RE: Between the Storms (Full Version)

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



Message

John 3rd -> RE: Between the Storms (6/23/2014 4:12:44 AM)

We were talking about Sea Gladiators for the HMAS CLV Melbourne. Does anyone have a Mod with them in use?



John 3rd -> RE: Between the Storms (6/23/2014 4:30:15 AM)

Here is a first crack at the G.6 Japanese CLV:



[image]local://upfiles/18041/1373D7D32C254F1C945ECEB05C0E33C8.jpg[/image]



wdolson -> RE: Between the Storms (6/23/2014 10:54:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

True, she does suck up some TTs and bombs that would prob screw up the Dec 7 results.


You could delay the Pennsylvania, but put the Utah back in.

Bill



John 3rd -> RE: Between the Storms (6/23/2014 1:08:21 PM)

That is a good thought as well.

Back to work on the G.6. If it carries 38 planes then what should the mix be? Figure two elevators for the shortened deck. Should we go 21 Zero and 18 Kate? 24 Z and 15 K? 27 Z and 12 K? or a balanced Air Group of 15 Z, 12 V, and 12 K?



ny59giants -> RE: Between the Storms (6/23/2014 1:16:08 PM)

It should be similar to Allied types. If the Allies cannot carry torpedoes, neither should G6. If you go with torpedoes, then the number of Kates should be two full strikes worth, IMO. Make sure they have enough torpedo carts. [;)]



Kitakami -> RE: Between the Storms (6/23/2014 1:22:45 PM)

I think it should somehow be a mix that shows why the future CVLs had the load they had. With that in mind, I see arguments for any and all of the above. But if we consider the loadout of G.6 a learning step, then I'd vote for either 27 Zeroes and 12 Kates, or the balanced air group of 15 Zeroes, 12 Vals, and 12 Kates, although I favor the first.



ny59giants -> RE: Between the Storms (6/23/2014 1:28:24 PM)

If you continue with the concept of 2 CV and a CVL, then the 27 Zero and 12 Kates goes with her role being TF CAP provider and possible ASW platform. Another possibility would be 27 Zero, 9 Kates, and 3 recon.



JuanG -> RE: Between the Storms (6/23/2014 1:57:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

It should be similar to Allied types. If the Allies cannot carry torpedoes, neither should G6. If you go with torpedoes, then the number of Kates should be two full strikes worth, IMO. Make sure they have enough torpedo carts. [;)]


I would say 27 Zeros and 12 Kates, with 24 torpedoes would be fair. I don't think they need to parallel the Allied CVLs directly, especially considering how much more powerful the SBD's are compared to the IJN DB's. Not to mention all those CVE's the allies get from late '42 onwards come with 24 torpedoes too.



John 3rd -> RE: Between the Storms (6/23/2014 2:25:29 PM)

My 'gut' feeling leans in the direction of the F--TB Group with then adding the Vals once the conversion occurs. The SBDs reflect the American use of them as Scouts as well as their favored 'delivery' package. The Kates fit the same role within Japan. Though I do have to say that Kitakami's point carries some serious weight with it being an intermediate design. Shouldn't it then have an intermediate air group? Keep tossing out ideas team!

I've been busy. Here comes a HOSTE of screenshots...



John 3rd -> G.6 Conversion (6/23/2014 2:28:48 PM)

Here is the G.6 Conversion. The ship still reflects her Mogami 'roots' but makes a jump in the Soryu's direction. Not quite Soryu's Air Group but still substantial.


[image]local://upfiles/18041/B8B30CFB731949829F8CF3C9D51020BA.jpg[/image]



John 3rd -> HMS Vindictive (6/23/2014 2:34:01 PM)

The British didn't believe in the CLV Hybrid idea so their design reflects that. Decided to make the Exeter-Class THREE ships with Exeter and then two CAV's being built as allowed by the London Treaty. Time period is much more right for their building so this made sense to me. The Brits see them more as AMC Killers so they keep the 8" guns and Torps while flying a modest air group:



[image]local://upfiles/18041/7DD7770CF5D9467FAB5E8BF040D0333C.jpg[/image]



John 3rd -> HMAS Melbourne (6/23/2014 2:36:05 PM)

..and here is their conversion creating a fairly useful CVL...


