Matrix Games Forums

Space Program Manager Launch Contest Announced!Battle Academy 2 is out now on iPad!A closer look at rockets in Space Program ManagerDeal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: Allied Side

 
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: The PERFECT WAR Mod: Allied Side Page: <<   < prev  22 23 [24] 25 26   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: Allied Side - 12/11/2011 12:34:28 PM   
oldman45


Posts: 2263
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline
Once the conversion is ready to go, just load the planes on-board. Modify the squadrons to fit like other CVL's and you are good to go. Unless I misunderstood your question.

_____________________________


(in reply to MateDow)
Post #: 691
RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: Allied Side - 12/11/2011 1:30:42 PM   
JuanG


Posts: 857
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Once the conversion is ready to go, just load the planes on-board. Modify the squadrons to fit like other CVL's and you are good to go. Unless I misunderstood your question.


I think the question was could you link an organic airgroup to arrive for them when converted, to which the answer is no as far as I know.

The only airgroups that take part in conversions are pre-existing ones on the ship, which can be linked like on the Japanese CS->CVL conversions, to convert to different squadrons if theyre onboard when the conversion is ordered.

_____________________________


Coral Sea HDM
AltWNT Scenarios

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 692
RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: Allied Side - 12/12/2011 12:58:32 PM   
MateDow


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Once the conversion is ready to go, just load the planes on-board. Modify the squadrons to fit like other CVL's and you are good to go. Unless I misunderstood your question.


JuanG was correct. I was thinking of an organic airgroup that would appear when the conversion was complete.

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 693
RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: Allied Side - 12/13/2011 5:47:13 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 11244
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
That is how I thought it was. Thanks for the comments guys.


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to MateDow)
Post #: 694
RE: War in the Skies - 12/23/2011 5:59:20 AM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 445
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline
Ok, so with China done I started looking at merging UK/Can/Aus/NZ aircraft production. That was the initial intention, about 11am yesterday morning...things have gotten a little unhinged since then. I'm not sure that's a good thing or a bad thing. Anyway:

I have pretty much consolidated aircraft types; there are some duplicates to allow production rate changes over time, but by and large things were fairly orderly and linear and aircraft numbers pretty much what they originally were...before I started messing with things. Here's how things have worked out so far:

* Conceptual background: With a relatively open Mediterranean, UK production is less stressed; there is less of a need to hold masses of aircraft in reserve, and more of an ability to plan ahead & tool new aircraft lines up. Meanwhile, Russia is under even more pressure than historical and pretty much needs anything that can fly - but preference here is for US equip as maintenance & ancilliaries are far more suitable given cicumstances. So, PTO gets scraps, then actually sees some modernish UK aircraft - to a certain extent this is a case of "wouldn't it be funny if...", but I figure there's no harm in that, and it keeps things interesting.

Land Fighters

- Beaufighter models partially merge
- Blenheim IVF introduced as early-42 long-range "fighter"; this is a bomber with a gunpod strapped to the belly as per Blenheim IF. Strictly night-fighter/long-range shipping protection, being terrifyingly slow, but it's a capability missing that can be filled.
- Buffalo models merge
- Hurricane IIb / XIIb merge
- Hurricane IId deleted (short war in Libya = likely not built)
- Hurricane III (technically existed as Packard Merlin aircraft; I've reappropriated the designation) replaces IIc / FR.II / IV as "refreshed" fighter-bomber from mid-43 with ability to lift bombs and a single drop tank at the same time - ie, it's actually of some use slinging bombs.
- A trickle of Spitfire V start to arrive mid-42 onwards; just a few per month, more as a morale booster than anything else, before ramping up towards the end of the year
- Spitfire VIII models merge
- Kittyhawk models merge
- UK Thunderbolt removed (! - yes, really); historically these were apparently meant to be fighter-bombers rather than air superiority fighters; that seems very odd in context of how WITP games tend to go, and the US has a notorious P-47 Gap which could probably use filling, so I got rid of'em. Replacing them is interesting...read on.
- CAC Boomerang removed. We have a fair number of spare Hurricanes kicking about - the Russians don't seem to have been fans - which makes this a basically unnecessary project. More sensible to concentrate on Beaufort>Beaufighter>Mosquito production in Australia, I think - best one efficient production focus than two 'ok' ones.
- Mosquito fighter models partially merge
- Mustang models partially merge

