Page 33 of 39
RE: CV Shinano
Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:18 am
by John 3rd
I saw. That is a pretty good pair of sites the two of you put out there
RE: CV Shinano
Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:23 pm
by FatR
ORIGINAL: kfsgo
I think this is everything I've done so far that currently has an in-game entity.
Thanks! Meanwhile I finished ironing out heavy cruisers (I afraid I got into the airgroups list to add necessary airgroups, but if you've need to work on this list, don't worry, I'll just redo this work later) and did all changes to 1E fighters discussed above. Decided to make Ki-61 go to Ki-100s, after all - we already have art and stuff, and the direction is sensible enough, moreover, I found that Ki-100 was in the works before the Kawasaki engine factory got bombed, so they wanted to do it anyway IRL. Ki-100-I is available in mid-1944 (not big deal at this point) and Ki-100-II with its good high-altitude stats in mid-1945.
RE: CV Shinano
Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:59 pm
by kfsgo
ORIGINAL: FatR
ORIGINAL: kfsgo
I think this is everything I've done so far that currently has an in-game entity.
Thanks! Meanwhile I finished ironing out heavy cruisers (I afraid I got into the airgroups list to add necessary airgroups, but if you've need to work on this list, don't worry, I'll just redo this work later) and did all changes to 1E fighters discussed above. Decided to make Ki-61 go to Ki-100s, after all - we already have art and stuff, and the direction is sensible enough, moreover, I found that Ki-100 was in the works before the Kawasaki engine factory got bombed, so they wanted to do it anyway IRL. Ki-100-I is available in mid-1944 (not big deal at this point) and Ki-100-II with its good high-altitude stats in mid-1945.
Everything I've done so far is confined to LCUs; anything I am likely to do with airgroups in the future should be confined to the USAAF/CW sector, which are in a nice separate block and can be merged into a post-modification scenario with witpload painlessly. So, go nuts.
'War' Progress
Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:47 pm
by John 3rd
Been a few days so how is it coming fellas?
RE: 'War' Progress
Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2011 4:57 pm
by John 3rd
Bump: Any progress Gents?
RE: 'War' Progress
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:29 am
by kfsgo
China is mostly 'done' (it won't be Done until a couple of people play through it for a year or so and I can see what happens, I guess, but still) but I am trying to pump out one last bit of uni work before the holiday season kicks in - ideally I should have the thing ready to merge around the end of the week.
RE: 'War' Progress
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:32 am
by John 3rd
GREAT!
FatR?
RE: 'War' Progress
Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:49 pm
by FatR
I wrote down 2E fighters changes as proposed above, and ship changes up to destroyers. Unfortunately, my job situation still gives little respite, as my opponents can unfortunately attest. I'll have the rest of the air proposals in my head, but no time to write them down. I hope to get to it around New Year.
RE: 'War' Progress
Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2011 9:38 am
by kfsgo
John: I sent you an e-mail on China; I think it's pretty much good to go (on a "there will be stuff I forgot" basis, so subject to modifications!)
Next on the agenda is the merger of Commonwealth aircraft types, if that's ok with everyone - I pretty much know what I'm doing with that (having done it for a couple of personal mini-scenarios) so I will crack on with it and if it's not felt desirable then no harm done. Not like I have much else to do at the moment...
RE: 'War' Progress
Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2011 5:20 pm
by John 3rd
kfsgo: I have not seen an email. Could you resend please? Make sure to send a copy over to FatR as well.
As to Commonwealth planes, I think FatR should should onto that one. What do you think Stanislav?
RE: 'War' Progress
Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2011 9:15 pm
by FatR
Kfsgo, do you want to do this merge yourself, so that I should send you the files for now?
Also, my job situation finally shows signs of improvement, so I hope that I will be able to finish everything fleet and aviation related in January.
Another note - I thought about end-war Japanese aircraft more, maybe we should just include all of the and let the player choose? We'll need someone to draw them, though.
