Matrix Games Forums

Deal of the Week Battle Academy Battle Academy 2 Out now!Legions of Steel ready for betaBattle Academy 2 gets trailers and Steam page!Deal of the Week Germany at WarSlitherine Group acquires Shenandoah StudioNew information and screenshots for Pike & ShotDeal of the Week Pride of NationsTo End All Wars Releasing on Steam! Slitherine is recruiting: Programmers required
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: CV Shinano

 
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: CV Shinano Page: <<   < prev  22 23 24 [25] 26   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: CV Shinano - 9/14/2012 6:42:12 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
But can you give me a brief review of what Allied changes are? I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable about the Allied OOB to notice changes to stuff like airgroups or lesser ships, and rereading the Allied thread might take a couple of days. I'm asking because I might pitch a couple ideas regarding countering the stuff I've added to the Japanese side, so it won't hurt to know if they were implemented already)).

_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 721
RE: CV Shinano - 9/15/2012 2:05:54 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
A quick side note, relating to the naval side of things. I wonder if anyone remembers the discussion of Japanese flak earlier in this thread, where I said, that the main flaw of Japanese 25/60 Type 96 was that there weren't nearly enough of them until well into 1944 (the second biggest was lack of gunsights/fire control improvements for the entire war). Some time ago I decided to check, whether my conclusion was correct, or whether I was deluding myself. I took up the description of the Battle of the Coral Sea in Lundstrom's The First Team, and plane losses noted there, and made a quick calculation of the number of AA barrels each side could use to ruin the enemy's day. Results were as follows:



Shoho on 7/5/1942

8x127/40
8 or 12(conflicting data, more likely 8)x25/60


4 old CAs + Sazanami escorting Shoho

16x120/45
36x25/60
8x13.2/76


Results: none.


Shokaku on 8/5/1942 (as far as I can tell from Lundstrom's description, she had NO flak support from other ships)

16x127/40
36x25/60


Results: 1 or 2 planes severely damaged out of 48 attackers.








Neoshos's group on 7/5/1942

8x127/38
10x20/70

Results:1 plane shot down out of 36 attackers.



TF 17 on 8/5/1942


Lexington

12x127/25
16 or 48(conflicting data, more likely 48 according to Lundstrom, AE gives the same number)x28/75
22x20/70
28x12.7/90


Yorktown

8x127/38
16x28/75
24x20/70
possibly (conflicting data) 24x12.7/90


Screening ships: CAs Chester, New Orleans, Portland, Astoria, Minneapolis, 7 DDs. Minneapolis actually drew some of the attackers.

24x127/38
40x127/25
88x28/75
36x20/70
42x12.7/90

Results:3 planes shot down, 1 assist, an unclear number of planes severely damaged out of 48 attackers that got past interceptors. Lexington seem to be responsible for half of the planes shot down.



Conclusion: Massive superiority of US Navy in sheer numbers of AA artillery as early as May 1942 is obvious, as is the fact that even with that numbers it still wasn't very effective. But utter failure of Japanese to score on May 7th, when their screening ships weren't completely mismanaged, raises some doubts in me.

< Message edited by FatR -- 9/15/2012 2:12:49 PM >


_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 722
Updating the status... - 9/15/2012 3:44:59 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
Just to remind (at least, myself), I don't think that there were any new naval ideas since John's posts #496 and 502 here:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2874742&mpage=17&key=

_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 723
RE: New Topics - 9/15/2012 4:50:54 PM   
1EyedJacks


Posts: 1927
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: The Eastern Sierras
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

With doing a bunch of the work for the Allied Side, I've had time to think and go through the map. Doing this has prompted questions and proposals:

A. New Aircraft and Units:
The Allies are going to start the war with about 200 additional planes. Roughly half are French and the remainder are new planes added to existing squadrons in the Phil and Malaya as well as the addition of 4 new squadrons in the same areas. This has made me think of what the Japanese would have been able to get done through the extra time bought without China. Proposal:

1. We bring the 9th Air Fleet from RA to this Mod. This would mean a HQ, 3 Air Flotilla, and 3 large BF for LCU and the addition of 3 Zero Daitai, 2 Betty/Nell Daitai, 3 Chutai of Mavis/Emily, 3 Chutai of Jakes, 1 Daitai of Vals, and 1 Daitai of Kates: 261 Planes. In RA we start these units at cadre strength in Kyushu where they must fillout and train up to combat ability. We could do that or consider that they are already there and deploy them--as a massed unit--to somewhere on the map.

