So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 2:11:50 AM

pry

Posts: 1410
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas
Status: offline

Ok So here is your chance...

Not to steal any thunder from the CHS folks and their soon to be released scenario but I am looking for a select few good folks to Alpha / Beta test my new campaign scenarios, one utilizes the stock map and another version utilizes (My personal favorite) Andrew Brown's Map. The scenarios are designed to work within the capabilities and design of the WitP game engine. There will also be a 12/8 start version of each scenario, making 4 scenarios total when completed)

These scenarios are not for the weak of heart, I designed them as human to human PBEM scenarios and to be a micro managers Nirvana

control of supply and air forces are now major areas needing much more attention than the stock game but players still retain the ability to play against the AI if you chose to do so. I have more changes that I plan to add but have reached the point where testing, feedback and player input on changes included so far is needed. I need new eyes looking at this to see how it is going or if I have indeed gone too far

.

I have been working on these scenarios since version 1.2 in between patches and put allot of additional research time into them. These scenarios are a personal project so I was able to do some things with these that were not possible in the official scenarios. I have however attempted to keep with the "Company Line" to protect the game balance as much as possible and make these highly detailed scenarios playable and still provide an enjoyable game to players no matter which side they play (I'll leave the Fan Boy scenarios to others)

If you are interested drop a note to pry-witp@houston.rr.com and I will select a few folks to take part in the tests.

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 2:42:25 AM

Oleg Mastruko

Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

Can you list principal features of your scenario(s)?

O.

_____________________________

(in reply to pry)

Post #: 2

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 3:00:31 AM

Cmdrcain

Posts: 1161
Joined: 8/21/2000
From: Rebuilding FLA, Busy Repairing!
Status: offline

Whats the Payscale? Medicial? Dental? Profit Sharing package? Other Perks?

_____________________________

Noise? What Noise? It's sooooo quiet and Peaceful!

Battlestar Pegasus

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 3

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 3:08:41 AM

jwilkerson

Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline

I'm in ... I happen to have some time for the next month or so .. strange how I "have" time - now that I'm moving ... anyway I can test an hour or so each day .. maybe more ... and BTW I'm not a fan boy ... but I also don't care a flip about game balance ... I'm a historical accuracy type ... and since your S16 is the only historically accurate full campaign game we've seen so far ... I support your efforts !

I assume you'll be using Andy's V3 with OUT the extension ... so I'll need another install for that since I've added in the extension for the CHS.

Joe W.

(in reply to pry)

Post #: 4

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 3:18:33 AM

pry

Posts: 1410
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas
Status: offline

Some examples of changes, Full list will be published at a later time.

I reworked the entire Air forces of both sides down to the Squadron / Chutai level wherever possible to provide the most flexibility in squadron deployments and player strategy options.

Image, Example of reworked Japanese Air Force, Saigon 12/7

Image, Example of reworked US Air Force, Pearl Harbor 12/7

Image, Added damage to all Allied Ships undergoing overhaul 12/7 to reflect actual status and availability, Example San Francisco

Image, Reduced cargo capacity of all vessels it now takes a whole lot more ships to move things, much closer to real life. (and slows things down as well) The problem is supply verses cargo capacity. These ships are not hauling rice with each cargo hold filled to the brim to pack in the Max amount possible, rather military cargo is bulky... So cargo capacity has been reduced by about 40% to reflect this (The largest AK are still large enough to be converted to other types) and it takes more ships to move things than in the stock game and making keeping places supplied a bigger challange.

Image, Highly accurate, The Pensacola convoy with 3 squadrons of A-24 bombers intended for Manila also embarked...

Image, Highly accurate, The Lexington task Force with VSMB-231 embarked on 12/7 enroute to Wake Island...

Many other fixes like fixing the arrival of most of the USN to Historic availibility, this is seen most in the submarines most were arriving between 2 months to a year early from historical... dismounting all 12/7 invasions except Malaya, Battan Island and I left in Wake all others will have to be done by the Japanese player at later times repositioned the 18th 33rd divisions to historical starting positions in China. Plus many other changes...

< Message edited by pry -- 3/26/2005 3:24:56 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Cmdrcain)

Post #: 5

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 3:21:27 AM

Andrew Brown

Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline

quote:

I assume you'll be using Andy's V3 with OUT the extension ... so I'll need another install for that since I've added in the extension for the CHS.

You should be able to use one install and use the utility I provide to swap between the maps, if you want to.

