Japan Blank Slate

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Japan Blank Slate

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

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

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 12:14:30 AM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

I've reached a conclusion about why I always found the Japanese to be overwhelming to start (which may also be valid for other players): the starting setup is complex, and unsatisfactory.

It feels a bit like I'm being handicapped by being 'required' to start my match with moves that don't make sense to me and which do not reflect how I would have initiated bringing the U.S. into the war.

Of course, Japanese player gets to have an orders phase prior to the commission of 7 December . . . but that is only partly satisfactory. There are a lot of LCUs I would not have prepared to do what they join the game prepared to do; there are a lot of TF I would not have configured that way; there are a lot of ships in parts of the map where I would not have stewarded them to be on the brink of starting a war with the U.S.; a lot of air groups I would not have stationed where they are when most of the Grand Campaign scenarios ensue.

So, I've been trying my hand at using the "Grand Campaign" scenario to make my own "Blank Slate" sort of scenario, wherein Japan gets no additional assets, but in which the starting positions, missions, etc., for many assets are radically different.

I have found the process of doing this to be rather tricky, and so I'm curious how some of you who have a lot of experience with the editor would go about "recreating" an alternate startup configuration for the Japanese?

Some examples:
1. I find there are an awful lot of amphibious TF heading for north/central Malaya and I figured, why not go ahead and invade Midway right away! This is one thing I managed to finally sucessfully setup: changed two of the existing TF to start out in same hex as KB and with a mission (including checked First Turn Move) to invade Midway. That took several tries to get it setup properly.

2. Instead of invading Philippines in the north what about a heavy-duty minesweeping of Bataan/Manilla (with some air cover) then send in pretty much everything that is going to Luzon straight at Manilla!? So I tried to break off all the Japanese DMS ships from their TF and send them in two waves of Minesweepers at Bataan then Manilla. This so far has not been a success, though I'm sure it is simply a matter of getting the settings correct in the editor.

So what I'm curious about mostly are: what steps would make the most sense to "redo" the Japanese opening setup? Delete a lot of TF and then create new ones?

-=-=-
Related to this question, but an even bigger 2nd question: Would it be possible to create a 1 Dec 1941 scenario? Say one in which: most of the Japanese units which were not already engaged in China, etc. were essentially in their starting HQs / ports and from which a player could set up their own configuration for the de facto declaration of war against the U.S. on 7 Dec 1941?

Would it be possible to: a. place Japanese assets in the spots where they were historically on 1 December (or possibly some other earlier date, such as the date that KB setout, I cannot recall what that date was . . .); b. leave allied assets where they were on 7 Dec, and "lock" them in place; c. allow the Japanese player to prepare for 7th Dec, constrained in a realistic manner, and thus perhaps invigorate interest in playing the Japanese side by allowing players greater latitude in determining Japans opening moves?

Even if such a scenario were eschewed for PBEM, might it be fun for playing the allied computer-opponent? I know it would be for me.

_____________________________

The x-ray is her siren song. My ship cannot resist her long. Nearer to my deadly goal. Until the black hole. Gains control...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkIIlkyZ328&feature=autoplay&list=AL94UKMTqg-9CocLGbd6tpbuQRxyF4FGNr&playnext=3

Post #: 1

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 1:00:06 AM

Big B

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline

Hello,

Well, you asked for a mouthful - but there is a simple answer...
YES

The game will accommodate any start date in 1941....I just tested it after reading your post (and thinking back on earlier experiments I had done).
I just played 2 complete game turns 01JAN41, 02JAN41...and left at the start of 03JAN41... so YES you can do Dec 1st 1941 start.

Here's the trick....

You have to go through the database with the Editor and:
A) change the Scenario Start Date (in the Scenario Tab)
B) the tough part - go through EVERY single unit...change the DELAY DATE from Dec 6th 1941... To 0 (that is ZERO...the numeral 0)

Do that - and everything will work FINE....but it's a lot of work - if you are up to it...

Then you have COMPLETE freedom of action to change any TF Mission etc....

