RA 5.4

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

Post Reply
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: RA 6.0

Post by FatR »

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

I would like to have the Japanese CV divisions be 2 heavy CVs with a CVL that carries nothing but 30 to 33 fighters on board. From reading Kaigun and Shattered Sword, I think that what was proposed by the IJN. At least after Midway and in keeping with the Japanese offensive mindset. Is this going to be possible with the changes?? When playing Japan, I would like to start the game with 4 heavy CVs and 2 CVLs to hit Pearl and another CV div of 2 CVs and CVLs to use in the SRA.

Regarding this, I can't find any evidence of such arrangements going beyond theoretical schemes. Take a look at the Japanese order of battle at Marianas:
http://www.navweaps.com/index_oob/OOB_W ... ne_Sea.htm

It seems, that the switch to three-carrier divisions at that period was intended to keep said divisions homogenous.

That said, Japan still has 3 fast CVLs (Ryujo, Shoho, Zuiho) that can be potentially added to the original carrier divisions and slower Ryuho, that can be attached to Junyo/Hiyo. Divisions, newly formed from Shokaku-kai carriers will have no such support, even potentially unless Tone-kai hulls are converted to carriers (this can be provided as an option, by making these cruisers initially available as hulls in late 1942, that can undergo either a brief "conversion" into the cruiser shape, or a real conversion into CVLs).
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
User avatar
Kitakami
Posts: 1316
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 11:08 pm
Location: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami

RE: RA 6.0

Post by Kitakami »

ORIGINAL: FatR
<snip>
That said, Japan still has 3 fast CVLs (Ryujo, Shoho, Zuiho) that can be potentially added to the original carrier divisions and slower Ryuho, that can be attached to Junyo/Hiyo. Divisions, newly formed from Shokaku-kai carriers will have no such support, even potentially unless Tone-kai hulls are converted to carriers (this can be provided as an option, by making these cruisers initially available as hulls in late 1942, that can undergo either a brief "conversion" into the cruiser shape, or a real conversion into CVLs).

You could also use the conversions of the Chitose, Chiyoda and Nisshin, no? They are rated at 29 kts.
Tenno Heika Banzai!
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17531
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: RA 6.0

Post by John 3rd »

Kitakami got in before me with that thought. Remember in RA we have Mizuho come in as an exact sister to Chitose and Chiyoda. Good, fast ship for conversion. Additionally, FatR forgot to mention Nisshin comes in AS a CVL within the first couple of months of the war starting. These four ships make FINE CVLs by Japanese standards...
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17531
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: 6.0

Post by John 3rd »

ORIGINAL: FatR
ORIGINAL: John 3rd

So where does that put you Sir?

Now I'm more inclined to say that building 8 original Aganos is a better option. Not sure if they should start with as many DP guns, but carrying 2x2 100/65 from the beginning should be fine (the difference between 100/65 and 80/60 open twin mounts is 8 tons according to navweaps, 6 tons according to Lacroix/Wells - sizeable, but nothing critical for an exceedingly stable ship, as far as I can tell after the Tomozuru Incident and the Fourth Fleet Incident Japanese built their ships with exceptional reserves of stability). The Mitshubishi's shipyard at Yokohama should be able to construct them in parallel with the Sasebo arsenal, and this will require

Going with 8 Agano's is fine by me. Faster, cheaper and slightly better AA. They make a fine DL. Not much for CV Escort though...

Do we stick to the 2 Tone-Kai or look to something that recycles those triple 6.1" turrets taken off of the Mogami Class?
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
bigred
Posts: 4013
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:15 am

RE: 6.0

Post by bigred »

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I was actually the kid in Oliver speaking to the Headmaster...

[8D]

Seriously though. The Kawachi-Class BC are excellent ships. We included them originally as the realistic 'bone' Yamamoto would throw out to the Big Gun Faction of the Kaigun. It would be a fun fight to pit them against the Alaska's!
Well, a smart allied player will "seek and destroy" those Kawachi's ASAP. I wonder if the 34 knot speed is a bit too much.
---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
tm.asp?m=2597400
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: RA 6.0

Post by FatR »

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Kitakami got in before me with that thought. Remember in RA we have Mizuho come in as an exact sister to Chitose and Chiyoda. Good, fast ship for conversion. Additionally, FatR forgot to mention Nisshin comes in AS a CVL within the first couple of months of the war starting. These four ships make FINE CVLs by Japanese standards...

Ehhh... my bad. They got sunk early in one of my games and are stuck forever in conversion in another, so their existence slipped out of my mind somehow.

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Going with 8 Agano's is fine by me. Faster, cheaper and slightly better AA. They make a fine DL. Not much for CV Escort though...

Do we stick to the 2 Tone-Kai or look to something that recycles those triple 6.1" turrets taken off of the Mogami Class?

