Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Development Lines

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: Development Lines Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Development Lines - 3/25/2010 9:38:25 AM   
bklooste

 

Posts: 1103
Joined: 4/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

quote:

This is not the A6M8 62 though ... the 62 has a 4" larger engine and 2 wing mounted 13.2 mm ( as well as the cannons).


Is that 4" longer or wider? How would the 13.2 mm effect the wingshape. As I've said I need a bit of help or the artwork might end up looking like this....





4" more circumfrence so 8" wider ( just the engine ) , im not 100% sure whtehr the A6M8 in game is the 62 model. The A6m8 62 should have 2 cannon on each wing , it shouldnt affect mush.


Regarding our A6M4 this is not based on the histrocal A6M4 but is a A6M8 62 with A6M3 non foldable wings

_____________________________

Underdog Fanboy

(in reply to Red Lancer)
Post #: 91
RE: New DDs - 3/25/2010 10:00:37 AM   
Smeulders

 

Posts: 1878
Joined: 8/9/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JuanG

WitploadAE is provided in the SCEN folder to extract and package the scenario data to and from .csv files. There a whole range of programs that can work with .csv, but I prefer Excel personally.


Are you simply changing the ammo by set parameter (ex. all x2) ? If so there is a pretty easy way of doing this.

1)Create a text file, put a number in it somewhere.
2)Open that text file with a spreadsheet program, I know this is possible in Open Office
3)Copy and paste the lines with the ammo amounts into the txt.
4)Apply the formula, creating a new row for the changed amounts
5)Save the txt. file and close it
6)Import it into excel again. Now here is the fun part, because it was saved as a .txt it only saves the values and not the formulas, so you now have a row with the original values and a row with the new values, which are no longer tied to the original values.
7)Copy and paste the row with your new values into the AE database spreadsheet, voila, thousands of changes in but a couple of minutes.

(in reply to JuanG)
Post #: 92
RE: Development Lines - 3/25/2010 11:08:40 AM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
I decided to include N1K4-A (carrier-capable George, 45/5) and A7M3 (Sam with 6x20mm, 45/9) while I'm at it, to give the player more planes to look forward for 1945. Both of these models were developed but not produced in RL (N1K4-A got to prototype stage, while the incomplete prototype for A7M3 was destroyed when the plant got bombed). A7M2 will upgrade to A7M3, A7M3-J will have its own microfactory.

EDIT: I'm also thinking about D4Y5. In RL this MK9-powered plane remained under development at the time of Japan's capitulation. As in this scenario Mitshubishi MK9 is available earlier, it might enter production around 45/7-45/8.


As a side note, with PDU OFF no Japanese CVLs, assuming any survive to 1945, will ever carry Georges or Sams (with PDU ON, as far as I understand, groups can always be upgraded to any fighters of a particular class). "No fighters but Zeros on CVLs" can be included as a recommended houserule.

< Message edited by FatR -- 3/25/2010 12:04:29 PM >

(in reply to Red Lancer)
Post #: 93
RE: Development Lines - 3/25/2010 11:37:19 AM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
A question: if I understand correctly, in a game with PDU OFF upgrades cannot be skipped, by waiting until the next model is available?

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 94
RE: Development Lines - 3/25/2010 1:14:58 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
And another question: anyone knows why E16A Paul has such limited combat range in the game? Its maximum range is superior to Jake, but the combat range is much inferior.

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 95
RE: New DDs - 3/25/2010 1:47:01 PM   
JuanG


Posts: 900
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Smeulders


quote:

ORIGINAL: JuanG

WitploadAE is provided in the SCEN folder to extract and package the scenario data to and from .csv files. There a whole range of programs that can work with .csv, but I prefer Excel personally.


Are you simply changing the ammo by set parameter (ex. all x2) ? If so there is a pretty easy way of doing this.

