Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4

 
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: BTS and BTSL 5.4 Page: <<   < prev  32 33 34 [35] 36   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/14/2019 1:29:59 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Plane Art is an issue. I have never been able to fold in new art work. Need help in this area. Who is out there that could add just a few planes to the art folder? I THINK all we need is the art for LIZ and RITA.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 1021
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/14/2019 1:44:53 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Have gone thru and made the organizational moves to separate Between the Storms--Lite and BTS--Heavy. Here is the build difference:

Between the Storms--Lite
4 Owari-Class BB (3x3 16") with no Yamato-Class. Speeds building and deployment since the yards don't have to be expanded or modified.
2 B-65 BC (3x3 14") add a pair of fast escorts to the CVs.
6 Niitaka-Class CA (two ordered instead of Tone-Class and four more in the war)

Between the Storms--Heavy
4 Yamato-Class BB (as planned)
6 Fuji-Class Command Cruisers (2x3 14")

The 'standard' build of Between the Storms for the rest of the Kaigun remains.

2 Shokaku-Class (instead of Taiho/Shinano)
4 Shokaku Kai-Class (instead of Unryu-Class)
3 Aso-Class CVL
6 Tokoro-Class CL (3x3 6" Guns) (built instead of Agano-Class and Oyodo)


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 11/14/2019 1:46:50 PM >


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1022
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/14/2019 1:56:36 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
What is the name of the fictional shipyard website? Cannot remember the site with all the optional/alternate warships with side art and little histories.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1023
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/14/2019 2:56:19 PM   
Kull


Posts: 2090
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline
Not sure if this is the one you are thinking about, but it has some interesting stuff

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1024
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/14/2019 2:57:43 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
YES! Thank You. I look at it so infrequently that I totally forgot the name. THANKS!


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Kull)
Post #: 1025
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/14/2019 3:40:10 PM   
Kull


Posts: 2090
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Plane Art is an issue. I have never been able to fold in new art work. Need help in this area. Who is out there that could add just a few planes to the art folder? I THINK all we need is the art for LIZ and RITA.



Hi John - This is one area where michaelm made our lives a LOT easier! Plane art used to be a nightmare because you had to try and park new or changed art into the middle of a single large file, but now it can all be done with folders. Take a look at the download available in this post.

It tells you exactly how to insert individual plane tops and sides in-game. I'll try to answer any questions, but I'm pretty sure the art already exists, and it's just a matter of finding it and then inserting it into your mod (and linking it the unit files)

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1026
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/14/2019 4:28:40 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
That is FANTASTIC. Thank you very much. Will look at it and post questions here.

I do have the artwork for both planes.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Kull)
Post #: 1027
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/15/2019 9:32:00 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

Not sure if this is the one you are thinking about, but it has some interesting stuff


This is one of the sites.

The other one I am thinking about has fantasy designs that are drawn/painted out to look at. It has a number of fantasy ships but it really useful. Does that jingle any other memories from people?



_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Kull)
Post #: 1028
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/15/2019 11:41:29 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
A better description is that it is hypothetical ships done as ship art.

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1029
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/16/2019 12:58:38 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Ship Bucket--that is the name of the website. Remembered it just as I woke up this morning. Just went over and found it. Damn. The site has been re-done with LOTS of extras added in. Very nice.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1030
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/17/2019 1:55:27 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I have completed making a 'Master' file for Between the Storms. All the differing ship class/options are contained within it. This has been done so Michael, over Thanksgiving Break, can do the China conversion to Big B's set-up. He can explain exactly what that means. The best part of this is once done, I can recreate the Treaty Mod, Between the Storms--Lite, and Between the Storms--Heavy with just a clicks of the button and allow for a major overhaul within one of the most abused areas of AE--China.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1031
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/24/2019 3:54:10 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I have been a busy boy creating a 'master' file for the Between the Storms Mods. With Michael playing into 1945 with his match and Sean and I at late-43, we have had enough play-testing to address issues within the Mods and I have been doing exactly that. It always irritates me when people, who don't know the Mods, criticize the Mods for being "a Japanese Fanboy's Dream." While these Mods are enhanced on the Japanese side, they are all grounded on actual history, writings of historical people, and/or legitimate 'what ifs' of the Pacific War and its history.

Here is a great example of BALANCE within the Mods. The Japanese build-up is obvious. War is coming. What if the United States took that a bit more seriously in 1941? Using the newly introduced ships as well as the Hepburn Report and Admiral Kimmel's own written desires, Between the Storms will feature and very different Pacific Fleet deployment. Here you go. ENJOY!



