Babes Update Question (Closed)

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

US87891
Posts: 422
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:31 pm

Babes Update Question (Closed)

Post by US87891 »

I wonder something. There is a extension to the extended map that we use for our Guadalcanal and operation SF scenarios and everything else too by default. It breaks out the Shortlands from Bougainville proper and moves the Shortlands base to a new place, and renames the old Shortlands to Buin. Shortlands is mostly port 2(3) and little air 1(0) while Buin is mostly air 1(3) and little port 1(0) and they belong to different commands.

I wonder if people would want the extended-extended map included in the next update? It looks like this..


Image
Attachments
Solomons.jpg
Solomons.jpg (35.79 KiB) Viewed 408 times
Buck Beach
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Upland,CA,USA

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by Buck Beach »

I vote yes.

Buck
DanielAnsell
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 9:43 am
Location: United States

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by DanielAnsell »

Seconded.
Mac Linehan
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 9:08 pm
Location: Denver Colorado

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by Mac Linehan »

Is the Pope Catholic?

Is a four pound Robin fat?

Would I take whatever the Babes Team is willing to share?

I am with Buck and Carny - Yes! (Please)

The map sample is awesome!

Babes Forever...

Mac
LAV-25 2147
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by witpqs »

Sure - to clarify, if I understand correctly that would be an updated extended map that pertains to the full campaign as well, yes?
User avatar
mikkey
Posts: 3173
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 1:04 pm
Location: Slovakia

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by mikkey »

+1 for extended-extended Guadalcanal map
User avatar
MateDow
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2002 12:00 am

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by MateDow »

I am gathering that, because the question is being asked, there are disadvantages to this modification. What are those?

Personally, I like the added detail and think that it is good.
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1324
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by Kitakami »

I would definitely love it. It is details like those that make DaBabes what it is :)
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
treespider
Posts: 5781
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:34 am
Location: Edgewater, MD

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by treespider »

ORIGINAL: MateDow

I am gathering that, because the question is being asked, there are disadvantages to this modification. What are those?

Personally, I like the added detail and think that it is good.


Keep in mind this would only apply to newly started games...it cannot be applied to a game in progress.
Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910
User avatar
SuluSea
Posts: 2414
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 2:13 pm

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by SuluSea »

Definately a yes here!!
"There’s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.” ~ Erwin Lutzer
User avatar
Puhis
Posts: 1741
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:14 pm
Location: Finland

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by Puhis »

It looks good, but I have a small doubt. Shortlands is now one hex closer to Guadalcanal. Does it affect air war?
GaryChildress
Posts: 6933
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: The Divided Nations of Earth

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by GaryChildress »

ORIGINAL: Puhis

It looks good, but I have a small doubt. Shortlands is now one hex closer to Guadalcanal. Does it affect air war?

It looks like it would bring Lunga within 7 hexes instead of 8 hexes of the Shortlands. Depending if the Japanese player were to develop an airfield on Shortlands capable of operating fighters, then Lunga just barely comes within the normal radius of the A6M2 (7 hexes). It maybe won't have too much effect on Allied fighters because the normal radius of most versions of the Wildcat and P-40 still fall short of 7 hexes.
US87891
Posts: 422
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:31 pm

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by US87891 »

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: MateDow

I am gathering that, because the question is being asked, there are disadvantages to this modification. What are those?

Personally, I like the added detail and think that it is good.


Keep in mind this would only apply to newly started games...it cannot be applied to a game in progress.
Yes. What treespider said. Even when started new, the disadvantage is full AI like BabesLite won’t recognize the new Shortlands base. The new Buin is in the old Shortlands slot, and AI will recognize Buin. All the big ticket troop and plane items were at Buin in any case. It is a minor issue but still an issue.

It won't show up on Tracker either.
US87891
Posts: 422
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:31 pm

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by US87891 »

ORIGINAL: Puhis

It looks good, but I have a small doubt. Shortlands is now one hex closer to Guadalcanal. Does it affect air war?
I hope not. If I read the map right, Henderson International is at Lat -9.430S : Long 160.0519.
HF to Ballale (Lat -6.986S : Lon 155.8984) is 531.8 km (287.2 nm)
HF to Poporang (Lat -7.097S : Lon 155.8757) is 527.7 km (284.9 nm)
HF to Buin (Kahili/Kara) (Lat -6.747S : Lon 155.6883) is 564.4 km (304.8 nm)
On the old map Buin/Shortlands to Lunga is 8 hexes (320 nm)
New map Buin to Lunga is still 8 hexes but new Shortlands to Lunga is 7 hexes (280 nm)

Fiddled with the new Shortlands base to make it lousy for AFs. All that was there was the seaplane base at Shortland Harbor on Poporang Is and eventually a 1500’ strip on Ballale Is. Buin base had the AFs (Kahili and Kara). Shortlands starts at AF 1(0) Buin starts at AF 1(3) and both are 80% damaged. It's like somebody cut the grass, but they need work to get them going.
The main AFs at Lunga and Buin are the same distance apart. The only benefit is to Petes and Mavis's [;)]
User avatar
Herrbear
Posts: 883
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 9:17 pm
Location: Glendora, CA

