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: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific

 
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: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 10/29/2018 11:05:19 PM   
kbfchicago


Posts: 265
Joined: 10/17/2009
Status: offline
For those following LST's Bottelnecks mod and waiting to jump in...jump in. I've played both sides (vs AI) through late 43 (IJN) and mid 44 (Allied) and am currently engaged in a PBEM as Allied.

LSTs has:
- Based his mode on DBB game changes
- slowed play through a series of tweaks that keep the allies from "busting" into the war at full production, mire the IJA in China keeping them from overrunning Chunking in the first few months of '42, in other words...throttles that keep many of the non-historical outcomes out of reach or at least make them more difficult.
- Added a host of new units for both sides. While not individually significant in total they add value to the game, not just more clicks and annoying units that need to be pushed out of the way.
- Added European play for the Axis with a Europa port and German units (that add real value)
- Simplified IJA production using fewer/generic engine types so you didn't need an extensive excel file and tracker to manage and plan

In all, a great mod. For now it is the only one I'll play...

This advert was not paid for or encouraged by LST... but if he happens to visit the Washington DC area in the U.S. happy to let him buy me a glass of fine red wine and I'd be most pleased to do the same for him...or perhaps "ein gutta Pilsner (I prefer Eichbaum von Mannhiem - which one just can not find here the U.S.)"!

Kevin

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 121
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 10/30/2018 1:14:16 AM   
Badlandz

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 3/18/2016
Status: offline
This mod looks great. I love the detail. My only question is about the AI. In the documentation LST says there are no AI files included. How does the game play without them?

Thanks

(in reply to kbfchicago)
Post #: 122
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 10/30/2018 7:38:19 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 3858
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

You take the ai.dat file from scenario 001 or 100 and rename it to match the LST scenario. It will work, provided LST left the units in the Editor in their original slots.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4257473

(in reply to Badlandz)
Post #: 123
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 10/31/2018 10:48:48 PM   
jjeerroo

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 9/11/2018
From: Paris - France
Status: offline
With RHS, this mod focus on war in china.
For me, China is the russian front for japanese.
You can't expect hold every cities and dot.
Forget mass death star. Yangste separate your force in two part.
And there are a lot of naval dust like in real life.

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 124
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 11/1/2018 2:56:08 PM   
Badlandz

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 3/18/2016
Status: offline
Yaab,
Thank you! I used the AI file from the Scen 100. I appreciate your help.

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 125
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 11/1/2018 6:16:54 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 3858
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jjeerroo

With RHS, this mod focus on war in china.
For me, China is the russian front for japanese.
You can't expect hold every cities and dot.
Forget mass death star. Yangste separate your force in two part.
And there are a lot of naval dust like in real life.


RHS is a great mod, but it seriously needs an overhaul of its economy. There is too much supply available for both sides.

(in reply to jjeerroo)
Post #: 126
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 11/4/2018 9:14:47 AM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 853
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline
Just loaded up 1.2b and i am not getting any Pearl Harbour attacks, seemingly because the jap planes are all on training missions???

Is this a bug or maybe i have a wrong setup??

Thanks

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 127
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 11/4/2018 9:40:17 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 5599
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Just loaded up 1.2b and i am not getting any Pearl Harbour attacks, seemingly because the jap planes are all on training missions???

Is this a bug or maybe i have a wrong setup??

Thanks


You have read post #1, right?

For a scenario to have the historical Pearl Harbor strike, three fundamental things are required.

1. The Historical 7 December 1941 setup option is selected.

2. AI files are associated with the scenario.

3. The requisite TFs have been assigned the special opening turn high speed move bonus.

Based on what the scenario designer has explained in post #1, you are not witnessing a bug.

Alfred

(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 128
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 11/4/2018 10:38:39 AM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 853
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Just loaded up 1.2b and i am not getting any Pearl Harbour attacks, seemingly because the jap planes are all on training missions???

Is this a bug or maybe i have a wrong setup??

Thanks


You have read post #1, right?

For a scenario to have the historical Pearl Harbor strike, three fundamental things are required.

1. The Historical 7 December 1941 setup option is selected.

2. AI files are associated with the scenario.

3. The requisite TFs have been assigned the special opening turn high speed move bonus.

Based on what the scenario designer has explained in post #1, you are not witnessing a bug.