I think that's it. So, filling the new CW P-47 gap: The interesting thing about easing up in 1941 is that it puts Hawker Tornado back on the table for UK; historically this was cancelled mid-1941 as engines were being a pain and it wasn't thought a good use of resources at the time - effectively in doing that you're moving the timetable on the new Hawker fighter airframe up about 6-8 months - you end up with Tornado rather than Typhoon, I guess.

Engines for it - three appropriate 2000ish HP UK aero engines in the pipeline - RR Vulture, Napier Sabre and Bristol Centaurus. Vulture is available early, but was famously catastrophic in bombers; "allegedly" worked ok in Tornado, so given an ability to say "ok, keep it in production for fighters" we might assume that worked out in ETO, but given problems were basically with cooling I suspect tropical heat would have killed it stone dead. Sabre has been around since before the war, but was subject to excessive tinkering by Napiers and not really useful overseas until 1943; Centaurus is a bit of a techy design, but seems to have worked out ok, and is available 1942 - given less war stress, production can probably 'go' earlier. So, focus should drift towards C - with derated-Centaurus (still hot out east, remember, so reliability won't be so hot even though it's a radial) - Tornado starting to trickle in to PTO late 1943, as Hurricane supplies start to dry up, before uprating and accelerating in 1944. Very much a low-altitude short-range aircraft in comparison to Thunderbolt - but something a bit different. A few Mustangs will also show up mid-44 for LR escort duties.

Accelerating Centaurus deployment also has a few beneficial consequences in:

Land Bombers

- Beaufort models partially merge
- Bolingbroke IV and Blenheim IV merge; some extra Blenheim made available from mideast. Of course, they're still Blenheims in the end...
- Hudson models merge
- Ventura models merge
- UK Liberators mostly removed. Some GR.III retained for VLR naval search/mining, but otherwise these are wanted by MTO. CW will receive the aircraft, but not until mid-44.
- Wellington GR / B production increases to cover for Liberator on night-bombing/naval search
- Warwick GR / B comes in mid-44 as Wellington replacement; with Centaurus available this is a much more viable aircraft.
- Martin Baltimore arrives as MTO-flow daylight bomber to cover lack of Liberator and eventually displace Blenheim; basically a cross between A-20 and B-25, with none of the really good things about either, but it's available and a dead rat nailed to a tree stump is preferable to Blenheim, so...
- A very small number of bomber-variant (ie the "holy crap that's fast" ones) Mosquito are introduced from 1943 for irritation purposes, ramping up end 1944.
- Vengeance models merge
- Lancaster FE accelerates to whenever the war in Europe is now supposed to end - likely a bit sooner - replacing Liberator. I have it down for 4/45, but who knows.

Recon, transport & patrol aircraft merge; not much to change there.

Naval Aircraft

This is an interesting one. There is a question in my mind as to what goes on with Martlet/Wildcat; the FAA seems to have ended up with the aircraft as a consequence of diverted French orders - the French will now be able to take them on to a certain extent. The way I've chosen to set things up is:

- Fulmar is available in greater numbers
- Sea Hurricane likewise, with Sea Hurricane III coming in late 42 on the same basis as land version (ie, better load capability = drop tanks off carrier deck = useful range)
- Firefly availability moves up to late 43; there seems no particular reason why the aircraft can't be made available as it's in production and needs elsewhere are less critical by this point.
- Martlet is available as replacements, but 42-arriving carriers carry SH/Fulmar mix on arrival, so total # available decreases. Wildcat unchanged.
- A few navalised Mosquito available late 1944 - naval conversions were apparently actually made around this time, but the aircraft never made it into service for some reason. Can't think of a reason not to...

e: yes I can - seems these were a one-off for bouncing bombs, which I don't think we can really represent. So no Mosquitos off carriers - the main navalised variant didn't show up until post-war.

