Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Planes not matching database

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich >> Tech Support >> Planes not matching database Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Planes not matching database - 1/30/2020 4:48:57 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1983
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Hi
was browsing through the nightfighters in the BoB41 full campaign and there is something really weird.
I selected the Defiant that has according to ingame database only 4x MG but there are different versions:
- 96 sq uses Defiants without any weapons
- 307 sq uses Defiants with radar


Some goes for the Beaufighter, in the db it has no radar but:
- All other sq except the 255 use Beaufighters with radar

What do I miss here?



_____________________________

Post #: 1
RE: Planes not matching database - 1/31/2020 3:35:14 AM   
warshipbuilder


Posts: 1198
Joined: 2/23/2013
From: C-eh-n-eh-d-eh
Status: offline
Changes will be made in the next patch to the 96 and 307 Sqns Defiants. 96 will receive weapons, 307 will lose the radar.

255 is flying the Beau IF, hence no radar.

_____________________________

warshipbuilder

Any ship can be a minesweeper, once.
Overshoot the green TI's.
Editor WitE2Pedia
ED/BTR Ressurection Project

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 2
RE: Planes not matching database - 1/31/2020 4:05:16 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1983
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Please enlighten me here, don't the units draw the data of their planes from the database?
Or are these units pointing to old entries in the db?

quote:

ORIGINAL: warshipbuilder
255 is flying the Beau IF, hence no radar.

Well all other squadrons that fly the Beau IF have radar, afaik the first plane with radar was received by the Fighter Interception Unit (FIU) at Tangmere on 12 August. And first kill by a Beau IF with radar was on 19. November 1940. I doubt one finds any Beaufighter used as nightfighter without radar by 1941.

_____________________________


(in reply to warshipbuilder)
Post #: 3
RE: Planes not matching database - 1/31/2020 4:19:10 AM   
warshipbuilder


Posts: 1198
Joined: 2/23/2013
From: C-eh-n-eh-d-eh
Status: offline
Yes you are quite correct, change will be made next patch.

_____________________________

warshipbuilder

Any ship can be a minesweeper, once.
Overshoot the green TI's.
Editor WitE2Pedia
ED/BTR Ressurection Project

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 4
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/2/2020 11:39:06 AM   
mark dolby

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 12/22/2019
From: United Kingdom
Status: offline
Ta-154 listed as in service date July '44 has Fug 212 but surely it should start its service life with SN-220?
I know that the 212 was the planned suite in mid '43 but as the type did not reach production in real life, an attempt by a player to succeed would result in the best radar being used surely?

(in reply to warshipbuilder)
Post #: 5
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/2/2020 4:32:31 PM   
simovitch


Posts: 4759
Joined: 2/14/2006
Status: offline
@BigDuke66: The in-game database reads the default aircraft load which can be modified in the editor by changing the loadout of the groups that fly that aircraft type.

_____________________________

simovitch


(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 6
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/2/2020 4:39:03 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1983
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Thanks, that explains at least some differences. I went through the setup for the full 1940 Bob campaign and found a few things to correct or at least take a look at.
Will do a check of the 1941 BoB campaign too and then post all I found.

_____________________________


(in reply to simovitch)
Post #: 7
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/2/2020 5:37:06 PM   
simovitch


Posts: 4759
Joined: 2/14/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mark dolby

Ta-154 listed as in service date July '44 has Fug 212 but surely it should start its service life with SN-220?
I know that the 212 was the planned suite in mid '43 but as the type did not reach production in real life, an attempt by a player to succeed would result in the best radar being used surely?

If the plane was never in production we can do whatever seems right. The game swaps out 5 nightfighters a day max with the 220 more or less starting slowly in late 1943. The 240 retrofit kicks in slowly in 1945.

_____________________________

simovitch


(in reply to mark dolby)
Post #: 8
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/2/2020 7:53:54 PM   
warshipbuilder


Posts: 1198
Joined: 2/23/2013
From: C-eh-n-eh-d-eh
Status: offline
I have added the 212/220 swap to my to do list of changes for the next patch.

_____________________________

warshipbuilder

Any ship can be a minesweeper, once.
Overshoot the green TI's.
Editor WitE2Pedia
ED/BTR Ressurection Project

(in reply to simovitch)
Post #: 9
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/2/2020 10:00:50 PM   
mark dolby

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 12/22/2019
From: United Kingdom
Status: offline
Good to know about the 5 SN220 swaps per day. Do you know if they fill one unit at a time or are random spread through different units?

