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: Admirals Edition Land Thread

 
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] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread Page: <<   < prev  64 65 [66] 67 68   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/31/2010 12:28:29 AM   
Central Blue

 

Posts: 695
Joined: 8/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse


quote:

ORIGINAL: Central Blue

There is the Blackforce MG battalion that goes into one of the Australian divisions, and for some reason the USMC divisional tank battalions are independent as if they were Army -- and rather opulent in comparison to the Army's. But at the given hex scale, I certainly understand the design choice to do it the way it was done. Matrix sells many fine games for the OOB obsessed. And if they sell one that allows me to select Pedro del Valle to command the 11th Marines for an invasion of Guadalcanal, I'll buy that one too.

I hope this won't discourage you from offering further peeks back stage; it's always a treat.


Thanks. At some point I'll write up my notes about the Marines -- it was a deliberate design choice to separate the Parachute and Tank battalions from the Marine Divisions. And leader 16358 del Valle, Pedro is available in 1944 to command a Marine Division (but, not, alas, the artillery on Guadalcanal - another limitation of the land combat/leader system).

Enjoy the Marines' tank "opulence" -- it is short-lived. The Marine tank battalion starts out with a mix of 72 M2A4 or M3 Stuart tanks; the Army tank battalion has 59 M3's. But the Marine TOE changes over time to 46 M4 Shermans . . . the Army battalion will eventually change to 53 Shermans, plus 17 Stuarts, plus 6 M4 105mm Close Support tanks.


by golly, you are quite right about those early war tank numbers. Four companies of 18. This always happens when I quibble before checking my sources.

_____________________________

USS St. Louis firing on Guam, July 1944. The Cardinals and Browns faced each other in the World Series that year

(in reply to Blackhorse)
Post #: 1951
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/2/2010 1:39:17 AM   
jcjordan

 

Posts: 1900
Joined: 6/27/2001
Status: offline 		Andy Mac, On my game started under original release & patched to last hotfix scen 1 of me vs IJ AI test game, I was looking around the ai side to see what it was doing after so many months of game time had gone on (Aug 42 as of now) & the ai is using several mongolian troops on an "expedition" to the chinese rear areas in the north like Hami. My question/problem w/ this is the troops don't really seem to be affected by the long supply lines as nearest IJ base is in the bases just north of Peking area plus the fact it's sending them at all. I had tried to mount a mini offensive from Yenen to the east but couldn't due to supply issues yet ai seems to be able to operate longer lines with little negative effects?? With the AI script changes you've made since release will these troops be restricted & stay more in the Mongolian area? I can post a savegame for you to look at situation but just wondering on the ai scripts when I restart game will same thing happen that ai goes for the long ball w/ little ill effects?

(in reply to Central Blue)
Post #: 1952
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 2/2/2010 10:45:04 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline 		I have been doing some reviewing of the TOE's of the Infantry Regiments and Battation sized units and am totally confused as to the Motor Support given (or lack there of) the 2357, 2387 and 2516 units. I thought I had an understanding of how this was approached in the game from another thread, but, I would like to have some clarification (for my modding purposes) as to how the game numbers might differ from those indicated in the following online publication:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/8801662/Osprey-Battle-Order-017US-Army-Infantry-Divisions-194243

It seems to me that the numbers given the Motorized Regiment 2386 TOE are more in line with history.

Just for clarification my comparisons have been to the Regiments and Battaions in Alaska at the begining of the war.


BTW I had mentioned to JWE previously that I thought there might be a mix up with the withdrawal and arrival date of the 37th (Sep) Regiment, that in the game is set to arrive in 1944 when that is the historic date they went back to Kansas.

