Matrix Games Forums

Falken wrote: Fri May 26, 2023 11:15 pm Hi..

Not sure if possible, or even if you want to , but would you be willing to share your zipped up changes to LST's mod? Only wondering... Currently in a DBB game so can't handle another one, but would love to see your changes for the latest beta...

Thanks... and if you can't.. no worries, but figured there was no harm in asking

JanSako wrote: Fri May 26, 2023 9:56 pm Putting out a call for an at least moderately experienced AFB.

Let's play in 11.27 Beta & The Bottlenecks mod, Realistic R&D & simplified (engine) production; updated & modified by LST & myself https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 8&t=309505

Developed by LST, it adds a lot of changes (and more were added by yours truly) to move the experience away from the brute-force roflstomping everything in your path by Japan (in the first 3 -4 months) and the Allies (late '42 and thereafter). What this mod has is a perfect balance of constant hunger for more fuel, more supply and more, well, everything at the place I need it (yesterday!), and the ability to allow your tactical acumen to excel in many different situations against an enemy facing many of the same constraints as you do, if not for the same reason. (i.e. Allies will never lack merchant hulls, but getting supplies into Burma or China...)

- slow Allied economy build-up, need to feed & repair industry in the off-map areas & West Coast before its true potential can be felt across the APAC region.
- the ability to make China into the nightmare for the Japan player that it was for the wartime IJA high command. This is the opposite of Quiet China, but pick your battles really carefully!
- Japan absolutely must grab every drop of fuel & oil ASAP otherwise economic collapse will happen very soon after the 6 months of the war
- The Allied player will NOT be marching across Burma with 100k strong stacks in early '43. Unless you want them to die of hunger before they cross the first 100 miles, that is. A lot of work went into setting supply caps simulating a logistical challenges of such undertakings
- Plane loadouts (for all sides) were fixed to simulate real-life level bombardment tactics (drop the package & bug out!), which means smaller numbers of bomb hits on average, with each hit causing more damage.
- Accuracy of the .50 cal defensive MG's on Allied 4E heavies was halved. I cannot overstate how good this change feels! Facing a raid of unescorted B-17's is no longer a death sentence for the interceptors, even though a lot of them will still get damaged, with corresponding OPS losses. In game you will see a lot of 'fighter driven off, fighter cannot close due to defensive fire' & similar messages but the AFB can no longer use their heavies as sweepers!

There are a good number of house rules as we try to match realism with fun & curb the biggest exploits. I am certainly open to a discussion & changes, but this post is getting long enough as is!
Download the 'base' mod from the link above, then get the zip-ped scenario package Bottlenecks Scen 065.zip with the updated pwhexe & check out the full description for scen 065. Using LST's map is highly recommended due to the train & road links & buildable railways.

Thanks for reading!

Tanaka wrote: Mon Jun 26, 2023 8:50 pm Wanted to check this out and but do not see the full description of your changes to the mod? Where can I find this? Thanks

JanSako wrote: Mon Jun 26, 2023 10:09 pm

Tanaka wrote: Mon Jun 26, 2023 8:50 pm Wanted to check this out and but do not see the full description of your changes to the mod? Where can I find this? Thanks

It is in the scenario description in the game itself (scen 65.txt) , but might as well post it:

Changelog May 25, 2023:
LST's changes:

- corrected duplicate B-17 slots
- fixed recombine error of NZ division
- corrections / minor changes to road network in Malaya
- a few localised tweaks to base sizes / supply caps
- Singers now light urban to reduce defensive terrain bonus
- fixed withdrawal date error for AK Betelgeuse
- corrected Mine Mark 18 not being produced because set to 'can build - no' by error
- Mine Mark 6 set to produce 300 per month for the duration of the war - historic starting pool was 59.000 (!) and it remained in the USN inventory until 1985
- Upped loading capacity of Daihatsu barges to be able to transport motorized support and light / medium tanks
- Increased Oil well output to 15, Refinery input the same and refinery output to 12 fuel points. Japan's issue historically was more in hull availability & the oil/fuel being in the wrong places than not having it. Higher output per point means any damage will affect production more. (JS + LST)

JS Changes:

- Made Chungking port size 3 to allow rearming of the Chinese river boats
- All AT guns for both sides (except Soviet & Chinese) changed to 'Naval Gun' type. This allows them to engage ships during invasions or naval bombardments if these ships come too close to the shore, to simulate gun emplacements close to the shoreline. These devices only have a range of 2, at the most 3 so unloading TF's will only be targeted if they come too close to the shore (dice roll). They should, however, directly engage mortar and rocket armed Landing support craft! Early war yolo-invasions should also come with a bit more attrition on the participants. Based on testing, land combat results do not appear to be affected.
- IJA 70mm T92 Bn Gun - changed the SNLF & NAV Guard units to use a 'Naval Gun' type (New device - 683). This is a VERY short ranged weapon (3k), so it is reasonable to expect these to be deployed in direct fire role for shore defence. The original 'Army version' (device 745) remains in use by IJA.
- IJA 10cm T92 Gun and 75mm T90 Field Gun changed to Naval Gun type & reduced PEN to 65 - these are 'high-performance' guns, very capable in direct-fire role, but they still should not be able to penetrate a CA's armor. They are also quite rare in the OOB at start, later on the 75mm T90 will replace the T95 and T38 field guns for IJA field divisions. There are 4 regiments using the 10cm T92.
- IJA 15cm T89 Gun changed to Naval Gun type & reduced PEN to 124; there are ~5 regiments of 8 guns + the Hong Kong Def Force CD unit is using these.

All other values, including accuracy, remained unchanged so these weapons will still be of limited use compared to dedicated CD units. As an example, the 15cm T89 gun has an accuracy of 4, compared to 47 for the 15cm 41YT CD Gun (used in many Naval Fortress units, including Truk & Saipan).

Design Note: The idea is that invading a shoreline defended by a full, unsuppressed and well supplied IJA division should incur costs for the ships taking part in it. There was a reason why operations like Cartwheel or any of the major invasions were executed the way they were, instead of just tossing out a couple-three Marine divisions & a bunch of tank units directly onto the enemy's main base & ROFLStomping the defenders. Japan could do the same in the early war to a large extent, so now they may face a bunch of 2pdr AT guns taking potshots at the unloading ships!

IMO the Allied doctrine did not really have a need for 'regular', or 'field' units to perform shore defence; there are plenty of dedicated CD units with 155mm guns in the USN OOB, many Royal Navy base forces carry 6" CD guns. There is also a game engine rule that only DP or naval guns with a range of 15k and above can participate in the Bombardment land combat phase so I could not just 'turn it on' for all light guns without affecting the land combat balance.

- Allowed ToE upgrades for the 1 and 2 battalion sized SNLF Naval Guard units to stronger coastal defense formations with 12cm guns that also makes them static units if triggered. The number of SNLF squads remains the same so they are still not enough to hold against a couple of US regiments by themselves. The upgrade takes place from 5/42 and does not affect 'assault' type SNLF units (the ones that come with Armored Cars), nor the smaller, company-sized formations.
- Reduced loading cost of Motorized Support from 12 to 11, to be in-between Regular Support (10) and Engineering Vehicle (12). Normal trucks should be a bit easier to move than dozers.

Tanaka wrote: Tue Jun 27, 2023 1:07 am Ah gotcha interesting thanks! Is LST implementing any of this in his mod? Are you doing a current AAR on this scenario 65?

Also noticed looking in your scenario 65 there are some training commands in Tokyo that are not in Scenario 61 with blank pictures. Seems like a bug?

JanSako wrote: Tue Jun 27, 2023 7:58 am

Tanaka wrote: Tue Jun 27, 2023 1:07 am Ah gotcha interesting thanks! Is LST implementing any of this in his mod? Are you doing a current AAR on this scenario 65?

Also noticed looking in your scenario 65 there are some training commands in Tokyo that are not in Scenario 61 with blank pictures. Seems like a bug?

The training commands in Tokyo (did you mean the 'reassigned trainers'?) are a beta-feature that LST implemented. Maybe not even beta, just an idea. They are meant as a 'holding pen'/transit spot for your elite pilots. Also in 11.27 TRACOM pilots can take ops losses so any sitting in these special groups will be fine. It is up to the player to use them or not.

The Allied player gets them too, in the special offmap location on the E edge of the map.

The top part of the changelog should be included in the next mod version, that is his work. About mine I am not sure if he will put any in. That said, just to do the changes takes maybe an hour even if you are not too familiar with the editor, once you are working from a list of changes you want.

I do have an AAR going. Still in the first week of the war.
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 5&t=396220