RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (Full Version)

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



Message

JuanG -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (5/28/2010 5:54:01 AM)

Sounds fine to me.

Yes, I can swap out the Chinese LCU's for the stock ones, if that is what youve decided to do. I did not change to the new artwork for the new Shokaku's yet, so I will do that aswell. Just have to remember to include the new artwork.



FatR -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (5/28/2010 9:10:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
5. A6M2 to A6M5 from Sen Baku Upgrade Path (FatR may already have done this)

Yes. As about Oscars, I'd prefer to leave all planes already on-map and in pool at the beginning as Ib model, with Ic in production. Also, should I change the engine for Ki-43-IV model?









John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (5/28/2010 5:53:56 PM)

Everything sounds GREAT!

FatR--Do as you note. Everything regarding the Oscars sounds solid to me.

Red Lancer--Run with what needs to be done once FatR sends it to you. Send to Juan when done.

Juan--I will send a comprehensive list of what needs to be done so you have a Check List.

I'll take it at the end and add the things that are listed at the bottom of last page.

Could everyone please post here when they have completed their section and sent it to the next person? This will help a bunch.

Any ideas you have as you work on this, just Post here and we can talk about it.



bklooste -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (5/29/2010 9:22:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tone

More on China - The problem with such massive TOE fill out of Chinese GU is not combat power - because that will die soon enough when the supply is gone. The problem is disabled AV - devices - engineers - support that will draw on supply trying to repair - for the rest of the game. The result will be no supply in China - not even to move a unit from A to B. This games logistic system is complex - even with a small squad upgrade there would have been problem - but this up grade is massive.

Thank you Yoshi.


I dont think this can be fixed without a restart .. not sure.

TOE is the same its the fill out that is changed .
Dont think so .. If you suicide units they come back at 30% you just need to do a better job at attacking.. Its kind of bad though ...

1) CHina launches a MASSIVE suicide attack and looses half her units after that supply is like historic - v bad for Japan .
2) China is passive and runs out of supply . v bad for China

Take your pick...



FatR -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (5/30/2010 10:40:06 AM)

I've sent the scenario file to you, John. Besides the changes already mentioned, deliveries of LaGG-3 and Yak-7 to Soviets are starting much earlier, compensated by lower replacement rate, so that VVS won't, at least, be totally without fighter replacements throughout 1943. Also, normal bombload on Ki-43s from IIa to IIIa is reduced to 1x250kg. While theoretically they could haul two, in RL it was always one bomb and a fuel tank, and besides, the same bombload as on fighters with much more powerful engines looks strange.



John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (5/30/2010 3:11:17 PM)

FatR--Was there anything else you noticed as you did your work?

I've got your earlier Posting of changes made for Version One. Could you do a Posting here of you changes/additions for Version Two and I will merge them together? Thanks--as always--for the work.

You have a campaign going right now Stan what do you think of China? Are you looking at a restart?

Red Lancer--When you are done let us know and then send on to Juan for his work.




John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (5/30/2010 3:38:53 PM)

The file has been sent forward to Red Lancer.



FatR -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (5/30/2010 8:37:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

FatR--Was there anything else you noticed as you did your work?

I've got your earlier Posting of changes made for Version One. Could you do a Posting here of you changes/additions for Version Two and I will merge them together? Thanks--as always--for the work.

You have a campaign going right now Stan what do you think of China? Are you looking at a restart?

No. Actually, stronger China made our game more interesting, this far. I'm actually forced to rack my brains seeking the way to victory, instead of just gathering 8-9 divisions and steamrolling everything in the way.







RedLancer -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (5/31/2010 9:14:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
The file has been sent forward to Red Lancer.



I've got the files OK - however I have n't been following the thread too closely - what do you want / expect me to do?



FatR -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (5/31/2010 1:04:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer
I've got the files OK - however I have n't been following the thread too closely - what do you want / expect me to do?

To check if planesides/tops for A6M3b, A6M8-S and A6M8-J in Scen 70, and A6M3a, A6M5b-S and A6M5c in stock display properly, and make necessary corrections if they don't.



