Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Good note Sir. Will look into it with my Site.

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

The main idea that Michael and I chatted about was changing a portion of the Mods into STREAMLINING Japanese production even more. Perhaps the best answer for Japan is LESS choice then MORE!??!

EXAMPLE:
The decision to get rid of Jack and replace with dedicated Interceptor and Carrier-Based A6 variants creates a huge number of different models that upgrade every 4-6 months until the better George and Sam models come into production.

What about:
1. Produce a much more limited line of A6 Models. Carrier-Based: M2 to M3a to M5 and DONE Ground-Based: M2 and ONLY M2.
2. Focus on bringing in George with massed work. Even if this means having bunches of Hangar Queens to start with when they begin.

Tentative and, hopefully, thought-provoking start...

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

The main idea that Michael and I chatted about was changing a portion of the Mods into STREAMLINING Japanese production even more. Perhaps the best answer for Japan is LESS choice then MORE!??!

EXAMPLE:
The decision to get rid of Jack and replace with dedicated Interceptor and Carrier-Based A6 variants creates a huge number of different models that upgrade every 4-6 months until the better George and Sam models come into production.

What about:
1. Produce a much more limited line of A6 Models. Carrier-Based: M2 to M3a to M5 and DONE Ground-Based: M2 and ONLY M2.
2. Focus on bringing in George with massed work. Even if this means having bunches of Hangar Queens to start with when they begin.

Tentative and, hopefully, thought-provoking start...

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Nice comments guys.

Infinite Monkey: What is a Scenario Checker Report? Curious I am! (Sound like Yoda.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Damn. That would be useful. In scenario creation finding many of those mistakes usually takes a person actually playing the Mod to see them. Like the idea.

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfiniteMonkey

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

The main idea that Michael and I chatted about was changing a portion of the Mods into STREAMLINING Japanese production even more. Perhaps the best answer for Japan is LESS choice then MORE!??!

EXAMPLE:
The decision to get rid of Jack and replace with dedicated Interceptor and Carrier-Based A6 variants creates a huge number of different models that upgrade every 4-6 months until the better George and Sam models come into production.

What about:
1. Produce a much more limited line of A6 Models. Carrier-Based: M2 to M3a to M5 and DONE Ground-Based: M2 and ONLY M2.
2. Focus on bringing in George with massed work. Even if this means having bunches of Hangar Queens to start with when they begin.

Tentative and, hopefully, thought-provoking start...

Let the player make the choices - not the scenario. Focusing production should require sacrifice, but you should allow the player to make those choices. That's part of the fun of being Japan.

Limiting the number of research and engine factories, but not the available models is a better approach imo. Build the new scenario with the expectation that the Japanese player will be able to skip research steps and choose appropriate arrival dates so that between skipping and using the bulk of their limited resources (factories) the player can focus to whatever models they want - and get them earlier than they arrived historically. Insert "precursor" models like the Ki-44 and Ki-43-Id so players can use those models to start the research.

Another thing I think is missed (at least in scenario 1) is how engines dictate the possibilities. I think more engines that must be researched (by hp class/manufacturer/etc.) to get to the models. The game treats engines as static - but progressive models of aircraft also often used the newest developments in the engines. Scenario 1 (and the game) treats the engines as less important than the air frame, yet one of Japan's biggest problems was the lack of high horsepower engines of the correct size.

On a completely different note, would you be interested in getting a Scenario Checker Report on your scenarios as I develop that piece of the scenario editor?

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

The problem with this is that the ALTHIST side of this is the whole reason for the Mods. Japan faces serious trade-offs within these Mods and that is the cost of Yamamoto coming to power as well as changes to the Treaty System. If Japan gains one ship then GB and USA gain that change of 5 to Japan's 3. Japan adds a 30,000Ton BC then the United States and Great Britain gain up to 50,000T of comparable warship.

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Got a proposal to make the CLV/CAV into CVE designations. Right now--due to the limits of the game--it is difficult to create a surface ship with aircraft ability and get it to do EVERYTHING.

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
The Mod creates SNLF Assault Brigades by combining three normal SNLF units into a Brigade-Sized Force.

Wonder if it might be logical to allow for an upgrade to the units and incorporate defensive characteristics in mid-43 on? Thinking about adding a CD component from all those extra guns taken off of warships in 41-42-43. Additionally, would a slight increase in the units engineers/combat engineers be of use? We wouldn't see an increase in AV (presently between 190-200) instead it would toughen the unit as an atoll defense force.

Don't know. Just ideas...

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
The problem with this is that the ALTHIST side of this is the whole reason for the Mods. Japan faces serious trade-offs within these Mods and that is the cost of Yamamoto coming to power as well as changes to the Treaty System. If Japan gains one ship then GB and USA gain that change of 5 to Japan's 3. Japan adds a 30,000Ton BC then the United States and Great Britain gain up to 50,000T of comparable warship.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

The role of the CAV/CLV was to augment the Scouting Force’s ability to spot enemies at a distance, and only use its main guns in self-defense.

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

The role of the CAV/CLV was to augment the Scouting Force’s ability to spot enemies at a distance, and only use its main guns in self-defense.

Right now in-game, CAV/CLVs are designated as light carriers - CVL. This classification allows them to operate aircraft, but restricts them to only AirCom or Escort TFs.

CVs and CVLs are subject to the carrier reaction "step-in". This is coded to the ship type and only applies to CVs and CVLs, but not to CVEs.

So, if you're operating a CAV/CLV as cover for other ships, and an enemy CV/CVL jumps your TF with your CAV/CLV in it as a CVL, either or both TF WILL react "step-in" and the CAV/CLV will get creamed.

CVEs on the other hand, are not subject to this reaction "step-in", regardless of the type of TF they're in, including an AirCom TF.

CVEs can operate in many types of TFs, in particular CV Escort, but NOT SurCom TFs. CVEs are NOT subject to the "step-in" reaction feature, even when placed in an AirCom TF (without CVs or CVLs).

In terms of game mechanics, I think that classifying CAV/CLVs as CVEs will get them to do what they were intended to do. When they get rebuilt they can transition to CVL type.