RE: Aircraft Pathways

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: Aircraft Pathways

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 >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: Aircraft Pathways

Page: << < prev 21 22 [23] 24 25 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Aircraft Pathways - 9/26/2017 11:54:31 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

Here is my first pass at revision and thinking with each line:

ZERO Line
A6M2 12/41
A6M5 8/43 (10/42) Move back two months--12/42

ZERO FB Line
A6M2 Sen Baku 10/42 (10/42)
A6M7 This plane is not built. The M5 is the LAST of the ZERO Line.

NEED a new FB Candidate from the other planes!

SAM
A7M2 9/45 (2/44) CV Variant Move back to 1/45 which still brings it in 8 months early.
A7M3-J 1/46 (12/44) Move back to 5/45 but still 7 months early.
A7M3 (6/45) CV Variant Also in 5/45.

SAM gets the benefit of more attention but it is still a late-war naval fighter.

JACK
JNM2 9/43 (9/43) Move up to 5/43.
JNM3 4/44 (4/44) Move up to 12/43.
JNM5 1/45 (1/45) Move up to 8/44

JACK-CV Variant
JNM3a (9/44) Move to 4/44.
JNM3b (2/45) Move to 10/44.

The JACK directly benefits from the full attention of the ZERO Design Team, however, its issues stay. This is why a CV-Variant doesn't appear for over a year of time. LOTS of problems leading it to KEEP its high SR.

GEORGE
N1K1-J 9/43 (1/43) Move back to 3/43.
N1K5-J 10/45 (5/45) Move to 4/45.

GEORGE-CV Variant
N1K2-J 11/44 (1/44) Move back to 5/44.
N1K4-A (1/45) Leave at 1/45.

GEORGE advances roughly six months reflecting direct Ministry support for the aircraft. Still has issues, just like JACK, and cannot produce a CV-Variant until 14 months after its debut on the ground.

SUMMATION:
M5 is the sole Japanese CV-Based Fighter until either 1.) JACK 4/44, 2.) SAM 1/45, or 3.0 GEORGE 5/44.

I would say that this SUCKS from a Japanese view but it is probably the best they can hope for...the Japanese can move planes up but they shall spend huge amounts of supply and resources to do so. It is one heck of a choice!

Comments now please...

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 661

RE: Aircraft Pathways - 9/26/2017 11:54:37 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

We have to ensure the fighters are balanced for both sides and what can go on CVs. I devoted 8 factories to George. Three were switched to produce 1st gen by Oct/Nov 42 and the second gen will be Apr 43 using five factories and engine bonus. So I�m getting an advance every 20 Days. This was from 1/44.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 662

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/26/2017 11:55:14 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

Apparently Johns intention is for Japan to have superior CV fighters for the entire war.

Don't think this statement applies with the revision. What do you think?

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to BillBrown)

Post #: 663

RE: Aircraft Pathways - 9/27/2017 12:08:25 AM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

Michael:

Going by your work and using these production lines and dates, when could you--reasonably--deploy George? More importantly when could you deploy a CV-Based 2nd Gen Fighter?

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 664

RE: Aircraft Pathways - 9/27/2017 12:17:27 AM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Here is my first pass at revision and thinking with each line:

ZERO Line
A6M2 12/41
A6M5 8/43 (10/42) Move back two months--12/42

This looks good to me.

quote:

ZERO FB Line
A6M2 Sen Baku 10/42 (10/42)
A6M7 This plane is not built. The M5 is the LAST of the ZERO Line.

NEED a new FB Candidate from the other planes!

This also looks good to me.
What about a FB version of the A6M5, since the M% is the end of the line?

quote:

SAM
A7M2 9/45 (2/44) CV Variant Move back to 1/45 which still brings it in 8 months early.
A7M3-J 1/46 (12/44) Move back to 5/45 but still 7 months early.
A7M3 (6/45) CV Variant Also in 5/45.

SAM gets the benefit of more attention but it is still a late-war naval fighter.

Agreed, but I am not an expert on late war. Others will have to pitch in as to the timing.

quote:

JACK
JNM2 9/43 (9/43) Move up to 5/43.
JNM3 4/44 (4/44) Move up to 12/43.
JNM5 1/45 (1/45) Move up to 8/44

JACK-CV Variant
JNM3a (9/44) Move to 4/44.
JNM3b (2/45) Move to 10/44.

The JACK directly benefits from the full attention of the ZERO Design Team, however, its issues stay. This is why a CV-Variant doesn't appear for over a year of time. LOTS of problems leading it to KEEP its high SR.

