Not possible. Would have to start form the beginning. I'll happily leave my Japanese empire AAR to be hidden among the many layers of forum's threads and rest in peace there like many soldiers and civilians do from all sides of that unfortunate conflict.
Yes, this is what I meant. However, could you please also .rar and send me the actual JAP aircraft icons used in CORE, i.e. all the models from 12_0 to 18_x? There is something I'm not sure I fully understand, like the lack of some models (e.g. 12_0, 14_1, 14_2), which I think are there but have simply not been named.OK, I think I'll happily take you up on that offer!
But then, what exactly do you need from me? Would a models.csv file detailing differences and similarities between CORE and TRP be enough? Something like this, but obviously with more coloring.
View attachment 103598
green = no change necessary other than editing model ID such as 1944 instead of VI for instance, orange = model change necessary between TRP and CORE, red = model included in CORE but not in TRP or the other way around.)
You know, I was simply referring to that famous e-mail and the real reply you would have given to that question (remember?)
Well, it definitely doesn't look good, no
. By the way, you've just reminded me why I sweared I would have never converted the TP icons to CORE - not that I had forgotten the reasons behind that, heh, but taking a look at those .csv files again brought back this issue to my memory in all of its harshness. (provided, of course, that I can find them at all: some of them don't seem to be too popular on the web, like e.g. the Mitsubishi Ki-1...).Yeah, I can't access it myself (and it apparently doesn't even recognize my login data). This fact, however, makes me confident that it is simply a temporary issue on RS' end, so it should be ok in a matter of days or even hours (...I guess :mellow: ). If the problem isn't resolved quickly, however, I'll reupload the mod.
.Glad you chose to write your first post here, also
. (OMG, the posts are piling up so quickly...)Well, it definitely doesn't look good, no
Anyway, let's take it like real men and see what could be done. The thing which I can't really wrap my head around is the lack of some models in the list - yet there actually are icons for them... What does that mean? Does, for example, the US have actual model numbers for jet/rocket interceptors like 13_7, 13_8, 13_9 in its .csv file section, unlike Japan? How does the game treat those?
Apart from the advanced jet models, though, which I can understand not having been listed because of lacking RL counterparts (although I think they might have put in at least the Nakajima Ki-201 Karyu), the thing which puzzles me the most is that there are even some apparently "basic" models lacking, namely 14_1 and 14_2 (which should be, basing myself on vanilla, Strat. bomber I and II). What gives? I'm not installing CORE just to check this, but could you please tell me how are these two models portrayed in game? Are they in but they lack their name, are they somehow "disabled" for Japan and thus not buildable, are they... hmmm? :unsure:
In summary, what I'd need i.e. I'd ask you to do, is to please prepare me a complete list of Japanese aircraft from bottom to top as you want/need them to be; basically, this means filling those mysterious (to me) gaps in the .csv file, eventually with not so accurate names, but most importantly by highlighting which model numbers correspond to what types of aircraft. For vanilla that was rather simple - 12_x is fighters, 13_x is interceptors and so on - but I'm afraid for CORE it might not be that simple (I point out again the light/medium bomber distinction which I know is in somehow, but not exactly under which form).
So, to be clear, you'd have to arrange me something like that (the aircraft types between ":::" are a guess of mine when it comes especially to 14_x and 15_x):
12_0 [name] :::Fighter:::
12_1 [name] :::Fighter:::
12_2 [name] :::Fighter:::
...
...
13_0 [name] :::Interceptor:::
13_1 [name] :::Interceptor:::
13_2 [name] :::Interceptor:::
...
...
14_0 [name] :::Light bomber:::
14_1 [name] :::Light bomber:::
14_2 [name] :::Heavy bomber:::
14_3 [name] :::Heavy bomber:::
...
15_0 [name] :::Medium bomber:::
15_1 [name] :::Medium bomber:::
...
16_0 [name] :::Naval bomber:::
This way I could concentrate on the actual icons, i.e. on adding to them the proper tags, tier numbers etc. Of course, it would be ideal if you named those which currently aren't since this way I could simply try and "adapt" my already existing icons to their CORE equivalent. If, conversely, you don't do that I'd theorethically have to create new icons basing on CORE names... and there are quite a few of them
If models are missing from the line-up within CORE, it implies that historically the country in question either did not produce these types, or the types flown have such underperforming stats that they aren't matching the model's intended performance.
Likewise, we aim for the type that has best matching performance for the type in question, rather than the historically mass-produced model (which does not deliver in terms of performance as the base model type representing it's class). So we end up with some pretty obscure models, which sometimes did not go beyond the prototype stage. And as I had to cover them in terms of matching model graphics, I do know the lengths you have to go to find material, especially in terms of photos of the damn buggers...This way I could concentrate on the actual icons, i.e. on adding to them the proper tags, tier numbers etc. Of course, it would be ideal if you named those which currently aren't since this way I could simply try and "adapt" my already existing icons to their CORE equivalent. If, conversely, you don't do that I'd theorethically have to create new icons basing on CORE names... and there are quite a few of them
Yes, look at those posts... you've already doubled their count in no time!Yeah, i thought i should save it for something important
Thanks for the info, let's hope RS can handle more than annoying ads.
Aye, thank you, Hagar. The problem for me isn't as much related to pictures, which wouldn't be too difficult to find (at least in many cases); the real obstacle are aircraft drawings, even more so since it's about top-view ones.
I know that you're not too fond of smilies, Epa, but off the top of my head there's no better way to express what I felt reading the above line than this (and, as an image is worth a thousand words, like they say): :laugh:
Thanks for the very kind words. As a matter of fact, though, the problems as I can see them are that:
