Differences between GC scenarii (Full Version)

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



Message

Chef Chaudard -> Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 8:44:43 AM)

Hi all,

I intend to start a GC PBEM, but I wonder which scenario to choose.
The main GC scenarii are 1/2/6 and "quiet China" scenarii.

I guess that the "quiet China scenarii" involve reduced operations in China, but what are the main differences between scenarii 1, 2 and 6 ?
Is is just a question of OOB, or something more important (such as warfare doctrine, or everything else) ?

Thanks for support !



Sardaukar -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 8:56:30 AM)

Scenario 1 is stock GC.
Scenario 2 is Hakko Ichiu where Japan gets more stuff (Japanese OOB adjusted)
Scenario 6 is Dec 8 start with historical PH attack results, other than that, similar to Scen 1

Quiet China scenarios reduce operations in China. Note that if your units are adjacent to Japanese (when playing Allies), they might still attack you).



Chef Chaudard -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 9:10:53 AM)

Thanx for your answer !
If I understand well, the only difference between SC1 and 6 is the "historical PH" event.



Sardaukar -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 10:04:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chef Chaudard

Thanx for your answer !
If I understand well, the only difference between SC1 and 6 is the "historical PH" event.


You are correct.



Ian R -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 11:40:34 AM)

I would suggest you try scenario 10 with Andymac's newest programmed opponent modules.



inqistor -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 4:48:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chef Chaudard

Thanx for your answer !
If I understand well, the only difference between SC1 and 6 is the "historical PH" event.

Not quite. Japan also already landed in Malaya, and one of transports is heavily damaged. I haven't checked closely, but probably there were air attacks in PI, and Malaya, so Allies are short lots of planes.
Overall, Japan won't get lots of points, which it could harvest on 7th in PH, and PI.



Macclan5 -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 5:02:31 PM)

I would honestly suggest that you NOT play any quiet China scenario.

I do not suggest this to infer the scenario is broken.

Nor because the scenario is too easy / too hard.

Simply the ground war in China both early and late are extremely instructive for a new-ish player. (i) It teaches you the fight and maneuver tactics particular to this (primarily) Naval game, (ii) it allows and effective supreme commander to engage the the IJA strategically and force it to depopulate its Manchurian garrison causing VP point loss and potentially calw back troops or minimize reinforcements for Burma

Simply - though a little bewildering at first - it is worth your time / investment / enjoyment to always play the full GC with active China



Sardaukar -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 5:32:54 PM)

Except AI does not suffer from lack of garrison, so won't lose points.



Chickenboy -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 6:55:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chef Chaudard

Hi all,

I intend to start a GC PBEM, but I wonder which scenario to choose.
The main GC scenarii are 1/2/6 and "quiet China" scenarii.

I guess that the "quiet China scenarii" involve reduced operations in China, but what are the main differences between scenarii 1, 2 and 6 ?
Is is just a question of OOB, or something more important (such as warfare doctrine, or everything else) ?

Thanks for support !


If you're thinking of a PBEM, the 'quiet China' scenarios aren't effectively implemented. They're only really relevant for AI games.



BBfanboy -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 8:41:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Except AI does not suffer from lack of garrison, so won't lose points.

Destroying Japanese troops does give you more VPs. But the Chinese need a lot of supply and a little leavening with Allied AA and A/T or Tank units to hold off the bombers and tanks that are the big Japanese advantage. There is also a lot of Japanese artillery but if your Chinese are in good defensive terrain (+3 or +4) and have built at least level 4 forts, artillery and bombing should not cause too many casualties.

Getting the logistics and reinforcements sorted out is a definite learning experience. Note that the China battles play out much differently if you are using the map with stacking limits everywhere instead of just on smaller islands. Overstacking increases supply usage so either side must plan their offensives carefully.



Kull -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 9:16:47 PM)

Do not play ANY of the Quiet China scenarios. All three have the original AI files and haven't been touched since 2010. Every other scenario not only has AI which is significantly better, but ALSO features updated database files (to include many of the bug fixes and improvements identified by the devs who worked on the DaBabes mods). Read this thread for more information.



RangerJoe -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 10:33:49 PM)

Since I bought the game in 2015, does that mean that I have the updated AIs without doing anything more?

Kull, thank you for all of the work that you put into this game and for everything that you posted to help others.



Kull -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 11:16:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Since I bought the game in 2015, does that mean that I have the updated AIs without doing anything more?

Kull, thank you for all of the work that you put into this game and for everything that you posted to help others.


Thanks for the thanks, RangerJoe! But unfortunately, no. Even the Official 11.26a release still uses all the old 2010 AIs and database. At a minimum you should update to the 2012 versions which are part of AndyMac's Patch 07 thread

Even those who play PBEM exclusively should perform these updates in order to get the database improvements:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

OK guys fair warning these will overwrite exiting scenarios and are all beta versions of the scens with the new AI files, and updated and fixed dat files for the minimal AA and ASW fixes and adjustment we needed to do



RangerJoe -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 11:27:52 PM)

Thank you. I am using the latest beta but I will update. I probably should just have a separate folder for all of the downloads.



Kull -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 11:35:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Thank you. I am using the latest beta but I will update. I probably should just have a separate folder for all of the downloads.


Yeah, you don't have to update every scenario, just the one(s) you plan to play. I know that you can't update the AI in an ongoing campaign, and I *think* the same is true with the .dat files (unfortunately).



Ian R -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/7/2020 11:57:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull
I know that you can't update the AI in an ongoing campaign, and I *think* the same is true with the .dat files (unfortunately).


With respect to the data files, some scenario alterations can be taken up in an ongoing game. They are limited to the ship class, aircraft type, and device files. There are some limited matters in the location files that can also be changed in an editable base scenario - e.g. daily supply in a base.

Individual ships, airgroups, and ground unit edits in a scenario file do not update an ongoing game.



inqistor -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/8/2020 9:39:03 AM)

IIRC you can add industry to empty slot in Base, and it will shows up in ongoing game. But changing amount of industry in already existing slot won't be registered.

As for changing of planes, or ship classes, I think you have to make upgrade for them to shows up. That was the case with Dutch submarines torpedo tubes, when game came out. I'm guessing, it might be possible to change TOE, if LCU haven't upgraded to it yet.



Andy Mac -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/10/2020 5:29:02 PM)

AI in QUiet China hasn't been touched in many many years - I would stay away from those the AI is pretty much the release version



PaxMondo -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/10/2020 11:06:27 PM)

Andy wrote the AI, so I would urge you to listen to his advice.

BTW: Mr. McPhie, nice to see you back again. Any updates from the feedback provided?



Ian R -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/12/2020 2:56:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: inqistor

IIRC you can add industry to empty slot in Base, and it will shows up in ongoing game. But changing amount of industry in already existing slot won't be registered.

As for changing of planes, or ship classes, I think you have to make upgrade for them to shows up. That was the case with Dutch submarines torpedo tubes, when game came out. I'm guessing, it might be possible to change TOE, if LCU haven't upgraded to it yet.


On the ship class database, I once edited the displacement of the ARD that used to show up in Portland - to reduce it below 10k so it could go down river to the ocean. No upgrade needed.

I just ran a quick test - changing a BB class displacement and then loading a save game - and you get the message on scenario load to add data base changes.

I then went back and gave the Iowas an extra 16" turret, whilst leaving the scenario loaded. If you click the preference screen button in game, after saving your edit, you get a bright yellow font, clickable message down near the bottom:

"Add database changes to this user designed campaign?"

So you don't even need to exit you current turn.



RangerJoe -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/12/2020 9:44:33 AM)

That yellow is hard to read.



