Matrix Games Forums

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 Ask Buzz Aldrin!Pike & Shot gets Release Date and Twitch Session!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign Mod v2)

 
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 >> Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign Mod v2) Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign Mod... - 8/29/2012 4:47:30 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
Starting this thread to capture thoughts and discussion of my re-adaptation of my original Treespider Mod.

The re-adaptation was prompted by a discussion of some of the economic aspects of my original mod. The original purpose of the first version of my mod was to place a much heavier burden upon the Japanese to transport resources to the Home Islands. I accomplished my goals in version 1, however I did this by eliminating supply production at HI and placed all supply production in LI. While the effort achieved the goal of requiring more resources to be shipped to Japan, it did create an anomaly in that the Japanese no longer needed to transport fuel to the home islands to create supply which would be used by their aircraft. Hence my effort to redesign the economy once again.

I think I have succeeded. I have now placed all supply production (other than daily supply allotments) into HI. LI is now simply used as a resource point "sink" and represents the civilian economy that consumes a fair amount of the resource points produced on the map.

My numbers are still raw and fresh but I think I can begin a discussion of them here...

First I have changed the Input/Outputs of all industries:

Resource centers = 20 RP/day
HI Factories consume 8 RP and 1 Fuel, and produce 2 Supply and 1 HI
LI Factories consume 7 RP ( although this may increase with a corresponding decrease in LI factories), as stated LI produce nothing.


Now let's examine how these changes impact the US and how I go about ramping up US supply production:


Going in my goals for US supply production were:

mid 42 = 41,300 supply per day
mid 43 = 71,200
mid 44+ = 79,000

In Stock AE the US receives 65,000 daily supply + 6200 supply from on map LI = 71,200 which I chose as the 1943 base line. I arrived at my baseline numbers by basing them on the US Munitions Budget:

US Munitions Budget:
1942 = $30.168B = 58
1943 = $51.745B = 100
1944 = $57.594B = 111

For the mod I reduce daily supply to 50,000.

I also alter HI Factories in the US. The US will now have 6220 At-Start HI factories which will produce 12440 supply points. Combined with the 50,000 daily supply results in 62,440 supply points being generated daily.

I then give the US a series of HI Factories - 38 total, all damaged

11 - 90 point centers
10 - 275 point centers
5 - 455 point centers
5 - 635 point centers
7 – 1910 point centers (these will never finish repairing)

So in Dec/41 with 38 HI centers repairing the US will use 38,000 supply per turn from the 62,440 produced leaving a surplus of 24,400/day which slowly grows as HI comes online.

90 turns into the game, roughly March 1942, the 11 - 90 point centers have completed repairing and the other 27 centers have 90 points repaired as well. So the US supply situation is 12440 (generated from At start HI) + 50000 daily + 1980 (11 centers x 90 factories x 2 sup) + 4860 (27 centers x 90 x 2) - 27,000 (27 HI centers still repairing) = 42280 supply/day ....my goal was 41,300.

Continuing on another 185 days (Turn 275) to Sep 42 another 10 HI centers have come completely on line and stopped repairing. So the US supply situation is 12440 (At start repaired HI) + 50000 daily + 1980 (11 HIx90x2) + 5500 (10 HIx275x2) + 9350 (17HIx275x2) - 17,000 (17 HI still repairing) = 62270 supply

Continuing on another 180 days (Turn 455) to March 43 another 5 HI centers have come completely on line and stopped repairing. So the US supply situation is 12440 (At start repaired HI) + 50000 daily + 1980 (11HIx90x2) + 5500 (10HIx275x2) + 4550 (5HIx455x2) + 10920 (12HIx455x2) - 12,000 (12 HI still repairing) = 73390 supply my goal was 71200 ... pretty close.

Continuing on another 180 days (Turn 635) to Sept 43 another 5 HI centers have come completely on line and stopped repairing. So the US supply situation is 12440 (At start repaired HI) + 50000 daily + 3960 (1980 (11HIx90x2) + 5500 (10HIx275x2) + 4550 (5HIx455x2) + 6350 (5HIx635x2) + 8890 (7HI x635x2) - 7000 (7 HI still repairing) = 84690 supply points per day....