Alfred


Thanks for the reply Alfred, however none of the points you mentioned were in the install notes in post #1 which just says "Unzip the files into a temp folder, then copy&paste the files into the appropriate game folders"

Having said that it was the ai files that seem to have sorted things out. I used SCN100 as mentioned in one of the above posts which apparently works provided LST left the units in the Editor in their original slots. @LST is this the case?



(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 129
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 11/4/2018 1:00:02 PM   
Falken


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

Please check out the "Documentation" link for the word doc. The attack on PH and Manila and Kota have already occurred (as this is based on DBB 029). You actually start in the afternoon, and those attacks have already happened. PH, PI and Kota forces are on Training to prevent a "double" attack.

Hope this helps.
Dave...

(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 130
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 11/5/2018 10:29:06 AM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 3929
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
quote:

provided LST left the units in the Editor in their original slots. @LST is this the case?


Most ground units and ships have been left in their original slots - but not all.

I did some "moving around", esp. in the Chinese and Aussie OOB.

The Japanese side should be impacted to a lesser degree, so it might be playable in Allies vs AI games.

Difficult to say more since work on the mod has been going on for years and I cannot remember all "moves".

It would take a side-by-side comparison of the Excel file data dumps to say more - any volunteers?

_____________________________


(in reply to Falken)
Post #: 131
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 11/29/2018 3:43:20 PM   
jjeerroo

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 9/11/2018
From: Paris - France
Status: offline
I check plane's upgrade and i see Zero.
A6M7 have 0/0/0 in available date.
It's normal ?

Thanks

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 132
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 11/29/2018 8:00:07 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 3929
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
Just checked and v1.2b of Oct 17th shows an availability date of 5/45 for the A6M7. Perhaps you are using an older version of the scenario files?

Si je ne me trompe pas tu joues contre Kevin / kbfchicago ? Je ne vois pas de "AAR" - comment votre jeu progresse-t-il ? D'ailleurs, je travaille à Paris.

< Message edited by LargeSlowTarget -- 11/29/2018 11:11:30 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to jjeerroo)
Post #: 133
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 12/3/2018 10:57:37 AM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 5305
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone™
Status: offline
Just downloaded, installed and toyed with the mod. Excellent stuff.

If you deliver what you promise (a "bottleneck") then you'd be the first and only one to simulate this critical aspect of the war in the Pacific.

I can live with the Japanese overruning the Chinese (a fantasy made true to boost the PBEM JFBs, nothing wrong with that). But the logistics, I am adamant, no fantasies for me, thanks.

If you truly did it (and will soon know as I'm starting a game) my hat is off to you.

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 134
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 3/11/2019 1:21:41 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 3929
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
Anyone playing this mod apart from SierraJuliet and Mundy resp jjeerroo and kbfchicago ?

Am looking for feedback / suggestions / errors / glitches / experiences with "external" AI files for example etc. for a future update.

Thx in advance.

_____________________________


(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 135
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 3/17/2019 1:42:53 PM   
Falken


Posts: 231
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: ON, Canada
Status: offline
Hi LST...

Although I am in the middle of an amazing B-MOD PBEM with Wineguy, I have started a H2H game with your latest version 1.2B to get a feel for this new release. I'm still in turn 1 of setting up for the IJN, and will continue to be for a few weeks (as my other game is top priority for me), I'll let you know if I spot anything.

Dave...

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 136
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 3/17/2019 8:50:40 PM   
Falken


Posts: 231
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: ON, Canada
Status: offline
LST,, one thing I forgot to mention. The one thing that seemed odd is my industry setup is that the L2D2 Tabby is actually available in 12/41 but in BMod, it's in 1944... Is this correct? Since it was based on DBB, it could be, and since I don't currently have DBB installed, this actually might be accurate, but I just wanted to double-check.

Thanks, Dave...

< Message edited by Falken -- 3/18/2019 10:17:54 PM >

(in reply to Falken)
Post #: 137
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 3/19/2019 7:44:11 AM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 3929
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
Hi Dave, I believe the Tabby enters too late in DBB and other mods.

Nakajima obtained a license to build the DC-3 in 1938. Intended as a transport plane for both the civilian sector and the military, it ended up almost exclusively with the military as the L2D Tabby.

Production started in 1940 and by 1942 70+ had been build by Nakajima. Production then switched to Showa Aircraft to allow Nakajima to concentrate on fighters.

Showa built 400+ Tabbies, making the type the numerically most important transport plane in the Japanese arsenal.

_____________________________


(in reply to Falken)
Post #: 138
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 3/19/2019 11:42:48 AM   
Falken


Posts: 231
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: ON, Canada
Status: offline
Thanks for the quick reply. Ok... i'll keep going on my setup then :),,,, i'll put a note in BMOD's thread to see if this is a change that he might want to incorporate into his next version. Thanks.

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 139
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 4/4/2019 3:20:31 PM   
pzrshrek

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 11/9/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Anyone playing this mod apart from SierraJuliet and Mundy resp jjeerroo and kbfchicago ?

Am looking for feedback / suggestions / errors / glitches / experiences with "external" AI files for example etc. for a future update.

Thx in advance.


Hi!

I am about to start a full war campaign as allies vs Jap AI, and if you have any AI files i am very interested to try it! I am an exclusevly allied player vs. AI only, and i have completed 4 full war campaigns so far. With the spice of a new mod (this one) i am ready to start a new campaign again.

But i have zero knowledge about fiddleing with AI files, is it just to rename existing files and if so, exactly what files and where?

Thanks in advance!


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 140
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 4/7/2019 6:43:03 AM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 3929
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
I have not designed the mod for AI play and not adapted the AI files for the additional units, ships and bases in my mod. Many base slots have been switched to other geographical areas and many ships and LCUs have been added and some have changed database slots in the editor. I have never tested my mod against the AI, so I cannot comment on the effects of my changes on AI behaviour with existing AI files. Strange things may happen.

< Message edited by LargeSlowTarget -- 4/9/2019 10:59:06 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to pzrshrek)
Post #: 141
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 4/18/2019 7:32:51 AM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 3929
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
Version 1.3 in the works - last call for bug reports / feedback !

Changes (going from memory, there are probable more small things I already forgot about):

- fixes for a number of database glitches, for example some Zeros having different 20mm canon models on normal range and on extended range
- fix for SWPac HQ being "not in play" (due to having a sub-unit - Dougout Doug)
- added missing art file for Hashima class netlayer
- added missing late-war IJN oiler Hario
- added missing late-war minelayers of the Minoo and Kamishima classes
- corrected classes for oilers Kazahaya and Hayasui, Hayasui gains the missing flight deck and float planes
- corrected Akitsu Maru: Was used as assault ship and aircraft ferry > can instant-convert between LSD (many troops, few planes) and AKV (few troops, many planes). Can upgrade the "flying-off platform" to full flight deck to operate Ki-76 and Ka-1, which she apparently did IRL (but ship remains LSD type, not being a full CVE)
- corrected Nitsigu Maru: Apparently she did not have a "flying-off platform" > new class and art file. Has conversion option to become a "flight deck LSD" like Akitsu Maru.


The most important change concerns R&D and Japanese engine management:

1. With current R&D model, the Japanese can advance the availability dates of planes by several months if not years, for example flying Zero M8 and Frank-r by 1943 - this is unrealistic and is a major gripes for AFBs.

2. Japanese aircraft R&D / production and engine production requires considerable engine management efforts, something which discourages playing Japan.

Since the philosophy of this mod is "more historically accurate (personal bias and all)", I will try to limit the unrealistic advancement of late-war plane types.

Also, I personally do not relish the engine management part of the game.

