Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (Full Version)

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



Message

Korth -> Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/3/2020 1:24:09 AM)

Previous WitP player now getting into WITP-AE. I am taking a look at Ironman, primarily T3. I noted that it was recommended that the Allied Player will likely need some augments to avoid Japanese AI Auto-victory.

So the question: are the Allied home country (Canada, US, NZ and Aus) Invasion Reinforcement Triggers still active? Is there a way to check what is linked to the triggers? (No luck looking at AI file on editor). I don't want to overdue the LCU load.

On a similar thread is there a way to distinguish between unused Allied Ironman units and Trigger units. (Which may be answered by knowledge of above).



BillBrown -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/3/2020 2:09:21 AM)

First thing is that the triggers are in the program file, not the scenario files. So yes, the triggers are there.
Second, use the editor and look in the locations tab. Starting at 7950 are the invasion forces for all of the
triggers.



Ian R -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/3/2020 3:23:39 AM)

Note that some invasion reinforcements also have an arrival date; e.g. the 9th Australian Division.

One way you can augment your ground forces is to give some of/the rest of those conditional reinforcements an arrival date. But, do not move them from the slot they are in.




Korth -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/3/2020 4:17:53 PM)

Thanks. Is there anything similar for Air Groups or Ships?



GetAssista -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/3/2020 4:40:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Korth
Previous WitP player now getting into WITP-AE. I am taking a look at Ironman, primarily T3. I noted that it was recommended that the Allied Player will likely need some augments to avoid Japanese AI Auto-victory.

There are progressive Ironmans available. What's the point of editing the hard scenario if you lose to the AI? Pick a lighter one instead for starters.



Scott_USN -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/3/2020 5:43:20 PM)

The progressive Ironman scenario are those downloads? I was looking for a little more fight.



PaxMondo -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/4/2020 1:23:45 AM)

There are 3 levels of Ironman, and then a 4th that was retracted.

Testing the current 3rd level, I didn't do that much to the allied side. 5 extra PP/turn, re-gun the P39 (hispano instead of the 37mm), upped the P39 production rates a bit in '42, and no withdrawals. Playing on VH pretty much all the way now (1st 2 months I was 50/50 Hard/VH). I've pretty much weathered most of the storms. AI may have a few more surprises for me, but its Apr42 and my first supply run from WC to OZ is inbound. Western OZ and Ceylon have been under siege for 2 months and not yet fallen. Heavy losses on both sides, but I haven't lost a CV yet, 2 are getting out of repair soon and the PH BB's are starting to trickle back into service. Granted the '42 upgrade cycle is upon me and those are LONG upgrade cycles for the most part, but I think I can get through them all.

Point being, you shouldn't need to do too much on level 3. This is the first time I've played the allied side in 10 years and I am badly out of practice. If you feel you do need to give a lot to counter the AI, then take GA's advice: play a lower level and get better before moving up. Truthfully, now that I'm back a bit more used to the allies I could have forgone all the changes I did except those extra few P39's and the P39 armament change.



HansBolter -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/4/2020 11:45:53 AM)

For the past couple of years I have been playing AndyMac's Ironman Nasty ported to Babes (scen 40).

I'm not sure what tier of Ironman difficulty it is based on, but the only advantage I gave to the Allied side was to play with withdrawals off. This is the first game I have ever done that and did it mostly for the novelty of seeing how it played out than because I thought my side needed a boost. It didn't and I won't use that setting again.

I don't see the need to give the Allied side any kind of a boost in these scenarios. That seems to be defeating the very purpose of the scenario.



Scott_USN -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/4/2020 2:32:25 PM)

Thanks Pax that sounds like fun! I will give it a run see what happens.



Scott_USN -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/4/2020 2:37:42 PM)

Is the following where you get the 3 versions?

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2920177

Just seemed a bit old.



Scott_USN -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/4/2020 2:52:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

For the past couple of years I have been playing AndyMac's Ironman Nasty ported to Babes (scen 40).

I'm not sure what tier of Ironman difficulty it is based on, but the only advantage I gave to the Allied side was to play with withdrawals off. This is the first game I have ever done that and did it mostly for the novelty of seeing how it played out than because I thought my side needed a boost. It didn't and I won't use that setting again.

I don't see the need to give the Allied side any kind of a boost in these scenarios. That seems to be defeating the very purpose of the scenario.



I have used no withdraws a time or two and my OCD kicked in. All those units with withdraw dates. End up with so many also.



Alfred -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/4/2020 3:39:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


...I don't see the need to give the Allied side any kind of a boost in these scenarios. That seems to be defeating the very purpose of the scenario.


Fully concur. As per Get Assista, play an easier scenario or a difficulty level more forgiving to a human if the objective is to defeat the computer.

Alfred



PaxMondo -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/4/2020 11:43:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Scott_USN

Is the following where you get the 3 versions?

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2920177

Just seemed a bit old.

No, there is a much newer one … like Dec2019-ish



BillBrown -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/5/2020 12:26:03 AM)

Here is a link to the newest tier 3 Ironman Japanese AI thread. https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4694836

Also in this thread AndyMac talks about varients he uses to help the Alles. https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4698763
And so you do not have to search for it, here is a picture of his matrix. He used 150 'variant' points in his AAR.


[image]local://upfiles/6818/B70B5D5C17594591A5B55CEF78078F1C.jpg[/image]



btd64 -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/5/2020 12:58:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

Here is a link to the newest tier 3 Ironman Japanese AI thread. https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4694836


Bill, do you remember which map it uses? Vanilla or Extended?



BillBrown -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/5/2020 1:05:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: btd64


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

Here is a link to the newest tier 3 Ironman Japanese AI thread. https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4694836


Bill, do you remember which map it uses? Vanilla or Extended?


It uses the stock vanilla map.



btd64 -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/5/2020 1:22:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown


quote:

ORIGINAL: btd64


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

Here is a link to the newest tier 3 Ironman Japanese AI thread. https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4694836


Bill, do you remember which map it uses? Vanilla or Extended?


It uses the stock vanilla map.


Thank you, have a good evening....GP



CaptBeefheart -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/5/2020 7:45:31 AM)

I think it's OK to add a few goodies when playing the Ironman scenarios. I usually add a few aircraft to the early runs (especially recon and PBYs), 30 PPs per day and some cancelled ships. I also don't like hunting down ships to withdraw, so I'll do No Withdrawals. To compensate, I do two-day turns.

Cheers,
CB



HansBolter -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/5/2020 11:46:30 AM)

No withdrawals has a HUGE impact on British participation in the Pacific.

Withdrawals means the Brits can not really build up a viable carrier force capable of independent action.
It also means they cannot build up a really viable BB force.

Withdrawals off means they can accomplish both of those things.

I won't play another game with withdrawals turned off.



Scott_USN -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/5/2020 2:52:26 PM)

Thanks for the links on the scenario. Looks like it went crazy to insane. Careful what you ask for as they say.


Pax I like your idea on the 20mm, never understood why they pushed the 37mm besides intercepting bombers, doesn't seem practical in dog fights. However when I changed out the 37mm to 20mm it looked fine in the editor then when I entered the game it had 20mm and 37mm.. [X(]

Does the version of editor matter? 32 vs 64?



Scott_USN -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/5/2020 2:54:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

Here is a link to the newest tier 3 Ironman Japanese AI thread. https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4694836

Also in this thread AndyMac talks about varients he uses to help the Alles. https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4698763
And so you do not have to search for it, here is a picture of his matrix. He used 150 'variant' points in his AAR.



Do these trigger during the campaign or is it static? I have never really edited much so wasn't sure if it was like the trigger that dumps all the equipment off on the East Coast.

Thanks



BillBrown -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/5/2020 2:57:52 PM)

These have to be added using the editor.

edit due to mistype



Scott_USN -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/5/2020 2:58:33 PM)

Ah ok so that is just a matrix to keep it logical and fair I assume. Use up your points?



Alfred -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/5/2020 3:00:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Scott_USN

... Does the version of editor matter? 32 vs 64?


No.

Alfred



CaptBeefheart -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/6/2020 4:42:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

No withdrawals has a HUGE impact on British participation in the Pacific.

Withdrawals means the Brits can not really build up a viable carrier force capable of independent action.
It also means they cannot build up a really viable BB force.

Withdrawals off means they can accomplish both of those things.

I won't play another game with withdrawals turned off.


Well, Hans, I disagree a bit. In my latest outing (Andy Mac's recent Ironman Nasty 3) I decided not to challenge the large KB unit gallivanting around the Bay of Bengal with the Royal Navy. The RN would have been slaughtered. Even with four decks, you still only have no more than 140 aircraft, plus a few slow BBs, vs. a KB that shows over 400 planes. This and your RN TB replacements have been depleted due to ill-advised naval attacks from Colombo.

