RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (Full Version)

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



Message

larryfulkerson -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/2/2016 6:33:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: paradigmblue
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
quote:

ORIGINAL: paradigmblue
Okay, I think I may actually have things working. Please give this a test and let me know if everything works. If it does I'll make a patch post and update the original post with the new version.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ik6mgetiodftl0/Focus%20Pacific%20Patch%20Install%201.04a.exe?dl=0

This link failed for me and I tried it twice. Just now.

What was the error message? Anyone else having the same problem?

The error message was Firefox's downloads manager telling me that the download "failed". And I tried it three times.

[image]local://upfiles/16287/E9F05C023AB049219D03C7A53F65E4EB.jpg[/image]



sanderz -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/2/2016 7:15:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: paradigmblue


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: paradigmblue

Okay, I think I may actually have things working. Please give this a test and let me know if everything works. If it does I'll make a patch post and update the original post with the new version.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ik6mgetiodftl0/Focus%20Pacific%20Patch%20Install%201.04a.exe?dl=0

This link failed for me and I tried it twice. Just now.


What was the error message? Anyone else having the same problem?



download was ok for me



sanderz -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/2/2016 9:48:57 AM)

Observations on Ship production

1) Tracker says Navy shipyards are in deficit of 3094 - seems a lot

2) Seydlitz comes in at a base rather than a TF but seems to have a build cost of "Normal60" in the game ship reinforcement screen - doesn't this mean it is costing shipyard build points? Maybe bringing it in as a TF located at the base would solve this.

3) The other german ships don't have a build rate listed so i assume they are not costing build points - Or are they? See also item 5) below. (they are listed in tracker as "pending builds" with POA of Hailar and build points listed like any other ship).

4) Oddly enough the Admiral Hipper whilst shown in the game ok is NOT shown at all in the ship production screen of Tracker - seems to be because in the editor it has a delay of 0 whereas all the other german ships have big numbers for delay - maybe all "reinforcement" ships should have delay set as zero (in the ship section) as the actual delay in the TF arriving is set in the TF section.?

5) If you look at tracker its shows ship build points needed at 4660 but in game its listed as 3724 - i think these 2 numbers should be the same (they are in my stock game). Maybe if reinforcement ships have delay set to zero this would correct things? If indeed this is the problem there are a few merchant ships that seem to fall into this category as well i.e. tracker says 1100 but it game its 1085.






btd64 -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/2/2016 3:03:47 PM)

Larry, Firefox may be the issue. I have found that, when I used it, Sometimes it works and sometimes it don't....GP



btd64 -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/2/2016 3:05:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Observations on Ship production

1) Tracker says Navy shipyards are in deficit of 3094 - seems a lot

2) Seydlitz comes in at a base rather than a TF but seems to have a build cost of "Normal60" in the game ship reinforcement screen - doesn't this mean it is costing shipyard build points? Maybe bringing it in as a TF located at the base would solve this.

3) The other german ships don't have a build rate listed so i assume they are not costing build points - Or are they? See also item 5) below. (they are listed in tracker as "pending builds" with POA of Hailar and build points listed like any other ship).

4) Oddly enough the Admiral Hipper whilst shown in the game ok is NOT shown at all in the ship production screen of Tracker - seems to be because in the editor it has a delay of 0 whereas all the other german ships have big numbers for delay - maybe all "reinforcement" ships should have delay set as zero (in the ship section) as the actual delay in the TF arriving is set in the TF section.?

5) If you look at tracker its shows ship build points needed at 4660 but in game its listed as 3724 - i think these 2 numbers should be the same (they are in my stock game). Maybe if reinforcement ships have delay set to zero this would correct things? If indeed this is the problem there are a few merchant ships that seem to fall into this category as well i.e. tracker says 1100 but it game its 1085.






