Nikmod AE - Guadalcanal

[Nikademus]

Certainly, just watch out for nuclear contamination.

[:)]

[Rob Brennan UK]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

Certainly, just watch out for nuclear contamination.

[:)]

they wont live long enough to notice [;)][;)]

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron


What I am not so sure about is the effect of IJN AAA. Do you think summer to fall 42 already had an increased discepancy in AAA cap between IJN and USN?

USN/IJN flak effectiveness, in terms of outright losses did not signifigantly diverge till the Battle of Santa Cruz though damage per plane was divergent earlier. Eastern Solomons would probably have seen more of a discrepancy save for the fact that Nagumo held back his torpedo bombers from the attack out of fear of heavy losses to enemy fighters and AA defenses. The main issue however, besides general comparable losses to USN flak during 1942 is the over effectiveness of IJN flak in term of outright losses, esp when players stack BB's in their TF's. In all four carrier battles, IJN flak never brought down more than 2 planes directly per engagement. At Santa Cruz AA firmly accounted for but one SBD.

[Jaroen]

Hey Nik, what great ideas you have for creating/modding your own scenario again!
Somehow I'm wishing some or all of these will make it to the Grand Campaign eventually.

I'll bet you read 'Fire in the Sky' from Bergerud as well!? What surprised me mostly from that account was the importance of nearby bases. Both Japanese and Allies were fighting hard for bases as close as possible to the ongoing operations. Apparently close distance bases were a much more important factor as represented in the game. Well, that's my opinion at least. Especially the Japanese can do some good in the game with their long range aircraft without suffering much. While in real life it was a struggle and they really were wanting the bases on New-Guinea and down the string of Islands.

Aside from an interesting discussion in the view of game development I was wondering if you were considering this as an extra change (number 6) in your mod?

Thanks!

[Nikademus]

"Fire in the Sky"

Yes.....good book. Been in my library for many years.

Aside from an interesting discussion in the view of game development I was wondering if you were considering this as an extra change (number 6) in your mod?

The development of bases? Well, the standard Scn004 modifies SPS values to retard this very thing. This is because players always do that very thing (attempt to immediately develop supporting and/or alternate bases close to the fighting) in order to benefit from hindsight and because the standard WitP build rules make it very easy using the SCN01 SPS values. In RL immediate development of new bases was mostly beyond both side's current logistical siutation...which was what made the bases in contention so important.

[Jaroen]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

Aside from an interesting discussion in the view of game development I was wondering if you were considering this as an extra change (number 6) in your mod?

The development of bases? Well, the standard Scn004 modifies SPS values to retard this very thing. This is because players always do that very thing (attempt to immediately develop supporting and/or alternate bases close to the fighting) in order to benefit from hindsight and because the standard WitP build rules make it very easy using the SCN01 SPS values. In RL immediate development of new bases was mostly beyond both side's current logistical siutation...which was what made the bases in contention so important.

Thanks for answering Nik.

If I understand correctly that would make it a little harder to quickly develop 'new' bases. But I believe I failed trying to tell that new bases were not necessary because the long range planes don't require nearby bases.

With the game we find planes always being capable of doing operations on maximum range and doing some fighting in between. In reality it was very hard and usually impossible to do long range operations. Even the Japanese preferred nearby bases for their Zero's to have some flying time for combat. Again, I think this is not represented in the game, the need for nearby bases isn't very strong I think. As an example. Historically the allies fought very hard for bases around Buna to gain a shorter range to Lae etc. With Port Moresby nearby there is hardly an incentive for the Allied player to do this as well in the game. You could go for Lae immediately. Similarly with bases on the Solomon Islands. Why fighting for New Georgia when you can go for Bougainville or even New Britain with the same trouble.

By the way, I was thinking the allies did manage to build small support bases (level 1-2 in the game) almost from scratch in a very short time. Although that was from 1943 onwards mainly.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Jaroen

Thanks for answering Nik.

If I understand correctly that would make it a little harder to quickly develop 'new' bases. But I believe I failed trying to tell that new bases were not necessary because the long range planes don't require nearby bases.

