Da Babes Mod

Please post here for questions and discussion about scenario design, art and sound modding and the game editor for WITP Admiral's Edition.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5190
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by Don Bowen »

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Have you all seen this site? We might not want Don to see it [:)]

http://shipbuildinghistory.com/



Don has seen it. JWE showed it to me.
User avatar
oldman45
Posts: 2325
Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 4:15 am
Location: Jacksonville Fl

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by oldman45 »

Did you see how many drydocks we built, where in the world did we send to. Plus I was very surprised at all the army ships and boats that were built.
User avatar
vettim89
Posts: 3669
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:38 pm
Location: Toledo, Ohio

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by vettim89 »

AH, I don't know how to ask this without possibly offending some people so I will try to say this as diplomatically as possible. I hope this is taken as just a honest question and by no means an attempt to start a firstorm.

Before I drop my bomb, I would like to say what you are talking about in this mod is very interesting to me. When I get around to playing my first PBEM, I may very well go with DBB. That ssaid I am still honoring my "No PBEM until patch 3" pledge to myselrf.

So my question: what was your motivation for Da Babes mod? Is it that there were some things not included in stock that JWE and Don Bowen thought should be included? Or is it that some things came out in play testing and initial deployment that seemed wrong and this is attempt t address those issues?

I just ask because it strikes this reader as odd to see a Mod being developed so soon after release and even more odd that that mod is being created by members of the original dev team.

You can ignore this if it opens up a can of worms that should be left closed. I understand
"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5190
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by Don Bowen »

ORIGINAL: vettim89

AH, I don't know how to ask this without possibly offending some people so I will try to say this as diplomatically as possible. I hope this is taken as just a honest question and by no means an attempt to start a firstorm.

Before I drop my bomb, I would like to say what you are talking about in this mod is very interesting to me. When I get around to playing my first PBEM, I may very well go with DBB. That ssaid I am still honoring my "No PBEM until patch 3" pledge to myselrf.

So my question: what was your motivation for Da Babes mod? Is it that there were some things not included in stock that JWE and Don Bowen thought should be included? Or is it that some things came out in play testing and initial deployment that seemed wrong and this is attempt t address those issues?

I just ask because it strikes this reader as odd to see a Mod being developed so soon after release and even more odd that that mod is being created by members of the original dev team.

You can ignore this if it opens up a can of worms that should be left closed. I understand

In developing the scenarios for the standard AE release, we had to consider a balance of historical accuracy and playability. Some folks (me! me!) want full accuracy - if's it's in the historical OOB it ought to be in the game OOB. Other people want an easier, more playable game and do not want to be bothered with handling small ships and units that have only a minor affect in the game.

The standard scenarios were developed with balance in mind. Once the game was released, we fanatics then began to create the full-on detailed mod. That's the reason the mod is named "Babes". Back in standard scenario development times, people would review my OOB requests and moan and groan about more "little baby" ships.

It is equally probable that someone will develop a less detailed mod where playability is considered over detail.
User avatar
vettim89
Posts: 3669
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:38 pm
Location: Toledo, Ohio

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by vettim89 »

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: vettim89

AH, I don't know how to ask this without possibly offending some people so I will try to say this as diplomatically as possible. I hope this is taken as just a honest question and by no means an attempt to start a firstorm.

Before I drop my bomb, I would like to say what you are talking about in this mod is very interesting to me. When I get around to playing my first PBEM, I may very well go with DBB. That ssaid I am still honoring my "No PBEM until patch 3" pledge to myselrf.

So my question: what was your motivation for Da Babes mod? Is it that there were some things not included in stock that JWE and Don Bowen thought should be included? Or is it that some things came out in play testing and initial deployment that seemed wrong and this is attempt t address those issues?

I just ask because it strikes this reader as odd to see a Mod being developed so soon after release and even more odd that that mod is being created by members of the original dev team.

You can ignore this if it opens up a can of worms that should be left closed. I understand

In developing the scenarios for the standard AE release, we had to consider a balance of historical accuracy and playability. Some folks (me! me!) want full accuracy - if's it's in the historical OOB it ought to be in the game OOB. Other people want an easier, more playable game and do not want to be bothered with handling small ships and units that have only a minor affect in the game.

The standard scenarios were developed with balance in mind. Once the game was released, we fanatics then began to create the full-on detailed mod. That's the reason the mod is named "Babes". Back in standard scenario development times, people would review my OOB requests and moan and groan about more "little baby" ships.

It is equally probable that someone will develop a less detailed mod where playability is considered over detail.

