Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: yubari

The A6M3b, shown on the Kaga is not carrier capable, could that be the cause?

Non carrier planes count as three times what they would on land in order to make it hard to operate planes.

I have a few proposals

There a thread out there about jap CV airgroup sizes, i think it's worth watching to see what they figure out about this as it is a very important thing for every JFB I guess (or at least for me)

Kaigun states That the 'X' turret of the Yugumo's were never removed during the war because her turrets could be used in the AA role. In the game they are incorrectly removed with the 43/12 upgrade
Also, it is written in the page above that Akigumo was of the Kagero class, not Yugumo (as it is in the game right now)

Create a CS upgrade path for the Chitose class just like Mizuho's. That way the palyer is not force to upgrade, or stick with the pre-war AA suite.

And the last one
Create a small (2 plane) naval search squadron on every carrier with the D4Y1-C aircraft. If the player wants it he can expand or disband it, the point is to have the possibility to use this aircraft the way it was (and the D4Y2-C and the C6N). Of course this would have to be done with a delay as the plane arrives in 42/10 currently. Also, this might be a bit incorrect as I seem to remember (really just out of might head, have no time to check it right now) that one of the carriers at midway had D4Y1-C's aboard for evaluation...

EDIT: Just one more thing, this is more of a question: Right now the Ki-84a is set to upgrade to the Ki-84r and skips the 'b' version. Why is it like this? The 'b' version has better armament and a service rating of two! This late into the war (if I ever get there) I doubt I'd have the supply to just start to convert factories to the 'b' version. But if it would be in the upgrade line I definiately wouldn't use the 'r' version, even though that is a bit faster, a bit more manouverable and has a bit better climb rate.

EDIT2: ( )
You have added the G3M4-Q patrol craft, but the availability of the devices that it uses were not changed. Sure the H-6 radar is a late war thing, but they must have been able to produce MADs...right?
Right now (to me) this early addition is completly worthless as I can just use the old nells in this role...

Just a little bit of addition to the D4Y1-C:

Production date according to Kaigun:
660 D4Y1 production aircraft (spring 1942-Apr 1944)

According to wikipedia (and the sources linked in the wiki article) the first production versions were used for recce duties because of structural problems. Unfortunately I cannot find anything as to when these were solved, but it's obvious that the availability date of the D4Y1-C should be brought forward, and some consideration should be given to changing the DB 'version's' date (according to the wiki article the DB verion's production started in '43 march, the stated source is Huggins, Mark. "Falling Comet: Yokosuka's Suisei Dive-Bomber". Air Enthusiast, No. 97, January/February 2002, pp. 66–71. ISSN 0143 5430.)

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I concur. It seems like the logical explanation for the bug that he is experiencing. Let us know if this is the problem!

Well The problem is As you guess zero 3b planes are not suitable for CV task. I did not upgrade them with such a intenition. It was an open path so I used it. But the problem is it has no reverse position. now I cant upgrade them with A6-2 this is a serious issue. Can there be another Data base upgrade to solve the problem. Or else my best air groups will be un-avaible for war.

I think this can be done. FatR can this be worked out. You handled the air side is this something that can be done?

air loss data Bigred against Dirtyharry. My zero losses jumped when I invaded Hilo. Look at my last air loss data report post #379. DHarry really has socked it to me.
I note my ops losses.

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I think this can be done. FatR can this be worked out. You handled the air side is this something that can be done?

I wonder how this upgrade could have been done in the first place. A6M3b is not carrier capable, therefore it should be impossible to uprgade carrier-capable groups to it, unless it is in the upgrade path. And all carrier aigroups upgrade to A6M5 by default in this mod. The only fix I can propose is to put affected carrier units on the ground permanently and replace them with some of the ground units.

ORIGINAL: FatR

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I think this can be done. FatR can this be worked out. You handled the air side is this something that can be done?

I wonder how this upgrade could have been done in the first place. A6M3b is not carrier capable, therefore it should be impossible to uprgade carrier-capable groups to it, unless it is in the upgrade path. And all carrier aigroups upgrade to A6M5 by default in this mod. The only fix I can propose is to put affected carrier units on the ground permanently and replace them with some of the ground units.

well That is what I did eventually

Sorry I haven't been more involved with this but I've been stuck running the Hotel for the last seven days with three to go. These are 10-12 hour days and they've been kicking my a**!

Have most of next week off so I should be able to get the changes done we've been talking about. Sorry for any inconvenience guys.

