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: Update V

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich >> RE: Update V Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Update V - 6/10/2007 11:51:01 AM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		okay, just to make sure, I did say I made the changes for BoB41

one hassle I have, is I do not have the slot range to use all of the names the way I would really like to, so with in reason, I will try to do it, as it was done, but at times, I am going to have to shorter, or change it, so the player can understand what we got (most times this is not really going to need to be done, but)

soooo

in BoB41 we have

452 Squadron RAAF
133 Eagle Squadron

(I have not gotten to the 300's yet)



_____________________________


(in reply to Reg)
Post #: 31
RE: Update V - 6/10/2007 1:36:56 PM   
Reg


Posts: 2787
Joined: 5/26/2000
From: NSW, Australia
Status: offline 		Sarge,

I for one are very happy with what you have done so far and I'm sure everyone else is too. That format above definitely looks like the way to go. You are doing a fantastic job with trying to make sense of that mess called real life within the constaints you have.

I just brought up that info as you may not have been aware of it. The next few pages of that history showed that not a few of the people involved didn't have much of an idea either.

Lookin' good,

_____________________________

Cheers,
Reg.

(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 32
RE: Update V - 6/16/2007 5:16:01 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		got a hassle with this one

No. 331 (Norwegian) Squadron RAF

now, I can drop the No. and the RAF

but I not got room for the ( ) so any "named" units I have to drop that

but I do not have room for Norwegian, which for the Czech that is okay to cut it down that way, but how do you cut down Norwegain ?

331 Norway Squadron, just does not look right to me

310 Czech Squadron and 303 Polish Squadron look and feel right

in BTR we had 331 NAF Squadron ?





< Message edited by Hard Sarge -- 6/16/2007 5:18:27 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Reg)
Post #: 33
RE: Update V - 6/18/2007 5:22:33 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		Well

I can't do this for all units, but here is one of the IT Gruppos for BoB41

(which to be honest, I should be able to do this for about 4 of the units, the rest will be pretty hit or miss or purely AI pilots)








Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 34
RE: Update V - 6/19/2007 1:21:50 AM   
jcjordan

 

Posts: 1900
Joined: 6/27/2001
Status: offline 		Just putting something out there if you've not thought about it & crossed it off your list but what about using a letter after the unit number - 331(N) Sqdn for 331 Norwegian, may not be historical but it's something. Even the NAF & such from BTR would throw me sometimes but guess nothing will be totally accurate.

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 35
RE: Update V - 6/19/2007 4:10:38 AM   
tblersch

 

Posts: 77
Joined: 8/4/2004
Status: offline 		You could always just use the 3-letter country code: NOR, POL, CZE, ZAF (South Africa, which would look a little weird, yes...)

Of course, those are modern country codes...and you'd have to make one up for the Free French (FFE, maybe)...but like jcjordan said, nothing's going to be totally accurate. Using the official country codes would at least have the advantage of being clear (331 NOR Squadron is pretty unambiguous) and consistent, with the disadvantage of looking pretty damn stupid, frankly...


...yeah, I know. It's my idea. It still looks stupid. Never mind...

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 36
RE: Update V - 6/19/2007 4:28:31 AM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		well, the Czech and Polish work, the Dutch, for the French we used the unit names with Fr in front of it

it is just for the Norwegian, you cut it down to Norweg, don't look right, and Norway don't really look right either

I might have to go with NAF

_____________________________


(in reply to tblersch)
Post #: 37
RE: Update V - 6/19/2007 4:42:48 AM   
Ursa MAior

 

Posts: 1416
Joined: 4/20/2005
From: Hungary, EU
Status: offline 		Can we have a screenshot of actual combat?

Or an overview map?

Edit
Sorry just saw the AAR. Digging into it.

< Message edited by Ursa MAior -- 6/19/2007 4:46:19 AM >

_____________________________


Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 38
RE: Update V - 7/18/2007 5:29:04 PM   
menik


Posts: 45
Joined: 12/18/2006
From: Patrimonium Petri (Italy)
Status: offline 		Am I in time? I have about the norvegian
http://www.europeanaf.org/history/331.htm
Official name was 331FN
I hope this can help

marco

> it is just for the Norwegian, you cut it down to Norweg, don't look > right, and Norway don't really look right either

.....
Disse il Cretese: "Tutti i Cretesi mentono"

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 39
RE: Update V - 7/18/2007 5:58:58 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		FN is the Unit code, not the Squadron name

the unit code in the 56th 3 squadrons were HV, LM and UN followed by the plane letter

I think NAF should tell the story ?




_____________________________


(in reply to menik)
Post #: 40
RE: Update V - 7/18/2007 7:05:01 PM   
menik


Posts: 45
Joined: 12/18/2006
From: Patrimonium Petri (Italy)
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge
I think NAF should tell the story ?