From here the US supply will continue to grow by 14 points per day till the end of the game as the 7 remaining unrepaired HI centers repair every day.


The US was relatively easy to convert to version 2 once i arrived at the numbers for inputs/outputs...much of the above analysis was simply a cut and paste from an earlier thread.

Japan and others areas presented greater challenges which will be discussed in coming days.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910
Post #: 1
RE: Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign... - 8/29/2012 5:34:04 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 14917
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: online
How will these industry changes affect China?

Do you still intend to add lots of bases to China, or do you feel the optional stacking limits take care of that issue? (They do make a tremendous difference.)

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 2
RE: Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign... - 8/29/2012 5:53:53 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 3739
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
Meritorious as the goal is, I don't see why players would care about feeding their Light Industry with resources. As LI in your mod would produce nothing there is no carrot for the player. As there is no stick from not feeding LI with resources, I just don't see the motivation for a player to run the risk of losing merchant hulls and consuming fuel in the process of transporting resources, just to feed LI. I predict players would simply allow their LI to be starved of the feedstock.

Alfred

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 3
RE: Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign... - 8/29/2012 8:40:37 AM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 6023
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/now in Israel
Status: offline
I think LI will draw resources automatically, so player would have to feed areas with resources to keep HI running?

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 4
RE: Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign... - 8/29/2012 11:33:24 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

How will these industry changes affect China?

Do you still intend to add lots of bases to China, or do you feel the optional stacking limits take care of that issue? (They do make a tremendous difference.)




Yes, the extra dot bases are present, as well as Supply Draw limits, as well as stacking limits....if you think China in version 1 was a true walk in the mud, version 2 will hopefully be like quicksand.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 5
RE: Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign... - 8/29/2012 12:05:08 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
quote:

Meritorious as the goal is, I don't see why players would care about feeding their Light Industry with resources. As LI in your mod would produce nothing there is no carrot for the player. As there is no stick from not feeding LI with resources, I just don't see the motivation for a player to run the risk of losing merchant hulls and consuming fuel in the process of transporting resources, just to feed LI. I predict players would simply allow their LI to be starved of the feedstock.

Alfred



quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

I think LI will draw resources automatically, so player would have to feed areas with resources to keep HI running?


Yes, LI will automatically draw Resource points, and IIRC the player cannot "shut-off" LI Production.

The changes to the factory numbers are significant, as the mod is more than just a change to inputs/outputs.

In regards to Australia - here is the quick and dirty analysis -


In Stock-AE Australia has 3210 Resource centers producing 64,200 RP. Australia also has 2770 LI and 1120 HI which require 63950 RP and 2240 fuel. As such she has a 250 point RP surplus...no more resources need to be transported to Australia. The Industry/Refineries produces 5010 points of supply. She also has 55 Refineries which produce 495 Fuel and 55 supply. So in the end Australia produces 250 RP, 5065 Supply points and has a -1745 Fuel Deficit if all the industry is fed. If the Allied player shuts off HI in Australia and no oil is brought in, 2770 supply points are still generated and the fuel deficit is 0.


With my changes in Empires in the Balance Australia has 3210 Resource centers producing 64200 RP. An additional 412 damaged Resource Centers have been added to existing centers in two bases. As they repair they will eventually generate an additional 8240 RP.

Australia has been allotted 2770 HI and 7180 LI (significant changes) which require 72420 RP and 2770 fuel. THE LI will produce nothing, however the HI will generate 5540 Supply and 2770 HI if fed. At start Australia will now have a 8220 point RP deficit.

However, as stated, as the damaged Resource Centers repair, Australia will eventually be able to meet her resource needs. After approximately 206 days the 412 Resource centers will produce a further 8240 RP eliminating the Australian RP deficit.