Hope that helps,
B

EDIT:
The land forces seem to be all be on map (not 100% sure), but definitely reset ALL appropriate SHIPS and SQUADRONS... also check Device dates and Aircraft dates.
Also - depending on how early in 1941 you wish to start, if you want to look historically accurate some units will be in other locations, or not arrived yet.
For example; I believe in November 1941 - the US 4th Marines will still be in Shanghai (not the PI) ... you get the picture.
One more thing to keep in mind: IF you are going for HISTORICAL...do NOT use Dec 7th Surprise ON for a Dec 1st start date - the Allies (at least the US) was on Full Military Alert - WAR WARNING from Nov 29th (as I recall) for about a week...
And as a Final answer (to anyone reading this) You Can-Not start before 1941...that is - No 1940 or earlier Start Date.

< Message edited by Big B -- 9/24/2016 1:39:28 AM >

_____________________________

Big B's Shipyard

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 2

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 1:41:32 AM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

Ah thanks Big B!

Yeah, definitely changing all values for stuff is not a problem. Even easier than hunting down stuff to be honest!

Just from the standpoint of "getting to play Japan how I want against the allied CO (computer opponent)" that will be fantastic and totally doable. It may even prove to be integral to making a scenario that others might enjoy!

So basically: "Delay = 0" means that the AI will not move the unit until the scenario start date?

Of course the other option is: start however much earlier you want in Hot Seat, play the side you want to change around (in my case Japan) then run through turns till you get to 7 Dec and reload that save as a "vs allied computer!"

< Message edited by Anthropoid -- 9/24/2016 1:46:15 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Big B)

Post #: 3

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 1:45:55 AM

Big B

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline

Pretty Much - YES
But Just to be clear - DELAY=0 means unit is available (on map and active) AT START...
Probably doesn't change your thinking... but that's how it works

The Editor is a powerful tool - the limit is YOUR research and imagination

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

Ah thanks Big B!

Yeah, definitely changing all values for stuff is not a problem. Even easier than hunting down stuff to be honest!

Just from the standpoint of "getting to play Japan how I want against the allied CO (computer opponent) that will be fantastic and totally doable. It may even prove to be integral to making a scenario that others might enjoy!

So basically: "Delay = 0" means that the AI will not move the unit until the scenario start date?

Of course the other option is: start however much earlier you want in Hot Seat, play the side you want to change around (in my case Japan) then run through turns till you get to 7 Dec and reload that save as a "vs allied computer!"

_____________________________

Big B's Shipyard

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 4

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 2:08:34 AM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B

Pretty Much - YES
But Just to be clear - DELAY=0 means unit is available (on map and active) AT START...
Probably doesn't change your thinking... but that's how it works

The Editor is a powerful tool - the limit is YOUR research and imagination

So, I wonder if the AI for U.S./European Powers/Australia/NZ behaves as if it is at war with Japan prior to 6 Dec 1941? Will those nations launch attacks against Japan prior to Japan attacking any of them?

If so that poses a slight problem, but not a huge one, and one which it would seem is fairly readily solved: set Japanese units to Delay = 0 (or to 411201 or however much time is desired), set all allied units (except Chinese) units to 411207 . . .

Now that I think about it, something like that really might be an excellent basis for an interesting scenario: put all the existing Japanese assets that begin 'in transit' back in their home locations, remove all preparations (else reduce them an appropriate length of time), and give players a week or however long is appropriate to initiate the war. Of course, it if were designed for PBEM, then not leaving the allied player totally out in the cold would make sense, but the process of deciding exactly how much control the allied player would have (which units are restricted, how many PP, which units have yet to arrive, etc., etc.) would of course be a balancing act that would require input from those with far more expertise in the details of the weeks preceding the onset of war . . .

You are absolutely right that the editor is a powerful tool. It is a bit tricky to get the hang of initially, and of course making optimum use of it even more tricky. When I read that line in the Editor manual I sort of thought to myself "yeah right" . . . but then today I was like "yeah, this really is a POWERFUL tool."

