Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Nikmod updated

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RE: Nikmod updated Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 4:27:26 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Not to mention of speculative personal hygeine standards. It has something to with being so galactically fat...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 31
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 4:58:01 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		Arn't you two supposed to be at the arena for the championship round of the Steel Panther's All-time Loser contest?



_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 32
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 5:22:00 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline


(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 33
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 5:39:15 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline 		Pfffft. Surprised you can even spell Steel Panthers Nik....we know you can't play it. You probably suck at Solitaire too..........

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 34
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 7:35:21 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Most likely had help with his typing.

GF Mk I Unit: "Now push S... Push S... It's over there, on the left of the keyboard... No, your OTHER left... That's an A, stupid..."

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 35
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 7:48:04 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		LOL You guys are relentless.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 36
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 9:16:30 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		That's how you win a war, Major: relentless, coordinated application of force at your enemy's weak point. Or weak points in Nik's case, for he has so very many of them...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 37
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 9:30:45 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 38
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 10:26:29 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		Spammers!

Time to call in the Knights who say NI!

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 39
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 10:27:55 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		You think this is bad? Check out Speedy's AAR against you.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 40
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 10:31:32 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		I'd rather check out the next turn....if he ever gets around to sending it.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 41
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 10:32:27 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		He hasn't been on much today. Need to smack him around some.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 42
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 10:34:19 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

Spammers!

Time to call in the Knights who say NI!


Sorry, they are now the Knights who say Ekki-Ekki-Ekki-Ekki-Ptang-Zoom-Boing!

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 43
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 10:46:52 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		Says you.

Go out and bring unto me.......a Shrubbery!

_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 44
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 10:51:02 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		No problem, I saw some poison ivy somewhere...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 45
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 11:11:24 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		Good...now go use it in the John.



_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 46
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/14/2006 11:19:01 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Sorry, already UPS'ed it to Seattle...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 47
DB obsolence? - 6/16/2006 10:48:29 PM   
Woos

 

Posts: 683
Joined: 6/5/2005
From: Germany
Status: offline 		When reading the following in the 6.0 FAQ:
quote:

by substantially increasing DUR in fighter and fighter bomber class aircraft. Essentially these classes now have their own DUR scale which should not be compared directly to the DUR factors seen in bomber aircraft (including 1E types) since the combats between fighters and bombers are resolved differently.

I began to wonder. Although combat between fighters and bombers might be resolved differently, I doubt that F/FB vs. AA combat is resolved differently than DB/LB vs. AA combat. But the Nikmod 6.0 scenario file features vastly increased Durability for F and FB. So I would suspect that F & FB would perform superior for bombing targets with AA defence over DB and maybe even LB. Did anyone experienced such an imbalance (I don't want to start a game just to notice after some weeks that it is unplayable).

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 48
RE: DB obsolence? - 6/16/2006 11:12:52 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		FB's will attack a land base @ 2000 feet, same as the DB's. They will survive better thx to the increased DUR but if the base is strongly defended will still take alot of damage.

Also, FB's are hardcoded not to be as accurate as DB's. This may only apply to naval attacks though. It was put in specifically after complaints about players employing fighters and fighter bombers en-mass as ersatz dive bombers to great effect in the game.


< Message edited by Nikademus -- 6/16/2006 11:13:39 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Woos)
Post #: 49
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/17/2006 9:33:17 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Nik,
When are you going to do a mod usable with CHS that starts in May 42??
We don't want you to rest on your laurels.


_____________________________


(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 50
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/18/2006 2:42:41 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Nik,
When are you going to do a mod usable with CHS that starts in May 42??
We don't want you to rest on your laurels.



The Nik mod and CHS are separate scenarios, so they cannot be used in conjunction. If you mean the use of the Nik mod with my map, then I have already converted his mod for use with my map - both the full campaign and 1942 start - and those scenarios are available from my website. I have yet to convert the latest version as I have been so busy releasing CHS itself.

Also, there is now a variant of CHS with "Nik mod" like air-to-air changes.

Andrew

< Message edited by Andrew Brown -- 6/18/2006 2:43:16 AM >

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 51
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/18/2006 2:53:12 AM   
Halsey

 

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline 		Is your AA fix as nasty as Nik's?
If it is I think I'll pass on it.

