The Sun In My Eyes - EOS from the Allied Perspective

[viberpol]

ORIGINAL: goodboyladdie

As you can see China is a bit of a jumble...

I must say the graphics on RHS-EOS is very very nice... [&o]
Are there any map "uniforms" of this kind available for CHS?

[Elladan]

Maybe there should be a mod of the RHS mod to finally have a great and playable scenario to play?
As for ship production/durability problems in EOS I can confirm that. My opponent just found that few days ago and we are on hold after first restart due to allied a/c production problem. Frustrating [8|] Another thing I have found unpleasant as an Allied player is Lily/Sally/Helen bombload. With so many small bombs I have to rate their effectiveness on par with my B-17s/B24s. Not good.

[goodboyladdie]

Hi Elladan

How bad is the problem? Is it just TKs that are affected? What impact does the requirement for more MS pointsfor TKs have on other vessels?

Very best regards

Carl

[viberpol]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Before AE was announced, I was working on getting Brian to put his mod on this map. It is very nice "eye candy." [&o]

I agree.
It would be great to have a playable scenario (like Brian's) on this map before AE is released and become fully playable (with that many changes I expect many bugs in AE even if Matrix would really be ready in summer to sell it).

[goodboyladdie]

I have opened this AAR to my opponent (1EyedJacks) from page 4 until we decide how to proceed, so please do not be alarmed if you see him lurking. I wanted him to be able to get into the discussion and be able to read all the valid points and advice coming in. Many thanks for joining in.

[Elladan]

It's mostly TKs, AOs and subs to some extent. AS, AR and such are probably also affected but it's not a big issue IMHO. TKs and AOs cost 16 times as much as same size AK on the overall, so they are too big burden on Japanese merchant shipyards and probably have to be all halted to have a chance to build anything. So basically - no TKs and AOs produced for Japan for the entire game. As my opponent calculated normal production on day 1 costed him some 10000 merchant points, around 10 times as much as his shipyards produce. He decided he's not going to play with such an issue.

[witpqs]

As I've only played as Allies against the AI, I can only comment on the Allied side of the TK/AO durability issue. Basically, large TK's (and AO's) are rated (in durability) like or higher than battleships. At first I was concerned about them being too hard to sink, but that turned out to be unfounded - they seem to sink in an appropriate way (meaning from the right amount of damage, not that they sink up in the air instead of to the bottom or anything [:D]). However, repairs to them do take forever unless you put them in a BIG shipyard like New Orleans. Sid feels that is appropriate, I am less than convinced, but it's not a very big deal (IMO).

As Allies don't build ships, they just arrive, that's it for ramifications of the TK/AO durability issue on the Allied side. The same effects should be seen on the Japanese side, plus the production issues.

I've already commented (see above) on the P-38 maneuver ratings problem. I think it's serious. You can always edit the scenario files yourself by mutual agreement if you want to make changes to the P-38 models.

[Elladan]

Witpqs: Could you post your proposed corrected stats for P-38?
 
GBL: TK/AO issue is not a big problem apart of production part which affect only Japanese. For them it basically means they do not get any new TK/AOs.
 
Another thing I remember is victory points - they are meaningless in RHS, but I'm sure you have all noticed that a long time ago.

[witpqs]

Okay. I had written recommendations in that old thread based on the test document from WWII. The forum search always fails for me and I don't remember where to find that document (it's on a web site). So, I just looked in the database and reconstructed some recommendations. I do not have the latest RHS version, but I don't think these values have changed in a while anyway. Note that the P-38L model had powered flight surfaces - new at the time. They gave it a big boost in responsiveness. I've included some other fighters (which includes some of the ones it was tested against) for comparison.

Current values:
P-38G 16
P-38J 17
P-38L 21

P-47D 32
P-47N 37

P-51A 26
P-51B 34
P-51D 36

P-40B 28
P-40E 26
P-40N 30

Proposed values:
P-38G 28
P-38J 29
P-38L 32

These are just my estimates based on that comparative test data and the narrative in the report. Somebody might have better ideas.

[Elladan]

Thanks witpqs

[Mistmatz]

Has the P38 stuff been discussed with el cid? Is the manouverability low on purpose in RHS or is it just an oversight?

[witpqs]

Discussed ad naseum months ago. It's low on purpose because he used a formula. Thing is the formula doesn't work for the P-38. See my remarks about the bumble bee in an earlier post in this thread.

[mlees]

In RHS CVO v5 I saw no repair yards in Aden. You might want to check your situation out. You'll have to do your repairs in Karachi or Bombay.

[1EyedJacks]

Ugh! I wish I had noticed a while back... This kinda sucks...



The damned AOs and Tankers are expensive... Think of all the CVs I could have made as Japan. [:D][:D]

I'll never be able to balance this kind of production. Carl, lemme think on this for a while. 4 right now I'd like to stop and see what El Cid is planning on for a fix. We've restarted 3 time now... Maybe this is too cutting edge and we should try a different mod?

[goodboyladdie]

Hi Mike

I completely agree with your decision. I cannot imagine why Cid did not feel that players did not appreciate their tankers enough and made them so expensive. If this dead, please feel free to read the rest of the AAR to see what I could see.

How about Gary's mod? We both like "what ifs?" and it is based on the relatively stable CHS 2d. I have a CHS game going with Scout1 (late July 1942) and I have no complaints. I am happy to take it all the way to the finish even when AE comes out (although it might have to spend a little time on the backburner around then for a reason you are aware of).

Very best regards

Carl

[1EyedJacks]

ORIGINAL: goodboyladdie

Hi Mike

I completely agree with your decision. I cannot imagine why Cid did not feel that players did not appreciate their tankers enough and made them so expensive. If this dead, please feel free to read the rest of the AAR to see what I could see.

How about Gary's mod? We both like "what ifs?" and it is based on the relatively stable CHS 2d. I have a CHS game going with Scout1 (late July 1942) and I have no complaints. I am happy to take it all the way to the finish even when AE comes out (although it might have to spend a little time on the backburner around then for a reason you are aware of).

Very best regards

Carl

Well, a new version of RHS is coming out if I read the threads right in Scenario Design... What's sad is that I really wanna play with the Mikes and Junker DBs...

[goodboyladdie]

If you want to do it mate, I'm in. What is being fixed in the new version?

[1EyedJacks]

It looks like the cost for production of TKs and AOs will be addressed. I tossed in a new thread looking for opinions from other RHS players on the accuracy of AAA. My hope is that if other playes feel the AAA is too severe that El Cid might be willing to find a way to reduce it...

[goodboyladdie]

I just weighed in on that thread. If enough people echo our sentiments perhaps some of it will be accepted?

[1EyedJacks]

That's my hope. Of course, it could be our opinion that is off and everyone else that thinks the AAA is spot on... [:)]