< Message edited by Anthropoid -- 9/24/2016 2:11:35 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Big B)

Post #: 5

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 2:13:54 AM

Big B

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline

Yep, anything On Map will be Fair Game for combat...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B

Pretty Much - YES
But Just to be clear - DELAY=0 means unit is available (on map and active) AT START...
Probably doesn't change your thinking... but that's how it works

The Editor is a powerful tool - the limit is YOUR research and imagination

So, I wonder if the AI for U.S./European Powers/Australia/NZ behaves as if it is at war with Japan prior to 6 Dec 1941? Will those nations launch attacks against Japan prior to Japan attacking any of them?

_____________________________

Big B's Shipyard

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 6

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 4:22:38 AM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

Big B so you didn't had any issue in Pearl Harbor day? that day some forces are "teleported" and maybe there are some hardcode going on. At least i was always advised to not start any scenario that goes trought Pearl Harbor day except as scenario first day.

(in reply to Big B)

Post #: 7

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 5:33:19 AM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

It works!

I checked and Kido Butai departed for Pearl on 25 Nov 1941, so I thought that would be a good date to start from. I did quite a bit of value changing and apart from one error I have yet to pin down (the five mini-subs appear at Pearl on start date, despite the ship being set to avail 411206), and one slight 'wrinkle ('0' [as in the number zero]) actually causes assets to arrive at the END of the first day of the scenario, which is a small and very easy thing to change): I got exactly what I was hoping for.

All allied powers except China have all of their Air Groups, and ships set to become available on 411206 (I left the LCUs with their existing values, most of which were "0"), but without ships and planes, even if they "want" to start the war early, they cannot.

I forget exactly what I did on the Task Forces . . . think I changed the avail date . . . anyway, NO TASK forces (except the aforementioned midget subs . . . I bet MiniMe would love one of those for his birthday . . .). Thanksfully, when a TF that an LCU was assigned to as a passenger/cargo is ont present, the unit seems to just spawn in the port where the TF would have embarked. I'll need to compare total number of ground forces in the actual stock for 6 Dec 1941 to be sure, but . . . it seems that all units which had been in TF came into the game!

All Japanese ships which normally are present 07 Dec 1941 arrive in their home ports either at start or end of first game day (again need to check to be certain).

All device, ship class and plane dates were checked: basically all devices available 25 Nov 1941.

Japanese assets with arrival of 411206 have that set to 411125 instead. Some units had it set to "0" and I changed quite a few to be 411125, but I must have overlooked the capital ships. When I first loaded only two CV/CVL in Japan's navy (the CVL) but the rest (and several other ships) arrived at the end of the first turn on 25 Nov 1941.

So basically: as long as the Japanese player doesn't attack anyone, it is has the semblance of "peace" (except China where they have all their asset and can attack Japanese forces at the computer's discretion) and the Japanese player gets ~12 to form up his assets to attack the U.S..

This is all of course just a first glance. To know if it works it will need to be played through to at least 7 Dec 1941.

< Message edited by Anthropoid -- 9/24/2016 5:48:32 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 8

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 3:05:35 PM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

So I'm 'testing' this little scenario a bit.

Main objective: without setting up ANY TF or missions, fast forward (in head-to-head mode) to Dec 7, 1941 and insure that the asset pools (air groups, LCUs, pilots, PPs I suppose) all match (or are at least comparable) to what they should be for a scenario with a 7 Dec start.

Two questions:

1. Is there a way to get it to process turns REALLY fast?
A. I selected "Continuous" turns, but if I don't watch it and periodically click [ESC] it tends to slow down.
B. At the end of each turn there are a ton of reports on the lower-left message bar about transfers of economic stuff (oil, supply, resource, etc.) (note: I need to leave production on for Japanese in this initial test [and with everything left in its default state] to determine how imbalancing it is to give the Japanese an extra 12 days of 'economy' prior to the onset of war . . . basically, what do the pools look like on 7 December compared to an actual 7 December start . . .
C. I recall with WitP the thing would just lightning through many days at a time, though perhaps my memory doesn't serve well. In this case, despite it being on "continuous mode" it advances two maybe three days, then it stops again.