The Deployment and Actions of the Pacific Fleet Prior to December 7, 1941

Base Building and Reinforcements

The Hepburn Board. -- On June 7, 1938, acting Secretary of the Navy Charles Edison appointed a board consisting of Rear Admiral Arthur J. Hepburn, Commandant of the Twelfth Naval District, as senior member, and Rear Admiral Edward J. Marquart, Captain James S. Woods, Captain Arthur L. Bristol, Jr., Captain Ralph Whitman, C.E.C., as members, with Lieutenant Commander William E. Hilbert as recorder.

The board, which became known as the Hepburn Board, made an exhaustive survey of the strategic needs in connection with the naval defense of the United States and of existing facilities for meeting those needs. In an outstanding report submitted to Congress on December 27, 1938, the board recommended the establishment of new air bases and the expansion of existing bases to provide three major air bases on each coast, one in the Canal Zone, and one in Hawaii; with outlying operating bases in the West Indies, Alaska, and our Pacific island possessions. The board also recommended that the naval air training station at Pensacola be greatly enlarged and that possibly an additional air training station be established at Corpus Christi, Texas; new submarine bases be established in Alaska and the mid-Pacific area, and several existing stations be improved or retained. Some additional facilities were suggested for the existing destroyer bases at Philadelphia and San Diego. No new mine bases were considered necessary, but certain deficiencies were noted in existing bases. A general priority schedule was set up, based on the necessity for providing facilities when the ships and aircraft authorized by the Vinson bill would be completed. In addition, there was a list of projects, considered to be of immediate strategic importance, which should be undertaken at the earliest practicable date. These items were: (1) improvement of air facilities at Kaneohe Bay. Hawaii; (2) submarine and air bases at Wake Island, Midway Island, and Guam; (3) air facilities at Johnston Island and Palmyra Island; (4) air and submarine bases at Kodiak and Sitka; (5) and submarine facilities at San Juan, Puerto Rico.3

In making its studies and formulating its report, the Hepburn Board drew upon the great mass of plans and projects that had been developed by the various bureaus of the Navy as being desirable. As Admiral Hepburn testified at the Congressional hearings on his report, "I would say that every item that the board has suggested has been considered in the past some time by one department or another or by the Joint Board involved, and they have been put down as projects to be attained when they can get the money."4 The board performed an invaluable service in taking all these proposals and, within the framework of definite strategic necessities and available facilities, formulating a comprehensive and coordinated plan for development, especially in the field of aircraft.

Although the estimated cost of the programs set up by the Hepburn Board report was $326,216,000, the first request for authorization from Congress to initiate the program was for $65,000,000 to cover a three-year program. However, events were mounting rapidly, and by the time this program was well under way it had been overshadowed by the need for even greater and more expensive developments. In the general defense program that was to begin a year later, practically all the board's recommendations, except those relating to Guam, were carried out and contributed materially to our position when war actually developed.

Between the Storms takes the Hepburn Report and advances it anywhere from a few weeks to several months. Troops, aircraft, supplies, fuel, and base building are all fully underway when war breaks out. There are several benefits to this development in that bases are tougher, troops are more forward deployed, and—in general—the Japanese will be required to bring much more to the fight if they want to east—north, due east, and/or south.

December 7, 1941
Changes in Deployment and Bases


NorPac
Umnak
Convoy: APs: Henry Allen, Examiner, Santa Inez, Santa Barbara, and 3 AK
Escort: CL Concord and DDs Harwood, Decatur, Hart, and Smith
47th Construction Regiment, and 1/153 Inf Bn
Supply: 2,500 Fuel: 250

Dutch Harbor
VP-24 (6 PBYs)

Cold Bay
808th Aviation Eng Bn and 3/153 Inf Bn (from Annette Isle)
Fort-1
Supply: 1,500 Fuel: 150

Kodiak
Set-Up as a Sub Base with AS Pelias, 3 Fleet Boats, and 2 S-Boats. Additional Support Ships are now stationed there to handle the small set of warships assigned to NorPac. Nearly 5,000 Supply and Fuel are currently present.


CenPac
Pearl Harbor
2nd USMC Para Bn, 2nd Pioneer Bn, 34th Inf Reg, and 198th Field Artillery

Lihue and Kona
Both Bases have their AFs raised to 2, with additional supplies and fuel, a Base Force, and a Squadron of PBYs. The 3rd Marine Defense Bn is building up Fortifications on Lihue.

Midway
Task Force 419: 6 PT boats
VP-21 (11 PBYs), VMF-211 (6 Buffalo), and VMSB-232 (18 SBD)
1/298 Inf Bn
P-1 AF-3 Fort-2
Supply: 3,500 Fuel: 1,500

Wake
Task Force 421: 6 PT Boats
VMF-211 (12 Buffalo), VP-14 (12 PBYs)
P-1 AF-2 Fort-2
Supply: 3,900 Fuel: 1,500
A second Marine Defense Bn is added.