1)Create a text file, put a number in it somewhere.
2)Open that text file with a spreadsheet program, I know this is possible in Open Office
3)Copy and paste the lines with the ammo amounts into the txt.
4)Apply the formula, creating a new row for the changed amounts
5)Save the txt. file and close it
6)Import it into excel again. Now here is the fun part, because it was saved as a .txt it only saves the values and not the formulas, so you now have a row with the original values and a row with the new values, which are no longer tied to the original values.
7)Copy and paste the row with your new values into the AE database spreadsheet, voila, thousands of changes in but a couple of minutes.


Brilliant approach, but sadly it wont work here as the changes have no relation to the original values, only on the rounds carried for each gun and its rate of fire.


John, on a related note - I mentioned the issue with Japanese DD's all carrying DP guns in stock; do you want me to correct these to what they should be (ie only Type-B and Type-D 12.7cm mounts are DP), or shall I leave them as is? On one hand changing this can really hurt your fleets AA, forcing you to rely on cruisers and BBs for AA, but on the otherhand it really makes those new DDs with proper DP weaponry invalueble.

I've got the sub changes and RN ammo down to DD's done, but I might not be able to finish everything today, sorry.

< Message edited by JuanG -- 5/2/2010 8:05:27 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Smeulders)
Post #: 96
Project Updates - 3/25/2010 2:54:30 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 15861
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I wake up and find tons of commentary:

1.  FatR--Keep up the work on the aircraft and, more importantly, keep up the questions on specific aircraft so we can get comments.
2.  BK--Good to see you back with us!
3.  I've got no issues with anything discussed regarding aircraft.  It all sounds reasonable to me.
4.  Red Lancer--I appreciate the attention to detail you are taking regarding your artwork.  NICE!
5.  Juan--Keep at the changes.  It sounds like a bear to do.

Smeulders--Thanks for the suggestion.  Brainstorming is a great thing and I really enjoy the synergy that comes with it.

Juan--As much as it pains me to say, go ahead and make those DDs guns RIGHT for the scenario.  Which classes of Japanese DDs actually have true DP guns?  I assume the Yugumos as well as Moon-Class.  Are there any others?

We've turned into a Scenario Design Team!  How about that?

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to JuanG)
Post #: 97
House Rules - 3/25/2010 2:56:35 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 15861
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Might be wise to begin a House Rules line of discussion on this Thread:

1.  No planes other then Zeros on Japanese CVLs.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 98
RE: Project Updates - 3/25/2010 3:00:55 PM   
JuanG


Posts: 900
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline
Ayanami (Fubuki II), Akatsuki (Fubuki III) and Hatsuharu have the Type-B mounts, which were capable of DP but had rather slow train and elevation rates.

Yugumo and Shimakaze had the more modern Type-D mounts. Obviously the Akizuki (Moon-class) had excellent DP capable mounts.

How far do you want me to go with this? I can probably get everything above DE and SS done today, but if you want me to go beyond that and do AKs, PCs and SCs, etc as well, it might take a few days.

As for the HRs, I'd revise it to have the same form as I use;

No A7M Sam, B7A Grace or N1K-A George on Japanese CVLs or CVEs, except for transfer purposes.

< Message edited by JuanG -- 3/25/2010 3:02:19 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 99
American CVs - Recon Wildcats - 3/25/2010 3:05:33 PM   
ny59giants_MatrixForum


Posts: 9613
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
Since Japan will get a small Chutai of Judy for recon, can the American CVs get a small squadron (3 or 4 planes) of the Wildcat recon planes?? Would they upgrade to a Hellcat version later on??

I'm not into the "nuts and bolts" like others, but did see in the G'canal scenario the Americans having recon Wildcats.

EDIT - John and wife are going to Las Vegas over weekend, Juan. So take your time.

< Message edited by ny59giants -- 3/25/2010 3:06:51 PM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 100
RE: American CVs - Recon Wildcats - 3/25/2010 3:12:03 PM   
JuanG


Posts: 900
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline
I would suggest against adding recon F4F's to US CV's - as it is, they have 4 groups. Adding a recon group will bring that to 5 which is the limit, and that reduces the flexibility of being able to drop USMC groups on them as needed.

If anything, I'd suggest a few more USMC recon groups, but I dont know if John wants to go altering the Allied OOB too much.

