TM, RA, and BTS Re-Write

[ny59giants]

G6 CVL has no delay for first upgrade. Nice to have radar installed in less than 24 hours. [;)]

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

G6 CVL has no delay for first upgrade. Nice to have radar installed in less than 24 hours. [;)]

That's the follow up visit so that the cable guy can plug it in...

[John 3rd]

News: School begins for my wife next week and then the boys begin the following Monday. With them AWAY...I plan to do some of the Mod work that has been detailed above. PLEASE keep the thoughts coming and FIND the issues so I can get them fixed.

[Admiral DadMan]

Just a question for clarification (I'm old and confused, lol): Do ALL of your scenarios use Extended Map? If not, which ones use which?

[John 3rd]

Every one does.

I love the extra brought in by that!

[John 3rd]

Also..do not forget the Off-Map aircraft purchase system we have introduced for the Allies.

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Every one does.

I love the extra brought in by that!

Excellent.

Not every scenario description on the website says "Extended Map". Or I missed it.

[Mundy]

Hi,

One suggestion, if I may.

I'm trying to get all the map and art files for these scenarios straightened out.

It would be helpful if the zipfiles for these had the same directory structure as the game does. I'm having to pick and sort some of these files by hand.

Thanks

Ed

[John 3rd]

Good note Sir. Will look into it with my Site.

[John 3rd]

Michael raised an interesting question. Can anyone opine on this?

Why does the smaller Hiryu Class have greater endurance that the Shokaku Class which is about 8500 tonnes larger? Speed is similar….

[Mundy]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Good note Sir. Will look into it with my Site.

[Admiral DadMan]

Shokaku-
Displacement:
25,675 long tons
Length: 257.5 m (844 ft 10 in)
Beam: 29 m (95 ft 2 in)
Draft: 8.8 m (28 ft 10 in)
Installed power: 160,000 shp (120,000 kW)
Propulsion: 8 × water-tube boilers; 4 × shafts; 4 × Kampon geared steam turbines
Speed: 34.5 knots
Range: 9,700 nmi at 18 knots

Hiryu-
Displacement:
17,300 long tons
Length: 227.4 m (746 ft 1 in)
Beam: 22.3 m (73 ft 2 in)
Draft: 7.8 m (25 ft 7 in)
Installed power: 153,000 shp (114,000 kW)
Propulsion:8 × Kampon water-tube boilers; 4 × shafts 4 × geared steam turbines
Speed: 34 knots (63 km/h; 39 mph)
Range: 10,330 nmi at 18 knots

It looks like that it's a function of Length to Beam ratio- Shokaku is 9.38:1, Hiryu is 10.21:1 - Higher ratio = thinner = easier to push thru the water.

[John 3rd]

POSTED IN THE AAR:


Michael and I just chatted for about 45 minutes on the phone.

School starts for my 8th and 6th Grade Sons on Monday. Paula goes back to work for the School District at the same time.

This translates to time HOME and--most importantly--ALONE!

It is time to get back to serious Mod work on all four Mods and, perhaps, we can look at a new one.

Michael has minor surgery coming up in a couple of weeks and we plan to tag team the Mod Work at that point.

For those weeks leading up to his surgery, I will stay off of Mod working and, instead focus on getting an extra turn per day in with Dan. Want to get to 1945. It is as simple as that. These lessons that are being learned right now really are going to help with the Mod work as well...

Am going to copy this Post onto the Mod Design Thread.

[John 3rd]

The main idea that Michael and I chatted about was changing a portion of the Mods into STREAMLINING Japanese production even more. Perhaps the best answer for Japan is LESS choice then MORE!??!

EXAMPLE:
The decision to get rid of Jack and replace with dedicated Interceptor and Carrier-Based A6 variants creates a huge number of different models that upgrade every 4-6 months until the better George and Sam models come into production.

What about:
1. Produce a much more limited line of A6 Models. Carrier-Based: M2 to M3a to M5 and DONE Ground-Based: M2 and ONLY M2.
2. Focus on bringing in George with massed work. Even if this means having bunches of Hangar Queens to start with when they begin.

Tentative and, hopefully, thought-provoking start...

[Kitakami]

Will be looking forward to what comes out of this line of thinking.

I am waiting for a new version of BtS and BtS Lite before I start seeking an opponent. I am considering playing the Allies for the first time.

[durnedwolf]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

The main idea that Michael and I chatted about was changing a portion of the Mods into STREAMLINING Japanese production even more. Perhaps the best answer for Japan is LESS choice then MORE!??!

EXAMPLE:
The decision to get rid of Jack and replace with dedicated Interceptor and Carrier-Based A6 variants creates a huge number of different models that upgrade every 4-6 months until the better George and Sam models come into production.

What about:
1. Produce a much more limited line of A6 Models. Carrier-Based: M2 to M3a to M5 and DONE Ground-Based: M2 and ONLY M2.
2. Focus on bringing in George with massed work. Even if this means having bunches of Hangar Queens to start with when they begin.

Tentative and, hopefully, thought-provoking start...

