Difference between campaign scenarios? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

AstaSyneri -> Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/8/2015 10:08:45 AM)

Hi!

Now that I solved the resolution problems I am starting one of the smaller scenarios to learn the game. Thinking ahead about what to do when I am done with that (harhar), I was looking at a full campaign - and am once more confused.

The game lists no fewer than seven campaign scenarios

01: Full Campaign
02: Hakko Ichiu (Jap. High Command takes Karate classes for 6 months and fights harder?)
06: December 8 Full Campaign
07: as 01 with Quiet China
08: as 02 with Quiet China
09: as 06 with Quiet China
10: Ironman

The actual descriptions are less than telling. :( Can anybody enlighten me what the difference between scenarios is?

The manual didn't shed any light on this either :(.



fredleander -> RE: Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/8/2015 10:29:33 AM)


faulty posting - disregard



Barb -> RE: Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/8/2015 10:49:45 AM)

Well there are few more available :D

But back to your question:

01: Full Campaign - standard, basic, stock scenario starting on Dec 7,1941 (be careful about "Historical First Turn" switch!)
02: Hakko Ichiu - Basically beefed up Japanese TOE, on premise they invested much more into the Navy, got some more ground units, air units, enlarged economy and more supplies and fuel hoarded to sustain increased demands of war.
06: equivalent to scenario 01, but without ability to alter Dec 7,1941 results/settings. You are dealt with situation as of real December 8, 1941
- all Quiet China - same as the original scenarios, but AI scripts are not provided for ground combat in China - that said AI will try to prosecute some attacks at locations where both sides are present, may even pursue. But the situation on the ground will simply become quiet.

10: Ironman - Japan on steroids!

P.S.: There are few more available as "mods" like RA (Reluctant Admiral scenarios), DBB (DaBigBabes scenarios), Ironman Ironman, and few more...

I am personally fond of DBB-C scenario 28 (Similar to scenario 01, with altered database data, limited cargo capacities, more little ships, etc).



AstaSyneri -> RE: Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/8/2015 1:11:42 PM)

So if I want to play a campaign from the US side of things, that takes off after the movie Pearl Harbor (;-)), but doesn't throw any extra bricks my way, I'll start with scenario #6? I imagine the Quiet China is more important when you are playing Japan? Or does it make sense in order to reduce complexity just a bit (harhar)?



rustysi -> RE: Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/8/2015 8:21:14 PM)

quote:

I imagine the Quiet China is more important when you are playing Japan? Or does it make sense in order to reduce complexity just a bit (harhar)?


Against the AI I don't think it does anything more than just giving you one less thing to deal with. Against a human opponent it can be quite difficult to hold China so a quiet China could be a benefit to an Allied player.



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/8/2015 10:01:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

I imagine the Quiet China is more important when you are playing Japan? Or does it make sense in order to reduce complexity just a bit (harhar)?


Against the AI I don't think it does anything more than just giving you one less thing to deal with. Against a human opponent it can be quite difficult to hold China so a quiet China could be a benefit to an Allied player.


It would, but playing a human there's no need to play the Quiet China scenario(s.) Just play stock 1/2 or a mod. Quiet China in PBEM depends on house rules.

I understand why the devs put in these scenarios, but when I played the AI I never used them. China is something you have to learn if you ever want to play PBEM. It and Oz are the two continental war training grounds, and China is harder than Oz due to terrain, lack of railroads, and lack of supply among other things. I wish I'd learned more playing the AI there, but I'm glad I tried at least.



PaxMondo -> RE: Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/9/2015 1:45:43 AM)

There are both Allied and IJ Ironman scenarios. Both are AI only. Both have standard, Nasty, and Nasty, Nasty variants.

For all "stock" (meaning non-Ironman) scenarios, you need to know that the base difficulty needs to be HARD for the AI to work. It will not work below HARD. This was a design decision made late in the development process after a lengthy and heated discussion. [8D]

For all Ironman scenarios, the baseline difficulty is NORMAL. Going to HARD gives the AI serious advantages and VERY HARD is moreso.