With the game we find planes always being capable of doing operations on maximum range and doing some fighting in between. In reality it was very hard and usually impossible to do long range operations. Even the Japanese preferred nearby bases for their Zero's to have some flying time for combat. Again, I think this is not represented in the game, the need for nearby bases isn't very strong I think.

The game does overcredit the bombers in terms of their being effective (especially against static bases) out too and including their maximum extended range. Joe and I find this out intimately in our current PBEM with the dastardly Aussies when we found our rear most bases in NW NG being pummeled by 1E bombers based all the way from island bases near PM in SE NG....or from Darwin etc etc. A possible solution would be to use the editor to lower max ranges to better represent combat effective ranges vs. theoretical operational ranges but of course, this would be somewhat arbitrary and subject to much debate. Fighters on the other hand, are the opposite. At longer ranges they suffer greatly in effectiveness due to pilot fatigue. For example A6M2 units, even with high 90's exp are hard pressed to be effective at range 14 vs Marine F4F units with exp levels in the 60's. (sweeps help due to the bonuses but its still a rough road)

the high serv ratings for all planes in the mod due help address the above issue to a signifigant degree in that they require players to lower the pace of their operations, employing rotation, rest and lower CAP/Search %'s.

In tooling with the game, I am enjoying the maxed out values more and more. Initially some of the situations made me think that it was a bit over the top in places. (such as with search planes and standing CAP's) Then i started adjusting my play, particularily for the small bases (level 1 bases for example you have to really watch your sortie count otherwise you go unservicable quick). For the first time, the "Rest" button has value for me. (Setting for example 30% rest for the USN CV's during the initial cover op for WATCHTOWER greatly reduced the high escort #'s while bombing, lowering plane fatigue.) Using rest at Milne Bay i kept a high level of serv there with the Kitty hawk squadron. The only cases now where i employ the typical ultra high CAP%;s are during critical situations such as unloading supply. This can only be sustained for limited periods of course which is very realistic. Radar is more critical than ever now as it can scramble planes not on standing patrol. Rotation and standdown....similar. Less planes in the air helps reduce the bloodiness.

Yes....the development of bases along a line of advance was key to US success in the Solomons. SCN004 of course however, focuses specifically on WATCHTOWER and the associated defense of PM so represents the pre-capability of the Allies to develop such bases as well as the Japanese logistical challenge for having neglected the Theater prior to the Marine landings.

[RevRick]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


It isn't that I disagree with your concept and statements about serviceability, but if all aircraft are 5's that removes one of the comparative criteria between planes. Also, kinda funny to think of a Wapitila taking as much effort as a B-17 next to it to maintain. I'm sure you are already thinking of this.

Is your plan to ask the dev's to expand the serviceability range to 10? Honestly, I can see some need for that.

As one of the "devs", I can tell you are no concrete plans to make further code changes at this time. Focus remains on bug hunting and correction of any major boo boo's found. Keep in mind that the serv rating is only one component of the formula that determines end servicability. This aspect of the mod is a work in progress too.

I just talked to Lt. Rico and Sgt. Zim. They're ready and willing to help....

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: RevRick
I just talked to Lt. Rico and Sgt. Zim. They're ready and willing to help....

To the everlasting glory of the infantry;
shines the name, shines the name;
of Roger Young

[Nikademus]

Violence has resolved more conflicts than anything else. The contrary opinion that violence doesn't solve anything is merely wishful thinking at its worst.

[:D]

[PaxMondo]

Way too much time watching DVD's ....[:D]

[RevRick]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Way too much time watching DVD's ....[:D]

When I first read about Zim and Rico, they didn't have VHS....

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.

[vettim89]

Nik, please see my note in the Naval OOB issue thred. There was a database error in the original GC scenario that was carried through to yours. Basically device 1736 Mousetrap Mk 20 has a load cost of 9999 when it should be 65. Ths USN subchasers cannot reload.


BTW, mod is great. ATA combat is seriously nerfed but AAA is deadly. I played a game as the IJN and lost 32 G4M in one turn to flak!!!!!!

[Nikademus]

interesting.....given that the only AA modification i've made is to lower IJN flak efficiency. Allied Flak is untouched. Gotta love this game [:D]

By "nerfing" do you mean in a good way or a bad way? [:D]