B-Mod Update

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: Anachro

I'm not sure what everyone here is angry about or what the non-troversy is, but Alfred and Timtom raise a good point regarding the design of the game as a whole. As Alfred mentions, Timtom states that there are balance issues with adding in additional transport units such as the early L2D2. I don't think they overlooked the problem so much as made a game design decision on it; it isn't as simple as adding in a plane because it was produced in a specific period. The relevant text from the posts Alfred referenced:

We've gone back and forth on whether to explicitly include some of the command transports more than a few times. As the Air Team OOB-wallah, my main concern is that doing would be opening the lid on a industrial-sized can o' worms not least considering the number of Allied transports found in echelon or similar - fx the entire US Air Transport Command in the Pacific is omitted and the argument for doing so is probably weaker than that for the IJN transports.

So the real question for me, I guess, is that if you are going to come down on one side of the issue that the developer team struggled with (i.e. whether to explicitly include some of the command transports), how will you compensate for what they saw as the repercussions of doing so? As timtom states, doing such would probably further require fixing the Allied transport OOB, which he believes is an "industrial-sized can o' worms" with the number of Allied transports/capabilities also omitted from the in-game OOB. So my question for BigB and LST is if they considered this in deciding to introduce these planes.

You've hit the nail on the head - in bold above - adding in additional transport units.
No additional transport units have been added.
What has been added is offering the Japanese player the chance to spend resources on upgrading their transport aircraft - a real life decision that they were free to make.
If the Japanese decides to do so - you will note that not a single transport unit is added to the OOB. They will have the exact same number of squadrons available with the exact same maximum number of air transport aircraft available. There are no 'new units', merely a hardware upgrade...one that they will have to pay fore incidentally.
This is precisely the type of economic decision and management that is historical and realistic.
Furthermore, this does NOT require a re-balance on the Allied side of air transport... say the way bringing futuristic high performance fighter aircraft drastically effects the game - rendering allied fighters that were dominate - into sub-par cannon fodder, with no way to respond to a dramatically changed environment.... such as often happens to the US Navy's F6F Hellcat in this game for example.

B

[Anachro]

Right, I get where you are coming from on this and understand the reasoning behind your choices. It doesn't add additional units and can be seen as an economic decision that the Japanese player has to make, nonetheless it does represent a design issue in that I'm not sure if what a Japanese player has to "pay" through the in-game production/economic system to ramp up production is enough of a balance for the increased ahistoric transport capacity that the plane would provide early on. That is to say, if the player can get these planes early and use them in ways they weren't used until '44, perhaps the Allied player should also have additional transport capacity that is also explicitly not modeled in-game. That is a key issue for me here (though most likely the impact on the game is pretty minimal so not a big worry).

Keep in mind, I'm not attacking the decision to add or not add the plane earlier in game. It's an interesting question. I, for one, was not aware of the R&D implementation as modeled by timtom until this thread, but there is another question which I don't have the historical data to answer (I am well aware you have researched these issues far better than me).

A quick look at the production figures leaves me with an estimate that one L2D2 or its variants was produced every four days from 1940-45, but was manufactured by two separate companies. The first 71 were manufactured by Nakajima, but they ended production in '42 and shifted to other combat plane production. Following this, the Showa company then started producing the rest of these planes and took awhile to ramp up. My question is when did this take place and how long until the full production was achieved. Plane production/manufacturing doesn't instantly shift from one company to another (and this plane seems more laborious to produce than, say, a zero) and there is a learning process to doing so that might be modeled in-game by the R&D/Production system. Depending on this, it might affect which date you decide to set as the introductory date for the L2D2. Like I said, I don't know the answer here, so interested in what you think.

EDIT
i.e. Maybe start with 71 Nakajima L2D2s in the pools and then model factory introduction according to the Showa production history.

[Big B]

What I did was decide not to have any in the pool, and start production (in Tokyo I believe) at One aircraft.
This matches the historical number produced there that month (12/41).
This gets rid of R&D (as it should), but also requires Japan to invest resources for expansion should they decide to go with the L2D2.

