Bombur mod 1930

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and bitter defeats here.

Moderator: Vic

User avatar
ArmouredLion
Posts: 651
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 4:20 pm

RE: A modest proposal

Post by ArmouredLion »

I never noticed raw being reduced before. I run steam, could that be an issue? Ohh well, I pass this to the guys with the higher pay grade.
User avatar
ironduke1955
Posts: 2037
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 9:52 am
Location: UK

RE: A modest proposal

Post by ironduke1955 »

Looking at fuel types some ships are listed as oil some listed as None not sure what None would translate to as fuel but they do have consumption rates. I did not see RAW listed as a fuel type for the French anyway. Perhaps those ships listed as none will default to RAW as a fuel.
Are we like late Rome, infatuated with past glories, ruled by a complacent, greedy elite, and hopelessly powerless to respond to changing conditions?

User avatar
Bombur
Posts: 3666
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:50 am

RE: A modest proposal

Post by Bombur »

Could you tell me what is the composition of your fleet? Some older ships use coal (raw) instead of oil, it´s possible I made a mistake. The Revenge (Ramillies) class Battleship is one of them. If you created lots of these ships...well.....
User avatar
Bombur
Posts: 3666
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:50 am

RE: A modest proposal

Post by Bombur »

Also tell me what ships use none as fuel. This is a mistake.
User avatar
Bombur
Posts: 3666
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:50 am

RE: A modest proposal

Post by Bombur »

This raw comsumption seems to be related to ship production. How many ships did you produce this turn?
User avatar
ArmouredLion
Posts: 651
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 4:20 pm

RE: A modest proposal

Post by ArmouredLion »

A bunch, so you are saying this is a normal read out that just registers after I bombard? I'll get you the ships, but they are all Queen Elizabeth... I believe.
User avatar
Bombur
Posts: 3666
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:50 am

RE: A modest proposal

Post by Bombur »

ORIGINAL: ArmouredLion

A bunch, so you are saying this is a normal read out that just registers after I bombard? I'll get you the ships, but they are all Queen Elizabeth... I believe.


No, my mistake, there is also the loss of raw after bombardment.
User avatar
Bombur
Posts: 3666
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:50 am

RE: A modest proposal

Post by Bombur »

The Queen Elizabeth used oil as fuel, it seems I made a mistake here.....must wait until I´m back to home.
User avatar
ArmouredLion
Posts: 651
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 4:20 pm

RE: A modest proposal

Post by ArmouredLion »

Ahhh... so the 5K raw loss in a ship bombardment?! That seems extreme, no? And what's the rationale? The shells? But okay, I'll take that into consideration in the future.... Thanks and sorry, I didn't know that... ship game is my prime weakness.
User avatar
ArmouredLion
Posts: 651
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 4:20 pm

RE: A modest proposal

Post by ArmouredLion »

I'll do the round with that in mind thanks...
User avatar
Bombur
Posts: 3666
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:50 am

RE: A modest proposal

Post by Bombur »

ORIGINAL: ArmouredLion

Ahhh... so the 5K raw loss in a ship bombardment?! That seems extreme, no? And what's the rationale? The shells? But okay, I'll take that into consideration in the future.... Thanks and sorry, I didn't know that... ship game is my prime weakness.



The trouble is that the fuel comsumption is related to AP spending, there is no way to make a ship to spend less fuel when it is doing bombardment because it spends AP anyway. Actually, I designed the scenario to make ships in combat spend MORE fuel/AP (iwas thinking about combat as a whole, and bombardment is a kind of combat). Of course, I could review it so fuel spending in combat is the same. Keep in mind, however, that 15 Battleships (not sure if you have this number) is a HUGE force anyway and it will a big drain to your supplies, both in the game and IRL. had I didn´t do this mistake you would lose about 5k of oil in each bombardment operation.

This said, I´m pretty sure I made a mistake with Queen Elisabeths.I could fix it, but my priority has been to upgrade GD1938v3. Bombur mod needs an overhaul. The resource logistics, in particular is a topic that isn´t well balanced.
User avatar
ArmouredLion
Posts: 651
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 4:20 pm

RE: A modest proposal

Post by ArmouredLion »

"but my priority has been to upgrade GD1938v3' YES IT IS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :) No worries. Now I know... I do like extra fuel and AP being used in combat. And in sea bombardment you'd likely use less fuel, and I think the raw makes sense maybe just less if there isn't a flaw in the Queen BB. Sorry for making Tom redo the round due to my ignorance. Thanks again guys for the time and feedback.
User avatar
ironduke1955
Posts: 2037
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 9:52 am
Location: UK

RE: A modest proposal

Post by ironduke1955 »

French ships with fuel set to None

BC Dunkerque
MTB
Raider
Are we like late Rome, infatuated with past glories, ruled by a complacent, greedy elite, and hopelessly powerless to respond to changing conditions?

User avatar
Twotribes
Posts: 6466
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Jacksonville NC
Contact:

RE: A modest proposal

Post by Twotribes »

MTB LOL how in hell does a little tub use coal?
Favoritism is alive and well here.
User avatar
ironduke1955
Posts: 2037
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 9:52 am
Location: UK

RE: A modest proposal

Post by ironduke1955 »

I think none means they run on fresh air RAW is coal.
Are we like late Rome, infatuated with past glories, ruled by a complacent, greedy elite, and hopelessly powerless to respond to changing conditions?

User avatar
ArmouredLion
Posts: 651
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 4:20 pm

RE: A modest proposal

Post by ArmouredLion »

CL Danae, Queen E, Bayern, Konigsberg fuel listed as none... that means they ride for free?! :)
User avatar
Twotribes
Posts: 6466
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Jacksonville NC
Contact:

RE: A modest proposal

Post by Twotribes »

Already tested it none means raw.
Favoritism is alive and well here.
User avatar
ArmouredLion
Posts: 651
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 4:20 pm

RE: A modest proposal

Post by ArmouredLion »

Thanks two tribes. Is that raw to move!!!! ACk, that would effectively end the Empire.
User avatar
Bombur
Posts: 3666
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:50 am

RE: A modest proposal

Post by Bombur »

Not to none.....0 means raw
User avatar
Bombur
Posts: 3666
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:50 am

RE: A modest proposal

Post by Bombur »

Sorry for my mistakes, I reviewed all the fuel types for my mod. The trouble is that it was built over an old file. The 1st version of Bombur mod set many ships to coal because it started before WW1 when I made the changes I forgot to make the fuel adjustments. It doesn´t make sense in the 30´s, as almost every warship was converted to use oil (or mixed fuel). Some aircraft also use coal.....my daughter found funny that I created coal aircraft...well....
I will send a fix in a few minutes, now everyting, except trains, use oil for movement.
I cannot make naval bombardment to spend less fuel, it is considered combat. What I could do is to set fuel spending to be the same for combat and movement (but ships spend a lot of fuel in combat because they fight at higher speeds).
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”