2. Is there a way in any of the screens in game (I know tracker can do this but I don't have it installed) to get a sum total for assets? Things like "how many LCUs" "how many ships" "how many air groups" do I have active? That would be the easiest way to compare the scenario on 7 December with those in an actual 7 December start.

_____________________________

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 9

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 7:30:29 PM

dr.hal

Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline

If playing against another player, shouldn't you give the Allied player some flexibility too???? Differing the set up so to speak? Always mindful of unit availability of course....

_____________________________

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 10

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 8:49:29 PM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal
If playing against another player, shouldn't you give the Allied player some flexibility too???? Differing the set up so to speak? Always mindful of unit availability of course....

Definitely, though arguably much less flexibility than the Japanese. I think I'm still a long way from a clear conception of how it would be setup to provide a fun PBEM scenario, but first priority is to see if it is fun as a scenario for playing Japanese against computer Allies. Another motivation for me is to use it as a way to get a more clear mental picture of the Japanese OOB and 'optimum strategic postures.'

So far, I've spent probably two hours fiddling with the Japanese assets (all in ports! and disembarked whoo hoo!) and made about 1% progress toward clicking "Finish Orders."

_____________________________

(in reply to dr.hal)

Post #: 11

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 9:37:23 PM

Skyros

Posts: 1570
Joined: 9/29/2000
From: Columbia SC
Status: offline

I would not train LCUs or pilots during this time,to keep the playing field even. You will have to go through your forces to see what has been set to training. If allied are not appearing on map, I don't think it will be an issue for them.

What about production? That may be an issue.

< Message edited by Skyros -- 9/24/2016 9:41:33 PM >

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 12

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 9:40:34 PM

dr.hal

Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline

When I've played the 'real' game against others and the AI as Japan, I've often disembarked troops from slow transports (speed 2) letting the remaining 'fast' transports (usually speed 3) move on out. I then reload the troops onto fast transports and often catch up to the rest of the group depending upon their destination. I don't know enough about the historical set up on 7 December, but the Japanese tendency to mix slow and fast transports was astonishingly short sighted!!!! And in a number of cases stuck in VERY slow escorts to boot!

_____________________________

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 13

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 10:01:27 PM

DOCUP

Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline

Interesting idea. I think someone had came up with a similar idea a few years ago.

You could do a lot with a blank slate. Have a starting time of some time in 1941. The two opponents can make some changes (a set number for allies and axis), to staring positions and maybe some research and development changes for both sides. Have someone maybe a 3rd party input the changes into the editor. I agree that the Japanese should be aloud more changes and freedoms.

(in reply to dr.hal)

Post #: 14

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/24/2016 10:06:46 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B

Hello,

Well, you asked for a mouthful - but there is a simple answer...
YES

The game will accommodate any start date in 1941....I just tested it after reading your post (and thinking back on earlier experiments I had done).
I just played 2 complete game turns 01JAN41, 02JAN41...and left at the start of 03JAN41... so YES you can do Dec 1st 1941 start.

Here's the trick....

You have to go through the database with the Editor and:
A) change the Scenario Start Date (in the Scenario Tab)
B) the tough part - go through EVERY single unit...change the DELAY DATE from Dec 6th 1941... To 0 (that is ZERO...the numeral 0)

Do that - and everything will work FINE....but it's a lot of work - if you are up to it...

Then you have COMPLETE freedom of action to change any TF Mission etc....

Hope that helps,
B

EDIT:
The land forces seem to be all be on map (not 100% sure), but definitely reset ALL appropriate SHIPS and SQUADRONS... also check Device dates and Aircraft dates.
Also - depending on how early in 1941 you wish to start, if you want to look historically accurate some units will be in other locations, or not arrived yet.
For example; I believe in November 1941 - the US 4th Marines will still be in Shanghai (not the PI) ... you get the picture.
One more thing to keep in mind: IF you are going for HISTORICAL...do NOT use Dec 7th Surprise ON for a Dec 1st start date - the Allies (at least the US) was on Full Military Alert - WAR WARNING from Nov 29th (as I recall) for about a week...
And as a Final answer (to anyone reading this) You Can-Not start before 1941...that is - No 1940 or earlier Start Date.

