Could someone rescue this game for us

[Yakface]

We started CHS scn 157 (with Nik mod) game about 8 months ago and have reached mid October 1942. Nik mod raises the durability of aircraft substantially, however it had the (unforseen at the time) by-product of causing large numbers of planes to become damaged when on CAP. It's making it impossible to defend bases

It's getting to the point where it is spoiling the game. I was hoping one of the developers could rescue it for us by reducing the durability of all planes by 30%.

[jwilkerson]

Hum, fixing design issues with modded games in progress is not something we've done (and we have been asked). And if we were to start, I fear the line would get long. I'll ask Nik if he has any ideas/workarounds.

[Yakface]

Thanks Joe - yeah I can see that if you do it for one there would be an endless series of problems and requests for a fix

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Yakface

We started CHS scn 157 (with Nik mod) game about 8 months ago and have reached mid October 1942. Nik mod raises the durability of aircraft substantially, however it had the (unforseen at the time) by-product of causing large numbers of planes to become damaged when on CAP. It's making it impossible to defend bases

It's getting to the point where it is spoiling the game. I was hoping one of the developers could rescue it for us by reducing the durability of all planes by 30%.

Care to clarify this problem? How would reduced durability make it possible to defend bases?

BTW, I suspect this happens in 159, too, but can't really tell.

[Miller]

Nik has done excellent work on his mods but version 8.0 was flawed due to the reasons you state. I ended my first PBEM in late 42 as it got to the point where carrier fleets had virtually no CAP as most of their fighters were damaged.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Miller

Nik has done excellent work on his mods but version 8.0 was flawed due to the reasons you state. I ended my first PBEM in late 42 as it got to the point where carrier fleets had virtually no CAP as most of their fighters were damaged.

How do CHS 2.0.8, scenarios 159-160, stack up against this?

[Miller]

I've no idea, but if they use version 8.0 of nikmod I guess they will be affected in the same way.

[Yakface]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Yakface

We started CHS scn 157 (with Nik mod) game about 8 months ago and have reached mid October 1942. Nik mod raises the durability of aircraft substantially, however it had the (unforseen at the time) by-product of causing large numbers of planes to become damaged when on CAP. It's making it impossible to defend bases

It's getting to the point where it is spoiling the game. I was hoping one of the developers could rescue it for us by reducing the durability of all planes by 30%.

Care to clarify this problem? How would reduced durability make it possible to defend bases?

BTW, I suspect this happens in 159, too, but can't really tell.

The repair routine takes into account the durability of the aircraft that is damaged. High durability = fewer repaired. When on CAP about 20% of aircraft becvome damaged. Net effect is that with version 8 (where fighters have durabilies between 75 and 120) flying 50% CAP with anything more than 80 DB left about 1/3 of them damaged. Bad for the Allies early in the game, not too bad they get radar, but disasterous for the Japanese Tojo/Tonies. They are virtually useless.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Yakface

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Yakface

We started CHS scn 157 (with Nik mod) game about 8 months ago and have reached mid October 1942. Nik mod raises the durability of aircraft substantially, however it had the (unforseen at the time) by-product of causing large numbers of planes to become damaged when on CAP. It's making it impossible to defend bases

It's getting to the point where it is spoiling the game. I was hoping one of the developers could rescue it for us by reducing the durability of all planes by 30%.

Care to clarify this problem? How would reduced durability make it possible to defend bases?

BTW, I suspect this happens in 159, too, but can't really tell.

The repair routine takes into account the durability of the aircraft that is damaged. High durability = fewer repaired. When on CAP about 20% of aircraft becvome damaged. Net effect is that with version 8 (where fighters have durabilies between 75 and 120) flying 50% CAP with anything more than 80 DB left about 1/3 of them damaged. Bad for the Allies early in the game, not too bad they get radar, but disasterous for the Japanese Tojo/Tonies. They are virtually useless.

OK, so the issue is that the game models repair time for aircraft as a function of their durability. I've definitely seen this in CHS 2.0.8, 159, but I'm not sure stock/155 is that accurate. Any comments from the observer population?

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Miller

I've no idea, but if they use version 8.0 of nikmod I guess they will be affected in the same way.

Yes, CHS 2.08 "Nikmod" scenarios do use an equivalent to version 8 Nikmod. If the problems with that version are this bad then maybe I should remove those scenarios from the download page? I do intend to update CHS to use the latest Nikmod version for the "Nikmod" variant, but I have yet to get around to doing it. It is on my to-do list...

Andrew

[Helpless]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: Miller

I've no idea, but if they use version 8.0 of nikmod I guess they will be affected in the same way.

Yes, CHS 2.08 "Nikmod" scenarios do use an equivalent to version 8 Nikmod. If the problems with that version are this bad then maybe I should remove those scenarios from the download page? I do intend to update CHS to use the latest Nikmod version for the "Nikmod" variant, but I have yet to get around to doing it. It is on my to-do list...

Andrew

It is affected and i don't recommend to start CHS-Nikmod to anyone until it is updated.

[Hortlund]

I just talked to nik about this and this is what he said.

Nikmod 8.0 featured a doubled durability for fighters which exaserbated an existing issue where for some reason, as DUR is increased pass a certain threshold, planes started falling into the unservicable catagory. JoeW and I tried to nail down 'why' this was happening for certain fighter groups (but not others) but we were unsuccessful.

NM 9.0 and 9.1 removed this problem by removing the 8.0 fighter DUR changes. You should have no issue with 9.1 in regards to servicability of aircraft.

[Nikademus]

just to add further clarification...the issue of increased DUR in 8.0 only impacted certain fighter or fighter bomber groups on CAP or escort mission settings.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

just to add further clarification...the issue of increased DUR in 8.0 only impacted certain fighter or fighter bomber groups on CAP or escort mission settings.

Question for Andrew: does this affect 159-160?

[matt.buttsworth]

I think this makes the nikmod CHS 157 variant unplayable until updated.

Matthew

Yes, CHS 2.08 "Nikmod" scenarios do use an equivalent to version 8 Nikmod. If the problems with that version are this bad then maybe I should remove those scenarios from the download page? I do intend to update CHS to use the latest Nikmod version for the "Nikmod" variant, but I have yet to get around to doing it. It is on my to-do list...

Andrew

[Nikademus]

in the que....

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: herwin
Question for Andrew: does this affect 159-160?

My "experimental" scenarios use a durability increase similar to that used in pre 8.x versions of Nikmod, which were not as large. My understanding is that they are not affected in the same way - at least nowhere near the same extent. Having said that there are some other issues with those scenarios that have been reported by some players, namely that they find bombers too resistant to being shot down. I can't comment myself as I have not played it.

My plans for the next version of CHS are to make a variant based on Nikmod 9.x, and another variant based on Big-B mod.

Andrew