RE: Pry's New Scenarios (Full Version)

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



Message

Sardaukar -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/1/2005 3:27:16 PM)

Scen31 as Allied:

7/1/1942 and last base on Java has fallen to IJA. Kido Butai is now teasing Timor and Darwin.

Cheers,

M.S.



witpqs -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/2/2005 9:11:27 AM)

Dumb question (sorry) - where can I find Pry's scenarios?



Bodhi -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/2/2005 9:15:07 AM)

Pry's first post in the thread contains links. They're active as well as being displayed as text, so just click them.



witpqs -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/2/2005 9:24:22 AM)

Thanks. At least I got the 'dumb question' part right.



Sardaukar -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/2/2005 3:18:46 PM)

Darn IJ AI is trying to take Timor from me !! And with KB it'll probably succeed too. That I didn't see in Scen 16 campaign. Maybe it's 1.5...or Hard difficulty...or something different in Scen 31 [:)]

Cheers,

M.S.



Sardaukar -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/2/2005 5:13:15 PM)

Pry:

Could you add P-47N as upgrade for P-47D ??

Cheers,

Mika S.



witpqs -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/3/2005 11:28:10 AM)

Pry,

Will your scenarios require modification or restarting once the upgrade to 1.51 takes place?



pry -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/3/2005 12:49:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Pry,

Will your scenarios require modification or restarting once the upgrade to 1.51 takes place?


No modification is needed to make current games compatable with 1.51 as is

These are still in-test scenarios and some modifications will be coming for the data bases which will require restarts to be come effective. I am still tweaking a few things based on results of current testing.



pry -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/5/2005 2:59:11 PM)

Updates...

Files updated to correct several issues 06/05/05
Fixed facing issue of Colorado Class 12/41 forward turret.
Fixed facing issue for North Carolina Class 20 mm (1203) 4/43.
Fixed facing issue for South Dakota Class 20 mm (1205) 1/44.
Fixed device list order for (336) O-19 class, subs should now be able to reload mines from Dutch MLE.
Removed Japanese 33rd Division from Shanghai and have it arriving as a reinforcement in Bangkock 01/01/42, this is meant as an AI helper to get the AI to utilize the 33rd in the correct area of operations. PBEM players can just consider that the 33rd gets a free ride from Shanghai to Bangkock...[;)]

Link to updated files can be found in the 1st post in this thread... Enjoy...



witpqs -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/5/2005 11:01:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pry
.
.
.
Location Changes
.
.
.
Allied
.
.
.
Removed all daily supply and fuel from West Coast bases and moved to United States base 330, supply will now have to trickle down to the coast from the supply center. Reduced total daily supply and fuel on to 30,000 supply and 20,000 a day each.(again subject to long term testing, also in testing so far this has caused an occasional bottleneck at US West coast ports while waiting for fuel and supply to trickle down to the ports, values subject to change based on test results)


Pry,

I've been thinking about this. Living in the LA area the past 6 years I've come to appreciate the size of the oil drilling/refining industry here (but I am by no means an expert). It seems like there should be some fuel production (daily supply) in Los Angeles. I don't really have a figure to suggest, and I know this is also a play balance thing anyway. Just food for thought.

I'm looking forward to starting up scenario 30 versus AI when 1.51 is final. Thanks for all the work on these mods.



treespider -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/6/2005 12:14:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pry

Updates...

Files updated to correct several issues 06/05/05
Fixed facing issue of Colorado Class 12/41 forward turret.
Fixed facing issue for North Carolina Class 20 mm (1203) 4/43.
Fixed facing issue for South Dakota Class 20 mm (1205) 1/44.
Fixed device list order for (336) O-19 class, subs should now be able to reload mines from Dutch MLE.
Removed Japanese 33rd Division from Shanghai and have it arriving as a reinforcement in Bangkock 01/01/42, this is meant as an AI helper to get the AI to utilize the 33rd in the correct area of operations. PBEM players can just consider that the 33rd gets a free ride from Shanghai to Bangkock...[;)]

Link to updated files can be found in the 1st post in this thread... Enjoy...


I assume I can make these changes manually in the database editor? I am in the middle of a PBEM and would prefer to leave the 33rd Division in Shanghai. If I can make the changes manually what are the correct settings?
Colorado 12/41 change to_____
NC 20MM changed to ____
SD 20mm changed to ____
And the o-19.......