_____________________________


(in reply to ny59giants_MatrixForum)
Post #: 101
Cupid - 3/25/2010 3:14:30 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 15861
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Paula and I are planning on renewing our Vows this Sunday at Cupid's Wedding Chapel!    After everything we've gone through in the last couple of years, it is time for a little 'why did we get married' time.  I joke with my wife that she got the proper Lutheran White Dress Wedding and now she's getting Elvis!

Juan---Take your time with things.  Go as far as you feel practical.

We are moving quite quickly through all this and it might not be too unreasonable to have a working model of the Scenario ready within a couple of weeks.  When work started, I had no idea how long this would take but with all the Design Team's help it shouldn't be too long.

As to the Wildcats, does anyone have an opinion on this?


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to ny59giants_MatrixForum)
Post #: 102
U-Boats - 3/25/2010 3:22:15 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 15861
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I just saw this Thread Post with Big B's:

quote:

ORIGINAL: P.Hausser

Let Carrier Capeble planes upgrade to George !!

Navy Fighters should be able to upgrade to Navy Fighters !! (At least when PDU is On)


And maby add the "German" submarines and surface raiders who served in Pacific to the game ... ?



My responce:
We've had the George (and other Navy Fighters) discussion within my Yamamoto Mod Threads.

Completely concur about adding the German U-Boats, Tenders, and Raiders! Wish I had thought of that in my Mod. Perhaps I still might...copying and pasting this page into the Reluctant Admiral...



QUESTION: COULD we add this? It has always driven me NUTS that this real-life facet of the war has not been included within WitP or AE.


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 3/25/2010 3:23:51 PM >


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to bklooste)
Post #: 103
RE: U-Boats - 3/25/2010 3:52:00 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
A preliminary list of new Navy planes that can benefit from new plane art/recolors for those who may be gracious enough to make them:

A6M3b
A6M4 (the first Kinsei-Zero in this mod)
A6M4i (has bigger 30-mm guns)
A6M8i
A7M3 (6 cannons inctead of four)
B7A3 Ryusei Kai (The version of Ryuisei with MK9 engine. Probably will pack armor instead of another speed increase - torpedo bombers are limited by safe torpedo drop speed anyway.)
D4Y5 (The version of Judy with MK9 engine. Either MK9 was really, really promising, or they grasped at straws by the end of the war.)
G3M4-Q (I decided in the favor of purely patrol version. In RL Nells were used this way from early 1943. An outdated airframe can't get proportional benefits from more powerful engines, and there is simply no space to place adequate defensive armament in G3M frame.)
J6M (Ki-83 used by IJN)
N1K4-A (The carrier-capable Shiden modification.)
Yasukuni (Ki-67-Ib used by IJN)

If anyone can draw an art and a planetop for G8N Renzan
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/bww2/g8n.html
(this 4E bomber was stopped from production only by deteriorating economic situation late in the war), I'll be extra thankful!

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 104
RE: U-Boats - 3/25/2010 4:05:15 PM   
Red Lancer


Posts: 3922
Joined: 11/16/2005
From: UK
Status: offline
quote:

A preliminary list of new Navy planes that can benefit from new plane art/recolors for those who may be gracious enough to make them:

A6M3b
A6M4 (the first Kinsei-Zero in this mod)
A6M4i (has bigger 30-mm guns)
A6M8i
A7M3 (6 cannons inctead of four)
B7A3 Ryusei Kai (The version of Ryuisei with MK9 engine. Probably will pack armor instead of another speed increase - torpedo bombers are limited by safe torpedo drop speed anyway.)
D4Y5 (The version of Judy with MK9 engine. Either MK9 was really, really promising, or they grasped at straws by the end of the war.)
G3M4-Q (I decided in the favor of purely patrol version. In RL Nells were used this way from early 1943. An outdated airframe can't get proportional benefits from more powerful engines, and there is simply no space to place adequate defensive armament in G3M frame.)
J6M (Ki-83 used by IJN)
N1K4-A (The carrier-capable Shiden modification.)
Yasukuni (Ki-67-Ib used by IJN)

If anyone can draw an art and a planetop for G8N Renzan
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/bww2/g8n.html
(this 4E bomber was stopped from production only by deteriorating economic situation late in the war), I'll be extra thankful!


