RE: Database upgrade TOE vs devices/scen 2 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Tech Support



Message

Andy Mac -> RE: Database upgrade TOE vs devices/scen 2 (10/9/2011 9:00:26 PM)

Build rate is irrelevant for Japan Japan builds what it needs

Hence the all or nothing comment



PaxMondo -> RE: Database upgrade TOE vs devices/scen 2 (10/9/2011 9:48:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Build rate is irrelevant for Japan Japan builds what it needs

Hence the all or nothing comment

Thanks for confirming for me. Gotta go re-think some stuff now. [:(]

Pretty sure some single malt will help ...

[sm=00000436.gif]



Kereguelen -> RE: Database upgrade TOE vs devices/scen 2 (10/10/2011 10:35:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

OK been investigating the Tuype 95 not upgrading looks deliberate OOB decison as almost no Type 98's or type 2's were actually built and if the upgrade path was left in all tanks would upgrade on day 1 of the game as there is no way to stop the Industry expending all the Japanese Vehicle points for the upgrade.

So this is NOT an error but looks deliberate only K can confirm.

p.s. You dont need to agree witht he logic but having looked into it I am convinced its deliberate

The typo on the Type 2 may or may not be correct again K would need to confirm.

Only the SD issue is IMO a bug


(a) Your assumptions about the Type 95 Tank (upgrade etc.) are absolutely correct. Design decisison (good guesswork, correct on all accounts).

(b) The radar upgrades were done by the Air Team (the only part of the Japanese ground OOB done by the Air Team). Probably by TimTom. Cannot comment on this.

(c) Type 2 Tank: Error (typo) carried over from stock WITP, anti-soft should probably be 14.

(d) 88mm AA Gun. Problem solved?



Andy Mac -> RE: Database upgrade TOE vs devices/scen 2 (10/10/2011 1:39:30 PM)

(a) Good ta K :)
(b) OK I think is an error as I did those :(
(c) Aye
(d) Aye



viberpol -> RE: Database upgrade TOE vs devices/scen 2 (10/10/2011 2:15:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen
(a) Your assumptions about the Type 95 Tank (upgrade etc.) are absolutely correct. Design decisison (good guesswork, correct on all accounts).


But isn't it a bit questionable decision anyway? [&:]
Please, someone enlighten me and tell me I am wrong, and there really are units using/that used or will be using Type 98 light tank?
If no unit uses it so what does it do in the database? Being an ornament only? [;)]

I think it's useful to compare real 2nd scenario PBEM march '44 numbers with some quasi-official info from Osprey's book with table of production.
What strikes me is the difference of almost non-existent in game active medium tanks (types 89/97) while IRL those were produced and used in quite good numbers (almost 1500 in first three years of war + more than a 1000 in years 1938-40!). One can argue that those are reflected by bigger number of Type 1 and/or Type 3, but those IMHO are just a song of the future and are produced from '44 onwards, so they reflect actually the potential of "better that IRL" Japan strategy & play (remember PBEM real data comes from "steroided" 2nd scenario).

And then again... should we really ignore type 98 light tanks? Yeah...let's ignore 5 - 10% of Japanese light tanks... [8|]
The Type 98/2 were produced in bigger numbers (according to different sources between 100 and 200) than say tankettes type 97 (IRL 58, PBEM 300 active in different LCUs).

I am not saying that all the Type 98 tanks should upgrade with Type 98,
but maybe at least some armored regiments should upgrade it's TOE and use more 98/ or 97 mediums instead of Type 95?
That's IMHO a good countermeasure (because TOE upgrade gives us more opportunities than simple device upgrade on availability date) so that it wouldn't be Andy's "all or nothing" thoughts. [;)]


[image]local://upfiles/18529/2281FF8DA7AC41A5BB89BF068F7261C7.jpg[/image]



Andy Mac -> RE: Database upgrade TOE vs devices/scen 2 (10/10/2011 3:26:37 PM)

Some units late war arrive equipped with the type2/98



Kereguelen -> RE: Database upgrade TOE vs devices/scen 2 (10/10/2011 5:48:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen
(a) Your assumptions about the Type 95 Tank (upgrade etc.) are absolutely correct. Design decisison (good guesswork, correct on all accounts).


