DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs LST's Bottlenecks vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
User avatar
Tanaka
Posts: 5150
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 3:42 am
Location: USA

DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs LST's Bottlenecks vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by Tanaka »

Playing my first PBEM (boy am I learning a lot!) using And Mac's Updated Scen 1 with the Bellum Pacifica map and thinking of what my next future PBEM will be...since I will be eventually switching over to Andrew Brown's extended map updates I am looking at the DaBabes scenarios...

Sort of a PBEM poll here for Vets:

Andy Mac's Scen 1 seems to be the best to play against the AI and seems to have the most up to date fixes? So do you prefer Andy Mac's Scen 1 or I am assuming that...

Do most of you play DaBigBabes C (highly modified LCU's, TOEs, OOBs, reduced naval and aviation support) (extended map and reduced cargos) with the stacking limits (I found supply to be really difficult) or is DaBigBabes B (no reduced cargo)with stacking limits preferred for less difficulty and complexity?

In other words is DaBigBabes C considered the best way to play WITPAE by vets or is this too extreme/difficult and DaBabes A/B(standard map AI possible) or DaBigBabes B (extended map with stacking limits but no cargo reduction) preferred? (I'm assuming extended map and stacking limits are preferred by vets?).

Or do you prefer the deluxe complexity of the even further modded DaBigBabes C LST's Bottlenecks in the Pacific?

Andy Mac: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4692890

DaBabes/DaBigBabes: https://sites.google.com/site/dababeswitpae/home

LST's Bottlenecks: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4262848
Image
rockmedic109
Posts: 2422
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 11:02 am
Location: Citrus Heights, CA

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by rockmedic109 »

I am playing DaBigBabes B. I have not played C. I have not played as Japan. I have gotten to 1945 playing B. I like it.

I cannot say what the effects of C will be. I think there would be enough allied sealift to move supplies but I am not sure there would be enough APA for large scale invasions that I think would be needed in Japan, Okinawa, Marianas and Iwo. Iwo might not be needed and the Philippines should have enough shoreline to pick a spot. I am also not sure how reduced aviation support would play out. I'd hate to get into 1944 and find I don't have enough air support for a bombing campaign. With the brain trust involved in dababes, I imagine it is not a problem.
User avatar
dr.hal
Posts: 3545
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:41 pm
Location: Covington LA via Montreal!

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by dr.hal »

I'm engaged in DaBabes scenario 28 which uses the extended map and reduced cargo. I think the extended map is a great change as it allows for a few key geopolitical realities to be realized that the original map missed. Although the reduced cargo is supposed to slow the game down, I've not seen it as the Japanese player, however it's early days yet (mid Feb '42) and it might have a biting impact later on. Overall however, I really like this scenario.
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I'm engaged in DaBabes scenario 28 which uses the extended map and reduced cargo. I think the extended map is a great change as it allows for a few key geopolitical realities to be realized that the original map missed. Although the reduced cargo is supposed to slow the game down, I've not seen it as the Japanese player, however it's early days yet (mid Feb '42) and it might have a biting impact later on. Overall however, I really like this scenario.
That's 28-C. My favorite also!
User avatar
USSAmerica
Posts: 19211
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 4:32 am
Location: Graham, NC, USA
Contact:

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by USSAmerica »

Stock Scenario 1 here. It's the only one I've played in PBEM, other than a few trips through the Guadalcanal scenario.
Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Image
Artwork by The Amazing Dixie
User avatar
kbfchicago
Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 4:46 pm
Location: NC, USA
Contact:

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by kbfchicago »

indirectly...DaBabes, I play a modified LST's Bottlenecks which is based on DaBabes with his adjustments. LST introduces allot of smaller units and some additional historical units. I've updated LST's startup. LST tweeted his start for rapid play, I prefer more historical start and randomly delayed mobilization of merchant ships (both sides). It actually also serves the purpose of making the initial turns easier, just in a different way. LST pre-positioned ships for easy assignment of initial orders. I slow the introduction of civilian merchants ships over the course of about 90-120 days. Reflecting for IJ the arming of merchants (no data, but my assumption is not every Japanese merchant ship was armed on 7 Dec 41....). Allied ships, which don't start armed, would have needed time to be mobilized, receive orders, et.al. Delays are shorter for ships in the immediate war zone (e.g. Philippines) and IJ mobilizes very quickly over the first couple of weeks. I also flattened some later mobilizations, spreading them out over time. Larger ships get mobilized before smaller ones (generally, some exceptions). Result is the first turn pain is spread out over the first 90 days or so. Again, no historical data to support this but as a guy who prefers to push the game to recognize historical constraints (where I can), I like it.


Also... I put (significantly) more ships out at sea, reflecting the civilian world was not "in port" on 7 Dec, but carrying on with their business as usual. It's been awhile since I did my last adjustment but I think I used all the available (initial setup) TFs for both sides...so lots of ships at sea.
MacBook Pro / WITP-AE running in Parallels v15.x
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by Lowpe »

In general I like the mods that attempt to slow the pacing of the game down, even tried Asian Roads modifier to dababes.

Having completed a handful of pbems to the end, it is the players that determine the pacing, the mods not so much effect.

So pretty much now I pick just choose whether I want to play a scenario 1 or 2 type game, and don't care as much whether it is stock or not - often it comes down to my opponent selecting.

As Japan I prefer the great challenge of a Scenario 1 game. As the Allies, giving Japan the Scenario 2 benefits seems to work ok.

Against the AI, Nasty, Nasty.

User avatar
Q-Ball
Posts: 7392
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 4:43 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by Q-Ball »

ORIGINAL: witpqs

That's 28-C. My favorite also!

+1 on this for me
JanSako
Posts: 503
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2022 12:06 pm

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by JanSako »

LST's Bottlenecks in the Pacific for me. (Based on DBB-c but even better!)

I am starting an SP campaign of Nasty Nasty too... I wonder how much over the top it will be.
User avatar
Tanaka
Posts: 5150
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 3:42 am
Location: USA

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by Tanaka »

Ok so far DaBigBabes C and modified DaBigBabes C (LST's Bottlenecks) seem to be the top choice.

Looking at Bottlenecks it does seem to be even more intense than DaBigBabes C! Woah!

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4262848
Image
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by castor troy »

Been playing DaBigBabes scen 28 extended map ever since release
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5457
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by Yaab »

Updated stock scenarios (001 and 007) all the way.

RHS mod is also great, however it is still unfinished.
User avatar
btd64
Posts: 14228
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:48 am
Location: Lancaster, OHIO

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by btd64 »

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Updated stock scenarios (001 and 007) all the way.

RHS mod is also great, however it is still unfinished.


I don't think Sid will ever finish the mod....GP
Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
SCW Manual Lead & Beta Support Team

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
User avatar
Tanaka
Posts: 5150
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 3:42 am
Location: USA

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by Tanaka »

So you guys got me interested in checking out LST's Bottlenecks mod as well:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4262848

Lots of interesting stuff and changes here. I had a chuckle because so much fuss was raised over my forum question if Sonia's could dive bomb and I see he changed it in his mod so that they can:

4. The KI-51 is now a dive bomber with "Attack bomber" ability and armor even for the A model - the plane has been designed as ground attack airplane for both low-level and dive bombing. However, in the game anything lighter than 100kg bombs is pretty ineffective against troops in terrain other than "clear", and no Allied player worth his salt will keep troops in the open as long as Japan has air superiority. Best use for the Ki-51 and similar light bombers is hitting airfields or ports in order to prevent fort construction.

Don't understand why so much ruckus was made over the question if the Sonia really was a dive bomber?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_Ki-51

Wonder why it was not made so in the base game?



Image
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5457
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by Yaab »

I think it has to do with how the code handles dive bombing.

Download RHS mod, where Sonias and a host of other bombers are dive bombers, and watch how they mince-meat the Chinese sampan fleet and the UK destroyers off HK on turn one. With some training, Japanese have a murderous horde of IJA dive bombers.

The best compromise was the glide-bombing feature, which alas was disabled somewhere in year 2012 or 2013.
User avatar
Tanaka
Posts: 5150
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 3:42 am
Location: USA

RE: Poll: DaBabes vs DaBigBabes vs Andy Mac: Which do you prefer?

Post by Tanaka »

ORIGINAL: Yaab

I think it has to do with how the code handles dive bombing.

Download RHS mod, where Sonias and a host of other bombers are dive bombers, and watch how they mince-meat the Chinese sampan fleet and the UK destroyers off HK on turn one. With some training, Japanese have a murderous horde of IJA dive bombers.

The best compromise was the glide-bombing feature, which alas was disabled somewhere in year 2012 or 2013.

Ah very interesting thanks!
Image
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”