RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding



Message

Historiker -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/6/2009 1:23:31 PM)

Nice! Looks a little like a South Dakota with a pagoda mast [:)]



JuanG -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/6/2009 1:44:01 PM)

Its sort of a mix between South Dakota, Yamato and the Hiraga replacement designs with their forward leaning superstructures. I like how it turned out for the most part.

Japan
2 BB Designs to do (Echizen, Yamato)
2 CV Designs to do (Shokaku, Omi)
3 CA Designs to do
6 CL Designs to do
2 DD Designs to do

And a lot more for the othes.....

As said, Ill probably just recycle something for the CA/CL/DD initially, and release an art pack later.


--------------------------------------

All IJN BBs done - here is the Echizen class;

[image]http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/7724/jnshil0427.png[/image]



JuanG -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/6/2009 4:04:50 PM)

And the almost identical Yamato class;


[image]http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/7271/jnshil0429.png[/image]


Now for the CV's, and then I can get to work on the USN stuff....

3 BB Designs (North Carolina 1931, Montana and Illinois) + Rebuilds for Lexington and North Carolina
Minor tweaks to CVs...

And then the RN stuff
7 BB (All of them after Renown...)
1 CV

Getting there! [;)]

As a bonus, heres a compilation of the IJN Battleline for BB Variant - Left is 12/41, Right is wartime upgrade;

[image]http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/7076/bbvijnbb.png[/image]

Im content with them - while theyre rough, I feel I've managed to retain the same style as the original AE artwork.

-----------------------------

Version 3 of Scenario 40 is now up. This database is pretty much final for now until the first real patch, and will probably be shared with Scen 41 when it comes out.

Changes are mostly more bugfixes, plus some further AA tweaks, and a changed range (5000 -> 8300) for the Akizuki class DDs. I really wish I had documented every change for every version, but I'm pretty bad at organizing things! (Though dont let my PBEM opponent know that...otherwise all he has to do is wait for my economy to commit seppuku.)

http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/8/1/2529503/Scen40v3.rar



JuanG -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/8/2009 6:06:13 PM)

I've made a further set of changes to the stock data because of some of the recent threads, so there will now be the following scenarios;

40) Scen 1 'WNT Light' - Only the naval device change, plus minor database fixes
41) Scen 1 'WNT Adaption' - Full set of device and database changes and additions
42) BB Variant
43) BB+ Variant
44) CV Variant
45) CV+ Variant
46) Balanced Variant (Under consideration)
46) Balanced+ Variant (Under consideration)
48) Coral Sea 'WNT Adaption' - Full database changes, but no additions
49) Guadalcanal 'WNT Adaption' - Full database changes, but no additions

The last two were a quick idea to let those who want to see how the changes affect the current gameplay have a try at the shorter scenarios. Ill be posting them later today along with the list of DB changes for 41, 48 and 49. Scen 42 should be due by the middle of next week, and 43 by the end of it.



Historiker -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/8/2009 7:11:40 PM)

You should really make lists for every change. Otherwise, your work will be quite useless after the first patch!



JuanG -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/8/2009 7:27:47 PM)

I do have a rough changelist for the non-naval device changes, and the naval device changes are based on my own databases.

Regardless, the first patch will not alter my scenario files, so I can always cross reference with witpload and compare, say, Pre-Patch Scen 1, Post-Patch Scen 1 and my Pre-Patch Modified Scen 1 (40/41).

However, I do appreciate that people may like to see exactly changelists, so will endeavour to produce some.

---------------------------------------

Here is Scenario 40 and 41, as of version 4;

Scenario 41 includes various changes that will be in the final scenario, in the form of changes to aircombat, and the addition of some latewar aircraft;

F2G-2 'Super Corsair' (CV version)
A7M1 Sam (early production model, inferior engine)
A7M3 Sam (later CV version)
N1K4-J George (later model, same engine as Model 5, but no supercharger)
N1K4-A George (latewar navalised N1K)
B7A2 Grace (latewar improved B7N)

If anyone wants to suggest some more I should include, please do!


The main change in aircombat is an overhaul of the aircraft weapon devices, which is ongoing. Currently the changes are relatively straightforward;

LMG effect reduced to 1 (from 2)
HMG effect reduced to 2 (from 3)
20mm effect unchanged (4)
30mm effect increased to 6 (from 5)
37mm/40mm effect increased to 7/8 (from 5/6)
75mm effect increased to 10 (from 8)

There have also been a few changes to accuracy values, and these will be adjusted further to improve the model.