- Corsair, Hellcat unchanged. Given availability of Centaurus-Tornado I suspect Hawkers would have gone ahead with P.1009 equivalent (ie Sea Typhoon), which I could see replacing one of these lines in theory, but I don't really think production would be up to it until after the war's pretty much over, which makes it a bit pointless.
- Walrus/Seagull V models merge
- Sea Otter is introduced late 43 as Walrus successor with a little more range

Taken as a whole, I guess that makes CW air forces more 'tactical' and less 'strategic', and although available aircraft numbers will be higher it's something of a downgrade in effective capability in game terms (loss of Thunderbolt and most Liberator is a big kick), but it's one way you might weight things given a different overall war situation.

Now, this stuff is all a bit back-of-the-envelope, and everything's still in .csv format from my moving slots around - so comments & corrections are downright demanded.

< Message edited by kfsgo -- 12/23/2011 2:47:59 PM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 695
RE: War in the Skies - 12/24/2011 1:15:36 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 2382
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
Kfsgo  Nice work.  First of all I'm not as experieced as you are in this area.  So my questions are not ment to offend you or your work.

You stopped the Hurri IId so does the previous model contiue longer or stop at the usual time?

The Tornados are they going to be upgraded or just a one off type?

(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 696
RE: War in the Skies - 12/24/2011 3:41:30 AM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 445
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline
I'm pretty sure the probability of offending me with questions is a negative number so, uh, don't worry about that.

Hurricane IId is a dedicated ground-attack aircraft with a pair of 40mm cannons. Its origins are essentially the war in Libya - with lots of open ground exposing things to shoot at it's a natural progression; however, as we don't have a war in Libya in the appropriate time period I can't see that any would be produced. The fact that it's essentially useless in game terms is, of course, a handy aside...

The total Hawker chain looks like this at the moment (bear in mind this is still all a bit...conceptual):

Hurricane I - 12/41 to 1/42, 12 aircraft/month. Performance as stock except speed increased by 10mph to 292; as I understand it this is meant to represent 'tired' airframes rushed in from the Middle East; in our world they'll be less so, instead "just" being saddled with tropical filters etc.

Hurricane IIa - as stock, arrivals only with new groups. Technically this is the better aircraft out of IIa and IIb, being faster with less guns; the extra guns of IIb could be removed for a performance boost, of course, but we don't get to manually switch between models.

Hurricane IIb - 1/42 to 8/42, 25 aircraft/month. An amalgamation of stock IIb and Canadian XIIb production.

Hurricane IIc - 5/42 to 7/43, 50 aircraft/month. Production rate increases over stock (remember that we're supplying Australia and Canada as well - conceptually it could be much higher, but there is the fact that it's a game to keep in mind...) but ends earlier. This is really the point at which the aircraft starts to become a ground attack aircraft first and an air superiority fighter second, though people don't often realise it as range with bombs is only 4 hexes.

Hurricane FR.IIb - 1/43 to 5/43, 10 aircraft/month. Converted fighter-bombers with a camera.

Hurricane FR.III - 6/43 to 4/45, 30 aircraft/month. Dedicated, "refreshed" fighter-bomber, with camera, extra armour and a centerline drop tank enabling carriage of tank and two 500lb bombs at the same time. Can carry bombs out to max range (6 hexes), though that max is lower than fighter models. All the bits do have a performance cost, with speed dropping down to 312mph and service ceiling to 31000ft, so it's not really a competitive fighter by this point.

Sea Hurricane Ib - 12/41 to 2/43, 14 aircraft/month. Otherwise as stock.

Sea Hurricane F.3 - 1/43 to 12/43, 10 aircraft/month. Navalised Mk. III without the extra armour - will do 340mph, which is not exactly Corsair territory but is an improvement. Will lift two 250lb bombs and a drop tank off a carrier deck and fly them out to 5 hexes.

Tornado III - 6/43 to 4/44, 6 aircraft/month. Initial version with Centaurus; almost certain there would be cooling and reliability issues, so service rating of 3 - probably generous at that. Derating engine to solve some of those problems leaves speed around 385mph. No drop tanks fitted, range is 7hex/5hex - internal fuel much improved over Hurricane.