Canton
2/298 Inf Bn
P-2 AF-1 Fort-2
Supply: 1,800 Fuel: 8,000

Christmas Isle
3/298 Inf Bn
P-1 AF-0 Fort-1
Supply: 1,500 Fuel: 800

SoPac
Pago Pago
VMSB-231 (18 Vindicators) and 51st/16th PS (18 P-40)
2nd and 7th Marine Def Bn, 104th USN Base Force, 30th Base Group and 160th Reg of the 40th ID
P-2 AF-2 Fort-2

Three Task Forces Present:
TF 442: CL Detroit, DDs Oreleck, SP Lee, Woodbury, Delphy and APs Pres Polk, Madison, and Monroe
TF 443: CL Raleigh, PC Taney, AKs Alcoa Pathfinder, Shooting Star, Ruth Alexander, and TK Eidsvold
TF 445: PC Sacramento and AO Tippecanoe
Disbanded in Port: 4 SS (S-Boats), AS Fulton, AD Rigel, AE Pyro, and an AM

Admiral Kimmel and the SCOUTING FORCE

The impact of the Hepburn Report and corresponding decision to implement it more quickly as well as the obvious rising danger of imminent war allow for Admiral Kimmel to deploy the entire Scouting Force of the Pacific Fleet on two important missions just prior to December 7th. The first is a quick voyage by CVL King’s Mountain to provide badly needed fighter reinforcement to Wake Isle. The 2nd mission is far more vital in that the bulk of the Scouting Force provides direct cover to the arrival of an Army Regiment as well as supplies and fuel to Pago Pago. Lexington is also tasked with the delivery of the Marine Dive Bomber Squadron to this location.

The SCOUTING FORCE Deployment
TF442
The King’s Mountain TF (CVL King’s Mountain 18 Buf, 12 SBD, 6TBD), CA New Orleans, Minneapolis, and 6 DD) have just delivered the other portion of Marine Fighter Squadron 211 to Wake. This TF is retiring towards Pearl Harbor on the 7th. It is exposed in the Central Pacific.

TF 406
CV Enterprise (18 F4F, 36 SBD, 15 TBD), CA Northampton, Chester, and 8 DD are just east of Canton Isle providing flank guard to the reinforcement of Pago Pago.

TF405
CV Lexington (18 F4F, 36 SBD, 12 TBD), CA Portland, Astoria, and 7 DD are at Pukapuka having just flown off the Marine Vindicator Squadron to Pago Pago.

TF403
CLV Jacksonville (12 Buffalo and 6 SBD), BCs Ranger, Constellation, CAs Indianapolis, Salt Lake City and 6 DD are between the two Carrier TFs.










_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1032
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/24/2019 4:39:30 PM   
BillBrown


Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline
As a player that has played bot BTS and BTS-L as the Allies, I concur with John. Yes, the Japanese have some extra advantages in the beginning, but so do the Allies.
And the Allied advantages continue on into 1945, so you might have to work a bit harder in the beginning to not lose the game, but you will be able to come back with
a vengeance latter.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1033
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/24/2019 5:20:49 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9748
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
I'm at end of June '45. Looking ahead to air groups (B-17s & 29) coming in Sept and beyond there seems to be a need of significant bump in Aviation Support in 45 to address this. Count groups x planes x engines, there is need for over 5000 AS to address this. I propose that American and some Brit BF have another bump. The Large American BFs start game at 48, go up to 96, and now should go up to 144 at beginning of 45. Air HQ should go up by at least 50% also.

< Message edited by ny59giants_MatrixForum -- 11/24/2019 5:21:37 PM >

(in reply to BillBrown)
Post #: 1034
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/24/2019 6:31:17 PM   
BillBrown


Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline
I wouldn't doubt it. As far as I have gotten is August of 1944 and I was starting to see some problems in the future.

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 1035
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/24/2019 9:36:25 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Thanks Bill.

Adding a Base Force upgrade for 1945 would be pretty easy. Could also be done with Air HQ units.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to BillBrown)
Post #: 1036
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/24/2019 11:44:48 PM   
BillBrown


Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline
I am waiting for your rewrite using Big Bs China setup. I am really tired of playing the Allies and the first thing is Japan moving all of the ART and such from Manchuria to China and overrunning it.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1037
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/25/2019 12:31:18 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
That, Good Sir, is EXACTLY what Michael is doing this week. He has the week off and is laboriously going through the changes. I truly hate how easy it is for Japan to take out China and then see the exact same thing in 1944 when China conquers Japan...

My game next month will play this. I truly want to see how it works and, more importantly, IF it works!