_____________________________

Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

(in reply to jwilkerson)

Post #: 6

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 3:22:51 AM

RUPD3658

Posts: 6922
Joined: 8/28/2002
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Status: offline

I am in it just for the chicks.

Mostly play against the AI but would be willing to help.

_____________________________

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits"- Darwin Awards 2003

"No plan survives contact with the enemy." - Field Marshall Helmuth von Moltke

(in reply to pry)

Post #: 7

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 3:26:19 AM

Tanaka

Posts: 4378
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

just curious pry but why didnt you join forces with the CHS guys??? or why didnt they join forces with you?!?!

seems like the CHS would have been even better with your help!!!

...Is it because your scenarios will be official???

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 3/26/2005 3:31:33 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to pry)

Post #: 8

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 3:26:56 AM

Tristanjohn

Posts: 3027
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Daly City CA USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pry

Ok So here is your chance...

Not to steal any thunder from the CHS folks and their soon to be released scenario but I am looking for a select few good folks to Alpha / Beta test my new campaign scenarios, one utilizes the stock map and another version utilizes (My personal favorite) Andrew Brown's Map. The scenarios are designed to work within the capabilities and design of the WitP game engine. There will also be a 12/8 start version of each scenario, making 4 scenarios total when completed)

These scenarios are not for the weak of heart, I designed them as human to human PBEM scenarios and to be a micro managers Nirvana control of supply and air forces are now major areas needing much more attention than the stock game but players still retain the ability to play against the AI if you chose to do so. I have more changes that I plan to add but have reached the point where testing, feedback and player input on changes included so far is needed. I need new eyes looking at this to see how it is going or if I have indeed gone too far .

I have been working on these scenarios since version 1.2 in between patches and put allot of additional research time into them. These scenarios are a personal project so I was able to do some things with these that were not possible in the official scenarios. I have however attempted to keep with the "Company Line" to protect the game balance as much as possible and make these highly detailed scenarios playable and still provide an enjoyable game to players no matter which side they play (I'll leave the Fan Boy scenarios to others)

If you are interested drop a note to pry-witp@houston.rr.com and I will select a few folks to take part in the tests.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but what do you mean by saying the scenarios attempt to keep the play "balanced"? How so?

Just for reference, if I were to design a scenario (I never will) I'd try to get the OOB/ratings/whatnot as close in line with history as possible. Does the "company line" not run parallel to that philosophy?

Just asking.

(in reply to pry)

Post #: 9

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 3:29:46 AM

Zorfwaddle

Posts: 263
Joined: 3/16/2001
From: Pensacola, FL
Status: offline

Samir: [trying to decide if he should go along with the virus plot] I have a question.
Peter Gibbons: Yes?
Samir: In... in these "beta tests," you can have sex with women?
Peter Gibbons: Yep, you sure can.
Samir: OK, I'll do it.

_____________________________

"AK-47. When you absolutely, positively got to kill every m****rf****r in the room. Accept no substitutes." Ordell Robbie - "Jackie Brown"

(in reply to RUPD3658)

Post #: 10

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 4:00:16 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

Please don't take this the wrong way, but what do you mean by saying the scenarios attempt to keep the play "balanced"? How so?

Just for reference, if I were to design a scenario (I never will) I'd try to get the OOB/ratings/whatnot as close in line with history as possible. Does the "company line" not run parallel to that philosophy?

Just asking.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...

etc.

Folks have been asking that question of GG and his Pacific War games for at least a dozen years, and no one has received a straightforward answer yet.

Maybe you will get "The Answer"...

Dave Baranyi

(Who would trade all of the OOBs in the world for a land movement/combat mechanism that worked.)

(in reply to Tristanjohn)

Post #: 11

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 4:08:04 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Hey pry, if you want, feel free to include any or all of my ship refit graphics in your scenario. I may have already told you that, but I've been so busy I honestly can't remember.

_____________________________

Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med

Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 12

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 4:42:07 AM

scout1

Posts: 2899
Joined: 8/24/2004
From: South Bend, In
Status: offline

quote:

just curious pry but why didnt you join forces with the CHS guys???

Interesting question. Did your "official" duties prevent you from joining the CHS ?

(in reply to Tanaka)

Post #: 13

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 4:51:02 AM

pry

Posts: 1410
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

just curious pry but why didnt you join forces with the CHS guys??? or why didnt they join forces with you?!?!

seems like the CHS would have been even better with your help!!!

...Is it because your scenarios will be official???

