Fugaku

[steveK]

I was disapointed when i didn't find "Nakajima G10N Fugaku"
I know it never materilized, however some of the planes that in the game were build in single digit numbers.
If the war would extend to may 1946 Japs Might build couple of them.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: steveK

I was disapointed when i didn't find "Nakajima G10N Fugaku"
I know it never materilized, however some of the planes that in the game were build in single digit numbers.
If the war would extend to may 1946 Japs Might build couple of them.

you have to try a mod, IIRC CHS has it included.

[n01487477]

This is what you really want and need as Japan ... Nemo's EA mod, but not for the faint hearted and not V AI ...

[Sarganto]

ORIGINAL: n01487477

This is what you really want and need as Japan ... Nemo's EA mod, but not for the faint hearted and not V AI ...

Available 42/6? [X(]

[FeurerKrieg]

Yup. It is an interesting mod. Made for carnage.

[Nemo121]

Khorne demands it [8D]
 
 
Basically the idea is to allow both sides all sorts of options ( Japan can build lots more CVs, can build raiding CVLs, can concentrate on building up an even stronger army, can build more subs or more surface ships, can build a primarily defensive air force or can build strategic bombers or go offensive with shorter range bombers) BUT to make sure that neither side can do more than a couple of those options ( E.g. Japan can do 2, maybe 3 of the above but not all of them ) and to make the modelling of the Japanese economy extremely challenging.
 
There are obvious traps, subtle traps and lots of interplay between various things in the mod which may have unanticipated consequences.
 
The Allies get lots of counters and interesting options too but there's much less room for error on both sides. Its pretty unforgiving but, I think, has been rewarding for those people who have played it.

[khyberbill]

Is there going to be an EA for AE?

[Nemo121]

kyhberbill,

I think that they'd have to make AE a LOT more stable and remedy some of the more egregious flaws ( PT results and surface combat and sub results being high on the list ) before it would be worth making an EA for AE. If they make those fixes then, possibly, I might make a simplified EA for it.

At the present moment in time though I don't even have AE due to its buginess. I'll wait for it to mature before getting it, if I ever do.

[n01487477]

The other impediment might be the engine count / airfield hard code, which might make Angels ineffective (smaller numbers allowed) ... I think the devs made a mistake here by not allowing this to be modable, it's all ok if you want to play a historical game ( and even YH has said that this is not true - cause you can't base historical numbers of B-17 etc at bases) ... but what about alternative histories - which are certainly more fun than playing a historical game ???

Or would it be a case of making all bases exceed the 10 base lvl ... something to test I guess ...


--Damian--

[Nemo121]

Yes, for all the talk of modability they have actually done something rather peculiar insofar as there is a huge ability to add new planes and plane subtypes etc. Same for ships, troops etc.
 
There is however very little ability to mod the basics of the game itself so as to achieve different operational and strategic realities.
 
In short there is a great ability to mod items they want you to mod in the ways they wish them to be modded BUT the game is NOT a fully open game yet as this modability extends only to changing technical characteristics.
 
I wish them well but, sadly, I think they missed a major opportunity here. Certainly people will mod every little plane which had a production run of even 2 or 3 planes and mod in many hypothetical planes but I think that little was done to accomodate the scope of something like Empires Ablaze which seeks to create different strategic and operational atmospheres.
 
So, yes, your planes can be a bit faster, or slower, more heavily armed, jet-powered or piston-powered BUT changing the strategic flavour of a game isn't accomplished through changing the technical-tactical factors of a weapons system but through changing the base environment in which that system can be employed... E.g. Damian's example of not being able to mod support capabilities is highly relevant here.
 
 
In short, AE is a case of "By all means add planes which had tiny production runs and Asperger yourself to death in creating subtypes BUT woe betide you if you have a strategic-level vision."
 
If there were some expressed willingness to allow issues of strategic relevance to be modded then I'd buy AE and churn out an EA version for it as I think most of the people who have tried EA have found it to be a very different and interesting ( albeit excruciatingly tough ) experience but I'm in no mood to have to struggle with a system to free up the strategic options again.

[n01487477]

Furthermore to what Nemo is saying, I'd propose an editor that would reveal the following to really make this game modifiable to encompass both operational and strategic alt-histories...
1. Base load/dock limits for shipping based on base lvl.
2. Base plane capacity variables based on base lvl
3. Production variables regarding inputs and outputs of raw and manufactured goods.[edit] actually I've just checked and they do this!!!
4. Production cost/build variables (1000/repair etc)
Additional, but not essential.
5. Base repair/build modifiers for engineers.
6. Base Lcu limits.(although I can live with the new reality here)

etc ...
anyone else want to chime in ?