Early in the game RP will need to be transported to Australia for her economy to keep functioning at peak efficiency. I tend to think of these Resource Points as asphalt, asphalt producing plants, crushing plants, compressors, jack hammers, screening plants for gravel, explosives, landing mat; for transportation, rail and rolling stock, trucks, gasoline storage tanks, and operating personnel, etc. After the first 206 days she will be fully self-sufficent.

quote:


With the best will in the world, Australia simply did not have resources for the tremendous effort required. Australian manpower, scant to begin with, had already been drained for her military forces and war industries. Her continental defenses were at rock bottom, the best of her troops and the bulk of her military equipment having been sent overseas. Her economy was already stretched tight by the demands of two years of war and was scarcely sufficient to meet her own requirements. While a large part of the basic U.S. Army ration, items of clothing, and the like could be obtained locally, only a brief survey was needed to convince Americans in Australia that the great bulk of military supplies—including construction equipment and construction labor would have to come from the United States.

-Global Logistics & Strategy 1940-43, p. 168
Leighton & Coakley


quote:


Australia and New Zealand were primarily agricultural, producing an exportable surplus of foodstuffs and raw materials, which in peacetime they normally exchanged with England for manufactured goods. Though their industry was increasing, and the pace of its development was vastly speeded by the war, it was far from sufficient in 1942 to maintain an essential civilian economy and provide equipment for the armed forces Australia and New Zealand could put into the field. The large American forces sent to the area promised an additional drain on the native economy. These American forces would be operating at the end of one of the longest supply lines in the history of warfare. If they could draw the bulk of their subsistence supplies from local sources, the saving in shipping would be immense. A fairly simple and direct exchange therefore suggested itself whereby Australia and New Zealand would furnish American forces with housing, subsistence, clothing, and miscellaneous supplies and services in return for which the United States would supply the marginal needs of both their military forces and civilian economy.

-Global Logistics & Strategy 1940-43, p. 497
Leighton & Coakley



The Australian Industry will produce 5540 points of supply if fed. She also has 55 Refineries which produce 550 Fuel. However because of the repairing resource centers the supply will be reduced to 3540 points per day for the first 206 days.

Australia At Start will produce a 8220 RP deficit, 3540 Supply points (5540 - 2000 for Resource Center Repair) and will have a -2220 point Fuel Deficit....assuming the US ships RP and Oil to Australia. Eventually the RP deficit will disappear and the damaged Resource center will not need supply for repair.

Due to other changes in the US economy which cause Supply to be much scarcer it may be beneficial for the US to ship RP in addition to supply to Australia in the beginning until Australia's economy can fully meet its RP requirements.

With ALL supply now being delivered by HI output, if Australian HI is turned off, does the Allied player want to tie up ships transporting 3540-5540 supply points per day to Australia to make up the deficit that is no longer being produced? Will those ships end up consuming more fuel than is used by the HI?

I hope these changes will also slow down the Allied ability to begin their push back sooner than August 1942. And before the AFB's begin crying foul...we have yet to discuss the limitations placed on the Japanese and JFB's.





< Message edited by treespider -- 8/29/2012 12:10:21 PM >


_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 6
RE: Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign... - 8/29/2012 2:15:09 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 3739
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

I think LI will draw resources automatically, so player would have to feed areas with resources to keep HI running?


That is correct but the point of the exercise is to force Japan to use shipping to transport resources back to the Home Islands. I don't think this is going to achieve that objective.

1. Japan is not badly off for indigenous resource centres.
2. The sea transport route from the Korea and Hokkaido surplus resource centres is so short and virtually invulnerable to Allied subs, that it does not really impose any sort of real restraint on Japan.
3. Elsewhere the size of Heavy Industry is so small relative to Light Industry that I don't think too many players would be concerned if they produced no HI points from thoses locations. But this would not necessarily be the outcome for resources are not moved every day. Players could just gamble that on certain days their bases with HI factories would receive an auto overland delivery of resources but other bases with only LI factories would not, thereby allowing intermittant production.