However, since other players may prefer things as they are and want to micromanage and optimize production, I will propose three scenario variants:

- scenario 059 Standard R&D
> standard engine production
> all 74 R&D factories available


- scenario 060 Limited R&D
> standard engine production
> only planes actually under R&D in Dec 1941 have a R&D factory assigned
> only the first version of a model line has a R&D factoy assigned, e.g. there is a R&D factory for the Jill B6N1, but none for the Jill B6N2
> this reduces the number of available R&D factories from 74 to 18
> so JFBs have still some leeway, but face far tougher choices and shouldn't be able to advance multiple late-war types
> the other R&D factories are now production factories, set to produce 0 units per month of a fictional "plane" called "R&D / Preprod setup"
> the JFB player can change these factories to produce available airframes, but he will still be limited by the engines bottleneck


- scenario 061 Simplified Production
> contains limited R&D like in Scen 060
> all planes except those using jets, rockets and 'foreign engines' use a generic "engine" device, just like the Allied planes do > no more engine management!
> research engine factories become available at the appropriate date (e.g. the "Ha-60" becomes the "10/42" engine and the factory can be switched to produce "engine" devices in 10/42)
> Samurai hono(u)r demands that engine research remain untouched, i.e. no switching of late-war factories to the earliest date available
> to offset the now easier / more efficient engine production, repair costs for engine factories have been doubled to 2000 supplies / point - so be careful not to over-extend!

ETA in about a month.

< Message edited by LargeSlowTarget -- 4/18/2019 7:36:07 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 142
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 7/1/2019 6:08:30 PM   
Alikchi2

 

Posts: 1767
Joined: 5/14/2004
Status: offline
I'm excited for Scenario 61 myself! Wrapping my head around engine management was always a pain.

_____________________________


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 143
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 7/4/2019 8:44:03 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 3929
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
I am late again, ETA was set for early may but I still have stuff to add. Obtained a file from Gridley380 with some interesting details and corrections and will work some of them into my mod. Updating three sets of scenario files is time-consuming, so I now aim for late August.

< Message edited by LargeSlowTarget -- 7/5/2019 3:53:43 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Alikchi2)
Post #: 144
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 7/4/2019 10:41:48 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16605
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
I understand. I maintain 7 file sets - 6 issued and one in development for a 1945 mini-game.
It takes time to duplicate many records. Just keep soldering on. You will get there. You
have provided me with many things - such as a vast list of US LST's with accurate data -
and many eratta reports. I am grateful.

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 145
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 7/5/2019 1:30:14 PM   
Gridley380


Posts: 464
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Obtained a file from Gridley280 with some interesting details and corrections and will work some of them into my mod.


That's *3*80. I'm not a Clemson. :-)

Glad there were some things of interest - anything in particular? I might be able to find more.

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 146
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 7/8/2019 10:42:01 AM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 3929
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
Sorry Gridley380, just a typo.

I haven't had the time yet to fact-check your entire doc, but the first few paragraphs contained interesting details for example on the cruise speed of the Wickes APDs (they lost half the boilers, but that should have an impact on top speed, not so much on the cruise speed) and the top speed of the Teapa lass (I learned that the banana boats have been re-engined with diesels and managed 16 knots, not 27 knots as in the game). I may also "steal" the tip to render the F4F7 carrier-capable and to add a recon detachment to each carrier.

However, in some details you should check your sources. The starting location for HMS Victorious for example - you want to put her at Aden instead of Cristobal, but in fact she entered the Pacific via the Panama canal. You also want to put CVE Shah and Tracker at Aden - that's not correct either. HMS Shah has been built at Seattle, picked-up her airgroup at San Francisco and then joined the British Fleet by crossing the Pacific, leaving San Francisco on 440115 (the game has a wrong date). HMS Tracker served in the Atlantic, got a refit at New York in order to be able to operate US carrier aircraft, and left New York on 45/01/01 for San Diego via the Panama canal (the game puts her at Cristobal at that date, so wrong place or time). But no worries, even if your data is not always on target, it points me to things I have not verified before which leads to the discovery of errors in the base scenario - so thanks again for sharing your data! I will continue to dig through the file.

_____________________________


(in reply to Gridley380)
Post #: 147
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 7/8/2019 1:49:19 PM   
Gridley380


Posts: 464
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Sorry Gridley380, just a typo.


No problem. :-)

quote:



However, in some details you should check your sources. The starting location for HMS Victorious for example - you want to put her at Aden instead of Cristobal, but in fact she entered the Pacific via the Panama canal. You also want to put CVE Shah and Tracker at Aden - that's not correct either. HMS Shah has been built at Seattle, picked-up her airgroup at San Francisco and then joined the British Fleet by crossing the Pacific, leaving San Francisco on 440115 (the game has a wrong date). HMS Tracker served in the Atlantic, got a refit at New York in order to be able to operate US carrier aircraft, and left New York on 45/01/01 for San Diego via the Panama canal (the game puts her at Cristobal at that date, so wrong place or time). But no worries, even if your data is not always on target, it points me to things I have not verified before which leads to the discovery of errors in the base scenario - so thanks again for sharing your data! I will continue to dig through the file.


