Long World War Campaign: List of scenarios? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns



Message

SetonHallPirate -> Long World War Campaign: List of scenarios? (11/6/2005 8:05:44 PM)

Does anybody have a list of the scenarios and the flowchart for all of the Long World War Campaigns (United States, United States Marine Corps, Germany, Japan, Soviet Union, United Kingdom). Thanks!



KG Erwin -> RE: Long World War Campaign: List of scenarios? (11/6/2005 10:34:50 PM)

Well, there's quite a bit of randomization in the Long Campaigns, but certain place names show up in given years.

For the USMC (starting in August 1942), the first two are invariably Tenaru and Bloody Ridge. After that it could be Buna or Kokumbona. In 1943 you can get New Georgia and then a number of Island Assaults (the island names are never mentioned). However, I seem to recall a 1945 battle that was placed on a notional Iwo Jima. Altogether, I think there were around 24 battles for the 4-year period, with roughly half of them being amphibious assaults (after June 1943).



Puukkoo -> RE: Long World War Campaign: List of scenarios? (11/6/2005 11:13:16 PM)

How many times you have played the whole USMC long campaign, Erwin? I have played it only once, in SP1.



KG Erwin -> RE: Long World War Campaign: List of scenarios? (11/7/2005 12:42:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Puukkoo

How many times you have played the whole USMC long campaign, Erwin? I have played it only once, in SP1.


In truth, I have only completed it ONE time, using 7.1. By 1945, my Marines were literally supermen, and I had thousands of upgrade points left over. THIS is why I lobbied (successfully) for a reduction in their ratings, and really dug in to modifying their OOB. After mid-1944, it just got ridiculous.

As H2H is based on 7.1, this is also why I am mystified as to why it is so popular. Is it because of politically correct (and better for PBEM play) historic ratings? Players got spoiled by this, and this is one of the reasons that the 8.4 changes have been so denigrated. All of a sudden, the game became MUCH tougher, as it was meant to be. The playing field isn't level any more, and this has upset many of the players who were comfortable with every nation being equally rated. The reality is that the minors were not as effective as the big boys, so this is reflected in the game. Even some of the big boys (look at the Russians) were overrated -- Stalin's purges made them a headless colossus, and it took them years to relearn the art of war. Once they learned, though, they were unstoppable.

Now, let's revisit the Germans. Their high ratings (at least in 1939-41), seem too high, BUT they were victorious due to factors that have no direct effect on gameplay (e.g. total domination of the air and much better communications to allow effective use of combined arms and mobility). By 1944-45, the manpower pool was drained, so try starting a German campaign in 1944. The marvel is that they lasted so long.

The Japanese are something else entirely. While technically defecient, their singular collective fanaticism and high morale make them fearsome opponents.

These are just a few examples of why the patched 8.4 is THE definitive version of SPWaW.



Puukkoo -> RE: Long World War Campaign: List of scenarios? (11/7/2005 11:20:29 AM)

All long campaigns tend to render players core force into titans that beat everything that is thrown at them. Even if you lose some of your core troops, you get replacements that are equally great as the lost ones. The game gets ridiculous when the computer just can't win you in advance mission.

The low ratings on some minors are just to reflect historical outcomes. In smaller scale battles the minors were just as good and maybe even better than the giants, but if you play the game with a very nasty bunch of Italians who win every battle, you may think that the game is incorrect in historical sense.

It may be a good idea to consider which of the long campaigns works best. I have played Japs into Philippines and so far it has been good, but I believe that even it becomes ridiculous.



serg3d -> RE: Long World War Campaign: List of scenarios? (11/7/2005 11:49:56 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puukkoo
All long campaigns tend to render players core force into titans that beat everything that is thrown at them.


In WinSPMBT this problem addressed with AI points alloctaed on the basis of the player force value. As player core force grow in strength so is AI opposition. Another touch is "special battles", then player can choose fight battle without auxillary and replacement points and get promoted for it. But in WinSPMBT destryed unit slots still available in the next battle for replacement and core can be extended.



Puukkoo -> RE: Long World War Campaign: List of scenarios? (11/7/2005 3:47:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: serg3d

In WinSPMBT this problem addressed with AI points alloctaed on the basis of the player force value. As player core force grow in strength so is AI opposition. Another touch is "special battles", then player can choose fight battle without auxillary and replacement points and get promoted for it. But in WinSPMBT destryed unit slots still available in the next battle for replacement and core can be extended.


That feature would be great for the SPWAW too. In SP1 there was that option of "special battles" and those I'd like to have back. There must be some real chance of losing too.



Hunpecked -> RE: Long World War Campaign: List of scenarios? (11/22/2005 4:55:32 AM)

KG Erwin: "By 1945, my Marines were literally supermen, and I had thousands of upgrade points left over."

I had the same experience with the German long campaign in SP1. I've been wondering about adding a few "meta-rules" to SPWAW's long campaign to alleviate the "superman syndrome":

Use it or lose it: No accumulation of replacement points. If not used on the turn they're available, they're lost.

Transfers: Historically troops were often transferred to serve with or command other units, sent to officer or specialty schools, or occasionally "appropriated" by other units when returning from leave or hospital. I've considered setting up an Excel spreadsheet to calculate "transfer" odds for each crew leader in the core. Every leader would have a small probability of "transfer" after each battle; the probability would increase with experience and rise to nearly one when promoted, unless there's an empty slot above him. This would require some core editing to put into effect, of course. Note that the core leader could be kicked upstairs, possibly spoiling the role-playing aspect of the campaign, but c'est la guerre. [:D]

Attrition: SPWAW has the "reduced squads" option to reflect "normal" wear and tear on infantry, but there is nothing similar for AFVs. In reality, of course, many AFVs fell out due to breakdowns as well as combat. I've considered using the same spreadsheet to randomly calculate which core vehicles to omit from a battle, based on historical readiness rates. For example, if 30% of Army Group Center's authorized AFV strength was actually operational for the Battle of Moscow (due to combat and breakdowns), then perhaps there should be a 40-50% chance that an operational core AFV should be held back in scenarios during this period (reflecting breakdowns only). This would require ballpark historical operational estimates for combatants at various periods of the war.

Changes like these would spoil a lot of the fun of building an elite force, and might even force the player to lose more scenarios to preserve his core, especially early on. On the other hand, if they keep the scenarios competitive right up to the end of the campaign, then all the effort may be worthwhile.



Puukkoo -> RE: Long World War Campaign: List of scenarios? (11/25/2005 8:57:05 PM)

To really tar the German long campaign we should add this feature:

Sorry, Oberst, no fuel available for our Panzers.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.8125