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: BTSL 3.1 Release

 
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: BTSL 3.1 Release Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 3/22/2017 5:24:43 AM   
John 3rd


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

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

John: How much of a big deal would it be if I didn't reduce the HI and LI in the Home Islands?

Whats up with the upgrade path for the Japanese air HQ/Div/flotilla's.


We have a 43 upgrade for Air Flotilla, Air Fleet, Air Division and Air Army. It isn't too much but helps some.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 211
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 3/22/2017 9:33:09 PM   
cardas

 

Posts: 184
Joined: 4/8/2016
Status: offline 		Okay, seem you got most of the small errors although you forgot about the Dutch corrections I'd posted about earlier.

The following deals mostly with the Dutch ships. These are fixes that are a bit more subjective. Although the original values are clearly wrong, the issue is more as to what exactly you put there instead.


Grimsby RAN-II (167): Upgrade Delay should be 21. Should Upgrade to 168 (As mentioned by US87891)

Admiralen Batch II (230): Weapon slot 1 and 2 (12 cm main guns) has Num: 2, Turrets: 2. Should be Num: 2, Turrets: 1.

SM GM (250, 289, 290): Cruise Speed: 8, Endurance: 3000, Fuel: 180, Maneuver: 43

Med GM (251, 291, 292): Cruise Speed: 8, Endurance: 3500, Fuel: 235, Maneuver: 40

A Class (252): Cruise Speed: 8 Endurance: 1200, Maneuver: 67

Merbaboe (253): Cruise Speed: 8, Fuel: 20, maneuver: 71

Alor (254): Cruise Speed: 8, Fuel: 40, Endurance: 1320, Maneuver: 71

Soemenep (255): Max Speed: 10, Cruise speed: 8, Fuel: 45, Endurance: 1320, Maneuver: 53

Djember (256): Cruise Speed: 8, Fuel: 45, Endurance: 1440, Maneuver: 70

Ardjoeno (257): Max Speed: 10, Cruise Speed: 8, Fuel: 15, Maneuver: 71

Arend (258): Max Speed: 18, Cruise Speed: 12, Fuel: 275, Endurance: 4000, Maneuver: 51

Admiralty MMS (809): Should upgrade to 809

Juyusen YO (2136): Should upgrade to 2136 (probably, inherited from DBB)

Adzuma (2149, 2150): Should upgrade to 2150



The following are device fixes for the Dutch 15 cm gun that I've also mentioned earlier and they should seriously be done. At the moment the Dutch has 15 cm guns which fires a heavier round with a higher sectional density at a higher velocity than the the Japanese 14 cm gun yet gets less penetration. In fact they also have less penetration than the 5.25 inch (~13.3 cm) gun used by e.g. Dido. Actually, nevermind that, with the values as they are right now they only get 1 mm more penetration than the US 5in/54 gun!

I can't find any sources for penetration as such but I have made a reasonable guess.

15cm/50 No. 11 (1630):
Range: 28
Accuracy: 50
Penetration: 128
Anti-armor: 64

15cm/50 No. 10 (1631):
Range: 28
Accuracy: 50
Penetration: 128
Anti-armor: 64

15cm/50 No. 9 (1632):
Range: 28
Accuracy: 50
Penetration: 128
Anti-armor: 64

15cm/50 No. 6 (1641):
Range: 21
Penetration: 128
Anti-armor: 64

< Message edited by cardas -- 3/22/2017 9:40:07 PM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 212
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 3/28/2017 3:41:32 PM   
cardas

 

Posts: 184
Joined: 4/8/2016
Status: offline 		King George V (005): Hm, I said it was an error with 004 upgrading to 005 instantly, however the ship class should definitely not have been deleted though! Anson, Duke of York and Howe uses it when they arrive in 1945.
I also said the upgrade it was an issue inherited from stock, but I double checked and that wasn't the case. Now I'm unsure if I was drunk and cross-eyed when I thought it upgraded from 004 instantly to 005 in BTSL or if the error was actually present. Sorry about that if I had seen something that wasn't there.