2. Create a large, new Army Air unit in China. Similar thought in that it serves to coordinate the air war in China. This group would have a HQ, several Air Divisions, and BF concentrated around some location in China. Reflecting airframe needs and issues, it could start with 2 Sentai of Fighters, 4 Sentai of Bombers (2 'heavy' like Lily or Sally and 2 lite like Ida or Mary) and 2 Chutai of Recon planes): 204 planes.

B. 1st Imperial Mobile Army
As spoken of earlier, bring the 1st and 2nd TK Div forward so they are already formed as well as create a pair of mobile divisions from 4 Ind TK Reg and 2 Ind Inf Reg for use in the China War. This Army would have its own HQ but not require more manpower as the units are already created and on the board IRL.

C. If the idea to develop the Naval Guard and SNLF troops in new directions goes south then we are back to the earlier proposal at the top of the previous page for the creation of an Imperial Army Amphib Corps of 3-5 Brigades assigned to the Pacific for IJN use. Start with 3 developed Brigades and then have two more added in 1942. Figure this is the army placating the Navy while it fights in China. These units could be created in lieu of an equal number of Ind Regiments that start in China.

D. Fleet Deployment
Stanislav has detailed the changes to the Imperial Fleet. I think we need to examine preliminary starting locations and specific deployment questions considering the Japanese start with several additional heavy units (BB/CV). The Allies have gotten a true shot in the arm for Fleet strength with the additions to Force Z, the French, and American Navies. This needs to be thought about.

I've got more topics but this serves to get us started.




Hey John. There's a concept I've been toying with in my head (wish-list of things I'd change in the game if I was king-4-a-day). Is it possible to add upgrade paths to existing LCU so that - as an example - in 1942 I could "upgrade" some of the engineer units to provide more air support or add engineer squads to enhance their ability to take down forts? And if I could "upgrade" artillery units along different specializations - Like Flak, small/medium/Hvy artillery - or maybe motorize the artillery units... Is this even a possibility?

TTFN,

Mike


_____________________________

TTFN,

Mike

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 724
RE: New Topics - 9/15/2012 5:02:34 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks

Hey John. There's a concept I've been toying with in my head (wish-list of things I'd change in the game if I was king-4-a-day). Is it possible to add upgrade paths to existing LCU so that - as an example - in 1942 I could "upgrade" some of the engineer units to provide more air support or add engineer squads to enhance their ability to take down forts? And if I could "upgrade" artillery units along different specializations - Like Flak, small/medium/Hvy artillery - or maybe motorize the artillery units... Is this even a possibility?

TTFN,

Mike


Upgrading units' TOE is possible. Many units in the game already have their TOEs improved later in the war. You just need to write new TOE, like you do with ship upgrades. But branching TOE upgrades are not possible, as far as I know.



_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to 1EyedJacks)
Post #: 725
RE: New Topics - 9/15/2012 6:52:09 PM   
1EyedJacks


Posts: 1927
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: The Eastern Sierras
Status: offline
Thanks for the feedback - I think I'll look into the editor and see what I can see.

TTFN,

Mike

_____________________________

TTFN,

Mike

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 726
RE: New Topics - 9/15/2012 8:03:20 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
So, why I started talked about AA artillery above^


