RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1

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 >> RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 7/13/2019 6:50:37 AM

Mandai

Posts: 18
Joined: 10/11/2016
Status: offline

mind_messing and others,

Rising_Sun asked for suggestions so that he can design a new scenario.

We can give comments - it is up to him to incorporate any suggestions since he is the one that will work on the new scenario.

Mind messing may prove that Truk cannot support major damage repair yards. It is up to rising sun to incorporate a repair yard and the players to decide whether to use a house rule to deter its use.

Likewise players are free to suggest repair yards at Midway Island Samoa, Fiji Islands etc. The house rules can also limit the size that the repair yard can expand to. The allied player can cede to the Japanese player by not using the yard at all.

Players taking on the Japanese role can negotiate with the allied player which house rule to adopt. An experienced allied player may be able to give more concessions while a weak allied player may get a repair yard at the fiji islands.

If lets say the KB is destroyed, the allied player can lift the restriction placed on the Japanese player so that the game can continue. For those that play against the AI, it is up to what one decides is gamey.

Alfred has stated his concerns about attempted "everything in the historical records". He is right in his concerns and that why we have the stock scenario for players that do not want to venture out.

I would suggest Rising Sun to include a readme file with his scenario so that players using his scenario will know all the concerns raise by mind_messing, Alfred and others. Let the players decide. Just like how the US voters elected President Donald Trump despite he has never held elected office before and has strong views not accepted by the political establishment in 2016 then.

The forum is for players to air their views and give the silent majority the right to decide.

Separately, I wonder if the repair yard at Truk can start with a negative value eg. -50. Then the japanese player will have to expend time and supply to get the yard started. This way, we can have repair yard in other places like midway, suva etc.

I am not sure if rising sun can look into this, this way "silly" commanders can be ordered by the players to build a yard in the right places, eg. Truk, midway etc.

Likewise, I cannot understand why the stock scenario has Tokyo starting with a repair yard of 10 (its the largest city in Japan) and yet impose an expansion to 50 if the japanese player wants to convert the 2 CS to CVL. Yokohama is just 1 hex away with a repair yard of 90, and it is not used.

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 31

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 7/13/2019 9:04:53 AM

Rising-Sun

Posts: 2082
Joined: 11/5/2009
From: Clifton Park, NY
Status: offline

Thank you Mandai, you nailed it there.

Keep in mind, that this scenario wont be easy for both sides. Just too much resources laying around and infact Allied, will have up buildup (repair) those industries in order to gain more from it, supplies, hardware, etc. USA as well Soviet wasn't in full capacity at the end of 1941. Took months to build up.

So not sure how the AI will be like, esp Japan, probably wont be good. But I will test it and see how it plays out. But this scenario will be great in PBEMs, regardless of the House Rules, anything can happen. At the beginning, players going to know where the weakness is, more likely they will take advantage of that. But if they do, good ways to lose your opponents too. The best way to play it, get some recons, showing that you know what is actually there.

For example, I got Force Z further south that is heading up there where Japanese landings is taken place, in history that Force Z was destroyed on Dec 9/10, not Dec 7/8th. So the Allied player may change (PBEM) course and not attack it or search and destroy, that would be mistake doing so.

So after a week what happen to Pearl, the Allied players can do whatever they like, gotta becareful not to abuse it from the beginning, this is why some players drop out that Allied players are exploiting it from the beginning.

Edited...
--------------------------
I have spoken to Sid on some details to improve and some interests on this scenario I been working on. Been poking around and read some important issues of their work, etc. Havent spoken to John yet, but I noticed that they were talking about D4Y "Judy" were carrying a 800kgs bomb on the centerline as a normal load and I don't think that aircraft can handle that much stress, but I will look into it.

So if any of you guys have some suggestion, please mention it so I can write it down. I may or may not agreed with it, but I do want this to be more accurate, not suppose to be easy on both sides at the beginning.

< Message edited by Rising-Sun -- 7/13/2019 10:03:07 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Mandai)

Post #: 32

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 7/13/2019 1:47:05 PM

LargeSlowTarget

Posts: 4443
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline

Well, just want to mention that many of your ideas have already been included in one mod or another, so you may want to dig through their documentations and the editor data and ask the author's permission to use the data of the mods - no need to re-invent the wheel. Most modders will gladly share their work. May save you time and allow you to concentrate on other things which haven't been touched yet.

_____________________________

AE Mod "Bottlenecks" UPDATED 01/2022

(in reply to Rising-Sun)

Post #: 33

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 7/13/2019 5:56:35 PM

Rising-Sun

Posts: 2082
Joined: 11/5/2009
From: Clifton Park, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Well, just want to mention that many of your ideas have already been included in one mod or another, so you may want to dig through their documentations and the editor data and ask the author's permission to use the data of the mods - no need to re-invent the wheel. Most modders will gladly share their work. May save you time and allow you to concentrate on other things which haven't been touched yet.