Under this system the relative firepowers of most fighters seem much more reasonable than in stock.

Here are the two files;

Scen 40;
http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/8/1/2529503/Scen40v4.rar

Scen 41;
http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/8/1/2529503/Scen41v4.rar

Scen 48/49 coming later today.



Historiker -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/8/2009 8:50:08 PM)

A He-100D was shipped to Japan, a Fw-190 is reported to be shipped for Japan, thoughI found no evidence it ever arrived...
Both some nasty upgrades for the Jap arsenal, if one wants so...



JuanG -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/8/2009 9:22:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

A He-100D was shipped to Japan, a Fw-190 is reported to be shipped for Japan, thoughI found no evidence it ever arrived...
Both some nasty upgrades for the Jap arsenal, if one wants so...



I want to hold off on german aircraft for now. They may feature in a later scenario with strong German/Japanese cooperation, but its too radical for the current versions.

Ill keep them in mind, however.



Historiker -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/8/2009 10:44:48 PM)

What was wrong in all the devices you've changed?



JuanG -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/9/2009 7:25:12 AM)

Which ones, exactly?

The naval devices I originally changed, or the new aircraft devices?



mikemike -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/10/2009 1:38:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JuanG


quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

A He-100D was shipped to Japan, a Fw-190 is reported to be shipped for Japan, thoughI found no evidence it ever arrived...
Both some nasty upgrades for the Jap arsenal, if one wants so...



I want to hold off on german aircraft for now. They may feature in a later scenario with strong German/Japanese cooperation, but its too radical for the current versions.

Ill keep them in mind, however.


Historiker: Japan received three He-100D-0 in 1940, and there definitely was a FW-190A-3 in Japan; it served as a pattern for the engine installation on the Ki-100.

JuanG: The IJN actually bought the license rights, full plans and production jigs for the He-100 D in 1939 for about 8,5 million Reichsmark. For some reason, the production line was never delivered to Japan, otherwise I have no doubt that the aircraft would have gone into production for the IJN. This was an aircraft that missed WitP by a hair's breadth, and no need for improved cooperation. They had already bought it!



JuanG -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/10/2009 3:45:10 PM)

Ill keep the He100 in mind, but it wont make the next version atleast. Likewise, sorry for missing Guadalcanal/Coral Sea scenarios, my internet died before I could upload them.

Note that these are for VERSION 5 - To be released as soon as my internet is properly working...

Naval Device Changes
All naval guns, DP guns and naval AA guns revised. Coastal guns (SP and DP) also revised. Land based AA unchanged. Naming system revised slightly.
-Due to inconsistencies in the naval devices, I redid all of them using data from a combination of sources (mainly BigGun by Rick Robinson, some calculations of my own, and checked this data against known values from NavWeaps.com and NA&B by Steven Lorenz)
-I extended this to include a better model for the AA weapons as well
-I may also redo the 'Soft Attack' values of the naval guns to something better than effect/10, probably based on HC shell weight and explosive weight
-Examples of data before and after changes is included at the end of the changelist

Ship Class Changes
Several ship classes had incorrect devices assigned, and some had incorrect data in other fields.
-Most Japanese prewar DDs had incorrect 5in/50 mount types. This has been corrected, and means that several of these classes do not mount DP weapons.
-Japanese Akizuki class DD had incorrect endurance value, this has been changed to 8300 (from 5000).
-Shinano class CV redone, as the current version was useless - thus the only thing anyone would have done is stopped it.
-Nagato class belt armour corrected, to 295 (from 270).
-Various minor errors fixed, as posted in the AE Naval Issues thread.
-Reduced PT boat manueverability values, making them somewhat easier to hit with light surface guns (Full Mod only)

Aircraft Device Changes (Full Mod only)
All aircraft guns and cannon revised. Changes subjects to further alterations. This was done as the relative firepower of most weapons seemed unreasonable.
-Most LMGs set to effect 1, accuracies to be revised
-Most HMGs set to effect 2, accuracies to be revised
-Most 20mms set to effect 4, accuracies to be revised
-Most 30mms set to effect 6, accuracies to be revised
-Most 40mms set to effect 8, accuracies to be revised
-Most 75mms set to effect 10, accuracies to be revised
-Other weapons set to appropriate effect/accuracy values
-Range values may be subject to revision
-Changes ongoing