General aircraft defense reinforcement proposal

1)Around 1934 Japanese government and IJA actually take note of the massive growth that Red Army Air Force undergoes at the moment, including mass production of heavy bombers that can theoretically reach Home Islands from Soviet territories in the Far East. Considering tense relations with USSR, this produces a scare, not unlike the scare caused by Luftwaffe buildup in Europe IRL. When asked what it can do to protect its country and the Emperor from the air threat, IJA sees that it only has medium flak guns, that might be less than effective against even relatively primitive heavy bombers, and its capability to design antiaircaft artillery of any sort is extremely limited as well. IJN, at the time, already has experience of successfully designing large anti-aircraft guns (Type 90 DP system), and good relationship with the Hotchkiss company, the latter ready to sell its 25/60 AAMG, specifically modified according to Japanese specs, to IJN. In the real life IJA was only able to develop a small-calibre flak gun by 1938 and another new medium/heavy AA gun of its own by 1943 (Army 88mm guns produced later being copies of a German design captured in China). In this alternative, IJA is less uncontrolled and due to the air scare, generals prefer to lose face by asking the Navy for their stuff, rather than lose more of it by being potentially unprepared for war. The design process for a family of 88mm high-ballistic guns for land and naval use is initiated under both services patronage. (As Japanese were able to design modern 76mm guns for Agano-class cruisers IRL before the war, I don't think this task is unfeasible). They are eventually accepted as 9cm/60 Type 97 guns (actual calibre 88mm). Their development also provides important experience with high-ballistic weapons, that will later be used in creation of the 120/55 DP gun. Production, though, remains slow, for both ground, and, particularly, naval versions, despite the break provided by longer period of peace. Only a few ground units are equipped with them in 1941-1942, and the newly built ships (auxilary combatants and valuable transports) begin to receive these guns only in 1943. They never come near fully replacing old 76mm guns.
At the same time, a wheeled version of Type 96 25/60 single is developed for Army use instead of the Oerlicon derivative they used historically. Effectiveness is not much different, but higher power makes them more useful as improvised AT weapons, and design standardization allows to produce more of them, providing at least a few of the best-equipped square divisions with attached small units of these guns, and creating more independent companies. Airfield units get flak increases earlier.


2)Meanwhile, by 1935 the Navy, seeing capabilities of D1A and B4Y, now entering service, and their projected successors, completely dispences with the idea of using 13.2 MGs for fleet air defense, except on small auxilaries, barges, and so on. The German model (Kriegsmarine was the first navy to adopt the combination of 20mm+37mm guns for close-range air protection, although their pre-war 37mm guns were really poor, not even fully automatic) becomes more influential, perhaps due to earlier contacts with German naval thinking, that, as postulated before, impacted IJN's sub doctrine. While the Navy is not about to go through the trials of changing its main automatic AA weapons again, particularly as Type 96 is found reliable and suited for mass production, the development of the single Type 96 mount is given high priority, and they start appearing on Japanese even before beginning of the war. IJN starts approaching Rheinmetall shortly before the war, interested in its 37mm Flak 36/37 guns. These, in their pre-war shapes, are found unsuitable for naval use, but acquired information (in combination with blueprints transported by subs during the war), helps Japan to start producing its own 37mm guns based on this design. Small numbers of them appear in 1943 in ground units and by second half of 1944 on ships. Production remains slow, fire control remains obsolete, etc, etc. But I guess this has a better chance of producing something during the war than trying to copy captured Bofors guns. And the fact that Flak 36/37 was quite lightweight should come useful when you lack good powered mounts.

3)AA rockets are not used.

4)120mm and 150mm Army guns are developed somewhat faster and deployed somewhat earlier due to cooperation with the Navy. More 120mm Type 3 guns are produced in 1944-45 in place of relatively obsolete and less powerful 120/45 10YT guns, some delivered to IJN's units in Home Islands.

5)Of course, this is all not going to help that much against determined and professional air attacks. For the fleet, even German standards of air defense will remain wholly unreachable due to limited production capabilities, and it is not like those were sufficient to protect shipping alongside German-owned coasts by 1944, even in conditions that very much helped the defending side. But hey, every little bit helps.

_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to 1EyedJacks)
Post #: 727
RE: CV Shinano - 9/16/2012 11:00:27 AM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
One more thing, John: I thought we've agreed on Shokaku Kai carriers for late war in this mod, but reading your posts, I see that you're thinking about Unryu class for this mod as well?

For that matter, I see three possible options for IJN, assuming a plan for carrier replenishment is formulated soon after the activation of emergency war preparations, not in mid-1942:

- Building Taiho class as the core. I should note that theoretically it was only about 20% more expensive than Unryu class, the problem, as far as I know, was with various industrial bottlecnecks.

- Building repeat Shokakus instead. Choice between them and Taiho depends on what you like more. Taiho has a slightly more spacious hangar and better passive protection, Shokaku is slightly faster and has stronger AA armament.

In either case, laying down two ships per year from 1941, with completion 2 years later is probably not too fantastic.

Alternatively, we might choose quantity over quality and start feverishly build Unryus from 1941. IRL Japanese laid down 3 of these in 1942 and 1943, while working on Taiho and Shinano, but completion of the last two ships faced difficulties, due to unavailability of machinery. Laying down 3 hulls per year from 1941 to 1943 might be possible. The tradeoff here is more hulls, greater overall aircraft capacity and AA fire volume, and greater ability to weather accidental losses to subs and so on, in exchange for relative fragility of every individual ship in a carrier battle, and increased problem with escorts.