(in reply to cardas)
Post #: 213
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/8/2017 8:57:56 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Nice to see so many FP groups able to upgrade to Rufes and later Rex in latest BTS Lite version (most of the -2 FP groups on CA/BBs do so). After re-sizing, I should have about 500 additional fighters. But more importantly, lots of trained IJN fighter pilots in the future.
Thanks John

_____________________________


(in reply to cardas)
Post #: 214
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/8/2017 4:15:09 PM   
Admiral DadMan


Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline 		Would there be any interest in enabling the US "pre-treaty" BBs and BCs to have the ability to undergo the "King Board" 5"/51 & 5"/25 AA suite re-builds to twin 5"/38 immediately after Dec 7?

Here is a sample of the methodology:

Nevada Class:
-Starts scenario in standard pre-war configuration.
-Dec 41 can begin 4 month "King Board" AA modernization via conversion at a 200+ level Repair Shipyard.
-Continues as “Oklahoma” class if King Board AA is not chosen, with modest AA upgrades.

In the Stock scenarios, Nevada has to wait until Dec 42 until she can get the King Board upgrade, and that upgrade takes 7 months. In reading about the upgrade on undamaged ships, Maryland took 4 months (May 45 - August 45) at Puget Sound, Seattle to complete work, which is what I propose as a time-frame.

I'm currently testing the mechanism on Focus Pacific, and it works.

Thoughts?

< Message edited by Admiral DadMan -- 4/8/2017 4:18:58 PM >

_____________________________

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

CVB Langley:

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 215
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/10/2017 11:55:33 AM   
Cavalry Corp

 

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline 		Nay news as to when RA and all these are sort of finalised and finished so we can consider what to start next?

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)
Post #: 216
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/10/2017 5:28:41 PM   
John 3rd


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

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

Would there be any interest in enabling the US "pre-treaty" BBs and BCs to have the ability to undergo the "King Board" 5"/51 & 5"/25 AA suite re-builds to twin 5"/38 immediately after Dec 7?

Here is a sample of the methodology:

Nevada Class:
-Starts scenario in standard pre-war configuration.
-Dec 41 can begin 4 month "King Board" AA modernization via conversion at a 200+ level Repair Shipyard.
-Continues as “Oklahoma” class if King Board AA is not chosen, with modest AA upgrades.

In the Stock scenarios, Nevada has to wait until Dec 42 until she can get the King Board upgrade, and that upgrade takes 7 months. In reading about the upgrade on undamaged ships, Maryland took 4 months (May 45 - August 45) at Puget Sound, Seattle to complete work, which is what I propose as a time-frame.

I'm currently testing the mechanism on Focus Pacific, and it works.

Thoughts?


Hey Sir!

The Fleet has already begun the upgrade when Dec 7th occurs. We have the New Mexico-Class at Pearl Harbor when the war starts. Several of the 'Big 5' are on the West already doing their upgrade.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)
Post #: 217
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/10/2017 5:30:49 PM   
John 3rd


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

ORIGINAL: cavalry

Nay news as to when RA and all these are sort of finalised and finished so we can consider what to start next?



Hey Cavalry.

I have between the Storms out. RA and Treaty have not had a serious makeover. The new database used for BTS should enable me to do these changes to the other Mods in an easier/quicker manner but I simply haven't had time to grab that bull by the horns.

Recommend Between the Storms. With all the changes on both sides it should be a TON OF FUN!

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Cavalry Corp)
Post #: 218
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/10/2017 6:40:33 PM   
Admiral DadMan


Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

Would there be any interest in enabling the US "pre-treaty" BBs and BCs to have the ability to undergo the "King Board" 5"/51 & 5"/25 AA suite re-builds to twin 5"/38 immediately after Dec 7?

