2194 Gigamap Version 0.8

Pap1723 · January 3, 2003, 03:37

Version 0.8 is ready to go, hopefully, this is almost the release version...

Thanks to Yaroslav and Conmcb25 we have figured out the pillaging problem, if you have experienced it.

Name the scenario folder 2194 Gigamap v08 and you will be fine.

CHANGES
-Deleted the Infantry unit
-Created a generic Marine unit available to everyone
-Raised the attack of the Japanese bomber Ki-67
-Created a new Japanese bomber G5N Shinzan later in the war
-Created a new Japanese dive bomber instead of Kamikaze planes, called the D4Y Suisei Bomber
-Deleted the GI unit
-Changed British Infantry to Allied Infantry
-Made a slot that has a Japanese tank that upgrades through the war
-Lowered the Japanese money they start with
-Added some generic Marine units for Japan at the start

Pap

jim panse · January 3, 2003, 07:38

sorry to disturb you pap. please check your email. i wanna play your scenario if you don´t mind.

Pap1723 · January 3, 2003, 10:57

Well, it looks like I am going to have to release the scenario here as Geocities refuses to work...

Part 1...

conmcb25 · January 3, 2003, 10:58

And whatever you do DO NOT use a "period" when you name the folder!

Examples:

This is OK!: 2194 Gigamap v08

This is NOT OK!: 2194 Gigamap v0.8

Do not use periods! Since windows recognizes a period as an extension it screws up the folder somehow and makes the scenario do weird things!

Pap1723 · January 3, 2003, 10:58

Part 2...

Pap1723 · January 3, 2003, 11:01

Part 3...

Pap1723 · January 3, 2003, 11:02

Part 4...

Pap1723 · January 3, 2003, 11:03

Part 5...

Pap1723 · January 3, 2003, 11:04

And finally Part 6...

conmcb25 · January 3, 2003, 12:51

I would wait a couple of hours before you download this! Pap and I are playtesting 1vs 1 right now! And before the first turn was up we found two "bugs". So be patient and let us play a few turns first!

DarthVeda · January 3, 2003, 13:58

*grumbles about not receiving credit on his units*

DarthVeda · January 3, 2003, 14:01

although the more I look at it, the more I want to re-do that val of mine...

jim panse · January 3, 2003, 14:12

that´s funny. i downloaded one version in one piece from your geocities homepage and the other one from this thread. much more funny is that the version from the geocitiers hp is nearly doublesize than this one .....

Chris 62 · January 3, 2003, 14:52

I had no problem DL the Geocities version this morning.

Pap, the unsupported unit thing at Pearl Harbor is still there, and as I mentioned on IM, the P-40 version should be B/C, the F version was not a heavily produced model, and didn't enter service till mid 1942.
(The model at Pearl was the C, two of these shot down 6 Japanese planes on 12/7/41 over Hawaii, the B was in service in the Phillipennes, and the Flying tigers used only the B version)
The 14th Airforce (which is what the Tigers became in 1942) used the E and later N version.
The F was a rare bird, only 1300 of them were made.

jim panse · January 3, 2003, 15:32

i´m just having a look or two on it and i´ve to confess that it looks very good

despite the things mentioned above (P-40ies) i found some things also in your exquisite scenario.

- Pearl Harbor: i tried the version i downloaded this morning from geocities and had no problems with the Japanese attacking Pearl.

- Helsinki: i´m sure you´ve got maps at home. Helsinki is not there where it should be (Suomi!!!) First i thought you made some city there to represent swedish ore support to the 3rd Reich but then i read that its name is Helsinki. if you haven´t got maps (something i can´t imagine) you should try the CIA World Factbook (www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook) to find out where Helsinki is and where not.

