Reluctant Admiral Feedback

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

bklooste
Posts: 1104
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:47 am

RE: 1st Class DDs

Post by bklooste »

ORIGINAL: FatR

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Would love to raise Tone/Chikuma to 8 FP. BK--Is this info corraborated anywhere in your literature? If so, it would be quite useful. Think it is funny that I raised the Tone-Kai to 8 without this info!
The problem here is that the optimal number of planes for actual operations < the number of planes that can theoretically be operated from a ship. I would love to see Terminus or anyone else to comment on viability of this proposal...


Do you have the data for that ? For one mission i vaguely remember they carried 6 and another 3 because the planes weren't available. 6 is rare ... How many is pure speculation but the Japanese were quite conservative in the number of planes they designed on their CVs also - they never quote maximum capacity only practical maximum capacity . I see no point in the whole design if its like 3-4 you may as well build Mogami/Takao class ships instead of new design overheads , loosing the turret and having the clumsy all forward arrangement. ie Use the savings for a new design to convert some AVs and use the CVS for the fleet.
Underdog Fanboy
bklooste
Posts: 1104
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:47 am

RE: 1st Class DDs

Post by bklooste »

Agano's to me reflect the real desires of the 'Fleet' Faction of the IJN: stronger and built for battle. I just wish we could build two more of them but I understand the whole decision process we have made. As to the timeline concern, BK only two start deployed for battle. The IJN gets two more in 1942 and the last pair in 1943.

So since 2 are available in 41 these designs are finalized and decisions are made say 37-39 with the first 2 laid down at the end of 39/ first half of 1940. The issues are if they are designed for fleet action are they as good as existing designs eg Mogami/Takao for fleet actions ? Especially when you have spare Mogami class turrets and can use an existing design meaning the cost for the smaller ship will probably be the same ! For an air based scenario you could make a case for 12 * 6.1" and 12 * 100/65 instead of 15 * 6.1" and 8 * 5"/40 but i dont think its much of an improvement as the 5"/40 is quite decent..

Also there is no way the 80mm AA is available at this time, the 100mm would be a big stretch ( but too heavy) .

During the war obviously the historical Aganos make a stronger case as they use significantly less resources.

Ben
Underdog Fanboy
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17785
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

Ball to Stanislav

Post by John 3rd »

The ball is now in Stanislav's court. Just sent the Zip file to him with all the Mod Files.

He has a lot of work to do but, once complete, I have no doubt we shall have a much more different, streamlined Mod to work with. Should be a lot of fun to see the differences and how they impact the game.

Don't want to release RA 3.0, Scen 69 until the mythical patch comes out so we'll see how long that takes.
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: Ball to Stanislav

Post by FatR »

2Don Bowen: Yes, normally Yamato and other superbattleships can reload without problem, but Scen 70 increases ammo loadouts for all weapons. So, forward batteries of Yamato and several other classes ran into the reloading cap.

2John 3rd: Considering how testing must be actually done, the patch is likely to appear earlier than I'll be finished with the air side of things... I'll surely post here any major propositions from my side.
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: Ball to Stanislav

Post by FatR »

One thing, John. In Scen 70 ammo stores on battleships and the like are increased massively (which caused the "Yamato reloading problem"), on cruisers/newer destroyers they are increased by about 20-30% at most and on ships below destroyers they are untouched compared to the stock (this all is inherited from JuanG's scenarious...). If you wish, I can increase them at least for the ships I'll be working with.
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: Ball to Stanislav

Post by FatR »

While we're talking about escorts, it seems that C/D-class gets its late-war AAA armament from the beginning - see its initial scheme below - while Mikura doesn't get its supposed 18x25mm complement ever... Going to fix that, unless someone comments on how many ships actually were built with armament like this:

Image
Attachments
32956911EE..300363F0.gif
32956911EE..300363F0.gif (39.75 KiB) Viewed 484 times
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
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: Ball to Stanislav

Post by JWE »

ORIGINAL: FatR
2Don Bowen: Yes, normally Yamato and other superbattleships can reload without problem, but Scen 70 increases ammo loadouts for all weapons. So, forward batteries of Yamato and several other classes ran into the reloading cap.
Well, it looks like you have run into the Law Of "try and tweak one thing and run into at least seven" Unanticipated Consequences. There's a couple more you haven't found yet.
User avatar
Local Yokel
Posts: 1494
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:55 pm
Location: Somerset, U.K.

RE: Ball to Stanislav

Post by Local Yokel »

Fukui gives no date for the enlargement of the AA armament on the Type 'C' and 'D' kaibokan in Japanese Naval Vessels at the End of the War.

