Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (Full Version)

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



Message

Cap Mandrake -> Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/18/2014 11:48:11 PM)

It seems the chief difference between B and C is cargo capacity of AK, AKL's. The smaller capacities in C would tend to hamper build-up for offensive operations or for resupply of partly isolated forces (like Oz for eg).

Seems to me this would handcuff the Allies a bit. Am I right?

Are the Babes changes fun, rewarding, interesting, more work?

What think you gentleman and ladies?



witpqs -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/18/2014 11:56:35 PM)

I've got a Babes C game in December 1943 as Allies. The reduced cargo capacities definitely hamper the Allies. And I love it.



wdolson -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/19/2014 12:03:14 AM)

Personally I like Babes B the best. With smaller capacity ships I think there is more micro-management because you have to use more ships to do the same transport job.

I play against the AI and I'm not really looking for a game that is going to push me against the wall (I want a bit of a challenge, but I'm not into putting myself through pain for entertainment), so I prefer the regular capacity cargo ships. It's a matter of preference though.

You go get some ships with the Babes that I don't find very useful. They end up piling up in ports, but overall I don't find that I end up with any more micromanagement and the overall OOB is more refined from stock. Sort of OOB version 2.0.

Bill



Jorge_Stanbury -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/19/2014 12:15:49 AM)

I just started DaBigBabes "B" vs Allied AI..

I would had prefered to play "C" but there are no AI scripts and therefore I cannot go solo.

And, I also understand the developers warned about Allied AI not working correctly, for several reasons, but I will take my chances; I am more a logistics gamer, so I guess I won't complain if the Allies are not performing

I will post in some weeks



dr.hal -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/19/2014 12:30:53 AM)

I'm playing C now as the allies against my honored opponent. It's great... I think there are way too many supplies for the allies and the reduction is making me think a lot more about who goes where with what.... to me it is far better than the original...



khyberbill -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/19/2014 1:41:13 AM)

quote:

The reduced cargo capacities definitely hamper the Allies. And I love it.

I am playing a game of C too and I found that after June of 42 I have no supply problems. The big Allied offensives don't really begin until the arrival of the F6F-3 and by then there is more than enough supply where ever you want. But the micro-management to do that is a bugger-but I have worked out a system that reduces the bugger diameter from 12 inches to 6 inches. The amount of supply ships the Allies get is staggering. In my last PBEM that went to 11/45 I had large amounts of xAKs and xAPs idle. I could have used some more B-29s though. Quantity of allied aircraft is a problem. In any version. I really do not know the affect of C on Japanese supply movement. With shorter supply lines it might not be as much a pain.



IdahoNYer -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/19/2014 4:26:05 AM)

I'm playing DBB C as the Allies against the AI. Despite "no scripting" the AI has been doing a fairly reasonable job expanding the Japanese Empire. I'm at the end of May '42 and have enjoyed extra realism of the reduced cargo. While I have plenty of supply and fuel to move - the reduced capacities require more ships to haul it. That in turn requires more ships in convoys resulting in increased port size needs to handle the increase in number of ships.



LoBaron -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/19/2014 6:31:56 AM)

We play a DBB-C PBEM currently, and up to now we like it.

In general I think it is much better in representing the logistical difficulties of the war due to the reduced cargo capacity compared to the other DBB versions and to stock.

There is one thing only time can tell:

While initially this mod seems to be tougher on the Allies as they need to haul large numbers of supplies over great distances, I think the strain it puts on the IJN should not be underestimated.

One of the key areas of the Japanese side is fuel, more in DBB as in stock. With the reduced transport capacity, moving around stuff costs more fuel per unit moved. The Japanese side have to be aware of this and compensate with either higher production output, lower consumption, or shorter routes.

Whether the change is critical for Japan and unbalances the game, I don´t know yet. I assume careful planning (one of our opponents streghts) should prevent early collapse.



Yaab -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/19/2014 3:25:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer

I'm playing DBB C as the Allies against the AI. Despite "no scripting" the AI has been doing a fairly reasonable job expanding the Japanese Empire. I'm at the end of May '42 and have enjoyed extra realism of the reduced cargo. While I have plenty of supply and fuel to move - the reduced capacities require more ships to haul it. That in turn requires more ships in convoys resulting in increased port size needs to handle the increase in number of ships.


