RE: CHS Release 1.02 (Full Version)

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



Message

akdreemer -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/13/2005 6:28:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Honestly, I don't think any game is perfect, no game can be.

What matters is do you have fun with it. I had a ball of fun with PTO (I, II, and even IV) which are far greater "failures" than WitP. The campaign series (West Front, East Front II, Rising Sun, Divided Ground) all have their flaws, but even today, 7 years after I bought West Front I still have a ball, and am throughly enjoying my current DCG as commander of the 70th Tank Battalion in the Road to Germany Campaign.

War in the Pacific, War Plan Orange, World at War, Hearts of Iron, the Campaign Series, the Operational Art of War, Panzer General, Pacific General, hell any wargame will have its flaws, and all eventually boil down, in some sense, to an arcade game. The old SSI General Series were far from realistic and historic wargames. Yet, they were fun to play. GG's World at War, while taking a somewhat rushed approach to WWII, is fun to play. War in the Pacific, while still being greatly abstracted in many areas (and I think I for one would find its hard codedness a bit of a stifler as much as anybody would), yet it is still by far the most realistic game out there covering this subject, and it is very fun to play.

Other than maybe pong and tetris, I challenge anybody, WitP hater or lover, to name any game that was perfect, that didn't have flaws, that wasn't frustrating, and that was all it could be. That rules out every game I own, hell that rules out the one I am making.


"To be perfect is to be God" old Muslim proverb. Indeed, not a single game can simulate reality, thus all are imperfect. But most are fun to play and can give hours of stimluating interaction.



Oleg Mastruko -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/13/2005 6:37:23 AM)

Is this one of those threads that end in a group hug? [:D] [sm=00001746.gif] [:D]

O.



Tankerace -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/14/2005 1:18:05 AM)

Back! Back I say! [:D]



Ron Saueracker -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/14/2005 11:06:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Ron what other wargames do you play, if any?

O.



At the moment, none really. Like the Silent Hunter I game but the SH2 blew, and have not bothered buying any games the last few years. 99% of what I have bought is history...they were so bad I just chucked them.

Close Combat was OK as well.



Oleg Mastruko -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/15/2005 12:35:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Ron what other wargames do you play, if any?

O.



At the moment, none really. Like the Silent Hunter I game but the SH2 blew, and have not bothered buying any games the last few years. 99% of what I have bought is history...they were so bad I just chucked them.

Close Combat was OK as well.



Well at least you're true to your words I give you that...

And I agree SH1 and Close Combats 2, 3 and 5 were great games.

Many other excellent games available at the moment though, you should give them a chance (most of them buggier than WITP too, but still very good [:D], could use to show WITP is not as bad as you make it to be).

Try SH3 if you can live with playing as German sub [:D]

O.




m10bob -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/15/2005 12:42:51 AM)

I guess quite a bit of my problem with criticism of the modders is that their contributions are free. One can choose to not play (or download) their mod.
As others have stated before, the solution is obvious.
If you don't like a particular mod, don't play it.
If you don't play it, move on.
If you have NOTHING to contribute but criticism (of a *free* contribution), you will definitely make yourself a very unwelcome commodity, anywhere.
It's kinda like the unwelcome neighbor coming over and telling the guy on the ladder painting his house "You missed a spot".
Maybe the guy on the ladder just dropped his brush, but the neighbor won't offer to retrieve it for the painter, he will just offer the criticism.

I did mention "UNWELCOME COMMODITY" didn't I ??
Just wanted to make sure..[8|]



Sardaukar -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/18/2005 3:43:49 PM)

IF...(and that is *BIG IF*) my observations will get confirmed and Surface-based air search radars will reduce submarine vulnerability to air attacks, will the US subs get SD (and later model SV) radars in later CHS versions ?? It may seriously unbalance the game, though..and so would need some testing.



Bradley7735 -> Coen is a tough base to occupy (8/19/2005 8:30:58 PM)

Hi guys,

I'm trying to get a base force to Coen (the base in NE Australia, inland). Marching a BF across 6 hexes of trail just destroys the poor unit. You can't airlift the unit because Coen has a 0 level airfield. It's inland, so you can't airlift via Patrol planes.