Andrew Brown -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/6/2005 1:08:35 AM)

I have now uploaded the newly revised scenarios 33,34 and 35 (for my map) to my scenarios web page.



pry -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/6/2005 12:53:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

I assume I can make these changes manually in the database editor? I am in the middle of a PBEM and would prefer to leave the 33rd Division in Shanghai. If I can make the changes manually what are the correct settings?
Colorado 12/41 change to_____
NC 20MM changed to ____
SD 20mm changed to ____
And the o-19.......



The scenario files are only read at the start of the scenario, any changes require a restart to become effective. In your case beings you already have a game going I would not bother as the changes are minor.

I would download the new files if you plan to start a new game.



pry -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/6/2005 12:54:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

I have now uploaded the newly revised scenarios 33,34 and 35 (for my map) to my scenarios web page.


Thanks Andrew



pry -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/6/2005 1:06:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Pry:

Could you add P-47N as upgrade for P-47D ??

Cheers,

Mika S.


I will consider this request, looking into the details it seems over 1,100 of these were produced and some made it to the Pacific and were operationally used.



Sardaukar -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/6/2005 4:07:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pry

I will consider this request, looking into the details it seems over 1,100 of these were produced and some made it to the Pacific and were operationally used.


Very good, especially if game continue beyond historical date !! AFAIK, P-47N was special Pacific version with extended range..and was build in quite large numbers.



Buck Beach -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/8/2005 3:34:34 AM)

I am no expert on OOBs but your P-38F FS (and some of the P-40Bs) tweaked my curiosity. I looked up on the INTERNET and found that the 27th, 71st & 94th FS did in fact spend a short time on the Pacific Coast protecting the bases at the first of part of the war, but their fighting was done in the Med and Europe arenas. Without a withdrawal provision (and who wants that) I guess it would be left up to a house rule or an individual to dissolve the squadrons later when appropriate. Lots of work for the few months on the line. (Oh my, I can hear Oleg screaming already). I know some the squadrons (or all of them) get upgraded to P-80s later.



pry -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/9/2005 1:24:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Pry,

I've been thinking about this. Living in the LA area the past 6 years I've come to appreciate the size of the oil drilling/refining industry here (but I am by no means an expert). It seems like there should be some fuel production (daily supply) in Los Angeles. I don't really have a figure to suggest, and I know this is also a play balance thing anyway. Just food for thought.

I'm looking forward to starting up scenario 30 versus AI when 1.51 is final. Thanks for all the work on these mods.


I left all the oil and resource centers where they were I just moved and reduced the additional allotment of (Offmap) extra Fuel and Supply inland to help slow down it's availability.



pry -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/9/2005 1:30:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

I am no expert on OOBs but your P-38F FS (and some of the P-40Bs) tweaked my curiosity. I looked up on the INTERNET and found that the 27th, 71st & 94th FS did in fact spend a short time on the Pacific Coast protecting the bases at the first of part of the war, but their fighting was done in the Med and Europe arenas. Without a withdrawal provision (and who wants that) I guess it would be left up to a house rule or an individual to dissolve the squadrons later when appropriate. Lots of work for the few months on the line. (Oh my, I can hear Oleg screaming already). I know some the squadrons (or all of them) get upgraded to P-80s later.


Without a withdrawl feature it is tough, yes these units went to Europe but they were indeed stationed on the west coast for a time and could have been commited to the Pacific had the need been there. That is why I assigned to west coast command, if the allied player wants to use them then he has to pay the PP to get them so it is not free and not a giveme...

As for who would want a US withdrawl feature, I'll stand at the front of the line for that...



treespider -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/10/2005 2:57:08 PM)

Do you plan on upgrading to reflect OOB changes in v1.52? (These may be significant enough to warrant a restart) Some of which you already fixed...

On a similar note...when you update a device...ie the forward Colorado class turret...Do you have to update the facing in the device list as well as in the ship list for each individual ship?



pry -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/10/2005 3:02:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Do you plan on upgrading to reflect OOB changes in v1.52? (These may be significant enough to warrant a restart) Some of which you already fixed...

On a similar note...when you update a device...ie the forward Colorado class turret...Do you have to update the facing in the device list as well as in the ship list for each individual ship?


I fixed the official scenarios and my personal scenarios at the same time, so basically I had to make each correection 22 times...

I will upload the corrected 1.52 compliant files probably this weekend...

