Which scenario is better for long-term play? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

TommyBoy84 -> Which scenario is better for long-term play? (8/12/2008 1:35:09 PM)

Hey all,

I'm curious.... when playing a long-term campaign from the beginning against the AI, is it better to use stock scenario 15 (with historical first turn, and Dec 7th surprise) or scenario 16? I've played the beginning of scenario 15 several times, and the beginning of scenario 16 a few times, and they seem to play out very differently, even though they start from the same date. Even after Pearl Harbor, things seem to go very differently in the Philippines, and at Wake, and more.

Which is best, in terms of realism, playability, and enjoyment?



FeurerKrieg -> RE: Which scenario is better for long-term play? (8/13/2008 3:36:52 AM)

Well, I like scen 15 because you have more flexibility, but I have never played 16, so I'm not sure I'm qualified to comment. [:)]



Anthropoid -> RE: Which scenario is better for long-term play? (8/13/2008 4:49:23 AM)

Having played through with Scenario 15 (and without Dec 7 surprise on) to about Aug 42 against the AI, my recommendations:

Give the AI as many advantages as you can bear to give it, and grin and bear it. The AI is pretty incompetent it seems, so if you really want to have fun for a longer period of time, do things to give it early game advantages. Like maybe play on Very Hard for the first six months or something like that, or play with 3 day turns for the first few months.

I started to play a few turns on Very Hard, but turned it off because I felt like the combat outcomes were unfair (which they are) but now I've got a game that is basically boring. I've already won the Solomon Island campaign and it never actually happened! The Japs are sending 40 bombers and 30 fighters to attack Darwin, when I have nothing there and they are not moving to invade. Manila still holds out although with very low supply . . . I've managed to prevent them from taking Batavia and Palembang, and they are bogged down at Akyab.

In short, while it would have been discouraging in the short run to give the AI more advantages in the short run, I think in the long run playing it mostly on Hard instead of Very Hard and also being quite wiley and intentional in what I did has made it less likely that I will actually finish this stock campaign against AI. I've pretty much decided to start learning the RHS mod, so I prolly never will finish the stock game.



bradfordkay -> RE: Which scenario is better for long-term play? (8/13/2008 6:15:08 AM)

Don't worry about long term play right now. I'm pretty sure that AE will be the one that you want for that, so mess with whatever tickles your fancy right now...



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.327637