Interesting. I have always stayed away from the C scenario thinking there are no AI scripts for it and played the A scenario instead.



offenseman -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/19/2014 4:31:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

We play a DBB-C PBEM currently, and up to now we like it.

Whether the change is critical for Japan and unbalances the game, I don´t know yet. I assume careful planning (one of our opponents streghts) should prevent early collapse.


There will be no collapse. [8D] and thank you for the kinds words!

The reduced cargo caps for IJ make life more interesting for sure. [:D] As important as it always was to save fuel by keeping routes clean, it is even more important in C. Like some Allied players have noted, for Japan, C seems to be more historical than other versions and better represents the severe problems moving materials and being economical in fuel usage.





Cap Mandrake -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/19/2014 5:18:20 PM)

Good comments. It seems it is a double-edged sword.



Jorge_Stanbury -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/19/2014 6:20:44 PM)

Now I am puzzled about the AI being capable to play without scripts...

What kind of behaviour should I expect if I play DB-C against the Allied AI?
would it simply wait passively for my conquest?



IdahoNYer -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/19/2014 7:03:59 PM)

Not sure about an Allied AI in DBB C, but without "scripts" the Japanese AI has done the following in my game so far:

- Usual expansion in the DEI, PI and Central Pacific.
- Taking a LONG time to take the last defenders in Java in Batavia and Sorebaja.
- Taken the Solomons and has airfield capability built up at Lunga.
- Taken Baker Is, but rebuffed at its attempt to take Canton Is - seemed to have difficulties coordinating its KB support which raided Canton about a week prior to the invasion force - which was left unprotected to the US CVs
- Conducted a CV raid (4xCVs) along the eastern Australian Coast from Townsville to Sydney hitting ports, shipping and airfields. Human player would have caused much greater havoc, but it was still a nasty surprise causing me to clear/re-route shipping. Lasted about a week.
- Failed to take Port Moresby in so far two attempts - again, trouble coordinating invasion TFs with naval support.
- Likes to send in surface TFs without adequate cover - even towards PH!
- Usual advance through Burma; currently battling to take Akyab.
- Nothing major in China (which is a good thing as I hate fighting in China)
- pretty much seems to have ignored the North Pacific

I'm playing along historical lines, not trying to "beat" the AI by doing something to really throw it off.

From playing the AI in non-Babes games, the AI seems pretty much on par - not nearly as effective as a PBEM opponent, but so far has given me a fairly good game to relearn WiTP after being away from it a while.



Jorge_Stanbury -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/19/2014 7:45:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer
From playing the AI in non-Babes games, the AI seems pretty much on par - not nearly as effective as a PBEM opponent, but so far has given me a fairly good game to relearn WiTP after being away from it a while.


I think you nailed here... I am starting to play DaBigBabes because we are not missing a lot due to AI being less capable. it is already not that great to start so the additional logistical depth offered outweights the AI poor behaviour issues

Once I decided to switch to the Allies side, I will likely do it in DB-C



Symon -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/19/2014 8:59:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer
Not sure about an Allied AI in DBB C, but without "scripts" the Japanese AI has done the following in my game so far:

All “Babes” scenarios have the Japanese OOB in its approximately appropriate slot locations so ALL “Babes”, Big, Lite, A, B, C, can be played as Allied against the Japanese AI. One can use ANY AI file written for a standard GC game (including Andy’s whacko stuff, but not his super-iron-man things).

BabesLite (scens 026 and 027) works against the AI for BOTH sides.

All one must do is simply renumber the desired AI file to the number of the Babes scenario you are using. i.e., renumber aei001-03 to aei028-03, for example. If you want a quiet China BigBabes, just use an AI file that starts with aei007, aei008, or aei009. Flexibility is a wonderful thing.

It doesn’t matter if you play with A, B, or C. That bears repeating IT DOESN’T MATTER if you play with A, B, or C. A, B, or C it just doesn't matter. IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO THE AI. IT .. JUST .. DOESN’T .. MATTER.