German ships are already built. I'm not sure why they are listed with build points. Probably a Japanese thing as all reinforcements get built....GP



BillBrown -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/2/2016 3:28:46 PM)

I use firefox and had no problems downloading the patch.



btd64 -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/2/2016 3:33:04 PM)

I had some problems. I'm sure it works for others....GP



Cavalry Corp -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/2/2016 5:17:11 PM)

Hi Downloaded this - it looks great
BUT cannot get my usual command line is use for RA and normal AE to work. This is what I use in my other games what is wrong please ?
game will start but at low res??

"C:\Matrix Games\War in the Pacific Admiral's Edition - Focus Pacific\autorun.exe" -px1920-py1080 -nofire -deepColor

Any help appreciated.



BillBrown -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/2/2016 5:29:36 PM)

You have to use the War in the Pacific.exe file, not the autorun file



Ol_Dog -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/2/2016 6:41:50 PM)

... and do you need a space between -px1920 and -py1080



Cavalry Corp -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/2/2016 10:02:56 PM)

Thanks for that - all working and strange thing is in my standard game I do not have the gap Ol Dog - but thanks and put the gap as you suggested.
First question is how do I know if the patch worked - extracted the file etc all ok but cannot see if it mentions it anywhere.
Do the French CV deliberately start with no capacity - where will the planes come from for them? Also prince of Wales art looks quite odd.

Is this map compatable with standard AE and or RA mod?

Great work all I am looking forward to getting into this mod.

cav



HansBolter -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/2/2016 10:16:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

Thanks for that - all working and strange thing is in my standard game I do not have the gap Ol Dog - but thanks and put the gap as you suggested.
First question is how do I know if the patch worked - extracted the file etc all ok but cannot see if it mentions it anywhere.
Do the French CV deliberately start with no capacity - where will the planes come from for them? Also prince of Wales art looks quite odd.

Is this map compatable with standard AE and or RA mod?

Great work all I am looking forward to getting into this mod.

cav



You need to read the backstory data on the mod.

The two French CVs that start with no planes also have no capacity as they are unfinished, along with two BBs.
You have to send them to a shipyard to complete construction and then later their squadrons will arrive as reinforcements.



Cavalry Corp -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/2/2016 11:53:03 PM)

yes you are right - I read first then ask - sorry...



larryfulkerson -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/3/2016 4:12:06 AM)

Matsuyama........I had to hurry up and type that out before I forgot how to spell it........Is Matsuyama one of the places that has a repair
yard that we have to repair first before we can use it? Either that or I've maybe found a problem because the shipyard at Matsuyama
is 0(0) and is therefore good for nothing yet.

[image]local://upfiles/16287/EEEF36B93E6C40B899C5D65B416FB0FB.jpg[/image]



BillBrown -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/3/2016 4:38:50 AM)

You do not repair it, you expand it.



sanderz -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/5/2016 7:56:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: General Patton


quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Observations on Ship production

1) Tracker says Navy shipyards are in deficit of 3094 - seems a lot

2) Seydlitz comes in at a base rather than a TF but seems to have a build cost of "Normal60" in the game ship reinforcement screen - doesn't this mean it is costing shipyard build points? Maybe bringing it in as a TF located at the base would solve this.

3) The other german ships don't have a build rate listed so i assume they are not costing build points - Or are they? See also item 5) below. (they are listed in tracker as "pending builds" with POA of Hailar and build points listed like any other ship).

4) Oddly enough the Admiral Hipper whilst shown in the game ok is NOT shown at all in the ship production screen of Tracker - seems to be because in the editor it has a delay of 0 whereas all the other german ships have big numbers for delay - maybe all "reinforcement" ships should have delay set as zero (in the ship section) as the actual delay in the TF arriving is set in the TF section.?

5) If you look at tracker its shows ship build points needed at 4660 but in game its listed as 3724 - i think these 2 numbers should be the same (they are in my stock game). Maybe if reinforcement ships have delay set to zero this would correct things? If indeed this is the problem there are a few merchant ships that seem to fall into this category as well i.e. tracker says 1100 but it game its 1085.