- Koingsburg: last but not least: i never ever found a scenario about WW2 containing Germany that was made by somebody whose mother tongue was not german that spelled KÖNIGSBERG right. i found some really creative versions (e.g. Konigsberg [quite near], Konigsburg [not that near]) but it was spelled KÖNIGSBERG in these days. [today you have to call it Kaliningrad. the northern part of the former german territory known as (East-) Prussia is soviet/russian territory since the end of WW2.]
you know, just for historical accuracy´s sake

Chris 62 · January 3, 2003, 16:13

What key combination is used for Umlats? (sp?)

Boco · January 3, 2003, 16:57

Is 'oe' still allowed for ö (that's Alt-0246 - the umlaut listings can be found in 'Accessories / Character Map' for Windows users)? I've also often seen Jaeger for Jäger.

So is :ö "

" in German?

Chris 62 · January 4, 2003, 11:15

Thanks. ö

I didn't see Character Map as an option in my accessories.

Henrik · January 4, 2003, 11:21

The common practice is to translate all names to English, in which case it actually is Konigsberg.
This is simply becouse it is too hard to track down the real names of all cities on a map, lots of balkan cities would have to have thier names changed, as would italian ones, spanish, scandinavian, russian, almost all asian cities, etc...
That said having all names in thier own tounge is acceptable, what I think is wrong and what should not be attempted is to have some names in thier own tounge and others in English.
This is why København (on your map Kopenahvn) should be renamed Copenhagen.

And I agree, Helsinki is way off (it's even in the wrong country!).
Infact I wonder if scandinavia shouldnt be edited a little, Finland is way too small on this map (it's only 4 tiles: 122,12 and 123,11 and 124,10 and lastly 124,12).

Sweden has a very strange shape (southern sweden is too broad (113,21 and 113,23 should be ocean) and doesnt go far enough to the south, it really ends at 115,25).
Denmarks capital is not in the northern part of the country it should be at a tile roughly on the coordinates 113,27 (Copenhagen is situated on an island between Denmark and Sweden).

conmcb25 · January 4, 2003, 18:08

If you downloaded at GEOCITIES please redownload here I dont believe the Geocities files are correct.

And make sure if you downloaded here you got the "NEW" part three files.

I think I was the only one to download the old part three but if you want it correct and up to date you better make sure.

Things are slow but seem to be working in the Playtest Pap and I are doing.

Hopefully we wont find anymore bugs.

jim panse · January 5, 2003, 13:04

i´m now playing the version i downloaded in this thread.

another thing: Dublin is at grid 95,25 but i think it would be better at grid 96,24.

also with this version i had no problems with the japanese attacking pearl harbor

conmcb25 · January 7, 2003, 00:32

Should aircraft be allowed to see subs? Right now the only way you can them with a plane is if you run into them?

And if so should all planes be able to seee them? Or just a select few. Pap and I were discussing this and came to the conclusion that bombers especially the Mitchells should be able to do this.

Anyone got an ideas or opinions?

Thanks!

jim panse · January 7, 2003, 05:43

as far as i can remember land-based aircraft (medium bombers) starting from greenland, iceland and/or the uk flew sea patrols (together with recon aircrafts like the PBY Catalina).

(though that´s not the answer to your question

)

conmcb25 · January 7, 2003, 09:15

Yes Jim that is my point, shouldn't some kind of plane have that ability?

jim panse · January 7, 2003, 09:37

i guess some kind of medium-range bomber. what happens to the "normal" bomber slot? this would be some chance because these sub-hunters appeared +/- in the middle of the war.

Chris 62 · January 7, 2003, 14:37

If you want historical sub hunting, I would give the ability in 42, when the allies perfected 10cm radar for aircraft.

Since Pap is changing the rules text with a batch file, it would be easy to simulate, at start no plane can see subs, sometime in 1942 allow US and British Heavy bombers to spot them.

The Mitchell wasn't used as a sub hunter, but then neither was the B-17 for that matter.
But it really doesn't make a lot of difference.

Oh, I noticed another odd thing, the B-25 is given greater range then a B-17, this is a bit off, the big bomber could fly farther.