Matrix Games Forums

Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!Piercing Fortress Europa Gets UpdatedBattle Academy Mega Pack is now availableClose Combat: Gateway to Caen Teaser TrailerDeal of the Week Alea Jacta Est
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1

 
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: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/16/2012 4:22:28 PM   
Lecivius


Posts: 1290
Joined: 8/5/2007
From: Denver
Status: offline
Gonna start a new game, & give this a whirl.  Do I need to copy the game, since the artwork is updated?  I can't remember.

(in reply to khyberbill)
Post #: 61
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/16/2012 4:54:14 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10496
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Hey Sir.

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

Have FUN!
John


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to Lecivius)
Post #: 62
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/18/2012 8:59:28 PM   
moore4807


Posts: 1035
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Blackwood NJ
Status: offline
Stupid question - I just D/L'd 4.2... when I go to scenario it still says 4.1 DeBabes mod, how do I tell if its the new one?

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 63
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/18/2012 10:33:09 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10496
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
To be safe, shoot me your email and I shall send you the current files. They SHOULD be current, however, to be safe I can send them directly.

FatR: Did you upload the 4.2 files?


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to moore4807)
Post #: 64
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/18/2012 10:55:09 PM   
moore4807


Posts: 1035
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Blackwood NJ
Status: offline
date for scenario #70 is 5/9/2012 - so I'm pretty sure it is 4.2, thought about checking that AFTER I sent the post....

Thanks for the help though

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 65
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.2b or c needed - 5/19/2012 11:37:20 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 6737
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
John,

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




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to moore4807)
Post #: 66
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.2b or c needed - 5/19/2012 12:24:13 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 6737
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
Saipan - Since RA starts with two of the SNLF Assault Divisions here, then the 6 Lima Class xAKs and/or the 7 Aden Class xAKs should already be converted over to the '-t" type with the additional troop capacity at start.

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




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 67
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/24/2012 9:52:16 PM   
Xargun

 

Posts: 2898
Joined: 2/14/2004
Status: offline
I don't suppose you have an early 42 scenario for RA ?

Xargun

(in reply to Lecivius)
Post #: 68
RA 4.3 Released - 5/25/2012 7:18:50 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10496
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I have sent RA 4.3 to FatR for Posting on the site. Mostly changes detailed by Michael above. Some tweaks to Allied aircraft production but that is about it.

An early-42 RA Scenario? Hmmm...

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


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to Xargun)
Post #: 69
RE: RA 4.3 Released - 5/25/2012 10:11:48 AM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1933
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline
Can we upgrade mid-game?

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 70
RE: RA 4.3 Released - 5/25/2012 1:53:10 PM   
Kitakami

 

Posts: 459
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: On the bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline
I would definitely be interested in an early 1942 scenario. As a JFB, starting a campaign on turn 1 is always an excercise in patience that needs a large amount of time...

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 71
RE: RA 4.3 Released - 5/25/2012 3:12:03 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10496
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Bill: These are database changes so you should be able to upgrade with no issue.

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


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 72
RE: RA 4.3 Released - 5/25/2012 3:25:01 PM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1933
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline
quote:

'after the DEI'

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

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 73
RE: RA 4.3 Released - 5/25/2012 4:07:36 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10496
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Tend to agree with you Bill but a lot of people see the opening as pure tedium. I tend--as you know--to take less casualties when I run the offensive from Day One and things always seem so contrived when you begin with units already set for a May 1st start. Perhaps we could make this a bit more 'reasonable.'


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to khyberbill)
Post #: 74
RE: RA 4.3 Released - 5/25/2012 7:17:42 PM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1933
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline
quote:

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

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

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 75
RE: RA 4.3 Released - 5/26/2012 5:29:46 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10496
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I've started a new RA: Early march Thread. Any ideas, please Post them there. We'll keep this one focused on RA 4.3.


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to khyberbill)
Post #: 76
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/26/2012 5:30:07 PM   
CRations


Posts: 75
Joined: 2/21/2012
Status: offline
Hi John,

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

CR

(in reply to Lecivius)
Post #: 77
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/27/2012 4:38:41 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10496
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
They are split so you have the opportunity for more then one Port Strike on Dec 7th. Both are 'warp speed' TF. Provides some opening flexibility if wanted.


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to CRations)
Post #: 78
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/27/2012 1:44:24 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2511
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
I'm noticing that the scenario description for 4.3 still says "4.1 Modded for Babes". This does not warrant a new version by itself, but should be fixed if there's going to be 4.4.

_____________________________

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 Lecivius)
Post #: 79
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/27/2012 3:52:13 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10496
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Good point FatR. WE'll fix with the next tweak.

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


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 80
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/27/2012 4:06:47 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 6737
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

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


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

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 81
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/28/2012 5:15:52 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10496
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Hmmm...wonder what is up with the artwork?


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 82
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/28/2012 5:16:36 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10496
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Stanislav: Do you have the Training Cruiser artwork we used for the Kitakami's? If so, could you shot it to me? Thanks!


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 83
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/28/2012 11:43:00 AM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2511
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
I've sent that artwork. Check your inbox for that and other emails from me.

_____________________________

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 #: 84
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 5/28/2012 1:36:31 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10496
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Got it. Could you also Post it here so players can download it?


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 85
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 6/9/2012 10:37:44 AM   
Wittmann30


Posts: 43
Joined: 3/5/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline
Hi!

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

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

Any help?

Thanks.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

“God grant me the courage not to give up what I think is right even though I think it is hopeless.”

- Chester W. Nimitz -

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 86
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 6/9/2012 2:04:16 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10496
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
THIS is a new one. Let me check my copy and see if I have the same problem. Anyone else have this issue?

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

_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to Wittmann30)
Post #: 87
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 6/9/2012 6:16:10 PM   
CRations


Posts: 75
Joined: 2/21/2012
Status: offline
Hmmm - I see 48k troops with a limit of 60k at Truk. Did something change?

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

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

CR

< Message edited by CRations -- 6/9/2012 7:32:46 PM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 88
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 6/10/2012 1:32:21 AM   
Lecivius


Posts: 1290
Joined: 8/5/2007
From: Denver
Status: offline
Just curious, not complaining. I just ran my Day 1 turn. Force Z was wiped, as were the cans in Hong Kong, and PH was scrubbed from the face of the earth. Is the damage up in this mod since there is more focus on naval matters?

Morning Air attack on Pearl Harbor , at 180,107

Weather in hex: Clear sky

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

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



Allied aircraft
no flights

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

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

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



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

(in reply to CRations)
Post #: 89
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 - 6/10/2012 5:00:05 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10496
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
HOLY CRAP! Why can't I see an attack like that?

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

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

_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to Lecivius)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1 Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   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

0.117