quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary D

Mac;

I believe if you download the 6 chunks posted now, and unzip them all into your scenario folder you are fine. The art chunk gets unzipped into your art folder.

All the best

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary D

Mac;

It gave me the "yellow text" data base update choice when I loaded my Jun 42 game, however personally it did not fix the issue with CV groups for me or include the torpedo tube modification. This was with scenario 27 the December 8th start. I had a few other gremlins in replacements that the update could not fix either so I am just restarting. I really want to see the torpedo tube mod in action.

Your luck might be better though! [:)]

I do some minor editing of almost every scenario I play, that could account for my issues too I think.

All the best!

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

I am doing the Dec 7 version and it did not update the airgroups. I ran a turn to see if that mattered and it didn't. I am debating if I want to restart. I think I have figured out a way to work around the aircraft, just do a fit to ship but add the planes manually, perhaps that will work. I really don't want to restart.

Shame there is not a way to have the DB changes effect the current game if you are playing against the AI and a check if your playing PBEM. Oh well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

Somebody, somewhere, asked if MO was Osterhaut. Yes. He's my friend Michael Osterhaut. He calls himself MO, and we all do too.

He's gonna frikkin hate this, but life's a witch, yeah? His written English might be be choppy, but that has nothing to do with what's on his mind. I was there when he gave a presentation to Henry Samueli that had both of us at the edge of our chairs.

Not only that, but this man is probably one of the world's 4 or 5 most knowledgeable authorities on 18th century naval warfare, and Age of Sail stuff in general. He don't write books, he sails on ships. I met MO when I first sailed on R.H.Dana's reconstructed ship, Pilgrim. He was the bosun, and as God is in his heaven, MO made that crew move sweet. He was also master's mate - corporate "master" pissants couldn't find their way from "A" mark to the harbor entrance.

A very good man. A very, very good man. Just my humble opinion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45
I decided with all the changes and corrections the best choice is a restart, but thats the last one till patch 3 [;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Osterhaut

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary D
Gents;

For your next update, the December 8th start, Scenario 27, is starting on the 7th. The setup is fine, just one calendar day early. The day of infamy was Saturday December 6th! [:)]

Thanks again for all your efforts on this project.

oh ok. These things all comes from the official scenarios and it is hard to have every file be good. setup is fine so just turn a Nelson's eye to calendar day [;)] Lite is done now and does not have any more fixes except for a real big one. Now we are working on the Big Babes and will keep you comments in the mind.

MO

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Have you all seen this site? We might not want Don to see it [:)]

http://shipbuildinghistory.com/

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

AH, I don't know how to ask this without possibly offending some people so I will try to say this as diplomatically as possible. I hope this is taken as just a honest question and by no means an attempt to start a firstorm.

Before I drop my bomb, I would like to say what you are talking about in this mod is very interesting to me. When I get around to playing my first PBEM, I may very well go with DBB. That ssaid I am still honoring my "No PBEM until patch 3" pledge to myselrf.

So my question: what was your motivation for Da Babes mod? Is it that there were some things not included in stock that JWE and Don Bowen thought should be included? Or is it that some things came out in play testing and initial deployment that seemed wrong and this is attempt t address those issues?

I just ask because it strikes this reader as odd to see a Mod being developed so soon after release and even more odd that that mod is being created by members of the original dev team.

You can ignore this if it opens up a can of worms that should be left closed. I understand

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

AH, I don't know how to ask this without possibly offending some people so I will try to say this as diplomatically as possible. I hope this is taken as just a honest question and by no means an attempt to start a firstorm.

Before I drop my bomb, I would like to say what you are talking about in this mod is very interesting to me. When I get around to playing my first PBEM, I may very well go with DBB. That ssaid I am still honoring my "No PBEM until patch 3" pledge to myselrf.

So my question: what was your motivation for Da Babes mod? Is it that there were some things not included in stock that JWE and Don Bowen thought should be included? Or is it that some things came out in play testing and initial deployment that seemed wrong and this is attempt t address those issues?

I just ask because it strikes this reader as odd to see a Mod being developed so soon after release and even more odd that that mod is being created by members of the original dev team.

You can ignore this if it opens up a can of worms that should be left closed. I understand

In developing the scenarios for the standard AE release, we had to consider a balance of historical accuracy and playability. Some folks (me! me!) want full accuracy - if's it's in the historical OOB it ought to be in the game OOB. Other people want an easier, more playable game and do not want to be bothered with handling small ships and units that have only a minor affect in the game.

The standard scenarios were developed with balance in mind. Once the game was released, we fanatics then began to create the full-on detailed mod. That's the reason the mod is named "Babes". Back in standard scenario development times, people would review my OOB requests and moan and groan about more "little baby" ships.

It is equally probable that someone will develop a less detailed mod where playability is considered over detail.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

AH, I don't know how to ask this without possibly offending some people so I will try to say this as diplomatically as possible. I hope this is taken as just a honest question and by no means an attempt to start a firstorm.

Before I drop my bomb, I would like to say what you are talking about in this mod is very interesting to me. When I get around to playing my first PBEM, I may very well go with DBB. That ssaid I am still honoring my "No PBEM until patch 3" pledge to myselrf.

So my question: what was your motivation for Da Babes mod? Is it that there were some things not included in stock that JWE and Don Bowen thought should be included? Or is it that some things came out in play testing and initial deployment that seemed wrong and this is attempt t address those issues?

I just ask because it strikes this reader as odd to see a Mod being developed so soon after release and even more odd that that mod is being created by members of the original dev team.

You can ignore this if it opens up a can of worms that should be left closed. I understand

In developing the scenarios for the standard AE release, we had to consider a balance of historical accuracy and playability. Some folks (me! me!) want full accuracy - if's it's in the historical OOB it ought to be in the game OOB. Other people want an easier, more playable game and do not want to be bothered with handling small ships and units that have only a minor affect in the game.

The standard scenarios were developed with balance in mind. Once the game was released, we fanatics then began to create the full-on detailed mod. That's the reason the mod is named "Babes". Back in standard scenario development times, people would review my OOB requests and moan and groan about more "little baby" ships.

It is equally probable that someone will develop a less detailed mod where playability is considered over detail.

I see said the blind man as he picked up his hammer and saw. That makes sense. I was struck by the lack of lift in Canadian WC bases. We now have even more bases and so few resources to keep them supplied. I am sure there are similar issues for the Japanese especially after the SRA is conquered. Nice to see the little extras added in. Now I want to play it even more. Will finish toying with my ASW ideas also

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary D

Gents;

Possible data base gremlin in Scen 27, Lite v2. Ship 152, T War Emergency class, has 0 ammo for the 20mm in weapons slot 7. First of the class is Trusty that shows up on 1 Jan 42. The 44 upgrade has 18 ammo so for my purposes thats what I tossed on it.

I realize you are done with Lite but thought it might be carrying over to your next version.

All the best.