RedLancer -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (5/31/2010 1:05:55 PM)

Got it - thanks



bklooste -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (5/31/2010 3:17:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR


I think by 1944 the starting size of Chinese forces will matter little. They'll die out in combat or from hunger. And the reinforcement rate is still the same, so you can waste a half-year worth of infantry in a singe battle. I support JuanG's suggestion that the better way to make Chinese more survivable initially (before their defeat in 1944 there was much fighting, that attrited Chinese forces) is to boost their experience somewhat.



Im not aware of much attrition over 42-44. In 41 just before PH there was the 2nd battle of Changsha and you have the massive battles in 37-38 but durring the war itself it was pretty passive . You have the communist 100 reg offensive and then Ichi Go. After the Japanese got kicked at Changsha with some massive losses they just decided CHina wasnt worth it till the bombers were based there.



John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/2/2010 4:35:56 AM)

Red Lancer--Have you gotten everything and when do you think you'll have the files done?

Juan--I am working on your list. Thought I'd make it specific so you can simply check stuff off as you go. Should be too bad to do I hope. Am working on my own list right now.



bklooste -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/3/2010 8:29:33 AM)

Suggestion ,

One of my per peeves is the Yamato and Musashi dates . Not for the dates themselves but for the fact you have 2 VERY expensive ships sucking HI longer than historical. If you add it up 200*3* 180 days is 110K HI per ship ( prob more as historically they were accelerated) . In addition if the Yamato were needed in Dec or Jan 41 they would have been used despite the 18" guns being less accurate than expected.

suggestions
i) Add 150K HI to the pool.
ii) Start the ships with some damage on the historical commision dates , the repair yard simulates the fixes that were made.
iii) Add devices with lower accuracy and upgrade them in a refit. Ships start on historical dates.

Ben



RedLancer -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/3/2010 10:16:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Red Lancer--Have you gotten everything and when do you think you'll have the files done?


All done and sent to you and juan by e-mail.



John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/3/2010 2:44:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bklooste

Suggestion ,

One of my per peeves is the Yamato and Musashi dates . Not for the dates themselves but for the fact you have 2 VERY expensive ships sucking HI longer than historical. If you add it up 200*3* 180 days is 110K HI per ship ( prob more as historically they were accelerated) . In addition if the Yamato were needed in Dec or Jan 41 they would have been used despite the 18" guns being less accurate than expected.

suggestions
i) Add 150K HI to the pool.
ii) Start the ships with some damage on the historical commision dates , the repair yard simulates the fixes that were made.
iii) Add devices with lower accuracy and upgrade them in a refit. Ships start on historical dates.

Ben



BK--My knowledge base here is pretty thin. Let me ask some simple questions:

1. What were the actual dates for commissioning?
2. What were the problems that AE/WitP tries to 'fix' by the later dates?

The Refit idea wouldn't be too rough to do in the game. Are you serious about 150,000 HI?! Wow.

Can anyone else sound off here?



John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/3/2010 2:46:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Red Lancer--Have you gotten everything and when do you think you'll have the files done?


All done and sent to you and juan by e-mail.


Already emailed and thanked you but thought I should do it on the Forum as well. Got all the files and am looking forward to seeing the changes.

THANKS!
[sm=00000436.gif]



John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/3/2010 3:02:06 PM)

As written earlier, Juan likes to work off of checklists (so do I) so here is the list of Juan's 'to do' for Version Two:

1. Art Work for ships:
a. Agano-Class uses the 4x2 arrangement in this Mod and you said that the Ayase CL (0484 or 0504) might be appropriate.
b. Shokaku-Kai could use the art work you have used in your Mods

(Should note that you might have done one or the other here earlier but am not sure)

2. Old US BB Upgrades as described (Basic, AA, and Complete Rebuild).

3. Allow for conversion to Sangamon CVE Class the following AOs: Neosho, Sabine, Kaskaskia, and Platte. Make this available on April 1, 1942 with the Conversion taking somewhere between 6-8 months. Should Air Groups be tasked with these ships? If so, they need to be added too...

4. Delete the USS Denver and Santa Fe from the American OOB and replace them with two Independence-Class CVL named Chateau Thierry and Brandywine. Go with the following arrival dates:

Independence 3-43 instead of 6-43
Princeton 4-43 instead of 7-43
Brandywine 6-43 (new ship that will need an Air Group)
Chateau Thierry 7-43 (new ship that will need an Air Group)

Leave remaining Independence-Class with normal dates.

