RE: Da Babes Mod (Full Version)

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



Message

Don Bowen -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/9/2009 9:54:29 PM)


The problem is that a lot of ships were in the Pacific or Indian Ocean for a while.. A triip to Australia, back thru the canal, maybe a convoy or two, then come back via Capetown and on to India. Etc, Etc. We call these toe dippers - world wide traffic that comes into the AE map area for one trip, then leaves.

We generally do not include these ships. What we do is identify those that were in the Pacific at a certain time (like scenario start) and generally leave them there. Not big or well knowns, like the Queens, but regular old freighters, etc. So if we have 100 toe dippers and end up with maybe a third of them in the OOB - it should work out.




RevRick -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/9/2009 10:48:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nomad

So this mod is not about replacing all the ship art work with LSTs sig banner and their friends? [:(]


We'd add that as a class of Misc. Auxiliary - if he'd just send us a picture without the text over.



LOL - just found that thread. Hey Don, you know the proverb "Be careful what you wish for, you may receive it"? [:'(].


If you would like, LST, you could send the picture to me, as a strictly unbiased party, of course, and I could peruse it and see if it might be to titillating for the rest of the members on the board.



Buck Beach -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/10/2009 3:31:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


The problem is that a lot of ships were in the Pacific or Indian Ocean for a while.. A triip to Australia, back thru the canal, maybe a convoy or two, then come back via Capetown and on to India. Etc, Etc. We call these toe dippers - world wide traffic that comes into the AE map area for one trip, then leaves.

We generally do not include these ships. What we do is identify those that were in the Pacific at a certain time (like scenario start) and generally leave them there. Not big or well knowns, like the Queens, but regular old freighters, etc. So if we have 100 toe dippers and end up with maybe a third of them in the OOB - it should work out.





I understand, but I have found some of the allusive ships in the USAT fleet. Here is an example:

http://www.convoyweb.org.uk/tn/index.html

All three of these US freighter's in this convoy are USAT ships (when I separpately Google them as such), that are not in the game.

Are we still interested in the USAT ships? If so they may show up in the individual convoys.



stuman -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/10/2009 5:30:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Osterhaut

So JWE is gone now?
Sometimes I sent some things to him. Should I send to you now?


Hello Osterhaut, I haven't seen you around lately. How have you been doinig ?



Don Bowen -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/10/2009 5:38:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

I understand, but I have found some of the allusive ships in the USAT fleet. Here is an example:

http://www.convoyweb.org.uk/tn/index.html

All three of these US freighter's in this convoy are USAT ships (when I separpately Google them as such), that are not in the game.

Are we still interested in the USAT ships? If so they may show up in the individual convoys.


We have the full list of the SWPA Permanent Fleet - USAT and others. Not all the catboat flotilla though. Don't think we will do the Australian Army ALC, and AV types, definitely not the trawlers. I think this area is pretty well covered.

I do believe we still need:

1. Coastal tankers in the Philippines, Australia, Burma/India and maybe NEI.
2. Floating drydocks, as per another thread.




Buck Beach -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/10/2009 1:32:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

I understand, but I have found some of the allusive ships in the USAT fleet. Here is an example:

http://www.convoyweb.org.uk/tn/index.html

All three of these US freighter's in this convoy are USAT ships (when I separpately Google them as such), that are not in the game.

Are we still interested in the USAT ships? If so they may show up in the individual convoys.


We have the full list of the SWPA Permanent Fleet - USAT and others. Not all the catboat flotilla though. Don't think we will do the Australian Army ALC, and AV types, definitely not the trawlers. I think this area is pretty well covered.

I do believe we still need:

1. Coastal tankers in the Philippines, Australia, Burma/India and maybe NEI.
2. Floating drydocks, as per another thread.




Roger that.



Buck Beach -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/24/2009 2:15:43 AM)

How is the "Da Babes" lite version for AI players coming along. Don, are you alone Don working on it or is JWE still your partner?

Buck



Don Bowen -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/24/2009 4:08:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

How is the "Da Babes" lite version for AI players coming along. Don, are you alone Don working on it or is JWE still your partner?

Buck



JWE is the man. I am the assistant.



Buck Beach -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/24/2009 4:24:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

How is the "Da Babes" lite version for AI players coming along. Don, are you alone Don working on it or is JWE still your partner?

Buck



JWE is the man. I am the assistant.



I'm sorry, I didn't mean to slight JWE. Although I do know he has return to the Forum (of sort), his status in relation to his travel and life plans, threw me a curve ball.

Sorry JWE.

Buck

Opps, so what is the status of the mod?



JWE -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/24/2009 2:52:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
JWE is the man. I am the assistant.

Ha! Don's the one holding the whip.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to slight JWE. Although I do know he has return to the Forum (of sort), his status in relation to his travel and life plans, threw me a curve ball.

Sorry JWE.

Buck

Opps, so what is the status of the mod?

No worries. Going back and forth a bit. Moving is such a pita. Be around for a while.