German ships are already built. I'm not sure why they are listed with build points. Probably a Japanese thing as all reinforcements get built....GP


hi GP

not 100% sure on any of the following but here goes (all refers to scn71)

i think any ship "reinforcements" listed with build points in game is because they have a date in the "delay" field of the "Ships" form (in the editor) - and i assume if the game is showing they are costing build points then they are

also its maybe not just this one ship - i think that as other german reinforcements "delay date" gets to a certain point that they also will enter the build queue and cost build points

the japanese already have a a big ship build point deficit and will already have to stop a lot of builds - JFBs are not going to want to spend points unnecessarily

so i think that any ship that you want as a reinforcement needs to have a "ship delay" of zero (some of the german reinforcements are already set to this but a lot aren't) - they may also need to be set as arriving as a TF rather than base but i can't remember now if this made any difference so may not be necessary



1EyedJacks -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/5/2016 7:20:07 PM)

Hi Bruce - I see the Id!!! lol!



paradigmblue -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/6/2016 4:10:31 PM)

What do people think of the new version? Everything look like its working as intended? How's the economy?

Known issue: Seydlitz. I have it arriving in a TF instead of a base now in my test scen for the next patch version, but it's not a game-breaking issue.



1EyedJacks -> RE: First 3 turns as Japanes plaer (8/6/2016 4:51:20 PM)

I was looking over the fighters that start on the board or arrive within 90 days.

• All Allied Fighters: 3733 Ready, 587 Not Ready, 114 in Reserve. About 170 FGs @ start of game.
• All Japan Fighters: 1998 Ready, 029 Not Ready, 212 in Reserve (130 are Claude, 300 are Nate, 420 are Oscar) so about 60% of the FG are Zero. About 90 FGs @ start of game.
• Japan receives 3 FG over the next 90 days.
• The allies receive 91 FG over the next 90 days - the average size of which is **probably** 35… 91 x 35 = 3,185 fighters over the next 90 days (a rough estimate)
• It looks like roughly 2,500 allied fighters are in the immediate theatres near Japan at the start of the game…


China
• Kwangchowan has 5 FG with 22 AC each
• Chengtu has 8FG. Most are small, one has 36AC. All have high gun accuracy. Three (I-16-III) have armor.
• Lanchow has 2 FG. Both are small.
• Kunming has 5 FG - all are small and I-15-III or I-16-III.
• Hami has 5 FG - all are small and I-15-III or I-16-III.

About 150 F

Burma
• Rangoon has 3 FG, one of which is the AVG. 27/10/15 AC
• Toungoo has 3 FG of AVG. Each 27 H81-A3 (armor plus center 2x50 Cal)
• Mandalay has an FG of 24 Buffalo I (Armor)

160ish F

Borneo
• Samarinda 2FG of 20 AC
• Sinkawang 1FG of 20
• Bandjermasin 1 FG of 25

85 F

PI/Mindano
• Iba has 4FG of 18 each
• Clark Field has 5FG 3 @ 18, 1 @ 24, & 1 @ 25. 4 of 5 or P-40B
• Bataan has 1 FG of 18 P-40B
• Manila has 2 FG of 18 P-40E
• Batangas has 1 FG of 24 P-26A
• Cebu has 4 FG of 24 AC - 3 F2A-3 Buffalo and 1 P-40E
• Cagayan has a FG of P40-E

Over 300 F

Malaya
• Singapore has 9FG and all but one have 24-27 AC

9 x 25 = 225 F

Sumatra
• Sabang has 1FG of 24 H-75A-4 Hawk
• Montok has 2FG of 24 AC
• Palembang has 1 FG of 24 AC