(in reply to warshipbuilder)
Post #: 10
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/3/2020 12:20:33 AM   
simovitch


Posts: 4759
Joined: 2/14/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mark dolby

Good to know about the 5 SN220 swaps per day. Do you know if they fill one unit at a time or are random spread through different units?

It doesn't look random enough in the code to not be one unit at a time. We could prioritize it a bit in the future though.

_____________________________

simovitch


(in reply to mark dolby)
Post #: 11
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/3/2020 7:45:33 AM   
Saturn V

 

Posts: 74
Joined: 9/12/2013
Status: offline
Speaking of aircraft in the game, or in the following case, not in the game: the Lancaster II.

The Lancaster II always seems to get overlooked (it isn't included in the campaigns in Gary Grigsby's War in the West either). Granted, while it was produced in limited numbers (300), it nonetheless equipped six squadrons in Bomber Command. While two of those operated the aircraft for a relatively short time, the other four used the type for a fairly lengthy period.

No. 61: Jan. 1943 to Mar. 1943
No. 115: Mar. 1943 to May 1944
No. 408 RCAF: Oct. 1943 to Sept. 1944
No. 426 RCAF: July 1943 to May 1944
No. 432 RCAF: Oct. 1943 to Feb. 1944
No. 514: Sept. 1943 to July 1944

With the Aug. 17, 1943, start for the full Bombing the Reich 1943 campaign, four of the six squadrons use the Lancaster II for a good period of time after that date. Given the Lancaster II had a lower ceiling, slightly slower cruising speed, and lower bomb load for the same distance as compared to the Lancaster I/III, in my view these warrant the aircraft being an official part of the game (rather than something edited in by individual users).

But I suspect I might be in the minority on this, as the Lancaster II never gets any love. ;)

(in reply to simovitch)
Post #: 12
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/3/2020 7:19:46 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1983
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
If Lancaster I/III are there, could II be left out for a reasons?

_____________________________


(in reply to Saturn V)
Post #: 13
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/4/2020 5:14:37 AM   
Saturn V

 

Posts: 74
Joined: 9/12/2013
Status: offline
My guess would be it's because either (a) not many people realize that variant existed; (b) it's judged to have been produced in too few numbers to warrant inclusion; or (c) it's viewed as having performance comparable with the Lancaster I/III.

That last point is not the case; the Lancaster II did have performance differences due to its Hercules radial engines (mainly in the bomb load as it used more fuel than the Merlin-engined variants).

For me, equipping six squadrons, four of them for close to a year, makes the type significant enough to warrant being included. (Some day I'm going to edit it in to the air-only campaigns into War in the West.)

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 14
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/5/2020 10:13:06 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1983
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
So my 1940 Full campaign check broad this:
Full 1940 campaign
LUFTWAFFE
Bf 109E-1
- II/JG53 has 2x MG/FF & 2x MG 17 although all others and the db show 4x MG 17 for the E-1. Or is this unit supposed to have the E-3 as the load out matches that type?

He 111H-4
- Stab/KG55, I/KG55, II/KG55 and III/KG55 have a device called Tokio, couldn't find out what that is and it is correct at all.
- The units of KGr 100 have a device called Knickebein but afaik it used the so called X-Gerät, that was a more complicated & precise blind-bombing system that used extra devices that had to be installed. The precision was 50% bombs landed after a flight 300km in a radius of 300m.
The Knickebein system itself used the blind fly instruments that every German bomber at that time used and so basically every bomber over England was likely to use this way of bombing at night and(or bad weather without the need for the X-Gerät. The precision was after a flight of 250km a target radius of 1500m, so obviously less precise but still good for bigger targets.
One has to consider that both systems could be jammed and it was done so successfully in the BoB.

Ju 87B-2
- IV(Stuka)/LG1, Stab/St.G. 2 and I/St.G. 2 use a load of a single 500kg bomb. The typical load is 1x 250kg + 4x 50kg but 1x 500kg was possible to use. Do these units purposely use a different load? Would it make a difference at all(450kg vs 500kg load)?

Ju 88A-5
- It has MG 17 instead of MG 15 in all units & the db. All units & db have to be corrected.

Ju 88C-2
- Uses Spanner device although it was not used on it. There is maybe also a different weapon loadout of 2x additional MG FF/M in the floor tray but with that no MG in C-Stand(BR), but that could not be confirmed sufficiently, but even if so there is the chance that this was a later version not used in the 1940 BoB. Besides, there are still the bombs, although being able to dive bomb a doubt this was done at night, and so a bomber with the bomb-sight removed for additional guns but still having bombs does not makes much sense. Spanner is used on all units & the db. All units & db have to be corrected.