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to BillBrown)
Post #: 1038
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/25/2019 4:05:20 AM   
Vipersp

 

Posts: 144
Joined: 12/6/2014
Status: offline
Hi John,

You can try these till you find better ones perhaps;


Cheers,

Vipersp

Attachment (1)

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1039
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/25/2019 1:13:49 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Damned but those are nice. Did you do them?

With a blizzard coming in, I have today and tomorrow off. Since Michael has the files I think I might work to clean-up the art files for ships as well as try to fix the aircraft art. May need help on the aircraft side. We'll see if it is more do-able now then earlier.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Vipersp)
Post #: 1040
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/25/2019 1:35:55 PM   
Vipersp

 

Posts: 144
Joined: 12/6/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Damned but those are nice. Did you do them?

With a blizzard coming in, I have today and tomorrow off. Since Michael has the files I think I might work to clean-up the art files for ships as well as try to fix the aircraft art. May need help on the aircraft side. We'll see if it is more do-able now then earlier.


Yeap;

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1041
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/26/2019 6:42:20 PM   
Enforcer

 

Posts: 317
Joined: 3/14/2002
From: New Smyrna Beach, Fla
Status: offline
John,

Did you get a chance to look at the treaty mod? The possible missing files?

Enforcer

_____________________________


(in reply to Vipersp)
Post #: 1042
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/26/2019 6:48:34 PM   
Anachro


Posts: 2455
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline
Regarding these mods so far, I would so the contest is pretty even as expected so far going into late '43. We'll see how '44 and '45 (and maybe '46?) turn out.

(in reply to Enforcer)
Post #: 1043
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/27/2019 8:21:00 PM   
Enforcer

 

Posts: 317
Joined: 3/14/2002
From: New Smyrna Beach, Fla
Status: offline
Hey John3rd or anyone else who knows,

2 things....

1-Is the Treaty Mod fixed? When I load it,, it does not show up in the list.. It looks like 2 files are missing
2-Even more important to me.. Which mods of yours still has the Kaga as a CV? that is my Favorite ship

Thank you
Enforcer

_____________________________


(in reply to Anachro)
Post #: 1044
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/28/2019 12:30:02 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
No Kaga AS CV...

I have Tosa in there. If you wanted you could rename it to Kaga and have her in her INTENDED form.

Have not grabbed those files for Treaty. Will make that a priority after dinner tonight.

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Enforcer)
Post #: 1045
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/29/2019 2:34:28 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Enforcer

Hey John3rd or anyone else who knows,

2 things....

1-Is the Treaty Mod fixed? When I load it,, it does not show up in the list.. It looks like 2 files are missing
2-Even more important to me.. Which mods of yours still has the Kaga as a CV? that is my Favorite ship

Thank you
Enforcer


Found the missing files and placed a new ZIP folder into the RA website. Download and all are now present.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Enforcer)
Post #: 1046
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/29/2019 11:04:16 AM   
Bearcat2

 

Posts: 568
Joined: 2/14/2004
Status: offline
I have noticed that British Carrier attack planes, ie Swordfish, etc, are basically a 1 shot use, there is a big hole in production for a year and half, they end up as fighters only unless you put US planers on them.

BTW: a very minor quibble, but what is with some Japanese CA's having depth charges at the start? The only example I can find is when in desperation, they put them on a few due to lack of escorts, These scenarios have escorts.

_____________________________

"After eight years as President I have only two regrets: that I have not shot Henry Clay or hanged John C. Calhoun."--1837

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1047
RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 - 11/29/2019 1:12:52 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16822
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
The Swordfish comment is excellent. I've never noticed that. Will check it out. We have bumped a bunch of different Allied planes allowing for more airframes. This might be another area to look at.

Have never messed with DC on cruisers. Have not even thought about it. Anyone know anything here on this subject?


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Bearcat2)
Post #: 1048
RE: TM, RA, and BTS Re-Write - 11/29/2019 4:59:42 PM   
LLT0407

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 11/20/2019
From: Chicago Ill
Status: offline
John3rd...

I have a question about the following units..

Kure 2nd SNLF
Sasebo 2nd SNLF
Babeldaop Naval Fortress

They are not in the RA scenario is there a reason why they were eliminated?

Enforcer

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1049
RE: TM, RA, and BTS Re-Write - 11/29/2019 6:56:50 PM   
Anachro


Posts: 2455
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline
John, I'll echo the comments on Swordfish but really go beyond that to all British naval aviation planes. Seems to be a production hole for all of them relative to the capacity of your British carriers, especially if you are running withdrawals turns off.

(in reply to LLT0407)
Post #: 1050
Page:   <<   < prev  32 33 34 [35] 36   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: BTS and BTSL 5.4 Page: <<   < prev  32 33 34 [35] 36   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

0.219