Because we do not see eye to eye on things... I actually did invite Don (I respect his subject matter knowledge) to work on these before they started theirs but our respective visions were totally incompatable.

No, they wont be "Official" this is a personal project of the scenario I want to play., and I figured some other detail freaks out there might appreciate it as well.

_____________________________

(in reply to Tanaka)

Post #: 14

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 5:01:13 AM

pry

Posts: 1410
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas
Status: offline

I knew the company line crack would bring questions...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

Please don't take this the wrong way, but what do you mean by saying the scenarios attempt to keep the play "balanced"? How so?

Because changing values in the editor helter skelter to any ole value you "think" fits will cause unintended results and cause the combat routines to provide out of whack results. So you try to keep in values in line with how the routines were written and tested to acheive similar results. You could turn the Nate into a flying tank and screw the whole pouch... and the whole balance of how the game unfolds.

quote:

Just for reference, if I were to design a scenario (I never will) I'd try to get the OOB/ratings/whatnot as close in line with history as possible. Does the "company line" not run parallel to that philosophy?
Just asking.

Scenarios must work within the capabilities of the engine running them So you make your scenario work within the capabilities of what the engine can and can not do. There is a point where historical accuracy and the game don't mix so you keep things right at or a little above that level, the game already abstracts the little things like coastal shipping and it all works and you can enjoy the game for what it is a game not an exact historical simulation.

_____________________________

(in reply to Tristanjohn)

Post #: 15

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 5:09:24 AM

pry

Posts: 1410
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Hey pry, if you want, feel free to include any or all of my ship refit graphics in your scenario. I may have already told you that, but I've been so busy I honestly can't remember.

Was planning on using some of them Justin but that is down the road a bit yet... I'll let you know which and when.

_____________________________

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 16

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 5:10:50 AM

Brady

Posts: 10701
Joined: 10/25/2002
From: Oregon,USA
Status: offline

Hmmm, Detail, yummy

_____________________________

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view

(in reply to pry)

Post #: 17

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 5:13:28 AM

mogami

Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline

Hi, It just shows that there are many ideas of what the game scenarios should reflect.
I like almost everything Pry has done in his new scenarios except for making the airgroups smaller.
Just as another designer might want to break divisions down to Regt/Bde level I feel units should be kept in scale with the map. So I prefer the medium size airgroups. (Daitai/Sentai for Japan)

These units can break down if required but most of the time they will be employed full size. I actually would rather airgroups go to the next larger size. (and be broken down when needed)

I'm only mentioning this to show there are many ideas. Everyone has their level of command preference. The thought of moving 3000 aircraft in 9 or 12 plane groups gives me the willies. If I'm going to place 400 aircraft at a base I'd just as soon do it in 36 or 48 plane blocks. (I really like those 64 and 72 plane Allied groups)

_____________________________

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to pry)

Post #: 18

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 5:22:17 AM

Brady

Posts: 10701
Joined: 10/25/2002
From: Oregon,USA
Status: offline

" (I really like those 64 and 72 plane Allied groups) "

I do and I dont..they are easy to move but I find that they work better for me at least operationaly in smaller groups, but as you say they can be easly broken down so...

I am very keen though to have a look at what pry has done though looks cool indead.

BTW does anyone know if the new variable bombload for Allied planes for 1.5 aply to the Japanese as well?

_____________________________

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 19

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 5:32:15 AM

Oleg Mastruko

Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

Sorry to mini-hijack the thread but Brady where di you get the info about "variable bombload" in 1.5? Don't remember ever seeing that. Sorry, promise to let this back on track as soon as Brady answers

O.

_____________________________

(in reply to Brady)

Post #: 20

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 5:40:31 AM

Oleg Mastruko

Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

Image, Reduced cargo capacity of all vessels it now takes a whole lot more ships to move things, much closer to real life. (and slows things down as well) The problem is supply verses cargo capacity. These ships are not hauling rice with each cargo hold filled to the brim to pack in the Max amount possible, rather military cargo is bulky... So cargo capacity has been reduced by about 40% to reflect this (The largest AK are still large enough to be converted to other types) and it takes more ships to move things than in the stock game and making keeping places supplied a bigger challange.

This is OK as far as AKs go, but are you sure APs need reducing as well?