I hope things are a bit more clear now.



Cap Mandrake -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 12:47:28 AM)

[:D]



LoBaron -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 6:07:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Symon

quote:

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer
Not sure about an Allied AI in DBB C, but without "scripts" the Japanese AI has done the following in my game so far:

All “Babes” scenarios have the Japanese OOB in its approximately appropriate slot locations so ALL “Babes”, Big, Lite, A, B, C, can be played as Allied against the Japanese AI. One can use ANY AI file written for a standard GC game (including Andy’s whacko stuff, but not his super-iron-man things).

BabesLite (scens 026 and 027) works against the AI for BOTH sides.

All one must do is simply renumber the desired AI file to the number of the Babes scenario you are using. i.e., renumber aei001-03 to aei028-03, for example. If you want a quiet China BigBabes, just use an AI file that starts with aei007, aei008, or aei009. Flexibility is a wonderful thing.

It doesn’t matter if you play with A, B, or C. That bears repeating IT DOESN’T MATTER if you play with A, B, or C. A, B, or C it just doesn't matter. IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO THE AI. IT .. JUST .. DOESN’T .. MATTER.

I hope things are a bit more clear now.



So let me try to rephrase as your statement is kinda vague, John...basically you are trying to say it makes no difference? Is this more or less correct?



[sm=scared0018.gif]



GreyJoy -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 11:16:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

It seems the chief difference between B and C is cargo capacity of AK, AKL's. The smaller capacities in C would tend to hamper build-up for offensive operations or for resupply of partly isolated forces (like Oz for eg).

Seems to me this would handcuff the Allies a bit. Am I right?

Are the Babes changes fun, rewarding, interesting, more work?

What think you gentleman and ladies?



I've played both DBB (Ironbabes) B and C and, Japanese and Allies.
The reduced cargo isn't really a problem imho, nor it changes the balance of the overall game (imho obviously). It just makes the logistic a little bit more complicated...which is a good thing, cause, as we all know, it's way too easy, both for Japan and for the Allies, to move around supplies over the pacific (obviously provided there are enough of them)

DBB is the only way to go Cap[;)]



Barb -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 11:30:50 AM)

DBB C version for me anytime. The reduced shipping capacity reflects the logistical difficulties much better.
One can just assume that the "lost" capacity of ships is used for some necessary war-related material... like typewriter machines for binary clerks, tons of paper for clerical work, silk-stockings, sanitary towels or lipsticks for the more beautiful part of the armed forces, a drum or keg of beer/rum hidden somewhere in the hold, tons of spare parts and whatever strange stuff you can think of :D



MrKane -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 11:33:25 AM)

Actually it is problem for Empire. Reduced cargo increase cost of running convoys 1/3. That is a lot of fuel.
In my last game it was not big issue, only because my convoy system was running without escort until late '44.



pws1225 -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 11:51:31 AM)

I'm just getting started in a DDB 28C game as Japan with adsoul64. So far the reduced shipping limits don't seem too bad, but I'm wondering about the little bits and pieces of Engineer LCUs and reduced supply generated in the HI. Does that enhance "realism" enough to offset the PITA factor of having to assemble useful engineer units? So far, I'm not convinced that it does.



Symon -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 2:09:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron
So let me try to rephrase as your statement is kinda vague, John...basically you are trying to say it makes no difference? Is this more or less correct?
[sm=scared0018.gif]

[sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000289.gif]
Yeah, I guess it was a bit vague [8D]. But people keep having the same misconceptions and they get repeated often. Gotta say it just ain’t so. Here’s the sad, sad truth, the dirty low down.

1. All Babes campaign scenarios can be played as Allies against a Japanese AI. BabesLite can be played as Japanese against an Allied AI, as well.

2. All Babes “A” scenarios are designed with bases, and units at those bases, located in the correct hex locations on the Stock (Standard) Map. Requires the Stock (Standard) Map Art and the Stock Map pwhexe, pwzlink, pwzone dat files.

