RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding


khyberbill -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/5/2012 9:34:51 PM)

LOL, I sent you an email about a week ago asking how you and the family were doing. I also asked if you wanted the spare $3m I had laying about or should I send it to the Luddites. When I did not hear from you, I sent it to the Luddites (I did send them an email telling them how to get it, hopefully they have computers by now).

Have already sent an email to Mr. Benoit. Thanks though. I hope Rob will start the turn tonight but I know he is busy with work until this weekend.

FatR -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/5/2012 10:01:30 PM)

The 4.1 version is available for upload on the site (see my signature). Just saying. Had no chance to take a good look at it yet.

khyberbill -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/5/2012 10:55:10 PM)

Thanks Mr. S. Got it from Michael.

John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/13/2012 4:31:44 PM)

RA 4.1a just sent to Stanislav. There is a simple database correction in it. Michael noticed that the A-24 don't get any replacements after just a couple of months and have no upgrade path. FIXED that. The A-24 producing until late-summer 42 and then is replaced by the successor to the Banshee. No big deal but helps some...

el cid again -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/13/2012 10:51:57 PM)

RE Pensacola Convoy - if you want surface forces - just keep entire Asiatic Fleet at Manila

I think dispersal is wise - but it was there to be a fighting force - and it would be a historical option to do what was long planned -
have it fight as a unit


ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Since a number of new RA 4.0 games have started with experienced players I wanted to open this Thread up for comments, questions, issues, and ideas for a 4.1 Version of the Mod.

Comments I've gotten or heard to this point:
1. China bases needing garrisons on DAY ONE with no troops in them. (Easy Fix)
2. The location of the Pensacola TF at Manila providing a nasty surprise to Japanese players while at the same time offering a VP FEAST for the Japanese side.
3. A number of Allied units in China, India, and USA starting a FULL strength instead of cadre level.
4. The A-24's having a withdrawl date when the intention is for that NOT to be so.

These are notes off the top of my head. What have I missed or need to be added?

Am looking for Japanese as well as Allied feedback.


ny59giants_MatrixForum -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/22/2012 4:25:34 AM)

Allied air groups - In one of the future versions, I would like see some of the American Army fighter and bomber groups be able to combine to become 75 fighters strong for FG and 48 strong for BG. Most of the American Army fighter have 4 components at start and when they come in as replacements - 3 x 25 planes and a fourth as a 5 plane HQ group that is always withdrawn. Can you use the Editor to have the large 75 plane FG come in broken down into 3 x 25 plane squadrons and sometime in '43 or later, the fourth part comes in as 1 plane group that allows the whole 75 group to be formed. Sort of like how the Japanese infantry come in as an "Infantry Group" that has some FA, Engineers, and maybe a small tank unit come in later (sometimes years later) that allows it to be recombined into a full division.

BigBadWolf -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/22/2012 11:08:31 AM)

I just got some of the much feared Vietnamese militia emergency reinforcements and they are static? Why are they static?

John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/22/2012 3:36:44 PM)

They shouldn't be static. Am sure Stanislav and I NEVER touched those obscure units. After church I will take a look and see if there is a problem.

ny59giants_MatrixForum -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/22/2012 10:42:21 PM)

American Recon Production/Replacement Rate

I know I spoke with John about increase them, but they are still like stock. [:(] You can easily run out in 42 and 43 before the future models kick in.

F-4 Lightning (ID 315) - 4/mo from 9/42 to 12/42 - increase to 6 to 8/mo
F-5A Lightning (ID 316) - 4/mo from 1/43 to 5/44 - increase to 6 to 8/mo
F-7A Liberator (ID 320) - 4/mo from 3/44 to end - increase to 6 to 8/mo
F4F-7 Wildcat (ID 426) - 6/mo from 11/42 to 12/42 - increase to 8 to 10/mo AND change production end date till 12/43

I know that John added the carrier capable Judy recon aircraft for Japan in 42, so it would be nice if the American had this same ability.

Dan Nichols -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/23/2012 2:11:05 AM)

I have a question about LCUs starting with no supply. There are a number of LCUs that start with no supply. My question is if this was intentional or not.

ny59giants_MatrixForum -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/23/2012 2:26:55 AM)

List the LCUs, their ID numbers, and at start locations so it can be looked at.

Dan Nichols -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/23/2012 3:35:17 AM)

Not all of these are important, but there are some that a player might want to move on turn 1. I am not sure
what happens if you load them on a amphibious TF. I think they might land and take supplies that are loaded with
them, but I am not sure about that.