Since WITP prompted me ro read or re-read my Pacific War library, I am surprised by number of occasions when (especially on Japanese side) something is written to the tune of:

"Seaplane Carrier Kimikawa Maru (or any other single, medium sized, not necesarilly even a transport ship) trasferred most of 35th brigade (or any other decent sized unit) to Munda (or wherever)." blah blah

And I'm thinking wow, it would take convoy of 6-8 APs to do that in WITP, and they did it with one ship? Many times important units were carried in no more than couple of destroyer transports etc.

I didn't exactly count the individual soldiers, but my "gut feeling" based on those readings is that both sides, but especially Japanese, could transport lots of troops on their AP-like ships (or APDs) if need arised.

O.

_____________________________

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 21

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 6:02:14 AM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

Not to mention that in order to convert a ship it has to be over 5000 tons.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 22

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 6:07:42 AM

Brady

Posts: 10701
Joined: 10/25/2002
From: Oregon,USA
Status: offline

Oleg, I read it on another thread, sry to interupt this thread with the subject just occured to me to ask (woops)...In a nut shell as I understand it some allied plane types will be alowed to use larger bombs (1k 04 2K) on some mishions if they have suficient experance/moral and suply I think I am a bit vauge on the details, I asked their if this were to apy to Japanese plane types as well.

Realy I would love to see all plane types cary a randomanised load, encompasing all bomb sizes they could use, even mixed loads would be cool, Bettys for example carrying 60KG and 250 KG bombs one day and 500KG bombs on another, or just 60KG, ext...

_____________________________

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 23

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 6:47:52 AM

Tanaka

Posts: 4378
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pry

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

just curious pry but why didnt you join forces with the CHS guys??? or why didnt they join forces with you?!?!

seems like the CHS would have been even better with your help!!!

...Is it because your scenarios will be official???

Because we do not see eye to eye on things... I actually did invite Don (I respect his subject matter knowledge) to work on these before they started theirs but our respective visions were totally incompatable.

No, they wont be "Official" this is a personal project of the scenario I want to play., and I figured some other detail freaks out there might appreciate it as well.

interesting....

any hints about what the differences in opinions/visions were???

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 3/26/2005 6:48:13 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to pry)

Post #: 24

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 7:54:42 AM

eMonticello

Posts: 525
Joined: 3/15/2002
Status: offline

It's probably reasonable to reduce the APs by 15-20%. My numbers below assume that the soldiers are carried in the AP (either Queen Mary or West Point) and the equipment are carried in the C-3s.

So, You would need the Queen Mary to transport one Infantry Division (which generally didn't happen until later in the war ... the Army didn't want to loose an entire division if she was sunk) and 3-4 C-3s to carry their equipment. Double the number of transports for 60-days worth of supplies.

The top chart shows the number of long tons of cargo a particular class of ship can carry and a calculated stowage percentage (for all intents, unusable space).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

quote:

Image, Reduced cargo capacity of all vessels it now takes a whole lot more ships to move things, much closer to real life. (and slows things down as well) The problem is supply verses cargo capacity. These ships are not hauling rice with each cargo hold filled to the brim to pack in the Max amount possible, rather military cargo is bulky... So cargo capacity has been reduced by about 40% to reflect this (The largest AK are still large enough to be converted to other types) and it takes more ships to move things than in the stock game and making keeping places supplied a bigger challange.

This is OK as far as AKs go, but are you sure APs need reducing as well?

And I'm thinking wow, it would take convoy of 6-8 APs to do that in WITP, and they did it with one ship? Many times important units were carried in no more than couple of destroyer transports etc.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by eMonticello -- 3/26/2005 8:08:33 AM >

_____________________________

Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example. -- Pudd'nhead Wilson

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 25

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 8:05:32 AM

Cap Mandrake

Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline

Cool chart Monticello;

Looks like Pry is dead on...an avg military cargo is about 40% of maximum capacity. Also intesting..gasoline in 55 gal drums is amazingly efficient (at least in terms of percentage of theoretical maximum cargo capacity...~85%)

_____________________________

(in reply to eMonticello)

Post #: 26

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 8:14:13 AM

eMonticello

Posts: 525
Joined: 3/15/2002
Status: offline

The entire US Army in World War II series is a great resource. Hopefully reality will slow the game down a bit :)

_____________________________

Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example. -- Pudd'nhead Wilson

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 27

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 9:46:23 AM

Apollo11

Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: pry

Ok So here is your chance...