This looks good, and the teething problems may be ironed out with research factories.

quote:

GEORGE
N1K1-J 9/43 (1/43) Move back to 3/43.
N1K5-J 10/45 (5/45) Move to 4/45.

GEORGE-CV Variant
N1K2-J 11/44 (1/44) Move back to 5/44.
N1K4-A (1/45) Leave at 1/45.

GEORGE advances roughly six months reflecting direct Ministry support for the aircraft. Still has issues, just like JACK, and cannot produce a CV-Variant until 14 months after its debut on the ground.

This is the one thing that worries me. Perhaps three months is better than six. Just a thought.

quote:

SUMMATION:
M5 is the sole Japanese CV-Based Fighter until either 1.) JACK 4/44, 2.) SAM 1/45, or 3.0 GEORGE 5/44.

I would say that this SUCKS from a Japanese view but it is probably the best they can hope for...the Japanese can move planes up but they shall spend huge amounts of supply and resources to do so. It is one heck of a choice!

That is if no heavy research efforts are focused in either the Jack or the George, which I am sure they will be, so it does not suck as much.

Just my 2 cents.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 665

RE: Aircraft Pathways - 9/27/2017 12:28:13 AM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

Good Thoughts. More?

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 666

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 1:11:07 AM

BillBrown

Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

Apparently Johns intention is for Japan to have superior CV fighters for the entire war.

Don't think this statement applies with the revision. What do you think?

What revision? I don't see one posted on your site. I am using the Sept 25th one.

< Message edited by BillBrown -- 9/27/2017 1:14:33 AM >

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 667

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 4:53:10 AM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

Haven't placed the new one up yet. Am meaning what is listed up here.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to BillBrown)

Post #: 668

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 9:52:28 AM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

quote:

GEORGE
N1K1-J 9/43 (1/43) Move back to 3/43.
N1K5-J 10/45 (5/45) Move to 4/45.

GEORGE-CV Variant
N1K2-J 11/44 (1/44) Move back to 5/44.
N1K4-A (1/45) Leave at 1/45.

GEORGE advances roughly six months reflecting direct Ministry support for the aircraft. Still has issues, just like JACK, and cannot produce a CV-Variant until 14 months after its debut on the ground.

First and foremost, I'm still a relative novice when it comes to playing Japan. My comments are based on current game that is in Feb '43.

NiK1-J (3/43) to N1K2-J (5/44) to N1K4-A (1/45) to N1K5-J (4/45) is the upgrade path for Mr George. Correct??

If so, then the K1 should come in Nov/Dec 42. A very minor advance. However, by devoting about 8 factories to the George line, all those size 30 R&D factories will be repaired and ready to accelerate the 2nd gen planes. Add in the engine bonus and you can advance a month in 20 days (based on what I have happening in my game vs GP). So the 20 days to advance starts in Dec '42 and the CV variant 'may' arrive in Jul/Aug '43.

John - Just remember when figuring out start dates, its the 2nd gen plane and later planes that truly benefit from significant R&D efforts as the size 30 factories should all be repaired.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 669

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 9:56:22 AM

Zecke

Posts: 1330
Joined: 1/15/2005
From: Hitoeton
Status: offline

YES�: we must found the key to found good japan opponets.

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 670

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 1:01:16 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

I was thinking about having the aircraft in TWO, separate design paths so the player has to decide if he wants to really move the Land or the Naval version forward rapidly. Would cost more and take up more research time. Do you think that would be too much?

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Zecke)

Post #: 671

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 1:21:03 PM

bristolduke

Posts: 109
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline

From the write up I can't tell the difference from BTS4.1 and BTSL 4.1. Is there any?

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 672

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 1:31:32 PM

Lecivius

Posts: 4845
Joined: 8/5/2007
From: Denver
Status: offline

I'm still thinking on a bad angle on the tech spiral. If you move up 2nd gen Hellcats, all the follow on (Bearcat etc.) has to get advanced as well. Same for Allied land based aircraft, they need to advance as well. Anything else, and the allied player gets stiffed.