Yet another note, not entirely mod-related - I just noticed that radars on most Japanese nightfighters in stock actually are surface search radars... And this was pretty much true to RL state of their air search radar development. Only S1A (1/46) and Ki-102c (10/45) nightfighters have radars that actually do something. Just wanted to give a warning, if anyone thinks that radar-equipped Francices and Irvings will help them. Given nature of the mod, Japanese get a little bit of break here, but take note, that now the first nightfighter with proper radar (J1N3) is available 4/45, and the first one capable of actually catching most of the newer Allied bombers (S1A1) 9/45.
I must note that I mellowed out a bit about Allied night bombing rampage in stock. You just have to grit your teeth, and accept the casualties, because you can afford to lose airframes. Of course sending your most worthess 1E fighters to die in night A2A (as far as I know, Bigred has multiple 4E aces by now, thanks to it) instead of more expensive twin-engine planes is ahistorical, but c'est la vie. In this mod, if we plan to seriously expand Allied air numbers, this issue needs further investigation, though.
RE: 'War' Progress
Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2011 11:13 pm
by DOCUP
Put me in coach, I'll play centerfield ahh I mean Allies. I beta test it for you all.
RE: 'War' Progress
Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:40 am
by kfsgo
Sure, I can do it myself - shouldn't take more than ten minutes or so. You should have my e-mail address - geo[etc]@gmail.com - as I cced you in on the one yesterday.
RE: 'War' Progress
Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2011 2:52 am
by John 3rd
GREAT to read solid and positive progress. Thanks DOCUP for volunteering...
RE: 'War' Progress
Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:57 pm
by kfsgo
ORIGINAL: FatR
Yet another note, not entirely mod-related - I just noticed that radars on most Japanese nightfighters in stock actually are surface search radars... And this was pretty much true to RL state of their air search radar development.
Remember that per the recent changes to nightfighter interaction with radar, radar devices on nightfighters are treated as air-search radars even if they're not defined as such in the database, I guess to cover just this sort of problem.
RE: 'War' Progress
Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2011 2:51 pm
by FatR
ORIGINAL: kfsgo
Remember that per the recent changes to nightfighter interaction with radar, radar devices on nightfighters are treated as air-search radars even if they're not defined as such in the database, I guess to cover just this sort of problem.
Ah, that's good to know, I guess I missed the news. Earlier (current on my version of the game) state of Japanese nightfighting capabilities is one of those things like flak which might be historical in itself (no, as you might remember if you followed RA discussion, I don't think that stock flak was the least bit underpowered, with shooting down 20-30% of the attackers in 1945), but starts to fail in its function when confronted with other aspects in the game. I do hope devs will make night defensive bomber fire less murderous. Even Georges stand little chance against it, and these are the best combination of firepower and protection JFBs will have until well into 1945.
I just sent the files to you, please return them when you can.
RE: CV Shinano
Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2011 5:20 pm
by FatR
Thanks for the files, kfsgo. New look of China is very impressive, although I can't dig deeply into it right now.
RE: CV Shinano
Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2011 10:52 pm
by DOCUP
Your welcome John. I don't have the skills or the knowledge to help with the mod. But I do like the way it sounds. So I will do what I can to help you all out.
RE: CV Shinano
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2011 8:09 am
by FatR
A few more notes:
- On expanding Allied production. While in 1942-43 greater numbers of planes at the Pacific can primarily appear at the cost of other theatres, in 1944 US already started reducing their military program IRL because the perspective of victory was obvious. Some players notice a drop-off in fighter reinforcements in second half of 1944 and complain about it. In case of stronger Japan, 1944's US air reinforcements can be increased by several times. Any tweaks in this area so far, John (I don't have time to read the entire Allied side thread)?
- I believe we need to reduce accuracy for 4E defensive armament, after all (not for other bombers, these are undergunned, for both sides).
Status
Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2012 2:02 pm
by John 3rd
Same question as in the Allied Thread. What is our status here? What is left to do?