Matrix Games Forums

Have you tried MS 12 on DDs like Simes class yet. Might be a tough one.[;)]

Believe it or not, the actual Matrix art had Ms12, but it was so dull it looked grey throughout. Not that tough, I'll do them after I get a few more cruisers.

Hehe, moved to Artwork forum.

I must confess.... I have a strong urge to make a pink submarine, and put Grant, C. as a sub leader....

The opening sceen depicts the submarine SEA TIGER being bombed during an air-raid in the Philippine Islands. The first attack on the Philippine Islands by the Japanese took place on December 8, 1941. Two days later, at 1:00 p.m. on December 10, 1941, 54 Japanese twin-engined bombers and 52 escorting Zero fighters brushed aside the few available U.S. fighter planes and attacked the Submarine Base at Cavite. Two bombs hit and sunk the submarine USS SEALION (SS-195) and damaged the adjacent submarine USS SEADRAGON (SS-194). The blasts killed five sailors, the first fatalities for American submarines in World War II. Heroic salvage efforts were made to salvage SEADRAGON, howere SEALION was a total loss. And, there really was a pink submarine that was caught while being repaired. That's right, SEADRAGRON was actually painted pink and had to sail out of the Philippines before being painted the traditional gray and black. An incredible amount of detail in the film really happened. The evacuation of nurses from Corregidor by U.S. submarines also took place. However, these women where Navy nurses, not Army nurses as depicted in the story.

It should also be noted that three boats were used in the making of the movie: USS BALAO (SS-285), was painted pink and was used for exterior shots in and around Key West, Florida. USS ARCHERFISH (SS-311) wore the standard colors of grey and black, and was used for interior and exterior shots. USS QUEENFISH (SS-393) was used in opening and closing scenes, as well as for at sea shots and was filmed in and around San Diego.

cobra Aus

My atempt at humor[X(][X(]

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Just so I know how far to go with this, do you guys want this for the upgrade graphics:

1941: Standard Grey, some PH BBs Grey and White.
1942: Measure 12 Modified (see my South Dakota Graphic) on most, some ships navy blue.
1943: Measure 32 (see Missouri, Essex, and Saratoga graphics) on some, Measure 33 and 22 on others
1944: Measures 32 and 33 predominate, some MS 22. Some ships will stay the same, others will switch schemes.
1945: Measure 22 which is the current navy blue up to height of stern, and grey above that.

Itll take a bit of work, but I think I can do it.

I’d say use the appropriate camouflage for the class at the time of the refit. Not so sure about having upgrades just to switch camo. Also, to be devil’s advocate: Do we want to use extensive disruptive camouflage on these icons. After all, the purpose of the icon is to display the details of the ship and the purpose of the camouflage is to hide the details of the ship.

And, and the risk of heresy, perhaps we might want to put the camouflage on the “shil” version only and leave the “side” version more visible. Just an idea – the “side” being used only for display of the ship and the “shil” for combat.

ORIGINAL: Tankerace
Hey Don, since I am doing extensive camo work, can we add in 2 upgrades (or rather one) to the Portlands? From a camo point of view, they were similar to the Northamptons:

10/42 fit receives Ms 21 Navy Blue
4/43 (current final fit) same

In 1944 they underwent overhaul, and emerged with Ms 32 (see splinter camo)
In 1945 both ships were in Ms 22. So, can we alias the 10/42 and 4/43 graphic to Northamptons 10/42 graphic (I used the same, as for WitPs scale they are identical), then create a new upgrade in 1944, no work done per se, just yard time and a new graphic with an Ms32 pattern different than the Northamptons, and then do the same in 1945, so she can finish up in Ms22. This achieves several things:

1) simulates different yard time.
2) allows the player to pick camo. Since the 1944 and 1945 upgrades are the same, if he wants he can have the ship in either Ms22, 21, or 32 camo.

We can do that (but read above). If we do I’ll find some difference extant at the time of the upgrade so there will be some actual change.

Here's my 2 cents.

I like the non camo designs. I really like most of the early and late war designs. I think Don's idea of having the camo only for the combat animations is an awesome idea. If you click on your ship, the non-camo (pretty) design is very pleasing to the eyes. However, once you see the surface battle open up, those camo ships would be awesome.

That being said, I think Tankerace is doing an awesome job with the icons. Whatever decision you guys decide to make is going to be perfect from my point of view.

bc

Doing the shil only version is fine with me. Or, perhaps, we could release both sets, and let plays choose to install Non camo or camo. Either way, I'll do em and you guys use 'em.

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Doing the shil only version is fine with me. Or, perhaps, we could release both sets, and let plays choose to install Non camo or camo. Either way, I'll do em and you guys use 'em.

This is a great idea - with regular and camo versions available everyone can make their own choice. We could please some of the players all the time and all of the players some of the time (my apologies to Mr. Lincoln).

We could even make a camo "load/unload" utility like Andrew Brown's neat little map-load bat file.

Don,
I just started on that book you found, “Ships for Victory,” and I may have found something of interest that may help in recreating US merchant ships.

On pg 21 it mentions that by 1942 91.8% of merchant ships would be 20 years old, and on the same page that “most of the dry-cargo vessels were of 10 to 11 knot speed.”

