Reluctant Admiral Feedback

[anarchyintheuk]

Same reasoning the Brits could never standardize their bb/ca secondary or dd main armament. No one in charge, too many people in charge, gun board member has a relative who owns one of the manufacturers, an admiral has fond memories for a type because he commanded a section of them after graduating Etajima, too many reasons really or none at all depending on your pov. Perils of bureaucracy.

The IJN may also have had a bottleneck in production like the Brits did w/ the Dido class. Your guess is as good as mine.[:)]

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: 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?

Purely guesswork here..., but the Japanese suffered from a sever shortage of machine tools and the ability to produce them. May be as simple as re-starting the old factory because the old tools and jigs were there, but couldn't be upgraded or replaced.

[FatR]

The problem with torpedo boats seems to be hard to escape. While other ships with location of "0" are automatically set to arrive in the default port (Tokyo for smaller combatants, like kaibokans; Hailar for barges and midgets), setting location of arrival to "0" for MGBs/MTBs cause them to disappear from the scenario... I'll try setting them to arrive in Hailar, but there is no guarantee at all that this will fix the bug.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: FatR

The problem with torpedo boats seems to be hard to escape. While other ships with location of "0" are automatically set to arrive in the default port (Tokyo for smaller combatants, like kaibokans; Hailar for barges and midgets), setting location of arrival to "0" for MGBs/MTBs cause them to disappear from the scenario... I'll try setting them to arrive in Hailar, but there is no guarantee at all that this will fix the bug.

MTB/MGB (and a few others) with no arrival base (i.e. zero) go into the pool, from which they can be bought using supply.

[FatR]

Thanks, Don Bowen. I see that midgets aren't showing up in the "Ship Availability" lists as well. Hopefully setting the location to "0" for motor boats will cause them to become available as they should be.

Speaking of motor boats, I'm thinking about adding a hundred or two to the queue for 1945-46, as well as some barges. Unlike midget subs, these torpedo delivery systems are cheap enough, that players might actually want them. Japanese obsession with midgets (and kaitens, and other underwater attack craft) at the end of the war was rather irrational anyway, just random grasping at straws, fueled by desperation. Assuming Yamamoto does not manage to kill himself in this alternative and IJN will be less driven by wishful thinking in its late-war development, we can easily postulate less enthusiasm towards them and concentration on more reliable designs.

Also, I just got "Warships of the Imperial Japanese Navy 1869-1945" by H. Jentschura and others, the book which John was talking about above in this thread, and quite a few late-war ships that might be worth adding to the scenario can be found there, but

[JWE]

Howdy Stan,

Not sure you need to add more MTBs to the queue. Can if ya want, but it might choke the chicken. As Don says, them guys buy from supply, and Intro-base=0 mean queue. But also, they respawn; sink 30, get 30 more. It was probably silly trying to add in every single US PT that ever was, given that they all return from the dead, but .. hoop-la, woof.

What I might suggest is look at the increase over the years and for each subsequent year, divide the actual number by (sqrt)2 - and factored all the way through. That allows for the walking dead to resurect and boggie and give a reasonable number of boats in the pools. Otherwise, you'll end up with a gazillion PT TFs in every port with enuf supply to buy them. "PTs in The Pacific!".

Once again, suggest Rule of Reason. Ciao. John

[John 3rd]

Got a few notes from Stanislav and am on a 6-day vacation seeing my Mom and Best Friend so don't have much time to participate in conversation. No real comments regarding last few Postings other then to congrat Stanislav on buying the Jentschura book...

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: JWE

Howdy Stan,

Not sure you need to add more MTBs to the queue. Can if ya want, but it might choke the chicken. As Don says, them guys buy from supply, and Intro-base=0 mean queue. But also, they respawn; sink 30, get 30 more. It was probably silly trying to add in every single US PT that ever was, given that they all return from the dead, but .. hoop-la, woof.

What I might suggest is look at the increase over the years and for each subsequent year, divide the actual number by (sqrt)2 - and factored all the way through. That allows for the walking dead to resurect and boggie and give a reasonable number of boats in the pools. Otherwise, you'll end up with a gazillion PT TFs in every port with enuf supply to buy them. "PTs in The Pacific!".

Once again, suggest Rule of Reason. Ciao. John

Are you really sure that MTBs/PTs respawn? Barges definitely do, they do not appear on the list of lost ships and barges with the same numbers as the destroyed ones can be seen in the queue again. But MTBs, once destroyed, are recorded by the game as lost and I don't see a few MTBs I've expended being available again. The option to create PT boats do not reappear.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: FatR
Are you really sure that MTBs/PTs respawn? Barges definitely do, they do not appear on the list of lost ships and barges with the same numbers as the destroyed ones can be seen in the queue again. But MTBs, once destroyed, are recorded by the game as lost and I don't see a few MTBs I've expended being available again. The option to create PT boats do not reappear.