I see said the blind man as he picked up his hammer and saw. That makes sense. I was struck by the lack of lift in Canadian WC bases. We now have even more bases and so few resources to keep them supplied. I am sure there are similar issues for the Japanese especially after the SRA is conquered. Nice to see the little extras added in. Now I want to play it even more. Will finish toying with my ASW ideas also
"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry
Central Blue
Posts: 695
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 5:31 pm

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by Central Blue »

ORIGINAL: vettim89

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: vettim89

AH, I don't know how to ask this without possibly offending some people so I will try to say this as diplomatically as possible. I hope this is taken as just a honest question and by no means an attempt to start a firstorm.

Before I drop my bomb, I would like to say what you are talking about in this mod is very interesting to me. When I get around to playing my first PBEM, I may very well go with DBB. That ssaid I am still honoring my "No PBEM until patch 3" pledge to myselrf.

So my question: what was your motivation for Da Babes mod? Is it that there were some things not included in stock that JWE and Don Bowen thought should be included? Or is it that some things came out in play testing and initial deployment that seemed wrong and this is attempt t address those issues?

I just ask because it strikes this reader as odd to see a Mod being developed so soon after release and even more odd that that mod is being created by members of the original dev team.

You can ignore this if it opens up a can of worms that should be left closed. I understand

In developing the scenarios for the standard AE release, we had to consider a balance of historical accuracy and playability. Some folks (me! me!) want full accuracy - if's it's in the historical OOB it ought to be in the game OOB. Other people want an easier, more playable game and do not want to be bothered with handling small ships and units that have only a minor affect in the game.

The standard scenarios were developed with balance in mind. Once the game was released, we fanatics then began to create the full-on detailed mod. That's the reason the mod is named "Babes". Back in standard scenario development times, people would review my OOB requests and moan and groan about more "little baby" ships.

It is equally probable that someone will develop a less detailed mod where playability is considered over detail.

I see said the blind man as he picked up his hammer and saw. That makes sense. I was struck by the lack of lift in Canadian WC bases. We now have even more bases and so few resources to keep them supplied. I am sure there are similar issues for the Japanese especially after the SRA is conquered. Nice to see the little extras added in. Now I want to play it even more. Will finish toying with my ASW ideas also

Then you will be impressed by the amount of lift in Babe's Lite. There are all kinds of handy little vessels in Canadian waters just right for moving regiments and battalions around that region. All the big passenger ships that can't dock anyway can now be sent off to other theaters.
USS St. Louis firing on Guam, July 1944. The Cardinals and Browns faced each other in the World Series that year
Image
User avatar
Gary D
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 1:43 am
Location: Southern California

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by Gary D »

And all these little guys have a lot of personality.

Lose a crusier... what the heck there are always more around somewhere. Lose one of your little Teapa AKL's and I had to go sit on the porch with my scotch and cigar and mourn them for a half an hour. [:)]
User avatar
comte
Posts: 2394
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 2:12 am
Location: Be'eri, Hadarom, Israel

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by comte »

The More ships the better in my opinion [:)]
User avatar
Gary D
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 1:43 am
Location: Southern California

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by Gary D »

Gents;

Possible data base gremlin in Scen 27, Lite v2. Ship 152, T War Emergency class, has 0 ammo for the 20mm in weapons slot 7. First of the class is Trusty that shows up on 1 Jan 42. The 44 upgrade has 18 ammo so for my purposes thats what I tossed on it.

I realize you are done with Lite but thought it might be carrying over to your next version.

All the best.
User avatar
Herrbear
Posts: 883
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 9:17 pm
Location: Glendora, CA

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by Herrbear »

ORIGINAL: Gary D

Gents;

Possible data base gremlin in Scen 27, Lite v2. Ship 152, T War Emergency class, has 0 ammo for the 20mm in weapons slot 7. First of the class is Trusty that shows up on 1 Jan 42. The 44 upgrade has 18 ammo so for my purposes thats what I tossed on it.

I realize you are done with Lite but thought it might be carrying over to your next version.

All the best.

FWIW - It is also that way in Scen 26 Lite v2.
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by JWE »

Thanks Gary, thanks Herrbear. Yeah, gremlin. Gary D has the right idea, just toss in 18. We got it and will have it in the next update. Ciao.
Mac Linehan
Posts: 1518
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 9:08 pm
Location: Denver Colorado

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by Mac Linehan »

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: vettim89

AH, I don't know how to ask this without possibly offending some people so I will try to say this as diplomatically as possible. I hope this is taken as just a honest question and by no means an attempt to start a firstorm.

Before I drop my bomb, I would like to say what you are talking about in this mod is very interesting to me. When I get around to playing my first PBEM, I may very well go with DBB. That ssaid I am still honoring my "No PBEM until patch 3" pledge to myselrf.

So my question: what was your motivation for Da Babes mod? Is it that there were some things not included in stock that JWE and Don Bowen thought should be included? Or is it that some things came out in play testing and initial deployment that seemed wrong and this is attempt t address those issues?