4276 - Babeldaob
4409 - Babeldaob
4275 - Etotofu
4209 - Etorofu
3583 - Harbin
3601 - Harbin
3776 - Liaoyuan
4724 - Marcus Island
3361 - Paramushiro-jima
4283 - Peleliu
4278 - Saipan
4280 - Saipan
4411 - Saipan
4081 - Sendai
4908 - Shirmushiri-jima
3676 - Sunwu
3683 - Sunwu
4723 - Takamatsu
4177 - Tatung
4274 - Truk
4410 - Truk
4273 - Yokohama/Yokosuka

In addition the following HQs have no LCU support but require it
5 Northeast Area fleet - Ominato
16 Combined Fleet - Saipan
17 1st Fleet Naval HQ - Hiroshima/Kure
18 2nd fleet - Samah
19 3rd Fleet - Babeldaob
20 4th Fleet - Truk
22 6th fleet - Kwajalein Island
23 Southwest fleet - Cam Ranh Bay
27 Southeast Area Fleet - Truk
28 china Area Fleet - Shanghai

John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/23/2012 3:50:27 AM)

The LCUs should be fine. The bases all start with supply so that isn't any big deal. Loading anything from those bases will automatically load supply as well.

I am playing a 4.0 (Japan) and a 4.1a (Allies) and everything looks good. Neither of my opponents have said anything about an issue like this.

What do you mean regarding the HQ requiring LCU Support?

Dan Nichols -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/23/2012 3:56:13 AM)

They have a support requirement, but no support or mechanized support.


John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/23/2012 3:37:20 PM)

Hmmm...Michael do you think this is an issue?

ny59giants_MatrixForum -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/23/2012 5:15:15 PM)

Just talked with John, he will make adjustments overt he next few days.

BigBadWolf -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/25/2012 1:50:42 PM)

Can you guys take a look at devices 1467 Sound Detector? It doesn't upgrade to anything. Shouldn't its upgrade path be 1468 Tai-Chi 13 Radar?

John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/25/2012 3:24:13 PM)

I am in the process of making a comprehensive list of items that need to be checked. ANYONE playing RA who has a questions or has seen an issue, please chime in!

Right now these are items I am aware of:

1. Support Issues alluded to earlier.
2. Need to check the Vietnamese Inf Div issues.
3. Will check BB Wolf's question above.

Are there other things needing to be checked and/or changed?

khyberbill -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/25/2012 7:59:07 PM)

I haven't seen anything obvious yet. But I am having so much fun that I might be missing something. Great Job Guys! I like the new placement of the Banshees and the Pensacola. This works for me.

ny59giants_MatrixForum -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/25/2012 8:51:25 PM)

Allied early war recon airframe production.
Static Japanese BFs get some engineers.
Garrison devices for India Command HQs upgrade to non-static device on 1/43 to allow mobility.

Mentioned to John, but so others known about them

John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/25/2012 9:29:17 PM)

Bill--glad you like the 4.0 changes.

Michael's notes added to the list.

khyberbill -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (4/25/2012 9:35:32 PM)


Bill--glad you like the 4.0 changes.

I am ready for a re-match!

John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/1/2012 11:02:25 PM)

Will be doing work on Wed-Thurs to get these changes made. Will update as I go.

Does anyone have additional thoughts as to things that need to be looked at?

ny59giants_MatrixForum -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/5/2012 5:12:45 PM)

Look at Prince of Wales AA values and her radars at start. The AA is very high, IMO. [X(] The ranges for her two radar sets appears to be off.


John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/5/2012 10:17:53 PM)



I just got some of the much feared Vietnamese militia emergency reinforcements and they are static? Why are they static?

Hey BBW.

I am working on the Mod. Can you give me the EXACT unit location number for each of the VM Militia. In scenario two Michael has them coming in location slot 3000-3003.

The problem in RA is that I put the 1st, 2nd, 3rd Air Flotillas in those slots creating a conflict. Am now moving those three units to 2990-2992 but need the VM locations.

John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/5/2012 10:23:13 PM)

Notes for RA 4.2:
1. Added minor amounts of support to Japanese Fleet HQ.
2. Bumped Allied recon production numbers.
3. Added 2 Eng Vehicle and 6 Eng to Static BF in Japan: minimal building/construction ability.

Working on VM Militia.

Have I missed any other topics?

kevin_hx -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/6/2012 12:25:19 AM)

The version of RA mod is getting to 4.2?
The title of this topic should be changed, haha.

MrBlizzard -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/6/2012 5:30:22 PM)

I'm playing as Jap RA 4.1, I found that some Eng Units lack a device (e.g. the 2th JNAF Coy; unit nr. 4402, based in Babeldaob). In the tracker the device missing is named (DEV 717, unknown device).


John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/7/2012 12:37:34 AM)

Ohhhhhhh...good catch. Let me take a look. Thanks for the screenshot.

John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/9/2012 7:40:51 AM)

I've sent the files to Stansilav for RA 4.2. Am still looking at Mr. Blizzard's issue but will be gone for most of the rest of the week so I thought getting this out was preferable.

Changes made as detailed above with one addition.

Michael suggested we move up the Squadron 803 arrival to Dec 7th. I agreed so there are 8 (can fillout to 12) Fulmar's starting at Trimcomalee. They may be moved to Hermes immediately if wished by the Allied player. Not much but it is something.

Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI