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: B-Mod Update

 
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: B-Mod Update Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: B-Mod Update - 4/9/2019 3:01:29 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline
Hi, LargeSlowTarget is correct.

quote:

I think this is WAD.

Two prototype / pre-production Emilies have been used in "Operation K" a.k.a. the second bombing of Pearl Harbor in March 1942.

I think the Yokohama Ku T-1 Det represents these two aircraft.

The regular production run of the Emily started later in the year.


Below is a screen print of stock scenario 1, the parent unit comes with Mavis's, but this detachment arrives as you see.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 151
RE: B-Mod Update - 4/9/2019 8:36:44 PM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 865
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline
Hi Brian

A quick question on the changes made to Heavy Bomber turret accuracy. I have been looking at both yours and LSTs mods and it seems you have taken very different views here e.g. (if i have read things correctly) you have increased accuracy (for powered turrets) whereas LST has halved accuracy all round.

From LSTs documentation...
quote:

The accuracy of the .50cal machine-guns on medium and heavy bombers has been halved (new device) – yes, JFB fanboyism alert! But the number of fighters, esp. night-fighters downed by bombers just does not feel right – those bombers are self-escorting as well as the best sweepers the Allies have! My theory for the accuracy change is that - since the number of weapons and fire pulses has not changed - there will be the same amount of “driven away by defensive fire” messages, but less kills than before. The front-facing machine-guns of designated attack bombers remain at original accuracy.


Whilst you can't argue with the logic for your changes the points that LST makes (basically about Heavy Bombers being a bit overpowered), does seem to hold some weight. So, i just wondered what your views on these differences are, and LST if you see this do you know how your changes worked out in practice in actual games, e.g. less kills and more driven offs?

Many thanks




(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 152
RE: B-Mod Update - 4/9/2019 10:11:31 PM   
Falken


Posts: 231
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: ON, Canada
Status: offline
Thanks for the replies back on the Mavis/Emily issue, and helping to clarify the Yokohama Ku T-1 Det problem that I thought existed.

Safe to say, ignore my request :) but i'm glad that we were able to resolve this one quickly and without incident.


(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 153
RE: B-Mod Update - 4/9/2019 10:15:30 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Hi Brian

A quick question on the changes made to Heavy Bomber turret accuracy. I have been looking at both yours and LSTs mods and it seems you have taken very different views here e.g. (if i have read things correctly) you have increased accuracy (for powered turrets) whereas LST has halved accuracy all round.

From LSTs documentation...
quote:

The accuracy of the .50cal machine-guns on medium and heavy bombers has been halved (new device) – yes, JFB fanboyism alert! But the number of fighters, esp. night-fighters downed by bombers just does not feel right – those bombers are self-escorting as well as the best sweepers the Allies have! My theory for the accuracy change is that - since the number of weapons and fire pulses has not changed - there will be the same amount of “driven away by defensive fire” messages, but less kills than before. The front-facing machine-guns of designated attack bombers remain at original accuracy.


Whilst you can't argue with the logic for your changes the points that LST makes (basically about Heavy Bombers being a bit overpowered), does seem to hold some weight. So, i just wondered what your views on these differences are, and LST if you see this do you know how your changes worked out in practice in actual games, e.g. less kills and more driven offs?

Many thanks




There has been no 'massacre' of Japanese fighters due to the power turret accuracy boost, they do score more hits though.

The principal to keep in mind is - not only is the hardware far better, US Heavy Bombers operated tactically different than other nations - using the bomber box formation. This was designed to let every gun on every bomber share a concentrated field of fire all around, and the aircraft purposely flew tight formations - never splitting up as other air forces did.
It was very effective.

_____________________________


(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 154
RE: B-Mod Update - 4/10/2019 3:50:15 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4081
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
More effective than other air forces did - but still ineffective enough that unescorted heavy bomber raids suffered up to 16% of planes destroyed over enemy territory plus up to 20% ops losses and write-offs after returning home due to battle damage - unsustainable even for the US until the long-range escort fighter solved the problem. But granted, that was over Germany against the Luftwaffe and Flak.