In game terms, though, Unryus win hand down. 3xUnryu hull=(610*61*3)111,630 NSY points. 2xTaiho hull=(1030*103*2)212,180 NSY points. 2xShokaku hull=(900*90*2)162,000 NSY points. Purely in the AE terms, I'll pick Unryus over Taihos every time, if allowed to choose, and most likely over Shokakus as well.

_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 728
New Topics... - 9/17/2012 2:29:32 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
Still working on airgroups. IJNAF airgroup numbering system is really arcane - all those numbers are not random.

Meanwhile, while John is not here, another fleet-related thought: how about reducing durability of late-war Std Cargo ships, reflecting cost-saving measures implemented for them historically, once all thought of their post-war usefulness were abandoned? Greater durability does not meaningfully increase survivability for slow and unprotected xAK with inexperienced crews.

_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 729
RE: CV Shinano - 9/17/2012 4:00:30 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 11117
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR

One more thing, John: I thought we've agreed on Shokaku Kai carriers for late war in this mod, but reading your posts, I see that you're thinking about Unryu class for this mod as well?

For that matter, I see three possible options for IJN, assuming a plan for carrier replenishment is formulated soon after the activation of emergency war preparations, not in mid-1942:

- Building Taiho class as the core. I should note that theoretically it was only about 20% more expensive than Unryu class, the problem, as far as I know, was with various industrial bottlecnecks.

- Building repeat Shokakus instead. Choice between them and Taiho depends on what you like more. Taiho has a slightly more spacious hangar and better passive protection, Shokaku is slightly faster and has stronger AA armament.

In either case, laying down two ships per year from 1941, with completion 2 years later is probably not too fantastic.

Alternatively, we might choose quantity over quality and start feverishly build Unryus from 1941. IRL Japanese laid down 3 of these in 1942 and 1943, while working on Taiho and Shinano, but completion of the last two ships faced difficulties, due to unavailability of machinery. Laying down 3 hulls per year from 1941 to 1943 might be possible. The tradeoff here is more hulls, greater overall aircraft capacity and AA fire volume, and greater ability to weather accidental losses to subs and so on, in exchange for relative fragility of every individual ship in a carrier battle, and increased problem with escorts.

In game terms, though, Unryus win hand down. 3xUnryu hull=(610*61*3)111,630 NSY points. 2xTaiho hull=(1030*103*2)212,180 NSY points. 2xShokaku hull=(900*90*2)162,000 NSY points. Purely in the AE terms, I'll pick Unryus over Taihos every time, if allowed to choose, and most likely over Shokakus as well.


Sorry for the absence. Life is pretty hectic right now as I am racing cold weather to get our new bouncing baby Union Pacific caboose sandblasted and painted for the move to the house. Been REALLY eating into my time. Just been trying to keep up with turns and examine RA for its latest upgrade.

As to CVs, I think the choice of sticking to tried-and-true classes is most appropriate. How about the laying of 2 Sho-Kai in 1940 and 1941? Once the war begins the Japanese shift over to the Unryu (Hiryu)-Class hulls?


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 730
RE: CV Shinano - 9/17/2012 7:29:48 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Sorry for the absence. Life is pretty hectic right now as I am racing cold weather to get our new bouncing baby Union Pacific caboose sandblasted and painted for the move to the house. Been REALLY eating into my time. Just been trying to keep up with turns and examine RA for its latest upgrade.

Not like I'm in a place to complain about absences :(. I'll check RA too for air stuff before posting 5.0.

As the rest of the work on Perfect War, I think I can finish work on airgroups and devices in a couple of days. After that the most tedious part begin - updating ship classes (including porting the work on gun placement and so on I did for RA), ships (adding a ****ton of escorts/PTs/whatever, ugh) and TOEs (for new flak devices). I won't touch anything OOB related, and will drop new escorts and wharever added on 7/12/41 in major ports. Then all that will be left is for you to check/adjust initial OOB and force positioning. Well, that and plane art.


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
As to CVs, I think the choice of sticking to tried-and-true classes is most appropriate. How about the laying of 2 Sho-Kai in 1940 and 1941? Once the war begins the Japanese shift over to the Unryu (Hiryu)-Class hulls?