What is EXE dependent though? Does the amphib bonus start at the scenario start, or does it click on at Dec. 7? (Not going to play any Japanese player with fifteen months of bonus!!) Do the Magic TFs only work on the Dec. 7 turn? Can Japan start aircraft R&D in January 1941 and get jets in 1944?

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Big B)

Post #: 15

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/25/2016 12:17:51 AM

dr.hal

Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline

I would have thought a good balance is that the MILITARY action starts on 7 December, the days prior are for maneuvering so to speak. If the start date of the "game" is pushed back almost a full year, and military action is to start a full year earlier, then you are asking for a whole new game! I thought the discussion was really to allow Japan (and to a limited extent the Allies) a chance to re-stack the deck so to speak. To get in differing start positions, but have the start at on or about the same time. Thus the amphib bonus could remain the same... I would expect R and D the same unless you are playing RA. But obviously this would be between the two contestants or the one against the AI.

_____________________________

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 16

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/25/2016 5:10:24 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I would have thought a good balance is that the MILITARY action starts on 7 December, the days prior are for maneuvering so to speak. If the start date of the "game" is pushed back almost a full year, and military action is to start a full year earlier, then you are asking for a whole new game! I thought the discussion was really to allow Japan (and to a limited extent the Allies) a chance to re-stack the deck so to speak. To get in differing start positions, but have the start at on or about the same time. Thus the amphib bonus could remain the same... I would expect R and D the same unless you are playing RA. But obviously this would be between the two contestants or the one against the AI.

I'm just not sure how you do this under the current engine.

Does Japan just turn off R&D? OK. Can it turn off supply generation? No. Japan is going to be way over-supplied on 12/7 under this engine since LI can't be turned off and there's no civilian consumption modeled and no combat for a year. Can you turn off LCUs getting experience up to national averages? No. Can you stop field forts from being dug? No. Pause all Japanese ship construction? Yes, but do you stop all shipyard point accumulation? And so on.

Some can be turned off, some can't. But it sounds like what the plan is here is to mostly just re-jigger LCU starting locations. Other than that if you leave the engine mechanics on you get uber-trained air groups, optimized leaders, huge PP pools, trained LCUs, big device pools for the Allies, big aircraft pools for Japan . . .

. . . and you have to play through a year of REALLY boring turns.

The game was designed to start on 12/7/41. You can make it jump through a different hoop perhaps, but would you want to?

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to dr.hal)

Post #: 17

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/25/2016 5:37:29 PM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

I think 25 Nov 1941 is about as far back as I'd like. It only takes a couple days for most TF to load. I noticed that: for the Japanese starting TF, when they get disembarked into their "home ports" there are far too many tons of ships to be able to reload all of them in one go.

If folks want, I can upload the scenario as it stands now, but it is not suitable for PBEM by a long shot yet.

Even so, I'm REALLY enjoying the chance to work through a "turn one" as Japanese player without any TF packages confusing things.

For an actual PBEM mod scenario, I think 25 Nov 1941 is too early, and I also think that moving ships and LCUs to where they "really were" (or really could be) so that the Japanese player can get everything loaded up in a week or so.

For now, I'm just doing it for fun, but if someone wanted to take the "blank slate" setup I've configured for the scenario and run with experimenting on settings for PBEM that is something I'd be very happy about, and willing to help out with to some extent.

_____________________________

(in reply to dr.hal)

Post #: 18

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/25/2016 6:53:47 PM

dr.hal

Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline

I agree, going back to far destroys too many norms. Bullwinkle is right, too many things to adjust to make it work within the bounds of the developers. However a week or two would "benefit" both sides in terms of industry and training... I believe this is somewhat in line with developer thought in that currently one can redirect the KB, etc. so that Pearl can be avoided. Why not go one step further and rethink the wider launch scenario.

_____________________________

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 19

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/25/2016 7:55:41 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I agree, going back to far destroys too many norms. Bullwinkle is right, too many things to adjust to make it work within the bounds of the developers. However a week or two would "benefit" both sides in terms of industry and training... I believe this is somewhat in line with developer thought in that currently one can redirect the KB, etc. so that Pearl can be avoided. Why not go one step further and rethink the wider launch scenario.

In an AI situation I'm not sure any scripts would fire until 12/7. That might not matter to a human Japan player.

In a PBEM, a roll-back benefits Japan a lot more if the Allies have to still "play stupid" until 12/7. Yeah, the Allies can train a few pilots for two weeks. But depending on what they're allowed to move (a long list of HRs) Japan gets to hyper-refine the 12/7 surprise while the Allied player just takes it. In the long, long run it probably doesn't matter, if the Japan player doesn't quit once the fun is over. But a lot of these what-if mods seek to make Japan something it wasn't. The game's design philosophy AND victory conditions (so many players reject them and then wonder why the game has less flavor) seeks to make a "fair" game inside the parameters of what Japan was and could have done.

Now if you want to play from Nov 25 and give the Allies knowledge the PH attack is coming, and give him free rein over all of his assets, that's different. But I doubt Japan players want to attack PH or the PI with a full CAP aloft and all surface combatants in TFs and undocked.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to dr.hal)

Post #: 20

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/25/2016 9:40:28 PM

Big B

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline

Just an FYI, some AI scripts are date sensitive - others are not (this can be seen in the AI Tab).
On the three day trial I ran way above in this thread, on day One(Jan 1st 1941) the Japanese took Batan Island - as normal for Dec 7, the following turn the Japanese took Makin Island (again - as usual).
Beyond that - the engine has it's own AI that always functions independent of AI Scripts.
So it comes down to how much time you wish to spend going over the entire database to fine-tine for a new scenario.

B

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I agree, going back to far destroys too many norms. Bullwinkle is right, too many things to adjust to make it work within the bounds of the developers. However a week or two would "benefit" both sides in terms of industry and training... I believe this is somewhat in line with developer thought in that currently one can redirect the KB, etc. so that Pearl can be avoided. Why not go one step further and rethink the wider launch scenario.

That might not matter to a human Japan player.

In a PBEM, a roll-back benefits Japan a lot more if the Allies have to still "play stupid" until 12/7. Yeah, the Allies can train a few pilots for two weeks. But depending on what they're allowed to move (a long list of HRs) Japan gets to hyper-refine the 12/7 surprise while the Allied player just takes it. In the long, long run it probably doesn't matter, if the Japan player doesn't quit once the fun is over. But a lot of these what-if mods seek to make Japan something it wasn't. The game's design philosophy AND victory conditions (so many players reject them and then wonder why the game has less flavor) seeks to make a "fair" game inside the parameters of what Japan was and could have done.

Now if you want to play from Nov 25 and give the Allies knowledge the PH attack is coming, and give him free rein over all of his assets, that's different. But I doubt Japan players want to attack PH or the PI with a full CAP aloft and all surface combatants in TFs and undocked.

_____________________________

Big B's Shipyard

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 21

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/26/2016 1:29:45 AM

dr.hal

Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline

Clearly going back too far distorts things such that the game would loose any sense of historical shaping. I thought the original emphasis was on undoing some of the Japanese's more bizarre arrangements such as the transport mix. This would only take a week or less. Much of this can be taken care of as I indicated in an earlier post (by disembarking some troops) without going back in time. I think the "go" date should remain the 7th (8th Japan time) but that some retooling could take place. Yes this favors the Japanese, but then again, the likely outcome in '45 is much the same. Those that play the RA version get a very unrealistic boost. This boost would be more realistic as it relies upon existing units, changing only the makeup and some locations (time permitting). Trying to backdate movements MONTHs would be a nightmare!!!!

_____________________________

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 22

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/26/2016 4:35:03 AM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B

....
So it comes down to how much time you wish to spend going over the entire database to fine-tine for a new scenario.

B

Which can be considerable.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Big B)

Post #: 23

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/26/2016 11:43:15 PM

Big B

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline

This does make for an interesting premise...
If one were to create a scenario starting in late November - it stands to reason one should take into account where the Allied naval forces were, and also the Dec 7 Surprise Option should be OFF, as Washington issued a War Warning the last week of November, and all commands were on High Alert....