Aircraft Changes (Full Mod only)
Changes based on reported errors in AE Air Issues thread. In addition to this, the following aircraft were added;
-F2G-2 'Super Corsair' (CV Capable)
-F8F-2 Bearcat
-A7M1 Sam
-A7M3 Sam
-B7A3 Grace
-N1K4-J George
-N1K4-A George (CV Capable)

Location/LCU Changes
Some fixes based on reported errors in the AE Land Issues thread.


Examples of Naval/DP Guns before and after - format is;
Name - Effect/Penetration/Accuracy/Range now (Effect/Penetration/Accuracy/Range before)

16in/50 Mk7 - 2700/790/20/42 (2700/825/20/37)
16in/45 Mk6 - 2700/700/20/38 (2700/725/20/37)
16in/45 Mk5 - 2240/675/15/36 (2240/725/15/35)
14in/50 Mk7 - 1500/620/18/37 (1500/700/12/36)
14in/45 Mk8 - 1500/570/16/34 (1500/700/12/34)

Just from looking at the old data for these USN Big Guns, its -really- clear to me that theres somethingh wrong with the stock values. I wont post the full list of changes, unless someone really wants it, as its easier just to go in and look at them in the editor.



JuanG -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/12/2009 9:45:05 PM)

Work on BB Variant continues. I've put the Guadalcanal and Coral Sea scenarios on hold for a bit while I finish the BB Variant.

Done with the IJN BB/CV/CA forces, still have CL/DD/CVL/CVE to do.
Done with most art for the USN, but still lacking most of the RN artwork.

Heres something in the meanwhile - the upgrade/conversion flowchart for the Fuso class;
[image]http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9760/fusoupgrade.jpg[/image]

(Theres a typo, the 09/45 Fuso Hybrid is meant to be 09/44)

Its a better system I think than the one-off thing going in stock, and gives you much more flexibility. The 2nd and 4th columns are an 'intermediate' class used only as a stepping stone for the conversion, to allow you to begin converting to the equivalent (date wise) class while accounting for conversion time. The Hybrid conversion is 200 days, the Fast conversion is 240. I'm toying with the thought of adding a Fast Hybrid branch available in 01/43 off the 7/42 Fuso Fast to allow those who convert to the Fast BB to still have a choice of a Hybrid.

Heres the artwork changes for the same class;
[image]http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/8367/fusoart.jpg[/image]

Sorry for choosing Fuso if anyone dosent like the class, but its in my opinion one of the most symbolic Japanese ships.



Akos Gergely -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/12/2009 11:57:45 PM)

Very nice, a lot of work gone into this already. I'll use your mod as a base for mine if you allow me.

Just one small nitpick: why didn't you delete X turret (the one right behind the pagoda mast) from the fast Fuso version? It would have been more logical since originally she had an additional boiler room just in front of that turret...

Did I understand it correctly you're going to do a Guadalcanal version as well? It sunds great to me :) !

Oh one more, as for additional planes I'd say all what Ryan did on the Modding thread should go in, but the Sea Wold and Sky Pirate should definitely go in!



JuanG -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 12:46:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: csatahajos

Very nice, a lot of work gone into this already. I'll use your mod as a base for mine if you allow me.


Feel free to do what you want with it, the scenario and all the art is anyones to use as they see fit. [8D]

quote:

Just one small nitpick: why didn't you delete X turret (the one right behind the pagoda mast) from the fast Fuso version? It would have been more logical since originally she had an additional boiler room just in front of that turret...


Both the space from that (under the rear superstructure) and the space from removing Turret #4 is used for the conversion. I suppose I could have extended further rear into Turret #5 instead of forwards, but I thought it would be more logical to do it this way to converve firepower - better a turret with a full arc aft than one of the central ones.

quote:

Did I understand it correctly you're going to do a Guadalcanal version as well? It sunds great to me :) !