_____________________________

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

(in reply to bristolduke)

Post #: 673

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 1:59:35 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

Perhaps this would work:
N1K1-J (9/43) -> N1K2-J (8/44) -> N1K4-A (4/45) -> N1K5-J (7/45)

If number crunching with 8x 30-size research factories shows the N1K2 would arrive too early, then change it back to:
N1K1-J (12/43) -> N1K2-J (11/44) -> N1K4-A (7/45) -> N1K5-J (10/45)

I am not entirely comfortable with splitting the research effort in two, but that is only me, and you are the experts. Yet, I also think things should not be accelerated to the point where the US planes need to be brought forward. That could lead to too many unintended consequences. I think the focus should be on "what would have been the consequences of ending the A6M program with the A6M5?", nothing more, and nothing game-breaking. The simpler the solution, the better, but I think it should include more advances for the J2M than for the N1K (if any at all for the N1K). After all, the J2M was also a Mitsubishi plane.

To put it in perspective, I think the N1K2-J should arrive AFTER the F4U-1A, which debuts in October of '43, even after acceleration.

Just my 2 cents.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Lecivius)

Post #: 674

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 2:51:20 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

Not bad Kitakami. I'll think on that some more.

Lecivius--I tend to agree with you. A tech spiral would be bad and we want to be somewhat appropriate.

As a thought--following Kitakami's thought--what about putting the effort into JACK seeing it advance some and let GEORGE be GEORGE. If player still want to advance that line then they can if so desired by spending all that research effort.

Will throw out a proposal in a while.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 675

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 2:56:14 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bristolduke

From the write up I can't tell the difference from BTS4.1 and BTSL 4.1. Is there any?

Only the BB decision is the difference. In BTS the Japanese build the Yamtao's. In BTSL, they build the Owari (3x3 16.1" Guns) and get them deployed earlier as well as work on two B-65 BCs for fast CV Escort. The time, money, and resources saved in NOT building the Yamato-Class allows for all sorts of other building option with Japan.

Do you want the option of 4 monster Yamato-Class OR 4 conventional BBs of the Owari-Class and 2 B-65?

< Message edited by John 3rd -- 9/27/2017 2:57:16 PM >

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to bristolduke)

Post #: 676

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 7:09:45 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

More I've thought about it, while at work, the more I agree on shifting GEORGE back some. Will have a proposal in a bit.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 677

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 7:26:29 PM

bristolduke

Posts: 109
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline

Thanks

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 678

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 9:18:42 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

OK. Here is the Real Life George Production Line w/Year and Month:

GEORGE
N1K1-J 09/43
N1K2-J 11/44
N1K5-J 10/45

Mod GEORGE Production Line
N1K1-J 9/43
N1K2-J 11/44 (CV)
N1K4-A 1/45 (CV)
N1K5-J 10/45 (CV)

The Japanese have a chance to develop an excellent CV-Based Fighter but it will take a lot of research to bring it forward as the A6M5 tries to hold the line. We'll say that instead of moving the plane models earlier, the extra research goes into creating a model strong enough for landings on the carrier.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to bristolduke)

Post #: 679

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 9:27:46 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

The JACK Line:

JACK
JNM2 9/43 Move up to 5/43--Advance 4 Months
JNM3 4/44 Move up to 12/43--Advance 5 Months
JNM5 1/45 Move up to 8/44--Advance 5 Months

JACK-CV Variant
JNM3a 4/44--Allows 5 Months of testing, fixing, and refinement for the CV-Based Variant
JNM3b 10/44--Six further months of work to make the plane less 'buggy' and accident prone

The JACK directly benefits from the full attention of the ZERO Design Team, however, its issues stay. This is why a CV-Variant doesn't appear for over a year of time. LOTS of problems leading it to KEEP its high SR.

Here we shall start with two production lines. This should reflect Horikoshi's Design Team moving from the ZERO to the JACK. There are no diversions to continuously do new models of the A6M Line. The plane has all sorts of issues and problems but it is brought in by sheer force of will and dedication by the Designers.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 680

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 9:31:14 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

The best, at the end of the war, is still the SAM:

SAM
A7M2 11/44
A7M3 4/45
A7M3-J 5/45

SAM gets the benefit of more attention but it is still a late-war naval fighter.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 681

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 9:38:29 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

CV-Variant Summary:

A6M2 to A6M5 in October 1942
JNM3a deploys April 1944 with an upgrade in October 1944
N1K2-J deploys November 1944 with an upgrade in N1K4-A in January 1945
A7M2 deploys November 1944 with upgrade in April 1945

There will be a long dry spell between A6M5 and whatever you focus research on. Look like a nightmare that could be a lot of fun for the Japanese Player.

Done. Thoughts???

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 682

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 10:32:26 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

A6M5 - can she get some armor??