I'll take this as a wish list. Gold Standard will be an actual picture, failing that I'll add new art that is similar (modified as I think it might have looked) but at least allows for a new picture for the type.

_____________________________

John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 105
RE: Project Updates - 3/25/2010 5:26:13 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41452
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I wake up and find tons of commentary:

1.  FatR--Keep up the work on the aircraft and, more importantly, keep up the questions on specific aircraft so we can get comments.
2.  BK--Good to see you back with us!
3.  I've got no issues with anything discussed regarding aircraft.  It all sounds reasonable to me.
4.  Red Lancer--I appreciate the attention to detail you are taking regarding your artwork.  NICE!
5.  Juan--Keep at the changes.  It sounds like a bear to do.

Smeulders--Thanks for the suggestion.  Brainstorming is a great thing and I really enjoy the synergy that comes with it.

Juan--As much as it pains me to say, go ahead and make those DDs guns RIGHT for the scenario.  Which classes of Japanese DDs actually have true DP guns?  I assume the Yugumos as well as Moon-Class.  Are there any others?

We've turned into a Scenario Design Team!  How about that?


Just FYI, all Jap DD's do NOT have DP guns in stock. That's patently untrue. We have all four kinds of 3rd YT mounts, correctly distributed among the classes.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 106
RE: U-Boats - 3/25/2010 5:56:58 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7841
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I just saw this Thread Post with Big B's:

quote:

ORIGINAL: P.Hausser

Let Carrier Capeble planes upgrade to George !!

Navy Fighters should be able to upgrade to Navy Fighters !! (At least when PDU is On)


And maby add the "German" submarines and surface raiders who served in Pacific to the game ... ?



My responce:
We've had the George (and other Navy Fighters) discussion within my Yamamoto Mod Threads.

Completely concur about adding the German U-Boats, Tenders, and Raiders! Wish I had thought of that in my Mod. Perhaps I still might...copying and pasting this page into the Reluctant Admiral...



QUESTION: COULD we add this? It has always driven me NUTS that this real-life facet of the war has not been included within WitP or AE.



Keep in mind the only 'tenders' were a couple of 'Seacows' which can't be properly modeled in the game. Its either an AS or an SS, no combo of the two.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 107
RE: U-Boats - 3/25/2010 6:03:10 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41452
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
Not correct. The KM had a small number of more-or-less jury-rigged subtenders.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 108
RE: Project Updates - 3/25/2010 6:31:14 PM   
JuanG


Posts: 900
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I wake up and find tons of commentary:

1.  FatR--Keep up the work on the aircraft and, more importantly, keep up the questions on specific aircraft so we can get comments.
2.  BK--Good to see you back with us!
3.  I've got no issues with anything discussed regarding aircraft.  It all sounds reasonable to me.
4.  Red Lancer--I appreciate the attention to detail you are taking regarding your artwork.  NICE!
5.  Juan--Keep at the changes.  It sounds like a bear to do.

Smeulders--Thanks for the suggestion.  Brainstorming is a great thing and I really enjoy the synergy that comes with it.

Juan--As much as it pains me to say, go ahead and make those DDs guns RIGHT for the scenario.  Which classes of Japanese DDs actually have true DP guns?  I assume the Yugumos as well as Moon-Class.  Are there any others?

We've turned into a Scenario Design Team!  How about that?


Just FYI, all Jap DD's do NOT have DP guns in stock. That's patently untrue. We have all four kinds of 3rd YT mounts, correctly distributed among the classes.


All of the Japanese DD's except the Fubuki class with 12.7cm guns in stock Scenario 1 use the Type B mount (Fubuki's correctly have Type A), which is incorrect. The Yugumo and Shimakaze use Type D, but as the device is identical to Type B that doesn't mean much.

The database does have all 4 (6 infact counting the singles) types of mount, but they are not used - even the Hatsuharu and Shiratsuyu classes use the Type B dual device rather than the correct Type A and Type B single devices respectively.