Mod is actually looking pretty good. Have a few more things to do, but we can see a light, and it ain't a train.



Andy Mac -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/24/2009 3:45:12 PM)

If you tell me the extent of the changes and the slots you are using John I can have a go at bastardising at least one Ai script to use all the new LCU's/Air units you want to add.

Shouldnt take to long depending on how many LCU's you are adding (I am doing something similar for my own Ironman Allied mod so its doable after we get patch 2 out)

The real killer is if you are adding extra bases.

Andy



JWE -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/24/2009 4:06:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

If you tell me the extent of the changes and the slots you are using John I can have a go at bastardising at least one Ai script to use all the new LCU's/Air units you want to add.

Shouldnt take to long depending on how many LCU's you are adding (I am doing something similar for my own Ironman Allied mod so its doable after we get patch 2 out)

The real killer is if you are adding extra bases.

Andy

Very cool, Andy! Definitely after patch-2, though, it will take a bit to get the land stuff worked out right (shifting NavSup and AirSup, etc). We'll be in touch, fo' sho'.

Not really adding bases, except I'm thinking of adding Bellingham - just a thought though - have to have Misters Bowen and Brown nod their heads over that one.



Buck Beach -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/24/2009 4:57:47 PM)

Prefacing this with I know absolutely nothing about what I am doing, I plan on jamming in a Port/base #572 at 199-41 to represent the U.S.Coast Guard District Ketchikan, TA, that was under the 13th U.S. Naval District.

http://niehorster.orbat.com/013_usa/_41_uscg/dist_ketchikan.html

I guess this could be folded in with the exsisting air base under construction at Annette Is. but with its RL location appearing to be on the boarder of that hex, a separate port just seems right for this fairly active USCG District Base.



JWE -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/24/2009 5:59:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
Prefacing this with I know absolutely nothing about what I am doing, I plan on jamming in a Port/base #572 at 199-41 to represent the U.S.Coast Guard District Ketchikan, TA, that was under the 13th U.S. Naval District.

http://niehorster.orbat.com/013_usa/_41_uscg/dist_ketchikan.html

I guess this could be folded in with the exsisting air base under construction at Annette Is. but with its RL location appearing to be on the boarder of that hex, a separate port just seems right for this fairly active USCG District Base.

Frankly Buck, I think Andy's concern is mostly for bases that "need" to be defended or assaulted. Not sure that 'home' type bases will break or even budge the AI, so pretty sure you would be ok doing that.

If you have a serious stiffy for Ketchikan, let us know. We might could maybe do something.



Andy Mac -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/24/2009 6:08:08 PM)

Yuh its bases in the combat area that are an issue others are ok.

I can even cope with one or two in the combat area something like Tree's adding hundreds of dots in China would be a PITA though

Doing one script for modest changres is doable retrofitting all those changes to 13 different scripts is a real PITA

At present evey time I find an error I sigh not because I mind fixing one script but because having fixed one script I need to go back through them all to adjust it and doing any script 13 times is a chore.

I canot automate it because each overall AI script may use that particular script in a similar fashion

If its just bodging one AI script thats ok setting up all 13 to use it thats less ok....



Mike Solli -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/24/2009 6:26:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
At present evey time I find an error I sigh not because I mind fixing one script but because having fixed one script I need to go back through them all to adjust it and doing any script 13 times is a chore.


That's why I gave up painting miniatures. [:D]



Buck Beach -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/24/2009 6:33:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE


quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
Prefacing this with I know absolutely nothing about what I am doing, I plan on jamming in a Port/base #572 at 199-41 to represent the U.S.Coast Guard District Ketchikan, TA, that was under the 13th U.S. Naval District.

http://niehorster.orbat.com/013_usa/_41_uscg/dist_ketchikan.html

I guess this could be folded in with the exsisting air base under construction at Annette Is. but with its RL location appearing to be on the boarder of that hex, a separate port just seems right for this fairly active USCG District Base.

Frankly Buck, I think Andy's concern is mostly for bases that "need" to be defended or assaulted. Not sure that 'home' type bases will break or even budge the AI, so pretty sure you would be ok doing that.

If you have a serious stiffy for Ketchikan, let us know. We might could maybe do something.


Serious stiffy days are over for me.

Since I only play AI, and a "home" base doesn't hurt, (and since I have already created it using my old Kentucky windage approach) no real need to cram it down others throats unless it serves a purpose and is right.

I will further tweak my Ketchikan, servicing all the cutters out of there, when "Da Babes" comes out. That way I will be able utilize any new concepts of Port BF changes.

Buck




eastburn -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/25/2009 9:33:00 AM)

Since everyone that is anyone is here why you all dish us medical folks in your game[:-]  Be nice to have some hospital units to move and ships with bulleyes on them


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_Navy_Hospital_Ships



eastburn -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/25/2009 9:34:23 AM)

I meant red crosses[8|]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Comfort_(AH-6)



Don Bowen -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/25/2009 1:56:23 PM)


Several historic types of ships simply have no use in WITP/AE. Hospital ships, refrigerated food ships, water carriers, tugs, ammenities ships, probably others but my brain has not yet had it's morning coffee.