Will do, I didn't want to download and steal their ideas though. That would be a shame. So would like to discuss it and going over the details. Btw I do want to do my parts going over the details, I know its the long roads, but least I am doing the research on it.

So if any of you guys willing to share or talk about it, please do so. Would like to hear it, on what you did or what you improved. Since there already some MIAs out there hasn't been around.

< Message edited by Rising-Sun -- 7/13/2019 5:57:49 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)

Post #: 34

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 7/19/2019 2:46:06 PM

Ian R

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline

You should add to the below that Japan implemented civilian food rationing in 1940 which included meat, vegetables, sugar, seafood, dairy goods, and rice... not that they got much meat anyway.

The arrival of the allied occupation forces was a godsend for a whole generation of Japanese. The US Occupation forces introduced school lunches in 1946 to alleviate the malnutrition of Japanese children.

If we are going to speculate about about Imperial Japan being a bit better organized, let's also speculate about the Allies having been better prepared.

1. The Indian divisions in Malaya are better trained/supplied and are combat ready - experience 55, morale 90ish. With anti tank guns and stuff. And Spitfires instead of Buffaloes covering them.

2. Actually, lets go a bit further and put the AIF 6 & 7 divs, and maybe NZ 2 div in Malaya. With some tanks. About 4 regiments. Matildas or Valentines would suffice.

3. Given 6 months, how many US separate infantry regiments (that were training since federalization in 11/40 and created by triangularisation in '41) can we ship to the PI pre-war? How about some B25/26s/P39s/more P40Es?

4. Can we please send some M3 lights, P40Es and B25Cs to the NEI. The ones they actually paid for and were en route in 12/41 would be nice.

This sort of speculation always reminds one of how even minor tweaks favoured the allies. I just redistributed about 3-5 allied division equivalents, and issued some kit about 4 months early.

The IJ don't get Palembang in this scenario. Probably nor Singapore. Game Over.

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

The Japanese STARTED the war short by several million tons of merchant shipping needed to keep their economy going and population fed. The IJA and IJN had borrowed some of that to support the initial expansion of the empire and tended not to return it to serving the needs of the economy/civilian population. The USN submarine offensive aggravated this shortage tremendously thus by 1944 the TOKYO TIMES was publishing "delicious" recipes for grass for the average housewife to "enjoy" serving up to bheir family. Then by 1945 the B-29 mining offensive against Japanese waters eclipsed the submarine offensive and brought the Japanese population in the cities across the threshold to outright starvation.

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 35

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 7/19/2019 5:59:44 PM

Rising-Sun

Posts: 2082
Joined: 11/5/2009
From: Clifton Park, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

You should add to the below that Japan implemented civilian food rationing in 1940 which included meat, vegetables, sugar, seafood, dairy goods, and rice... not that they got much meat anyway.

The arrival of the allied occupation forces was a godsend for a whole generation of Japanese. The US Occupation forces introduced school lunches in 1946 to alleviate the malnutrition of Japanese children.

If we are going to speculate about about Imperial Japan being a bit better organized, let's also speculate about the Allies having been better prepared.

1. The Indian divisions in Malaya are better trained/supplied and are combat ready - experience 55, morale 90ish. With anti tank guns and stuff. And Spitfires instead of Buffaloes covering them.

2. Actually, lets go a bit further and put the AIF 6 & 7 divs, and maybe NZ 2 div in Malaya. With some tanks. About 4 regiments. Matildas or Valentines would suffice.

3. Given 6 months, how many US separate infantry regiments (that were training since federalization in 11/40 and created by triangularisation in '41) can we ship to the PI pre-war? How about some B25/26s/P39s/more P40Es?

4. Can we please send some M3 lights, P40Es and B25Cs to the NEI. The ones they actually paid for and were en route in 12/41 would be nice.

This sort of speculation always reminds one of how even minor tweaks favoured the allies. I just redistributed about 3-5 allied division equivalents, and issued some kit about 4 months early.

The IJ don't get Palembang in this scenario. Probably nor Singapore. Game Over.

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

The Japanese STARTED the war short by several million tons of merchant shipping needed to keep their economy going and population fed. The IJA and IJN had borrowed some of that to support the initial expansion of the empire and tended not to return it to serving the needs of the economy/civilian population. The USN submarine offensive aggravated this shortage tremendously thus by 1944 the TOKYO TIMES was publishing "delicious" recipes for grass for the average housewife to "enjoy" serving up to bheir family. Then by 1945 the B-29 mining offensive against Japanese waters eclipsed the submarine offensive and brought the Japanese population in the cities across the threshold to outright starvation.