Power turrets were an immense improvement over hand-held guns, but even they have restricted arc of fire and blind spots, so "every gun" does not have a "field of fire all around".

I understand the wish to reflect power turrets in the game, but with the fragility of the Japanese fighters it probably won't make much difference whether one has been downed by one hit or by multiple hits. But IMO Allied bombers are already so much better at shooting down Japanese fighters than Japanese bombers are at shooting down Allied fighters - rarely seen - that I went the other way. At the moment I have no stats how my change works out in practice, may need to inquire the forumites who play the mod about their experiences.

_____________________________


(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 155
RE: B-Mod Update - 4/27/2019 3:25:24 AM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline
New Update.
Largely finishing China, added new locations (borrowed from RHS) and filled out Chinese OOB. Also touched Dutch, British & Indian, and aircraft.

Should be final update for stock/standard scenario.

Enjoy,
B

_____________________________


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 156
RE: B-Mod Update - 4/27/2019 1:20:50 PM   
Falken


Posts: 231
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: ON, Canada
Status: offline
Cool...thanks brian...

(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 157
RE: B-Mod Update - 4/27/2019 4:23:22 PM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 865
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline
Hi Brian

Thanks again for keeping this mod updated.

I have been digging around in the editor comparing your scenario with stock and came across something seemingly odd with devices for Japanese Infantry squads i.e. they have a build rate of zero, however when i looked at a scenario 1 that also had Japanese squad build rates as zero. The allied troops all have build rates in both scenarios.

I assume this can't be an error but either me looking in the wrong place, or a quirk with Japanese squad production that i am missing?

Many Thanks

(in reply to Falken)
Post #: 158
RE: B-Mod Update - 4/27/2019 4:58:41 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline
Hi,
A fair question, but a simple answer.
In the campaign games (scenario 1 for example) there is no set Japanese production rate for devices, as these are all produced On-Map at the rate the Japanese player decides on...like aircraft.

B


quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Hi Brian

Thanks again for keeping this mod updated.

I have been digging around in the editor comparing your scenario with stock and came across something seemingly odd with devices for Japanese Infantry squads i.e. they have a build rate of zero, however when i looked at a scenario 1 that also had Japanese squad build rates as zero. The allied troops all have build rates in both scenarios.

I assume this can't be an error but either me looking in the wrong place, or a quirk with Japanese squad production that i am missing?

Many Thanks






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 159
RE: B-Mod Update - 4/27/2019 5:28:13 PM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 865
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline
Thanks Brian, am new to delving into the inner workings of the game. Am looking to mod your game (for personal use only)if thats ok?

Where in the game do you set the squad production only there is nothing in the Industry window.

Hmmmm.... is it related to "Armaments"? i.e. the more of them i build the more squads you get?

Is there anything buried in the editor that defines how many squads are built depending on amount of armaments produced?

Thanks again

(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 160
RE: B-Mod Update - 4/27/2019 6:56:08 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Thanks Brian, am new to delving into the inner workings of the game. Am looking to mod your game (for personal use only)if thats ok?

Where in the game do you set the squad production only there is nothing in the Industry window.

Hmmmm.... is it related to "Armaments"? i.e. the more of them i build the more squads you get?

Is there anything buried in the editor that defines how many squads are built depending on amount of armaments produced?

Thanks again


By all means use all or any part of B-Mod you wish

As for Japanese production manipulation, I am not the best to tell you how to get the most out of it.
I suggest you open the manual to section 13.3 (as seen below) and peruse it, then post any questions in the general forum area where most people will see it. (sorry not to be of more help here )




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 161
RE: B-Mod Update - 4/27/2019 7:03:05 PM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 865
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline
will do - thanks again

(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 162
RE: B-Mod Update - 4/28/2019 2:28:51 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5272
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

More effective than other air forces did - but still ineffective enough that unescorted heavy bomber raids suffered up to 16% of planes destroyed over enemy territory plus up to 20% ops losses and write-offs after returning home due to battle damage


Are you quoting statistics from the ETO? I have read in several sources that pilots of the A6M2 were loath to even attack the B-17Es that attacked the Kido Butai at Midway.

