Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Axis vs Allies => Topic started by: Citabria on March 09, 2004, 03:34:32 AM
-
first 256 map is accurate scale islands but location of the islands has been fudged to make for good fights and fleets are much closer
second 512 map is complete historically accurate in scale distances fleet distances etc (ijn fleets are closer than they were but the rest is authentic)
im gonna go with the first 256 map for the combat theatre. the second 512 map is for a scenario so historic distances should be fine for it. it will look accurate in flight as all islands are 1:1 scale just flight time between them is shorter
(http://www.r0013636.hostultra.com/uploads/data/media/1/Oahu_CT.jpg)
(http://www.r0013636.hostultra.com/uploads/data/media/1/hawaii_names.jpg)
-
Schweeeeet!
Sakai
-
TY For the wounderfull map!, Howeaver Thier are some issues that may prevent it from being used. First off for any set up in the CT Base capture is a nesessary componet. The map presents at a galance a few problems, their are very few bases for each side. What hapens if the Japaneses CV's are sunk, what will the players do? If the Allies are ran off of the island the map will reset and Pork the areana, the CT can not be reset the way the MA can it buggers the set up and requires the Staff to manualy reset it. SO:
To make this work we nead more basese, in the Hawian islands, Historical accuracery rocks, but game play takes precedance. To that end I would add more bases to the Islands, idealy bases should be 25 miles or less apart, fill the chain up, every island should have as many bases as they will praticaly suport.
CV's: How about 4 Fleats of 2 CV's each with their attendant CA and DD screans, Pluss the Surface action group you have their.
Fleat Spawn: Two sectors away from any one allied base, preferably to the N some whear.
SB: Shore aBatries nead be if their not already at each base to keep the Fleats at bay.
Maned Guns: Nead be on each field if not already.
GV & PT spawns: Whear practicle spaws for both of these on the larger islands.
I know it may be asking a lot, but this would make the map playable, it would work much like the Okinawa map works, and I sincerly appricate you making this available for us.
-
aye brady i can fill up the chain, as to the fleets the ijn has 6 separate fleets and all but 1 have a cruiser and 2 destroyers.
this is historically accurate and makes the problem of awful ai 88mm flak less annoying. the fleets are tied to an offmap port and the ijn side also has 2 offmap airbases.
on okinawa when those overgrown fleets got near they put up so much flak that it made flying on the side against them very annoying. nearly unfun.
the us has 1 large fleet though similar to okinawa style large fleets.
the ijn cant be reset though because it has 2 bases in the northwest corner off map as does the unused third side.
im thinking of also adding 2 offmap bases and a port for the us side and attaching the fleets to it making reset not possible.
if the ijn did
-
brady im using the okinawa map as a gameplay model and that map is designed to make cv capture impossible.
your statement about cv capture being necessary seems to contradict this
in essence the balance method to keep from reset and keep playability would be for uncapturable carriers with offmap ports
thereby no matter who controls the land bases the fleets remain and respawn to the origional owners 50 miles away form the fight.
-
Maybe add an on map base for the IJN to simulate Wake Is. I know it was not captured yet, but it was soon after and that would add a hvy buff capability to the IJN side.
-
Go HEAVY on the shore batteries.
There was a map in a scenario we flew (Scily I think) that had them lined up in a sold chain all around the island. You had to blow a hole in the chain before you could land.
Was also one A/A gun at each Battery.
This will keep the fleets from driving right up on the beach and if they are going to engage in a gun dual they will have to do it at respectful distance or fly off aircraft.
-
go heavy on the flak ...
oh wait- no need, with that many boats it oughta b a hoot
-
I was not refering to CV Capture, just Base capture, on the Islands. Your right in your aproach to the Non capturable CV's, and off map ports. Very cool on the 50 miles away from the action spawning.
I ilke thge idea of puting one or two us bases off map to prevent reset this a good one. I ausme the third country is also off map, to prevent it from being captured and or atacked as well.
The idea behind the one large fleat on the Okinawa map is that it would be hard to sink (actualy their are two but only one was ever used in the set up), this would alow for more fighting, I was always afraid the ships would all be sunk and their would be nowhear to fight from for the allies so I asked Kanttorie to build them that way, the single CV fleats were to represent the Brits and be added to alow for easy scaling of the set up, yes the ack is a bit of a pain, but even still that fleat gets sunk regulary. The only down side i see from having several smaller fleats is players bunching them making them as bad if not worse in terms of loacal flak intensity. So I would sugest eitehr going with what you have now, or doing a 2 CV TF set up and reducing the CV fleats to just 3 with 2 in each, this was sugested above because I too felt that the heavy flack was a bit much, and for time fame even more so given the plane set.