1. Indian divisions in Malaya with morale of 90's? I don't think so, the one are pretty good are the Communist Chinese. So They have like 65 to 70 wish is pretty good. Anything above that would be in serious tank columns feeling well protected and strong. But I will look into this, how things were setup in Malaya.
3 and 4 I will look into that as well. I don't want to over do things, but I do however want to get it setup like it was back in those times. Do you have any sources on that?

As Allies player vs. Japanese AI, hard to tell. I haven't test it yet. Still got along way to go. But for PBEMs, well that a different story.

< Message edited by Rising-Sun -- 7/19/2019 6:01:02 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Ian R)

Post #: 36

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 7/22/2019 7:57:06 AM

Mandai

Posts: 18
Joined: 10/11/2016
Status: offline

Rising Sun

Further to my earlier post, I have relooked at the upgrade paths for Japanese player, reread
Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War by RJ Francillion (the "Book"). Retracing the information in
the Japanese Aircraft Wire Chart by Hansberger (Scenario 1a), I am proposing the following revisions.

a) For planes already existing in Dec 1941 in the stock scenarios, the stock scenario has neglected the upgrade paths between them.

Sally / Kate / Dinahs

Eg. Sally (Ki-21-Ic) upgrades to Salley (Ki-21-IIa), likewise, Kates (B5N1) upgrades to Kate (B5N2).

Restoring the upgrade paths will allow the Ki-21-Ic / B5N1 factories to upgrade to newer Sally and Kate models without penalties.

Babs

I further read that Babs (Ki-15 II and C5M2) are essentially the same plane. Can the Ki-15 II and C5M2 upgrades into each other? Then,

1 single Bab factory can switch production between Ki-15 II and C5M2 without penalties.

Nates / Ida

The later versions are just Kamikaze versions. Existing trainers are modified to carry bombs.

If there are already factories building Nates / Ida, the factories should be allowed to upgrade without penalties.

For reference, the stock scenario allowed the Sonia such an upgrade to the later sonia.

b) Planes already produced in Dec 1941, but introduction being delayed in stock scenario

Tojo (Ki-44), Hickory (Ki-54), Mavis (H6K) and Tabby (L2D2)

The discussion on Tabby was documented in B-Mod.

Hickory and Mavis are also produced at the start of the war and would follow the same reasoning as per Tabby.

The Tojo was already deployed at the 47th Chutai. Actual production started in Jan 1942.

The detail explanation are in the zip file.

c) Upgrades and Variants of Japanese Planes

Many japanese planes are upgrades / variants of another and should not be separately researched from scratch.

Using information from the Book and the wire chart, I have rejoined the upgrade paths - japanese players will be able to research other
planes types alongthe upgrade paths eg. A6M2 Sen Baku (Fighter Bomber), A6M5d-S (Night Fighter), A6M2-K (Fighter Bomber) and A6M7
(Fighter Bomber) etc.
The inclusion of additional upgrades is a double edge sword to the japanese player, it will slow his research to the later planes.
To reflect this historical events (the japanese diverting research to other variants), the japanese player should not be allowed to skip
upgrades without the consent of the allied player.

d) Planes that were only prototypes

Many japanese planes remained prototypes and the stock scenario attributed a hypothetical deployment date. The Book describes how
US bombings hampered the japanese research effort and thus delayed the test flight or destroyed the prototypes.

The game has research factories, so if these are damaged by the bombing, the hypothetical deployment date by the stock scenario
would apply, but if bombings had not targeted the research centers? will these plane come out earlier?

I have proposed revised dates based on the test flight dates and leave it to Rising Sun to decide since he is the one
making the scenario. For ease of reference, I have included the page number of the Book which I based my revisions.

The changes proposed by me can be selectively agreed between players before the start of the game. The allied player can agree only to the revised
upgrade paths for certain model while objecting to others eg. I have segregated into 4 types.

a) For planes already existing in Dec 1941 in the stock scenarios
b) Planes already produced in Dec 1941,
c) Upgrades and Variants of Japanese Planes
d) Planes that were only prototypes

I hope my proposed revised upgrade paths can introduce more variety to the game when PDU is selected.

Allied players that think this may be too advantages to the Japanese may impose a condition to bring the USSR into the war earlier. Some notable milestones can be

a) After Battle of Stalingrad or should it be battle of el alamein
b) After Warsaw is liberated
c) After Romania switch sides
d) After Finland capitulated
e) After Hungary surrenders
f) After War ended in Europe (May 1945)

This is Scenario by Rising Sun, he will have final say as to how many milestones is available.

