Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/23/2014 11:24:56 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Has anyone gotten a game to mid 42 yet ??

Very keen to understand how some of the AI easter eggs worked out....

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 31
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/23/2014 11:31:45 PM   
Califvol


Posts: 135
Joined: 11/8/2002
From: The Land of Yore
Status: offline 		Like I said, I am only to Feb '42.

I don't know if the I-400 subs are in the Nasty as of 1941. But, one could use the I-400's in a group to raid "safe bases". Kind of like creating a KB of submarine aircraft. I don't know if you can even use sub aircraft in that fashion? But, if you could, assuming all the I-400's Yamamoto wanted were built (LOL before he even thought to request them built) and in service on 7 December 1941, then you could have a very deep raiding force at start that should be survivable given early war Allied ASW assets.

Thanks for the note back with an explination!

< Message edited by Califvol -- 6/24/2014 12:34:53 AM >

_____________________________

Why am I sharing my opinion? Because I am such a special snowflake that others need my knowledge. What…there are like a billion snowflakes? Oh, well isn't that special.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 32
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/23/2014 11:53:38 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		I will see what I can do with enhanced sub raiders

There are a few surprises yet to come that may help cover off some of those ideas but I will take another look at the Ai's sub force

(in reply to Califvol)
Post #: 33
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/24/2014 12:02:55 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		I just want the AI to genuinely surprise someone and make a real game of it

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 34
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/24/2014 12:17:57 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		What difficulty level do you recommend? Hard or Very Hard? I will try VH I think.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 6/24/2014 1:19:00 AM >

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 35
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/24/2014 6:02:04 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline 		Those deadly floatplane-toting Q Ships and extra fictional CVLs are a real pain in the backside as they do a lot of damage to Oz-bound convoys. Andy, your objective #2 is being met, as I can hardly move anything without the full Allied CV complement escorting unless I accept 30% losses.

As with NY Giants, I added a few airplanes to the production, mainly US fighters and recon. I added three USN training squadrons, as those are seriously lacking in stock. I also added one extra Cleveland and Northampton to show up later with six DDs each. One thing I could not figure out was making them upgradable. It all looked good in the editor to me but no upgrade option in the ship screen (not a big deal, but I would want to figure that out before doing a serious mod).

Also, I didn't make any PP adjustments. That's really making life hard.

I am now in March and am completely unable to stop the AI where I normally do. Good fun!

EDIT: I should also mention I turned withdrawals off, which is a huge plus for the Allies. Would be great if you could turn off just RN ships, for instance, which was what I was really after. As it is, those squadrons I disbanded in the PI and Singers are coming back to life and will be usable.

EDIT 2: Andy, I'll let you know once I come across more Easter eggs. Of course I'll PM so as to not spoil the fun for others.

Cheers,
CC

< Message edited by Commander Cody -- 6/24/2014 7:11:04 AM >

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 36
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/24/2014 11:55:28 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		Cody, a couple of things;

You can go through the editor and remove the withdrawal date manually for the ships you want to keep.

The upgrades are already in the editor, so if you copy and paste a ship that is the "late war" version than all the upgrades are assumed to be completed. If you pick an earlier one you will get the up grades.

_____________________________


(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 37
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/24/2014 4:53:07 PM   
Peever


Posts: 196
Joined: 3/17/2002
From: Minnesota
Status: offline 		Losing transports to Japanese cruisers in ports with coastal defense guns is getting pretty damn annoying. I'm looking at you Sydney! Do coastal guns have no effect whatsoever in stopping surface action in their hex?

_____________________________

"Sergeant the Spanish bullet isn't made that will kill me," Bucky O'Neil seconds before receiving a fatal shot to the head at the battle of San Juan Hill.

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 38
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/24/2014 8:29:45 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Muhahahahah

(in reply to Peever)
Post #: 39
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/24/2014 8:30:25 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		But seriously if anyone gets a game to may/June could you send me a save please a.mcphie@btinternet.com

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 40
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/25/2014 6:15:45 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Cody, a couple of things;

You can go through the editor and remove the withdrawal date manually for the ships you want to keep.

