|
inqistor -> RE: scraping the bottom of Chinese barrel (5/19/2012 8:27:21 AM)
|
Scenario 32 is ready.
New changes:
Japanese airborne torpedoes get upgrades as war progresses. That also have another consequence - that early models carry weaker torpedoes (this of NELL is really poor, and does not upgrade, same as early MAVIS). Neither MABEL, nor KATE N1 upgrade, so that should answer the question - what produce.
Jean, Nell, Mavis K4 KAI-1 model damage/penetration 331
Mabel, Kate N1 KAI-2 model damage/penetration 452
Kate N2, Mavis K5, and BETTY M1 KAI-2 upgraded to KAI-3 (KATE in January, BETTY in March, damage/penetration 529)
All later BETTY, Frances, and PEGGY KAI7 model damage/penetration 926
JILL, Emily KAI-3 Improved (only better accuracy, and less DUD)
GRACE KAI-4 model damage/penetration 679
It is hard to tell what weaker torpedoes impact is. During tests I had situations, where no BB was sunk in PH (and none of them was in danger of sinking), and other situations, where 4 BBs were sunk in first attack. Similar to stock.
What seems common - Force Z seems to be able to keep ONE heavy ship, under Scenario original setting, most of the time (although damaged). NELLs carry really weak torpedo.
BETTY models streamlined, some arrive earlier, and some have armor. Also, I have added fake torpedo to later models, to simulate their bigger bombload. Torpedo have 0 accuracy, and effect (but it will use torpedo from AIR HQ), but is exchanged for standard bombs during non-torpedo attacks.
Initial position shows 6th December - that means NO JAPAN TROOPS in Thailand. Also I have added damage to infrastructure, where there are THAI forces, to simulate, that Thailand must first be conquered.
Planes arrival dates incorporate initial research factories (it is more complicated in Scenario 2, as some planes arrive early anyway). Also some fixing in planes. Some of them gets 12.7mm MG in later models, and some have MAX LOAD set to their KAMIKAZE load (that should also increase their supply usage).
Since I see in initial el cid RHS tests, that there seems to be no difference, between 15kg, and 250kg bombs, during attacks on squads, some initial experiments with bombload. The main goal is to give reason, to keep some models still in production, because now LILY is just poor version of SALLY (costs the same, but carry smaller bombs), and PEGGY is poor version of BETTY (same number of bombs, shorter range)
VAL exchange 250kg bomb, for 4x60kg bombs for ground attack.
LILY exchange 100kg bombs, for 2x50kg bombs for ground attack. Also, I have not found single reference, which shows, that DB model carried LESS bombs, and ALL references show, that II model had DOUBLE bombload (still, 800kg is less, than 1000kg of SALLY).
PEGGY carry 1x500kg bomb against ships, exchanged for 8x100kg for ground attack
GEORGE is ground-attack version. It carry 4x250kg bombs (it seems to be actually most common 2 version produced)
Also, I see in AARs, that there are some supply problem for Japan in mid-war, and I have yet see shortage of fuel for naval operations, so first bite into economy:
Refineries produce 3 supply, and 8 fuel from 10 oil (yes, 11 for 10, that would show pretty clear, that it is oil which should be transported)
Also, I have cut manpower production from 5 to 4, although seeing how much it players accumulate, even cutting it to ONE, will probably result in surplus.
I have some new Open Office version, and it seems it uses semicolon, instead of comma, go figure!
This time I have cut flat cargo loads to 82.36%. All ships, except tenders, who have capacity of more, than 50% of tonnage, have bulk capacity cut (except some Japanese ships, which need at least 3000 for conversion, they are capped at 3000)
Magical line:
=IF(AND(S2+T2+U2>V2/2;C2<>58;C2<>45;C2<>35;C2<>36;C2<>43);IF(AND(P2=2;OR(C2=82;C2=56);T2>2999;T2*0.8236<3000);3000;T2*0.8236);T2)
|
|
|
|