To ensure that HI would be starved unless resources were imported along vulnerable sealanes, a total disregard of the historical production would be necessary. I would find it very unsatisfactory to make an unrealistic set up in order to "achieve" an historical outcome. For then certain other anomlies are bound to crop up.

In the other thread I agreed with Treespider that allowing Allied HI to be turned off was a dubious enhancement. That made it easy for Allied players to be profligate with their fuel consumption. It however emphasises the point that for both the Allied and Japanese player, the real chockepoint for Heavy Industry production is not resources but fuel.

Alfred

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 7
RE: Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign... - 8/29/2012 3:16:20 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

I think LI will draw resources automatically, so player would have to feed areas with resources to keep HI running?


That is correct but the point of the exercise is to force Japan to use shipping to transport resources back to the Home Islands. I don't think this is going to achieve that objective.

1. Japan is not badly off for indigenous resource centres.
2. The sea transport route from the Korea and Hokkaido surplus resource centres is so short and virtually invulnerable to Allied subs, that it does not really impose any sort of real restraint on Japan.
3. Elsewhere the size of Heavy Industry is so small relative to Light Industry that I don't think too many players would be concerned if they produced no HI points from thoses locations. But this would not necessarily be the outcome for resources are not moved every day. Players could just gamble that on certain days their bases with HI factories would receive an auto overland delivery of resources but other bases with only LI factories would not, thereby allowing intermittant production.

To ensure that HI would be starved unless resources were imported along vulnerable sealanes, a total disregard of the historical production would be necessary. I would find it very unsatisfactory to make an unrealistic set up in order to "achieve" an historical outcome. For then certain other anomlies are bound to crop up.

In the other thread I agreed with Treespider that allowing Allied HI to be turned off was a dubious enhancement. That made it easy for Allied players to be profligate with their fuel consumption. It however emphasises the point that for both the Allied and Japanese player, the real chockepoint for Heavy Industry production is not resources but fuel.

Alfred


Currently on my phone so I will be brief...I already modded the Japanese economy once and it achieved the desired effect of requiring substantially more resources to be transported to Japan over the sea lanes. However as I mentioned I relied upon LI for supply production which required no fuel to generate supply. With the new version all supply is generated by HI which requires fuel. As a consequence much of the supply production on map for the Japanese will now originate in the HI.

I will provide the analysis of Japan this evening when I return home.


_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 8
RE: Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign... - 8/29/2012 4:27:20 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 14917
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: online
How about the source of that oil for Australia? In Stock and Babes once "the usual places" have been conquered by Japan the only spot on the map that produces excess oil is Abadan.

The US has a bit of excess oil at start, but production exactly equals consumption (in Stock and Babes). AFAIK the US should be able to export oil to Australia, even if one is made to go through the Panama Canal or to "the East Coast" base to get it.

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 9
RE: Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign... - 8/29/2012 10:12:38 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

How about the source of that oil for Australia? In Stock and Babes once "the usual places" have been conquered by Japan the only spot on the map that produces excess oil is Abadan.

The US has a bit of excess oil at start, but production exactly equals consumption (in Stock and Babes). AFAIK the US should be able to export oil to Australia, even if one is made to go through the Panama Canal or to "the East Coast" base to get it.


Yes Oil will be available from the US for Australia.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 10
RE: Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign... - 8/30/2012 12:32:12 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

I think LI will draw resources automatically, so player would have to feed areas with resources to keep HI running?


That is correct but the point of the exercise is to force Japan to use shipping to transport resources back to the Home Islands. I don't think this is going to achieve that objective.

1. Japan is not badly off for indigenous resource centres.
2. The sea transport route from the Korea and Hokkaido surplus resource centres is so short and virtually invulnerable to Allied subs, that it does not really impose any sort of real restraint on Japan.
3. Elsewhere the size of Heavy Industry is so small relative to Light Industry that I don't think too many players would be concerned if they produced no HI points from thoses locations. But this would not necessarily be the outcome for resources are not moved every day. Players could just gamble that on certain days their bases with HI factories would receive an auto overland delivery of resources but other bases with only LI factories would not, thereby allowing intermittant production.