I'm at a loss as to how to occupy the base.

Can you give the base a starting AF of 1? Or, can you upgrade the trail to a road? Or can you start a base force at the base on 12/7/41?

Or, can you give me advice on how to get a unit there without destroying it completely. (by the time the unit marched 48 miles from Cooktown, not even leaving that hex, it had lost all it's engineering vehicles and a significant portion of AV, Support and engineers were disabled.)

Thanks!!



Herrbear -> RE: Coen is a tough base to occupy (8/19/2005 10:49:24 PM)

Did they lose them or were they just disabled?



Bradley7735 -> RE: Coen is a tough base to occupy (8/19/2005 11:00:23 PM)

The eng vehicles were all destroyed. Some of the other devices were destroyed as well, but since there are so many to begin with, most were just disabled. But, I was only part of 1 hex out of 6 to march there. The unit would make it with only some AV and support remaining. I dont' think a unit can take replacements unless it's at a base, so it'd just sit there without engineers to build the base. Which would defeat the purpose of sending it there to begin with.

My problem is that I can't figure out how to get engineers to Coen alive. Hopefully, the scenario can be adjusted with one of my suggestions above.

Paratroops are the only unit that can make it as is. And, I don't know if paratroops have intrinsic engineers or not.



Andrew Brown -> RE: Coen is a tough base to occupy (8/20/2005 2:09:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735
My problem is that I can't figure out how to get engineers to Coen alive. Hopefully, the scenario can be adjusted with one of my suggestions above.


You raise a good point about Coen. I have learnt a lot about the game mechanics since I first drew the map, but I have not revisited this area up to now.

I am currently thinking about what to do about Coen, and I will incorporate any changes into the new map before I release it (planned for this week). One thing I may do is add a base in hex 49,94 - Portland Roads - and connect this base to Coen with a trail. This will make it easier, but still very difficult, to get to and supply Coen, so I may need to do more. Perhaps one or two of the trail hexes somewhere need to be converted to road. I hate doing stuff like that as I don't see it as realistic, but sometimes the limitations of the game mechanics force these things, unfortunately.

By the way you can also land troops on the coast next (48,96) to Coen and have them walk in from there. It is one clear hex away. That may be sufficient...

Andrew



Captain Cruft -> RE: Coen is a tough base to occupy (8/20/2005 3:27:39 AM)

Why not just make it a size 1 airfield? Then troops can be airlifted in. It will only take an eng unit about a week to build it to size 1 anyway once they're there, if that.



witpqs -> RE: Coen is a tough base to occupy (8/20/2005 4:37:38 AM)

I think LCU's can get replacements if not at a base if supply is good. I doubt this will help while the unit is moving. How about try moving it all the way to the base, then airlift in enough supplies to help the unit recover? Supplies can be airlifted in even to a size 0 airfield. They can even be airlifted to an LCU outside a base.




Rob322 -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/26/2005 10:29:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

I guess quite a bit of my problem with criticism of the modders is that their contributions are free. One can choose to not play (or download) their mod.
As others have stated before, the solution is obvious.
If you don't like a particular mod, don't play it.
If you don't play it, move on.
If you have NOTHING to contribute but criticism (of a *free* contribution), you will definitely make yourself a very unwelcome commodity, anywhere.
It's kinda like the unwelcome neighbor coming over and telling the guy on the ladder painting his house "You missed a spot".
Maybe the guy on the ladder just dropped his brush, but the neighbor won't offer to retrieve it for the painter, he will just offer the criticism.

I did mention "UNWELCOME COMMODITY" didn't I ??
Just wanted to make sure..[8|]



M10bob,

Sometimes the simplest, easiest logic of the situation just fails to register. Or else people just love to hear themselves talk.



bradfordkay -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/27/2005 8:17:43 AM)

Andrew's new map has taken care of some of that Coen problem, though I wish that I had earlier seen this thread. In my game using his v1 map, I landed the 808th Engr Bttn (Regt?) at Cooktown, marched them to Coen supplying them along the way by C47, and had a level 4 airfield by Jan, '43.



