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



Message


Lecivius -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/16/2012 4:22:28 PM)

Gonna start a new game, & give this a whirl.  Do I need to copy the game, since the artwork is updated?  I can't remember.




John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/16/2012 4:54:14 PM)

Hey Sir.

Glad you are going to play. You SHOULD be able to pull everything down off of JWE's Babes site. Make sure you do the expended map with stacking limits. It is EXCELLENT! I sent to Stanislav RA 4.2 last week and he got it Posted.

Have FUN!
John




moore4807 -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/18/2012 8:59:28 PM)

Stupid question - I just D/L'd 4.2... when I go to scenario it still says 4.1 DeBabes mod, how do I tell if its the new one?




John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/18/2012 10:33:09 PM)

To be safe, shoot me your email and I shall send you the current files. They SHOULD be current, however, to be safe I can send them directly.

FatR: Did you upload the 4.2 files?




moore4807 -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/18/2012 10:55:09 PM)

date for scenario #70 is 5/9/2012 - so I'm pretty sure it is 4.2, thought about checking that AFTER I sent the post....[:o]

Thanks for the help though




ny59giants -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.2b or c needed (5/19/2012 11:37:20 AM)

John,

The small BF Co have slot 5 empty (shows up as Device 717) with 2 of them. You need to change the Device to 721 (7.7mm AAMG) for the 9 small BF Co. assigned to Combined Fleet. They are near slot 4400 under Locations.

[image]local://upfiles/15133/8327599BB60049188A1E88142D6C7ED1.jpg[/image]




ny59giants -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.2b or c needed (5/19/2012 12:24:13 PM)

Saipan - Since RA starts with two of the SNLF Assault Divisions here, then the 6 Lima Class xAKs and/or the 7 Aden Class xAKs should already be converted over to the '-t" type with the additional troop capacity at start.

At Truk, the port is large enough to allow this, so I can take the 5 to 6 days to do so with the ships that start there, but it would be nice if some were converted to xAK -t

[image]local://upfiles/15133/60D90FC09666425CBB7AD812B51EB262.jpg[/image]




Xargun -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/24/2012 9:52:16 PM)

I don't suppose you have an early 42 scenario for RA ?

Xargun




John 3rd -> RA 4.3 Released (5/25/2012 7:18:50 AM)

I have sent RA 4.3 to FatR for Posting on the site. Mostly changes detailed by Michael above. Some tweaks to Allied aircraft production but that is about it.

An early-42 RA Scenario? Hmmm...

THAT is interesting. Beyond Xargun would there be interest in it?




khyberbill -> RE: RA 4.3 Released (5/25/2012 10:11:48 AM)

Can we upgrade mid-game?




Kitakami -> RE: RA 4.3 Released (5/25/2012 1:53:10 PM)

I would definitely be interested in an early 1942 scenario. As a JFB, starting a campaign on turn 1 is always an excercise in patience that needs a large amount of time...




John 3rd -> RE: RA 4.3 Released (5/25/2012 3:12:03 PM)

Bill: These are database changes so you should be able to upgrade with no issue.

My brain chewed on the 'after the DEI' starting idea and I like it a lot. Time is a serious concern since summer is starting and the boys are home. That being said it could be a lot of fun to put together and we could brainstorm a whole bunch of 'what happened' ideas. Tentative idea would be to work with an March 1st or April 1st start point figuring the DEI has just fallen...




khyberbill -> RE: RA 4.3 Released (5/25/2012 3:25:01 PM)

quote:

'after the DEI'

I for one, as an Allied player, enjoy the sparring that goes on in the DEI and I am continually looking for ways to change my tactics in this area. I played two PBEMs with the late start in WITP and found them wanting.




John 3rd -> RE: RA 4.3 Released (5/25/2012 4:07:36 PM)

Tend to agree with you Bill but a lot of people see the opening as pure tedium. I tend--as you know--to take less casualties when I run the offensive from Day One and things always seem so contrived when you begin with units already set for a May 1st start. Perhaps we could make this a bit more 'reasonable.'




khyberbill -> RE: RA 4.3 Released (5/25/2012 7:17:42 PM)

quote:

Perhaps we could make this a bit more 'reasonable.'

