DaBabes AAA Tweak Info?

[Nemo121]

Pardon, we're trying to have a rational discussion here JWE.

Why are we being penalised while we're having a rational discussion about something which does appear as though it might be an issue? That seems a bit excessive.

If it isn't an issue then that means you must have tested and found it wasn't - which is great. If you haven't tested for the implications though I don't see what is "bizarre" or "crap" about discussing possible implications.


Keep DaBabes exclusive etc by all means with your private mailing lists etc etc etc but locking yourselves in a fort and refusing to engage with people who are trying to have a reasoned discussion isn't the way to promote improvement.


P.s. I've had a look around the forums and I only see this thread and another "official" thread discussing DaBigBabes. JWE are you really contending that this thread is full of bizarre crap sufficient that you're going dark on the mod? I'm just really puzzled what contained in this thread could have possibly offended you so much.

[rockmedic109]

ORIGINAL: JWE

Given all the bizarre, utter crap being spewed on various forums, DaBabes information will no longer be posted on any of these forums. Babes players can continue to recieve info privately, in the usual fashion.

I'm also sorry to read this. I play DaBabes and find it the best scenario yet. I applaud the hard work that has gone into it.

Given that it is free and anyone playing it {other than the authors} is taking advantage of others' {the authors} work, I find it distressing that the authors need to take this action. It's their scenario. We are using their work. We did not pay for it and they are letting us use it FREE.

If we paid them for their work, then we would have cause to complain if we don't like something. Complaining about someone else's hard work....that we get to use ....and not have to pay for? Rude.

[Nemo121]

Couple of points rockmedic,

1. The authors don't NEED to take this action. No-one's forcing them. They are choosing to stop discussing their mod and design decisions. It is a choice.

2. It would be rude, indeed, to complain about things for no reason. On the other hand it is the basis of rational discussion and consensual working together to discuss something, ask questions about it, spot possible flaws and then explore them with a view to making it better.

If we reach a situation where someone asking questions about a thing is sufficient reason for others to throw a strop and then run off home with the ball then we're pretty soon going to end up with no rational discussion.


Bottom line: sub-40mm calibre weapons were tweaked. The tweaks weren't applied to larger guns so as not to effect surface combat. PT boats are armed with 40mm and smaller weapons thus logically the tweaks will increase their surface combat lethality. Pointing this out and seeking to see if the solution creates yet more problems is hardly bizarre and unconstructive. I would have thought it was a highly constructive attempt to find and fix a possible problem.

When people found flaws in EA I didn't ban all future discussion about it. I thanked them and fixed the flaw and it made EA better. Are we so sensitive that people can't tolerate even the question about flaws nowadays?

[herwin]

@Nemo121

Your PM storage is full.

These discussions remind of how you knew your Marines were happy--they were grumbling...

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Pardon, we're trying to have a rational discussion here JWE.

Why are we being penalised while we're having a rational discussion about something which does appear as though it might be an issue? That seems a bit excessive.

If it isn't an issue then that means you must have tested and found it wasn't - which is great. If you haven't tested for the implications though I don't see what is "bizarre" or "crap" about discussing possible implications.


Keep DaBabes exclusive etc by all means with your private mailing lists etc etc etc but locking yourselves in a fort and refusing to engage with people who are trying to have a reasoned discussion isn't the way to promote improvement.


P.s. I've had a look around the forums and I only see this thread and another "official" thread discussing DaBigBabes. JWE are you really contending that this thread is full of bizarre crap sufficient that you're going dark on the mod? I'm just really puzzled what contained in this thread could have possibly offended you so much.

Heck, we don't care if people mess around with it. That's what we did, so why shouldn't everyone else. And it's not the people here that are a problem at all, at all. It's the vicious emails and pms from main forum people that decided us it just isn't worth it.

[ed] Will still support the scenarios, just won't do any more explanations, except privately.

[Nemo121]

Thanks for clarifying that JWE. I was REALLY puzzled.

I'm very sorry to hear about those PMs etc. They are utterly unjustified. EA is a one person endeavour but is much more limited in scope than DaBigBabes so even though you have a team working on it I think I'm in a position to recognise the amount of work per person it requires to turn out a mod.

Even if DaBigBabes wasn't for me I would never support the disrespecting of the work that went into it.... Quibble with some choices or data? Sure, but I think that's healthy and a source of continuous improvement...

Anyways I think that maybe you should consider confining yourselves to a section of the forum ( such as the scenario design forum ) so as to avoid the intellectual and ethical black hole the main forum often resembles.... I, personally, withdrew to my AAR ( and pretty much just my AAR ) for a few months there when the crap on the main forum was too vitriolic and that worked well. The people who wanted to fight etc didn't bother following me there so I got the break I wanted. To be fair though I was never Spam-PMed. That's unconscionable behaviour. Back about 10 years ago I got cyber-stalked from a forum into my real life and so I have a healthy understanding of how upsetting it can be.