[image]local://upfiles/18041/D904CD8AD3554EA785B9CDDC4CD8157E.jpg[/image]



John 3rd -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/23/2014 2:38:12 PM)

Query: The Vindictive is British and the Melbourne Australian. Does this mean I need to create them as TWO sets of classes? I need a Brit Class and then an Aussie Class or can I just click the class slot and make the ship Aussie?



John 3rd -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/23/2014 2:38:49 PM)

That is it for the moment. I'll sit and await commentary!



oldman45 -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/23/2014 3:03:58 PM)

Take a look at the turret armor values on the Vindictive.

I don't think you can convert from one country to another. This was brought up years ago over the AKV conversions from merchants.




ny59giants -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/23/2014 3:26:58 PM)

quote:

My 'gut' feeling leans in the direction of the F--TB Group with then adding the Vals once the conversion occurs. The SBDs reflect the American use of them as Scouts as well as their favored 'delivery' package. The Kates fit the same role within Japan. Though I do have to say that Kitakami's point carries some serious weight with it being an intermediate design. Shouldn't it then have an intermediate air group? Keep tossing out ideas team!


Would it make sense to shrink the strike aircraft (DB/TB) number by 3 to allow that 3rd group be a recon type aircraft?? These would be for both sides.



John 3rd -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/23/2014 3:29:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Take a look at the turret armor values on the Vindictive.

I don't think you can convert from one country to another. This was brought up years ago over the AKV conversions from merchants.




Good catch. Will fix.

Yaaaaa...I thought I might need to do the Exeter CAV as TWO nationalities...



John 3rd -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/23/2014 3:49:00 PM)

Thinking on the Brit/Aussie CAVs, perhaps they could start with Buffaloes instead of Sea Gladiators?



John 3rd -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/23/2014 4:11:57 PM)

Just sent a query off to Juan regarding his ship art for Amagi and Constitution. Have gotten some art but thought I'd make an art work request for anyone who might like to take crack at some of these models.



ny59giants -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/23/2014 4:12:18 PM)

The British Buff wasn't carrier capable.



oldman45 -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/23/2014 4:23:32 PM)

Besides, the Gladiators would look good in the game!



John 3rd -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/23/2014 4:56:01 PM)

Agreed but we need to model them. REPEAT: Has anyone used them in a Mod and may we see your version of them?



John 3rd -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/23/2014 10:21:55 PM)

SuluSea---are you out there? We have need of your SKILLS!



wdolson -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/23/2014 11:04:48 PM)

The Sea Gladiator was included in stock in the original WitP. Many pointed out that it was never used in the Pacific, so it got removed in AE. You could look up the specs in WitP and compare with the specs for aircraft that are in both games. You could then tweak the values to be inline with AE. It would be a start.

Bill



oldman45 -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/24/2014 1:22:33 AM)

Thanks, I want to put the Gladiator in my game and was just winging the stats, I forgot they were in WitP.



DOCUP -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/24/2014 1:41:57 AM)

What about Lend Lease CV AC for the Ozzies?



ny59giants -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/24/2014 8:12:32 AM)

Maybe a 12 plane British fighter training group in the UK coming on Jan 42. That actually means 36 pilots, but as my PBEM game in April 44 shows, the British fighter pilot pool has very few trained pilots.



John 3rd -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/24/2014 1:50:50 PM)

Red Lancer is back on board to do any new aircraft art. That is a GREAT development.

I'm all for putting the Sea Gladiator in but we can always shift to the Lend-Lease concept without issue. America sends a shipment of 25-50 former USN Buffalos over to Australia just before the war breaks out so the Aussies start with a full Squadron and pool to handle early losses. Makes some sense.

Michael and John are writing back-and-forth working on RA presently and they appear to be doing great work,

I have about an hour before work so we hope get all the new ship's names in place and begin the location discussion.



John 3rd -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/24/2014 1:51:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Maybe a 12 plane British fighter training group in the UK coming on Jan 42. That actually means 36 pilots, but as my PBEM game in April 44 shows, the British fighter pilot pool has very few trained pilots.


Sounds Good to me.



John 3rd -> RE: HMAS Melbourne (6/24/2014 1:52:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Thanks, I want to put the Gladiator in my game and was just winging the stats, I forgot they were in WitP.



Do you still have WITP? If so could you Post a screenshot of these planes here and I'll copy it into AE.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.625