Leave Froce Z in the game and that might make it more reasonable. The allied opening turn is even more tedious than Japan's with xAK's etc all over the place and none where you want them. It normally takes me over an half hour to do the SS orders from Manila alone (I counted 11 mouse clicks per order or more). But in two turns, all is right!




John 3rd -> RE: RA 4.3 Released (5/26/2012 5:29:46 PM)

I've started a new RA: Early march Thread. Any ideas, please Post them there. We'll keep this one focused on RA 4.3.




CRations -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/26/2012 5:30:07 PM)

Hi John,

Can I ask why you split KB in two TFs at the start of the scenario? Are there hex limits of some kind in this game?

CR




John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/27/2012 4:38:41 AM)

They are split so you have the opportunity for more then one Port Strike on Dec 7th. Both are 'warp speed' TF. Provides some opening flexibility if wanted.




FatR -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/27/2012 1:44:24 PM)

I'm noticing that the scenario description for 4.3 still says "4.1 Modded for Babes". This does not warrant a new version by itself, but should be fixed if there's going to be 4.4.




John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/27/2012 3:52:13 PM)

Good point FatR. WE'll fix with the next tweak.

QUERY: Does anyone have art issues with the Kitakami and/or our redesigned training cruisers showing up in the combat display when surface combat is occurring? Just really noticed I have that issue within my install. Figure it is just me but wanted to throw out the question.




ny59giants -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/27/2012 4:06:47 PM)

quote:

QUERY: Does anyone have art issues with the Kitakami and/or our redesigned training cruisers showing up in the combat display when surface combat is occurring? Just really noticed I have that issue within my install. Figure it is just me but wanted to throw out the question.


I have this class show up as MIA, but its OK when I pull up any DaBabes game. I doubled checked in the Editor and everything seems OK there.




John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/28/2012 5:15:52 AM)

Hmmm...wonder what is up with the artwork?




John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/28/2012 5:16:36 AM)

Stanislav: Do you have the Training Cruiser artwork we used for the Kitakami's? If so, could you shot it to me? Thanks!




FatR -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/28/2012 11:43:00 AM)

I've sent that artwork. Check your inbox for that and other emails from me.




John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (5/28/2012 1:36:31 PM)

Got it. Could you also Post it here so players can download it?




Wittmann30 -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (6/9/2012 10:37:44 AM)

Hi!

I have a problem with a missing BB Art in RA 3.4.2. The BB conversion art of the New Mexico class is missing.

I replaced the Art Folder "AlliedShip_Back" and "AlliedShip_Transp" of RA 4.2 into my folders, but no luck.

Any help?

Thanks.

[image]local://upfiles/24310/0D855211EA304609AAFA841D9DFEDC23.jpg[/image]




John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (6/9/2012 2:04:16 PM)

THIS is a new one. Let me check my copy and see if I have the same problem. Anyone else have this issue?

Michael brought up to my attention that Truk starts the war WAY overstacked. If not worked on immediately this leads to a severe drain on supply. Am considering pulling some troops and placing them in the Marianas to alleviate the issue.




CRations -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (6/9/2012 6:16:10 PM)

Hmmm - I see 48k troops with a limit of 60k at Truk. Did something change?

I don't suppose I could talk you into adding FF to the possible upgrade list of Japanese FP air groups? [:)]

Also, can I ask why the Oi & Kitakami (both are CL in the stock scenarios)had their torpedo complement reduced? In the stock games both CL fire a broadside of 20 torpedoes. In RA their broadsides are reduced to 2 torpedoes. I was just wondering if that was intentional or if maybe the database for those ships has a typo (2 VS 20).

CR




Lecivius -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (6/10/2012 1:32:21 AM)

Just curious, not complaining. I just ran my Day 1 turn. Force Z was wiped, as were the cans in Hong Kong, and PH was scrubbed from the face of the earth. Is the damage up in this mod since there is more focus on naval matters?