Here is a sample of the methodology:

Nevada Class:
-Starts scenario in standard pre-war configuration.
-Dec 41 can begin 4 month "King Board" AA modernization via conversion at a 200+ level Repair Shipyard.
-Continues as “Oklahoma” class if King Board AA is not chosen, with modest AA upgrades.

In the Stock scenarios, Nevada has to wait until Dec 42 until she can get the King Board upgrade, and that upgrade takes 7 months. In reading about the upgrade on undamaged ships, Maryland took 4 months (May 45 - August 45) at Puget Sound, Seattle to complete work, which is what I propose as a time-frame.

I'm currently testing the mechanism on Focus Pacific, and it works.

Thoughts?


Hey Sir!

The Fleet has already begun the upgrade when Dec 7th occurs. We have the New Mexico-Class at Pearl Harbor when the war starts. Several of the 'Big 5' are on the West already doing their upgrade.


I must be going blind. Totally missed that.

I'm guessing that the Tennessee, Nevada, and Pennsylvania classes are later in the year because they have to wait their turn?

Fascinating what I've been reading about what was proposed for the "Big 5" + New Mexicos to get them up to fast battleship status (28kts/15kts).

Any thought about giving your Constitution class a King Board upgrade?

< Message edited by Admiral DadMan -- 4/10/2017 7:43:42 PM >

_____________________________

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

CVB Langley:

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 219
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/10/2017 10:28:14 PM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline 		AdmiralDadMan: What were the changes for the Big5, New Mexicos and the Constitution class?

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)
Post #: 220
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/10/2017 11:09:17 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Those Constitutions are MARVELOUS! Wouldn't everyone want to have a pair? Big, wide open decks for locks of AA guns...mmmm...

Not sure Adm Dadman. Could give it some thought!

The Big 5 were scheduled for the King Board upgrade and it got put off. NOT in BTS.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 221
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/10/2017 11:11:47 PM   
BillBrown


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

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

Nay news as to when RA and all these are sort of finalised and finished so we can consider what to start next?



Hey Cavalry.

I have between the Storms out. RA and Treaty have not had a serious makeover. The new database used for BTS should enable me to do these changes to the other Mods in an easier/quicker manner but I simply haven't had time to grab that bull by the horns.

Recommend Between the Storms. With all the changes on both sides it should be a TON OF FUN!


The last update for BtS is version 2.5 dated April 19, 2016.

You have put up an updated BtS Lite version 3.1 dated Mar 221, 2017

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 222
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/11/2017 1:00:43 AM   
Admiral DadMan


Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

AdmiralDadMan: What were the changes for the Big5, New Mexicos and the Constitution class?

For AA?

_____________________________

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

CVB Langley:

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 223
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/11/2017 1:05:43 AM   
Admiral DadMan


Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Those Constitutions are MARVELOUS! Wouldn't everyone want to have a pair? Big, wide open decks for locks of AA guns...mmmm...

Not sure Adm Dadman. Could give it some thought!

The Big 5 were scheduled for the King Board upgrade and it got put off. NOT in BTS.


Like this:





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

CVB Langley:

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 224
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/11/2017 1:10:38 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline 		Admiral: You mentioned speed increase for the older BB's. Are you talking about better engines or increasing the lengh of the ship?

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)
Post #: 225
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/11/2017 12:39:51 PM   
John 3rd


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

ORIGINAL: BillBrown


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

Nay news as to when RA and all these are sort of finalised and finished so we can consider what to start next?



Hey Cavalry.

I have between the Storms out. RA and Treaty have not had a serious makeover. The new database used for BTS should enable me to do these changes to the other Mods in an easier/quicker manner but I simply haven't had time to grab that bull by the horns.

Recommend Between the Storms. With all the changes on both sides it should be a TON OF FUN!


The last update for BtS is version 2.5 dated April 19, 2016.

You have put up an updated BtS Lite version 3.1 dated Mar 221, 2017


You want Between the Storms Lite 3.1. This is the most recent update.