5. Import and original China LCUs and replace the borked ones in Version One.


Questions? Comments?

I printed off the full five pages of this Thread and went through everything. I think this is everything that needs to be done by you. We are not in any form of hurry here so whenever you get to it just let me know. Thanks!

Time to add my 'To Do' list in the next Posting.



John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/3/2010 3:14:24 PM)

My 'To Do' List once the files return to me:

1. Nisshin Air Group (my game STILL does not show it arriving with the aircraft).

2. Fix the lack of fuel on the DDs at Etorofu and Babeldoap.

3. Fix LCU prep targets for units moved to Ominato, Truk, and the Marshalls.

4. Move 41st AA Regiment from Chungking (Strange!) to Shanghai.

5. Fix IJN SS TF Move Bonus to allow about 40% of IJN subs to be able to be deployed as the Japanese player sees fit.

6. Replace Admiral Yamamoto with Ugaki to reflect him being Navy Minister.

7. CL Tenryu 7-44 Upgrade to leave 10/65 AA Guns instead of switching back to 12.7.

8. Create a TF carrying an Aussie Brigade and support unit somewhere between Noumea and PM. Consolidate the ANZAC Cruiser Force to be escorting this Transport group.

9. Create a Fighter, Dive Bomber, and Torpedo Bomber set of Training Squadrons on the West Coast that start with just a few planes, can expand, and are perminently restricted.

10. Check engine balance for the beginning of the war to reflect the increased aircraft production of the Mod.


That is my list. Questions? Comments?

Think this renewed Mod will fix a bunch of problems we have found (most notably China) but also add the American response to the increased Japanese Fleet's power being demonstrated in early-to-mid 1942. The changes along with response should make the Mod a bit more enticing for BOTH sides to want to play it.




[image]local://upfiles/18041/9C7467507B06457993867E711D01B46F.jpg[/image]



bklooste -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/4/2010 10:47:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


quote:

ORIGINAL: bklooste

Suggestion ,

One of my per peeves is the Yamato and Musashi dates . Not for the dates themselves but for the fact you have 2 VERY expensive ships sucking HI longer than historical. If you add it up 200*3* 180 days is 110K HI per ship ( prob more as historically they were accelerated) . In addition if the Yamato were needed in Dec or Jan 41 they would have been used despite the 18" guns being less accurate than expected.

suggestions
i) Add 150K HI to the pool.
ii) Start the ships with some damage on the historical commision dates , the repair yard simulates the fixes that were made.
iii) Add devices with lower accuracy and upgrade them in a refit. Ships start on historical dates.

Ben



BK--My knowledge base here is pretty thin. Let me ask some simple questions:

1. What were the actual dates for commissioning?
2. What were the problems that AE/WitP tries to 'fix' by the later dates?

The Refit idea wouldn't be too rough to do in the game. Are you serious about 150,000 HI?! Wow.

Can anyone else sound off here?



Yamato trials started August 41 she was comissioned 16th December 41 after completing her aceptance trials , here gunnery werent great and there were some issues so with the US fleet at the bottom they put here in the yard for about 4 weeks in February ( mem scratchy) she then had a lot more trials and practice. The gunnery was finally satisfactory at the date she is in the game.

She shows up in the game 5.25 months later. You could deduct the 6 extra weeks at Kure.


here is her TROM

12 August 1941:
Departs Kure for trials.

5 September 1941:
Kure. Battleship No. 1 is fitting-out. Captain (later Vice Admiral) Miyazato Shutoku (former CO of NAKA) is posted as her Chief Equipping Officer.

15 October 1941:
Captain Miyazato is promoted Rear Admiral.

1 November 1941:
Kure. Captain (later Vice Admiral) Takayanagi Gihachi (former CO of ISE) is posted as Battleship No. 1's Chief Equipping Officer. Rear Admiral Miyazato is reassigned as Chief of Personnel for Kure Naval District.

