Scenario for Testing: Focus Pacific

Please post here for questions and discussion about scenario design, art and sound modding and the game editor for WITP Admiral's Edition.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Skyland
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:30 pm
Location: France

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by Skyland »

What you describe here is a Division Cuirassée (DCr) composed of 2 half brigade + BCP (Battalion Chasseurs) + Artillery Rgt + AT battery + Support.

You may want to add some engineers (Compagnie de Sapeurs) and a Division HQ
There should be 12 AT guns, 3 60mm mortars and 4 81 mm in BCP. You should add also some motorized support in all sub-units.
Lessons learned from the 1940 battle was the lack of AA guns. You can add more 20 mm AA to replace 25 mm AA guns.

Regarding the stat for tanks, i think you can use stat from R-35 tank that should be in my mod to represent H39. And for B1bis, armor is 60mm and an idea is to use stat of 75mm field gun for antisoft and stat of a 47mm AT gun for antiarmor value. Loadcost is weight i think so 31 (tons).

paradigmblue
Posts: 784
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:44 pm
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by paradigmblue »

ORIGINAL: Skyland

What you describe here is a Division Cuirassée (DCr) composed of 2 half brigade + BCP (Battalion Chasseurs) + Artillery Rgt + AT battery + Support.

You may want to add some engineers (Compagnie de Sapeurs) and a Division HQ
There should be 12 AT guns, 3 60mm mortars and 4 81 mm in BCP. You should add also some motorized support in all sub-units.
Lessons learned from the 1940 battle was the lack of AA guns. You can add more 20 mm AA to replace 25 mm AA guns.

Regarding the stat for tanks, i think you can use stat from R-35 tank that should be in my mod to represent H39. And for B1bis, armor is 60mm and an idea is to use stat of 75mm field gun for antisoft and stat of a 47mm AT gun for antiarmor value. Loadcost is weight i think so 31 (tons).


This is all incredibly helpful, thanks Skyland.

If you could also provide some insight for me on air group naming conventions, that would be fantastic. Currently I'm using GC I.1, I.2, etc, but I've seen several different contradictory numbering and naming conventions, and I'm not sure which ones should be used for fighters, which ones for bombers, etc.

Thank you again for your insight!



User avatar
Skyland
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:30 pm
Location: France

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by Skyland »

A Escadre is 2 or sometimes 3 Groupes
A Groupe is composed of 2 Escadrilles
An Escadrille is 9 planes + spares (3)

GC is Groupe de Chasse (Fighter)
GB is Groupe de Bombardement (Bomber) or GBA (GB Assault)
GR is Groupe de Reconnaissance (Reco)

Example :
4th Escadre de Chasse (4°EC) is composed of
GC I/4 with Escadrilles n°1 and n°2
GC II/4 with Escadrilles n°3 and n°4

GAO are Groupe Aerien d'Observation (tactical reco group attached to army corps HQ)
User avatar
Skyland
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:30 pm
Location: France

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by Skyland »

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Para: nice looking mod. Do you know how much of the Joffre was actually completed when the France fell?

I think this is the last picture of Joffre (end march 1940). Main deck is finished and hangar wall are being raised.

Image
Attachments
joffre18.jpg
joffre18.jpg (140.18 KiB) Viewed 497 times
User avatar
btd64
Posts: 12738
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:48 am
Location: Lancaster, OHIO

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by btd64 »

Para,
Don't forget the CV capable fighters at Tahiti are not CV Capable. Small adjustment. Also, did you get the ship art I sent to you? Also, as someone mentioned above or on previous page, The Japanese start with a greatly enhanced navy. So, I would increase Allied naval aircraft production by maybe 10% and include at least one more USN CV. As a Alternate player option, Set no unit withdrawals to ON. I have played Andy's Scenario 60 twice and I am in oct 42 on number three and this time I set withdrawals to ON to balance a little. This does help some, against the AI. Not really sure if it would be necessary against a "LIVE" opponent with a additional USN CV group. In this current game I didn't change any production numbers on airframes and I am feeling it. About half of my LBA fighter squadrons are at half strenght or less. CV aircraft are OK. As I have a few in the pool.
I mention scenario 60 because you mentioned Andy's Nasty AI scripts in one of your first posts. PM me and I can send you the info I have on my extra CV group....GP
Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester
DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
New Game Development Team

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24063
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: paradigmblue

Hi Lowpe, I have several units of French Colonial Infantry in the scenario. I actually have "French Tank Brigade" written in my "To Do" list, but I'm going to have to do some research on what kind of unit composition that would be, and what those device stats would look like.