[Akos Gergely]

Dear Big B!

Any chance for a '42 May version of this scenario. I remember you used to have (tm.asp?m=2753637) one, but I wonder if there is a more up-to-date version available?

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: Akos Gergely

Dear Big B!

Any chance for a '42 May version of this scenario. I remember you used to have (tm.asp?m=2753637) one, but I wonder if there is a more up-to-date version available?

Thanks, I may work on one for the future [;)]

B

[Anachro]

@BigB Since, we are going down this route, what do you currently have set as the introduction date for the K5Y1 Willow? From what I can tell, DBB and stock have the introduction date as 5/45 but the airplane was in service in 1934,used primarily for flight training, and was produced throughout the war. No doubt, the 5/45 introduction date here reflects the fact that they were first used by operational units in-game (kamikaze units) in 1945. Probably low priority for a lot of players, but it's nonetheless there.

EDIT

Another one I found: K11W1 Shiragiku is listed in-game as being introduced in 2/45, but according to *ahem* Wikipedia it was produced from 1942-1945 and introduced in 1943. You have better sources that can probably prove or disprove this. I also don't know when it switched from prototyping to actual production.

EDIT #2

The H8K1 Emily also appears to have gone into production before its listed date of 7/42, though its unclear to me when actual production and not prototyping was done. Frankly, based on the number produced, they might have all been prototypes, which makes it very unclear to me then when the H8K1 should be introduced.

Production: A total of 167 H8Ks were built by Kawanishi Kokuki K.K. in their Naruo and Konan plants as follows:
1 H8K1 prototype (Dec 1940)
2 H8K1 pre-production aircraft (1941)
14 H8K1 production aircraft (1941-42)
112 H8K2 production aircraft (1943-45)
2 H8K3 prototypes (1944)
(2) H8K4 prototypes modified from H8K3 frames (1945)
36 H8K2-L production aircraft (1943-45)

Some sources say production started in mid-to-late 1941 whereas others say this was still prototyping. Again, judgement calls here and you have better data to confirm.

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: Anachro

@BigB Since, we are going down this route, what do you currently have set as the introduction date for the K5Y1 Willow? From what I can tell, DBB and stock have the introduction date as 5/45 but the airplane was in service in 1934,used primarily for flight training, and was produced throughout the war. No doubt, the 5/45 introduction date here reflects the fact that they were first used by operational units in-game (kamikaze units) in 1945. Probably low priority for a lot of players, but it's nonetheless there.

EDIT

Another one I found: K11W1 Shiragiku is listed in-game as being introduced in 2/45, but according to *ahem* Wikipedia it was produced from 1942-1945 and introduced in 1943. You have better sources that can probably prove or disprove this. I also don't know when it switched from prototyping to actual production.

EDIT #2

The H8K1 Emily also appears to have gone into production before its listed date of 7/42, though its unclear to me when actual production and not prototyping was done. Frankly, based on the number produced, they might have all been prototypes, which makes it very unclear to me then when the H8K1 should be introduced.

Production: A total of 167 H8Ks were built by Kawanishi Kokuki K.K. in their Naruo and Konan plants as follows:
1 H8K1 prototype (Dec 1940)
2 H8K1 pre-production aircraft (1941)
14 H8K1 production aircraft (1941-42)
112 H8K2 production aircraft (1943-45)
2 H8K3 prototypes (1944)
(2) H8K4 prototypes modified from H8K3 frames (1945)
36 H8K2-L production aircraft (1943-45)

Some sources say production started in mid-to-late 1941 whereas others say this was still prototyping. Again, judgement calls here and you have better data to confirm.

