Reluctant Admiral Feedback

Please post here for questions and discussion about scenario design, art and sound modding and the game editor for WITP Admiral's Edition.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17760
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Allied balance

Post by John 3rd »

ORIGINAL: bklooste

The best thing to be done for allied balance is resources or slow expansion BUT you dont want these to be 44 killers . Suggestions

- Add a restricted dutch Brigade to Palembang
- Add 2 dutch wildebeast squadrons
- Add a Huricane squadorn
- Move 2 brittish subs , and 2 squadrons ( fighter and light bomber ) to Jolo this should make the PI very interesting
- Suggest mini KB is downgraded to claude's.
The above will make the DEI /Malysia a bit more tricky.

Upgrade the Phillipine division troops in dec 7 41 ( need to pay supplies ) to simmulate better rifles

Add an Ausie militia Brigade to PM from Oz.

Increase production of older aircraft this would prevent the common but Gamey tactic of attritioning the US so he no longer has enough for training and fighting since they simply would have made inferior , diverted eastern europe forces or used mothballed planes for training .

Take 6 44 ariving oil tankers and bring them forward to 42 especially if they arive from other theaters [ More emphasis on Theater]


This is interesting. We have already reflected the Australians moving units into Port Moresby with that TF halfway there on the 7th. It contains the remainder of the Inf Brigade, Base Forces, and a couple of Squadrons plus the ANZAC Cruisers.

Maybe the Aussies have caught on to something...

Anyone got further thoughts for these ideas? I like the idea of shaking things up a bit in a minor manner.
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17760
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Das U-Boat

Post by John 3rd »

ORIGINAL: Terminus

The Monsun group had no particularly "elite" crews.

Certainly not 90-90. What do you think would be reasonable for stats? We could make a baseline and then do a +/- 6% (using the old-fashioned d6 from my AD&D days).
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
DuckofTindalos
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Das U-Boat

Post by DuckofTindalos »

I would actually set their night exp higher than their day exp, since the Germans preferred attacking at night. Baseline about 60 for day, 65 for night.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17760
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Das U-Boat

Post by John 3rd »

That sounds reasonable. Other people's views?
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17760
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Das U-Boat

Post by John 3rd »

Hey Red Lancer! Saw you looking at the Thread. Hope all is well with our RA Aerial Artist.
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
gajdacs zsolt
Posts: 113
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:29 pm

RE: Fast late war Zeros

Post by gajdacs zsolt »

I'm using the A6M4 for a month or two now, it's much better than the A6M3b (which was a disappointment for me compared to the A6M2). The Ho-103 is a great increase in firepower. Unfortunately I cannot comment on their performance against 4E bombers as I have yet to engage them.

(Do note that in this game there is not much activity out in the Pacific yet, so this is more like my personal feelings about the plane than any sort of hard evidence)
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17760
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Fast late war Zeros

Post by John 3rd »

ORIGINAL: Zsolo007

I'm using the A6M4 for a month or two now, it's much better than the A6M3b (which was a disappointment for me compared to the A6M2). The Ho-103 is a great increase in firepower. Unfortunately I cannot comment on their performance against 4E bombers as I have yet to engage them.

(Do note that in this game there is not much activity out in the Pacific yet, so this is more like my personal feelings about the plane than any sort of hard evidence)

So you have gotten into 1943 then? My arrival date is 1/43 for them and I am about to bump my research for those bad boys.

I've managed to do OK with my 3b. They APPEAR to do better versus Allied Fighters then the M2s. What have you seen?
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
gajdacs zsolt
Posts: 113
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:29 pm

RE: Fast late war Zeros

Post by gajdacs zsolt »

No, my game is in '42 september. I got the plane in July. (I'm researching both A6M lines very heavily)

The type did not see too much combat, but they did well against the H81-A3 and early hurricanes (markedly better than the A6M2)
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17760
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Fast late war Zeros

Post by John 3rd »

You must REALLY have rushed your research with the M4! Well done.

Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
gajdacs zsolt
Posts: 113
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:29 pm

RE: Fast late war Zeros

Post by gajdacs zsolt »

It's not that hard to do... The A6M3 comes at 2/42, so if you set research on day 1 you can have a lot of factories repaired by that time, and then you just need to change them along the upgrade line. 8 factories with 30 research points/month should bring up availability twice per month (in my case it's every 12th day).

One can argue that it's gamey, but this is not without a cost. I'm paying a big economical price for this (the A6M line is not the only one I'm researching....)
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: Fast late war Zeros

Post by FatR »

Oh dang. The forum ate my extra-detailed response. So I'll answer relatively concisely:

1)Bklooste's proposals about Allied extras = game lost by Japan by early 1944 at the latest unless the Allied player really doesn't know what is good for him or restricts himself deliberately; or the Japanese player goes for extra-gamey moves to circumvent new and improved Allied defense. Ask Michael how his game against me went, or read my first AAR to see why. Without fast capture of DEI with moderate damage at most, Japan will collapse under Allied assault really fast, because it won't be able to afford both active operations of the Combined Fleet and massive air production, but really needs both to slow Allies down. A brigade in Palemang particularly feels almost like a cheat to me, but other additions can combine to produce a similar effect.

