[REL] A new set of campaign layers

[tater]

The BBs were obviously out in force during the southern advance, but yeah, they frequently found themselves at anchor at Truk, Palau, Davao, or tawi Tawi (some at Singapore), particularly as oil became even more of a problem. The spawn rates are pretty rare though, many of the TF groups only make one journey every few months.

As for easy sinkings, a huge amount has to do with the broken stock damage model. All the Cvs die to ONE fish since they have a cloned DM from a medium merchant.
When Werner dials NSM in, that will be fixed, and you'll have to work to kill a BB or CV without them steaming away from you (and they repair one out of render range).

That will make a huge difference.

At least Asashio is virtually identical to Kagero visually (and aside from improvements in reliability mechanically as well).

[LukeFF]

Tater, just an FYI for you. For the Japanese Armed Trawler, you need to copy over the DDS file of it's silhouette from the stock Armed Trawler's file in order for it show up in the recognition manual. Before I did this the page would just show up blank.

[LukeFF]

Originally Posted by Wulfmann

I know most will disagree with my history uber alles attitude but if one looks at the war how many Jap BBs where sunk by subs? One, Kongo ob a lucky shot.
I sank a Fuso in the first week of playing SH4 and at 100% from my first patrol.
I have attacked a number of TF and in SH3 never did have a firing position except once I fired a spread at long range at a KGV scoring a hit and once I attacked a fleet carrier all this in two years of nearly daily playing.
I know most want more action I want more history.
I sank a Taiyo in a TF that had 2 of them as well as two Maya.

Well, consider me one of those that agrees with you. Having multiple ships show up in one engagement where only one ever existed is a pet peeve of mine as well. Hopefully as tater's work progressses this will become less of a problem.

[tater]

Re: Armed Trawler
I thought I did that.

Doh!

As for the group contents, yeah, they need tons of work.

The one thing to remember regarding 1-off ships, is that there have to be substitutions given the existing ships. Ashashio is used for Asashio Class, Kagero Class, and Yugumo Class, for example. There was one Taiho, but I'm assuming any other appearances might be Hiyo, Junyo, or Shinano until I have something better.

Even if I did have unique ships, the game makes it impossible to never see them again. If you sink the only Yubari (assuming one ever was modded in), then start a new patrol, you might sink her again. There is no possible way around this.



tater

[Wulfmann]

True tater. but we must also consider that when we as an American skipper get killed we come back for another patrol as well!!

It is not about making it perfect just better without getting too carried away.
At least they have Takao one of my all time favorite ships (Not sure why, just like the look)

When the Japs made their big early push the BBs were out a little but when the battle raged only the Kongos showed their faces while the others sat it out. Funny, I have seen Ise and Fuso classes twice each but not the Kongo.
My edits will surely change that as most TF are now Kongo class with only a couple the other two older classes.:hmm:

Wulfmann

[Wulfmann]

I am still plagued by diesel engines receiving minor damage being fixed but then not working at all.

Is there a damage fix for the subs as I also had no rudders another time when they also had minor damage and were fixed all being reported by the crew as ready.

Funny because the dive planes were destroyed and yet the boat dove the same but would not turn. Had to scuttle the boat, crew POWs.

Wulfmann

[FAdmiral]

Originally Posted by Wulfmann

True tater. but we must also consider that when we as an American skipper get killed we come back for another patrol as well!!

It is not about making it perfect just better without getting too carried away.
At least they have Takao one of my all time favorite ships (Not sure why, just like the look)

When the Japs made their big early push the BBs were out a little but when the battle raged only the Kongos showed their faces while the others sat it out. Funny, I have seen Ise and Fuso classes twice each but not the Kongo.
My edits will surely change that as most TF are now Kongo class with only a couple the other two older classes.:hmm:

Wulfmann

The Kongo was the ONLY Japanese BB that could be in a carrier TF. It had the
speed but all the others (except Yamato) didn't...

JIM

[LukeFF]

Originally Posted by tater

The one thing to remember regarding 1-off ships, is that there have to be substitutions given the existing ships. Ashashio is used for Asashio Class, Kagero Class, and Yugumo Class, for example. There was one Taiho, but I'm assuming any other appearances might be Hiyo, Junyo, or Shinano until I have something better.

Even if I did have unique ships, the game makes it impossible to never see them again. If you sink the only Yubari (assuming one ever was modded in), then start a new patrol, you might sink her again. There is no possible way around this.

Yep, I hear ya.

One thing I was looking at today was the dates and content of the British surface units. Yikes! It's not so much the commissioning dates that are incorrect, but that the game has them in the PTO when they were actually fighting in the Med or the Atlantic. For instance, there should be NO King George V BBs in port or at sea between early December 1941 and November 1944, which was when the BPF came into being. What do we have in the Australian ports, though? Yep, KGVs galore. :rotfl:I know the Allied surface traffic and port configuration isn't your biggest priority right now, tater, but this is something I think needs to be looked at some time in the future.

[tater]

Agreed. For the most part I haven't touched any allied traffic at all aside from deleting groups.

tater

[Wulfmann]

Originally Posted by FAdmiral

The Kongo was the ONLY Japanese BB that could be in a carrier TF. It had the
speed but all the others (except Yamato) didn't...JIM

While true that does not have anything to do with the surface actions involving Hiei and Kirishima where no carrier escorting was done just night shoot outs.
It was the speed as well as fuel consumption that allowed their use.
Until late 44 no other class of Jap BB did anything but waste manpower and then they were only token sacrifices.
The sinking of the Bismarck, the retreat of the sisters and the sinking of the PoW and Repulse had made these dinosaurs obsolete.
The Japs would have made better use of them buy installing their guns as coastal defense and scrapped the hulls to make toys and souvenirs for the soon to be occupiers.

Wulfmann

[tater]

To be fair, the bulk of the IJN BB force was constructed before CVs were capable offensive platforms. The real waste was Yamato and her sisters. They could have built over 100 desperately needed escorts for the same effort in manpower and materials.

tater

[tater]

Status Report:

Been a busy week or two in RL, all the time I've had to actually work on the campaign I've frankly been too tired to do so. I plan on starting up again.

Things to do (short term):

Check the later war layers to make sure the traffic is in the right places. Correct as needed.

Start tweaking the contents of the groups again (with an eye towrds the goal of making them more historically correct (comments by Wulfmann, LukeFF, et al appreciated)).

Figure out how to clone the sampan03 so I can make it invisible (the invisible part I have done!) and therefore do the beach defense photo recon missions I have sketched out already.

Start work on the scripted layers to make them historical.

tater

[sneekyzeke]

Originally Posted by tater

Status Report:

Been a busy week or two in RL, all the time I've had to actually work on the campaign I've frankly been too tired to do so. I plan on starting up again.

tater

(cheering him on) go tater go! go tater go! Tater, Tater, He's our man. If he can't do it nobody can!

P.S. Hey moderators, we need a wider selection of humorous smileys so we can more accurately convey our message. God knows I can't write.

[LukeFF]

Sounds good, tater.

One thing I've started doing is reducing the tonnage requirments for the "Sink" objectives to 5000 tons. From reading a few patrol reports, it seems 5000 tons was about the average benchmark for a patrol to be considered successful, and given the utterly crappy nature of the Mark 14 before 1943, it seems logical that coming back with "just" 5000 tons of merchant shipping sunk would be considered a success. If you want I can send the files to you when I finish them.

[tater]

Yeah, that is a good idea.

Ditto for warships. My plan was also to remove any merchant requirements as well. Warships (large ones, anyway) were always on the menu.

tater