This is a case where I think it would be inappropriate to introduce the K5Y1 Willow into the game earlier than 5/1945, I'll explain;
My records indicate there were 556 K5Y1 Willow's produced 1931-1945. All 556 were produced prior to 1941, so in effect - it didn't remain in production.
Furthermore it was a trainer throughout the war, but the game introduces it as a level bomber for kamikaze use in 1945. It's claim to fame seems to be sinking the destroyer USS Callaghan on July 29, 1945, the last US warship lost to kamikaze attack during the war.

So the game correctly limits it's use and time frame as a combat aircraft.
To introduce it as a trainer would upset the balance of the game - you would have to introduce the thousands of allied trainers, to put it in proper perspective.

So in short, I won't be touching the K5Y1 Willow, and probably not the others listed.

[Big B]

I see one more update coming, before looking into some kind of fun What-If scenario.

For reasons unknown, the basic tool of the trade for all US Army and USMC rifle companies has been left out of the standard OOB.
Namely - the 60mm M2 Mortar, a platoon of which was inherent to every rifle company.

Other nations had 45mm/50mm mortars in a similar role, but they are factored into the rifle squad FP already.
On the other hand, the 60mm M2 was quite a different weapon, who's presence is not in the game (as a portion of squad FP it is not represented as are the other grenade launcher/light mortars for Japan/British Empire, etc).

In a matter of weeks or days I will do the math and update the scenario database, that should prove to be the final change for a stock based scenario... then I will look into a What-If.

B

[Falken]

Hi BigB,

Can you please check the following for your next BMOD Update.

In a game with Wineguy, we are at Feb 15 1942. I just received the Yokohama Ku T-1 Det H8K1 Emily at Yokohama; however, it is slated to be available only in July 1942, but we are currently in February 1942.

I will attach a picture for your analysis

If Wineguy is reading this, I will ensure that this group stays on Standby at Yokohama until July 1942.

Dave...

[LargeSlowTarget]

I think this is WAD.

Two prototype / pre-production Emilies have been used in "Operation K" a.k.a. the second bombing of Pearl Harbor in March 1942.

I think the Yokohama Ku T-1 Det represents these two aircraft.

The regular production run of the Emily started later in the year.

[Big B]

Hi, LargeSlowTarget is correct.

I think this is WAD.

Two prototype / pre-production Emilies have been used in "Operation K" a.k.a. the second bombing of Pearl Harbor in March 1942.

I think the Yokohama Ku T-1 Det represents these two aircraft.

The regular production run of the Emily started later in the year.

Below is a screen print of stock scenario 1, the parent unit comes with Mavis's, but this detachment arrives as you see.

[sanderz]

Hi Brian

A quick question on the changes made to Heavy Bomber turret accuracy. I have been looking at both yours and LSTs mods and it seems you have taken very different views here e.g. (if i have read things correctly) you have increased accuracy (for powered turrets) whereas LST has halved accuracy all round.

From LSTs documentation...

The accuracy of the .50cal machine-guns on medium and heavy bombers has been halved (new device) – yes, JFB fanboyism alert! But the number of fighters, esp. night-fighters downed by bombers just does not feel right – those bombers are self-escorting as well as the best sweepers the Allies have! My theory for the accuracy change is that - since the number of weapons and fire pulses has not changed - there will be the same amount of “driven away by defensive fire” messages, but less kills than before. The front-facing machine-guns of designated attack bombers remain at original accuracy.

Whilst you can't argue with the logic for your changes the points that LST makes (basically about Heavy Bombers being a bit overpowered), does seem to hold some weight. So, i just wondered what your views on these differences are, and LST if you see this do you know how your changes worked out in practice in actual games, e.g. less kills and more driven offs?

Many thanks

[Falken]

Thanks for the replies back on the Mavis/Emily issue, and helping to clarify the Yokohama Ku T-1 Det problem that I thought existed.

Safe to say, ignore my request but i'm glad that we were able to resolve this one quickly and without incident.

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Hi Brian

A quick question on the changes made to Heavy Bomber turret accuracy. I have been looking at both yours and LSTs mods and it seems you have taken very different views here e.g. (if i have read things correctly) you have increased accuracy (for powered turrets) whereas LST has halved accuracy all round.