Tone-Kai, with an option to conver them to CVLs on the slipways, as described above, if you wish. Why bother with outdated Mogami turrets for a two-ship class, when building normal CAs let's you create another homogenous 4-ship division?
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17531
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: RA 6.0

Post by John 3rd »

OK. Looks like things are settled then for RA 6.0.

I have written that we do the following:

ALL wartime CV Building of Unryu's is scrapped in favor of 3 sets of Sho-Kais.
Keep the Kawachi's and Tone-Kai's
Replace old CLs with 8 lean and mean Aganos. Two at sea when the war starts and other six phasing in with time.
Take out the late-war pair of CVLs.
Allow conversion of 5 more 'Shadow Program' Ships.

Did I miss anything?
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: RA 6.0

Post by FatR »

You forgot your opinion on my light forces proposal and upgrade to Babes from the beginning of this thread, John. I'm willing to do the tedious work on classes and ship lists (in fact, much of it is done already, as proposal for ships below destroyers are heavily based on what I did for the Perfect War files). Also, Kayo and 2 extra CVEs will be removed from the queue, replaced with on-map conversions you mentioned.
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17531
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: RA 6.0

Post by John 3rd »

Why not? Makes sense to me to do so. I slight dialing back but still allowing lots of options. I do so LOVE options!

Is there anything here that an AFB would realistically like to see changed, tweaked, added?
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: RA 6.0

Post by FatR »

In that case, we need a few more pieces of art:

W 101 Minesweeper
http://www.navypedia.org/ships/japan/jap_ms_ex_brit.htm

Kamishima Minelayer
http://www.navypedia.org/ships/japan/ja ... ishima.htm


SS Type LST
http://www.navypedia.org/ships/japan/jap_aux_ss.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IJA_SS-19.jpg

Sokuten/Ajiro Minelayer (the art in AE doesn't really resemble its real looks). The same art except with a bigger gun fore and a gun instead of AAMG tower mount aft should be used for new escorts.
http://www.navypedia.org/ships/japan/jap_ml_sokuten.htm


The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
User avatar
DOCUP
Posts: 3109
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 7:38 pm

RE: RA 6.0

Post by DOCUP »

Couple of Ideas John

1: US could build up to treaty limits on its ships. I think it was short a few cruisers and DDs.

2: Modernize its BBs.

3: The US dosen't drag its feet with the Alaska construction and starts right off the bat in 38 or early 39. In response the Japanese starts building the B65s earlier (if its possible with the shipyards). With the Alaska's already built then the DDs that took up the Montana's spot can be built in the yards that had the Alaskas and the Montanas can be built. Do you get what I'm trying to say.

I have followed some of this threat but don't remember everything that you guys have done. So I'm sorry if I have repeated anything that has been mentioned from before.

Or for some odd flavor have BB 49 Washington or one of the Lexington BCs built as a BattleCarrier instead of scrapped. It could be like a CS ship for the US. Could also do this for some of the scrapped Japanese BBs or BCs I know BCVs sucked during the war but in 1920s who knew it would suck. Be kinda cool to see one of them for the US. Justs some ideas. Yes I am odd.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17531
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: RA 6.0

Post by John 3rd »

A lot of those suggestions are used in Perfect War. The single most interesting ship design I remember is the hybrid CA--CV. Fascinating possibility...
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
DOCUP
Posts: 3109
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 7:38 pm

RE: RA 6.0

Post by DOCUP »

Yea, I know couldn't think of anything else.&nbsp; Was this question towards only the navy or all of it?
User avatar
derhexer
Posts: 251
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:04 am

Reluctance question about backups (was RE: RA 6.0

Post by derhexer »

I'm reluctant to do this. The Readme sheet says, "In order to do this right, and retain the capability of playing scenarios with the Stock Map, you are going to have to save some game files in a ‘backup’ folder. " How will I know when a scenario is a stock scenario? What will happen if I try to play a stock scenario with the Extended Map? And what files do I move where?

Thanks[&:]
Chris
(Did you ever stop to think and forget to start?)
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: RA 5.4

Post by FatR »

To avoid continued confusion and data errors, associated with several people working on one mod, I decided to write down a detailed changelog this time. Take a look at the part of it that (if no one disagrees with the changes) will equally apply to the Reluctant Admiral and the Perfect War mods:



SECOND-CLASS TORPEDO SHIPS

(1)20 old 2nd-class destroyers of Momi and Wakatake classes are converted to numbered patrol boats, undergoing a major reconstruction (using old AA weapons removed from first-line ships). The PB-51 class of patrol craft is added to the scenario. Armament includes 1x120/45 3 YT, 1x2 40/61 T91, 2x4 13.2 T93, 1x2 53cm torpedoes, 48 DCs. Speed 25 knots, endurance 5000(14).

