B-Mod Update

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
John 3rd
Posts: 17785
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by John 3rd »

Brian: Do you have a Guadalcanal Scenario?
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
Big B
Posts: 4642
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:41 pm
Location: Cali
Contact:

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by Big B »

Hi John,
Why yes - scenario 195 on the website....

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Brian: Do you have a Guadalcanal Scenario?
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17785
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by John 3rd »

Consider it being used now.

I take it that I should do a separate install of the AE and then do all the downloads?
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
morejeffs
Posts: 249
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 8:51 pm

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by morejeffs »

Hi Big B..

Recently just started some games(vs humans). We have the production issue Do we need to restart or just update the scenario?

Thanks
that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
Big B
Posts: 4642
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:41 pm
Location: Cali
Contact:

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by Big B »

Update the scenario from the website - download and restart.

I'm sorry about the corrupted version that was up there for a few days.
ORIGINAL: morejeffs

Hi Big B..

Recently just started some games(vs humans). We have the production issue Do we need to restart or just update the scenario?

Thanks
morejeffs
Posts: 249
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 8:51 pm

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by morejeffs »

Understood...Thank you for your effort...Sadly our timing was a perfect bullseye on the bad files.

Will restart
that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
Aurorus
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 5:08 pm

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by Aurorus »

In the desire to "fix" China, everyone seems focused on Chinese supplies. I'm not sure that this is the correct focus. The Chinese army was very short of supply throughout the war, until 1944. The Japanese army also experienced significant supply problems in China, which rarely appear in the game. In part, this is owing to the fact that most Japanese players expend much more supply in China than Japan did historically. This is not a problem; it is a strategic decision.

The real problem with China, in my opinion, is that the game does not accurately reflect the problem that the Japanese faced with guerrillas, especially near the Communist territories. I think that a better "fix" for China would be to increase the garrison requirements, especially in northern China. As the game is, Japan can effectively garrison most of China with the various "puppet" units. This was not the case, and large portions of the Japanese army were tied down in garrison duties and attempting to maintain control of the countryside and the roads. Increasing the garrison requirements (substantially... maybe as much as double) would limit Japan's ability to launch offensives in China in a way that would reflect the historical realities.
Big B
Posts: 4642
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:41 pm
Location: Cali
Contact:

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by Big B »

I partially agree - a massive problem for the Japanese was garrisoning China in sufficient numbers to be effective - this proved all but impossible in reality.
As a matter of fact - B-Mod has substantially increased garrison requirements in China for both sides (representing guerilla warfare on the one side, and warlord reluctance to part with their personal troops on the other side).

Regardless, I will respectfully disagree about supply in China - as it relates to the game.
While Nationalist China wasn't swimming in supply in game as if it were Los Angeles or Detroit, The Chinese had enough supply of their own to wage war for years - which they did do.

However, in the stock game - China is usually conquered in any PBEM simply because China can't even supply the existing army that it has...it simply starves to death on it's own a few hexes from Sian or Chunking.

So as far as the game goes - it's not a matter of granting China supply levels to make it a modern industrial power - it's getting China enough supply to survive on it's own as it did in reality....

And as far as anyone is concerned about too much supply in China will mean a big American 4 engine bombing campaign against the home islands, There is no way to put enough supply in China to run an American Air Force - unless it is fed in from Burma or the coast.

B
ORIGINAL: Aurorus

In the desire to "fix" China, everyone seems focused on Chinese supplies. I'm not sure that this is the correct focus. The Chinese army was very short of supply throughout the war, until 1944. The Japanese army also experienced significant supply problems in China, which rarely appear in the game. In part, this is owing to the fact that most Japanese players expend much more supply in China than Japan did historically. This is not a problem; it is a strategic decision.

The real problem with China, in my opinion, is that the game does not accurately reflect the problem that the Japanese faced with guerrillas, especially near the Communist territories. I think that a better "fix" for China would be to increase the garrison requirements, especially in northern China. As the game is, Japan can effectively garrison most of China with the various "puppet" units. This was not the case, and large portions of the Japanese army were tied down in garrison duties and attempting to maintain control of the countryside and the roads. Increasing the garrison requirements (substantially... maybe as much as double) would limit Japan's ability to launch offensives in China in a way that would reflect the historical realities.
Aurorus
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 5:08 pm

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by Aurorus »

ORIGINAL: Big B

I partially agree - a massive problem for the Japanese was garrisoning China in sufficient numbers to be effective - this proved all but impossible in reality.
As a matter of fact - B-Mod has substantially increased garrison requirements in China for both sides (representing guerilla warfare on the one side, and warlord reluctance to part with their personal troops on the other side).