In doing a little searching on the internet, it appears that there was a lot of opportunity for German influence of aircraft design during WWII. While it looks like it would be a stretch to use German aircraft designs for your carrier-capable fighter aircraft for anything other than perhaps weapons upgrades, You could make a good argument to use the Bf 109 and Fw 190 fighter models for the Army. I read that the Bf 109 G series - which came out in 1942 for Germany, had a greater rate-of-climb than the P-51! I'd argue that a high rate of Climb would be of great advantage to Japan when they start going on the defense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany%E2%80%93Japan_industrial_co-operation_before_World_War_II#Aircraft

[InfiniteMonkey]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

The main idea that Michael and I chatted about was changing a portion of the Mods into STREAMLINING Japanese production even more. Perhaps the best answer for Japan is LESS choice then MORE!??!

EXAMPLE:
The decision to get rid of Jack and replace with dedicated Interceptor and Carrier-Based A6 variants creates a huge number of different models that upgrade every 4-6 months until the better George and Sam models come into production.

What about:
1. Produce a much more limited line of A6 Models. Carrier-Based: M2 to M3a to M5 and DONE Ground-Based: M2 and ONLY M2.
2. Focus on bringing in George with massed work. Even if this means having bunches of Hangar Queens to start with when they begin.

Tentative and, hopefully, thought-provoking start...

Let the player make the choices - not the scenario. Focusing production should require sacrifice, but you should allow the player to make those choices. That's part of the fun of being Japan.

Limiting the number of research and engine factories, but not the available models is a better approach imo. Build the new scenario with the expectation that the Japanese player will be able to skip research steps and choose appropriate arrival dates so that between skipping and using the bulk of their limited resources (factories) the player can focus to whatever models they want - and get them earlier than they arrived historically. Insert "precursor" models like the Ki-44 and Ki-43-Id so players can use those models to start the research.

Another thing I think is missed (at least in scenario 1) is how engines dictate the possibilities. I think more engines that must be researched (by hp class/manufacturer/etc.) to get to the models. The game treats engines as static - but progressive models of aircraft also often used the newest developments in the engines. Scenario 1 (and the game) treats the engines as less important than the air frame, yet one of Japan's biggest problems was the lack of high horsepower engines of the correct size.

On a completely different note, would you be interested in getting a Scenario Checker Report on your scenarios as I develop that piece of the scenario editor?

[Kitakami]

I agree with giving the player the tools, but allowing him (or her) to make the choices. Variety is not bad in itself. Lack of focus is.

[John 3rd]

Nice comments guys.

Infinite Monkey: What is a Scenario Checker Report? Curious I am! (Sound like Yoda.)

[InfiniteMonkey]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Nice comments guys.

Infinite Monkey: What is a Scenario Checker Report? Curious I am! (Sound like Yoda.)

A simple checker that verifies data consistency in your scenario files. Some of the checks I'm thinking about/planning are listed below. Make suggestions if you have em. I'm working on it now, and hopefully tomorrow. If all goes well, I will have screenshots and a simple report that I can show you - maybe as soon as tomorrow night.

• AIR-Aircraft
• Invalid device of type XXX - not an aircraft device
• Aircraft does not have ordnance for mission]
• Mission ordnance exceeds load
• Unused Aircraft (nothing upgrades to it, nothing equips it)
• Mismatched device slots
• CLS-Ship Classes
• Invalid device of type XXX - not a ship device
• Unused Class (nothing upgrades to it, nothing equips it)
• Aircraft ordnance missing on AV/CS/CV/etc
• Torpedo ordnance missing on AV/CS/CV/etc
• Has AC capacity but has no air groups
• Air groups exceed AC capacity
• More than 5 air groups
• AC/Torpedo Ordnance in wrong slot

• DEV-Devices
• End Date before Available
• Unused Device warning (nothing upgrades to it, nothing equips it)
• GRP-Air groups
• Air Group not at airfield, laid ship, float equipped? (on ak, etc.?)
• Invalid device of type XXX - not an aircraft device
• LDR-Leader
• LOC-Bases
• Docked ships exceed tonnage limit
• Garrison requirement exceeds starting troop AV
• Invalid device of type XXX - not a base device
• LOC-Task forces
• Has no ships
• LOC-LCU's
• ???
• PLT-Pilots
• Pilot type does not match assigned group
• SHP-Ships
• In location with no port
• Not in valid TF or Port base
• Aircraft ordnance missing on AV/CS/CV/etc
• Torpedo ordnance missing on AV/CS/CV/etc
• Has AC capacity but has no air groups
• Air groups exceed 115% of AC capacity
• Air groups exceed ready AC capacity
• More than 5 air groups
• AC/Torpedo Ordnance in wrong slot
• Incomplete device slots
• Bitmap does not exist in ART folder
• Bitmap not entered
• Ship arrives before class
• Tolerances
○ Maneuver out of tolerance for class
○ Belt/Deck/Tower Armor vs tonnage for class
○ (Cargo + Troop + Liquid)/tonnage out of tolerance for type
○ Endurance * (Cargo + Troop + Liquid)/fuel out of tolerance for type
○ Durability/belt-tower-Deck armor/tonnage out of tolerance for type
• AK/etc. check. Fragment too big for ship
• Invalid device of type XXX - not a ship borne device