Anyways, I just wanted to say that while I may still remain unconvinced on the sub-40mm DP modelling for naval guns the only reason I was even bothering looking into it is because I was sufficiently impressed by DaBigBabes that I was ( and still am ) considering using it as the base for the Grand Campaign EA mod ( with your permissions of course ).

So, if I'm thinking of basing off it then, obviously, I think it is good work. For whatever that opinion is worth to you of course.

Anyways, F em all and F their opinions, they have no idea of the work you guys have put in or the difficulty of making what you've made. Criticism is good and helpful but hectoring is unconscionable.

[JWE]

Have no problem at all with people taking Babes and running with it. Have always tried to be as open source as possible. Other people have already contributed much, and expect they will do much more.

Explanations, where needed, can always be had privately. Just want to avoid giving ammo to the more vicious of the ignoramuses out there.

[witpqs]

JWE,

As much as I have come to expect a certain amount of garbage as inevitable in a forum, I am really surprised to hear that you guys have gotten that level of crap in PM's and emails.

It just ain't right.

I wish I could p*** on their sand castles.

[herwin]

This, by the way, is called a "splash power" computation. It generally supports JWE's posted numbers and gives insight into how they should extrapolate to larger calibers. The tripling for proximity fuzes was restricted to 3" or larger caliber at the time as that was the smallest shell that you could install a radar in. The USN was shifting from 40mm quads to 3" dual mounts in its 1945 ships for that reason.

[Pascal_slith]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Pardon, we're trying to have a rational discussion here JWE.

Why are we being penalised while we're having a rational discussion about something which does appear as though it might be an issue? That seems a bit excessive.

If it isn't an issue then that means you must have tested and found it wasn't - which is great. If you haven't tested for the implications though I don't see what is "bizarre" or "crap" about discussing possible implications.


Keep DaBabes exclusive etc by all means with your private mailing lists etc etc etc but locking yourselves in a fort and refusing to engage with people who are trying to have a reasoned discussion isn't the way to promote improvement.


P.s. I've had a look around the forums and I only see this thread and another "official" thread discussing DaBigBabes. JWE are you really contending that this thread is full of bizarre crap sufficient that you're going dark on the mod? I'm just really puzzled what contained in this thread could have possibly offended you so much.

Heck, we don't care if people mess around with it. That's what we did, so why shouldn't everyone else. And it's not the people here that are a problem at all, at all. It's the vicious emails and pms from main forum people that decided us it just isn't worth it.

[ed] Will still support the scenarios, just won't do any more explanations, except privately.

I'm shocked that your getting vicious emails and pms. If I remember there is a forum moderator. Those who send any uncivil emails and pms should be banned from the forum.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: Pascal
I'm shocked that your getting vicious emails and pms. If I remember there is a forum moderator. Those who send any uncivil emails and pms should be banned from the forum.

Yes, we got moderators and they do a good job. The perps, though, have a couple alter egos they use. It's like cockroaches; you spray for them, but they always come back. They just open a new login and keep doing their stuff.

[Nemo121]

Pascal,

Sadly it is pretty much impossible to estimate how low people will stoop when they can hide behind the relative anonimity of the internet.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Sadly it is pretty much impossible to estimate how low people will stoop when they can hide behind the relative anonimity of the internet.

I've often said that the true measure of a person's character is how they behave when they know that no one is watching (alternately that they know there will be absolutely no consequences to them).

[Smeulders]

Too bad, though I am not really an active debater I always enjoy reading what you are doing on the babes scenarios. Thanks for the work you're putting into it.

[JeffroK]

I've just started (made it to 8/12/41) the BigBabes AAA extravaganza as my next GC.

Havent got far enough to comment on AAA effect, I'll have to wait until the 40mm becomes a standard AA weapon.

Funny things to mention, the KB attack on PH sank 1 BB and badly smashed 2 more, other BB only have sys & flot in the 30's, minimal attacks on airbases so on day 2 I had about 75 P40/36's on CAP.
On day 2 KB had moved back towards Midway but attacked Lihue with Kates, my CAP "leaked" to Lihue and took out about 40 Kates, a fair exchange for the old BB I reckon.
Wake hasnt been attacked and no Ampib TF is in sight.

Hopefully this is one of AndyMacs different scripts and could be interesting or JWE has tweaked something.

[Mac Linehan]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Pascal
I'm shocked that your getting vicious emails and pms. If I remember there is a forum moderator. Those who send any uncivil emails and pms should be banned from the forum.

Yes, we got moderators and they do a good job. The perps, though, have a couple alter egos they use. It's like cockroaches; you spray for them, but they always come back. They just open a new login and keep doing their stuff.