8 December 1941: The Attack on Pearl Harbor:
Kure. At the opening of hostilities, Battleship No. 1 is still fitting-out.


16 December 1941:
Battleship No. 1 is completed and registered (commissioned) as the YAMATO in the Kure Naval District. Captain Takayanagi is the Commanding Officer.

YAMATO is assigned to the Combined Fleet's BatDiv 1 with NAGATO and MUTSU at Hashirajima.

21 December 1941:
Departs Kure. Arrives at Hiroshima Bay, Inland Sea. Anchors W of NAGATO at Hashirajima.

21 December 1941-10 February 1942:
Inland Sea. Final fitting-out. Deficiencies found are corrected at Kure. YAMATO's initial AA suite is twelve 127-mm guns (6x2), twenty-four 25-mm guns (8x3 enclosed mounts) and four 13.2-mm machine guns (2x2).

12 February 1942:
Departs Kure. Arrives at Hashirajima. The flag of the Combined Fleet's Commander-in-Chief Admiral (Fleet Admiral, posthumously) Yamamoto Isoroku (former CO of AKAGI) is transferred from NAGATO to YAMATO.

19 February 1942:
BatDiv 1 departs Hashirajima for training in the Iyo Nada. Returns later that day.

20-23 February 1942:
The Chief of Staff of the Combined Fleet, Rear Admiral (later Vice Admiral) Ugaki Matome (former CO of HYUGA), conducts a series of war games aboard YAMATO to test plans for the second-stage operations.

The Chief of the Naval General Staff's 1st Bureau (Plans and Operations) Rear Admiral (later Vice Admiral) Fukudome Shigeru (former CO of NAGATO) and the NGS's Captain (later Rear Admiral), the Baron, Tomioka Sadatoshi attend the war games. An invasion of British Ceylon in the Indian Ocean is war-gamed unsuccessfully.

ComCarDiv 2 Rear Admiral (Vice Admiral, posthumously) Yamaguchi Tamon (former CO of ISUZU) distributes copies of his plan for a new offensive against Hawaii beginning in early 1943. Cdr (later Captain) Prince Takamatsu Nobuhito (brother of Emperor Hirohito (Showa) and Major Prince Tsunenori Takeda arrive aboard YAMATO to observe the table tap maneuvers.

9 March 1942:
Admiral Yamamoto issues orders to the fleet to prepare for Operation "C", a raid into the Indian Ocean.

30 March 1942:
Inland Sea. Admiral Yamamoto observes while Captain Takayanagi conducts more armament trials at a range of 23 miles. They are judged a failure. Both Takayanagi and his gunnery officer are upbraided because YAMATO's gun aimers manning the main rangefinder misread the horizontal settings.

March 1942:
Inland Sea. Training and gunnery practice.

11 April 1942:
Fleet Admiral Prince Fushimi Hiroyasu, former Chief, Naval General Staff, pays a call on YAMATO.

April 1942:
Captain (later Vice Admiral) Arima Kaoru (former CO of HIEI), the Chief Equipping Officer of YAMATO's sister-ship MUSASHI, pays an orientation visit with members of MUSASHI's fitting-out crew.

April-May 1942:
Inland Sea. Training and gunnery practice.

1 May 1942:
Captain Takayanagi is promoted Rear Admiral.

Early May 1942:
Admiral Yamamoto conducts war games aboard YAMATO to test plans for the Invasion of Midway.

19 May 1942:
Departs Kure for battle training. The new light carrier JUNYO, under Captain (Vice Admiral, posthumously) Ishii Shizue (former CO of KASUGA MARU), almost sidewipes YAMATO.

23 May 1942:
Returns to Hashirajima.

27 May 1942:
YAMATO is deemed operational.







John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/4/2010 2:49:57 PM)

I like taking the extra time off to bring the BB in earlier makes some sense.

What about Musashi and her dates?




bklooste -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/4/2010 3:39:32 PM)

Prob best is to have her with lower experience and a 18" device with less accuracy , fewer AA guns , and start with 10 sys and 5 eng damage.  A refit in Jan gives these upgrades anyway its quite obvious that she was ready for action in case of a major fleet action  after PH .


For Musashi ...