Tornado F.4 - 3/44 to 5/45, 40 aircraft/month. Range on internal fuel as above, drop tanks will stretch this out to 10hex/8hex. Less engine explosions bring reliability and power back up, speeding the aircraft up to 415mph. SR is 2; yes, it's a radial, but still a rather odd one. Maneuverability increases slightly as a consequence; good at low altitudes, poor at high altitudes.

Tempest F.2 - 6/45 to the end of time, 40 aircraft/month. As stock, just accelerated by 4 months.

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 697
RE: War in the Skies - 12/26/2011 8:23:18 PM   
oldman45


Posts: 2263
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline
I love what ya wrote except for the Liberators. There was a greater need in the Pacific because of the range these planes had over other bombers of the period. I think the case could be made for the Martin bombers to start coming over to the pacific with the French and British. Besides I always liked the Baltimore's, thought they were a good looking airplane.

_____________________________


(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 698
RE: War in the Skies - 12/27/2011 7:39:32 AM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 445
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

I love what ya wrote except for the Liberators. There was a greater need in the Pacific because of the range these planes had over other bombers of the period. I think the case could be made for the Martin bombers to start coming over to the pacific with the French and British. Besides I always liked the Baltimore's, thought they were a good looking airplane.


The French already have a few Marylands courtesy of Skyland; some could similarly make it over to India or Australia, I guess, though as I understand it the RAF mostly used them as recon aircraft. I always thought the Baltimore was pretty hideous, to be honest, but it's available in numbers due to the whole 'not being shot up over Libya' thing.

There are two regular Liberator strands for the CW in the stock game; British aircraft start arriving late 1942, but numbers are pretty small until you get into B.III / B.VI towards 1944. Australian aircraft start arriving mid-44 in similar numbers. So - the naval search models aren't going anywhere, since they're a range capability that can't really be had anywhere else, but there are better things for the regular bombers to be doing than messing around in Burma - better Romania than Rangoon, or so goes the theory - which sounds like a terrible hardship but, really, there are a lot of aircraft available for the sort of jobs the Liberators are meant to be doing - have a look at the 1943 records of the first UK Liberator squadron to arrive in-game, for example - very little further away than Rangoon, and bombing conducted more or less entirely at night - nothing that can't be done with Wellington, in other words.

e: although on looking at later models I'm not so sure - they lose some range. Will have to have a think...

From an Australian perspective there's no loss in capability, since they wouldn't be receiving Liberator until mid-44 and...that's when 'CW' Liberator shows up anyway.



< Message edited by kfsgo -- 12/27/2011 4:09:20 PM >

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 699
RE: War in the Skies - 1/6/2012 4:04:32 PM   
DOCUP


Posts: 2382
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
Could you all increase the mine production some.  I think this area is lacking some.  I don't want a huge increase, I can see where it could go way wrong.

(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 700
RE: War in the Skies - 1/13/2012 3:56:30 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 11244
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
OK. RA 4.0 is out. Where are we at with this?


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 701
RE: War in the Skies - 1/13/2012 5:15:47 PM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 445
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline
Approximately where we were a month ago, I think. I have a partially-updated CW squadron table on the basis of the aircraft reassignments I posted above, but it still needs a long afternoon and, frankly, some external review. UK aircraft production is a bit of a minefield; there's so, so many things that could have been done quite easily but weren't, due to institutional issues or the need to get something serviceable out yesterday, that it's hard to keep track.

After that, the Australian land and naval forces need reexamining in light of the situation in the ME, which will take another day or two on top of the air stuff, but I pretty much know what I'm doing there so less painful.

e: also, the French situation probably need to be looked at, to be honest. I know that's its own thing, but some of the deployments are rather odd and there are some issues around device specifications vis-a-vis the new Babes specs.

More tomorrow...the rest of today I intend to spend doing absolutely nothing, for once.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 702
RE: War in the Skies - 1/13/2012 5:51:50 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 11244
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Skyland: Do you know what kfsgo is talking about regarding your Frenchies?