Bradley7735 -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/29/2005 8:29:28 PM)

Well, I might have been exaggerating a bit when I said my unit would destroy itself just from marching from Cooktown to Coen. I certainly lost 4 engineering vehicles and quite a few other devices became disabled. But, all that happened from marching in the Cooktown hex (malaria). Once outside that hex, the unit didn't take any further damage.

It's now at Coen, has been for 5 days, and isn't drawing supply from Cooktown. I've got C-47's on supply runs from Cairns. The unit has enough supply now, and the base does as well. But, the engineers (8 healthy, 2 disabled) haven't increased the construction to even 1%.

It's too early to say much, but I sure hope it increases within the next couple of days. Hopefully, the unit can draw reinforcements (engineering vehicles) as well.



Andrew Brown -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/29/2005 11:30:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

Well, I might have been exaggerating a bit when I said my unit would destroy itself just from marching from Cooktown to Coen. I certainly lost 4 engineering vehicles and quite a few other devices became disabled. But, all that happened from marching in the Cooktown hex (malaria). Once outside that hex, the unit didn't take any further damage.

It's now at Coen, has been for 5 days, and isn't drawing supply from Cooktown. I've got C-47's on supply runs from Cairns. The unit has enough supply now, and the base does as well. But, the engineers (8 healthy, 2 disabled) haven't increased the construction to even 1%.

It's too early to say much, but I sure hope it increases within the next couple of days. Hopefully, the unit can draw reinforcements (engineering vehicles) as well.


If you are using the latest version of my map, then it MAY be possible for the unit to draw supply from Portland Roads, if it is built up as a port and if supplies are delivered there. I have yet to test this, though.

Andrew



Halsey -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/29/2005 11:40:44 PM)

Move the Aus Command HQ there.
You'll get your supplies.[;)]



Bradley7735 -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/30/2005 5:11:09 PM)

Well, things are all ok now. It only took 2 months to march to Coen, but the unit is building the airfield. It's jumping about 3% per day. I'll have an actual base within a couple of weeks. The C-47's are doing fine with supply. I'll post again after the base is built and let you know if it's drawing supply. (not that this matters anymore, since Andrew has updated his map and I'm using the old one)



EasilyConfused -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/30/2005 7:10:06 PM)

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but why does the ABDA naval HQ only allow generals to be leaders?



Terminus -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/30/2005 7:16:27 PM)

Because ABDA isn't a naval HQ, but a command HQ.



Bradley7735 -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/30/2005 7:18:57 PM)

I think he's talking about the small CHS HQ that comes in as a reinforcement. I think it has support and AV support. And, I think it's a fleet HQ.

I don't know the answer to his question, though.

bc



Kereguelen -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/30/2005 9:43:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

I think he's talking about the small CHS HQ that comes in as a reinforcement. I think it has support and AV support. And, I think it's a fleet HQ.

I don't know the answer to his question, though.

bc


Only USN (and IJN) admirals may be appointed to (naval) HQ's. Other admirals may act as HQ leaders only when defined as HQ leaders, but then they're never able to command TF's (only three British admirals, Mountbatten, Fraser and Arbuthnot are HQ leaders). = Restrictions of the database (solution: simply change Helfrich to be a HQ leader in the leader database and you have an admiral for ABDA Float)

K



akdreemer -> RE: CHS Release 1.02 (8/31/2005 8:15:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

I think he's talking about the small CHS HQ that comes in as a reinforcement. I think it has support and AV support. And, I think it's a fleet HQ.

I don't know the answer to his question, though.

bc


Only USN (and IJN) admirals may be appointed to (naval) HQ's. Other admirals may act as HQ leaders only when defined as HQ leaders, but then they're never able to command TF's (only three British admirals, Mountbatten, Fraser and Arbuthnot are HQ leaders). = Restrictions of the database (solution: simply change Helfrich to be a HQ leader in the leader database and you have an admiral for ABDA Float)

K


Personally, I revamp my HQ's, adding the 11, 12, 13, & 14 US Naval District HQ's to insure that at least Seattle, San Francisco, San Diego, and Pearl Harbor have a pernament historical Naval HQ's over seeing their respective ports. ABDA naval is one on the one's that I sacrifice.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 5 [6]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.7810059