Kull -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/12/2020 2:25:19 PM)

Back to the issue of "database updates" which are in the 2012 AI Patch 07 release (but not part of the "as-delivered" game). In other words, if you don't do the "AI update", you're missing all of this:

A couple of quotes from AndyMac:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

I am miles away from my home base at present but from memory

Fixed japanese radar upgrades
Fixed Dutch Squad upgrade loop
Fixed Jap ASW device on super E's
Fixed a few japanese tank stats
Fixed a few load costs for jap gun/torps
Added new AA gun for Japan



and

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

780 Type 2 Tank SA set to 14
996 12”CD gun changed from DP gun back to Naval Gun
1044 Dutch KNIL upgrade loop corrected
1066 3.7” Gun set to DP changed to AA only
1467 Japanese Army SD set to upgrade to 1468 Ta-Chi 13 Radar
1685 reduced load cost to 1.5x to allow AD reloading of Jap torpedoes
1686 reduced load cost to 1.5x to allow AD reloading of Jap torpedoes
1698 Type 95 DC : change Range (depth) from 164 to 175
1699 Type 95 Mod-2 : change Range from 295 to 275
1700 Type 2 DC : change Range from 476 to 375
1759 3in A/S Mortar : change Range from 1000 to 150; change Accuracy from 30 to 3; change Load Cost from 16 to 70


and

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

And then JWE worked his magic to add a few more of the babes lite data changes to ASW and AA but I couldnt describe what he actually did

Andy


But JWE can:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Symon

Flak is a little different because it has two parts – the code part and the data base part.

Code Part:

A year ago michaelm re-did the calculation method for Flak (AA and DP guns). Worked well, except just recently found that one of the nifty new statements, that makes it work, were in all the Flak routines except Land Flak. Michaelm just fixed this. See his Unofficial Public Beta thread in the Tech Forum (post #2).

25/11/12: 1120c - Tweaked Land based flak influenced by device's 'accuracy' value

This is the code part, and works the same for everything – stock, Babes, RA, you name it. The code change is just a simple use of any beta executable 1120c or greater. Doesn’t require anything else. It will improve the Flak performance of any stock scenario, now the Land part has the same stuff as Naval Flak.

But, wait …there’s more! You don’t have to pay $19.95, or even $9.95! By using this Special Offer and entering the Promo Code “RantzMohametz”, you can further upgrade your Flak performance for nothing! That’s right – bupkis, rien, nada, nichts, nichevo, mei you, betsuni!

Data Base Part:

Given the new calculation methods, Babes database of Device values (AA and DP guns) were modified to better conform to the new math. However, these new values cannot be accessed through the editor. They only show up in csv files generated by Michael’s latest model WitploadAE.exe program, at columns V, W, X, and Y. Unfortunately, data from a mod scenario cannot transfer to a stock scenario. But if everyone closes their eyes and wishes real hard, my gun can get more bullets … (oops, sorry, wrong movie).

Fixing Stock:

AndyMac recently posted updated (but Beta) versions of the stock scenarios in the Patch 07 unofficial data scen updates thread in the Tech Forum. These are 1-for-1 replacements for stock scenarios and have been “stamped” by Michael so they are “technically” updateable to ongoing games. Much of the new content will update nicely, but there will be some burps, here and there.

Andy’s scenarios have the Babes Device data expressly included, so if you wish to update an existing game, under stock, you can do so by substituting Andy’s scen version for the stock scen version and saying yes to the “update game? prompt”.

Now you got a stock scenario with the Babes data elements in it, and if you use Michael’s 1120c (or better) you will get good Flak (and more besides).

Ciao. JWE


As JWE points out, you'll need a new WitploadeAE file in order to see those new flak database fields and that is not included in the "as-delivered" game either, but it is available here. Please note! This last bit about WitploadAE is purely informational, and not required in order for your game to USE the new fields!



BBfanboy -> RE: Differences between GC scenarii (4/12/2020 5:05:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

That yellow is hard to read.

Just highlight it and the reverse colours are easy to read.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.65625