But if one wanted to do a serious alternate history scenario of hostilities starting much earlier, say Jan - April 1941, it would require much research to tweak actual force levels forces, and data base editing.... and one would need to come up with a plausible casus-belli for hostilities to commence... but ultimately it could be a very interesting game.

A LOT OF WORK

B

_____________________________

Big B's Shipyard

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 24

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/27/2016 2:31:43 PM

Kull

Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline

Since this effectively eliminates the "Pearl Harbor surprise" option, will KB's aircraft still launch torpedo attacks against the allied ships in Port at PH? Attacking those BBs with bombs alone is scarcely worth it.

_____________________________

AE-Japan Setup

AE-Allied Setup

Japan Air-Engine Plan

(in reply to Big B)

Post #: 25

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/27/2016 8:31:54 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

You are on the right track. A better Japanese plan requires reworking of many things.
But there are some technical problems with your suggestions.

First of all, most of the IJA is not available to use as you may dream of. It has
real missions. It is Japan's main asset - and one can argue that failure to commit it
(as was done in the Russo Japanese War) was a strategic error. But the logistical
foundation of Japan isn't strong enough to send much of that army very far AND feed it
once it gets there.

Midway, for example, was actually preliminary to an invasion of Oahu - by an Army of three
divisions - later in 1942. That is probably a fools errand and the need for Midway is not
great if you are not going to pursue it. [Japanese planning for an invasion of Hawaii dates
from 1910 and was entirely serious. It was more feasible early on - and indeed Hawaii probably
should not have ended up US territory. Almost no one thinks it was legally acquired - not
even the US President of the time - who did not order it occupied and who tried to reverse
the coup. There were numbers of contenders for Hawaii not to mention the possibility of
compromise by letting it remain independent.] However, by 1941, the Hawaii Separate Coast
Defense Command (Gen Marshall wrote it had 117 pieces; not all were crewed, but Gen Short
planned to rob USAAF to man them: all local crews need do is match pointers and shoot when
directed - fire control was from centralized locations with professional staffs). The terrain
is formidable. I once was working on a game of a Japanese invasion; a friend (a US Army Lt Col,
ex Marine, ex enlisted Ranger) did an aerial survey and reported "it is utterly impossible" that
Japan might dislodge two divisions in such terrain. I gave up the project.

Attacking Manila is a good idea. But not by forcing Manila Bay. Invade South of Manila - or even
East of it (SE in particular, at the historical landing site with a primary road crossing over to
the main N-S LOC). AE tends to eat naval forces that enter Manila Bay - usually 100% regardless of
size in a single day! For cause. Manila Bay was second only to Oahu as a US coast defense fortress.

The most practical solution is to start with stock and modify existing task forces. Note you can
specify which task forces have a starting movement bonus - you do not need to accept stock solutions.

A big factor is what are the initial command assignments of your troops, and what locations have they planned for?
Also, who is in command. Setting all this up helps the player a great deal and means political points are
now available for use as he wants - not to do things that should have been planned pre war.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 9/27/2016 8:34:38 PM >

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 26

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/28/2016 2:56:54 PM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

Anyone who is contemplating having a start date earlier than 7 Dec 1941 really should read my post in this thread

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3878837&mpage=1&key=&#3878868

and the embedded link provided.

There really are several pitfalls which will ensnare the unwary. It really requires a huge amount of work from a very experienced modder to cope with the pitfalls. Personally I see no valid reason for all this work when the easiest course of action is simply to take scenario 1 and modify the starting locations to the new desired locations. Of course that will tend to make it playable only by human v human as the AI scripts would be out of "focus".

Alfred

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 27

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 9/28/2016 5:44:33 PM

GaryChildress

Posts: 6830
Joined: 7/17/2005
From: The Divided Nations of Earth
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B

B) the tough part - go through EVERY single unit...change the DELAY DATE from Dec 6th 1941... To 0 (that is ZERO...the numeral 0)

Actually the easy way to do that would be to use WitPLoad, use filters (in Excel or whatever spreadsheet program you use) to locate only units with a delay of 12/6/41 and change them to 0. Or you can simply do a "find and replace" for the delay column, and choose "replace all".

