Updated 30/07/2022: Bottlenecks in the Pacific v1.3b

[DesertedFox]

Hi LST,

Looking at diving into this great mod.

Thx for the time and effort you put into this mod and to those who contributed to it, especially the DBB crowd.

EDIT: Disregard, I found that I was mistaken. Game on.

[Tanaka]

Love this mod will you be updating to the new beta patch?

No need to update my mod.

The code changes of the new beta patch are "universal" regardless of scenario used (stock or mod doesn't matter).

The scenario, map graphic and pwhex data changes of the new beta patch are for use with stock scenarios only.

If you use my mod, you must install the specific scenarios, map graphics and pwhexdat data files provided with the mod installation files.

The important point is that if you have my mod already installed and you apply the new beta patch, it will overwrite the map and pwhexdat files of my mod - in other words, after installing the new beta patch, you will need to reinstall the mod.

Ah thanks for the clarification!

[M Peaston]

Hi LST

In Bottlenecks scenario 59 I seem to have a duplicate B17E. Note the two separate pools for the B17E. I’ve had a look at the individual airgroups and from what I can see they all show there are ten planes available in the pool; no airgoups show twelve.

I had a quick look in the editor (not that I know anything about the editor) and it seems that numbers 285 and 288 are both B17Es.

I can quite happily live with having twice the number of B17Es, but my opponent might not be best pleased. If all the airgroups are using the ‘correct’ aircraft, and if I am careful not to upgrade to the duplicate, it may not matter too much.

Once again, thank you for your hard work on this excellent, challenging and enjoyable mod.
Matthew.

B17 Pools.png (770.64 KiB) Viewed 1945 times

B17E.png (81.27 KiB) Viewed 1945 times

[LargeSlowTarget]

The 288 version of the B-17E is a database glitch, I have created it for some testing purpose and forgotten to delete it afterwards.

If I am not mistaken, air units are using / upgrading to the 285 version only, if you don't change the upgrade path manually to the 288 version you should be fine.

[M Peaston]

Thanks LST.

Of course, it would be that the 288 ID is accumulating airframes in the pool at a faster rate than the 'real' one......such is life....

[Axe1999]

Think I found a bug, not sure if it a known one.

USN AK Betelgeuse arrives April 24 1942 but has a withdraw date 18 February 1942, causing it to eat PP before she can get from Panama to CONUS to withdraw.

Scen 61 I havent checked the other ones, I'm using updated files you sent me that arent integrated into official mod yet if Im correct.

[btd64]

Sounds like a typo ....GP

[LargeSlowTarget]

Yes, typo - should be 430218

[Cavalry Corp]

Modders nightmares so easy to get an issue - one digit changes everything spend a long while myself getting rid of these kind of things.

[Yaab]

LST, I took a peek at your scen 059

I see VPs for bases follow stock VP values. Chungking gets 100 VP multiplier, Noumea 50 etc. However, I found one base that is an outlier.

Here is Mengtze in China with 50 VP multiplier in scen 059. Is this WAD?



Here is Mengtze in stock.

[LargeSlowTarget]

Mengtze only got 1 Allied VP in stock and DBB - but IMO it is a key point for the Allies as it is blocking the shortest route to Kunming. But 50 is probably a typo, should be 5, like for Kunming.

[LargeSlowTarget]

Btw @yaab

Saw your post in https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 5&t=396803 :

I applaud you on actually playing this scenario. I have recently opened scen059... It is a hard work even understanding the initial LCU/bases/economy layout. Good luck!

Do you have any particular questions or need for explanations?

[Yaab]

No, I am just lacking mental energy right now to process Bottlenecks first turn info (overall strategy, supply situation, supply routines, new ships etc). Same goes for the RHS scenarios since they are huge too.

[Yaab]

LST, this is a quote from your Bottlenecks.doc for scen059:

"December 7th afternoon start:
Initial air strikes on PH, Wake, Malaya and PI are already over and the historic damage has been done in the game – this is to avoid the very variable results of Day 1 actions. "

However, the info does not tell you, that the Allied aircraft losses at Pearl Harbor are directly DEDUCTED from the air groups there (the air groups start the scenario understrength). At first I thought the scenario was incomplete somehow, because air losses were so few on Dec 8, 1941

[similar]

Hi LargeSlowTarget, thank you for this amazing mod, I played it very enjoyably to early 1944 as Japan and was holding back the Allies with some success. I started that game in September 2019. I am now looking to start a new game with your mod, using a new installation.

The numbers of pilots in the initial replacement pools appear to have changed significantly between my scenario installations, and I was wondering the rationale to the changes (especially as Japanese prospects look a little dimmer).

In 2019 using scenario 59, there were 1,300 IJN and 1,600 IJA pilots in the pools.
Now I'm coming back to scenario 59, there are 250 IJN and 300 IJA pilots in the pools.
The replacement rate in both cases remains the same 150 IJN and 200 IJA per month.

Conversely, Allied pilot replacement pool numbers have gone up e.g. US Navy from 400 in 2019 to 1800 now.

Many thanks for all your work with this mod and for sharing it with us.

[LargeSlowTarget]

Thank you similar. I have changed the numbers after some reading. In short, the Army Air Corps (and Navy and Marines as well) started training many more pilots well before Dec 7 41, the Japanese didn't (they did in fact, but the efforts really dwarfed compared to the Allies). The numbers itself are not "scientifically correct" but they reflect historical realities somewhat better.

Just two quotes :

Facing resurgent German militarism and an aggressive Japanese military in 1939, the Air Corps planned to graduate 4,500 pilots in the following two years. [...] When France fell to Germany in 1940, the Air Corps increased the number of pilots to be trained to 7,000 per year. (https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit ... e-of-wwii/)

The Japanese system was suitable for a nation that hoped to win quick, limited wars. When the Japanese attacked in the Pacific, they held nothing back. There was no reserve of skilled pilots to speak of. Indeed, Peattie (2001) has pointed out that, when war broke out, 11 Air Fleet had been drawn on so heavily for cadre for the new Shokakus that its rosters already included significant numbers of incompletely trained pilots. As attrition set in, particularly during the Guadalcanal campaign, the training system proved entirely inadequate to replace losses. (http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/F/i/Fighter_Pilots.htm)

[Yaab]

LST, I reread the Bottleneck notes.

The "Changes to China OOB" section does not mention that engineer values are now lower. Chinese corps now have just 6 eng value, the construction regiments also have just 6 eng value. Since your scenario greatly changes base and supply situtation in China, I think the eng reduction warrants a mention in the scenario notes.

[LargeSlowTarget]

True, I have nerfed the number of Eng devices - not just for the Chinese - in order to slow things down in accordance with the mod philosophy. One of the "undocumented features"^^

[Yaab]

So, I poked around Allied first turn a bit, and, oh boy, one special TF around Tahiti would make Anita Sarkeesian rage quit your mod at once!

[JanSako]

So, I poked around Allied first turn a bit, and, oh boy, one special TF around Tahiti would make Anita Sarkeesian rage quit your mod at once!

If you lose them, a special event fires that either halves or doubles the morale of all Allied units. Everyone gets real sad or real mad, depending on if they recently visited Tahiti.
(joke)