Page 5 of 24
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 2:27 pm
by JWE
Ok, so …
8th Field Rgt: after break-up of 70th Div, assigned to 25th Indian Div in ’43 as a Jungle Field Rgt.
51st Field Rgt: after break-up of 70th Div, assigned (as infantry) to 16 Brigade – 3rd Special Force Div in ’43, becoming 51 Column, 16 LRP Brigade on 10/43.
60th Field Rgt: after break-up of 70th Div, assigned (as infantry) to 23 Brigade – 3rd Special Force Div in ’43, becoming 60 and 68 Columns, 23 LRP Brigade on 10/43.
45th Recce Rgt: after break-up of 70th Div, assigned (as infantry) to 16 Brigade – 3rd Special Force Div in ’43, becoming 45 and 54 Columns, 16 LRP Brigade on 10/43.
Prior to the creation of Wingate’s private army, 70th Div was a cohesive, experienced unit, so why not keep it that way till the break-up date. The TO&E of the LRP units (columns) was considerably different from a nominal infantry Regt (Bn), so it makes little sense to have three regular Brit brigades just change their name to Chindits.
Chindits didn’t have any of the cool “stuff” that a regular division had, so … ok, let 70th withdraw, dump all its “stuff” into the pool, and a month later … hey, presto – 3 LRP brigades with the right stuff.
Yea, nay, maybe ??
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 2:42 pm
by witpqs
Sounds good from here...
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 2:55 pm
by Weidi72
If the separate units will get a delay, so they won't come as reinforcement, why not.
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 4:00 pm
by JWE
ORIGINAL: Weidi72
If the separate units will get a delay, so they won't come as reinforcement, why not.
Why not, indeed. So we'll keep 70th Div as a Div and let it fight as a Div till its withdrawal date. We'll kill 45th Recce as a separate unit because it became part of 16 LRP. We'll also kill 8th Field Rgt as a separate unit because God spoke from the high place (actually, Nigel Evans spoke in more mundane terms) and said they kept short 25#'s and went to 25th Div. And after 70th Div gets broken up (and is removed from the game), the remaining constuitent units appear as 14, 16, 23 LRP brigades with their particular TO&E.
Gosh, how many more of these things are there? Please ... I don't really want to know.
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:24 pm
by Andy Mac
The main reason we did it the way we did it in stock was to avoid having a full Brit Div set of devices dumped into the pools
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:25 pm
by Andy Mac
Other one to watch is 3rd NZ Div HQ thats also a weird one from stoick
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 1:26 am
by oldman45
ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
The main reason we did it the way we did it in stock was to avoid having a full Brit Div set of devices dumped into the pools
Would it really effect things considering the combat losses it would incur? I remember what you wrote about the finite replacements and if the 70th is in heavy combat it could be a problem down the road. Am I out to lunch with that theory?
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 2:52 pm
by JWE
ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
Other one to watch is 3rd NZ Div HQ thats also a weird one from stoick
Ok. Got rid of 3rd NZ Div (yeah, that was weird). To give Barrowclough something to do, added North, Central, South Mil Districts as static Corps HQs (just in case Japanese player gets frisky).
Tightened up a few more things. Moved stuff to keep the 4932 – 4946 slots empty. Couldn’t find enough of the right kind of stuff without an AI attribution to move there, so went for “ugly but no problem” as opposed to “fancy but maybe not”.
Waiting on a couple things from the Air people, and a final update should be out in a couple days. There should have no impact on any ongoing games; just tweaks, and twonks, and dinks here and there for smoothness and simplicity.
Have lots of input that suggests everything is working as expected, so this last cleanup should be the end of the Project, insofar as a release version. Boy, oh boy, what a journey – woof !!
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 3:37 pm
by Alfred
JWE,
I have always been fascinated as to how scenario slot numbers are allocated to mods. Who (obviously before the scenario number was publicly announced) determined the scenario number for DaBabes? How did you prevent any other modder from using the same numbers?
Alfred
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2010 4:27 pm
by JWE
ORIGINAL: Alfred
JWE,
I have always been fascinated as to how scenario slot numbers are allocated to mods. Who (obviously before the scenario number was publicly announced) determined the scenario number for DaBabes? How did you prevent any other modder from using the same numbers?
Alfred
They really aren't allocated, they are grabbed. The engine allocates scen slots 001 to 025 as 'official', non-editable, slots and this is reflected in the editor (there is a CRC check sum in the engine to make sure). Being developers, we got lucky and got on the pony early. Our peers respect out slot selection, and we respect theirs. But anybody who wants to can do whatever they want between 026 and whatever.
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Sat Jul 17, 2010 3:09 pm
by oldman45
Cosmetic bug:
ComAirNoPac arrives in PH
ComAirSoPac arrives in Anchorage
Might want switch those around.
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 12:21 am
by rockmedic109
Well, I guess the transports I send to take ComAirNoPac to Anchorage can pick up ComAirSoPac and take them to Noumea. Provided the SoPacers don't freeze to death in their Uniform, Lighweight, Tropical.
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 5:47 pm
by Weidi72
Unit 3745 11th BG/431st BG should be 11th BG/431st BS
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 1:04 pm
by oldman45
3 of my units are not showing the 81mm mortars; 5084, 8002, 5175. I looked in the editor and see no problems ie they are all pointing to device 1155 but on the unit screen in game there is a blank with just the number of mortars showing. The unit need for supplies is lower on the units not showing the mortars.
Has anybody else noticed this?
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:19 am
by Sardaukar
I am in late 8/42 and Perth is requesting 85 000 fuel...I don't understand why it'd be doing that.
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:45 am
by Don Bowen
ORIGINAL: Sardaukar
I am in late 8/42 and Perth is requesting 85 000 fuel...I don't understand why it'd be doing that.
What TFs do you have home ported there?
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:02 pm
by Sardaukar
Right now there are only 2 SC TFs, consisting of 3DDs and 2 DDs with Perth as Home base. But there is quite a lot of shipping disbanded. Might that be the reason? On the other hand, they have been there from fall of DEI and I haven't noticed this before.
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:23 pm
by Don Bowen
Yeah, ships in port are a major portion of fuel requirement.
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:53 am
by Sardaukar
Yea, that was it, problem solved. [;)]
RE: DaBigBabes Beta errata
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:33 pm
by witpqs
I am in a PBM stock scenario 1, and I've noticed an issue that is also present in "DaBigBabes Full Campaign" (I checked in the editor and saw that it is present).
The issue is this: All the various nationalities have their infantry squads updated periodically. To facilitate managing this the have been given names like "Aus Inf 42", "USA Inf 43", etc. All except the Chinese. Device numbers 1301, 1302, and 1303 are all identically named "Chinese Rifle Squad". This makes it almost impossible to see which LCU's have upgraded versus which ones haven't.
They should be named by the year of availability, as:
device 1301 = "Chinese Rifle Squad 41"
device 1302 = "Chinese Rifle Squad 43"
device 1303 = "Chinese Rifle Squad 45"
While not a Babes errata per se, AFAIK the change would be easy and it sure would help managing an important sector of the war. Please consider it.
[8D]