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 1/13/2012 5:52:23 PM >


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 703
RE: War in the Skies - 1/13/2012 6:34:41 PM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 445
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline
Well, for example:

- French merchant cargo capacities are still at 'stock' rather than 'Babes reduced' values;
- French gun (most relevant to DP/AA, but still) specs are still...well, they're whatever they were originally. The point is that they're not consistent with everything else in-game; these are the same gun, for example, in Japanese and French service respectively:



There are a few similar issues like that and some devices with very odd stats - accuracy twice as high as comparable guns etc. None of it is exactly game-breaking, since use of all these things is relatively small-scale, but all could use some tidying up.

- Some starting deployments are kinda strange. Why is there a submarine squadron at Nouméa, for example? There's a war on in the Med and submarines are priceless there - better to have them trickle in from Aden if they're going to be employed - there's nothing they can do in the South Pacific that a gunboat with a big flag can't do five times as well, practically speaking; submarines don't impress Pacific Islanders. We "know" the Japanese are going to be screaming down from Truk in a few weeks - but realistically we don't actually 'know' that, if you get what I mean.
- A few ship upgrades are, uh...questionable. 36 Bofors in April 1942, on a pair of battlecruisers tied to USN yards...oy.

Anyway, there's plenty else to do in the meantime...

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 704
RE: War in the Skies - 1/13/2012 6:37:32 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 11244
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I believe Skyland placed everything at Noumea due to the French being thrown out of Indochina. Noumea was their next strongest location for a fallback...


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 705
RE: War in the Skies - 1/13/2012 6:43:39 PM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 445
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I believe Skyland placed everything at Noumea due to the French being thrown out of Indochina. Noumea was their next strongest location for a fallback...



I get that that's why they're there in practice, but conceptually (well, conceptually the whole thing with Indochina is kind of weird and handwavy, but I understand why) it makes no sense - they'd just go to Algeria, since not having surrendered that's where the Govt is.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 706
RE: War in the Skies - 1/13/2012 7:02:38 PM   
Skyland


Posts: 216
Joined: 2/8/2007
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kfsgo


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I believe Skyland placed everything at Noumea due to the French being thrown out of Indochina. Noumea was their next strongest location for a fallback...



I get that that's why they're there in practice, but conceptually (well, conceptually the whole thing with Indochina is kind of weird and handwavy, but I understand why) it makes no sense - they'd just go to Algeria, since not having surrendered that's where the Govt is.


We discussed that point at the very start of the mod thread.
IRL, there was a sub squadron in Indochina, i send them to south pacific with others available forces from that theater in order to defend to remaining french territory against the jap.
The rest of the fleet is already in the Med, the remaining facilities are anyway unable to deal with the complete french fleet.

_____________________________

War Options 1941 mod : https://sites.google.com/site/waroptionswitpaemod/

(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 707
RE: War in the Skies - 1/13/2012 7:06:29 PM   
Skyland


Posts: 216
Joined: 2/8/2007
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kfsgo

Well, for example:

- French merchant cargo capacities are still at 'stock' rather than 'Babes reduced' values;
- French gun (most relevant to DP/AA, but still) specs are still...well, they're whatever they were originally. The point is that they're not consistent with everything else in-game; these are the same gun, for example, in Japanese and French service respectively:



I will have a look and i will make change if you send me the files. As you said, it is possible that the values are the one from stock, not from DB mod.

_____________________________

War Options 1941 mod : https://sites.google.com/site/waroptionswitpaemod/

(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 708
RE: War in the Skies - 1/13/2012 10:24:14 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 11244
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Thanks Skyland! Good to see you Posting. haven't seen your avatar in a bit...


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to Skyland)
Post #: 709
RE: War in the Skies - 1/14/2012 10:02:11 AM   
Skyland


Posts: 216
Joined: 2/8/2007
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kfsgo


- French gun (most relevant to DP/AA, but still) specs are still...well, they're whatever they were originally. The point is that they're not consistent with everything else in-game; these are the same gun, for example, in Japanese and French service respectively:

There are a few similar issues like that and some devices with very odd stats - accuracy twice as high as comparable guns etc. None of it is exactly game-breaking, since use of all these things is relatively small-scale, but all could use some tidying up.