5 August 1942:
Battleship No. 2 is completed and named Musashi She is registered in the Yokosuka Naval District three months late because of the requirement to be fitted as a flagship with additional communications gear. Captain Arima is assigned as the Commanding Officer. She is moved from Nagasaki to Kure for fitting-out.
MUSASHI is assigned to the Combined Fleet's BatDiv 1 with YAMATO, NAGATO and MUTSU.
10 August 1942:
MUSASHI arrives at Hashirajima where she carries out additional tests, such as full speed trials and maneuvering in the Iyo Nada, mooring and aircraft launch drills.
3-28 September 1942:
Final fitting-out at Kure. MUSASHI’s initial AA suite is twelve 127-mm guns (6X2), twenty-four 25-mm guns (8x3) and four 13.2-mm machine guns (2X2). Twelve additional 25-mm guns (4X3) and a Type 21 radar are installed during this period.
28 September 1942:
Returns to Hashirajima for trials.
October-November 1942:
Training, gunnery practice in the western Inland Sea.
1 November 1942:
Captain Arima is promoted to Rear Admiral.
December 1942:
Western Inland Sea. Conducts air training exercises with carrier ZUIKAKU.
18 January 1943:
Departs Kure.
22 January 1943:
Arrives at Truk.



John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/5/2010 12:16:10 AM)

Thanks BK. I will seriously look at the ships, dates, and upgrades. Might be a nice thing to work on.



bklooste -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/5/2010 3:55:14 AM)

hehe looks like somone was not happy she wouldnt be ready when the war started ...Reminds me of K19.


1 November 1941:
Kure. Captain (later Vice Admiral) Takayanagi Gihachi (former CO of ISE) is posted as Battleship No. 1's Chief Equipping Officer. Rear Admiral Miyazato is reassigned as Chief of Personnel for Kure Naval District.



FatR -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/5/2010 2:10:33 PM)

I see nothing wrong with your lists, John. As about giving Yamato and Musashi earlier, remember, that Japanese production is specifically balanced to take in the account them arriving on the dates they arrive in stock.



bklooste -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/5/2010 3:05:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR

I see nothing wrong with your lists, John. As about giving Yamato and Musashi earlier, remember, that Japanese production is specifically balanced to take in the account them arriving on the dates they arrive in stock.


Thats the dev line , somehow i never found this line convincing :-) .... If its not Yamato it would be another ship being built... And they were ... Shinano was built but the players dont really have that option and just turn it off.. With the so called balance you cant build Yamato , Musashi and Shinano at the accelerated rates but that was because Yamato wasnt being built...IMHO Yamato , Musashi and Shinano were accelerated for 50% of their production historically since these ships were delivered in 4 years this isnt counted either , if you look at AE non acc rates Shinano should have started in 38 but she was laid down in 40 .

We do need to prob redo the sums as what can be built but i dont think AE stock is correct. Prob if you do the historical AE build and accelerate one of ships say Musashi to rep Shinano you should have about 0 nav points left.

Note the counter argument is you are getting free credit for the Musashi and Shinano since it was being accelerated for half of its production however in a mod or a player which doesnt build Shinano you are loosing that capacity.



FatR -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/5/2010 5:44:48 PM)

EDIT: Never mind this post, my worries probably were misguided.



John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/6/2010 2:28:03 AM)

Hi guys.

I don't think I'll move them up very much but I do think, perhaps, 4-6 weeks might be fairly realistic. I went through the editor and think it just might be easier to advance the date some (save the HI) and use that for a new deployment time.

This should be an improvement that doesn't have a huge impact on things.



Tone -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/6/2010 3:31:22 AM)

Hello - In my game against JonReb - with heavy Chinese army group size of attacks - I have been loss big number of infantry squads - when will Japanese economy produce replacement squads please - thank you tone.



bklooste -> RE: Reluctant Admiral Feedback (6/6/2010 4:03:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Hi guys.

I don't think I'll move them up very much but I do think, perhaps, 4-6 weeks might be fairly realistic. I went through the editor and think it just might be easier to advance the date some (save the HI) and use that for a new deployment time.

This should be an improvement that doesn't have a huge impact on things.



If you move it up 12th of Feb is a good day since she was Flagship if the fleet then.



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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.033203