Right you are. Should probably have reread page 2 of Don's memo, from way back. [:D]
Buy from supply types are:
LB, LCVP, LCM, LCT, PT, MTB, MGB, SSX

Auto replacement for:
LB, LCVP, LCM, LCT

Heigh ho.

[John 3rd]

What are you going to do with this Stanislav?

[FatR]

Well, I'll proceed with adding more MTBs... as soon as I'll have enough time again. Did you receive my last email, one with the mod in its current state?

[John 3rd]

I'm on the final day of my short trip. Will be home tonight and try to take a look.

[John 3rd]

Am home now and will take a look at what you sent Stanislav.

Queries for RA Designers and Readers:
1. Stanislav: How long do you think you'll need for a realistic time completing your work?

2. Do we have any clue as to when the newest Patch is due out? Since I have been gone this might be a stupid question...

3. The Mod is going to need a thorough going through BEFORE we release it. Is there anyone out there who would like to see the Mod so comments could be made here and we go through any bugs/issues that might be found?

Post here if interested...

EDIT: Just checked out the new Babes site. Strikes me as a good idea to create an off-forum site for downloads, changes, comments, etc...

What would it take to create a site and is it a worthwhile activity?

[FatR]

Extra ships of the mosquito fleet probably can be added on this weekend. Subs, probably next week, as I want to check the dates where construction of historical hulls. Aviation, save for fixing the known bugs, and Allied late-war reinforcements proposal - some time after that.

John, you should take note of the new and improved kaibokan shipsides by Local Yokel (great work and thanks, LY!) and, if he agrees, add them to the art pack of the mod.

[John 3rd]

Your 'to do' plan sounds good and reasonable.

I have already seen the work done by LY and I like it. If he is willing, I think they'd make a fine addition to the Mod Art.

What do you think of SuluSea's work with the Mod?

[FatR]

And one more thing. I believe more and more, we should implement DaBabes' flak upgrades after all, at least in general. I think early-war flak - to where I managed to progress in the game - is somewhat anemic compared to RL, and some results it produces are just strange, like US AAA units being complete trash (as evidenced by demolition of Oahu in my ongoing RA game). Late-war flak I still don't find underpowered compared to RL even after testing with quitting to desktop after every time, but I find it underpowered compared to the realities of the game.

I would be very thankful, though, if JWE or someone else from the devs can answer three questions related to that:

1)Is weapons' effectiveness against surface targets primarily governed by anti-soft/anti-armor ratings? Because I would hate to see Japanese destroyers being cut in two by Boforses and Pom-Poms.
(1.5)Speaking of that, statistics for 2pdr HA MK VIII in Scen 26 are really bad-ass. In stock it is quite good as well, but after DaBabes flak upgrade it is slightly better than Bofors. Considering that this gun was commonly considered inadequate in RL and meager achievements of shipboard British AAA in 1942, are you sure these stats are supposed to reflect a single barrel, rather than a mount of 8?)
2)Can you provide us the list of the guns that have been modified? I would have preferred to add changes to the existing devices file, as to avoid overwriting any previous modifications.
3)Can you provide us the a list of Japanese AAA units armed with 8cm/88mm T99 AA gun, assuming it is historically accurate? When we were adding 88mm Type 99 to Scen 70, before patches added this gun to stock, I just assigned to some units in Home Islands arbitrarily.

[John 3rd]

I have been watching AA pretty closely in my game with Lew (nearly Nov-1942) and it is getting stronger but only when it appears to be concentrated.

Stanislav and I have been emailing back-and-forth as he wades his way through changes and modifications. Figure there will be a Posting here pertaining to some of that. Pretty good for discussion and/or thinking...

[Local Yokel]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I have already seen the work done by LY and I like it. If he is willing, I think they'd make a fine addition to the Mod Art.

My apologies for being unable to respond sooner. Have been unable to access the web for some time after some clot in Slough apparently severed a fibre link connecting me to my ISP. So much for this internet thingy being resilient enough to withstand nuclear attack...

I should be only too happy for my kaibokan artwork to be incorporated into the RA art pack!

Inveterate fiddler that I am, I have changed just two pixels in the D-gata kaibokan and think they improve the appearance of the stack compared to my original version. Hope you don't mind my uploading to this thread a zip file containing the two altered images, background and transparency.

[John 3rd]

Very NICE! Thank You Sir.

Stanislav: Can you add it to the Mod since you have the files right now?

[AdmNelson]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I have been watching AA pretty closely in my game with Lew (nearly Nov-1942) and it is getting stronger but only when it appears to be concentrated.

It is very concentrated in some areas if that makes a difference.