Mod Update (Full Version)

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



Message

Big B -> Mod Update (12/3/2015 11:35:57 PM)

Mod Update

There are now two different variants of scenarios available.
One set of scenarios (Dec 8th or Dec 7th, scen188 & scen189 respectively) has all stock political points and unit restrictions, so it will play with the same restrictions as stock.

The other set (scen193, scen197, scen198, & scen199) feature more political points - and also - all maneuver units formerly in permanently restricted commands are now in restricted commands that can be changed (with exceptions), so they may be bought out with political points.... of course this applies equally to both sides.
Other minor updates made.

For details click HERE, Read the Me file (includes change log).

B

Edit: forgot to supply the link [sm=crazy.gif]

By the way - if anyone has any questions - please ask here, I will be happy to answer or explain anything...I like to keep it all transparent.



btd64 -> RE: Mod Update (12/5/2015 3:48:48 PM)

Had a "Senior" moment right. It's ok, I have them all the time. Keeps my wife on her toes.[:D] [:D][sm=00000002.gif]....GP

edit; I have a couple of your mods already. I'll take a look later today.



sanderz -> RE: Mod Update (12/21/2015 9:19:53 PM)

hi

am having a look at your mod and have a couple of questions - i've been looking at your change log and comparing to what gets loaded in order to check i have installed it properly - most things seem to be there but (in SCEN 199) i can't see :-

1) the Sonia as a dive bomber (editor still set to level bomber?)
2) or how the Vals use SAP (editor says GP but not sure how naval only attacks are dealt with)

if i'm missing something please could you give me some pointers on what i might have messed up in the install

many thanks




Big B -> RE: Mod Update (12/21/2015 9:46:49 PM)

Hi,
I just did an aircraft refresh over the weekend, and those two changes got left out. [sm=character0085.gif]
Thanks for the catch - I'll have that amended and back on the site by tomorrow .

B



Big B -> RE: Mod Update (12/21/2015 11:44:09 PM)

Ok, I got it fixed, and it's back up and ready to download.

First I had to find the problem, figure out what I did before (easy peasy), then fix all seven scenarios, compile it and re-upload it all.

The reason this came up was because I changed what I had done for air-to-air combat. After a lot of playing and seeing results, which led to further testing and testing some more, I decided to go back to the stock base air-to-air stats, mainly because they gave Jap fighters the best chance of survival - no matter how much I thought the numbers were off.

I remembered long conversations with JWE/Symon about modding this thing, and I remember most what he said about getting it 'right' ... you can't always go by real world numbers...you have to take into account what the game does with it, because it's results that feel right that we want.

So, swallowing some humble pie about that - I went back with a clean slate to stock on aircraft, and just ran the numbers at equal calculating weights (something that got skipped in stock AE development), and re-did all the aircraft. Then ran several multi-month duration tests...accepted what I saw and packaged it back up.

Hence, my missing the Val and Sonya changes I had earlier made (good changes for the Japanese player).

Anyway, it's all set right again and good-to-go.

B





PaxMondo -> RE: Mod Update (12/22/2015 12:15:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B

Ok, I got it fixed, and it's back up and ready to download.

First I had to find the problem, figure out what I did before (easy peasy), then fix all seven scenarios, compile it and re-upload it all.

The reason this came up was because I changed what I had done for air-to-air combat. After a lot of playing and seeing results, which led to further testing and testing some more, I decided to go back to the stock base air-to-air stats, mainly because they gave Jap fighters the best chance of survival - no matter how much I thought the numbers were off.

I remembered long conversations with JWE/Symon about modding this thing, and I remember most what he said about getting it 'right' ... you can't always go by real world numbers...you have to take into account what the game does with it, because it's results that feel right that we want.

So, swallowing some humble pie about that - I went back with a clean slate to stock on aircraft, and just ran the numbers at equal calculating weights (something that got skipped in stock AE development), and re-did all the aircraft. Then ran several multi-month duration tests...accepted what I saw and packaged it back up.

Hence, my missing the Val and Sonya changes I had earlier made (good changes for the Japanese player).

Anyway, it's all set right again and good-to-go.

B




Didn't realize you had gone back weights on your a/c ... will need to take a hard look at your results.

Thanks for the fine work in publishing all of this.



Big B -> RE: Mod Update (12/22/2015 12:34:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Didn't realize you had gone back weights on your a/c ... will need to take a hard look at your results.

Thanks for the fine work in publishing all of this.


I have all the Air Team aircraft data from original AE development, because I was on the Air Team at the beginning. I won't tell tales, but I had differences so I ended up leaving that team before it was all done, and I just concentrated on ship art.