I shall make the changes to BTS soon because those are easy. Take out the Owari BBs and the B-65s then replace with four Yamatos.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to BillBrown)
Post #: 226
RE: BTSL 3.1 Release - 4/11/2017 2:31:37 PM   
Admiral DadMan


Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Admiral: You mentioned speed increase for the older BB's. Are you talking about better engines or increasing the lengh of the ship?

In building the last 8 "Standard Battleships" (New Mexico, Tennessee, Colorado classes), the same basic hull shapes were used: 600ft @WL, 97ft Beam, 30ft Draft (38ft for Colorado). This gives a natural hull speed of 24.49kts. To drive the ships @21kts, you'd need about 35k of shaft horse power (shp).

By 1940, more compact, more powerful, and more fuel efficient propulsion machinery had been developed (as installed in the South Dakota class BBs) to afford the quantum leap in shp. SoDak's modern power plant could generate 133,000shp. With some effort this could be adapted to those 8 ships (they really should be called the "Big 8").

Together with the King Board AA upgrade/overhaul/refit (5in/51 & 5in/25 to 5in/38 twin, and the torpedo bulges), these ships theoretically could make 28kts without lengthening their hulls. Granted, adding 25 feet of bow to lower the block coefficient wouldn't hurt.

Constitution can already make 34/35kts, but could use the AA refit.

< Message edited by Admiral DadMan -- 4/11/2017 3:32:25 PM >

_____________________________

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

CVB Langley:

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 227
BTSL 3.2 Release - 4/12/2017 5:34:40 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		BTSL 3.2 released today and on the website. Did some serious tweaking to Japanese Patrol/Recon air units to better reflect Yamamoto's vision. I had, quite frankly, avoided doing this due to large number of units but had time this morning to get it done.

Other Items:
1. Fixed an upgrade path issue with Lily.
2. Added a second Japanese 4EB Daitai arriving at the end of 1942. Starts with only 2 planes but can be built up to 36. This allows a Japanese 'strategic' air contingent of 72 bombers if the player wants it.


Michael asked me a question on the Furutaka and Kako-Class CLs (remember they are downgraded to CLs to make them a bit more capable). His question was where is the CLAA conversion? He and I had talked about it with them STARTING the war in that mode. I thought about it some and decided to allow for the conversion in Feb 42. The conversion would make them excellent CV Escorts and free up valuable CAs if wanted. Question is does the Japanese player WANT to do this in the middle of the opening war moves. Should provide a nice conundrum for that player...



_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)
Post #: 228
RE: BTSL 3.2 Release - 4/12/2017 5:35:22 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Starting work on taking care of the original BTS adding all these updates. Shouldn't take too much.


_____________________________



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 #: 229
Between the Storms 2.6 Release - 4/12/2017 6:23:16 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Got it done. BTS 2.6 is released and available for download. How about that!!??


_____________________________



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 #: 230
RE: Between the Storms 2.6 Release - 4/12/2017 7:05:49 PM   
btd64


Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline 		You da man John....GP

_____________________________

Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 231
RE: Between the Storms 2.6 Release - 4/12/2017 7:30:52 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		I have to admit that there is a 'little' surprise in Between the Storms. Just a 'little' one--if you WANT to build it...

Thanks GP.


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/12/2017 7:31:09 PM >

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to btd64)
Post #: 232
RE: Between the Storms 2.6 Release - 4/12/2017 8:20:19 PM   
btd64


Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline 		Busy with Mike and BTSL at the moment, But thanks....GP

_____________________________

Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 233
RE: Between the Storms 2.6 Release - 4/12/2017 9:42:48 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		How is your game going GP? I haven't seen much in the AARs...


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to btd64)
Post #: 234
RE: Between the Storms 2.6 Release - 5/20/2017 2:06:07 AM   
BillBrown


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

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Got it done. BTS 2.6 is released and available for download. How about that!!??



I just looked and you did not fix the TOE for the 9th Australian Division.

Also, BTSLite has the same problem.

< Message edited by BillBrown -- 5/20/2017 2:09:49 AM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 235
RE: Between the Storms 2.6 Release - 5/20/2017 4:18:14 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Just asked on my Thread. MICHAEL???