72F

Java
• Batavia has 1 FG of 17 AC
• Madioen has 2FG of 18 AC

35 F

Russia
• Alexandrovsk has 1 FG of 20 AC
• Okha has 1 FG of 31 AC
• Petropavlovsk has 2FG of 20/30 AC
• Nikolaevsk has 2 FG of 20/30
• Vladivostok has 6FG of 30-45
• Voroshilov has 3FG of 30ish
• Rybolov has 1 FG of 30ish
• Bikin has 2FG of 30ish
• Khabarovsk has 3 FG of 30ish
• Komsomolsk has 1 FG of 30ish
• Birobidzhan has 3FG of 30ish
• Kuibyshevka has 3 FG of 30ish
• Borzya has 1 FG of 30ish
• Shilka has 1 FG of 30ish
• Choybalsan has 1FG of 20
• Ondorhaan has 4FG of 30ish
• Dalan Dzadagad has 1 FG of 45
• Soviet Union has 2 FG of 50ish

37 x 30 = 1,110 F


PH
• Has 13 FG from 10ish to 25ish

About 200 F



1EyedJacks -> Fighters (8/6/2016 5:10:01 PM)

Do you have enough engineer units to provide air support on both sides of the table?

I was looking at the replacement rates for the allied fighters that are available in December of 41... The total number of replacement fighters for the allies per month seems a little steep to me. I don't think I can come close to matching that kind of production in Japan... It looks like the US Army will bring in about 360 fighters and the US Navy will put an additional 160 fighters on the board each month... And then when you add in Chinese, British, Dutch, French, and Russian monthly replacements...




moonraker65 -> RE: Fighters (8/6/2016 5:41:05 PM)

Don't forget both the Allies and Japan start much better prepared in this scenario



1EyedJacks -> RE: Fighters (8/6/2016 5:46:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: moonraker

Don't forget both the Allies and Japan start much better prepared in this scenario


Nate and Claude have a GV of 4... Oscars have a GV of 6... None of the Japanese fighters start with armor. My guess is that about 1/4 of allied fighters start with armor...

In my first test run I lost a *lot* of fighters... <laughter>



moonraker65 -> RE: Fighters (8/7/2016 9:07:17 AM)

Just about all the Japanese early war fighters lacked armour. A short coming that cost them a lot of pilots throughout the war



BillBrown -> RE: Fighters (8/11/2016 2:52:46 AM)

Soviet class DD Gnevny ID 2898 has an endurance of 100. Should be 2170.



btd64 -> RE: Fighters (8/11/2016 3:02:49 AM)

Thanks Bill. Will take a look....GP



btd64 -> RE: Fighters (8/12/2016 7:12:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

Soviet class DD Gnevny ID 2898 has an endurance of 100. Should be 2170.


Fixed in scen 75 for next update. more details to follow....GP



btd64 -> RE: Fighters (8/16/2016 2:27:12 AM)

Need a couple names for a couple of new Japanese BB's I'm planning on adding. These will be older BB's for supporting Amphibious Assaults. The winning names get a payday[:D][;)]. Also, para Amsterdam Island works now. I think it always did....GP



DOCUP -> RE: Fighters (8/16/2016 3:04:45 AM)

What type of BBs? Have you thought about bringing back to life some older BBs/pre dreadnoughts. Ie Kawachi or Satsuma class ships, modernize them. There is art for them. Kawachi has 12 12in guns, Satsuma 4 12in guns and 8 10in guns.



CaptBeefheart -> RE: Fighters (8/16/2016 4:54:07 AM)

Izumo would be a cool name if it's not already in the scenario.

By the way, that's an interesting looking "destroyer."

Cheers,
CC



btd64 -> RE: Fighters (8/16/2016 12:50:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

What type of BBs? Have you thought about bringing back to life some older BBs/pre dreadnoughts. Ie Kawachi or Satsuma class ships, modernize them. There is art for them. Kawachi has 12 12in guns, Satsuma 4 12in guns and 8 10in guns.


You hit the nail on the head. Thats what I'm looking for....GP



Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1