From LSTs documentation...

The accuracy of the .50cal machine-guns on medium and heavy bombers has been halved (new device) – yes, JFB fanboyism alert! But the number of fighters, esp. night-fighters downed by bombers just does not feel right – those bombers are self-escorting as well as the best sweepers the Allies have! My theory for the accuracy change is that - since the number of weapons and fire pulses has not changed - there will be the same amount of “driven away by defensive fire” messages, but less kills than before. The front-facing machine-guns of designated attack bombers remain at original accuracy.

Whilst you can't argue with the logic for your changes the points that LST makes (basically about Heavy Bombers being a bit overpowered), does seem to hold some weight. So, i just wondered what your views on these differences are, and LST if you see this do you know how your changes worked out in practice in actual games, e.g. less kills and more driven offs?

Many thanks

There has been no 'massacre' of Japanese fighters due to the power turret accuracy boost, they do score more hits though.

The principal to keep in mind is - not only is the hardware far better, US Heavy Bombers operated tactically different than other nations - using the bomber box formation. This was designed to let every gun on every bomber share a concentrated field of fire all around, and the aircraft purposely flew tight formations - never splitting up as other air forces did.
It was very effective.

[LargeSlowTarget]

More effective than other air forces did - but still ineffective enough that unescorted heavy bomber raids suffered up to 16% of planes destroyed over enemy territory plus up to 20% ops losses and write-offs after returning home due to battle damage - unsustainable even for the US until the long-range escort fighter solved the problem. But granted, that was over Germany against the Luftwaffe and Flak.

Power turrets were an immense improvement over hand-held guns, but even they have restricted arc of fire and blind spots, so "every gun" does not have a "field of fire all around".

I understand the wish to reflect power turrets in the game, but with the fragility of the Japanese fighters it probably won't make much difference whether one has been downed by one hit or by multiple hits. But IMO Allied bombers are already so much better at shooting down Japanese fighters than Japanese bombers are at shooting down Allied fighters - rarely seen - that I went the other way. At the moment I have no stats how my change works out in practice, may need to inquire the forumites who play the mod about their experiences.

[Big B]

New Update.
Largely finishing China, added new locations (borrowed from RHS) and filled out Chinese OOB. Also touched Dutch, British & Indian, and aircraft.

Should be final update for stock/standard scenario.

Enjoy,
B

[Falken]

Cool...thanks brian...

[sanderz]

Hi Brian

Thanks again for keeping this mod updated.

I have been digging around in the editor comparing your scenario with stock and came across something seemingly odd with devices for Japanese Infantry squads i.e. they have a build rate of zero, however when i looked at a scenario 1 that also had Japanese squad build rates as zero. The allied troops all have build rates in both scenarios.

I assume this can't be an error but either me looking in the wrong place, or a quirk with Japanese squad production that i am missing?

Many Thanks

[Big B]

Hi,
A fair question, but a simple answer.
In the campaign games (scenario 1 for example) there is no set Japanese production rate for devices, as these are all produced On-Map at the rate the Japanese player decides on...like aircraft.

B

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Hi Brian

Thanks again for keeping this mod updated.

I have been digging around in the editor comparing your scenario with stock and came across something seemingly odd with devices for Japanese Infantry squads i.e. they have a build rate of zero, however when i looked at a scenario 1 that also had Japanese squad build rates as zero. The allied troops all have build rates in both scenarios.

I assume this can't be an error but either me looking in the wrong place, or a quirk with Japanese squad production that i am missing?

Many Thanks

[sanderz]

Thanks Brian, am new to delving into the inner workings of the game. Am looking to mod your game (for personal use only)if thats ok?

Where in the game do you set the squad production only there is nothing in the Industry window.

Hmmmm.... is it related to "Armaments"? i.e. the more of them i build the more squads you get?

Is there anything buried in the editor that defines how many squads are built depending on amount of armaments produced?

Thanks again