

Ok back on topic...does anyone have graphics for the G8N Renzan 'Rita' ?

Specifically top and side graphics for the G8N Rita, F8F Bearcat, F7F Tigercat, P80 Shooting Star, Ki-?Kikka, and the Ki-83 Long Range Escort Fighter.

Thanks in advance artsy guys or gals?

IF you can use excel I made up a spreadsheet and sent it to Spooky's with the above aircraft stats I derived from several sources including G Grigbys games.

< Message edited by rhohltjr -- 12/7/2004 7:53:03 AM >

_____________________________

My e-troops don't unload OVER THE BEACH anymore, see:
Amphibious Assault at Kota Bharu
TF 85 troops securing a beachhead at Kota Bharu, 51,75
whew! I still feel better.

(in reply to ladner)

Post #: 20

RE: New Planes - 12/8/2004 3:10:32 AM

ladner

Posts: 338
Joined: 8/24/2001
From: Virginia USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rhohltjr

Specifically top and side graphics for the G8N Rita, F8F Bearcat, F7F Tigercat, P80 Shooting Star, Ki-?Kikka, and the Ki-83 Long Range Escort Fighter. Thanks in advance artsy guys or gals?

IF you can use excel I made up a spreadsheet and sent it to Spooky's with the above aircraft stats I derived from several sources including G Grigbys games.

I have already looked at your work, and thank you for making it publicly available on Spooky's site. Unfortunately, I think I have the same skill set as yourself. I am working on the graphics for a hypothetical BC ship class that the Japs were designing but did not build as a counter to the Alaska Class.

(in reply to rhohltjr)

Post #: 21

RE: New Planes - 12/8/2004 3:57:16 PM

Rainerle

Posts: 463
Joined: 7/24/2002
From: Burghausen/Bavaria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

Aichi E16 - Source from Francillion - Japanese Aircraft from the Pacific War
Max Speed = 273 mph
Cruise Speed = 207 mph
Ceiling = 32810 feet
Climb = 2110 ft/sec
Manuever = ?
Durability = ?
Armor = ?
Endurance = 436
Max Load = 551 lbs
Gun Value = 12 (2x20mm Type 99 mod 2 in wings (F); 1x13mm Type 2 rear-firing (TR)
Max Rng = 1504 mi (25 hexes)
Ext Rng = 501 mi (8 hexes)
Nor Rng = 379 mi (6 hexes)

Hi,
my (admittedly bad) source states that it could carry a pair of 250 kg bombs you have indication on that ?
2) Does your book have stats on the Kyushu Q1W1 Tokai ??

I like the feedbakc hopefully we can get the interest of some artists

edited for color correction

< Message edited by Rainerle -- 12/8/2004 2:57:49 PM >

_____________________________

Image brought to you by courtesy of Subchaser!

(in reply to Herrbear)

Post #: 22

RE: New Planes - 12/10/2004 5:53:06 PM

Herrbear

Posts: 883
Joined: 7/26/2004
From: Glendora, CA
Status: offline

I have checked 2 other sources on the Aichi E16 and all say max is 250 kg or 551 lbs.

Now for the Kyushu Q1W1 Tokai

Kyushu Q1W Tokai - Source from Francillion - Japanese Aircraft from the Pacific War
Max Speed = 200 mph
Cruise Speed = 150 mph
Ceiling = 14730 feet
Climb = 751 ft/sec
Manuever = ?
Durability = ?
Armor = ?
Endurance = 334
Max Load = 1102 lbs
Gun Value = 3-10 (1x7.7mm Type 92 rear-firing (TR); optionally 1 or 2x20mm Type 99 (F)
Max Rng = 834 mi (13 hexes)
Ext Rng = 278 mi (4 hexes)
Nor Rng = 209 mi (3 hexes)

(in reply to Rainerle)

Post #: 23

RE: New Planes - 12/11/2004 4:56:47 AM

ladner

Posts: 338
Joined: 8/24/2001
From: Virginia USA
Status: offline

I do not know much about this aircraft, Kyushu Q1W1 Tokai, but a couple of quick searches on the internet indicate that a 153 were built and it served as an ASW patrol aircraft. Not sure what to give it for a bomb load out. Interestingly enough it uses the Hitachi engines....could pose a real dilema if trying to maximize limited Japanese production.

(in reply to Herrbear)

Post #: 24

RE: New Planes - 12/12/2004 8:42:26 AM

trojan58

Posts: 266
Joined: 8/8/2004
From: bendigo, Victoria, Australia
Status: offline

Does anyone have stats and pics for the Me109e, f and g. here are some pics I have modified

[image][/image]

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ladner)

Post #: 25

RE: New Planes - 12/12/2004 3:26:39 PM

ladner

Posts: 338
Joined: 8/24/2001
From: Virginia USA
Status: offline

Trojan - just let me say nice work. I recoginze the G8N Rita but what are the other aircraft?

(in reply to trojan58)

Post #: 26

RE: New Planes - 12/12/2004 4:25:52 PM

ladner

Posts: 338
Joined: 8/24/2001
From: Virginia USA
Status: offline

To those who have done this before, how exactly do you add your new plane graphics? I see in the editor that the planes refer to a bit map; however the plane side, and plane tops are a matrix containing multiple planes. How is the matrix number in terms of elements, I am assuming that the upper left element would be 1,1, of course how does this correlate to the bitmap numbers? Aggghh...now I see why 2by3 wants to switch to a new engine.

(in reply to ladner)

Post #: 27

RE: New Planes - 12/12/2004 10:16:56 PM

trojan58

Posts: 266
Joined: 8/8/2004
From: bendigo, Victoria, Australia
Status: offline

Sorry They are from top to bottom

Ki 83

Aichi sieran float bomber

G5 or G8 heavy bomber

(in reply to ladner)

Post #: 28

RE: New Planes - 12/13/2004 1:54:34 AM

Herrbear

Posts: 883
Joined: 7/26/2004
From: Glendora, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ladner

To those who have done this before, how exactly do you add your new plane graphics? I see in the editor that the planes refer to a bit map; however the plane side, and plane tops are a matrix containing multiple planes. How is the matrix number in terms of elements, I am assuming that the upper left element would be 1,1, of course how does this correlate to the bitmap numbers? Aggghh...now I see why 2by3 wants to switch to a new engine.

I just did my first adds. I used Corel Draw to copy one plane and copy it to the place in the file I wanted to place the new or revised plane image.

(in reply to ladner)

Post #: 29

RE: New Planes - 12/13/2004 11:52:24 AM

Rainerle

Posts: 463
Joined: 7/24/2002
From: Burghausen/Bavaria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ladner

I do not know much about this aircraft, Kyushu Q1W1 Tokai, but a couple of quick searches on the internet indicate that a 153 were built and it served as an ASW patrol aircraft. Not sure what to give it for a bomb load out. Interestingly enough it uses the Hitachi engines....could pose a real dilema if trying to maximize limited Japanese production.

Hi,
IMO the game fun increases more if more support planes are added than late 45/early46 secret weapons whose stats and impact on the war are pure speculation. Just my 0.02 Euros. And this does not mean that ASW planes like Q1W1 do not come in handy for the japanese player. Which begs the question: I wanted to include these in my personalized version of the game and labelled them as a patrol plane, but patrol planes are by definition floatplanes only, not landbased. So finally I ended up labelling them as bombers. In which case the player has to restrain himself not to misuse them (labelling them recon is also bad, since you have no ASW mission).

trojan: nice pics

_____________________________

Image brought to you by courtesy of Subchaser!

(in reply to ladner)

Post #: 30

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> New Planes

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>