But isn't it a bit questionable decision anyway? [&:]


You are perfectly free to question the decision.

quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol
Please, someone enlighten me and tell me I am wrong, and there really are units using/that used or will be using Type 98 light tank?
If no unit uses it so what does it do in the database? Being an ornament only? [;)]


I could not find any Japanese tank unit that used them operationally. And this is the reason why no unit uses them in the game.


quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol
I think it's useful to compare real 2nd scenario PBEM march '44 numbers with some quasi-official info from Osprey's book with table of production.


Better refer to scenario 1...


quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol
What strikes me is the difference of almost non-existent in game active medium tanks (types 89/97) while IRL those were produced and used in quite good numbers (almost 1500 in first three years of war + more than a 1000 in years 1938-40!). One can argue that those are reflected by bigger number of Type 1 and/or Type 3, but those IMHO are just a song of the future and are produced from '44 onwards, so they reflect actually the potential of "better that IRL" Japan strategy & play (remember PBEM real data comes from "steroided" 2nd scenario).


There are some Type 89 and Type 97 tanks available at start. But the IJA Type 89 was already regarded as obsolete by the IJA in December 1941 and phased out in 1942 (slow, underarmed, undergunned 1920's design infantry support tank).

quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol
And then again... should we really ignore type 98 light tanks? Yeah...let's ignore 5 - 10% of Japanese light tanks... [8|]
The Type 98/2 were produced in bigger numbers (according to different sources between 100 and 200) than say tankettes type 97 (IRL 58, PBEM 300 active in different LCUs).


The Type 97 Tankette had been in production since 1938. Total prodcution was more than 550.

quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpolI am not saying that all the Type 98 tanks should upgrade with Type 98,
but maybe at least some armored regiments should upgrade it's TOE and use more 98/ or 97 mediums instead of Type 95?
That's IMHO a good countermeasure (because TOE upgrade gives us more opportunities than simple device upgrade on availability date) so that it wouldn't be Andy's "all or nothing" thoughts. [;)]


Could be done in a mod by various means but hardly warrants a change of the official scenarios.




viberpol -> RE: Database upgrade TOE vs devices/scen 2 (10/11/2011 9:56:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
the SD issue is IMO a bug

(b) The radar upgrades were done by the Air Team (the only part of the Japanese ground OOB done by the Air Team). Probably by TimTom. Cannot comment on this.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
(b) OK I think is an error as I did those :(


OK, is this an official "stamp" to introduce a fix in the next patch? [;)]



inqistor -> RE: Database upgrade TOE vs devices/scen 2 (10/16/2011 9:37:07 PM)

Not that I know anything about excellent "paper" Japanese tanks, but looking at TAKIs site:

Type 4 simply exchanges new turret on old chassis. It seems actually possible, that conversion could be made in field (or quickly in factory, like T-34), so historical production numbers could not said whole truth.

I also discovered something weird with Soft Attack tank statistics. They seem to not be dependent of tanks real armament. Some examples:
777 Type 94 Tankette - Soft Attack 12, tank was armed with only 1 MG
778 Type 95 Light Tank - Soft Attack 13, but it was armed with 37mm gun, and 2 MGs, so obviously should have more than TWICE attack of Type 94
779 Type 98 Light Tank - Soft Attack 14, and it was armed with 37mm gun, and 1 MG. Obviously it should be better, than Type 94, but worse than Type 95.

Something really weird here...



viberpol -> RE: Database upgrade TOE vs devices/scen 2 (11/6/2011 5:27:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen
(b) The radar upgrades were done by the Air Team (the only part of the Japanese ground OOB done by the Air Team). Probably by TimTom. Cannot comment on this.
(c) Type 2 Tank: Error (typo) carried over from stock WITP, anti-soft should probably be 14.
(d) 88mm AA Gun. Problem solved?



quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
(b) OK I think is an error as I did those :(
(c) Aye
(d) Aye


I confirm the beta fixed those 75 --> 88 mm AA guns. [&o]
How far we're from sound device --> radar fix? [:)]



Andy Mac -> RE: Database upgrade TOE vs devices/scen 2 (11/6/2011 5:54:51 PM)

There is no offical data update patch what I am working on is an unnofficial data upgrade patch which whll be optional for players but will use the TOE upgrade functionality I am awaiting answers on a few issues before I proceed further



viberpol -> RE: Database upgrade TOE vs devices/scen 2 (1/14/2012 12:55:21 PM)

BUMP.

Andy... are there any conclusions concerning this data upgrade?



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.75