I do love those tanks, in fact any early war French stuff, but in truth, any Free French armored units would have gone to Cairo. I can't imagine the French would be able to service and maintain tanks out of Tahiti, or even India, well maybe India given your history and timeline.

Once the war in Europe is over, however, French Forces might be freed up and sent over but by then they would be using lend lease equipment.

So if you throw a tank brigade over to the Pacific...pools should be very, very low imho.

In addition, you might send some more French pilots over once the Battle for Britain is over.

And finally, you might want to have withdraw dates for the French forces, as you see fit, the closer we get to DDay since I am sure the priority would be fielding forces in France proper before the Pacific.

Great work[&o]
paradigmblue
Posts: 784
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:44 pm
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by paradigmblue »

ORIGINAL: Skyland

A Escadre is 2 or sometimes 3 Groupes
A Groupe is composed of 2 Escadrilles
An Escadrille is 9 planes + spares (3)

GC is Groupe de Chasse (Fighter)
GB is Groupe de Bombardement (Bomber) or GBA (GB Assault)
GR is Groupe de Reconnaissance (Reco)

Example :
4th Escadre de Chasse (4°EC) is composed of
GC I/4 with Escadrilles n°1 and n°2
GC II/4 with Escadrilles n°3 and n°4

GAO are Groupe Aerien d'Observation (tactical reco group attached to army corps HQ)

Fantastic, I'll make the name changes this weekend.
paradigmblue
Posts: 784
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:44 pm
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by paradigmblue »

ORIGINAL: General Patton

Para,
Don't forget the CV capable fighters at Tahiti are not CV Capable. Small adjustment.


Those fighters weren't historically CV capable, but they have an upgrade path that allows them to upgrade to CV capable fighters. I'm almost tempted to remove those two groups from the game, and have them arrive with lend-lease CV capable planes 6 months in.
Also, did you get the ship art I sent to you?

Yes, thank you. I actually was using Gary's art in the mod for most of the French units - if there are specific ships missing artwork let me know, I will just have to add them to the dropbox file. All of the art looks present on my end, so I'm not sure why it's not showing up on yours. Please re-download the art folders in dropbox and let me know if any ships aren't showing up.
Also, as someone mentioned above or on previous page, The Japanese start with a greatly enhanced navy. So, I would increase Allied naval aircraft production by maybe 10% and include at least one more USN CV.

The allies have a lot more carrier power already vs stock. At the beginning of the game, the allied player starts with two additional CVLs (The Bearn and Ares), six additional CAVs (The Vindictive, Vengeful, Melbourne, Wellington, Charlotte and Jacksonville), has two AVs that can immediately start a conversion to CVEs, and receives an additional CVL with the Yorktown (King's Mountain). The addition of the Joffre and Painleve also gives the allied player two additional CVs by April.

Allied naval aircraft production is increased significantly vs stock. Additionally, the allied player can buy more air frames via the aircraft purchase system. This is not a small emergency amount like in Between the Storms, but significant amounts of aircraft that can be purchased this way. Between these two changes, I would be surprised if the allied player wasn't swimming in air frames. This is intentional, as I want the allied player to have the confidence in challenging the Japanese even while Japan is expanding.
As a Alternate player option, Set no unit withdrawals to ON. I have played Andy's Scenario 60 twice and I am in oct 42 on number three and this time I set withdrawals to ON to balance a little. This does help some, against the AI. Not really sure if it would be necessary against a "LIVE" opponent with a additional USN CV group.

I had the same thought when creating the mod. 90% of the ships and airgroups that withdraw in stock no longer need to in this scenario. This is especially significant for British carrier power. When they don't withdraw, you wind up having a British Carrier Task Force that is nothing to sneeze at.
In this current game I didn't change any production numbers on airframes and I am feeling it. About half of my LBA fighter squadrons are at half strenght or less. CV aircraft are OK. As I have a few in the pool.

LBA production numbers are also much higher, which allows the allied player to keep their 50 additional air groups well stocked with planes throughout the war. I may be wrong, but I really think that the allied player isn't going to be hurting for planes unless the Japanese player is smarter in the air war than they are. Now quality air frames that won't be shot down en masse by the Japanese? That's another story.