Well, why not? Please take a look at the rest of the stuff I posted above, when you have the time, just in case.


< Message edited by FatR -- 9/17/2012 7:31:18 PM >


_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 731
Checking the fleet.... - 9/19/2012 11:12:38 AM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
Naval airgroups are mostly done... I've paused with them to determine what airgroups are needed for IJN's ships first.

I'll be posting the current state of main ship classes, as I'm actually doing them in the editor.

Carriers

Initial: Akagi (81), Atago (81), Soryu (63), Hiryu (69), Tenryu (69), Rairyu (69), Shokaku (72), Zuikaku (72), Ryujo (39), Taiyo (27), Hosho (18)

Available in 1942: Junyo (58), Hiyo (58), Unyo (27), Chuyo (27)

Available in 1943: Ryukaku (72), Renkaku (72), Shinyo (33), Kaiyo (24), Kaiyo #2 (24, converted from Brazil Maru which IRL was lost before its planned conversion)

Avaialable in 1944: Unryu (63), Amagi (63), Katsuragi (63), Kurama (63), Small CVEs ## 1-2 (18 planes each, replace Army's CVEs)

Available in the first half of 1945: Kasagi (63), Aso (63), Ikoma (63), Small CVEs ## 3-4

Conversions: only battleship hybrids.

Total normal carrier capacity, assuming no losses (haha): 1505 planes.

We're replacing 8 converted hulls and possible conversions, plus Taiho, with 4 normal CVs and one extra cargo ship conversion. Late-war ships also are available a bit earlier, late-war CVE's are a bit better, and AAA on existing ships is strengthened earlier due to resulting savings.

Unryu-class carriers for some reason have less armor in stock than Hiryu, even though historically their protection remained largely the same, but various measures were taken to improve survivalbility and faciliate damage control. This is fixed.

We need 5 Navy-style names for CVEs.

Any other comments?

< Message edited by FatR -- 9/22/2012 4:00:46 PM >


_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 732
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 9/19/2012 2:52:37 PM   
MateDow


Posts: 217
Joined: 8/6/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR

Naval airgroups are mostly done... I've paused with them to determine what airgroups are needed for IJN's ships first...

Conversions: only battleship hybrids.

...Any other comments?


Do we want to have the option for the conversion of the Kongo-class BC to CV? It would be a long process (720+ days?) but for the player that needs the carriers it might be a nice option. They could just add airgroups from shore if the conversion is chosen.

If we really wanted to go extreme, we could have a full conversion for the Ise and Fuso classes. Something similar to the Eagle, Hermes or Bearn in capability.

What effect would this have for the Japanese economy? I know that we can't accurately model the effect that it would have on new construction due to game limitations, but it would effect ship repairs.

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 733
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 9/20/2012 7:45:09 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MateDow

Do we want to have the option for the conversion of the Kongo-class BC to CV? It would be a long process (720+ days?) but for the player that needs the carriers it might be a nice option. They could just add airgroups from shore if the conversion is chosen.


Realistically such convesion will be too costly to be viable. But while from pure realism viewpoint it is like adding war materials to Japan for free, from the game viewpoint such long conversion will severe oppotunity cost in an actual campaign, even besides sacrificing valuable surface ships in exchange for sucky carriers (see: converting Japanese CS ships into carriers, many players don't do that, or convert only some of them). So, maybe can be added, to be undertaken at a player's own risk.

Any other comments on this idea, everyone?




_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to MateDow)
Post #: 734
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 9/21/2012 3:20:23 AM   
bigred


Posts: 2892
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR


quote:

ORIGINAL: MateDow

Do we want to have the option for the conversion of the Kongo-class BC to CV? It would be a long process (720+ days?) but for the player that needs the carriers it might be a nice option. They could just add airgroups from shore if the conversion is chosen.


Realistically such convesion will be too costly to be viable. But while from pure realism viewpoint it is like adding war materials to Japan for free, from the game viewpoint such long conversion will severe oppotunity cost in an actual campaign, even besides sacrificing valuable surface ships in exchange for sucky carriers (see: converting Japanese CS ships into carriers, many players don't do that, or convert only some of them). So, maybe can be added, to be undertaken at a player's own risk.

Any other comments on this idea, everyone?




Let em have the kongo conversion. If I am playing the allies I hope the japs do the conversion.