Very strange - in the first six weeks of the game only Tokyo has been producing additional airframes and engines! Not sure if this is a problem or a passing aberration so intend to carry on. But wonder if this has happened to anyone else. Specifically after the first week Toyko added 1x Oscar and 1x Ha-33 per day while the rest of the economy stared at the sky!

I have had no major issues in this area except for resources and oil being so low to start.

Make sure you are careful about your levels within the cities. Is Tokyo running high with supply? There can be so many things to build that your build doesn't happen at all unless you have enough supplies present.

Very strange - in the first six weeks of the game only Tokyo has been producing additional airframes and engines! Not sure if this is a problem or a passing aberration so intend to carry on. But wonder if this has happened to anyone else. Specifically after the first week Toyko added 1x Oscar and 1x Ha-33 per day while the rest of the economy stared at the sky!

Send you a PM to assist.

My thanks to the members of this site for their response. Solved my problem!! My difficulty was that this is my first serious go on the Japanese side. Before was playing against the Japanese using the dreaded Ironman (Plus) - a very different set of problems!

Never realised when reading up on this mod - but in some ways the most valuable result of the IJN improvements is that priority can be given instead to beefing up the (now) relatively feeble IJAAF.

It is a good group that has helped to create and now play the Mod. Rather biased there...

You are really correct in stating the IJN's additional prep provides the chance for one to work on the IJA. That is an interesting point within the Mod. The IJN starts better prepared with a more organized, capable force forward-deployed when the war starts. It isn't that much bigger but it is BETTER. This really provides a chance to then work the army side because it can lean more on the navy. It isn't quite what I imagined when we created the thing...

Big Red wants to start a new RA-70 Campaign and needs to make sure everything has been fixed.

I want to touch base and then get the fixes Posted.

These were the issues found earlier I believe:
1. A whole Class of CA without Belt Armor until their late-42 upgrade.
2. The Zero speed issue.
3. Zero Upgrade problems for CV and non-CB based.
4. Modern BB loadouts for Ammo.
5. A few Judy Recon units arriving inearly-42

Stanislav--You fixed the Zero Speed issue a bit ago and it is good--right? Did you do anything else in the aircraft area?

If you have, could you shoot me the most current set of files for the whole Mod? I can deal with the CAs, BBs, and Judys.

Juan--Can you walk me through how to fix this the RIGHT way? I know I can reduce the AMMO LOADS back to 12 (I believe) but I'd like to keep the additional ammo and said that could be done. Any chance you could explain that here?

Are there any issues from the Allied side? I am strongly considering moving the Lexington's Battle Group down to Pago Pago to cover the reinforcement occurring there. Might be a real positive change for the Allied player.

Should take too long to do the fixes...

1. Am I ok to start inputting a dec7 turn or should I to wait?

2. Why exactly is the gun ammo forward turrent load issue not able to be fixed to max reload? Will Matrix support a fix?

Hold for a day or two. I have tomorrow off and will try to get right on it.

Stanislav--I need the most current files you have. I'm on a new computer and am not sure which is the newest set. Just send the data files. I don't need the art files and other stuff.

To make sure I will also email Stanislav.

don't forget the HMS Nelson on the british side has 6 x 16 cm in forward mounts (x2).

My guess is it will also suffer the same ammo reload problem.

I would not have thought of her. THANK YOU!

OK. Got the Mod Files downloaded from the Scenario website. Will be working on the project this morning. This is my topic list below. Is there anything else that needs worked on?

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Big Red wants to start a new RA-70 Campaign and needs to make sure everything has been fixed.

I want to touch base and then get the fixes Posted.

These were the issues found earlier I believe:
1. A whole Class of CA without Belt Armor until their late-42 upgrade.
2. The Zero speed issue.
3. Zero Upgrade problems for CV and non-CB based.
4. Modern BB loadouts for Ammo.
5. A few Judy Recon units arriving inearly-42

Stanislav--You fixed the Zero Speed issue a bit ago and it is good--right? Did you do anything else in the aircraft area?

If you have, could you shoot me the most current set of files for the whole Mod? I can deal with the CAs, BBs, and Judys.

Juan--Can you walk me through how to fix this the RIGHT way? I know I can reduce the AMMO LOADS back to 12 (I believe) but I'd like to keep the additional ammo and said that could be done. Any chance you could explain that here?

Are there any issues from the Allied side? I am strongly considering moving the Lexington's Battle Group down to Pago Pago to cover the reinforcement occurring there. Might be a real positive change for the Allied player.

Should take too long to do the fixes...