I remember now that i made some modifications for the stats of the french guns according to my documentations and by comparison with others guns.
I did not change the same guns stats for the japs as there were used in the "Vichy" units and not anymore in the mod IIRC.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kfsgo

- A few ship upgrades are, uh...questionable. 36 Bofors in April 1942, on a pair of battlecruisers tied to USN yards...oy.



Could you give more details ? May be you are talking about the Dunkerque class. Yes Bofors in 1942 is may be late as the weapons was in use in the french army before 1939 (same for 20 mm Oerlikon). Not in the navy but with the fall of France and no armistice (in the mod) we can suppose that the navy will adopt also this weapon from 1941/42. This "light" upgrade (AA weapons and radar) can be done in any yards including the french ones in Indian Ocean or in Med.

_____________________________

War Options 1941 mod : https://sites.google.com/site/waroptionswitpaemod/

(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 710
RE: War in the Skies - 1/14/2012 10:36:59 AM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 445
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Skyland

I remember now that i made some modifications for the stats of the french guns according to my documentations and by comparison with others guns.
I did not change the same guns stats for the japs as there were used in the "Vichy" units and not anymore in the mod IIRC.



Right, but the Japanese devices aren't the issue - the French ones are. They just need to be gone over in light of the Babes alterations to gun specs - note the Thai and FR naval devices appear to be fine; I guess you did those at a later date. Frankly, I can clear it up myself when I do the Australian stuff, so don't worry about it too much.

quote:


Could you give more details ? May be you are talking about the Dunkerque class. Yes Bofors in 1942 is may be late as the weapons was in use in the french army before 1939 (same for 20 mm Oerlikon). Not in the navy but with the fall of France and no armistice (in the mod) we can suppose that the navy will adopt also this weapon from 1941/42. This "light" upgrade (AA weapons and radar) can be done in any yards including the french ones in Indian Ocean or in Med.


Yeah, but it's just - where are they getting them from? I don't doubt that it's a reasonable fit-out (if anything I'd imagine they would have had radar fitted already, and there should be at least one more upgrade later in the war with later-war radar, extra LAA etc) but note even the USN fast battleships and carriers don't start to sprout Bofors until October-November 1942 - we have Algerie getting a bunch in Feb. and D&S getting them in April, which just seems odd - the things are in short supply in New York, never mind New Caledonia.


< Message edited by kfsgo -- 1/14/2012 10:37:17 AM >

(in reply to Skyland)
Post #: 711
RE: War in the Skies - 1/14/2012 10:49:39 AM   
Skyland


Posts: 216
Joined: 2/8/2007
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kfsgo


Yeah, but it's just - where are they getting them from? I don't doubt that it's a reasonable fit-out (if anything I'd imagine they would have had radar fitted already, and there should be at least one more upgrade later in the war with later-war radar, extra LAA etc) but note even the USN fast battleships and carriers don't start to sprout Bofors until October-November 1942 - we have Algerie getting a bunch in Feb. and D&S getting them in April, which just seems odd - the things are in short supply in New York, never mind New Caledonia.



The french have the license for the Bofors. In my mind (and in this parallel world), the production was transfered in mid-1940 in some new US based plant and several hundreds were build for the french needs before pacific war.
I agree that may be one more upgrade later is more plausible.

_____________________________

War Options 1941 mod : https://sites.google.com/site/waroptionswitpaemod/

(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 712
RE: War in the Skies - 1/14/2012 2:38:36 PM   
oldman45


Posts: 2263
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline
In my version using babes and Skylands mods, I have the French going into the US yards in 40/41. I assumed the French would pay for the licences to be used in the US or Commonwealth for manufacture of the AAA guns. So when the war starts they have an upgraded AAA suite with their first major upgrade (capital ships) happening in 43. The escorts upgrade in mid 42 if it involves ASW and 43 for radar and AAA.