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 2/2/2010 10:47:08 PM >

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1953
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/2/2010 11:02:30 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		ot every script has this attack its a raid they return to the south afterwords - p.s. they dont get a supply advantage
quote:

ORIGINAL: jcjordan

Andy Mac, On my game started under original release & patched to last hotfix scen 1 of me vs IJ AI test game, I was looking around the ai side to see what it was doing after so many months of game time had gone on (Aug 42 as of now) & the ai is using several mongolian troops on an "expedition" to the chinese rear areas in the north like Hami. My question/problem w/ this is the troops don't really seem to be affected by the long supply lines as nearest IJ base is in the bases just north of Peking area plus the fact it's sending them at all. I had tried to mount a mini offensive from Yenen to the east but couldn't due to supply issues yet ai seems to be able to operate longer lines with little negative effects?? With the AI script changes you've made since release will these troops be restricted & stay more in the Mongolian area? I can post a savegame for you to look at situation but just wondering on the ai scripts when I restart game will same thing happen that ai goes for the long ball w/ little ill effects?


(in reply to jcjordan)
Post #: 1954
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/2/2010 11:06:13 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Well I aint going to recheck your sources Buck Joel who did the US may want to but defacto unless its a pure armoured formation they will always have some ord support to relfect cooks, loggies etc etc

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1955
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/2/2010 11:10:45 PM   
jcjordan

 

Posts: 1900
Joined: 6/27/2001
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

ot every script has this attack its a raid they return to the south afterwords - p.s. they dont get a supply advantage
quote:

ORIGINAL: jcjordan

Andy Mac, On my game started under original release & patched to last hotfix scen 1 of me vs IJ AI test game, I was looking around the ai side to see what it was doing after so many months of game time had gone on (Aug 42 as of now) & the ai is using several mongolian troops on an "expedition" to the chinese rear areas in the north like Hami. My question/problem w/ this is the troops don't really seem to be affected by the long supply lines as nearest IJ base is in the bases just north of Peking area plus the fact it's sending them at all. I had tried to mount a mini offensive from Yenen to the east but couldn't due to supply issues yet ai seems to be able to operate longer lines with little negative effects?? With the AI script changes you've made since release will these troops be restricted & stay more in the Mongolian area? I can post a savegame for you to look at situation but just wondering on the ai scripts when I restart game will same thing happen that ai goes for the long ball w/ little ill effects?




Ok thanks for the raid info just thought it might be something like the AI using the Thai divs in Burma so wondered if that needed to be looked at too.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1956
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/2/2010 11:15:50 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		No I use these forces to try and give the Ai the oooph it needs against a player

(in reply to jcjordan)
Post #: 1957
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/2/2010 11:50:18 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Well I aint going to recheck your sources Buck Joel who did the US may want to but defacto unless its a pure armoured formation they will always have some ord support to relfect cooks, loggies etc etc



Oh well what the hell. Nothing ventured nothing gained.

Other topic, have you thought much about doing an AI routine for Da Babes Biggie.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1958
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/3/2010 12:21:42 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Not seen it yet but based on what John said its going to be a massive change so not sure probably not if the changes are as big as john was indicating - it really depends

If 90% of changes are on allied side it will probably be ok at running Jap AI as is.


(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 1959
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/3/2010 5:35:51 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		I know I am going to give it a try, whats the worst that can happen, the Japanese take PH

_____________________________


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1960
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 2/5/2010 6:06:01 AM   
Blackhorse


Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline 		Hey BB,

The Motorized Support # does *not* equate to an equal number of trucks. It is an abstract representation of how "vehicle heavy" a formation was. During the war, General Headquarters and US Army Ground Forces was constantly pushing to reduce the amount of transport in infantry formations, because of both the critical shortage of shipping, and the shortage of rubber.

Eventually, General McNair settled on a formula that infantry divisions should have enough vehicles to carry 1/3 of the unit at a time. US Army infantry divisions start the war about 50% motorized. (Or, in other words, half of the support is motorized, the other half is not) As the TOE updates, the support drops to 33% motorized. The separate infantry regiments are 33% motorized from the get-go, and that doesn't change as the TOE updates.

In stock, only motorized and armored divisions had motorized support. This change in AE better reflects the need for more sealift to carry all the trucks even a slimmed-down US Infantry Division took into combat.

I hope this is helpful.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

I have been doing some reviewing of the TOE's of the Infantry Regiments and Battation sized units and am totally confused as to the Motor Support given (or lack there of) the 2357, 2387 and 2516 units. I thought I had an understanding of how this was approached in the game from another thread, but, I would like to have some clarification (for my modding purposes) as to how the game numbers might differ from those indicated in the following online publication:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/8801662/Osprey-Battle-Order-017US-Army-Infantry-Divisions-194243

It seems to me that the numbers given the Motorized Regiment 2386 TOE are more in line with history.