To ensure that HI would be starved unless resources were imported along vulnerable sealanes, a total disregard of the historical production would be necessary. I would find it very unsatisfactory to make an unrealistic set up in order to "achieve" an historical outcome. For then certain other anomlies are bound to crop up.

In the other thread I agreed with Treespider that allowing Allied HI to be turned off was a dubious enhancement. That made it easy for Allied players to be profligate with their fuel consumption. It however emphasises the point that for both the Allied and Japanese player, the real chockepoint for Heavy Industry production is not resources but fuel.

Alfred



Now for the discussion of Japan that I promised earlier today:

In Stock AE the Honshu/Shikoku/Kyushu/Hokkaido cluster has 6160 HI and 7940 LI. The industry requires 242,300 RP /day to meet its needs. Domestic RP production in this cluster is 197,800….which results in a shortfall of 44,500 RP/day or 16,242,500 RP per year.

Historically Japan imported 22,039,600 tons of 16 different types of bulk commodities in 1940. 22,039,600 equates to 60382 tons per day. In 1941 that figure was 20,004,430 tons. The numbers got progressively smaller as the war progressed. Figures are from USSBS Report #54- The War Against Transportation, page 100.

Under the assumption that our RP roughly equates to a ton of stuff, there is a 5,797,100 point shortfall between what the game requires and what the 1940 Japan economy required to be imported into Japan per year. That equates to 15,882 points per day. My mod seeks to address this shortfall and also seeks to place a premium on getting fuel to the Home Islands..

So how do I arrive at my numbers?

As stated I have altered the inputs and outputs of all industry. LI now serves as a resource “sink” and simulates civilian resource consumption.

In Japan I have allotted 12,320 HI factories which will generate the same number of HI points. The HI points generated are no different than stock. The HI will consume 98560 RP per day.

I have allocated Japan with 11525 Resource factories which generate 230,500 RP or 84,132,500 RP per year. An analysis of the historic Japanese economy revealed that Japan produced 84,954,014 tons of resources in 41 different bulk commodities.

So now we have to account for our Imports. Domestic RP production minus HI consumption results in a RP surplus of 131,940 RP/day. However I need a deficit of roughly 60382 RP/day to account for the amount of RP Japan imported. So Japan is allocated 27,475 LI factories which consume 192,325 RP. When you subtract the previously calculated surplus you find a 60,385 RP deficit per day which will need to be imported. That is a 35% increase over Stock requirements...coupled with the DBB-C 25-33% reduction in shipping capacity that I use and you see a significant strain placed on Japanese shipping.

Aggregate Supply production in Japan with the new model is slightly higher than Stock and remains relatively unchanged in the rest of the contested areas of the map once the industry levels are modified. HI points and Industry fuel consumption are unchanged.




_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 11
Big Changes in Little China - 9/3/2012 9:19:00 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
This is a screen shot showing the new map in China for my mod. Unseen are the stacking limits and Supply Draw limits that have been put in place.

The dashed rail line between Sinyang and Chengchow represents the fact that this stretch of track had been destroyed by the Chinese. I represent this stretch as a major road.

I have also downgraded the rail lines along the China-Manchukuo border. This helps to slow the accumulation of supplies/resources etc at Port Arthur. More tends to pool at Shanghai with the change.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by treespider -- 9/3/2012 9:23:02 PM >


_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 12
RE: Big Changes in Little China - 9/3/2012 9:51:51 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 14917
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: online
Diabolical!

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 13
RE: Big Changes in Little China - 9/3/2012 11:25:10 PM   
Dan Nichols


Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline
War of the dot bases!