I have no idea if that was balance decision or what, but they are not "correctly distributed among the classes".

< Message edited by JuanG -- 3/25/2010 6:39:16 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 109
RE: Project Updates - 3/25/2010 6:48:08 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41452
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
What are you talking about? The Hatsuharu and Shiratsuyu both had two double and one single mount, which is what they have in the game.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to JuanG)
Post #: 110
RE: Project Updates - 3/25/2010 6:54:37 PM   
JuanG


Posts: 900
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline
Yes, however, this is the data ingame for Shiratsuyu class;

2 x 2 x 12.7cm/50 3YT T. B. (#1669)
1 x 1 x 12.7cm/50 3YT T. B. (#1669)

These are both DP weapons, with an elevation of 75 degrees.


However, this is incorrect, and the devices should be;

2 x 2 x 12.7cm/50 3YT T. C. (#1670)
1 x 1 x 12.7cm/50 3YT S. B. (#1673)

Both of which were only semi-DP weapons (like the 15.5cm/60), only able to elevate to 55 degrees, and thus not classified as DP in the database.

Note that the designation system for the Twin and Single mounts is different.

As you can see these devices are in the database, they are just not used for whatever reason.


Essentially, as it stands now, all Japanese DDs after and including the Fubuki II group are DP capable. This was not the case.

< Message edited by JuanG -- 3/25/2010 6:55:48 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 111
RE: Project Updates - 3/25/2010 8:02:38 PM   
Red Lancer


Posts: 3922
Joined: 11/16/2005
From: UK
Status: offline
quote:

If anyone can draw an art and a planetop for G8N Renzan
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/bww2/g8n.html
(this 4E bomber was stopped from production only by deteriorating economic situation late in the war), I'll be extra thankful!


How's this?






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev

(in reply to JuanG)
Post #: 112
RE: Project Updates - 3/25/2010 8:14:56 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
Great work, Red Lancer, thanks!

(in reply to Red Lancer)
Post #: 113
RE: Project Updates - 3/25/2010 8:35:59 PM   
Red Lancer


Posts: 3922
Joined: 11/16/2005
From: UK
Status: offline
OK - here's my interpretation of a D4Y5 Judy - I've stretched the nose of a D4Y4 a bit to allow for the longer engine. Please tell me if you're not happy.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 114
RE: Project Updates - 3/25/2010 8:41:34 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41452
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
Sorry Juan, I see what you mean now. That IS not correctly done; I can't tell you the reasoning behind it, since I didn't do the Jap DD's, but I would guess that they were MEANT to be correctly distributed (because the devices are all there), but were somehow overlooked...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Red Lancer)
Post #: 115
RE: Project Updates - 3/25/2010 9:14:54 PM   
Red Lancer


Posts: 3922
Joined: 11/16/2005
From: UK
Status: offline
An A7M3 Reppu - as I understand the supercharger was at the bottom.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 116
RE: Project Updates - 3/25/2010 9:30:35 PM   
Red Lancer


Posts: 3922
Joined: 11/16/2005
From: UK
Status: offline
quote:

I'm not 100% sure whether the A6M8 in game is the 62 model


Having found the original picture and compared them the stock A6M8 does have the 62 model engine.

_____________________________

John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev

(in reply to Red Lancer)
Post #: 117
RE: Project Updates - 3/25/2010 10:14:32 PM   
chesmart


Posts: 908
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Malta
Status: offline
Interesting Termi is there an error in the Japanese Naval Devices ? BTW Welcome Back

(in reply to Red Lancer)
Post #: 118
RE: Project Updates - 3/26/2010 1:00:32 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 15861
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

quote:

If anyone can draw an art and a planetop for G8N Renzan
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/bww2/g8n.html
(this 4E bomber was stopped from production only by deteriorating economic situation late in the war), I'll be extra thankful!


How's this?







Very NICE!


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Red Lancer)
Post #: 119
RE: Project Updates - 3/26/2010 1:02:37 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 15861
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I like the art work.  It looks excellent.

Terminus---Glad through this Mod work we could find an error in the regular AE.  It is always good to see unexpected benefits.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: Development Lines Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.169