JWE -

I too, am totally surprised and stunned that one of my fellow forum members would send PM's or emails that are full of Rubbish. I really thought, after the last go around, that folks of that way of thinking had left and moved on. Babes is a mod, if you don't like it - play stock or something else. It is absolutely unconscionable and unethical to belittle or ridicule another man's work or dream. The fact that these folks hide under false names speak volumes about there lack of character, manners and respect for other opinions. I am very distressed that a few mean spirited individuals could malignantly influence the good work that is being done on this forum, and the Babe's Team work.

It would be difficult to convey to the Babe's Team the sheer enjoyment I have derived from the Babes scenarios. As for the lively discussions on the various Babes threads - I have learned so much more about history in general, and have been given a very real, deep appreciation for all of the small and large details that makes Babes so unique and addictive.

I respectfully request that you add me the list of Babe's enthusiast who are interested in any and all releases and updates.

I will also do all that can be done to support the Babes Team and enthusiasts.

Sincerely Mac

Malice is only another name for mediocrity.
Patrick Kavanagh

What God cannot do, man need not attempt
Mary Baker Eddy

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt

[Sardaukar]

I have found that using the green button will work just fine. [8D] And spam filter in email. [8D] On the other hand, I don't tend to get vicious emails or PMs..at least not many. [:D]

Ok...that sounds funny, "I don't tend to get PMS"..OK..maybe male variant...[:D]

[rockmedic109]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Couple of points rockmedic,

1. The authors don't NEED to take this action. No-one's forcing them. They are choosing to stop discussing their mod and design decisions. It is a choice.

2. It would be rude, indeed, to complain about things for no reason. On the other hand it is the basis of rational discussion and consensual working together to discuss something, ask questions about it, spot possible flaws and then explore them with a view to making it better.

If we reach a situation where someone asking questions about a thing is sufficient reason for others to throw a strop and then run off home with the ball then we're pretty soon going to end up with no rational discussion.


Bottom line: sub-40mm calibre weapons were tweaked. The tweaks weren't applied to larger guns so as not to effect surface combat. PT boats are armed with 40mm and smaller weapons thus logically the tweaks will increase their surface combat lethality. Pointing this out and seeking to see if the solution creates yet more problems is hardly bizarre and unconstructive. I would have thought it was a highly constructive attempt to find and fix a possible problem.

When people found flaws in EA I didn't ban all future discussion about it. I thanked them and fixed the flaw and it made EA better. Are we so sensitive that people can't tolerate even the question about flaws nowadays?

You have valid points Nemo. And I was not singling you out.

I read JWE's post and maybe jumped the gun a little. I still think that arguing with someone over their work is wrong. If one doesn't like it, don't use it. Constructive criticism is one thing, but if the authors want to stop posting information on it then I would have to believe some of the PMs they've been getting has gone a lot further than constructive criticism.

Watching the development of the scenario in the forum has taught me much and I will miss it. Which is probably why I jumped the gun a bit. Grief sucks. Even grief over the house you grew up in or a scenario in a game you are fond of.

[Mac Linehan]

Hi, JWE, Gents -

After a good night's rest, I have bounced back to my usual cheerful self.

I am absolutely certain that Babes will go on, in whatever format, and that the designers and players will continue to have more fun than a human being should be allowed to have!

It doesn't matter how many speed bumps one hits; it's how many times you get back up and keep on chugging.

As Don Belushi said, in his famous quote from "Animal House" - "Did we give up and throw in the towel when the Italians Attacked Pearl Harbor?"

So - that's it for now. Look forward to more good gaming and design work from the Babes Team - they are absolutely Fist Class.

Mac

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: JuanG

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

JuanG are you comparing 4-barreled 2 pounder mounts with the 4-barrelled 40mm mounts though?

Per barrel it might be as good but perhaps the number of barrels per mount might be the difference?

Just want to point out one thing here, even though I'm not going by game data...the 40mm Bofors would always be superior to the 40mm 2Pdr due to muzzle velocity, range and effective/maximum ceiling.

40mm/39 2Pdr Mark VIII = 2300 fps Muzzle Velocity, effective range 1700 yards, AA ceiling 13,300 feet, Rate of fire 96-98 practical (manual) or 115 (automatic).

40mm/56.3 Bofors QF (numerous marks) = 2720 Muzzle Velocity, Effective Range 3500 yards (increased to 7000 yards later in war), AA Ceiling 23,500 feet, Rate of fire 140-160 practical (depends on crew efficiency).

With a barrel to barrel comparison it is easy to see which is more effective, despite the effect of the warhead. Also, the effective range on the Bofors was limited by self-destructing ammunition, hence the ability to increase the range later in the war with a change to the ammunition.

I'm not sure this stuff is modeled in the game, but it is what it is.