I just ask because it strikes this reader as odd to see a Mod being developed so soon after release and even more odd that that mod is being created by members of the original dev team.

You can ignore this if it opens up a can of worms that should be left closed. I understand

In developing the scenarios for the standard AE release, we had to consider a balance of historical accuracy and playability. Some folks (me! me!) want full accuracy - if's it's in the historical OOB it ought to be in the game OOB. Other people want an easier, more playable game and do not want to be bothered with handling small ships and units that have only a minor affect in the game.

The standard scenarios were developed with balance in mind. Once the game was released, we fanatics then began to create the full-on detailed mod. That's the reason the mod is named "Babes". Back in standard scenario development times, people would review my OOB requests and moan and groan about more "little baby" ships.

It is equally probable that someone will develop a less detailed mod where playability is considered over detail.

Don -

Am so gratefull that the "fanatics" took the plunge and made the mod. Many thanks for your work - no small task (to put it mildly!).

Loyalist Mac <grin>
LAV-25 2147
TIMJOT
Posts: 1705
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2001 8:00 am

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by TIMJOT »

This is probably a dumb question but I down loaded da babes lite mod from Roques website and as far as I can tell the art zipfile had only about 5 bitmaps each in the IJN and Allied shipsides folders. I thought there were dozens of new classes in this mod or am I missing something? Thanks in advance for any assistance.
User avatar
davidjruss
Posts: 256
Joined: Sat May 25, 2002 11:03 am
Location: Derby, England

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by davidjruss »

Gary D , Herrbear and JWE,

re T class British Submarines and 20mm AA Guns.

According to my reference book (Warships of World war II - H.T. Lenton etc ) the T class was split into 2 groups. The First group of 22 subs ( built 39-41 ) had 1-4inch and 3 machine guns. The second group of approx 37 subs ( built 42-45) had 1-4inch , 1-20mm AA and 3 machine guns. The Database as it originally stands therefore seems correct in having no ammo for the 20mm AA at start of play Can anyone else confirm the armament ?.

DavidR

P.S. On further reading the book also states that "warning R.D.F and a single 20 mm AA were included in most war built S and T classes and added in earlier units" .

So when to upgrade ? Perhaps by the time of Pearl Harbour the T boats had been fitted with the 20 mm AA , so ammo would be needed.

Also re TIMJOT post I note that the Canadian xAP BCCS Alice Class in the scenarios do not have a picture of the vessel or details of devices on board when viewing the ship information screen.
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by JWE »

ORIGINAL: TIMJOT

This is probably a dumb question but I down loaded da babes lite mod from Roques website and as far as I can tell the art zipfile had only about 5 bitmaps each in the IJN and Allied shipsides folders. I thought there were dozens of new classes in this mod or am I missing something? Thanks in advance for any assistance.
Version 002 is posted in the thread titled "Da Babes Version 002" here tm.asp?m=2373258

A newer art file is included. A lot of the art is already in the stck art file.
User avatar
davidjruss
Posts: 256
Joined: Sat May 25, 2002 11:03 am
Location: Derby, England

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by davidjruss »

JWE,

Re my post - apologies - I have downloaded the newer art file ( missed this file ) and the picture of the Canadian Alice class is now viewable.

However would you please note that it appears that there are still no devices listed for this class on the ship information screen.

DavidR
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5190
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by Don Bowen »

ORIGINAL: DavidR

JWE,

Re my post - apologies - I have downloaded the newer art file ( missed this file ) and the picture of the Canadian Alice class is now viewable.

However would you please note that it appears that there are still no devices listed for this class on the ship information screen.

DavidR

If the Canadian Alice class is the BCCS ships, they should have no devices. Just civilian coastal ships.
TIMJOT
Posts: 1705
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2001 8:00 am

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by TIMJOT »

Thanks JWE, didnt realized you snuck all those bitmaps in with Stock. Thanks again for your help
User avatar
drw61
Posts: 842
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 12:58 pm
Location: South Carolina

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by drw61 »

Would it be possible to get a listing of the ships added to babes lite? I want to add them to scenario 2 for more of a challenge against the AI.

Thanks, Daryl
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: Da Babes Mod

Post by JWE »

No, not possible to do that. There are literally hundreds. But, all of the relevant Scen002 “Late Arriving” ships from ship slot 14000 to 14197 have already been incorporated. The “Enhanced Japan Scenario” ships from 14200 to 14524 can be added to Babes Lite by following a few simple steps.

Use WitploadAE and export Scen002 to .csv files. Then export Scen026 to .csv files. Open the WITPshp002.csv file and copy rows 14200 to 14524. Then open WITPshp026.csv and select rows 14200 to 14524, and hit paste. Then do a save of the csv file.

Use WitploadAE and import the csv files back into Scen026. Now you have Scen026 with the Enhanced Japan Scenario ships.
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design and Modding”