I'm doing a Guadalcanal scenario using the device changes, ect. I suppose I could also do a 'Alternate WNT' Guadalcanal with an appropriate OOB substition. Thats a lot more work than just switching device files though.

quote:

Oh one more, as for additional planes I'd say all what Ryan did on the Modding thread should go in, but the Sea Wold and Sky Pirate should definitely go in!


Some of them will definately go in. Ill do my best include as much as I can.



51st Highland Div -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 11:35:04 AM)

Excellent work..already embarked on the Scen 41 campaign and enjoying it lots..keep up the excellent work and looking forward to the other scenarios [:)]



JuanG -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 4:24:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: 51st Highland Div

Excellent work..already embarked on the Scen 41 campaign and enjoying it lots..keep up the excellent work and looking forward to the other scenarios [:)]


Thanks for the encouragement! [:)]

If you find anything that seems off or dosent give reasonable results, please do drop me a PM or mail, or just put the feedback in here - would love to know what you (and anyone else) think of the changes.



A question if anyones got an opinion to contribute;
-Availability of "strange" conversions for other ships, be it allied or japanese - should I put some in? Any ideas?

An Ise like BB Hybrid Sagami with its large quarterdeck?
A Kongo hybrid?
An AA heavy Nevada conversion, for escort duty?

For the allies the conversions can be rather outrageous as they have a somewhat unlimited economy, and so dont cheat on it because of the costless conversions like the Japanese do.

(Edit - Updated the Fuso chart)



51st Highland Div -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 5:07:43 PM)

Apologies if you have visited this website before http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php has quite a lot of interesting land/sea/air projects in it that might be useful in your scenarios..worth a look at anyway for some inspiration [:)]



Historiker -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 5:38:35 PM)

quote:

A question if anyones got an opinion to contribute;
-Availability of "strange" conversions for other ships, be it allied or japanese - should I put some in? Any ideas?

An Ise like BB Hybrid Sagami with its large quarterdeck?
A Kongo hybrid?
An AA heavy Nevada conversion, for escort duty?

For the allies the conversions can be rather outrageous as they have a somewhat unlimited economy, and so dont cheat on it because of the costless conversions like the Japanese do.

Will this hybrids have a flightdeck for wheeled planes or just more floatplanes? With the new editor, float-DBs, float-TBs and floatfighters are possible, so even just floats might make some sense if attacking an unpretected enemy convoy.

With late 42 or early 43, the Japanese CLs might have the possibility to convert to CLAAs with their main armement replaced by DP guns.
The CAs might replace their medium caliber guns with DPs as well.


And of course, beautiful work!



JuanG -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 6:04:25 PM)

Cheers for the link Highland, I'll be sure to do some reading.

Historiker;
-Theres already the M6A for a float-TB, and theres the E16A for a float-DB ingame. So I'm not worried about the conversions not having teeth, just if they make sense.
-The Kuma class have all been converted to CLAA at the start, the Nagara class are in their historic DL form, and the Sendai's are torpedo-cruisers in the style of Kitakami. The Nagara and Sendais both get options to convert to CLAAs later in the war. The Ayase class (Yubari followon - 4x2x5.5in) does not currently have a conversion like that, but it might make sense. Most of the newer CLs use 3in/60s as secondaries anyway, with a 5.5in main battery.
-For CA's, I may add a 'Maya-like' conversion, sacrificing Turret #3 for a pair more DP guns.

Heres the list of aircraft I'll be adding in the next version (v5);

He-100 (I need a Japanese Designation for this; it would probably serve as a land-based IJN fighter, so J something - was the J3 designation ever used?)
J7W1-A

C-74
P-71
P-75
P-81
TB2D Skypirate (Recommend HR allowing use only on Midway class...)
TBY Sea Wolf
AD Skyraider
FH Phantom

These will all use RyanCrierie's brilliant art, as posted in the Modding forum.



Historiker -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 6:32:16 PM)

Will the He-100 be a Navy or Army plane? Its weak armement makes it a fine air superiority fighter but no good bomber destroyer - at least if you don't give her a compareable (and never been) upgrade path with the Me-109.
Me-109 and Fw-190 might be also a choice, especially the latter with its heavy armement. It'll be THE 4e killer.
Ju-88 makes a good LB and DB. Will the G5M be in the game to provide Japan with 4e bombers?



