Page 3 of 17
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 11:26 pm
by ny59giants
List the LCUs, their ID numbers, and at start locations so it can be looked at.
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:35 am
by Dan Nichols
Not all of these are important, but there are some that a player might want to move on turn 1. I am not sure
what happens if you load them on a amphibious TF. I think they might land and take supplies that are loaded with
them, but I am not sure about that.
4276 - Babeldaob
4409 - Babeldaob
4275 - Etotofu
4209 - Etorofu
3583 - Harbin
3601 - Harbin
3776 - Liaoyuan
4724 - Marcus Island
3361 - Paramushiro-jima
4283 - Peleliu
4278 - Saipan
4280 - Saipan
4411 - Saipan
4081 - Sendai
4908 - Shirmushiri-jima
3676 - Sunwu
3683 - Sunwu
4723 - Takamatsu
4177 - Tatung
4274 - Truk
4410 - Truk
4273 - Yokohama/Yokosuka
In addition the following HQs have no LCU support but require it
5 Northeast Area fleet - Ominato
16 Combined Fleet - Saipan
17 1st Fleet Naval HQ - Hiroshima/Kure
18 2nd fleet - Samah
19 3rd Fleet - Babeldaob
20 4th Fleet - Truk
22 6th fleet - Kwajalein Island
23 Southwest fleet - Cam Ranh Bay
27 Southeast Area Fleet - Truk
28 china Area Fleet - Shanghai
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:50 am
by John 3rd
The LCUs should be fine. The bases all start with supply so that isn't any big deal. Loading anything from those bases will automatically load supply as well.
I am playing a 4.0 (Japan) and a 4.1a (Allies) and everything looks good. Neither of my opponents have said anything about an issue like this.
What do you mean regarding the HQ requiring LCU Support?
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:56 am
by Dan Nichols
They have a support requirement, but no support or mechanized support.

RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:37 pm
by John 3rd
Hmmm...Michael do you think this is an issue?
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 2:15 pm
by ny59giants
Just talked with John, he will make adjustments overt he next few days.
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:50 am
by BigBadWolf
Can you guys take a look at devices 1467 Sound Detector? It doesn't upgrade to anything. Shouldn't its upgrade path be 1468 Tai-Chi 13 Radar?
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:24 pm
by John 3rd
I am in the process of making a comprehensive list of items that need to be checked. ANYONE playing RA who has a questions or has seen an issue, please chime in!
Right now these are items I am aware of:
1. Support Issues alluded to earlier.
2. Need to check the Vietnamese Inf Div issues.
3. Will check BB Wolf's question above.
Are there other things needing to be checked and/or changed?
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 4:59 pm
by khyberbill
I haven't seen anything obvious yet. But I am having so much fun that I might be missing something. Great Job Guys! I like the new placement of the Banshees and the Pensacola. This works for me.
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 5:51 pm
by ny59giants
Allied early war recon airframe production.
Static Japanese BFs get some engineers.
Garrison devices for India Command HQs upgrade to non-static device on 1/43 to allow mobility.
Mentioned to John, but so others known about them
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 6:29 pm
by John 3rd
Bill--glad you like the 4.0 changes.
Michael's notes added to the list.
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 6:35 pm
by khyberbill
Bill--glad you like the 4.0 changes.
I am ready for a re-match!
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 8:02 pm
by John 3rd
Will be doing work on Wed-Thurs to get these changes made. Will update as I go.
Does anyone have additional thoughts as to things that need to be looked at?
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 2:12 pm
by ny59giants
Look at Prince of Wales AA values and her radars at start. The AA is very high, IMO. [X(] The ranges for her two radar sets appears to be off.

RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 7:17 pm
by John 3rd
ORIGINAL: BigBadWolf
I just got some of the much feared Vietnamese militia emergency reinforcements and they are static? Why are they static?
Hey BBW.
I am working on the Mod. Can you give me the EXACT unit location number for each of the VM Militia. In scenario two Michael has them coming in location slot 3000-3003.
The problem in RA is that I put the 1st, 2nd, 3rd Air Flotillas in those slots creating a conflict. Am now moving those three units to 2990-2992 but need the VM locations.
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 7:23 pm
by John 3rd
Notes for RA 4.2:
1. Added minor amounts of support to Japanese Fleet HQ.
2. Bumped Allied recon production numbers.
3. Added 2 Eng Vehicle and 6 Eng to Static BF in Japan: minimal building/construction ability.
Working on VM Militia.
Have I missed any other topics?
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 9:25 pm
by kevin_hx
The version of RA mod is getting to 4.2?
The title of this topic should be changed, haha.
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 2:30 pm
by MrBlizzard
Hi,
I'm playing as Jap RA 4.1, I found that some Eng Units lack a device (e.g. the 2th JNAF Coy; unit nr. 4402, based in Babeldaob). In the tracker the device missing is named (DEV 717, unknown device).

RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 9:37 pm
by John 3rd
Ohhhhhhh...good catch. Let me take a look. Thanks for the screenshot.
RE: Reluctant Admiral 4.1
Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 4:40 am
by John 3rd
I've sent the files to Stansilav for RA 4.2. Am still looking at Mr. Blizzard's issue but will be gone for most of the rest of the week so I thought getting this out was preferable.
Changes made as detailed above with one addition.
Michael suggested we move up the Squadron 803 arrival to Dec 7th. I agreed so there are 8 (can fillout to 12) Fulmar's starting at Trimcomalee. They may be moved to Hermes immediately if wished by the Allied player. Not much but it is something.