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 683

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 11:02:28 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

Not in the design line Sir. Still love ya though...

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 684

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/27/2017 11:50:22 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
OK. Here is the Real Life George Production Line w/Year and Month:

GEORGE
N1K1-J 09/43
N1K2-J 11/44
N1K5-J 10/45

Mod GEORGE Production Line
N1K1-J 9/43
N1K2-J 11/44 (CV)
N1K4-A 1/45 (CV)
N1K5-J 10/45 (CV)

The Japanese have a chance to develop an excellent CV-Based Fighter but it will take a lot of research to bring it forward as the A6M5 tries to hold the line. We'll say that instead of moving the plane models earlier, the extra research goes into creating a model strong enough for landings on the carrier.

I know this is being anal, but I would suggest that CV-capable versions have the -A suffix, while the non-CV-capable versions have the -J suffix. Historical accuracy and all that ;p

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 685

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/28/2017 12:11:53 AM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

CV-Variant Summary:

A6M2 to A6M5 in October 1942
J2M3a deploys April 1944 with an upgrade in October 1944
N1K2-J deploys November 1944 with an upgrade in N1K4-A in January 1945
A7M2 deploys November 1944 with upgrade in April 1945

There will be a long dry spell between A6M5 and whatever you focus research on. Look like a nightmare that could be a lot of fun for the Japanese Player.

Done. Thoughts???

I like it. The N1K2-J can be advanced so that it comes in earlier by researching the N1K1-J first, and then changing the model in the research factories. The J2M line can also be researched, although the non-CV line might bear more fruit. Finally, the A7M is going to be a late-war plane, no doubt.

Of course there IS competition for research factories... the G5M/G8M heavy bombers, the B6N's & B7A's, the J7W... I like the predicament the Japanese player will be in. Will have to choose one or two, but can't choose them all if there is to be any serious advance.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 686

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/28/2017 3:35:26 AM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kitakami

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
OK. Here is the Real Life George Production Line w/Year and Month:

GEORGE
N1K1-J 09/43
N1K2-J 11/44
N1K5-J 10/45

Mod GEORGE Production Line
N1K1-J 9/43
N1K2-J 11/44 (CV)
N1K4-A 1/45 (CV)
N1K5-J 10/45 (CV)

The Japanese have a chance to develop an excellent CV-Based Fighter but it will take a lot of research to bring it forward as the A6M5 tries to hold the line. We'll say that instead of moving the plane models earlier, the extra research goes into creating a model strong enough for landings on the carrier.

I know this is being anal, but I would suggest that CV-capable versions have the -A suffix, while the non-CV-capable versions have the -J suffix. Historical accuracy and all that ;p

Great comment. Will implement that thought.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 687

RE: BTSL Complete - 9/28/2017 3:36:22 AM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kitakami

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

CV-Variant Summary:

A6M2 to A6M5 in October 1942
J2M3a deploys April 1944 with an upgrade in October 1944
N1K2-J deploys November 1944 with an upgrade in N1K4-A in January 1945
A7M2 deploys November 1944 with upgrade in April 1945

There will be a long dry spell between A6M5 and whatever you focus research on. Look like a nightmare that could be a lot of fun for the Japanese Player.

Done. Thoughts???

I like it. The N1K2-J can be advanced so that it comes in earlier by researching the N1K1-J first, and then changing the model in the research factories. The J2M line can also be researched, although the non-CV line might bear more fruit. Finally, the A7M is going to be a late-war plane, no doubt.

Of course there IS competition for research factories... the G5M/G8M heavy bombers, the B6N's & B7A's, the J7W... I like the predicament the Japanese player will be in. Will have to choose one or two, but can't choose them all if there is to be any serious advance.

There are BUCKETS of choices and that is something I love to add into the Mods. I do believe that this plan works. Does anyone else have comments?

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 688

RE: Aircraft Pathways - 9/29/2017 2:28:53 AM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

Have sent the files over to Michael to look at. NOTHING has been changed yet. Want him to take a look and then I'll change all the material we've talked about and then a release for people to take a look at prior to calling them finished.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 689

RE: RA 7.9 - 9/29/2017 2:34:03 AM

BillBrown

Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

From the Sub Thread:

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

So the USN get three that can resize and the IJN gets all of theirs?

No. You inferred. ALL pre-war US CV/CVL ships can: Lex, Sara, King's Mountain, Ely, Langley, Yorktown, Enterprise, Hornet, and Wasp. Make sense? The others come in and do their thing as per normal.