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by Herrbear »

Yes
User avatar
Puhis
Posts: 1741
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:14 pm
Location: Finland

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by Puhis »

ORIGINAL: US87891

ORIGINAL: Puhis

It looks good, but I have a small doubt. Shortlands is now one hex closer to Guadalcanal. Does it affect air war?
I hope not. If I read the map right, Henderson International is at Lat -9.430S : Long 160.0519.
HF to Ballale (Lat -6.986S : Lon 155.8984) is 531.8 km (287.2 nm)
HF to Poporang (Lat -7.097S : Lon 155.8757) is 527.7 km (284.9 nm)
HF to Buin (Kahili/Kara) (Lat -6.747S : Lon 155.6883) is 564.4 km (304.8 nm)
On the old map Buin/Shortlands to Lunga is 8 hexes (320 nm)
New map Buin to Lunga is still 8 hexes but new Shortlands to Lunga is 7 hexes (280 nm)

Fiddled with the new Shortlands base to make it lousy for AFs. All that was there was the seaplane base at Shortland Harbor on Poporang Is and eventually a 1500’ strip on Ballale Is. Buin base had the AFs (Kahili and Kara). Shortlands starts at AF 1(0) Buin starts at AF 1(3) and both are 80% damaged. It's like somebody cut the grass, but they need work to get them going.
The main AFs at Lunga and Buin are the same distance apart. The only benefit is to Petes and Mavis's [;)]

7 hexes is normal range of Dauntless DBs. Did Dauntless had the range to bomb Shortlands' naval base?
US87891
Posts: 422
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:31 pm

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by US87891 »

ORIGINAL: Puhis

ORIGINAL: US87891

ORIGINAL: Puhis

It looks good, but I have a small doubt. Shortlands is now one hex closer to Guadalcanal. Does it affect air war?
I hope not. If I read the map right, Henderson International is at Lat -9.430S : Long 160.0519.
HF to Ballale (Lat -6.986S : Lon 155.8984) is 531.8 km (287.2 nm)
HF to Poporang (Lat -7.097S : Lon 155.8757) is 527.7 km (284.9 nm)
HF to Buin (Kahili/Kara) (Lat -6.747S : Lon 155.6883) is 564.4 km (304.8 nm)
On the old map Buin/Shortlands to Lunga is 8 hexes (320 nm)
New map Buin to Lunga is still 8 hexes but new Shortlands to Lunga is 7 hexes (280 nm)

Fiddled with the new Shortlands base to make it lousy for AFs. All that was there was the seaplane base at Shortland Harbor on Poporang Is and eventually a 1500’ strip on Ballale Is. Buin base had the AFs (Kahili and Kara). Shortlands starts at AF 1(0) Buin starts at AF 1(3) and both are 80% damaged. It's like somebody cut the grass, but they need work to get them going.
The main AFs at Lunga and Buin are the same distance apart. The only benefit is to Petes and Mavis's [;)]

7 hexes is normal range of Dauntless DBs. Did Dauntless had the range to bomb Shortlands' naval base?
I honestly don't know but Henderson International is on the site of Henderson Field and the Lat/Lon of Poporang is smack in the middle of Shortland Harbor. So if a Dauntless can go 280 nm, it seems logical it can go 285 nm, yes? There wasn't much of a naval bse there but it did have flak. Just don't know.

Isn't normal range of SBD 9?
User avatar
oldman45
Posts: 2325
Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 4:15 am
Location: Jacksonville Fl

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by oldman45 »

yes for me
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: US87891

It won't show up on Tracker either.
It should show up on Tracker just fine. Simple to add the base to a regions-definition file for Tacker too.

Tracker just reads in what is in the save file. Not sure if it reads the scenario file the first time but I think it does not. The point is that Tracker does not contain its own list of bases, if you add them it will pick them up.

All the additional bases that have already been added in Babes came up on Tracker just fine without any Tracker updates (getting the regions updated is optional so won't stop Tracker from working).
US87891
Posts: 422
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:31 pm

RE: Babes Update Question

Post by US87891 »

ORIGINAL: witpqs
ORIGINAL: US87891

It won't show up on Tracker either.
It should show up on Tracker just fine. Simple to add the base to a regions-definition file for Tacker too.

Tracker just reads in what is in the save file. Not sure if it reads the scenario file the first time but I think it does not. The point is that Tracker does not contain its own list of bases, if you add them it will pick them up.

All the additional bases that have already been added in Babes came up on Tracker just fine without any Tracker updates (getting the regions updated is optional so won't stop Tracker from working).
Thank you. That's good to know. We don't use Tracker much so don't know a lot about it. Sorry Tracker people [:'(]

If Mr Catbus is satisfied, then the new Solomons go in as new panel 024. A good time to do it since JWE did a extensive update on size and terrain for all the islands in the Pacific and it makes sense to lump everything together.

I recall him spending time with a Navy oceanographer last year. Here's John's changelog from October. It is a .doc file but remaned .txt to post. Take it but rename to .doc before you open it. Opening as .txt will not work.

Regards, Matt

Attachments
Changelog10_22.txt
(14.39 KiB) Downloaded 42 times
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design and Modding”