(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 163
RE: B-Mod Update - 5/2/2019 1:48:01 AM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

More effective than other air forces did - but still ineffective enough that unescorted heavy bomber raids suffered up to 16% of planes destroyed over enemy territory plus up to 20% ops losses and write-offs after returning home due to battle damage


Are you quoting statistics from the ETO? I have read in several sources that pilots of the A6M2 were loath to even attack the B-17Es that attacked the Kido Butai at Midway.


Hi Spence,
I wasn't going to comment on this, but, after a glass of wine - my inhibitions drop a bit...so here goes.
What LargeSlowTarget had to be referring to was the Double Strike on Schwinefurt and Regensburg.
This particular 8th Air Force Bombing Mission was notorious for being the most ambitious and premature bombing raid of Germany in the war.

No such occurrence happened again in the ETO, or ever to that proportion in the PTO.

It does not in itself alter the reality of USAAF Heavy Bomber formation defensive firepower vs attacking fighters...which was the question at hand.
Even given those unsatisfactory results of that Double Strike Mission(for the US), that was against the Luftwaffe, with pilots and aircraft far better suited to the task.
Not only a unique day, but keep in mind - the bomber formations fought a running battle for hundreds of miles with every Luftwaffe fighter squadron in range hitting going in - then rearming and hitting them again coming back.

A special study was quoted by none other than NBC Television Network in a "NBC News White Paper Special", during the the 1980's, on the subject - The "Mighty 8th Air Force" in World War 2.
It was the 8th Air Force bomber crew gunners that eventually actually broke the back of the Luftwaffe in the exchange of losses (over the long haul of missions)...more than did their formidable fighter escorts.
It was quite an eye opener.
Much has been made of over-claiming by bomber crew gunners, but the numbers after the war verified them getting the majority (over 51%)...

The Japanese had no answer at all to that tactical problem.... and certainly the A6M and the KI-43 (which were the two major fighter types employed by Japan in any significant numbers, and the KI-43 which actually got the most kills against enemy aircraft) were Not up to the task.

_____________________________


(in reply to spence)
Post #: 164
RE: B-Mod Update - 5/5/2019 9:05:04 AM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 865
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline
Hi again BigB

Hope you can help with a few more questions :)

1) P47 replacements
If i am reading things correctly there are no replacements for the 8 months from 7/44 to 2/45 (same as stock). However in your mod notes you say "There are also several other aircraft who have had their production cycles (dates) modified to reflect the fact that aircraft production – does not stop with a several month or year long gap between production models". But this does not seem to apply to the P47. Is the big gap in P47 replacements because they all went to Europe for D-day?

2) Infantry squad replacements
For the mod i am working on (an enhanced Scenario 2 mod based on B mod) i was going to up the squad replacements but notice that this is (whilst i think not mentioned in your notes) something you have already done. Just curious if this was for game-play purposes or more historical reasons.

Many thanks


(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 165
RE: B-Mod Update - 5/5/2019 8:04:29 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Hi again BigB

Hope you can help with a few more questions :)

1) P47 replacements
If i am reading things correctly there are no replacements for the 8 months from 7/44 to 2/45 (same as stock). However in your mod notes you say "There are also several other aircraft who have had their production cycles (dates) modified to reflect the fact that aircraft production – does not stop with a several month or year long gap between production models". But this does not seem to apply to the P47. Is the big gap in P47 replacements because they all went to Europe for D-day?

2) Infantry squad replacements
For the mod i am working on (an enhanced Scenario 2 mod based on B mod) i was going to up the squad replacements but notice that this is (whilst i think not mentioned in your notes) something you have already done. Just curious if this was for game-play purposes or more historical reasons.

Many thanks




Hi sanderz,
1) I see P-47D2 production running from 7/43 to 2/44, then P-47D25 picking up at 3/44 to 6/44, then P-47N production starting in 3/45, so there is a gap from 7/44 through 2/45... it was something that escaped my notice until now - not a decision.
2)Infantry squads increased - yes on both accounts - they are needed to update units before the war ended ( ), and represent a mere fraction of the Millions of new troops and weapons pouring in every year...