_____________________________


(in reply to Skyland)
Post #: 713
RE: War in the Skies - 1/17/2012 6:28:14 PM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 445
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline
Moving on...

---- I've worked most CW squadrons up with the new aircraft set; only half of RAF left to do. They all have appropriate upgrade paths (and mostly use the same aircraft, just in merged pools) so conceptually everything should work with PDU on, though obviously that's unlikely to be needed in practice.

---- Have updated Beaufort VIII, Beaufighter TFX, Barracuda and CW Avenger to use Mk XV versus Mk XII torpedo; the former replaced the latter through 1942-43 so I'm not sure why this wasn't the case already. Ideally aircraft would get torpedo type from the date and the nationality of the Air HQ, but...

---- Have altered Dutch slightly. In stock Dutch air OOB in the NEI period is as follows:

* Two fighter groups with 75 aircraft
* Three bomber groups with 70 aircraft
* Four light recon/army coop squadrons with 36 aircraft
* One transport squadron with 18 aircraft
* Thirteen marine aviation detachments with 40 aircraft

These are all assumed to snuff out in fighting around Java etc except the transports. Later-forming groups are:

* 18 Sqn RAAF with Mitchell (18 aircraft, April 42)
* 19 Sqn RAAF with Dakota (16 aircraft, August 45)
* 119 Sqn RAAF with Mitchell (18 aircraft, Sept 43)
* 321 Sqn RAF with Catalina (6 aircraft, August 42)

I have kept those, and added two:

* 26 Sqn RAAF with Buffalo (18 aircraft, June 42); upgrades through Hurricane II, Spit V, Spit VIII, Mustang IV. This arrives with one aircraft and one pilot, so use is dependent on what can be made available from elsewhere in that respect.
* 44 Sqn RAAF with Catalina (6 aircraft, August 42); upgrades through CW Catalina line. Same principle.

That gives a small outlet for competent Dutch pilots, a number of which tend to accumulate and who ordinarily can't be used for anything. That said, I have set their monthly pilot replacement rate to 2, so there'll be a tiny trickle - figure transfers from RAF, the training schools in the US etc. As with the torpedoes, ideally one would just be able to assign them to RAAF/RAF squadrons, but...


(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 714
RE: War in the Skies - 1/19/2012 10:30:53 PM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 445
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline
Ok, CW air squadrons are now worked up with the new aircraft list. Air units arriving from the Middle East in the 1941-1942 timeframe have reduced experience reflecting the reduced intensity of operations there. I need to go through the list of named pilots and ding a bunch of them appropriately, but that won't take too long.

On to Australia...this will take a little time, both because the organisational structure could do with being a little more flexible than it currently is and because there seem to be some TOE upgrade path issues; should have something solid by next weekend, at the latest.

(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 715
RE: War in the Skies - 1/20/2012 1:03:25 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 2382
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
Nice work Kfsgo.  I have a question for anyone here.  The Wirraways, I thought they were fighter bombers  (crappy fighters, but none the less)?  In my game they are just level bombers.  I am confused.

(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 716
RE: War in the Skies - 1/20/2012 2:02:46 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2263
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline
I want to say that they were trainers that were pressed into service as fighters/fighter bombers. I think the dev's decided to call them bombers because they were so crappy.

_____________________________


(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 717
RE: War in the Skies - 1/20/2012 2:46:41 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 2382
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
Thanks Oldman.

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 718
RE: War in the Skies - 1/20/2012 6:40:49 AM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 445
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Thanks Oldman.


Yeah, anything can be a fighter if you're desperate enough - SBD, Val, Il-2 etc were also used in that way. Realistically, whatever the argument for making them FBs in stock (I think it'd be justified, with the caveat that they'd be more dangerous to their pilots than to the enemy) there isn't likely to be quite that level of desperation here as aircraft availability is somewhat better.

I have given it a camera, though, so it's more useful as a sort of Lysander-style battlefield recon aircraft than it was.

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 719
RE: War in the Skies - 1/20/2012 6:27:04 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 11244
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Makes sense...


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 720
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: The PERFECT WAR Mod: Allied Side 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

0.120