Regardless, I will respectfully disagree about supply in China - as it relates to the game.
While Nationalist China wasn't swimming in supply in game as if it were Los Angeles or Detroit, The Chinese had enough supply of their own to wage war for years - which they did do.

However, in the stock game - China is usually conquered in any PBEM simply because China can't even supply the existing army that it has...it simply starves to death on it's own a few hexes from Sian or Chunking.

So as far as the game goes - it's not a matter of granting China supply levels to make it a modern industrial power - it's getting China enough supply to survive on it's own as it did in reality....

And as far as anyone is concerned about too much supply in China will mean a big American 4 engine bombing campaign against the home islands, There is no way to put enough supply in China to run an American Air Force - unless it is fed in from Burma or the coast.

B
ORIGINAL: Aurorus

In the desire to "fix" China, everyone seems focused on Chinese supplies. I'm not sure that this is the correct focus. The Chinese army was very short of supply throughout the war, until 1944. The Japanese army also experienced significant supply problems in China, which rarely appear in the game. In part, this is owing to the fact that most Japanese players expend much more supply in China than Japan did historically. This is not a problem; it is a strategic decision.

The real problem with China, in my opinion, is that the game does not accurately reflect the problem that the Japanese faced with guerrillas, especially near the Communist territories. I think that a better "fix" for China would be to increase the garrison requirements, especially in northern China. As the game is, Japan can effectively garrison most of China with the various "puppet" units. This was not the case, and large portions of the Japanese army were tied down in garrison duties and attempting to maintain control of the countryside and the roads. Increasing the garrison requirements (substantially... maybe as much as double) would limit Japan's ability to launch offensives in China in a way that would reflect the historical realities.


Lol... we are having the Stillwell-Chiang Kai Shek debate all over again as to whether the Chinese army had sufficient supply or not. I think part of the problem is the bias on the part of Western military historians to accept Stillwell's position at face value and assume that Chiang Kai Shek was being difficult deliberately. I am more inclined to believe Chiang Kai Shek than Stillwell, since Chiang Kai Shek was much more familiar with the situation on the ground in China: politically, logistically, and militarily.

As to a major U.S. bombing campaign against Japan from China, that was the plan, at least initially. The supplies for this operation were ultimately diverted to the Chinese ground forces, if I recall correctly.
Big B
Posts: 4642
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:41 pm
Location: Cali
Contact:

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by Big B »

Oh I'm trying not to debate anything, I'm just simply trying to point out what the game situation is.... and only as a game. [:)]
Lol... we are having the Stillwell-Chiang Kai Shek debate all over again as to whether the Chinese army had sufficient supply or not. I think part of the problem is the bias on the part of Western military historians to accept Stillwell's position at face value and assume that Chiang Kai Shek was being difficult deliberately. I am more inclined to believe Chiang Kai Shek than Stillwell, since Chiang Kai Shek was much more familiar with the situation on the ground in China: politically, logistically, and militarily.

As to a major U.S. bombing campaign against Japan from China, that was the plan, at least initially. The supplies for this operation were ultimately diverted to the Chinese ground forces, if I recall correctly.
Aurorus
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 5:08 pm

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by Aurorus »

ORIGINAL: Big B

Oh I'm trying not to debate anything, I'm just simply trying to point out what the game situation is.... and only as a game. [:)]
Lol... we are having the Stillwell-Chiang Kai Shek debate all over again as to whether the Chinese army had sufficient supply or not. I think part of the problem is the bias on the part of Western military historians to accept Stillwell's position at face value and assume that Chiang Kai Shek was being difficult deliberately. I am more inclined to believe Chiang Kai Shek than Stillwell, since Chiang Kai Shek was much more familiar with the situation on the ground in China: politically, logistically, and militarily.

As to a major U.S. bombing campaign against Japan from China, that was the plan, at least initially. The supplies for this operation were ultimately diverted to the Chinese ground forces, if I recall correctly.