The thought about replacing Nagatos with a pair of older battleships as the cover for Malayan invasion, and placing the rest of the battleline at Home Islands rings true, though. I don't think that British would have reacted to Fusos down there much differently than to Congos, particularly considering their historical lack of knowledge (and/or appreciation of the knowledge they had) about the enemy's capabilities.

2)About giving more planes to Allies in 1942. You know how many first-line fighters Allies will get through reinforcements alone in as early as September of 1942, already? 298. Maybe more if I missed something. Considering that you are probably lucky to exchange fighters 1:1 while assaulting a strategic schwerpunkt, because that's where Lightnings and Hurricanes and massed 4Es will be, unless you have outplayed your opponent, can you afford to lose 300 planes in a month - and, more importantly, about 200 pilots - just to saw through reinforcements alone and actually starting attriting the opposing force? No, not under usual circumstances. Assertion that Japanese can outattrit Allied aviation to the point of achieving greater operational freedom through this is very unlikely to end up true against a competent opponent. At least after the point Allies can field even relatively small number of superior airframes to cement their air defences. Even if they can still outproduce Allies in planes, uneven exchange of pilots is likely to make Japanese airforce collapse sooner rather than later. In fact, I don't remember any AAR where Allies actually ran out of planes in summer of 1942 or later. After checking the numbers, I now regret betting on an attritional air campaign in my current game.

3)About ##1-2 as a whole - giving Allies more extras until really late in the war, in 1944 and later, defeats the purpose of this mod, which is supposed to be easier on Japan than Scen 1, and makes it rather hard to balance (for example, do you realize, that the gun club benefits more from the changes in the current version of the mod, than any other part of the Japanese Navy, comparative to the enemy's capabilities?). I'm against this. The Allies side already got bonuses that allows it to overcome some of its worst weaknesses and give some options at the beginning. The most I can accept is Allies retaining three above-mentioned patrol squadrons. And then again, with now-reduced service rating on patrol planes (the change I still see as pointless, considering I never had problems with ops losses), this might be rather excessive.

And do note, that I already proposed to improve Warhawks, as a compensation to Allies for nerfing Hurricanes. This is quite beneficial to them overall, as Warhawk versions comprise about a much greater part of their total reinforcements. Together with reduction in IJN pilot experience, this already moderates main factors that can make early air war very onesided and create false perception that Allies cannot contest the air early in the war.
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: Das U-Boat

Post by FatR »

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

That sounds reasonable. Other people's views?
Sounds like a good baseline to me.
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
User avatar
RedLancer
Posts: 4338
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:09 am
Location: UK

RE: Das U-Boat

Post by RedLancer »

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Hey Red Lancer! Saw you looking at the Thread. Hope all is well with our RA Aerial Artist.

Just keeping up to speed whilst my latest turn of WITE is running. Let me know if you need anything doing.
John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev
darbycmcd
Posts: 405
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:47 am

RE: Das U-Boat

Post by darbycmcd »

Gadjacs, its totally gamey!!!! hahhahaha, but it's ok. just remember our 6 month rule.......
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9902
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: Das U-Boat

Post by ny59giants »

Besides the numbers of fighters the Allies get as reinforcement that FatR mentioned, there are the extras that come in when the 5 ABDA fighter units on Australia are withdrawn in mid-March 42. That is 125 P-40E that go into the pool which greatly helps. I have had a few B-17Es withdrawn that have been added to my pool.
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
DuckofTindalos
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Fast late war Zeros

Post by DuckofTindalos »

I'd like to know the rationale for the British establishing an air and submarine base on Jolo, when US subs and air are much closer.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
bklooste
Posts: 1104
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:47 am

RE: Das U-Boat

Post by bklooste »

Did any of the uboats ? Another question is compared to british , US and Japanese in late 1941 how would you rate their experience?

ORIGINAL: Terminus

The Monsun group had no particularly "elite" crews.
Underdog Fanboy
bklooste
Posts: 1104
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:47 am

RE: Fast late war Zeros

Post by bklooste »

1. That why if you want to hinder Japan early you need things that dont benefit the allies in 44. The brigade in Palembang i would not see as a cheat its more to balance the historical knowledge the Japanese player has.. re the Fuso i kind of agree on the brit response but i dont see the Japanese breaking up their battle line pre PH for any reason. They would just have baby KB with cruiser support.

2. I said give them more obsolete planes .. ie much worse than the warhawk or even unarmed trainers.
There are a few stock AAR but the allies do have the freedom eg train and commit durring an offensive. Many AARs i have seen have the Japanese force an attrition on the allies but then consolidate. Agree to the allies elite forces at key points and this is very historical in terms of where the B17s were used. Also note in the Ausies vs Amis AAR what happens when there is low attrition .. ie Japanese planes facing significantly larger quanitties of experienced allied pilots in great air craft where the allied player chooses from mid 42..