This will be a very interesting scenario when you get done.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 14
RE: Big Changes in Little China - 9/4/2012 10:06:53 AM   
moonraker


Posts: 481
Joined: 7/14/2004
From: Swindon,Wilts. UK
Status: offline
Wow loads of dot bases in there. I'll give this one a try when it's done

_____________________________

Packard Bell S3840 imedia Desk Top - 4GB DDR3 Ram - Geforce GT 630 4GB - Windows 7 Home Premium - Wired Keyboard and Mouse - 22 inch HD Monitor

(in reply to Dan Nichols)
Post #: 15
Bomb Loads - 9/6/2012 6:43:25 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
Making some good progress regarding adapting the altDevice/altUse feature for this mod. Results of the changes will hopefully see changes in use of aircraft types by players...level Heavy and Medium Bombers will have loads that will be most effective against facilities and less so versus ground or naval targets, Attack Bombers and Close support aircraft will have loads which will see them more effective in the Naval Attack and ground Attack roles.

One way I will achieve this is through the use of bomb "groups/packs/sticks". So for example the Helen instead of carrying 4- 250kg GP Bombs would carry two (2x250kg GP Bombs). As a result Helen gets two bites at the apple. The B-17 instead of carry 8- 500lb GP Bombs would carry two (4x500lb GP Bombs). Of course the 4x500lb GP will be more effective than the 2x250kg GP. Initial tests look very promising.

In addition I am altering Bomb Effect values using a standardized formula. Result will see a smoother bell curve of bomb values...smaller bombs will have more effect than Stock or DBB...larger bombs less effect....mid range bombs will be approximate to Stock and DBB.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to moonraker)
Post #: 16
RE: Bomb Loads - 9/8/2012 1:48:15 AM   
Dan Nichols


Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline
treespider, I like the changes you are making, it will be interesting to see how it all works together. Did you or are you planning on using the data from the Babes for ASW changes and AA changes?

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 17
RE: Bomb Loads - 9/8/2012 2:29:01 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dan Nichols

treespider, I like the changes you are making, it will be interesting to see how it all works together. Did you or are you planning on using the data from the Babes for ASW changes and AA changes?


DBB Scenario 28 C is the foundation upon which this is built....with my tweaks here and there.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Dan Nichols)
Post #: 18
RE: Bomb Loads - 9/8/2012 3:26:38 AM   
Dan Nichols


Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline
Excellent.

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 19
RE: Bomb Loads - 9/8/2012 8:07:32 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
DAMN, you are going to update ALL larger bombers? There are like gazillion of them!

If you check el Cid AARs/tests, you will see, that bomb effect does not seem to have any different influence on LCU devices. 15kg bombs works the same, as 250kg bombs. Also, damages to runway seems to depend mostly on number of hits, not bomb size (but planes seems to be easier to destroy by larger bombs).


Anyway, the more I think about it, the more I am convicted, that 4Es should only use ONE LARGE device, to represent whole bombload.

(in reply to Dan Nichols)
Post #: 20
RE: Bomb Loads - 9/10/2012 2:18:44 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
Making good progress on my bomb pack algorithms...lots of cuberoots....special thanks to JWE and MichaelM for their time and patience. Learned a few nuances that will ease my effort.





_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 21
Update - 9/14/2012 7:02:52 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
Update:

Still working on the altered Bombloads, which required testing and consultation with MichaelM concerning some discrepancies in code.

New project added:

Re-evaluation of aircraft ranges. New ranges will be based on an algorithm that accounts for:
- Marshalling Formations while launching
- Bingo/Reserve Fuel Levels
- Fighter use of Max Power while in Combat
- No Load, Internal, & External Load Drag
- Use of Internal versus External DT's.

In addition analysis of carrier launched versus land launched formations will likely see the introduction of a new "class" of Fighter. All fighters that are CV capable will be designated with "-cv" in name. They will have ranges that are substantially less than the corresponding land based version currently in the game. Analysis revealed that the time needed for marshalling and escorting a full strike from a CV was approximately twice that needed for a similarly sized land based strike. As such "-cv" fighters will see shorter available ranges.