Just for clarification my comparisons have been to the Regiments and Battaions in Alaska at the begining of the war.


BTW I had mentioned to JWE previously that I thought there might be a mix up with the withdrawal and arrival date of the 37th (Sep) Regiment, that in the game is set to arrive in 1944 when that is the historic date they went back to Kansas.



< Message edited by Blackhorse -- 2/5/2010 6:09:21 AM >

_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 1961
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 2/5/2010 6:27:59 AM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline 		Thank you very much Blackhorse.

(in reply to Blackhorse)
Post #: 1962
Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/7/2010 9:00:48 AM   
Oliver Heindorf


Posts: 1911
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Hamburg/Deutschland
Status: offline 		Hi, in my game I own Wake Atoll since the game started. However, the AI tries to take it. This time, I had a small jap landing force landing on Wake but refuse to assaukt ist. irrc on atolls, you have to shock attack and you are feared to be taken out. This time the japs doesnt assault shock - they sit there since three days...any ideas ? thank you

_____________________________


(in reply to Central Blue)
Post #: 1963
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/7/2010 1:46:09 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oliver Heindorf

Hi, in my game I own Wake Atoll since the game started. However, the AI tries to take it. This time, I had a small jap landing force landing on Wake but refuse to assaukt ist. irrc on atolls, you have to shock attack and you are feared to be taken out. This time the japs doesnt assault shock - they sit there since three days...any ideas ? thank you



do they have non disabled combat squads left? if there aren´t any combat ready combat squads then there isn´t a shock attack

_____________________________


(in reply to Oliver Heindorf)
Post #: 1964
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/8/2010 8:39:55 PM   
sven6345789

 

Posts: 1050
Joined: 3/8/2004
From: Sandviken, Sweden
Status: offline 		Hi, checked the russian OOB the other night and did not find a single unit with yellow TOE.

Does this mean the russians are stuck with BT-7 and the like in 1945?
Or does the whole russian OOB change at a later date (Tank Corps and the like)?



_____________________________

Bougainville, November 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. It rained today.

Letter from a U.S. Marine,November 1943

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1965
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 2/8/2010 11:08:11 PM   
BigJ62


Posts: 1800
Joined: 12/28/2002
From: Alpharetta, Georgia
Status: offline 		Just like in witp devices can upgrade individually.

_____________________________

Witp-AE
AeAi…AeAi …AeAi…Long live AeAi.

(in reply to sven6345789)
Post #: 1966
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 2/20/2010 12:14:50 AM   
doc smith

 

Posts: 122
Joined: 7/21/2004
Status: offline 		Does anyone have any information about the convoys that appear at Capetown or Pt. Stanley and disappear a few days later? What are we supposed to do with them? They have lots of neat stuff. I see them dropping off fuel and supplies, but their "manifest" describes details like "M3-Lee tanks".

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1967
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 2/20/2010 12:18:57 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		They go to the pool when they disband

(in reply to doc smith)
Post #: 1968
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 2/20/2010 2:32:04 AM   
WLockard


Posts: 183
Joined: 11/13/2005
Status: offline 		Andy Mac, I noticed that when playing a game with +/- 60 day reinforcements, when I get a CD Convoy early, it still doesn't disband until its scheduled disband date. Is that intended?

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1969
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 2/20/2010 11:57:19 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Urrrghh not sure probably not but its probably int he too hard to fix without data changes camp

(in reply to WLockard)
Post #: 1970
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 2/20/2010 2:17:05 PM   
BigJ62


Posts: 1800
Joined: 12/28/2002
From: Alpharetta, Georgia
Status: offline 		Under the current code any CD convoy unit when it comes on map its' withdraw date is reset to 3 days.


quote:

ORIGINAL: WLockard

Andy Mac, I noticed that when playing a game with +/- 60 day reinforcements, when I get a CD Convoy early, it still doesn't disband until its scheduled disband date. Is that intended?