_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 735
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 9/22/2012 3:59:04 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
One more thing perhaps should be added for carriers - with the relative plenty of heavy surface combatants by 1941-42, no neavy cruisers will laid down according to the wartime replenishment program and the intent of the pre-war conference on the construction programs (on 6th November of 1941) is followed more strongly. This might allow the construction of the 7th Unryu-class carrier, Kurama (RL name for the Carrier # 5008), normally available very late in 1944, instead of what could become CVL Ibuki. See the modified proposal in the post # 732 above.

< Message edited by FatR -- 9/22/2012 4:00:10 PM >


_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 736
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 9/22/2012 6:29:56 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 11117
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Think that sounds pretty good to me.


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 737
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 9/28/2012 2:48:38 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 7104
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
I know John has already read, "Racing the Sunrise," but I'm finally getting around to it (I have stack of over 6 books to read before going 'shopping at Amazon again'). At the end of Sept '42, the 41st Division was finished training and the needed transports were gathering to send it to the Philippines. However, MacArthur vetoed the idea and asked for more equipment for the troops he already had. Those transports were instead use to transport the 18th UK Division which we see in the game at Cape Town.

"What If" the 41st ended up on Luzon at start?? Then the 18th UK is still in England or the Middle East. Those large transports could be headed back to England to pick the 18th up.

Not saying it goes into the mod itself, but have a version "B" that a player could download as a slight alternative. It would make the Philippines a lot more difficult for Japan at start.

Just an idea.

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 738
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 10/18/2012 10:14:11 PM   
DOCUP


Posts: 2363
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
Any updates?

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 739
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 10/19/2012 1:15:19 AM   
RevRick


Posts: 2539
Joined: 9/16/2000
From: Dontblinkyoullmissit, GA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Any updates?


First Repeater!

_____________________________

"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 740
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 10/19/2012 3:13:54 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 2363
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
HAHAHA I'm a trend setter.

(in reply to RevRick)
Post #: 741
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 10/19/2012 7:43:47 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 11117
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I am useless right now. Am trying to resolve a life issue next Tuesday night and then should be able to get things going again. Don't know how FatR is doing but life in La Salle (us vs. the town) has been interesting.


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 742
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 10/19/2012 8:06:42 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 2363
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
I'm sorry to hear your having problems John 3rd.  I hope things get better for you.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 743
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 11/25/2012 11:37:40 PM   
DOCUP


Posts: 2363
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
Any news yet?

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 744
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 4/11/2013 1:50:08 PM   
Jo van der Pluym


Posts: 479
Joined: 10/28/2000
From: Netherlands
Status: offline
How is the progress with this mod?

_____________________________

Greetings from the Netherlands

Jo van der Pluym
The CrazyDutch

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 745
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 4/11/2013 4:34:40 PM   
General Patton


Posts: 1166
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in OHIO
Status: offline
Hows it going? Hope all is well. Just went though this thead, looks interesting.
Cheers

(in reply to Jo van der Pluym)
Post #: 746
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 4/11/2013 5:16:45 PM   
Lecivius


Posts: 1530
Joined: 8/5/2007
From: Denver
Status: offline
Do I need to come up there & set the town coucil straight?

(in reply to General Patton)
Post #: 747
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 4/11/2013 8:54:16 PM   
RisingSun


Posts: 721
Joined: 11/5/2009
From: Clifton Park, NY
Status: offline
I havent had a chance to read all this thread and wondering what improvements he/they did. What i am looking for is accurate aircraft plants, reinforcements are moved to homeland instead of frontline so you can transport them and finally can start right after Peal Harbor was hit on the 8th of December. Of course many units would have to be moved around since its another 24 hrs time frame.

_____________________________


(in reply to Lecivius)
Post #: 748
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 4/11/2013 10:26:11 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 11117
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
We're currently working on RA 6.0. I'd like to get back to this but life keeps interfering.

FatR: What do you think here?


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to RisingSun)
Post #: 749
RE: Checking the fleet.... - 4/12/2013 8:12:34 AM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
As I noted in the latest RA thread, many of my proposals there are based on what I want to apply to the Perfect War, so the work on this mod is definitely not dead. I just thought, that RA 6.0, Full Babes Edition, will be much faster to actually complete, and I needed an attainable mid-term goal to get myself out of the slump. I hope to return to this mod fully after we done there.

_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 750
Page:   <<   < prev  22 23 24 [25] 26   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: CV Shinano Page: <<   < prev  22 23 24 [25] 26   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

0.133