Good scenario/settings for more challenging game? (Full Version)

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



Message

boldrobot -> Good scenario/settings for more challenging game? (12/30/2018 7:29:40 PM)

I've been playing my first campaign as the Allies on and off for the last year or so and while it has been fun, I don't feel like the AI has put up a great fight, especially after 1942. I'm looking to start another Allied campaign vs. AI with a scenario or settings that would be more challenging (without being insane). I also really don't want to mess with China so I would strongly prefer a Quiet China scenario. Would the best option be the Quiet China version of Hakko Ichiu? Is there a Quiet China version of Ironman? I've read about the differences between Hakko Ichiu and Ironman but would be interested to get a sense of how hard each of those feels as compared to stock Scenario 1.

(I know that the real answer is "play PBEM" but I don't want to commit to the amount of time and logistical issues).



GetAssista -> RE: Good scenario/settings for more challenging game? (12/30/2018 7:58:35 PM)

Stock scenarios (both 1 and 2) are nothing compared to Ironmans. AI gets A LOT more material in the latter so can put up a fight for quite some time despite losses.

Also, why would you care about quiet China against Ironman Japan? Just let him stomp your guys and return in 44 to try conquer everything back.




mind_messing -> RE: Good scenario/settings for more challenging game? (12/30/2018 8:01:31 PM)

Downfall as the Allies against at Japanese AI.

The Japanese get enough extra, that when combined with the bonuses the AI gets, they can give a really, really tough game for the Allied player.

It's also good in that it gets the most out of areas that the AI is strong in (ground and air combat) while its weaker areas (naval combat) aren't as much of a factor.



Anachro -> RE: Good scenario/settings for more challenging game? (12/30/2018 8:20:01 PM)

Play as Allied using BTS or RA mod against a Japanese opponent. Or do the Ironman scenarios against the AI.



durnedwolf -> RE: Good scenario/settings for more challenging game? (12/30/2018 11:23:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: boldrobot

I've been playing my first campaign as the Allies on and off for the last year or so and while it has been fun, I don't feel like the AI has put up a great fight, especially after 1942. I'm looking to start another Allied campaign vs. AI with a scenario or settings that would be more challenging (without being insane). I also really don't want to mess with China so I would strongly prefer a Quiet China scenario. Would the best option be the Quiet China version of Hakko Ichiu? Is there a Quiet China version of Ironman? I've read about the differences between Hakko Ichiu and Ironman but would be interested to get a sense of how hard each of those feels as compared to stock Scenario 1.

(I know that the real answer is "play PBEM" but I don't want to commit to the amount of time and logistical issues).


PBEM - note in your post for an opponent that you are looking for a slower game - X days per week. There are a lot of gamers that are interested in slower-paced games.



spence -> RE: Good scenario/settings for more challenging game? (12/31/2018 1:43:28 AM)

Use the AI to learn all the minutiae of the game as Allies then find a PBEM opponent to be the Japanese. Meanwhile play the Allied AI to learn the minutiae of production as the Japanese then go ahead and try as the Japanese in a PBEM.

Just say at the outset that you want to play PBEM fairly slowly. (I might add that a lot of Japanese Players don't enjoy playing once the Allied Player starts to get decent fighters and their torpedoes start to work in 1943/1944 so perhaps you can get the Japanese Player to agree to having a certain VP ratio (but less than that for an automatic victory) on 1/1/43 to claim any victory (Negotiate).

BTW in PBEM the Japanese can earn lots of VPs in China so beware (just like real the key to the stalemate existing in China on 12/07/41) is to declare war on the rest of the world[X(]).



Korvar -> RE: Good scenario/settings for more challenging game? (12/31/2018 5:39:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: boldrobot

I've been playing my first campaign as the Allies on and off for the last year or so and while it has been fun, I don't feel like the AI has put up a great fight, especially after 1942. I'm looking to start another Allied campaign vs. AI with a scenario or settings that would be more challenging (without being insane). I also really don't want to mess with China so I would strongly prefer a Quiet China scenario.


Like you, I also chose Quiet China as my initial grand campaign since I wanted to focus on air/naval operations and figured there was already plenty enough to learn without the Chinese front; however, I wouldn't start another Quiet China campaign.

First, I'm not aware that Andy Mac ever got around to updating the AI for the Quiet China scenarios. The updated AI files are the best bet for as challenging of an AI opponent as possible. Furthermore, after some initial setup and movements, the Chinese front tends to settle into a static war against the AI (if you don't put much effort into managing it).



rustysi -> RE: Good scenario/settings for more challenging game? (1/2/2019 5:13:24 PM)

As a JFB I would avoid a 'Quiet China' game simply because Japan needs Chinese resources IOT effectively run an 'end game'.

This is not to say that Japan needs to conquer China. I for one feel that a good Allied player, while losing much of the country should be able to hold on if they accept certain forgone conditions.



PaxMondo -> RE: Good scenario/settings for more challenging game? (1/4/2019 11:21:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: boldrobot

I've been playing my first campaign as the Allies on and off for the last year or so and while it has been fun, I don't feel like the AI has put up a great fight, especially after 1942. I'm looking to start another Allied campaign vs. AI with a scenario or settings that would be more challenging (without being insane). I also really don't want to mess with China so I would strongly prefer a Quiet China scenario. Would the best option be the Quiet China version of Hakko Ichiu? Is there a Quiet China version of Ironman? I've read about the differences between Hakko Ichiu and Ironman but would be interested to get a sense of how hard each of those feels as compared to stock Scenario 1.

(I know that the real answer is "play PBEM" but I don't want to commit to the amount of time and logistical issues).



For the AI to be effective in any stock scenario, you need to play on difficulty level of at least HARD, with 5 - 10 days/ month on VERY HARD.

Ironman scenarios address this so that you can play on NORMAL, but even so you will get FAR better results on HARD/VERY HARD.







Yaab -> RE: Good scenario/settings for more challenging game? (1/5/2019 7:44:49 AM)

Scen 100 with self-imposed house-rules works fine.



xj900uk -> RE: Good scenario/settings for more challenging game? (1/13/2019 11:38:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

As a JFB I would avoid a 'Quiet China' game simply because Japan needs Chinese resources IOT effectively run an 'end game'.

This is not to say that Japan needs to conquer China. I for one feel that a good Allied player, while losing much of the country should be able to hold on if they accept certain forgone conditions.


Whoe ver puts armies and effort tinto China, China wins. There is simply not the infrastructure to support large big well-equipped armies, everyone runs out of suplly and starts taking serious attrition damage within 6 months.



rustysi -> RE: Good scenario/settings for more challenging game? (1/17/2019 5:23:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: xj900uk


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

As a JFB I would avoid a 'Quiet China' game simply because Japan needs Chinese resources IOT effectively run an 'end game'.

This is not to say that Japan needs to conquer China. I for one feel that a good Allied player, while losing much of the country should be able to hold on if they accept certain forgone conditions.


Whoe ver puts armies and effort tinto China, China wins. There is simply not the infrastructure to support large big well-equipped armies, everyone runs out of suplly and starts taking serious attrition damage within 6 months.


This statement is just patently false. If you know what it is that you do, supply in China is no problem for Japan.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.578125