Ironman Nasty scenarios give the AI the ability to recover from more mistakes allowing the game to progress well into '43 or even '44.

Ironman Nasty, Nasty scenarios are simply Nasty. The AI gets a lot of toys and Easter Eggs. As IJ, you have to maintain a schedule in spite of horrific losses or you will not secure the DEI and are then doomed. As the allies, you will have to deal with an avalanche of assaults that seemingly have no end ... funny as that's just how the allies felt in '41. [;)]



dr. smith -> RE: Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/10/2015 6:34:24 PM)

I complied the differences some years ago. The actual numbers may have changed a bit with data updates, but you can get an idea of the scale of the differences from these charts.

First Initial Japanese Ships - has type of combat ship, initial number in the base, hakko, and Ironman.
(have this nicely formatted in a Word doc - worthless here).
___Ship-Base-Hakko-Iron
Combat CV 6 6 8
Combat CVE 2 2 1
Combat CVL 2 2 6
Combat BB 10 10 12
Combat CA 18 18 24
Combat CL 20 20 33
Combat DD 115 123 153
Combat CS 3 3 0

For Subs, only difference is Ironman get 107 subs initially, vs 57 for the other 2.

A huge problem for the IJN AI is finding escort vessels - here's the initial tally.
4 extra E boats for Hakko, some 74 extra E's, PB's, & TB's for Ironman

__Type-Base-Hakko-Iron
Escort E 12 16 43
Escort PB 117 117 145
Escort PC 5 5 5
Escort TB 13 13 28
Escort SC 47 47 47

For those escorts, increased cargo ships for Ironman only:

____Type-Base-Hakko-Iron
Transport AK 10 10 97
Transport AKL 0 0 125
Transport AKV 0 0 1
Transport AO 17 17 17
Transport APD 6 6 25
Transport LCI 0 0 0
Transport LSD 1 2 11
Transport LST 0 0 0
Transport TK 65 65 77
Transport xAK 653 653 766
Transport xAKL 279 279 147
Transport xAP 51 51 80





ottogott -> RE: Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/11/2015 6:32:36 PM)

Quick question: Is there a description somewhere of the 15 campaign scenarios included in AE? Thanks.



btd64 -> RE: Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/11/2015 8:33:38 PM)

Yes, in the game. Not sure if they are anywhere else....GP



ottogott -> RE: Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/12/2015 4:36:23 PM)

Thanks GP; appreciate it. I realize they are within the game, but I do not have the game, yet. [;)]

Let me rephrase and ask a better question: what I am wondering is if there are campaign scenarios where the playing field is more or less level between the USA and Japan. From digging around, it appears the Japan Ironman is close to what I am thinking of, but I am curious if there are variants to this concept. Obviously, unit types are very different between the sides, but are there scenarios where resources and/or reinforcements are level and arrive at similar time points? Right now, I am interested in knowing what my options are against the AI in regard to differing scenarios.

Thanks again. Cheers.



PaxMondo -> RE: Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/12/2015 6:47:47 PM)

Stock scenario 1 is historically accurate.

Scen 2 gives the IJ some distinct advantages, but about the mildest of the fantasy scenarios.

Ironman gives the IJ AI a big boost and will allow it to recover from at least 2 major setbacks.

Ironman Nasty gives the IJ AI more Easter Eggs and not only can it recover, the beginning game is pretty challenging.

Ironman Nasty, Nasty is a real test. IJ AI gets a ton of everything and is a challenge.



barkhorn45 -> RE: Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/12/2015 9:26:57 PM)

OMG a mention of tmtsnbm.



Kull -> RE: Difference between campaign scenarios? (12/12/2015 10:40:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

For all "stock" (meaning non-Ironman) scenarios, you need to know that the base difficulty needs to be HARD for the AI to work. It will not work below HARD. This was a design decision made late in the development process after a lengthy and heated discussion. [8D]


Can you expand on this (or point to a thread where it was discussed)? What does not happen when the AI is set to Normal or lower? According to the manual (2.5.9), "Normal" is "no advantage to either side", "Hard" provides "some logistical advantages" to the AI, and "Very Hard" tacks on "combat advantages".



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.140625