Actually, I moved some of the RN ships for personal preference. This is, after all, notes for *my* mod. :-) I didn't expect anyone would be interested in anything short of a full-up scenario, so I didn't distinguish between things I did for historical accuracy and things I did for personal preference (I've also got a note in there about having the Americal Division appear as the 23rd Infantry Division, for example - not at all historical). Probably should have highlighted the "choice" ones before passing my notes to you, sorry.

A few notes on the notes:
My B-29 data is OBE - I've found better info since. I can dig that out if you're interested.
The changes to the Treasury class reflect that AGCs aren't as useful in-game as those ships are as long-range escorts. The pain of doing long-range convoys historically isn't worth the pain of having those ships fill a historical role that the game doesn't really use.
The Dutch engineers are somewhat speculative - they had engineer units in their OrBat, but I'm not sure how many personnel they had assigned.
The US Army land OrBats and TOEs both seem to need some serious work. Basically some day I'll sit down and comb through Stanton for the PTO as I've mostly done for the ETO. The US "division wedge" also seems to have too little support in-game. I've been mulling splitting most of the support out of HQc/y and creating some ENG units representing groups of Army Service Force personnel.
Allowing the conversion of Crater AK to Liberty xAK is another preference thing - be the time I get the Crater class I don't have a use for them except as more xAK's. Making them xAK's makes them easier to keep track of.
Dougout Doug's stats are a matter of debate, but I don't like him, so in my game he will have truly lousy stats. :-)
Buffing up Wake is something I need to play test more - I'd like to be able to get a semi-historical result for the initial Japanese assault at least, say, one time in three.
The VF Dets are something that I feel the US is really missing out on late-war; recon is VERY important in the game, as it was historically, and the fast carrier force had aircraft aboard for that purpose. The game should provide for that.
The Advanced Carrier Training Groups are another "miss" - they existed historically and can fulfill their basic purpose in the game.
The Barracuda's arguably had limited "on map" service and thus representing them is a boost for the Allies, but since the class data existed I decided to take advantage of it.
The xAPc's are useless in-game, and they're never going to get into a place where they might be sunk in a game I'm playing, so since there are lots of units missing I use the slots for those.
I haven't play-tested the Ground Support Equipment idea, but fixing aviation support is a major goal.
AA lethality is something I brought up in another thread, but nothing I've seen there has changed my mind.

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 148
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 9/3/2019 7:26:08 AM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 3929
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
Just to inform you that the release of the v1.3 tentatively set for August is being delayed.

After checking the arrival dates and locations of capital ships, I have discovered that the arrival dates and locations of US submarines are inexact as well.

For example, in the DBB base scenario, the USS Barb arrives September 15th 1942 at Balboa. IRL she was assigned to the Atlantic Fleet and operated out of Roseneath, Scotland, until July 1943. She was then reassigned to the Pacific Fleet and reached Pearl Harbor in September 1943 - so in the game she arrives in the PTO one year early! (Strange, never heard any complaints from AFBs about getting Allied assets way earlier...)

Same for USS Blackfish - arrives September 15th 1942 at Balboa, when IRL she operated in the Atlantic until July 1943.

Other boats have their arrival dates off by a week or a month - for example USS Gato, which in the game arrives at Balboa on January 15th 1942 when IRL she departed New London, CT for Pearl Harbor via Panama only on February 16th 1942.

So, I'm digging through DANFS again to correct the dates of US subs in the editor. With the holiday season over, my RL workload is picking up , so for the moment I cannot project a new release date.

_____________________________


(in reply to Gridley380)
Post #: 149
RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific - 9/3/2019 1:47:31 PM   
Gridley380


Posts: 464
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline
The US gets some CVEs early too - I think all four of the Sangamon arrive early.

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: Mod Release: Bottlenecks in the Pacific Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   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

0.172