The adation of the US fleat is interesting and will ad fleaxabaility to the set guy, howeaver I think it would run nice as a reverse type of Okinawa set up whear the Japanese are at sea, and the US is on land.
This should be prety cool:) TY for making the map this way!
As Jester mentioned the SB's and the attendant AA (manable to) guns are important features for a set up like this.
-
Last year that I was ask for a request Pearl Harbor Map for the Combat Theater and someone told me that's really bad idea if Pearl Harbor enter the Combat Theater because all those people died on December 7, 1941 morning and they didn't know they having a war against Japan. So, I abandon to ask request and i dont know why, but oh well. :(
BTW, Fester, Excellent map and excellent planes skins. :aok
-
When your done with this I will use it for Squad Operations. :) At least that is the plan.
-
Looks great Fester.
The CT loves you.
eskimo
-
Looks great fester.
For one, there is no reason why we cant have one F!@# map with no base capture. If we are curently running a ETO map with axis not being able to capture england (which I love to death), we can have this map with no capture at all.
Too bad we cant just leave Brady out of this one :)
-
Base capture is nigh on impossible in the Slot map too, but that seems to work just fine.
-
Why isn't Hickam Field a flyable field? It was hit heavy in the attack but some B-17s from the mainland landed then.
Of the 231 Army aircraft on Oahu, 64 were destroyed. The 79 that remained usable included 4 B-17s, 11 B-18s, 5 A-20s, 27 P-40s and 16 P-36s.
If these scenarios are going to allow repeated attacks beyond the historic three waves, need to enable Hickam as a flyable field.
Would not do to ring Oahu with too many shore batteries. As I understand it, there weren't many, and the one on downtown Waikiki Beach supposedly was test fired once and then just kept on standby because it broke so many windows in the area.
Minor point: Can Diamond Head be made more prominent? It's quite the landmark.
Great work on the overall map and fields.
-
Incidentally, in checking around for the most specific types and numbers of aircraft on Oahu when Pearl Harbor was attacked, here is the best source I've found:
http://www.ww2pacific.com/aaf41.html
This list should be invaluable for all Pearl Harbor scenarios, e.g., 87 P-40B, 11 P-40C, 39 P-36A, 6 P-26A, and 6 P-26B at Wheeler; 11 F4F-3 at Ewa; no fighters at Hickam; 8 P-40C and 2 P-36A at Haleiwa; 5 F4F-3A, 5 F4F-3, and 8 F2A-3 (Buffalo) at Ford Island .
I've read a lot about Dec. 7, 1941, but had no idea there were so many fighters on Oahu and none at Hickam that morning.
-
Fester email me about this map please. I have a few ideas bouncing around for possible use in the CT and would like to drop them on you to see what you think. Email addy is in my profile.
-
Brady wrote "First off for any set up in the CT Base capture is a nesessary component."
Several times I have asked why capture is nesessary in the CT. I have never recieved a valid answer. Last time I have been involved in a capture attempt it was for a lone base so we could get a perked plane back. Most CT regulars dont care much about capture (i think?). Whenever I see a base get taken its almost always some wank-tard clear on the other side of the map milkin. Some squads run ops on their squad nights in the CT, but i think even they would not mind doing something other than capture for the chance to play on a new and unique map.
Then again, I am an idiot.
-
Okay just a thought... one night we could reinact it... have the CT for one night even up sides and try to make something of it... Like I said just an Idea.... Map looks really good....:aok
-
I think at least the possibility of base capture should be present. There have been whole CT squads who have stated that their goal is base capture in the CT. Often times base attack is the driving force behind many of the furballs. Take away base capture and you in turn lose one of the driving forces behind attacking the base in the first place. Even if no one launches a goon to capture the field, I think the idea that someone COULD makes attacking the field worthwhile to the average player. The more facets of gameplay that can be successfully incorporated the better we're off in the CT.
-
Okay just a thought... one night we could reinact it... have the CT for one night even up sides and try to make something of it... Like I said just an Idea.... Map looks really good....
If you want to re-enact it I'll have to put it up a night early and only tell the axis flyers. :)
-
Originally posted by Soulyss
If you want to re-enact it I'll have to put it up a night early and only tell the axis flyers. :)
Like I said it was a thought... guess not a very good one...:(