Focus Pacific: Release

[cardas]

The 7.62mm ShKAS MG doesn't have such high accuracy for no reason, it's a clear outlier in real world performance in the 7.5 mm - 7.92 mm span. 39 accuracy is actually a bit low for that gun. I can't see any justification from a real world perspective as to why it wouldn't have the best accuracy of all the aircraft MGs.
Note that I believe RPM is the most important part for accuracy determination, with MV playing a secondary role and maybe some fudge factor.

RPM/MV/Round weight values from http://users.skynet.be/Emmanuel.Gustin/ ... un-pe.html and Acc = accuracy currently in Focus Pacific

Code: Select all

 Name                 Acc    RPM    MV     Round weight (gram)
 7.62mm ShKAS MG      39     1800   870    10,9
 .303 Browning MG     34     1150   750    10,6
 7.9mm MG17 MG        33     1200   775    10,8
 7.92mm Type 89 MG    27     900    810    10,5     
 

[paradigmblue]

ORIGINAL: cardas

The 7.62mm ShKAS MG doesn't have such high accuracy for no reason, it's a clear outlier in real world performance in the 7.7 mm - 7.92 mm span. 39 accuracy is actually a bit low for that gun. I can't see any justification from a real world perspective as to why it wouldn't have the best accuracy of all the aircraft MGs.

RPM/MV/Round weight values from http://users.skynet.be/Emmanuel.Gustin/ ... un-pe.html and Acc = accuracy currently in Focus Pacific

Code: Select all

 Name                 Acc    RPM    MV     Round weight (gram)
 7.62mm ShKAS MG      39     1800   870    10,9
 .303 Browning MG     34     1150   750    10,6
 7.9mm MG17 MG        33     1200   775    10,8
 7.92mm Type 89 MG    27     900    810    10,5     
 

Thanks Cardas, I'll collect more game data before I make any changes.

Has anyone else seen performance from the Soviet air force (particularly their biplanes) that has seemed too effective vs Japan, or am I just having good luck in my game with 1EyedJacks?

[cardas]

I have a difficult time determining what is reasonable or not as I got no idea how well those biplanes would have actually done in the real world. The random nature of WitP:AE also makes it hard to know exactly what determined the combat results.

With the I-153 you get a better maneuver value at every altitude(!) than the A6M2 and the Oscar. It also has all of its 4 guns in the centre-line which means their accuracy value is doubled and the gun. While the Oscar also has centre-line guns it has less and worse guns. Finally it has equal durability to the A6M2 and only 1 lower than the Oscar. Sounds like a pretty potent opponent all in all, the only combat drawback it has is its lower speed, although that is usually claimed to be enough for the later war allied aircraft so who knows how important that is in the combat algorithm? Another drawback is of course the much lower range but that doesn't matter as much when combat is joined.

How about a solution where you dump the starting experience on the Russian pilots even further?

Edit:
The primary armament seems right on Algérie for the version of Focus Pacific (1.03) I have? 4 forward facing guns in 2 turrets, 4 rear facing guns in 2 turrets. Now the armour is different from the values I have for it. I have it at a 110 mm belt, 100 mm CT and 100 mm front facing armour on the main turrets.

[paradigmblue]

ORIGINAL: cardas
Edit:
The primary armament seems right on Algérie for the version of Focus Pacific (1.03) I have? 4 forward facing guns in 2 turrets, 4 rear facing guns in 2 turrets. Now the armour is different from the values I have for it. I have it at a 110 mm belt, 100 mm CT and 100 mm front facing armour on the main turrets.

I may have already fixed it - either the ship file or the class file had it as 3 guns instead of four in front. The configuration that you're seeing is correct.

[cardas]

Well there is actually a problem with it that somehow I managed to overlook in the version I have, but its not with the main guns. The class definition is correct so after it's upgraded it isn't a problem, but the ship starts with 3x1 100 mm guns to each side instead of 3x2 that it should have. It is also the 1917 naval gun rather than the 1930 DP gun (this is incorrect both for the ship class and the ship).

[btd64]

ORIGINAL: cardas

Well there is actually a problem with it that somehow I managed to overlook in the version I have, but its not with the main guns. The class definition is correct so after it's upgraded it isn't a problem, but the ship starts with 3x1 100 mm guns to each side instead of 3x2 that it should have. It is also the 1917 naval gun rather than the 1930 DP gun (this is incorrect both for the ship class and the ship).