Will post some samples later this afternoon.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 22
RE: Update - 9/14/2012 10:25:09 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
As promised here are some of my "new" aircraft - small, subtle changes:


A6M2-cv
Cruise Spd – 130kn
No DT
Max cruise Range 1010nm = Transfer range 26 hexes
Normal Range 524nm = 7 hexes
Extended Range 605 nm = 8 hexes

With DT ( adds 539 nm to Range)
Max Range 1363nm = Transfer Range 34 hexes
Normal Range w/DT 638 nm = 8 hexes
Extended Range w/DT 845 nm = 11hexes


A6M2
Cruise Spd – 130kn
No DT
Max cruise Range 1010 nm = Transfer range 26 hexes
Normal Range 610 nm = 8 hexes
Extended Range 691 nm = 9 hexes

With DT (adds 539 nm to potential Range)
Max Range 1363 nm = Transfer Range 34 hexes
Normal Range w/DT 738 nm = 9 hexes
Extended Range w/DT 961 nm = 12 hexes

A6M2-Stock
Cruise Spd – 207 mph
No DT
Max cruise Range 860nm = Transfer range 22 hexes
Normal Range 520 nm = 7 hexes
Extended Range 660 nm = 9 hexes

With DT
Max Range 1430nm = Transfer Range 36 hexes
Normal Range w/DT 870 nm = 11 hexes
Extended Range w/DT 1090 nm = 14 hexes


A6M3a
Cruise Spd – 130kn
No DT
Max cruise Range 1110 nm = Transfer range 28 hexes
Normal Range 610 nm = 9 hexes
Extended Range 768 nm = 10 hexes

With DT (adds 539 nm to potential Range but factored for Drag)
Max Range 1451 nm = Transfer Range 36 hexes
Normal Range w/DT 796 nm = 11 hexes
Extended Range w/DT 1028 nm = 13 hexes

F4F-4-cv
Cruise Spd – 160kn
No DT
Max cruise Range 670 nm = Transfer range 17 hexes
Normal Range 255 nm = 3 hexes
Extended Range 355 nm = 4 hexes

With DT (adds 406 nm to potential Range but factored for Drag)
Max Range 946 nm = Transfer Range 24 hexes
Normal Range w/DT 356 nm = 4 hexes
Extended Range w/DT 543 nm = 7 hexes

F4F-4 - Land based
Cruise Spd – 160kn
No DT
Max cruise Range 670 nm = Transfer range 17 hexes
Normal Range 312 nm = 4 hexes
Extended Range 412 nm = 5 hexes

With DT (adds 406 nm to potential Range but factored for Drag)
Max Range 946 nm = Transfer Range 24 hexes
Normal Range w/DT 425 nm = 5 hexes
Extended Range w/DT 624 nm = 8 hexes

F4F-4-stock
Cruise Spd – 160kn
No DT
Max cruise Range 610 nm = Transfer range 16 hexes
Normal Range 380 nm = 5 hexes
Extended Range 470 nm = 6 hexes

With DT
Max Range 940 nm = Transfer Range 24 hexes
Normal Range w/DT 580 nm = 8 hexes
Extended Range w/DT 720 nm = 9 hexes


_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 23
RE: Update - 9/15/2012 12:06:06 AM   
Lifer

 

Posts: 383
Joined: 6/8/2003
From: Caprica
Status: online
Wow! Looks goods from a non-modder lurking in the modding forum.  What happens to a -cv designated air unit that gets transferred to a land base?

Greg

_____________________________

Man does not enter battle to fight, but for victory. He does everything that he can to avoid the first and obtain the second.
Ardant du Picq

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 24
RE: Update - 9/15/2012 3:58:55 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lifer

Wow! Looks goods from a non-modder lurking in the modding forum.  What happens to a -cv designated air unit that gets transferred to a land base?

Greg



Unfortunately nothing...however the land based A6M2's won't be CV capable.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Lifer)
Post #: 25
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> Empires in the Balance (Treespider's Grand Campaign Mod v2) Page: [1]
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

0.109