Morning Air attack on Pearl Harbor , at 180,107

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 116 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 43 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 87
B5N2 Kate x 147
D3A1 Val x 135



Allied aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 5 damaged
A6M2 Zero: 3 destroyed by flak
B5N2 Kate: 4 damaged
B5N2 Kate: 2 destroyed by flak
D3A1 Val: 10 damaged
D3A1 Val: 3 destroyed by flak

Allied aircraft losses
PBY-5 Catalina: 93 damaged
PBY-5 Catalina: 15 destroyed on ground
B-17D Fortress: 23 damaged
B-17D Fortress: 2 destroyed on ground
P-40B Warhawk: 39 damaged
P-40B Warhawk: 4 destroyed on ground
B-17E Fortress: 11 damaged
B-17E Fortress: 1 destroyed on ground
B-18A Bolo: 24 damaged
B-18A Bolo: 5 destroyed on ground
A-20A Havoc: 13 damaged
A-20A Havoc: 3 destroyed on ground
O-47A: 4 damaged
O-47A: 3 destroyed on ground
SBD-1 Dauntless: 27 damaged
SBD-1 Dauntless: 3 destroyed on ground
P-36A Mohawk: 16 damaged
P-36A Mohawk: 1 destroyed on ground
F4F-3 Wildcat: 2 damaged
F4F-3 Wildcat: 1 destroyed on ground
R3D-2: 2 damaged
C-33: 1 damaged
C-33: 1 destroyed on ground
SOC-1 Seagull: 6 destroyed
OS2U-3 Kingfisher: 7 destroyed

Allied Ships
BB Oklahoma, Bomb hits 7, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
DD Allen, Bomb hits 3, and is sunk
BB Maryland, Bomb hits 5, Torpedo hits 6, and is sunk
BB Arizona, Bomb hits 8, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
BB Nevada, Bomb hits 4, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
BB California, Bomb hits 9, Torpedo hits 5, and is sunk
BB Tennessee, Bomb hits 4, Torpedo hits 6, and is sunk
DD Schley, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
BB Pennsylvania, Bomb hits 9, Torpedo hits 5, and is sunk
DD Mugford, Bomb hits 2, and is sunk
BB West Virginia, Bomb hits 6, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
CA San Francisco, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
CL Detroit, Bomb hits 3, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AR Vestal, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CL St. Louis, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
CA New Orleans, Bomb hits 3, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
AE Mauna Loa, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AG Aries, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DM Tracy, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
SS Narwhal, Bomb hits 1, heavy damage
AVD Thornton, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Blue, Bomb hits 1, on fire
PT-29, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
AV Wright, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
CL Phoenix, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Worden, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
DM Montgomery, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
SS Triton, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AD Dobbin, Bomb hits 1
CL Honolulu, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
DMS Zane, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
CL Raleigh, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
DM Pruitt, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
CL Helena, Torpedo hits 1
DD Dewey, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Bagley, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
AE Pyro, Bomb hits 1, on fire
ACM Planter, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Dale, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
DD Tucker, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Downes, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Monaghan, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
AK Castor, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
SS Tambor, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage
DD Cassin, Bomb hits 1, on fire
AK Alchiba, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DM Gamble, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Henley, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AO Neosho, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage
DD Patterson, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage
PT-23, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
DM Preble, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
DD Phelps, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
DD Selfridge, Bomb hits 1, on fire



Repair Shipyard hits 8
Airbase hits 20
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 57




John 3rd -> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 (6/10/2012 5:00:05 AM)

HOLY CRAP! Why can't I see an attack like that?

Nothing is changed regarding damage. You allowed him to attack all these locations? Did he use only CV Air? I allow for up to 2 Port Strikes but they must be launched from Carriers.

CRations: The Oi and Kitakami are not TT Cruisers in RA. You will see that their mounts get used elsewhere. Oi, Kitakami, and two others are training cruisers in RA. The Katori-Class Training CL does not exist. It isn't built in this AltNavHist.




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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.710938