For that perticular ship, I agree with cardas. It's going in my next update. Para my next update will be late July, because My wife and I are going on a long Vaca and I am doing some research on adding a couple allied CS ships based on Langley. Para, when you do an upgrade, please email me your change log. I need some ideas for some japanese additions as well. Thanks....GP

[1EyedJacks]

ORIGINAL: paradigmblue

ORIGINAL: cardas

The 7.62mm ShKAS MG doesn't have such high accuracy for no reason, it's a clear outlier in real world performance in the 7.7 mm - 7.92 mm span. 39 accuracy is actually a bit low for that gun. I can't see any justification from a real world perspective as to why it wouldn't have the best accuracy of all the aircraft MGs.

RPM/MV/Round weight values from http://users.skynet.be/Emmanuel.Gustin/ ... un-pe.html and Acc = accuracy currently in Focus Pacific

Code: Select all

 Name                 Acc    RPM    MV     Round weight (gram)
 7.62mm ShKAS MG      39     1800   870    10,9
 .303 Browning MG     34     1150   750    10,6
 7.9mm MG17 MG        33     1200   775    10,8
 7.92mm Type 89 MG    27     900    810    10,5     
 

Thanks Cardas, I'll collect more game data before I make any changes.

Has anyone else seen performance from the Soviet air force (particularly their biplanes) that has seemed too effective vs Japan, or am I just having good luck in my game with 1EyedJacks?

Did the I-153 or any of those older model aircraft really-really have armor? 'Cause right now the Oscars & Nates with their 7.7 and 12.7 MG seem to be having a hard time. If you put the armor on to give the I-153 a better chance to stand against Japan then maybe pull the armor off and it becomes a reasonable dogfight?

In-game stats - not those quoted by Cardas. Right now the jump is 23% accuracy for the ShKAS MG over the Zero's Center MGs and 20% over the Oscar's MGs... Note that the air frame does not impact accuracy in this game so the maneuverability argument that Cardas makes, while probably valid in the real world, does not seem to factor into this game.

-- I53 has 4x7.62 Range 300 Acc 78
-- 15bis is the same.
-- 16m24 is the same.
-- Mig has 1x12.7 Range 400 Acc 60 & 2x7.62 Range 300 Acc 78
-- LaGG has 1x20mm Range 500 Acc 50 & 1x12.7 Range 400 Acc 60

Zero 2x7.7 Range 300 Acc 54 & 2x20mm Range 500 Acc 28
Oscr 2x12.7 Range 400 Acc 58

[paradigmblue]

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks

ORIGINAL: paradigmblue

ORIGINAL: cardas

The 7.62mm ShKAS MG doesn't have such high accuracy for no reason, it's a clear outlier in real world performance in the 7.7 mm - 7.92 mm span. 39 accuracy is actually a bit low for that gun. I can't see any justification from a real world perspective as to why it wouldn't have the best accuracy of all the aircraft MGs.

RPM/MV/Round weight values from http://users.skynet.be/Emmanuel.Gustin/ ... un-pe.html and Acc = accuracy currently in Focus Pacific

Code: Select all

 Name                 Acc    RPM    MV     Round weight (gram)
 7.62mm ShKAS MG      39     1800   870    10,9
 .303 Browning MG     34     1150   750    10,6
 7.9mm MG17 MG        33     1200   775    10,8
 7.92mm Type 89 MG    27     900    810    10,5     
 

Thanks Cardas, I'll collect more game data before I make any changes.

Has anyone else seen performance from the Soviet air force (particularly their biplanes) that has seemed too effective vs Japan, or am I just having good luck in my game with 1EyedJacks?

Did the I-153 or any of those older model aircraft really-really have armor? 'Cause right now the Oscars & Nates with their 7.7 and 12.7 MG seem to be having a hard time. If you put the armor on to give the I-153 a better chance to stand against Japan then maybe pull the armor off and it becomes a reasonable dogfight?

In-game stats - not those quoted by Cardas. Right now the jump is 23% accuracy for the ShKAS MG over the Zero's Center MGs and 20% over the Oscar's MGs... Note that the air frame does not impact accuracy in this game so the maneuverability argument that Cardas makes, while probably valid in the real world, does not seem to factor into this game.

-- I53 has 4x7.62 Range 300 Acc 78
-- 15bis is the same.
-- 16m24 is the same.
-- Mig has 1x12.7 Range 400 Acc 60 & 2x7.62 Range 300 Acc 78
-- LaGG has 1x20mm Range 500 Acc 50 & 1x12.7 Range 400 Acc 60

Zero 2x7.7 Range 300 Acc 54 & 2x20mm Range 500 Acc 28
Oscr 2x12.7 Range 400 Acc 58

This is really strange - I'm not seeing those accuracy values in the editor. I'm seeing an accuracy of 39 for the 7.62mm ShKAS MG, 30for the 12.7mm UBT MG, and 25 for the 20mm ShVAK Cannon. The values that you're seeing seem doubled.

Have you tried starting a vs AI game just to take a look at the stats in game? Maybe there was an issue with the previous patch? I re-installed 1.3 to ensure that I was looking at my most up-to date figures.

[1EyedJacks]

This is from our game

[1EyedJacks]

This is 1 of my oscar unit:

[1EyedJacks]

Here is a new game vs JPN AI





BTW - I seem to have mis-spoke regarding armor. There are two Russian fighters with armor - the I-153 is not one of them.

[Lokasenna]

The in-game accuracy as displayed is doubled for centerline guns. In the editor if it's 39, it will show as 78 if it's a C mount.

[1EyedJacks]

So along that same note, your P-50 Skyrocket has a pair of 20mm cannon with an accuracy of 52 and a pair of .30 Browning with an accuracy of 70...

This is Tracker from 14 December 41 on the Japan side (so losses from the allies are subject to the FoW). And a lot of the zero losses are air groups of 18-45 that swept enemy bases bases on Dec 7 & 8 against odds from 3:1 to 5:1 depending. I lost about 80 fighters on Dec 7, if I remember correctly, with those losses taking place in Russia, the PI, and
Kwangchowan... (There was no coordination from any of my sweeps, from what I can remember).

[1EyedJacks]

So the other thing I'm noticing is AVG Experience.

Fighter Groups @ Kwangchowan have an average experience ranging from 75 to 65.

The Br697 has 2x20mm Acc 52 + 2x7.5mm Acc 60

The MS410 has a 1x20mm Acc 50 and 4x7.5mm Acc 30

@ Hong Kong both Hurricane AG have pilot skills of 75 ( and gunz 12x.303 Acc 34 (F, not C))

[BillBrown]

French SNCASE SE.120 has F-mounted 30 kg GP bombs

French Bloch MB.162 has no upgrade but the MB.163 has an upgrade of MB.162.

French A-20C FF Boston upgrades to the B-25D Mitchel that comes out a month before the A-20

[paradigmblue]

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

French SNCASE SE.120 has F-mounted 30 kg GP bombs

French Bloch MB.162 has no upgrade but the MB.163 has an upgrade of MB.162.

French A-20C FF Boston upgrades to the B-25D Mitchel that comes out a month before the A-20

Thanks Bill, I'll get this fixed.

[mussey]

I'm ready to start #72 vs. Japan AI, and if time permits will provide some observations. Before I begin, a few questions:

1) Does anyone know how the AI will act against the Soviets? Will it initiate combat against them, or as the Allies can I ignore this theater?

2) Even though I've played Ironman before, I'm not sure how to begin as the Allies in 'Focus Pacific', except how I've usually done - to secure bases from PH through the S.Pac to NZ/Aus. But with French assets in N.Cal can I rely on them to hold out until reinforcements arrive....?

3) How I intend to play: Will any of these create more balance gameplay vs. AI or will they tip the scales too drastically to the Axis? Any comments or suggested alterations are welcome!
- x1 day tactical/operational turns. Every x5 days check USA Westcoast defences and set-up convoys and send LCU's etc. This creates a good game pace and slows down a bit US reinforcements. (same with India/M.East).
- no LCU can move until it has reached 10 prep pts towards its objective for US units, 20 pp's for Aus/NZ LCU's, 30 pp's for Indian/Brit LCU's. Slows Allied reaction times vs. AI.
- All Allied HI to remain on, fuel/resources convoys most be sent to supply it.
- In "My World", fuel from Abadan was for India and UK, thus I send it there only. (A game within a game).
- These constraints slow down Allied actions and help the Axis. How much? We will find out....

[btd64]

Scenario 72 is Soviet inactive. So don't worry about it. These scenarios are not for AI play but you can if you wish. Play the game as you wish. Enjoy....GP

[mussey]

GP
The FAQ states these scenarios utilize AI Ironman scripts, if so I'll give it a ride. With my limited experience it gave me a great fight in previous games and the extra CV's defeated my 3rd/5th fleet in the Marianna's 1944.[:(]

I'm looking for some payback. The added French forces might just do the trick... But all the extra forces on all sides will prove interesting.

[mussey]

In Map Changes - Extension of the bottom of Bougainville in the Solomons to move the Shortland Islands into the next hex and provide a separate base for the Shortlands (hex 110, 132). This also allows the original Shortlands base to be renamed Buin. Did this change take effect? On my map the base 109, 131 remains named Shortlands, and there is no base at 110,132.