With a "R" of Royal? RNAF?

_____________________________

Antrocom Online Journal of Anthropology:
www.antrocom.net

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 41
RE: Update V - 7/18/2007 11:20:21 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		Hmmm

you got a point, but I wonder how many people will know what it means ?




_____________________________


(in reply to menik)
Post #: 42
RE: Update V - 7/19/2007 4:24:47 PM   
wernerpruckner


Posts: 4148
Joined: 5/5/2005
Status: offline

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 43
RE: Update V - 7/19/2007 4:38:28 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		Well, kind of worried about how many would read it to mean, Royal Naval Air Force




_____________________________


(in reply to wernerpruckner)
Post #: 44
RE: Update V - 7/20/2007 1:37:57 PM   
davidjruss


Posts: 235
Joined: 5/25/2002
From: Derby, England
Status: offline 		Hard Sarge,

Would not the abbreviation for planes of the Royal Navy be NAS ( such as 812 Naval Air Sqaudron ) or FAA for Fleet Air Arm

DavidR

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 45
RE: Update V - 7/20/2007 1:44:58 PM   
davidjruss


Posts: 235
Joined: 5/25/2002
From: Derby, England
Status: offline 		Hard Sarge,

I take your point about using initials but there could be a glossary that lists the full meanings of initials used in the game so there should then be no confusion.

DavidR

(in reply to davidjruss)
Post #: 46
RE: Update V - 7/20/2007 2:45:52 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		Acronym Definition
RNAF Royal Naval Air Force
RNAF Royal Netherlands Air Force
RNAF Royal Norwegian Air Force

which yea, RNAS was used during the WW I (along with RFC and RAF)

but, then again, how many people are going to know JG, JGr, ZG, LG, KG, KG(J), Hohen, Jabo, RNZAF, RAAF, SAAF, USAAF, LW, GE, GB, CW and many others ?

ahhhhhhhh


< Message edited by Hard Sarge -- 7/20/2007 2:47:38 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to davidjruss)
Post #: 47
RE: Update V - 7/20/2007 3:02:51 PM   
von Shagmeister


Posts: 1273
Joined: 10/8/2005
From: Dromahane, Ireland
Status: offline 		You could always abbreviate Squadron to Sqn (the accepted RAF abbreviation) to make space then insert the nationality in brackets for none CW/Dom Sqns

ie 303 (Polish) Sqn or 332 (Norwegian) Sqn or 322 (Dutch) Sqn

if still lacking space sorten nationality to first three letters

ie 332 (Nor) Sqn

Fleet Air Arm Sqns follow the format 800 Sqn FAA

CW/Dom Sqns follow format 401 Sqn RCAF or 456 Sqn RAAF

_____________________________

Per Speculationem Impellor ad Intelligendum


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 48
RE: Update V - 7/20/2007 11:26:34 PM   
forgotmypassword

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 4/7/2001
From: Norway
Status: offline 		Hi

RNoAF For Royal Norwegian Air Force
RNAF  For Royal Netherlands Air Force

The norwegian got the o during the war.

runbak

(in reply to von Shagmeister)
Post #: 49
RE: Update V - 7/25/2007 1:10:06 PM   
menik


Posts: 45
Joined: 12/18/2006
From: Patrimonium Petri (Italy)
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

Acronym Definition
RNAF Royal Naval Air Force
RNAF Royal Netherlands Air Force
RNAF Royal Norwegian Air Force

which yea, RNAS was used during the WW I (along with RFC and RAF)

but, then again, how many people are going to know JG, JGr, ZG, LG, KG, KG(J), Hohen, Jabo, RNZAF, RAAF, SAAF, USAAF, LW, GE, GB, CW and many others ?

ahhhhhhhh



hehehehe.... Hard Sarge is right
considering still... We do not require a such historical deepening. In exemple, for italian force: I suppose no people will know what it means RA (Regia Aeronautica) for 1939-1943 and then, 1943-1945 ANR (Aeronautica Nazionale Repubblicana) for pro-Axis government and RA for pro-Allied gov. So, a precise statement can be harmful.
We have to admit: "It" (italian), this is enough! So we can retain RNZAF, RAAF, SAAF, USAAF ...(Since they are a lot of known) and, at the same time, we can say: NAF for norwegian (or simpli: "norge", NL for netherland, FF for France Libre...

< Message edited by htullio -- 7/25/2007 1:11:23 PM >

_____________________________

Antrocom Online Journal of Anthropology:
www.antrocom.net

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 50
RE: Update V - 7/25/2007 2:31:01 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		Welllllll

we do have the RA, which will disappear with a few hold outs left over, and then the ARN will show up

which, if I can swing it and make it work, we should also then have the RA show up, right now, they would join the MED, but I need to get some codeing done, so I can add in the BAF (I can as of now, add in the BAF no hassle, but some units in it, are already in other commands, so need coding to switch them, also, they would have no fields to fly from, so need codeing to make AFs change commands once the BAF enters, but the hassle is time and when, but)

yea, letters and letters

I would think 331 NAF Squadron should be enough to let the player know what they need to know and still be in the right nameing pattern

Greesh

303 Polish Squadron
310 Czech Squadron
331 NAF Squadron
401 Squadron RCAF
456 Squadron RAAF



< Message edited by Hard Sarge -- 7/25/2007 2:34:46 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to menik)
Post #: 51
RE: Update V - 8/1/2007 10:26:15 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		Kind of happy with this one

been waiting to rework it for a while, but wasn't sure if it would work the way I wanted it to or not

I think BoB41 is going to be fun




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 52
RE: Update V - 8/2/2007 12:23:13 AM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		don't mind the 110s yet, I am waiting on some info for which model I plan to have them be in 41

for BTR, I am again, trying to get the BAF to work, I can do almost everything I wanted with it, but the most importent thing :(, so it was put on hold for a while

not I think I worked out how to get most of what I want working again :)

so, question is, since it should be part of MED, I want to go with Squadrons, instead of Groups, but that will mean a good chunk of new units just for BAF, but Group size, makes them more importent to the game then they really should be, while Squadron size adds numbers, it does not add the impact that Groups would




_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 53
RE: Update V - 8/4/2007 9:11:02 PM   
Denniss

 

Posts: 7902
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline 		Screenshot shows small errors:
Should read SM.81 Pipistrello
Bis should always be lower case bis.

< Message edited by Denniss -- 8/4/2007 9:12:56 PM >

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 54
RE: Update V - 8/4/2007 10:09:57 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Denniss

Screenshot shows small errors:
Should read SM.81 Pipistrello
Bis should always be lower case bis.


ahhhhh

SM.81 corrected
Bis is lower cased and moved next to the name (G.50bis)



_____________________________


(in reply to Denniss)
Post #: 55
RE: Update V - 8/4/2007 10:49:17 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		the BAF

it is going to have some It Units, they will be getting old It planes (also some P-39s)

so, I got the game set up to start making MC.202 and MC.205s for a short production run, for the Allies, they will be FBs and based in the south

the production run should be around 200 planes (planes found and repaired) enough for the units, but not enough to really rearm any of the Allies

the It BAF will be flying 202/205/2002/P-39/Balt V

the 39s and Vs will come from Allied Stockpiles

there are other units assigned to the BAF also




_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 56
RE: Update V - 8/5/2007 3:30:53 AM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		right now running though some AI vs AI tests, to see what is going on

you would be surprised at the silly stuff you may run into :)

but this test is looking pretty good

losses have been pretty heavy, for both sides, but overall, pretty close

but the AI and targets are very nice to see, heavy damage to Chem and BBs

nice to see the AI doing things it is suppost to and make changes that you wanted it to make, for the right reason (?)

the 15th AirForce is doing a bang up job







Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Hard Sarge -- 8/5/2007 3:31:11 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 57
RE: Update V - 8/5/2007 3:33:31 AM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		Ahhhhhh

not sure if the red for knocked out areas, show up as well as it could, but try and look for red areas to see what has been knocked out


_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 58
RE: Update V - 9/19/2007 3:58:16 PM   
xj900uk

 

Posts: 1340
Joined: 3/22/2007
Status: offline 		I really love the original Bof B from Talonsoft (never owned Bombing the Reich),  but found it ridiculously easy playing the RAF (won every time!) and for the German Luftwaffe, whilst a genuine challenge,  got bogged down in the planning of the missions (particularly the reconissance) - often planning just one day took well over an hour to do!
However,  I really like Uncommon Valour which uses a similar system, particularly when it comes to planning air activity, raids etc.  I think one of the reasons for this is that with the original BofB,  everything goes back to sleep at the end of the day and you have to start plannign again completely from scratch,  whilst with UV it remembers the set activity (naval strike, reconissance, airfield raid, transport etc) from the previous days activity,  which speeds things up 99% & makes things a lot more interesting.

How will the new BofB (& BtR) compare to this?

(in reply to Reg)
Post #: 59
RE: Update V - 9/19/2007 6:00:38 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		it is still pretty much the same engine, we have been able to make improvements to the engine and how it does stuff, but the engine is still pretty much the same

so, you are going to have to replot each day, but weather will be more of a factor then in UV or WitP




_____________________________


(in reply to xj900uk)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich >> RE: Update V Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
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

1.250