Matrix Games Forums

I've recently started to build a number of those 1/700 waterline IJN models, mostly by Fujimi. The instruction sheets have a side view and deck plan, I think for painting instructions (I don't read Japanese). In view of the discussion about what modifications to do on the old CL's, here is the plan of the RL conversion of Isuzu:






It doesn't seem as if there would be space enough for a fourth 127mm mount without major surgery at least to the main mast.

As I was building the model of Tone, I started to think about the huge free deck space you would get if all of the aviation gear was dispensed with, so I played around a bit with the drawings:






I drew in four additional 127mm mounts, the forward pair in place of the catapults, the aft pair on an extended main deck, spaced to avoid the hull cutouts for the torpedo tubes. It might be possible to squeeze in an additional pair of mounts if at least the after torpedo tubes were eliminated. In my opinion this would be a more worthwhile modification to the Tone design than increasing the number of planes carried, at least for the later part of the war, even if this put more of the recce load on the carriers. I'm certain that reconnaissance JUDYs and especially Saiuns had a far better survivability than any float plane, and the carrier task forces could well use all the AA guns they could get.

That is COOL work. I built a bunch of those 1/700 when I was a kid. Would love to have the kits now and truly enjoy building them as well as KEEPING them!

Your renering of the Tone is fascinating to see and think on. Concur with the notes about the CLAA upgrade for the old CLs.

I'll make one and get it to you when I'm finished helping another modder with his artwork. My help has been slow because I've been playing and studying with all my free time plus battling depression.[:(]
I do have a couple cool ideas but it would probably be sometime this fall.

I can certainly understand being busy Sir. Whenever you can get to it that will be great! Your work for RA is outstanding and I'm glad to hear you're working with another Mod. Which one? What are you doing with it? Would love to see that work too...

It looks like at least July changes in KB airgroup sizes are hardcoded now... I don't like this and hope USN gets similarly hardcoded limits. So posting this observation in case if anyone wonders. Scen 69 by itself does not mandate carrier airgroup resizing/restrict size customization.

Hi,

Sorry if this has been asked before, but.....

I've just started my first turn on the RA3 mod vs JAI, and I didn't even check to see if this mod will even work on Japanese AI.

So, before I go too far, is RA3 built to work w/JAI or is it strickly PBEM / H2H?

Thanks....

As far as I know, normal scripts inherited from Scen 1, should generally work for AI... As about changes to production, I believe AI just gives itself planes starting from their availability dates, so the scenario should work, but I'm not totally sure.

One thing I wanted to note: if anyone intends to play this scenario with 2-day turns, I can strongly recommend to make the first turn 1-day. A mandatory second day of attacks on Pearl was potentially quite punishing to Japanese even in stock. With new and improved flak it will wipe out KB airgroups. Playing the first turn as 1-day probably should be a recommended houserule now.

I was not aware that you could change the number of days in a turn once the game was started. When did this change?

It applies to AI games only. And the more realistic thing about multiple day turns is you have to plan more carefully. Move your carriers into range and then retire out of range, although I do agree it can be very tricky, probably a bit of practice to make work just right for that particular situation.

I thought it is possible to change turn cycles for PBEMs, but looks like I was wrong...

After a seemingly endless time, RA 3.0 is complete and released for anyone who is curious to check out a Mod that features a stronger Japanese Navy with little changes to the IJA. The Mod sort of fits between Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 when it comes to Japanese strength within the war. Instead of Scenario 70, we've placed into the 069 slot.

69 is the same scenario number used for Sharp's May 1, 1942 scenario. Can you use a different number??[&o]

We could look at going to Scen 71 or simply replace 70. Does anyone have an objection if we replace the old Version 2 and keep the Scenario 70 designation?

If there are no opinions to the contrary, I can rename the current scenario as Scen 70 and reload it to Box.net.

Also, I've found a couple of very minor bugs (ASW mortar on the last Mikura upgrade firing to the left, instead of front; plus some clear mistakes not of our doing - DC racks having ammo of 1, Type 95 and Type 2 DCs being present at once in some of Wakatake APD/E upgrades), if no one minds, I can use this opportunity to fix them.

Sounds good to me. Go ahead.

I've been very happy with things so far. Haven't noticed any glaring mistakes or issues to this point. Think our thoroughness--read that as being VERY anal--really paid off here as things do look solid.

Okay - RA 3.2, now as Scen 70 again:

http://www.box.net/shared/bfvja98f11u843fmmzjt

Save for changing the scenario number, the changes are really minimal, just fixing a couple of minor errors.

Thanks, d/l and installed!

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Thanks, d/l and installed!

+1

Thanks Stanislav.

Since others have loaded the Scenario do you guys have any comments thus far?