User avatar
btd64
Posts: 12738
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:48 am
Location: Lancaster, OHIO

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by btd64 »

Para,
CV capable aircraft made available 6 months in is a good idea. At that point the French CV's would be ready or at least close to ready.
Good on the production.
Juan has updated arrival dates of some purchase groups by the way. Just released with the new BTS's 2.1 update.
Let me know when you need another look at your next update. Email/PM me or post here. Although I check email more often....GP
Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester
DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
New Game Development Team

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
paradigmblue
Posts: 784
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:44 pm
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by paradigmblue »

Updated the scenario files this morning. Changes include:

Addition of a Division Cuirassée for the French, arriving in mid 43.

Changed the names of French air units to a more accurate naming convention.

Thanks to Skyland for help with both of the changes!
User avatar
EHansen
Posts: 360
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 1:31 am

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by EHansen »

So, is this scenario ready to try?
paradigmblue
Posts: 784
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:44 pm
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by paradigmblue »

ORIGINAL: EHansen

So, is this scenario ready to try?
Try, yes. Ready for full release yet? No. It still needs a polish pass, a balance pass and most importantly some more testing to make sure that it's fun.

I'm looking for someone to play a PBEM game with me to help with all three.
User avatar
MadmanRick
Posts: 579
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 2:39 pm
Location: New York City, U.S.A.

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by MadmanRick »

As a significant contributor of plane art to both the Ryan Art Mod and various other ventures, I offer up my services. So if you are in need of any additional aircraft artwork, just drop me a line. I will be in D.C. for a conference beginning this Friday, but I will be back home in less than a week. So I should be able to get any request(s) turned around pdq.

Rick
Image
"Our lives begin to end the moment we become silent about things that matter". Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
User avatar
traskott
Posts: 1571
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:30 am
Location: Valladolid, Spain

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by traskott »

If u need a player to test the scen, im available.
User avatar
btd64
Posts: 12738
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:48 am
Location: Lancaster, OHIO

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by btd64 »

ORIGINAL: paradigmblue

ORIGINAL: EHansen

So, is this scenario ready to try?
Try, yes. Ready for full release yet? No. It still needs a polish pass, a balance pass and most importantly some more testing to make sure that it's fun.

I'm looking for someone to play a PBEM game with me to help with all three.

Available if needed....GP
Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester
DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
New Game Development Team

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
paradigmblue
Posts: 784
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:44 pm
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by paradigmblue »

ORIGINAL: MadmanRick

As a significant contributor of plane art to both the Ryan Art Mod and various other ventures, I offer up my services. So if you are in need of any additional aircraft artwork, just drop me a line. I will be in D.C. for a conference beginning this Friday, but I will be back home in less than a week. So I should be able to get any request(s) turned around pdq.

Rick
Thank you for your generous offer!
paradigmblue
Posts: 784
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:44 pm
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by paradigmblue »

Quick question - I'm adding air art kindly provided by Madman Rick.

How do I ensure that I'm lining up the planes correctly on the top view and the AtopAlpha and the JtopAlpha .bmps?

I'm adding the planes in the appropriate spaces, but I'm just not sure how to make sure that they are pixel perfect in being aligned to where they're supposed to go.

Also, does anyone have some good stats and/or art for the Nakajima G5N?
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9881
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by ny59giants »

Also, does anyone have some good stats and/or art for the Nakajima G5N?

Check the RA/BTS thread. I think John 3rd added her.
[center]Image[/center]
paradigmblue
Posts: 784
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:44 pm
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by paradigmblue »

ORIGINAL: ny59giants
Also, does anyone have some good stats and/or art for the Nakajima G5N?

Check the RA/BTS thread. I think John 3rd added her.
Right you are, thank you!
paradigmblue
Posts: 784
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:44 pm
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska

RE: Focus Pacific

Post by paradigmblue »

I have updated the scenario, and those that have previously downloaded the scenario will need to redownload the scenario files, as well as allied and japanese plane art files.

The specific changes are two numerous to mention, with a lot of the work being miscellaneous polish and clean-up, but the noticeable changes give the allies a bit more to fight back with in 1942 vs the last version.

I hope you enjoy! As always, please let me know of any bugs are inconsistencies you find so I can make the fix.

Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design and Modding”