Bradley7735 -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/25/2009 8:17:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


Several historic types of ships simply have no use in WITP/AE. Hospital ships, refrigerated food ships, water carriers, tugs, ammenities ships, probably others but my brain has not yet had it's morning coffee.


Hi Don,

What about the Japanese "Hospital ships" that carried cargo instead of wounded men? [;)]

I'm referring to an account from a US sub that sank a Japanese hospital ship, realized it after the fact, and gathered a couple floating bundles of rubber as proof that they were in violation of the Geneva thingy.

(Don, I'm being sarcastic here. I'm not advocating you add any Japanese hospital ships.)

bc



eastburn -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/26/2009 1:56:53 AM)

At least an arguement could be made to add a medical Battalion which is one of the organic battalions that is part of the Infantry Division.



ckammp -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/26/2009 3:25:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hammerdamage

At least an arguement could be made to add a medical Battalion which is one of the organic battalions that is part of the Infantry Division.


The Division medical BNs are included as part of the support squads. So are the signal, MPs, admin,intel, quartermaster, ordance, maintenance, and chemical units. And the band. And the chaplain.

They are not listed separately simply because of the scale of the game.

Hope this helps.



JWE -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/26/2009 9:55:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
Sorry for the reserection of this old thread, but, it has stimulated some thinking about the subject. I understand the concept use for the Chimos and that is cool, but, have you decided how to alien the ACMs types into a more historical basis for Da Babes?

It is exactly as Don posted. I suppose it could be done, but there’s at least 27 various Coast Artillery and Coast Guard mine planters and cable ships, available for the duty by 1937. It would be a real pita to to develop all the different classes, all their movements, all the withdrawals, all the changes to types that the game does not support, etc ..

There will still be some degree of “aggregation” in Don’s babies. The USAMP and CG ships will still be “Chimo” class, for example, and the USAMP ships that were taken over by the USN will be listed by their USN names. Gotta sacrifice somewhere.
quote:

I believe the armament of the Alders is more realistic for the ACM ships of the early war period than that of the Chimo.

Army put a 37mm on the bow of the Grahams in 1936, and also the MP-1s. Navy changed it out to a Bofors on the Chimos. Since there’s a gazillion small classes in da babes, it doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense to have 3 or 4 gazillion upgrade schedules. We would literally run out of room, even with 5000 slots.
quote:

And now a non-related question, do any of the tools allow for a cross reference of ships to ship class? Example, what are all the Alder class ships in the game?

Witploadae will export all data files to cvs format. Open the ship cvs file and click on the autoformat button. Then click on the Class ID drop down menu and select 781, for the Chimos, or 788 for the Alders, and you will get a complete list.
quote:

BTW, I see where the Alder class is listed in the "in game database" but I can't locate any ships of that class in the game.

Several classes are listed in the stock database that are not populated for the stock game. The general gaming public would not appreciate the multitude of ‘ants’, and the necessary record keeping, as much as certain grogs; thus the Don’s Babies mod.



Buck Beach -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/27/2009 6:06:19 PM)

Thank you JWE



drw61 -> RE: Da Babes Mod (11/29/2009 5:05:00 PM)

Don / JWE
Just wondering if Da Babes Mod light version will be ready by the time patch 2 (final version) is available.
No pressure, just wanting to start a new game with patch 2 but not wanting to go through Dec41/Jan42 multiple times.

Thanks, Daryl



JWE -> RE: Da Babes Mod (12/1/2009 8:38:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: drw61
Don / JWE
Just wondering if Da Babes Mod light version will be ready by the time patch 2 (final version) is available.
No pressure, just wanting to start a new game with patch 2 but not wanting to go through Dec41/Jan42 multiple times.

Thanks, Daryl

No. There are quite a few changes. Have to wait. We have to understand and accommodate the code changes and the data changes before anything can be done. We have to tweak a stable data set, so we have to wait till the data set is stable.

You don't want a Babes mod that is incompatible with the base game, and neither do we. We want the Babes 'light' to be a seamless drop-in to AE stock; thus, we have to understand AE stock. Patience.



Buck Beach -> RE: Da Babes Mod (12/1/2009 9:44:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE


quote:

ORIGINAL: drw61
Don / JWE
Just wondering if Da Babes Mod light version will be ready by the time patch 2 (final version) is available.
No pressure, just wanting to start a new game with patch 2 but not wanting to go through Dec41/Jan42 multiple times.

Thanks, Daryl

No. There are quite a few changes. Have to wait. We have to understand and accommodate the code changes and the data changes before anything can be done. We have to tweak a stable data set, so we have to wait till the data set is stable.

You don't want a Babes mod that is incompatible with the base game, and neither do we. We want the Babes 'light' to be a seamless drop-in to AE stock; thus, we have to understand AE stock. Patience.



I was really encouraged with Andy Mac's offer to put together an AI routine for the Mod. Is this still in the works?



Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.859375