I am not really debating either. It is just ironic how our different points of view parallel those of Stillwell and Chiang Kai Shek.
DmitryZ
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:24 am

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by DmitryZ »

Hi, Big B!
Thank you for your greate work!
Have a sound issue in separate WITP installation. The "first" WITP installation is working correctly, with sound. Intro of "second" WITP, with mod, is voiced also. The game works and all sound files present in their directory. But there are no sound in the game from the moment of main screen launching.
And, additional question, if I would look combat-save at other installation, could it cause the synk-bug? Sound is usefull for knowing if the damaged ship sunk, all other sounds in game are not so important:)
Big B
Posts: 4642
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:41 pm
Location: Cali
Contact:

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by Big B »

Hi DimitryZ, and thank you for the kind words.

Regarding sound issues, I have never encountered any with this mod, or with separate installs either.
As a matter of fact, after reading your post, I opened up a mod scenario on a completely separate install I use on my machine - and every sound and music trac played fine.

It's puzzling to me - but I have never seen this issue before, perhaps you might ask in the Tech Support thread about any known sound issues when having multiple installs...or perhaps someone reading this might pop in.

B [:)]
ORIGINAL: DmitryZ

Hi, Big B!
Thank you for your greate work!
Have a sound issue in separate WITP installation. The "first" WITP installation is working correctly, with sound. Intro of "second" WITP, with mod, is voiced also. The game works and all sound files present in their directory. But there are no sound in the game from the moment of main screen launching.
And, additional question, if I would look combat-save at other installation, could it cause the synk-bug? Sound is usefull for knowing if the damaged ship sunk, all other sounds in game are not so important:)

DmitryZ
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:24 am

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by DmitryZ »

Thank you!
And what about possibility to look combat-save movie at other installation, without mod data? Could it cause any issues to your opinion?
Big B
Posts: 4642
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:41 pm
Location: Cali
Contact:

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by Big B »

No idea really
ORIGINAL: DmitryZ

Thank you!
And what about possibility to look combat-save movie at other installation, without mod data? Could it cause any issues to your opinion?
DmitryZ
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:24 am

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by DmitryZ »

Repaired sound. Just re-updated exe-file and it helps. Looking combat-save at one installation and playing at other is bad idea: results are different, so, it cause synk-bug.
Thank you again!
sanderz
Posts: 867
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:39 pm
Location: Devon, England

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by sanderz »

Hi Big B

I see there was another update to scenario 199 in late July. I have a game already started, can you give some brief info on what the changes were and whether they will apply retroactively to games in progress or need a new start to take effect.

Many thanks
Big B
Posts: 4642
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:41 pm
Location: Cali
Contact:

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by Big B »

Hello sanerz,
If you are playing against the AI, updating should occur automatically between turns.
If you're in a PBEM, I'm afraid those never update unless by Official Patch.

Changes were not drastic, I found the Chinese received about 100 P-51B's - so I added them; I put the Soviet T-34/76's back into the game, added 13.2mm AA MG's to the Momi class DD's (at start, Dec 7th, so they don't have to wait a year for AA).
Nothing too major....

Thanks,
B


ORIGINAL: sanderz

Hi Big B

I see there was another update to scenario 199 in late July. I have a game already started, can you give some brief info on what the changes were and whether they will apply retroactively to games in progress or need a new start to take effect.

Many thanks
sanderz
Posts: 867
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:39 pm
Location: Devon, England

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by sanderz »

ORIGINAL: Big B

Hello sanerz,
If you are playing against the AI, updating should occur automatically between turns.
If you're in a PBEM, I'm afraid those never update unless by Official Patch.

Changes were not drastic, I found the Chinese received about 100 P-51B's - so I added them; I put the Soviet T-34/76's back into the game, added 13.2mm AA MG's to the Momi class DD's (at start, Dec 7th, so they don't have to wait a year for AA).
Nothing too major....

Thanks,
B


ORIGINAL: sanderz

Hi Big B

I see there was another update to scenario 199 in late July. I have a game already started, can you give some brief info on what the changes were and whether they will apply retroactively to games in progress or need a new start to take effect.

Many thanks

thanks for the update

i'm actually playing head to head at the moment so i guess that counts as PBEM



Big B
Posts: 4642
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:41 pm
Location: Cali
Contact:

RE: B-Mod, Last Update

Post by Big B »

Completed a major revision of B-Mod. The biggest changes affecting the game are in China.
After a long period of play-testing the game, this should complete satisfactorily making the land war in Asia realistic enough to finish the game satisfactorily.
Details can be read here. Read Me file

Hope you can enjoy.

B
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design and Modding”