Wakatake (PB-51), Kuretake (PB-52), Sanae (PB-53), Asagao (PB-54), Fuyo (PB-55), Karukaya (PB-56), Yugao (PB-57), Hasu (PB-58), Kuri (PB-59), Tsuga (PB-60), Nire (PB-61), Take (PB-62), Kaki (PB-63), Ashi (PB-64), Sumire (PB-65), Hishu (PB-66), Kiku (PB-67), Susuki (PB-68), Tsuta (PB-69), Yomogi (PB-70) are included in this class.

Kaya, Nashi - decomissioned 1940 IRL, become PB-71 and PB-72 (slots 416-417).

(1.2)Added upgrade options for those destroyers of Momi and Wakatake classes that start the war converted to APDs.

(2)2 old destroyers of Momo class begin the war as second-rate escorts. Not reconstructed beyond replacing cannons with DCs and AAMGs.

(3)The Tomozuru class is renamed to Chidori class, for historical accuracy. All TBs remain classified as TBs, insread of Es, as they retain their torpedo armament.

(4)120/45 guns on unupgraded Minekaze and Kamikaze classes are changed from the 10YT (DP) to the historically correct 3YT (non-DP), so that these ships have practically no AA potential at the beginning of the war, as they should.

(5)6 old Minekaze-class DDs are convered to APDs in 1941, instead of 2 (Tachikaze to Nadakaze, slots 317-322), to compensate for absence of Momi/Wakatake APDs. These ships undergo a thorough reconstruction.




ESCORT SHIPS

(1)The only historical class of escorts in the scenario is Shimushu. All other escort classes presented in the scenario are derived from Sokuten/Hirashima minelayer class, rather than Shimushu class. Also, all escort hulls differ only in their degree of simplification and adaptation for rapid building techniques, no building of different-sized ships.

(2)The first class of new escorts is Matsuwa class, first ships laid down in the last months of 1941 and entering service in late 1942. Consists of 12 ships (slots 353-364). 725 tons of standard displacement; initial armament of 2x120/45 3YT (non-DP guns), 2x3 25/60 T96, 60 DCs; Speed 20 knots, Radius 4000 (14).

(3)The second class is Miyake class, first ships laid down in second half of 1942 and entering service in second half of 1943. The slightly improved variant of the previous class, the main differences are replacement of old 120/45 3YT guns with 10YT DP guns and 120 DCs. Consists of 10 ships (slots 365 - 374).

(4)The third class is Okinawa class, built through 1943 to 1945, with the first ships entering service at the end of 1943. A simplified and improved design, with slightly inreased fuel storage. 730 tons of standard displacement; initial armament of 2x120/45 10YT, 3x3 25/60 T96, 120 DCs; Speed 20 knots, Radius 4500 (14). 48 ships (slots 375-412).

(5)C and D class escorts are using the same hull and basic armament as Okinawa class, but less powerful and simpler to make engines. Armament is the same as IRL. Speed is slightly higher, while endurance is lower. Consists of 157 ships (slots 416-546, 613-622 and 6981-6999).

(6)Only 10 subchasers of the Ch-28 class are ordered (Ch-28 through Ch-37, those laid down before the adoption of the Circle Perimeter program), and the concept of the large subchaser is abandoned thereafter, to save manpower and resources for construction of large escorts and destroyers.

(7)3-ship historical Ch-251 class is added to the scenario (slots 8337-8339).



AMPHIBIOUS TRANSPORT SHIPS

(1)4-ship historical Kibitsu Maru LSD class is added to the scenario, arriving from December 1943 to 1945 (slots 2991-2994).

(2)16-ship historical SS LSI/LST class is added to the scenario. The number of ships is lower (16, slots 7385-7399), but they are available early in 1942-early 1943.

(3)Type SB (previously T-101) LSI/LST class is available from summer of 1943, and the number of ships in it is increased to 95 (slots 7441-7499 and 8575-8599) as production contunues throughout 1945.

(4)The number of Type 1 LSI/APDs is increased to 50 (slots 7411-7440 and 8550-8596), as the fist ship become available in mid-1943 and production continues until the end of the scenario.




MINE WARFARE SHIPS

(1)3-ship Ajiro minelayer class (slot 2898 and 14407-08) is added to the scenario (IRL this class consisted of 1 ship, not represented in stock), arriving in late 1943-early 1944.

(2)12-ship Kamishima minelayer/minesweeper (convertable both ways) class (slots 14410-21) is added to the scenario for late 1944 and 1945 (IRL this class also consisted of only one ship).

(3)2-ship Eijo minelayer class (historical) is added to scenario (slots 2899-2900).