Akos Gergely -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 6:59:42 PM)

"C-74
P-71
P-75
P-81
TB2D Skypirate (Recommend HR allowing use only on Midway class...)
TBY Sea Wolf
AD Skyraider
FH Phantom "

Woohooo good news!!! I'll definitely give a go for your mod an base mine on this. Very good job on your part, Sir!

As for conversions I'd like to see in the CV version later an Iowa and Baltimore conversion to CVs (I can give you drawings and stuff as these were real planned stuff around 4th June 1942...)



R8J -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 7:31:12 PM)

The Alaska class was also considered.

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/s-file/s511-50.jpg



51st Highland Div -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 8:07:27 PM)

Yeah i would like to see those Batlimore/Alaska/Iowa class conversions to CV also....[:)]



Akos Gergely -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 8:21:14 PM)

Yeah I was refering to these SS drawings for the other two as well :D



JuanG -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 8:27:08 PM)

BB Variant has CV/CVL Conversions for Omaha, Cleveland, Baltimore and Lexington CC classes. I'm also considering allowing some of the TKs to convert to CVEs. There is no Alaska class in BB Variant.

CV Variant had the same previously, plus a conversion for the Alaskas. The Iowa conversion is a good idea, as I feel the Allies will need every flattop they can get, especially in the Enhanced CV Variant. [;)]


To backtrack a bit;

quote:

ORIGINAL: JuanG
quote:

ORIGINAL: csatahajos
Just one small nitpick: why didn't you delete X turret (the one right behind the pagoda mast) from the fast Fuso version? It would have been more logical since originally she had an additional boiler room just in front of that turret...


Both the space from that (under the rear superstructure) and the space from removing Turret #4 is used for the conversion. I suppose I could have extended further rear into Turret #5 instead of forwards, but I thought it would be more logical to do it this way to converve firepower - better a turret with a full arc aft than one of the central ones.



I've just realised I completely misunderstood what you meant here - I thought you meant delete Turret 5, but I see you mean 3 instead. This is what I did with the Ise's, and may actually do the same here after having looked at some drawings. Sorry, I answered late at night and clearly misread your post.



Akos Gergely -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 10:16:24 PM)

No worries Juan :). Your version makes sense as well but it would involve more work I guess.

Looking froward to the BB variant and the others.



Terminus -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 10:28:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JuanG

BB Variant has CV/CVL Conversions for Omaha, Cleveland, Baltimore and Lexington CC classes. I'm also considering allowing some of the TKs to convert to CVEs. There is no Alaska class in BB Variant.

CV Variant had the same previously, plus a conversion for the Alaskas. The Iowa conversion is a good idea, as I feel the Allies will need every flattop they can get, especially in the Enhanced CV Variant. [;)]


To backtrack a bit;

quote:

ORIGINAL: JuanG
quote:

ORIGINAL: csatahajos
Just one small nitpick: why didn't you delete X turret (the one right behind the pagoda mast) from the fast Fuso version? It would have been more logical since originally she had an additional boiler room just in front of that turret...


Both the space from that (under the rear superstructure) and the space from removing Turret #4 is used for the conversion. I suppose I could have extended further rear into Turret #5 instead of forwards, but I thought it would be more logical to do it this way to converve firepower - better a turret with a full arc aft than one of the central ones.



I've just realised I completely misunderstood what you meant here - I thought you meant delete Turret 5, but I see you mean 3 instead. This is what I did with the Ise's, and may actually do the same here after having looked at some drawings. Sorry, I answered late at night and clearly misread your post.


Turret 3 would be "Q" turret.



Terminus -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 10:29:50 PM)

Wasn't the Harima BB a more "scrunched-up" design, i.e. with superstructure and turrets clustered closer together, to save on armour?



JuanG -> RE: Alternate WNT Scenarios (8/13/2009 10:55:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus
Turret 3 would be "Q" turret.


Most Japanese texts I've seen use numbers, so when referring to their ships I tend to do the same. Both work. [:D]


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus
Wasn't the Harima BB a more "scrunched-up" design, i.e. with superstructure and turrets clustered closer together, to save on armour?


Which Harima are you referring to? The one in my AU? Its a slightly improved Nagato, and does indeed have slightly shorter armoured length as it is more compact. Its hard to tell from the pictures since theyre so small, but they are closer togeather. Theres only so much you can scrunch it up and still keep the Nagato hullform however.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.312012