_____________________________


(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 166
RE: B-Mod Update - 5/11/2019 3:07:39 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B


quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Hi again BigB

Hope you can help with a few more questions :)

1) P47 replacements
If i am reading things correctly there are no replacements for the 8 months from 7/44 to 2/45 (same as stock). However in your mod notes you say "There are also several other aircraft who have had their production cycles (dates) modified to reflect the fact that aircraft production – does not stop with a several month or year long gap between production models". But this does not seem to apply to the P47. Is the big gap in P47 replacements because they all went to Europe for D-day?



Many thanks




Hi sanderz,
1) I see P-47D2 production running from 7/43 to 2/44, then P-47D25 picking up at 3/44 to 6/44, then P-47N production starting in 3/45, so there is a gap from 7/44 through 2/45... it was something that escaped my notice until now - not a decision.





P-47 production gap has been resolved.
Now, between 7/44 and 2/45, the P-47D30 is in production (in a bit lower numbers than the -D25), before the P-47N arrives.
All P-47D2 and P-47D25 squadrons now have this in their upgrade path.
The P-47D30 was the next follow-on block made in large numbers to the P-47D25, arriving in 1944. The difference between the two was that the -D30 had a small dorsal fin added to the fuselage for improved stability.
I made the appropriate aircraft art to distinguish between the -D25 and -D30 (modified originals by Cathartes).





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Big B -- 5/11/2019 3:50:42 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 167
RE: B-Mod Update - 5/11/2019 7:20:37 PM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 865
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline
Thanks for the update

cheers

(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 168
RE: B-Mod Update - 5/11/2019 9:31:57 PM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 865
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline
Brian - a very minor point about your website in that the newly updated files don't have a "date updated" date, this is very useful when checking your site for scenario updates.

Thanks again

(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 169
RE: B-Mod Update - 5/11/2019 9:47:04 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Brian - a very minor point about your website in that the newly updated files don't have a "date updated" date, this is very useful when checking your site for scenario updates.

Thanks again


Actually, if you look at the screen print below taken from the Mod page, you can see at the top the last listed update date, and down the lower right, the actual time and date that file was uploaded... it helps if your checking for something new.

Cheers




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 170
RE: B-Mod Update - 5/12/2019 6:00:18 AM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 865
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline
Thanks Brian - after double checking i found one of my browser addons was blocking a script from running, hence not seeing all the dates.

Cheers

(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 171
RE: B-Mod Update - 5/26/2019 7:06:12 PM   
Falken


Posts: 231
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: ON, Canada
Status: offline
Brian,

Just wanted to give you an update, and another thank you. Wineguy and I are doing really well with our B-Mod campaign. We haven't picked up your latest changes, but with the version that we have, we just hit April 2nd, 1942 in our game, and it's going really well.

No major issues at all. Honestly, it's been really clean. You have further cemented my belief that the B-Mod is the "MOD" to play for historical play. I used to be DBB as my primary, but can safely say that this is my new base for MODs.

BTW,,, China is a real (*(*&^(*(* :) :) :) Very hard to make any ground, and even if you do, you need some much guarrison, that it's very hard to make any headway... Luv it.

Should be able to give you a better update in a few months as the new planes come in. I'm about to get the Nick, and once we hit June, the new Zero-3 and a few other things will be coming. But so far, so good.

Right now, only the new Rufe, Lily, and Mavis have come in so can't really comment yet on Aircraft Upgrade performance.


(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 172
RE: B-Mod Update - 5/27/2019 10:11:08 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline
Thanks for the input,
It feels gratifying to hear that from others. I could never go back to 'stock'...too many holes for my taste.
There were a couple minor updates since you started, but by April 1942 nothing to be concerned with.

The next update coming will deal with the Fulmar, their role will change by June 1942, the British rearmed them with an external 500lb bomb and 4x .50 M2-Brownings and a .30 cal rear gun and certified them for Dive Bombing (60 degree dive)...finally a use for the Fulmar. I am just looking at the best way to implement that in the game.