(4)W-19 destroyer minesweeper class consists of only 4 ships. 13 more ships starting from W-23 are not ordered, with priority being given to escort construction and, later, smaller minelayers on a standardized hull.

(5)W-101 minesweeper class (historical ships made from captured British hulls) is added to the scenario (slots 624-625).

(6)Many small changes to flak upgrades are introduced for practically every class.





AUXILARIES, GUNBOATS, MERCHANTS, ETC

(1)The old former cruiser Asahi (slot 14405), reconstructed as a submarine tender, is included in the scenario.

(2)Three very old Japanese cruisers (Yakumo, Izumo, Iwate, slots 14402-4) are included in the scenario as patrol gunboats. Just don't expect them to participate in naval combat...



GENERAL

(1)In-game fuel loads on various cargo ships, auxilaries, escorts, and mine warfare ships are reduced by 1/3, to compensate for the reduction of their cargo loads compared to stock. These ships effectively take less fuel to travel the same distance. In some cases, where data regarding historical fuel loads is available, it is used instead of the normal reduction, as the game seems to burden Japanese auxilaries and small ships with excessive fuel consumption anyway.

(2)Many upgrades are tweaked. In general, the number of AAMG increased on many classes, but is often lower than in stock before upgrades.
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: RA 5.4

Post by FatR »

And regarding PT boats for both mods: I propose that Japanese buy this German export design (developed for China IRL),
http://www.navypedia.org/ships/germany/ger_mb_s30.htm

both a few boats, and a license/documentation for their production. The justification is interest in small and relatively cheap motor boat for outlying base protection, that can execute night torpedo attacks on enemy forces at open sea, and base all of their PT wartime boat construction on it.

The number of PT boat constucted would be much lower than in stock, though - engines on this little walnut-shell were more powerful than on average Japanese escort and four times more powerful than on most of RL Japanese PT boats. However, this design will have an advantage of not being totally useless (in the game Japanese PT boats actually can accomplish stuff sometimes, but that's more of an artifact of game mechanics).
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17531
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: RA 5.4

Post by John 3rd »

Like the first Post. Need to think about the second.
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
Symon
Posts: 1885
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:59 pm
Location: De Eye-lands, Mon

RE: RA 5.4

Post by Symon »

Think you guys are doing things right. But, then again, Irish lamb Stew; utter yumm. You really need the bay leaves and cardomom and that slash of malt. Just remember the rule when you are using 'beverages' to flavor your recipe: A slash for the recipe and a slash for yourself. That keeps ya from using the 'cheap' stuff. Anything that you won't drink has no business going into your food.

Ok, I'll do the art Stan wants. No brainer.

Just talking about lamb because my meat market turned me on to 'fresh' Colorado lamb legs. A bit more marbelized than the NZ guys, but when you factor in the freeze thing, it's pretty darn close. Tasty, tasty; and I am one of those people who like mutton. So, take what you will. I bought a big boneless leg and made a roast, souvlakis, rounds, and the leftovers are going into a stew. Golly, I do like lamb.

JWE
Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5185
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: RA 5.4

Post by Don Bowen »

ORIGINAL: Symon

Think you guys are doing things right. But, then again, Irish lamb Stew; utter yumm. You really need the bay leaves and cardomom and that slash of malt. Just remember the rule when you are using 'beverages' to flavor your recipe: A slash for the recipe and a slash for yourself. That keeps ya from using the 'cheap' stuff. Anything that you won't drink has no business going into your food.

Ok, I'll do the art Stan wants. No brainer.

Just talking about lamb because my meat market turned me on to 'fresh' Colorado lamb legs. A bit more marbelized than the NZ guys, but when you factor in the freeze thing, it's pretty darn close. Tasty, tasty; and I am one of those people who like mutton. So, take what you will. I bought a big boneless leg and made a roast, souvlakis, rounds, and the leftovers are going into a stew. Golly, I do like lamb.

JWE


Try some lamb stew with Berbere and some Ethiopian Lentils on the side. This is what beer was invented for.

Please share any icons you do with good old Don (well, at least old Don).
User avatar
Symon
Posts: 1885
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:59 pm
Location: De Eye-lands, Mon

RE: RA 5.4

Post by Symon »

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
Try some lamb stew with Berbere and some Ethiopian Lentils on the side. This is what beer was invented for.

Please share any icons you do with good old Don (well, at least old Don).
Any excuse I can get, Bro. Ethiopian Lentils? Are they tasty different from Indian Lentils? I mean, I make a wicked Dal Makhani. And I kinda like Kingfisher beer. Most of the folks, here, serve that Shiva brand, that tastes like recycled gasoline. Woof !!

You own all the art I do. Anything I do comes the way of 'good old Don'.

Ciao. John
Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design and Modding”