Anyway, I have spreadsheets that I can't post - because they include calculation formulas - which I am sure must be proprietary.
What I did on this go around was to re-calc the Allied Fighters because there were anomalies in comparison with Japanese during development.
I'm not sure if patches since opening day addressed some of them - but there was still room at the table for changes when I re-did mine.

I am pretty sure I am regarded as an AFB by a large segment of the forum, and by heritage and personal real world feelings of course I am.
However, when it comes to the game and modding - I strive to be neutral and do my best for both sides equally, and that goes so far as to be able to say - the only 'non-historical bonuses' I have done - have actually been for the Japanese side in my mod..

Thanks Pax-Mondo



sanderz -> RE: Mod Update (12/22/2015 5:17:57 AM)

so overall how would you sum up (in general) the differences in aircraft performance in your mod vs stock scenario 1 - who are the winner and losers?

i believe DBB mods also changed ASW and AA - did you make changes or is it all as stock?

i really like the changes you made to china - a bit of a game changer??? How did things go in any test games?

thanks



Big B -> RE: Mod Update (12/22/2015 3:43:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

so overall how would you sum up (in general) the differences in aircraft performance in your mod vs stock scenario 1 - who are the winner and losers?


Well, I never looked at it as winners and loosers, - both sides gained something, but my main goal was to get the data apples to apples and let the chips fall where they may - it won't be that much different from stock, but at least I have peace of mind that the data was all rated by the same yardstick.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz
i believe DBB mods also changed ASW and AA - did you make changes or is it all as stock?


No, I left that as stock, I did not alter any gun values.


quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz
i really like the changes you made to china - a bit of a game changer??? How did things go in any test games?

thanks


From what I see, "How China turns out" is going to be different every time - it's really dependent upon the players and how ambitious they are in China.
I don't see it likely that Chunking will be falling in 1942, the Chinese Army has enough supply to at least fight back, but in test games, all those static Chinese Corps really kept the Chinese from massing a Death Star to unleash on the Japanese also.

I think overall it's really an improvement - getting a bit more reality on the map.



Mac Linehan -> RE: Mod Update (12/22/2015 4:16:24 PM)

Big B-

Your Mod, of course, meets or exceeds all standards of excellence. I would expect nothing else.

My respect to you, Sir!

Mac



Big B -> RE: Mod Update (12/29/2015 2:12:31 AM)

Ok, I think this is it (- beyond any unforeseen DB errors to address).

After the air-combat refresh I mentioned above, and fixing a couple issues I had earlier provided for (SAP bombs for Val's, etc) I reinstated one last change I made earlier - a Fire Power and Accuracy Bonus for the following Japanese Aircraft ( and 2 Soviet):
quote:

A5M4
KI-27b
KI-43 Ia
KI-43 Ib
KI-43 Ic
KI-43 IIa
KI-43 IIb
KI-43 IIIa

LaGG-3
Mig-3


With the Air Combat Refresh in stats, fixes to previous additions left out, I think I'm now pretty much done with a Stock-Based Game.


B



CaptBeefheart -> RE: Mod Update (3/18/2016 6:52:17 AM)

Big B: I went to your website and am thinking of firing up Scenario 186 (May '42 start). You've done some stellar work there.

Are your scenarios supported for Japan AI (i.e. playing Allied vs. IJ computer)?

EDIT: Website: https://sites.google.com/site/bigbsshipyard/b-mod-ae

Cheers,
CC



Big B -> RE: Mod Update (3/18/2016 5:13:01 PM)

They have the same AI as any stock scenario (and of course the inherent AI which is a part of the game engine).
So they will play just as good (or as poorly) as any stock scenario out there.

And... thanks [:)]


quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

Big B: I went to your website and am thinking of firing up Scenario 186 (May '42 start). You've done some stellar work there.

Are your scenarios supported for Japan AI (i.e. playing Allied vs. IJ computer)?

EDIT: Website: https://sites.google.com/site/bigbsshipyard/b-mod-ae

Cheers,
CC




thinman -> RE: Mod Update (3/28/2016 9:44:03 AM)

Hi Big B,

Scen 199: there is an upgrade from Clemson DD 5"51 (Ship Class ID 849) to CA Kent (Ship Class ID 853).

Cheers



Big B -> RE: Mod Update (3/29/2016 6:40:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thinman

Hi Big B,

Scen 199: there is an upgrade from Clemson DD 5"51 (Ship Class ID 849) to CA Kent (Ship Class ID 853).

Cheers


Thanks for the catch - must have gotten corrupted when I split off the Kent Class.

EDIT: DB error - corrected and uploaded on website.





Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.795898