I appreciate your feedback, I have endeavored for years to make a more realistic/historical game out of it, which is why I haven't delved into the 'What-if' world yet....I want a strong base before going there.
Spence once asked on the forum - "just give me what was there and have it work like it did"...that's been my target.

B


quote:

ORIGINAL: Falken

Brian,

Just wanted to give you an update, and another thank you. Wineguy and I are doing really well with our B-Mod campaign. We haven't picked up your latest changes, but with the version that we have, we just hit April 2nd, 1942 in our game, and it's going really well.

No major issues at all. Honestly, it's been really clean. You have further cemented my belief that the B-Mod is the "MOD" to play for historical play. I used to be DBB as my primary, but can safely say that this is my new base for MODs.

BTW,,, China is a real (*(*&^(*(* :) :) :) Very hard to make any ground, and even if you do, you need some much guarrison, that it's very hard to make any headway... Luv it.

Should be able to give you a better update in a few months as the new planes come in. I'm about to get the Nick, and once we hit June, the new Zero-3 and a few other things will be coming. But so far, so good.

Right now, only the new Rufe, Lily, and Mavis have come in so can't really comment yet on Aircraft Upgrade performance.





_____________________________


(in reply to Falken)
Post #: 173
RE: B-Mod Update - 6/20/2019 11:51:58 AM   
Akos Gergely

 

Posts: 730
Joined: 4/8/2004
From: Hungary, Bp.
Status: offline
Dear Brian,

any more details you are willing to share about your B-mod based what-if scenario? :) I' can'T wait for it! Hope that if it is a smaller scenario and not full scale it will be a mid/late war one.

_____________________________


(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 174
RE: B-Mod Update - 6/20/2019 2:09:17 PM   
WingCmdr

 

Posts: 150
Joined: 7/25/2017
From: BS, MT
Status: offline
quote:

There has been no 'massacre' of Japanese fighters due to the power turret accuracy boost, they do score more hits though. The principal to keep in mind is - not only is the hardware far better, US Heavy Bombers operated tactically different than other nations - using the bomber box formation. This was designed to let every gun on every bomber share a concentrated field of fire all around, and the aircraft purposely flew tight formations - never splitting up as other air forces did. It was very effective.






Wait, I don't follow.

You as the modder have designed Bomber tactics into a weapon system?

So help me out with this. Is this the difference between the two mods?

Help your other modders out with how you factor a planes formation into the gun value?

Why do small flights receive the same benefit?

< Message edited by WingCmdr -- 6/20/2019 2:13:13 PM >

(in reply to Akos Gergely)
Post #: 175
RE: B-Mod Update - 6/20/2019 2:44:23 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline
It's quite simple
From the design notes:
quote:

Heavy Bombers: American Heavy Bombers (B-17, B-24, & B-29) equipped with power turrets have had those weapons boosted in accuracy rating (fully powered turrets, with reflector gun sights, are much more accurate than hand held machine-guns...And – this will help reflect the Mutual Support that American Heavy Bomber units had – with their unique tactical doctrine – the Bomber Box).


The reason fighters with only 2 machine guns got a firepower boost was to make them more effective in combat - as they actually were.

For example, the KI-43 Oscar: In the stock game the KI-43 is not as effective as a fighter as the A6M - I don't think any player would disagree.
In reality the Oscar downed more enemy aircraft than any other Japanese fighter, and that's counting only 5,919 Oscars built - compared to 10,939 Zeros built.
With the 2x machine gun fire power bonus - the KI-43 has proven to be as effective a fighter as the A6M - in B-Mod.

I hope this answers your questions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WingCmdr

quote:

There has been no 'massacre' of Japanese fighters due to the power turret accuracy boost, they do score more hits though. The principal to keep in mind is - not only is the hardware far better, US Heavy Bombers operated tactically different than other nations - using the bomber box formation. This was designed to let every gun on every bomber share a concentrated field of fire all around, and the aircraft purposely flew tight formations - never splitting up as other air forces did. It was very effective.