In their monograph on the kaibokan, Lengerer and Rehm-Takahara say that augmentation of these vessels' original fit of 2 X triple 25mm mounts took place after completion of the first ships, up to 'about' CD 21. Jentschura et al give August 1944 as the completion date of this vessel.

Grounds for setting September 1944 as the availability date of an AA upgrade for these vessels?
Image
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17785
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Ball to Stanislav

Post by John 3rd »

ORIGINAL: FatR

One thing, John. In Scen 70 ammo stores on battleships and the like are increased massively (which caused the "Yamato reloading problem"), on cruisers/newer destroyers they are increased by about 20-30% at most and on ships below destroyers they are untouched compared to the stock (this all is inherited from JuanG's scenarious...). If you wish, I can increase them at least for the ships I'll be working with.

Think that sounds like a decent idea.
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17785
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Ball to Stanislav

Post by John 3rd »

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: FatR
2Don Bowen: Yes, normally Yamato and other superbattleships can reload without problem, but Scen 70 increases ammo loadouts for all weapons. So, forward batteries of Yamato and several other classes ran into the reloading cap.
Well, it looks like you have run into the Law Of "try and tweak one thing and run into at least seven" Unanticipated Consequences. There's a couple more you haven't found yet.

That is rather serious sounding John. Care to share?
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17785
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Ball to Stanislav

Post by John 3rd »

ORIGINAL: FatR

While we're talking about escorts, it seems that C/D-class gets its late-war AAA armament from the beginning - see its initial scheme below - while Mikura doesn't get its supposed 18x25mm complement ever... Going to fix that, unless someone comments on how many ships actually were built with armament like this:

Image

That actually isn't a bad looking vessel.

LY--Your date for the AA upgrade might be workable. Re-working the ASW Escorts is going to be all Stanislav.

Ideas, comments, and suggestions will be highly valuable since we are taking the Adm. Yamamoto streamlining and maximizing personnel in a new direction.
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17785
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

Art and Intro

Post by John 3rd »

While start starts his work, I plan to continue working on a few other things:

1. A new introduction to the scenario.

2. Making sure that all of EJ's new artwork gets included. EJ--Can you whip-up something for the Allied Player that could replace one of the Allied Screens? Might be nice for the other side to get something new.

3. A serious examination of all starting LCUs and whether anything should be changed or not. Additionally we can settle on a few other Day One placements.

Will Post here as work progresses or ideas need solicitation.
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: Ball to Stanislav

Post by FatR »

ORIGINAL: Local Yokel

Fukui gives no date for the enlargement of the AA armament on the Type 'C' and 'D' kaibokan in Japanese Naval Vessels at the End of the War.

In their monograph on the kaibokan, Lengerer and Rehm-Takahara say that augmentation of these vessels' original fit of 2 X triple 25mm mounts took place after completion of the first ships, up to 'about' CD 21. Jentschura et al give August 1944 as the completion date of this vessel.

Grounds for setting September 1944 as the availability date of an AA upgrade for these vessels?
Thanks for the information, I'll pick September.

Anyway, easy of ASW tweak is mostly done, I've modified escort classes and USN sub durability (Type 2 DCs already had reduced range). Now I have to go through the extremely tedious process of changing the building queue of kaibokans by hand.
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: 17785
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Ball to Stanislav

Post by John 3rd »

Tedious is the RIGHT word for that! I did that with 42 DDs. You have a bunch more then that. Good luck and make sure you SMILE while you're doing it.
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17785
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

New Introduction

Post by John 3rd »

Spent a little time adding and changing the Introduction to 3.0. Any feedback would be appreciated! JWE and SuluSea--could you email me your names so I can appropriately note them?


The Reluctant Admiral is a Japanese 'what if' scenario based upon a greater contribution by Adm. Yamamoto Isoroku. The premise of the Mod is that Yamamoto exerted a much greater influence first on the Japan Naval Aircraft Industry, then as Deputy Navy Minister, and finally as Navy Minister itself. Yamamoto chooses, at great risk to his life, to forego command of the Combined Fleet and dedicate himself to preparing Japan for a war he didn't want.

In choosing to do this Yamamoto changes the 4th Circle Building plan replacing the 3rd and 4th Yamato-Class Battleships with improved Shokaku-Class CVs and a pair of fast Battlecruisers. Other warships are added as planned within 4th Circle. The Japan Naval Air Arm is changed so that everything is staked to the Zero Airframe with a specialization of the Zero into a Land-Based Interceptor as well as CV-Based Fighters. Additional engineers and engineering vehicles are added to Naval Units better reflecting Yamamoto's foresight into base building and expansion needs. New and expanded Naval Yards, Heavy Industry, and Armaments are added at tremendous cost for the Japanese economy.