_____________________________

Witp-AE
AeAi…AeAi …AeAi…Long live AeAi.

(in reply to WLockard)
Post #: 1971
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/3/2010 9:21:17 AM   
somali

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 9/24/2009
From: Tachikawa, Japan
Status: offline 		misspelling of IJAAF Base force(4976)

Tachirai miss

Tachiarai correct

Tachiarai was the name of airfield near Fukuoka(103,57)

(in reply to Central Blue)
Post #: 1972
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/9/2010 12:14:58 AM   
gajdacs zsolt

 

Posts: 113
Joined: 9/16/2009
Status: offline 		I hope this is the right place to ask this:

While creating my own personal mod i noticed inaccuracies in the values of japanese and allied tanks. (example: Type 2 light tank armor:40mm(16IRL) , penetration:60mm (25IRL); Valentine III: armor: 100mm (65IRL), penetration: 90mm (49-17mm depending on distance, angle of impact, with the 2 pounder (i assumed this to be Valentine MKIII))

Are these values set up like this for balance reasons, are they were just overlooked?

Thank you!

(in reply to somali)
Post #: 1973
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/20/2010 11:16:16 AM   
PMCN

 

Posts: 625
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Germany
Status: offline 		One thing I noticed when comparing the forces for the 25th Army from the Neihorster site to what I saw in game was the independent engineering, tank and recon regiments.  These are actually battalion sized formations regardless of the name but the counter for them shows a "III" of a regiment.  Is the TOE for a battalion or a regiment?

(in reply to gajdacs zsolt)
Post #: 1974
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/20/2010 12:27:11 PM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1829
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely

One thing I noticed when comparing the forces for the 25th Army from the Neihorster site to what I saw in game was the independent engineering, tank and recon regiments.  These are actually battalion sized formations regardless of the name but the counter for them shows a "III" of a regiment.  Is the TOE for a battalion or a regiment?


Battalion TOE's.

But it doesn't make any difference in the game (technically) if a LCU is defined as a battalion or as a regiment.

(in reply to PMCN)
Post #: 1975
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/20/2010 1:24:43 PM   
PMCN

 

Posts: 625
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Germany
Status: offline 		Thanks for the reply.  The definition isn't important but the TOE would be!  It would probably be confusing to show "II" and beside that have the name Ind. x Rgt.

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 1976
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/23/2010 11:36:18 AM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline 		I have a question that is related to modding (sorry if it already had been asked). If I change armament for some but not all units from a certain category, will the reinforcements they receive be determined by their "template" TOE, or by changes I introduced? For example, if I change the type of AA gun in some of Japanese AA regiments from X to Y, without changing TOE, will these units receive guns of type Y as reinforcements?

(in reply to PMCN)
Post #: 1977
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/23/2010 6:44:13 PM   
BigJ62


Posts: 1800
Joined: 12/28/2002
From: Alpharetta, Georgia
Status: offline 		don't do that, currently mismatch toes can cause problems if the devices don't match as far as replacements are concerned.
devices should match toe.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR

I have a question that is related to modding (sorry if it already had been asked). If I change armament for some but not all units from a certain category, will the reinforcements they receive be determined by their "template" TOE, or by changes I introduced? For example, if I change the type of AA gun in some of Japanese AA regiments from X to Y, without changing TOE, will these units receive guns of type Y as reinforcements?



_____________________________

Witp-AE
AeAi…AeAi …AeAi…Long live AeAi.

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 1978
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/25/2010 3:55:04 PM   
jwilkerson


Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely

Thanks for the reply.  The definition isn't important but the TOE would be!  It would probably be confusing to show "II" and beside that have the name Ind. x Rgt.


A number of Armies in WWII used a name like "regiment" to refer to units whose TOE was more like "battalion" ... Japanese recon, engineer and tank units were among them.

_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to PMCN)
Post #: 1979
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 4/25/2010 4:12:46 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		I always struggle with Regiments being more akin to a Bde in the US Army I guess its what you are used to Regiment = Bn for me

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 1980
Page:   <<   < prev  64 65 [66] 67 68   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread Page: <<   < prev  64 65 [66] 67 68   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

1.406