3. Not so keen on the warhawks as it is a change that benefits the Allies in the long term ( esp higher pilot survivability due to better results) , prefer things like restricted brigades , dutch troops etc . I dont think an early DEI is needed but i dont mind if the Japanese are punished if they rush it. It just makes the game more interesting. An early Palembang while SIngapore hasnt been taken is IMHO very gamey ( though i am one of the few who actually support a Mersing landing due to continuing on the same night and landing there at dawn - no idea how to supply a major landing there though !)

Do you regret not getting the A6M4 , as its a specific counter vs B17s/B25 ?

Curious , in what way do the gun club benefit ? Is it the Aganos ?

Ben
ORIGINAL: FatR

Oh dang. The forum ate my extra-detailed response. So I'll answer relatively concisely:

1)Bklooste's proposals about Allied extras = game lost by Japan by early 1944 at the latest unless the Allied player really doesn't know what is good for him or restricts himself deliberately; or the Japanese player goes for extra-gamey moves to circumvent new and improved Allied defense. Ask Michael how his game against me went, or read my first AAR to see why. Without fast capture of DEI with moderate damage at most, Japan will collapse under Allied assault really fast, because it won't be able to afford both active operations of the Combined Fleet and massive air production, but really needs both to slow Allies down. A brigade in Palemang particularly feels almost like a cheat to me, but other additions can combine to produce a similar effect.

The thought about replacing Nagatos with a pair of older battleships as the cover for Malayan invasion, and placing the rest of the battleline at Home Islands rings true, though. I don't think that British would have reacted to Fusos down there much differently than to Congos, particularly considering their historical lack of knowledge (and/or appreciation of the knowledge they had) about the enemy's capabilities.

2)About giving more planes to Allies in 1942. You know how many first-line fighters Allies will get through reinforcements alone in as early as September of 1942, already? 298. Maybe more if I missed something. Considering that you are probably lucky to exchange fighters 1:1 while assaulting a strategic schwerpunkt, because that's where Lightnings and Hurricanes and massed 4Es will be, unless you have outplayed your opponent, can you afford to lose 300 planes in a month - and, more importantly, about 200 pilots - just to saw through reinforcements alone and actually starting attriting the opposing force? No, not under usual circumstances. Assertion that Japanese can outattrit Allied aviation to the point of achieving greater operational freedom through this is very unlikely to end up true against a competent opponent. At least after the point Allies can field even relatively small number of superior airframes to cement their air defences. Even if they can still outproduce Allies in planes, uneven exchange of pilots is likely to make Japanese airforce collapse sooner rather than later. In fact, I don't remember any AAR where Allies actually ran out of planes in summer of 1942 or later. After checking the numbers, I now regret betting on an attritional air campaign in my current game.

3)About ##1-2 as a whole - giving Allies more extras until really late in the war, in 1944 and later, defeats the purpose of this mod, which is supposed to be easier on Japan than Scen 1, and makes it rather hard to balance (for example, do you realize, that the gun club benefits more from the changes in the current version of the mod, than any other part of the Japanese Navy, comparative to the enemy's capabilities?). I'm against this. The Allies side already got bonuses that allows it to overcome some of its worst weaknesses and give some options at the beginning. The most I can accept is Allies retaining three above-mentioned patrol squadrons. And then again, with now-reduced service rating on patrol planes (the change I still see as pointless, considering I never had problems with ops losses), this might be rather excessive.

And do note, that I already proposed to improve Warhawks, as a compensation to Allies for nerfing Hurricanes. This is quite beneficial to them overall, as Warhawk versions comprise about a much greater part of their total reinforcements. Together with reduction in IJN pilot experience, this already moderates main factors that can make early air war very onesided and create false perception that Allies cannot contest the air early in the war.
Underdog Fanboy
bklooste
Posts: 1104
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:47 am

RE: Fast late war Zeros

Post by bklooste »

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I'd like to know the rationale for the British establishing an air and submarine base on Jolo, when US subs and air are much closer.

Yes US would be more logical but only for air.

Underdog Fanboy
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17760
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Fast late war Zeros

Post by John 3rd »

A couple of us have written on how much more useful the Agano's are.

I'm not of the same opinion regarding the Battleline. Whole premise of this Mod is Yamamoto suppressing the 'Gun Club' enough to change building policy, force composition, aerial research, and initial deployment. Taking out the two oldest Japanese BB for Invasion Force protection would make sense since they were 'obsolescent' to the more 'Air Minded.'

I've yet to get the A6M4 and I WANT them! Looking forward to it.

Stanislav is researching the U-Boat Captains and checking the boat histories. This will help in establishing their experience. Think we can give high ratings to two of the AMCs and decent ones to the others...
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design and Modding”