The foresight of the Admiral will payoff during 1942 and early-1943 as new ships and aircraft enter into the Japanese Order-of-Battle, however, the cost is steep. Though expanded and using modern aircraft many Japanese Naval Air units start with their experience lowered to reflect the dilution of the experienced pilots into new units. Supply and fuel reserves start at a much reduced state. The Japanese MUST take the DEI as fast as possible.

In a major change over the previous two versions of Reluctant Admiral, the 3.0 reflects more of Yamamoto’s influence upon the wartime Kaigun. First class destroyers are accelerated and emphasis is shifted to the AA Akizuki-Class at the expense of the more balanced Yugumo’s. Manpower is at a premium within the Fleet so Submarines, Escorts, and ASW forces all see a major retooling reflecting the Japanese quality over quantity belief.

It should be noted that not all the changes are for the Japanese. The Allies see some major changes in their starting locations, new air units, and several additional CVLs and CVEs. The added warships reflect a ‘stopgap’ counter to the increased Japanese strength found at war’s start.

How well can YOU do to use these new tools OR how well can you stop the Japanese Navy in its tracks as the Allies.

(Designer's note: Production is 'on' for this scenario)

Scenario Designers: Stanislav Bartoshevitch (FatR), Michael Benoit (NY59Giants), John R. Cochran, III (John 3rd), Juan Gomez (JuanG), Ben Kloosterman (BK), John (JWE), EJ (SuluSea) and John Young (Red Lancer)
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: Yamato

Post by FatR »

What I've done at the moment:

Ship Classes:
1)Stats of USN subs are brought in line with DaBabes. (Checked Type 2 DC, range was already at 375).
2)Stats for Mikura-class and C/D-class esorts tweaked. The number of DC racks is decreased, small-calibre AAA armament is changed towards more historical (as far as I can tell).
3)Changed the upgrade tree for Otori-class TBs to a weapon loadout more optimized against air and surface targets, and made the key upgrade available from 42/1. Three ships of the class (those in the invasion TFs) will start the game already upgraded.
4)Added a 6/45 kaited carrier upgrade for Matsu-class DDs (but not Tachibanas). Allegedly it was done IRL. It reduces their ASW and flak capabilities, though.
5)Made in-game ship classification a bit less confusing. Torpedo boats that retain their torpedo armament will stay torpedo boats. Only those stripped of it will be reclassified as escorts.
6)Slightly increased gun ammo loads to escorts.

Ships
1)Removed 33 Ukuru-class escorts from the queue.
2)Added 41 C/D-class escorts to the queue, and rearranged the production queue. Production of C/D class escorts will reach the peak in autumn of 1944, gradually decrease in the next five months, and drop radically from May of 1945 onwards, with the last ship arriving in September of 1945 (only about 6 ships from the stock queue arrive after this date anyway). I doubt that long-range escorts will be a priority need at this point...

Example of modified stats - early Type C kaibokan:

Image
Attachments
Scr01.jpg
Scr01.jpg (187.75 KiB) Viewed 484 times
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: 17785
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Yamato

Post by John 3rd »

That is a lot of work. Well done Sir!

What was the final decision regarding SS? We bantered it around quite a bit...
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: Yamato

Post by FatR »

I believe the post #823 concluded our discussion on subs.
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
traskott
Posts: 1577
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:30 am
Location: Valladolid, Spain

RE: Yamato

Post by traskott »

U can kill me if u want ( or can!! ) but, do you have plans for similar changes to the allied side ?

Thank you.

Nice job, btw. As soon as I drop one of my 3 games of WitP I'll began one with this mod as japan [:)]
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: Yamato

Post by FatR »

Traskott, I believe we should give Allies greater number of reinforcements late in the war, but no conrete plans so far. The Allied side is unlikely to get more in-depth reworking than that.


Meanwhile: does anyone know why Japanese bothered with producing 120mm/45 10YT gun during the war, apparently even going as far as restarting its production? As far as I can tell, single-mount manually operated variant of 127/40 existed and had almost the same weight as 120/45 10 YT and 3YT mounts installed on many smaller ships, but wasn't mass-produced, even though 127/40 had slightly better overall characteristics (standard double mounts for 127/40 were better than anything made for 120/45, but this is a separate issue...). Why produce two guns that take practically the same tactical niche?
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design and Modding”