ROYAL AIR FORCE
Blenheim IF
- First all units and the db list it with 5x .303 in front, afaik it were only 4x .303 all build into the wings. Now the db shows no radar although the Blenheim clearly used radar but only the AI MK III, afaik the fighter command di not use any other version for this stop-gap night fighter. Till 26th July some 70 Blenheim IFs were modified with the rudimentary Air Interception (AI) Mk III radar, that is already as much as the RAF has at the start of the 1940 BoB campaign. The AI Mk III radar was considered partially reliable, it had a maximum range of 3-4 miles down to a 800-1,500ft minimum range, which was beyond the reach of the aircraft’s four .303 Brownings. First kill by radar on 22nd July 1940.
Bad thing is that all units have the AI MK IV assigned, I don't know what values that thing uses in the game but wouldn't wonder if it was better then the Mk III. So a new device would have to be added, and added to the db & all units.

Defiant Mk I & Mk IA
- Just as a precaution, the Mk IA is afaik the radar equipped version of the MK I. correct designation would be NF Mk IA. Basically it was a MK I to which radar was added and renamed to NF Mk IA, and it seems it didn't get radar before autumn 1941 parallel to the introduction of the Defiant MK II. So not sure why the Mk IA is in the 1940 Bob campaign but it's surely wrong to have any radar equipped Defiant's in 1940 and in 1941 they likely do not show up before September 1941.

Beaufighter IF
- It has no radar in the db although it was, except for some early batches, equipped with the AI Mk IV radar.

_____________________________


(in reply to Saturn V)
Post #: 15
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/6/2020 3:11:25 AM   
warshipbuilder


Posts: 1198
Joined: 2/23/2013
From: C-eh-n-eh-d-eh
Status: offline
Bf-109E-1
quote:

Or is this unit supposed to have the E-3 as the load out matches that type?


Don't know but see no reason to change anything.

He-111H-4
quote:

Stab/KG55, I/KG55, II/KG55 and III/KG55 have a device called Tokio, couldn't find out what that is and it is correct at all.


Drop tank.

Ju 87B-2
quote:

Do these units purposely use a different load? Would it make a difference at all(450kg vs 500kg load)?


Probably and probably not, but again I see no reason to change anything.

Blenheim IF - it had a belly pack of four forward firing .303MG and also one fixed in the wing, hence the five.

Will have to look at giving the Blenheim and Beau radar.



_____________________________

warshipbuilder

Any ship can be a minesweeper, once.
Overshoot the green TI's.
Editor WitE2Pedia
ED/BTR Ressurection Project

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 16
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/6/2020 5:56:10 PM   
mark dolby

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 12/22/2019
From: United Kingdom
Status: offline
He-111H-4
quote:

Stab/KG55, I/KG55, II/KG55 and III/KG55 have a device called Tokio, couldn't find out what that is and it is correct at all.


Drop tank.


Were these the 600L tanks? I can find no name for them but presume them to be the aforementioned 'tokio' tanks. And note that the B17F also had wingtip tanks with the same name.

(in reply to warshipbuilder)
Post #: 17
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/6/2020 8:06:21 PM   
Denniss

 

Posts: 6703
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline
II./JG53: Lexikon der WEhrmacht claim the untis was re-equipped with E-4s in April 1940 (from E-1 and E-3)

(in reply to mark dolby)
Post #: 18
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/7/2020 1:21:09 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1983
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Could explain this mixed E-1/E-3 entry, maybe someone had a wrong upgrade date and thought this units still to have a mix of E-1/E-3 or was in the process of correcting this entry and somehow failed.
Anyhow this could now be corrected to E-4s, what is surely needed.

_____________________________


(in reply to Denniss)
Post #: 19
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/7/2020 2:15:45 AM   
warshipbuilder


Posts: 1198
Joined: 2/23/2013
From: C-eh-n-eh-d-eh
Status: offline
quote:

Anyhow this could now be corrected to E-4s, what is surely needed.


In game as of 8/40 the E-1 can be upgraded to the E-3 and the E-3 can be upgraded to the E-4 at the same time. So you can resolve this issue in the first couple of turns of the game.

_____________________________

warshipbuilder

Any ship can be a minesweeper, once.
Overshoot the green TI's.
Editor WitE2Pedia
ED/BTR Ressurection Project

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 20
RE: Planes not matching database - 2/7/2020 2:34:06 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1983
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
What can be said about most other entries too, but you can also just correct it so that it is like it should be from the start.
I would do it myself but unless we get an editor that does not need MS Office this is out of my reach.

_____________________________


(in reply to warshipbuilder)
Post #: 21
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich >> Tech Support >> Planes not matching database 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

0.188