The upgrades are already in the editor, so if you copy and paste a ship that is the "late war" version than all the upgrades are assumed to be completed. If you pick an earlier one you will get the up grades.


Thanks. Will try that next time.

quote:

But seriously if anyone gets a game to may/June could you send me a save please a.mcphie@btinternet.com


Will do.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 41
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/25/2014 6:50:57 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		How is the AI coping with the new Burma and Malayan bases ??

Anyone had any odd behaviour yet ?

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 42
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/27/2014 7:26:44 PM   
Califvol


Posts: 135
Joined: 11/8/2002
From: The Land of Yore
Status: offline 		I don't see any "new" bases. Do you have map coordinates for them?

_____________________________

Why am I sharing my opinion? Because I am such a special snowflake that others need my knowledge. What…there are like a billion snowflakes? Oh, well isn't that special.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 43
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/29/2014 1:08:00 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		New bases in Malaya and Burma I thought I had included them but perhaps not

(in reply to Califvol)
Post #: 44
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/29/2014 1:29:08 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		You did. i just lost Toungoo to the forces starting at some of these bases.

_____________________________


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 45
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/29/2014 4:14:55 PM   
Califvol


Posts: 135
Joined: 11/8/2002
From: The Land of Yore
Status: offline 		I certainly have the new forces starting positions as they have captured existing bases. But, I don't see the new bases themselves. I assume they are dot bases and hence are very hard to see at times. This was a two part download. Maybe I download one of the parts wrong? I just stuck the whole thing in the scenario folder, was that correct?

_____________________________

Why am I sharing my opinion? Because I am such a special snowflake that others need my knowledge. What…there are like a billion snowflakes? Oh, well isn't that special.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 46
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/29/2014 4:22:12 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		There are 13 new dot bases in Burma. This screen shot shows some between Magwe and Akyab in the jungle, North of Magwe and then down around Toungoo.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Califvol)
Post #: 47
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/29/2014 5:46:18 PM   
Califvol


Posts: 135
Joined: 11/8/2002
From: The Land of Yore
Status: offline 		Thank you for taking the time to upload a screen shot!

On my game base 58,48 (just southwest of Meiktila) does not appear, nor do the other new bases. I am using the newest version of "Nasty" that is a two part download. Since you have it and I don't, my question to Andy (or anybody in the know) was the entire two part download to go into the scenario folder? If so, was there a sequence order as I actually loaded part 2 first.



_____________________________

Why am I sharing my opinion? Because I am such a special snowflake that others need my knowledge. What…there are like a billion snowflakes? Oh, well isn't that special.

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 48
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/29/2014 11:21:30 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Hmm ok I will check the download tomorrow the install you described should have worked

(in reply to Califvol)
Post #: 49
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 6/30/2014 8:09:03 PM   
Peever


Posts: 196
Joined: 3/17/2002
From: Minnesota
Status: offline 		Andy I was wondering if you have ever tested games with the Soviets active from the start? Without creating a host of new AI scripts would the AI fall apart too fast if another front was opened from the start of the war?

I've been thinking about the idea of a fantasy scenario based of Iornman where Japan joins Germany's war against Russia shortly after Barbarossa starts and captures some territory, mostly the bases around the Sea of Okhotsk, but not a full scale invasion of Russia. The start of the scenario would have Japan controlling all of the island Sakhalin and bases West of Yakutsk; Magada, Petropavlovsk, Anadyr etc. The Russian fleet would have been destroyed before the game starts and a large portion of Russian air units would also have been destroyed.

My fear is that adding this front would bog down the AI and have it spend too much trying to capture Vladivostok that it would neglect the South Pacific. Japanese forces would also have to be beefed up in Manchukuo to prevent a human player from sending a Soviet steamroller down to Port Arthur and Korea/China. I think I could solve that by increasing the starting disabled % on all Soviets as well as creating static fortified Japanese units in key areas. However I'm still afraid the AI would spend too many resources against the Soviets before securing the Dutch East Indies.

EDIT: Never mind. The more I thought about this it doesn't seem like it would add much to the game and just create more problems.