_____________________________

(in reply to Big B)

Post #: 28

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 10/5/2016 2:57:03 AM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

I have a preliminary version of this "Japan Blank Slate" scenario made up in the editor. Start date is 25 Nov 1941. All Japanese TF were disbanded (which causes the ships to switch their "base" to the location where the TF is set to start in the stock Scen 001, and all their contents to also be located there). The result of this was that Samah, Cam Ranh Bay, Pescadores, and Takao had piles and piles of units and ships in them. When I play tested it, I realized: there was just simply too much to get things loaded up and ready for 6 Dec.

I've made some more changes so that the lionshare of these ships and LCUs start in one of Japans larger Home Island ports. This involved a lot of copy-pasting and it is possible I've introduced some hairbrained errors . . . but good enough for me to play with a bit more. I also made some adjustments to PP rates, but that is something anyone can easily change in the editor.

Other than that, it is basically still just "Stock Scenario 001."

Not sure how guys tend to share the files for WitPAE scenarios, and like I say, it is still a WIP and only suitable for solo play against the AI or head-to-head (or two players who have a really good rapport. But if anyone would like to check it out, I'm happy to share it at this point.

With enough time, I might even be able to mold it into a half-way decent PBEM scenario, but I think that will require a lot of tweaking of "Restricted" settings on units, delay dates, etc. Also the cost/benefits of Japanese player either intiating the war early or late would have to be considered. Even then, it might require substantial house rules to prevent the Japanese player from gaming it too much.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B

B) the tough part - go through EVERY single unit...change the DELAY DATE from Dec 6th 1941... To 0 (that is ZERO...the numeral 0)

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 29

RE: Japan Blank Slate - 10/5/2016 3:09:24 AM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

I have a preliminary version of this "Japan Blank Slate" scenario made up in the editor. Start date is 25 Nov 1941. All Japanese TF were disbanded (which causes the ships to switch their "base" to the location where the TF is set to start in the stock Scen 001, and all their contents to also be located there). The result of this was that Samah, Cam Ranh Bay, Pescadores, and Takao had piles and piles of units and ships in them. When I play tested it, I realized: there was just simply too much to get things loaded up and ready for 6 Dec.

ADDIT: it may also be necessary to start with KB part-way embarked and its oiler support TF tagging along and pre-filled. That part I am not sure of yet . . .

I've made some more changes so that the lionshare of these ships and LCUs start in one of Japans larger Home Island ports. This involved a lot of copy-pasting and it is possible I've introduced some hairbrained errors . . . but good enough for me to play with a bit more. I also made some adjustments to PP rates, but that is something anyone can easily change in the editor.

Other than that, it is basically still just "Stock Scenario 001."

Not sure how guys tend to share the files for WitPAE scenarios, and like I say, it is still a WIP and only suitable for solo play against the AI or head-to-head (or two players who have a really good rapport. But if anyone would like to check it out, I'm happy to share it at this point.

With enough time, I might even be able to mold it into a half-way decent PBEM scenario, but I think that will require a lot of tweaking of "Restricted" settings on units, delay dates, etc. Also the cost/benefits of Japanese player either intiating the war early or late would have to be considered. Even then, it might require substantial house rules to prevent the Japanese player from gaming it too much.

quote:

Gary Childress:

Actually the easy way to do that would be to use WitPLoad, use filters (in Excel or whatever spreadsheet program you use) to locate only units with a delay of 12/6/41 and change them to 0. Or you can simply do a "find and replace" for the delay column, and choose "replace all".

Yep! That is a huge time saver :)

Re: Alfred's kind cautionary post above: yeah, I have no idea if crazy stuff might happen, nor if things like date-associated modifiers and scripts and the like packaged inside the .exe will make this whole thing a fools errand!

If nothing else it has been a fun way to get familiar with the editor, and with the data set

< Message edited by Anthropoid -- 10/5/2016 3:12:06 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 30

Page: [1]

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

Page: [1]

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

1.984

Slitherine

Japan Blank Slate