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to BillBrown)
Post #: 236
RE: RA 7.9 - 5/20/2017 4:36:46 AM   
BillBrown


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

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

All starting American carriers can now resize from Day One.

Fixed TT issue with Japanese CVs. All carry two basic loads for their TB now.



Apparently, this did not make it into BTS 2.6

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 237
RE: RA 7.9 - 5/20/2017 4:45:10 AM   
BillBrown


Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline 		A-24B's are not fixed, still upgrade to A-24's. I'll check other things tomorrow.

(in reply to BillBrown)
Post #: 238
RE: RA 7.9 - 5/27/2017 2:40:05 PM   
bristolduke

 

Posts: 109
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline 		Is there any target to upgrade the RA scenario?

(in reply to BillBrown)
Post #: 239
RE: RA 7.9 - 6/19/2017 4:59:29 AM   
Kitakami


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

I know I have been away for a long time, but as I looked at the last BtS Lite version, a few questions popped up:

1. Shokaku and Zuikaku are overloaded by 3 planes. Perhaps you should decrease the fighter squadron size by 3, just as it was done with the other 4 fleet carriers?
2. Kiso, Kitakami & Oi are in torpedo cruiser configuration (20 Long Lances per side). Is that as intended?
3. DELETED.
4. Conversion bind 404 (1033 CL Nagara -> 1037 CLAA Nagara): class 1033’s date is 12/42, while class 1037’s date is 10/42. Is that as intended?
5. Conversion bind 104 (1696 BB Fuso -> 1700 BB Fuso (Hybrid)): class 1696’s date is 12/42, while class 1037’s date is 12/43. Perhaps the bind should be (1697 BB Fuso -> 1700 BB Fuso (Hybrid)), as class 1697’s date is 7/43, or at least add it as a possibility?
6. Kiyokawa Maru-2 and Sanyo Maru-2 are the only 2 (out of 10) at-start AV FP units that can’t upgrade to the Rufe. Unless there is a doctrine reason for making those differences, perhaps it would be better if all or none are allowed to upgrade?
7. Ishitaka-1 is the only one (out of 6) at-start BC FP unit that can be upgraded to the Rufe. Unless there is a doctrine reason for making those differences, perhaps it would be better if all or none are allowed to upgrade?
8. CA Chishima, Yoshino, and Seiki’s FP units are reversed in comparison to the other CA FP units; Number 1 can upgrade to the Rufe, and number 2 can’t. For neatness’ sake, perhaps it would be better to have them the other way around?
9. CA Miyako has both Miyako-1 and Miyako-2 being able to upgrade to the Rufe. Perhaps only Miyako-2 should be able to?
10. Aoba-1 is the only unit that can be upgraded to the Rufe in the Aoba and Furutaka classes. Perhaps it should be the same in all four ships (perhaps removing Aoba-1’s ability)?
11. All IJN 2E at-start bomber units can upgrade to the Liz and Rita. Is that as intended?
12. 19th KuT-1 is the only at-start land FP unit equipped with the Pete not able to upgrade to the Rufe. Perhaps it should be able to?
13. Chinhae KuT-1 is the only at-start land FP unit equipped with the Alf that can upgrade to the Rufe. Perhaps it shouldn’t be able to?
14. The Hiryu air group is 21-24-24, and the Soryu air group is 21-21-21. Is that as intended?
15. The Junyo, Hiyo, Kaimon, and Taikaku air groups exceed capacity by 3. Is this as intended?
16. Nisshin's air group exceeds capacity by 2, and two of its 25 mm banks start with 0 ammo. It this as intended?

Since I have been away for so long, I do not know if things should be so or not. Take all of the above with a grain of salt.

Cheers!


< Message edited by Kitakami -- 6/19/2017 3:14:29 PM >

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to bristolduke)
Post #: 240
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: BTSL 3.1 Release Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   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

0.781