As for part 2 yes for a unit that starts on map on the 1st turn of any scenario if you make a correction to the class information you must also refresh the ship information as well/



treespider -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/10/2005 3:10:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pry


quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Do you plan on upgrading to reflect OOB changes in v1.52? (These may be significant enough to warrant a restart) Some of which you already fixed...

On a similar note...when you update a device...ie the forward Colorado class turret...Do you have to update the facing in the device list as well as in the ship list for each individual ship?


I fixed the official scenarios and my personal scenarios at the same time, so basically I had to make each correection 22 times...

I will upload the corrected 1.52 compliant files probably this weekend...


We are not worthy[&o][&o][&o][&o][&o]

quote:

As for part 2 yes for a unit that starts on map on the 1st turn of any scenario if you make a correction to the class information you must also refresh the ship information as well/


Hopefully they don't find a problem with AK's or AP's[X(]

The reason I asked...I was contemplating making the changes myself...

IYO if you were 18 turns into a PBEM would you restart with these changes?



witpqs -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/17/2005 11:44:49 PM)

Pry,

Are you waiting for the current open Beta patch (called 1.54 as I write this) to be final before you consider your scenarios released as opposed to pre-release, or are your scenarios final right now?



pry -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/18/2005 3:39:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Pry,

Are you waiting for the current open Beta patch (called 1.54 as I write this) to be final before you consider your scenarios released as opposed to pre-release, or are your scenarios final right now?


I have already included all the 1.5X (Official 1.6) changes to these scenarios (updated scenarios are not publicly available just yet) However after new information and clarification from Mike on a game code issue I have to make some changes to the Allied Air group slot order relating to Russian Activation, a relatively minor fix for my scenarios.

Over all I am more than pleased with how these scenarios play the pace is decidedly slowed down (My main goal for creating them) and I feel most of the issues I had concerns about are not a factor. I have encountered no issues with the AI using these scenarios other than the AB map versions where the AI does not know that Bora-Bora and Addu Atoll exist so they are from a game stand point pacific Gibraltar's immune from Japanese attack because the AI does not know they are there. Again from the AI issue these can be played without any real issues from either side against the AI.

The one major item that has not been fully played out is the long term issue of my much reduced Allied daily supply and fuel allotments. We have yet to see how the numbers hold up with the massive allied forces on map in 44 and 45. Given the AI's weakness in keeping itself supplied this could be an issue in Japanese verses Allied AI games but we will just have to figure that out as we get to it.

Overall after I make a few changes to account for what I described above, I feel comfortable in calling the next release, "Release Beta"... unless something rears its ugly head that requires a major change they should be game ready and offer you a stable scenario that can be played full term.



tanjman -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/18/2005 3:56:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pry

I have already included all the 1.5X (Official 1.6) changes to these scenarios (updated scenarios are not publicly available just yet) However after new information and clarification from Mike on a game code issue I have to make some changes to the Allied Air group slot order relating to Russian Activation, a relatively minor fix for my scenarios.



pry,

Are you allowed to post the information on which air group slots are affected? If so I, for one would much appreciate it. [:)]



pry -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/18/2005 4:04:59 PM)


Long story short do not move ANY Russian Air or LCU in the data base, consider those slots reserved (like Japanese slots 1940 thru 1984 in the LCU DB) for the Russian unit that resides there.




tanjman -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/18/2005 4:11:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pry


Long story short do not move ANY Russian Air or LCU in the data base, consider those slots reserved (like Japanese slots 1940 thru 1984 in the LCU DB) for the Russian unit that resides there.




pry,

Thats what I've been assuming. Thanks for confirming it.



Banquet -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/23/2005 8:03:12 AM)

Pry, what's the situation with the 1.6 patch and your scenario? I'm using your sc34 with AB's map. Can I just install the patch?

cheers



pry -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/23/2005 12:56:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Banquet

Pry, what's the situation with the 1.6 patch and your scenario? I'm using your sc34 with AB's map. Can I just install the patch?

cheers


No issues, you will have to copy back AB's pwhex file for the custom map after updating to 1.6 as it will be replaced by a new pwhex file for the standard map.






stonefoot -> RE: Pry's New Scenarios (6/25/2005 10:06:37 AM)

Quick little mixup for you Pry. Scen 31. Airgroups 476, 477, and 478. Listed as Nightfigher group but have Recon Irvings instead of the Nightfighter Irvings.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.062012