Now, on pages 27-28 it mentions that the C1, C2, & C3 “sorts” were used to classify ships after 1939. I had been under the impression that all ships in the game fell into one of these categories, but apparently using the Cs to classify the December 1941 merchant fleet would be incorrect, at least for about 90% of them. Is there any way to come up with hard data on which ships predated the 1939 reforms? The Cs are well documented, but the preC ships would be considerably slower and maybe even somewhat smaller.
bs

ps. btw, 10% of 12/41 AKs and all AKs built later would be Cs, though.

pps. what's a "Hog Islander"?

ORIGINAL: bstarr

Don,
I just started on that book you found, “Ships for Victory,” and I may have found something of interest that may help in recreating US merchant ships.

Damn - mine has not arrived yet and I'm beginning to worry that it may be lost in the mail.

On pg 21 it mentions that by 1942 91.8% of merchant ships would be 20 years old, and on the same page that “most of the dry-cargo vessels were of 10 to 11 knot speed.”

Now, on pages 27-28 it mentions that the C1, C2, & C3 “sorts” were used to classify ships after 1939. I had been under the impression that all ships in the game fell into one of these categories, but apparently using the Cs to classify the December 1941 merchant fleet would be incorrect, at least for about 90% of them. Is there any way to come up with hard data on which ships predated the 1939 reforms? The Cs are well documented, but the preC ships would be considerably slower and maybe even somewhat smaller.
bs

ps. btw, 10% of 12/41 AKs and all AKs built later would be Cs, though.

Yes - there is a book called Merchant Fleets 1939 which gives tabular data on all merchant ships over 2000 tons in existance in 1939. Includes speed but not endurance. I have a copy and Matrix used it heavily in creating the original merchant OOB. They did an excellent job but generalized the ships into a half-dozen classes (like Japan). We will split them out (like Japan).

The US Maritime Commission, which came up with the C1, C2, etc. designations, was the 1930s successor to the old U.S. Shipping Board.

pps. what's a "Hog Islander"?

A Hog Islander is a World War I Liberty Ship built at the Hog Island shipyard. There were also "Submarine Boat" and "West Coaster" variations built at a shipyard owned by the Submarine Boat Company and to a general design at several west coast yards.

Tanker, Cobraus,
I'm really diggin' the camo. All the ship art is great!

Any way to combine the texture of the original art with the new camo schemes?

Keep it up!

Any way to combine the texture of the original art with the new camo schemes?

when i have finished Don & his crews transporters I will move on to the transport ships from the original Artwork I hope TankerAce will do the others

Cobra Aus

I am working on U.S. Destroyers and deliberating upgrade paths for Flush Deckers.

Pacific Fleet Flush Deckers that began the war as Destroyers were upgraded to Escort Destroyers with half the torpedo battery and one boiler removed to improve ASW capability and endurance. Maybe half of them were subsequently modified to APD (one or two went directly to APD but not worth the trouble to create a separate upgrade path).
I can:
Create a single upgrade path: DD -> DDE -> APD to move all to APD
Create two parallel classes: DD -> DDE and DD-> DDE -> APD to move half to APD and leave half as DDE

Also, the AVD conversions (Ballard) were replaced by new construction Barnegat class AVPs and converted to APD or back to DD. The DD conversion was little more than a re-designation as weapons were little modified. I can:
Create a single upgrade path: AVD -> APD to move all to APD
Create two parallel classes: AVD -> APD and AVD -> DD. To more some to APD and the rest to DD. The second would require a new “under armed” DD class.

I am in favor of a single upgrade for each and letting the player decide what to upgrade. However, I do not know now the AI would deal with this – would everything get pumped to the end of the upgrade path??

Advice appreciated.

I would bet that the AI upgrades all the way through the path, and not stop at any time. Or, I should say that the AI will leave the ship on upgrade: Yes. It still has to move the ship to a shipyard for the upgrade to happen. I've noticed (when opening an AI game in head to head) that the AI doesn't intentially move ships to shipyards to get upgraded. The game is at 7/43 and most of the AI's capital ships still need their mid 42 upgrades done. (sorry, off topic).

I think you should keep one upgrade path and let the player decide what to upgrade to (I wish you could see the end result before allowing an upgrade, though).

The allied AI should have enough ships that I don't think this option would be of any consequence. And, it allows the player more freedom of option. (and, maybe it's easier for you guys who are doing the data entry for your mod)

Just my opinion.

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

The Essex, as based off of Randolph in 1944:

Blended the camo and added some textures. Not a big change, but noticable.

Tanker, what program do you use for art mods?

MS Paint, at least till I can make enough off War Plan Orange to get photoshop.

I think I'll hold off the camo stuff, leave it to the guys with the good programs. MS Paint works good for single pattern ships, but not dazzle patterns. Still, I can crank out new ship graphics.

I'm pretty busy with planetops, but that blending I did took about 5 min. If you want to continue with the camo and send me the roughs, I'll smooth them out.

MS Paint, at least till I can make enough off War Plan Orange to get photoshop.

Tanka I've got both photo shop and the one I have used for years Paint shop Pro and after using both on the Map conversion and Ships Paint shop come out miles in front for ease of use and versatility. All the free downloads such as gradients,paterns and plugins work on both programs plus I think you will find PSPro a lot cheaper check out before buying look up on Google It might have a demo version to download

Cobra Aus

I have no problem with going the one path. I play Allied vs AI all the time so it doesn't matter what the AI will do to these as I get to decide.