Wait, I don't follow.

You as the modder have designed Bomber tactics into a weapon system?

So help me out with this. Is this the difference between the two mods?

Help your other modders out with how you factor a planes formation into the gun value?

Why do small flights receive the same benefit?



_____________________________


(in reply to WingCmdr)
Post #: 176
RE: B-Mod Update - 6/20/2019 4:19:12 PM   
WingCmdr

 

Posts: 150
Joined: 7/25/2017
From: BS, MT
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B

It's quite simple
From the design notes:
quote:

Heavy Bombers: American Heavy Bombers (B-17, B-24, & B-29) equipped with power turrets have had those weapons boosted in accuracy rating (fully powered turrets, with reflector gun sights, are much more accurate than hand held machine-guns...And – this will help reflect the Mutual Support that American Heavy Bomber units had – with their unique tactical doctrine – the Bomber Box).


The reason fighters with only 2 machine guns got a firepower boost was to make them more effective in combat - as they actually were.

For example, the KI-43 Oscar: In the stock game the KI-43 is not as effective as a fighter as the A6M - I don't think any player would disagree.
In reality the Oscar downed more enemy aircraft than any other Japanese fighter, and that's counting only 5,919 Oscars built - compared to 10,939 Zeros built.
With the 2x machine gun fire power bonus - the KI-43 has proven to be as effective a fighter as the A6M - in B-Mod.

I hope this answers your questions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WingCmdr

quote:

There has been no 'massacre' of Japanese fighters due to the power turret accuracy boost, they do score more hits though. The principal to keep in mind is - not only is the hardware far better, US Heavy Bombers operated tactically different than other nations - using the bomber box formation. This was designed to let every gun on every bomber share a concentrated field of fire all around, and the aircraft purposely flew tight formations - never splitting up as other air forces did. It was very effective.






Wait, I don't follow.

You as the modder have designed Bomber tactics into a weapon system?

So help me out with this. Is this the difference between the two mods?

Help your other modders out with how you factor a planes formation into the gun value?

Why do small flights receive the same benefit?




It's not so Simple. What does a single engine fighter have to do with Electric Turrets?

I don't think you answered a single question. Feel free to do it by bullet points like the real world does.


< Message edited by WingCmdr -- 6/20/2019 4:20:47 PM >

(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 177
RE: B-Mod Update - 6/20/2019 4:28:50 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: WingCmdr


I don't think you answered a single question. Feel free to do it by bullet points like the real world does.



If you would have read the Read Me file on the website - you would see that the two are not the same
Select 4E bombers got an Accuracy bonus for power turrets... that brings them up to the accuracy of centerline aircraft guns.

2x machine gun fighters got a Fire Power bonus - granting a 50% increase in firepower effect - not accuracy.
The two are totally different functions, and effect different aspects of combat.


_____________________________


(in reply to WingCmdr)
Post #: 178
RE: B-Mod Update - 6/20/2019 5:02:10 PM   
Falken


Posts: 231
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: ON, Canada
Status: offline
I’m sorry but why the harsh words for Brian “Feel free to do it by bullet points like the real world does. “. Brian is one of the most knowledgeable people that I know on this board and he has worked very hard to provide us with a heck of a good mod, in his free time.

I fully understand if u don’t agree with an aspect of the Mod but please give Brian the respect that he deserves.

Also if you don’t agree, then u are free to build your own version

Thank you

(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 179
RE: B-Mod Update - 6/20/2019 5:25:41 PM   
Korvar


Posts: 813
Joined: 9/3/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falken

I’m sorry but why the harsh words for Brian “Feel free to do it by bullet points like the real world does. “. Brian is one of the most knowledgeable people that I know on this board and he has worked very hard to provide us with a heck of a good mod, in his free time.

I fully understand if u don’t agree with an aspect of the Mod but please give Brian the respect that he deserves.

Also if you don’t agree, then u are free to build your own version

Thank you


+1,000,000

_____________________________


(in reply to Falken)
Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: B-Mod Update Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   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

0.184