Not to steal any thunder from the CHS folks and their soon to be released scenario but I am looking for a select few good folks to Alpha / Beta test my new campaign scenarios, one utilizes the stock map and another version utilizes (My personal favorite) Andrew Brown's Map. The scenarios are designed to work within the capabilities and design of the WitP game engine. There will also be a 12/8 start version of each scenario, making 4 scenarios total when completed)

These scenarios are not for the weak of heart, I designed them as human to human PBEM scenarios and to be a micro managers Nirvana control of supply and air forces are now major areas needing much more attention than the stock game but players still retain the ability to play against the AI if you chose to do so. I have more changes that I plan to add but have reached the point where testing, feedback and player input on changes included so far is needed. I need new eyes looking at this to see how it is going or if I have indeed gone too far .

I have been working on these scenarios since version 1.2 in between patches and put allot of additional research time into them. These scenarios are a personal project so I was able to do some things with these that were not possible in the official scenarios. I have however attempted to keep with the "Company Line" to protect the game balance as much as possible and make these highly detailed scenarios playable and still provide an enjoyable game to players no matter which side they play (I'll leave the Fan Boy scenarios to others)

If you are interested drop a note to pry-witp@houston.rr.com and I will select a few folks to take part in the tests.

IMHO, the more good scenarios in WitP we have - the more longitivity of a game is 100% assured!

Thus I see no problem at all having excellent Pry's scenario(s) together with CHS scenario(s)!

Great work guys!

And now small hijack/diversion - sorry (but still on course):

You wrote that you started to work on your scenario(s) ever since WitP v1.2 (now long ago). How would you deal with upcoming v1.5 changes (or this doesn't play any role for you)?

Do you, perhaps, use Michael's WitP export and check utilities and load stuff to some database for editing and comparing (and thus avoid official editor)?

Same applies to CHS guys...

Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________

Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to pry)

Post #: 28

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 1:15:17 PM

Banquet

Posts: 1184
Joined: 8/23/2002
From: England
Status: offline

Pry, I'm not clued up enough on game mechanics to be able to give you any useful feedback for testing your scenario's, but wanted to say they look really great! I'll certainly look forward to playing them when they're released. Thanks for you efforts

_____________________________

http://i904.photobucket.com/albums/ac241/norfolktraveller/command-banner_zps8a55d0fa.jpg

(in reply to Apollo11)

Post #: 29

RE: So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester - 3/26/2005 2:26:51 PM

pry

Posts: 1410
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eMonticello

It's probably reasonable to reduce the APs by 15-20%. My numbers below assume that the soldiers are carried in the AP (either Queen Mary or West Point) and the equipment are carried in the C-3s.

eMonticello,

I appreciate you input on this, however the problem with using the numbers you provide is that you have seperated the men from their equipment and supply this is something you can not do in the game.

You can not seperate the troops from their equipment in the game due to a limitation in the loading process, the whole loading process is abstracted as the game loads heavy artillery as well as troops into AP's which was impossible in real life nothing bigger than crew served weapons that could be hand carried were loaded on AP's. So I compensated with an across the board reduction to all AP's and AK's to deal with this.

lets look at some actual invasions and you all draw your own conclusions if I am in the ball park or not...

The 12/8 invasion of Malaya, was carried out by the most part by the 143rd Regiment (+) of the 5th Division and support troops or about 10,000 men and supplies and equipment was landed 12/8 from 26 ships, 7 transports for the troops and 19 cargo ships for the supplies and equipment.... Currently nearly the whole of the 5th Division is loaded on 11 ships....

The landing at Aparri was made from 27 (AP and AK's) transports, Vigan 28, Batan Island 21, Lamon Bay 21, Davo 14 and so on and so on... These are Japanese examples, Look up the Guadalcanal invasion force.

Invasion force was made up of 75 vesels of which 35 were escorts (carrier groups and direct fire support included) thus taking somewhere around 40 transports and cargo ships to land the Marines on Guadalcanal

I might rethink the AP reductions some but I inclined at this point to let it be, the Average WWII AP in the Pacific had the Capacity to haul about 1,500 men and their personal equipment each. Being able to haul the entire 2nd Marine Division 15,500 load points as an example plus a fair amount of supply on 4 6,000 AP's just dont get it... and is one of the big reasons why the game moves so fast IMO... In my scenario it takes 36 transports a mix of AP's and AK's to move the Japanese 5th Division to Songora and KB for the 12/8 invasions these are much more realistic numbers if still a tad light...

_____________________________

(in reply to eMonticello)

Post #: 30

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> So You Always Wanted To Be A Tester

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>