PS:
I'd love to see a 5/42 start for CHS also.



Here's how I break down the AA fix.
1. Fighters kill fighters.
2. Bombers kill fighters.
3. Flak kills bombers.
4. Both types get a lot more damage from AA and A2A, reducing flying time between the next mission.
Due to repairs that take longer because of increased durability.
The increased rate of damaged aircraft due to the model increases op losses.

Did I explain that right?


< Message edited by Halsey -- 6/18/2006 3:02:11 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 52
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/18/2006 3:11:49 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Halsey

Is your AA fix as nasty as Nik's?
If it is I think I'll pass on it.


The only thing I did with AA is compensate for the increased aircraft durability, so it is not quite the same as Nik's AA fixes. I expect that it will not be as "nasty".

quote:

PS:
I'd love to see a 5/42 start for CHS also.


So you are volunteering?

Actually David Freer has already made one of those, but he is a little behind in the adaptation of it. It's a lot of work to maintain such a scenario. He would probably appreciate some help.

Andrew

< Message edited by Andrew Brown -- 6/18/2006 3:13:30 AM >

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 53
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/18/2006 3:37:50 AM   
Captain Cruft


Posts: 3652
Joined: 3/17/2004
From: England
Status: offline 		The 5/42 scenario either CHS or stock version needs a lot of work. I started "correcting" David Freer's work but, as usual with me, gave up after a while.

By "correcting" I mean just sorting out the vast number of problems, not trying to enhance the thing at all. The scenario is basically just the stock campaign scen with the units moved around a bit and all their HQs set in a bizarre fashion. No account is taken of supply usage, base building, unit degradation, aircraft production or indeed anything else that might have happened since Dec 7, 1941.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 54
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/18/2006 4:02:49 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

The 5/42 scenario either CHS or stock version needs a lot of work. I started "correcting" David Freer's work but, as usual with me, gave up after a while.

By "correcting" I mean just sorting out the vast number of problems, not trying to enhance the thing at all. The scenario is basically just the stock campaign scen with the units moved around a bit and all their HQs set in a bizarre fashion. No account is taken of supply usage, base building, unit degradation, aircraft production or indeed anything else that might have happened since Dec 7, 1941.



As you are probably aware, it would be a huge job to make a proper 1942 CHS. I certainly don't have the time to do it.

Andrew

(in reply to Captain Cruft)
Post #: 55
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/18/2006 7:05:07 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Halsey

Did I explain that right?



No. A few less smileys might help clarify whatever it is your trying to say.




_____________________________


(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 56
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/18/2006 7:33:42 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

We don't want you to rest on your laurels.


Well if i was resting on my laurels, I wouldn't be working on the new beta......

< Message edited by Nikademus -- 6/18/2006 7:35:05 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 57
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/18/2006 1:39:53 PM   
Halsey

 

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline 		OK, delete the smiles.

The results still end up the same.

Ftrs kill and damage Ftrs.
Bmbrs kill and damage Ftrs.
Flk kill and damage Bmbrs.

Sorry, but this is what I'm seeing.
Very few A2A kills against bombers.
Almost all reach the target and go in, then the flak decimates them.

It was depressing enough for my opponent to quit the game after 7 weeks.
His losses were over 700 aircraft. Mine were 550 in 49 days.
Japanese bombers losses were 60 shot down in A2A and 310 losses to flak!
The majority of losses to flak were bomber missions in China with only 1 or 2 small BF's present.

< Message edited by Halsey -- 6/18/2006 3:57:32 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 58
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/18/2006 3:10:30 PM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline 		I have finally converted the latest Nik Mod scenarios for use with my map. Modified versions are available of all four Nik Mod scenarios - campaign game and beta, and 42 scenario and beta. They are available, as usual, from my scenarios web page:

Andrew Brown's War in the Pacific Map - Scenarios

Andrew

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 59
RE: Nikmod updated - 6/18/2006 7:59:04 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		What altitudes were you attacking? I am certainly not seeing this in my games.

_____________________________


(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RE: Nikmod updated Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.235