After a few months of keeping everything back at Bombay, I finally decided to send most of the RN BBs, CAs and CVs to SoPac by way of the Cape to bolster the USN in that area, which needed a lot of help to counter the big KB unit causing mischief in that theater. A couple of USMC squadrons helped to fill space on those RN decks due to a dearth of Stringbags and Albacores.

It's now July 1944 and my Burma campaign is a pure ground and air slugfest, while most capital units of the RN are ably assisting the drive north of New Guinea toward the PI and the drive into the DEI. IJN still has quite a few CVs and CVLs, although from experience I expect they won't come out and play unless I do a Marianas invasion. I may do one just for grins.

Cheers,
CB



NigelKentarus -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/7/2020 3:43:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

No withdrawals has a HUGE impact on British participation in the Pacific.

Withdrawals means the Brits can not really build up a viable carrier force capable of independent action.
It also means they cannot build up a really viable BB force.

Withdrawals off means they can accomplish both of those things.

I won't play another game with withdrawals turned off.

I'm thinking of giving Ironman (Babes) a try. Do you still set AI to hard?



HansBolter -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/7/2020 2:00:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: NigelKentarus


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

No withdrawals has a HUGE impact on British participation in the Pacific.

Withdrawals means the Brits can not really build up a viable carrier force capable of independent action.
It also means they cannot build up a really viable BB force.

Withdrawals off means they can accomplish both of those things.

I won't play another game with withdrawals turned off.

I'm thinking of giving Ironman (Babes) a try. Do you still set AI to hard?



Yes, but unlike Paxmondo, I didn't use Very Hard at intervals as I was afraid of it allowing the AI to avoid running out of supply in surrounded siege conditions. Eliminating supply is essential to conquering heavily fortified, heavily defended bases. I have since learned that it is possible to eliminate supply under Very Hard and plan to implement a practice like Pax Maondo's in my next game.



HansBolter -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/7/2020 2:02:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

No withdrawals has a HUGE impact on British participation in the Pacific.

Withdrawals means the Brits can not really build up a viable carrier force capable of independent action.
It also means they cannot build up a really viable BB force.

Withdrawals off means they can accomplish both of those things.

I won't play another game with withdrawals turned off.


Well, Hans, I disagree a bit. In my latest outing (Andy Mac's recent Ironman Nasty 3) I decided not to challenge the large KB unit gallivanting around the Bay of Bengal with the Royal Navy. The RN would have been slaughtered. Even with four decks, you still only have no more than 140 aircraft, plus a few slow BBs, vs. a KB that shows over 400 planes. This and your RN TB replacements have been depleted due to ill-advised naval attacks from Colombo.

After a few months of keeping everything back at Bombay, I finally decided to send most of the RN BBs, CAs and CVs to SoPac by way of the Cape to bolster the USN in that area, which needed a lot of help to counter the big KB unit causing mischief in that theater. A couple of USMC squadrons helped to fill space on those RN decks due to a dearth of Stringbags and Albacores.

It's now July 1944 and my Burma campaign is a pure ground and air slugfest, while most capital units of the RN are ably assisting the drive north of New Guinea toward the PI and the drive into the DEI. IJN still has quite a few CVs and CVLs, although from experience I expect they won't come out and play unless I do a Marianas invasion. I may do one just for grins.

Cheers,
CB


Even with withdrawals on, the Brits can build up viable naval forces capable of independent operations by '44.
It's the period '42-'43 that no withdrawals has a huge impact on.



Scott_USN -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/10/2020 8:19:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

For the past couple of years I have been playing AndyMac's Ironman Nasty ported to Babes (scen 40).

I'm not sure what tier of Ironman difficulty it is based on, but the only advantage I gave to the Allied side was to play with withdrawals off. This is the first game I have ever done that and did it mostly for the novelty of seeing how it played out than because I thought my side needed a boost. It didn't and I won't use that setting again.

I don't see the need to give the Allied side any kind of a boost in these scenarios. That seems to be defeating the very purpose of the scenario.



Did you port the Nasty to Babes yourself or is it a scenario that can be downloaded?

Thanks



BillBrown -> RE: Questions On Ironman (Allied Player) (2/10/2020 8:38:22 PM)

Here is the link to scenario 40 https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3459280



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.625