< Message edited by Peever -- 7/1/2014 6:00:02 PM >

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 50
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 7/2/2014 10:04:11 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Sorry Peever yers you could do it but it would be a PITA for the AI

(in reply to Peever)
Post #: 51
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 7/2/2014 10:15:43 PM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		I had to stop playing so I could make some changes to the Allies. It seems (I know its not true but its my story) that the AI can control weather and it snuck the KB into the Coral Sea when my ships were thinking it was just transports. After losing the rest of my big carriers (6 in the span of 3 days) I decided to call it a game. Well done Andy, I will have to rethink how I face the AI in your games.

You really did a good job in this, thanks so very much!!

_____________________________


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 52
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 7/3/2014 7:08:15 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline 		I decided I had to cheat by firing up Japan on Dec 7 in order to count the number of CVs, CVLs and Q-Ships (i.e. ACMs and AKAs with floating fighters and dive bombers) I'd be facing. Hint: The IJN has naval aviation superiority well into 1944. This severely restricts Allied options for defense, especially if you don't fiddle with Andy's standard PP accumulation. This is certainly a challenge and it's not fun to lose a whole squadron of P-40Es on an AKV heading for Perth, not too mention other reinforcements, supplies and fuel.

In other words, I like it!

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 53
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 7/3/2014 9:18:58 AM   
traskott


Posts: 1546
Joined: 6/23/2008
From: Valladolid, Spain
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

I decided I had to cheat by firing up Japan on Dec 7 in order to count the number of CVs, CVLs and Q-Ships (i.e. ACMs and AKAs with floating fighters and dive bombers) I'd be facing. Hint: The IJN has naval aviation superiority well into 1944. This severely restricts Allied options for defense, especially if you don't fiddle with Andy's standard PP accumulation. This is certainly a challenge and it's not fun to lose a whole squadron of P-40Es on an AKV heading for Perth, not too mention other reinforcements, supplies and fuel.

In other words, I like it!

Cheers,
CC




Looks like the statment of Andy of: Feel free to add allied toys on the roster is not a kindly suggestion, it's imperative!!

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 54
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 7/3/2014 12:07:09 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		I just lost Wasp and Hornet by straying a convoy to close to Christmas Island in Oct 42 so I feel your pain......

I am barely clinging on to southern Australia as well at the moment (fingernails are almost gone !!!)

Andy

(in reply to traskott)
Post #: 55
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 7/4/2014 2:23:02 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline 		That OZ invasion is getting to be a tad worrisome for me, too.

I'm in late May and will try to remember to send you a save this weekend (I'm at work now).

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 56
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 7/4/2014 11:22:27 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		You know its bad when the designer is barely hanging on.... You created a monster her Andy.

_____________________________


(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 57
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 7/4/2014 5:37:09 PM   
Peever


Posts: 196
Joined: 3/17/2002
From: Minnesota
Status: offline 		What kind of convoy lanes do/did you guys have setup to Australia by the way? I keep having to push my convoys further South to avoid raiders and seaplane carriers. I'm thinking Australia should push their island closer if they want me to supply it.

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 58
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 7/4/2014 10:18:37 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		lol

(in reply to Peever)
Post #: 59
RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty - 7/7/2014 8:20:03 AM   
traskott


Posts: 1546
Joined: 6/23/2008
From: Valladolid, Spain
Status: offline 		Lol? More raiders?

I'm played only 10 days and I'm out of airframes all over the map. Even P.H. is almost empty and Hilo Fortress is.... I hate the 19th Garrison unit !!.

Overall is very frustrating ( which is the point ). Burma/India saboteurs are uber powerful against the poor trained indian/burmese units... Even the MG bon of the 7th is unable to hold a position against one unit. One brigada was expulsed from a base with fort2 by another saboteur unit...

On the bright side: My dutch CLs and DDs of the ABDA Fleet rocks!! Remember those wonderful APAs loaded with a full ija division? . ( First time EVER dutch fleet fight - and wins - a naval combat since I bought the WitpAE ). 10.000 japanese losses. Yeah....

Edit: Have u tweaked the V.P.? I'm only lost H.K. and some non critical points and the japanese have 19k against my 10k ??


< Message edited by traskott -- 7/7/2014 9:21:15 AM >

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: New Version of Ironman Nasty Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.430