3. All Babes “B” scenarios are otherwise identical to “A” scenarios, but are designed with bases, and units at those bases, located in the correct hex locations on the Extended Map. There are some additional bases located at modified hex locations. Requires the Extended Map Art and the Extended Map pwhexe, pwzlink, pwzone dat files.

4. All Babes “C” scenarios are otherwise identical to “B” scenarios, but have the cargo capacities of transport and some tender vessels reduced by approximately 1/3. Requires the Extended Map Art and the Extended Map pwhexe, pwzlink, pwzone dat files.

5. All Babes scenarios (except scen030, IronBabes) have the same HI, LI, Refineries, Oil, Resources, Supply, Factories, Pools, Woof.

6. Refineries do not produce supply in any Babes scenario.

7. All Babes scenarios have compensating LI and/or daily supply to make up for the loss of supply from refineries. It is the same in all scenarios.

Hope this helps [:)]



offenseman -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 3:58:46 PM)

Perhaps I can assist in making this clear.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3S_k1dRbXY

In all seriousness John, that listing is very good in a nutshell stuff. BTW, game report on DBB-C- awesome! New Air Data, Awesome as well. Bravo to all. [&o]



LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 5:11:37 PM)

Big fan of DBB-C here - has a more "historic feel" of bottleneck / shoestring conditions. Shipping was always too scarce for the planners!

Reduced cargo capacity also reflects poor logistics management of the Empire - ships belonging to Army, Navy and Civilian pools and only shipping stuff for its own party. There was the odd spectacle of Japanese ships passing each other in opposite directions travelling in ballast because they belonged to different pools...



pws1225 -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 5:53:41 PM)

quote:

7. All Babes scenarios have compensating LI and/or daily supply to make up for the loss of supply from refineries. It is the same in all scenarios.


That makes me happier! [:)]



Blind Sniper -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 9:26:24 PM)

quote:

7. All Babes scenarios have compensating LI and/or daily supply to make up for the loss of supply from refineries. It is the same in all scenarios.


Sorry for the dumb question, but how it works exactly?



pws1225 -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 9:58:30 PM)

LI generates supply and the daily supply "gift" is an amount of supply that automatically appears in a base every day. If refineries no longer produce, say, 100 supplies per day, then either LI of the daily supply gift is increased by a corresponding amount. That's my take on Symon's post anyway.



pws1225 -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 10:03:54 PM)

quote:

But people keep having the same misconceptions and they get repeated often.


We can't help it Symon. LargeSlowTarget keeps posting and we're all too busy imagining that second "g" in this signature photo magically disappearing.



Jorge_Stanbury -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/20/2014 11:29:38 PM)

For BabesLite: do you think it possible or desirable to reduce naval and air support?
this reduces the operational tempo, forces players to aggregate assets and requires higher operational planning,

but since there are no additional types of LCUs or changes to OOBs; it can be played vs. the Allied AI


EDIT: Or a better idea... again ideas to try to play against the Allied AI.
How difficult will be to create a DaBigBabes that only changes the Japanese side's LCU/ OOBs? in other words
the Allies side keep the normal, generic engineers, naval support LCU/ OOBs while the Japanese side is restricted
to work with the advanced engineer devices created for DaBigBabes(labor sq, shipping eng, etc.). This way the Allied AI can work
properly, while a human Japanese player gets a more realistic game.

I am hoping it is as simple as maybe copying a file from BabesLite... but knowing this game it is probably not

Thanks a lot anyway



offenseman -> RE: Play balance DaBigBabes B v C (3/21/2014 12:23:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Blind Sniper

quote:

7. All Babes scenarios have compensating LI and/or daily supply to make up for the loss of supply from refineries. It is the same in all scenarios.


Sorry for the dumb question, but how it works exactly?



There is some extra daily supply that makes up for what the refineries in the Home Island produce in stock and a little extra. However the extra is not equal to what the refineries produce in stock when Japan expands to Balikpapan, Palembang, Miri,and Tarakan. So despite the extra daily supply, Japan has less supply available than in stock by a fair margin. In addition, Palembang has less refineries than stock so creates less fuel. Pretty much, that means you have to send oil Home more often than you might have in stock.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.1875