On the agreed event, the allied can inform the japanese player to activate the USSR. Just send a japanese air unit to attack USSR units and USSR enters the war on the side of the allied player. The permutation is already immense without tweaking resources, supply etc.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Rising-Sun)

Post #: 37

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 7/22/2019 9:14:32 AM

Rising-Sun

Posts: 2082
Joined: 11/5/2009
From: Clifton Park, NY
Status: offline

@Mandai, I agreed there are some aircrafts should have better upgrade path. I mean who want to continue using Nates? So why not upgrade that to Oscars, etc? I will give the Japanese side more flavors so they can choose better options.

There a lot of things that needed to be improved in this scenario, not just Japan, but both sides of course.

Gonna rename the full grand campaign to "The Rising Sun" scenario number 50 slot here.

< Message edited by Rising-Sun -- 7/22/2019 1:57:56 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Mandai)

Post #: 38

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 7/23/2019 9:52:51 AM

Barb

Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline

Well you should consider several things (I do get what you are trying to do):
1) Planes in production on Dec 1941
A) Reconnecting the models Ki-21 / Kate / Dinah
- Retooling the factories took time. A lot of time. Even the US with their great industrial capacity often choose to let the current model to roll out of the production line only to be sent to modification center for all the required modifications!
- For this purpose ALL factory upgrades to new model should start from scratch if we are going to be IRL (but the HI/Supply/time cost would be huge)
Ki-15II and C5M2 - they are not the same!
- They certainly had differences like radios, etc to adapt them to the service requirements of different services.
- They used different engine (Ki-15-II used Mitsubishi Zuisei Ha-26-1, C5M2 used Nakajima Sakae 12) !!!
Ki-27 Nate to Ki-79 Nate
- Ki-79 was build to different specifications and with different engine. Better option should be to keep them separated (and the player have plenty of time to research Ki-79 if he wants to). Ki-27 should have a bomb option becoming available sometimes in 1945 to change the pool/training aircraft to kamikaze (any surviving Ki-27 at this time would probably sit in the pool or in some training unit).
B) Ki-44 Tojo
- IIRC the Ota factory building Tojos took whole year to get the average output over 30 planes. Players can do this in a month! For the whole 1942 the same factory produced a total of 131 planes. Check the size and arrival date of this and then try to match it to the same number of planes delivered if not touched!
C) Upgrades and Variants of Japanese Planes
- A6M7 was completely different plane to the regular "fighter" variants - it should be separated from the tree as is!
- A6M2 Sen Baku was a bomb carrying version of the regular A6M2 - thus should follow similar line as Ki-27 - allow it to carry a central mounted bomb instead of a drop tank, but this bomb should get available at later date
- A6M2-K was a two-seat training version completed to different specification, so also should be a standalone.
- A6M5d-S was also result of a different specification so should also be left out of the basic tree.
- A6M2-N was a rebuild of the basic A6M2, but as this is also an off-shoot of the main line this should also be left alone.
My idea of the development line should be A6M2 - A6M3a - A6M3b - A6M5a - A6M5b - A6M5c - A6M8

Just My2c

_____________________________

(in reply to Rising-Sun)

Post #: 39

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 7/24/2019 7:48:34 AM

Rising-Sun

Posts: 2082
Joined: 11/5/2009
From: Clifton Park, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Barb

Well you should consider several things (I do get what you are trying to do):
1) Planes in production on Dec 1941
A) Reconnecting the models Ki-21 / Kate / Dinah
- Retooling the factories took time. A lot of time. Even the US with their great industrial capacity often choose to let the current model to roll out of the production line only to be sent to modification center for all the required modifications!
- For this purpose ALL factory upgrades to new model should start from scratch if we are going to be IRL (but the HI/Supply/time cost would be huge)
Ki-15II and C5M2 - they are not the same!
- They certainly had differences like radios, etc to adapt them to the service requirements of different services.
- They used different engine (Ki-15-II used Mitsubishi Zuisei Ha-26-1, C5M2 used Nakajima Sakae 12) !!!
Ki-27 Nate to Ki-79 Nate
- Ki-79 was build to different specifications and with different engine. Better option should be to keep them separated (and the player have plenty of time to research Ki-79 if he wants to). Ki-27 should have a bomb option becoming available sometimes in 1945 to change the pool/training aircraft to kamikaze (any surviving Ki-27 at this time would probably sit in the pool or in some training unit).
B) Ki-44 Tojo
- IIRC the Ota factory building Tojos took whole year to get the average output over 30 planes. Players can do this in a month! For the whole 1942 the same factory produced a total of 131 planes. Check the size and arrival date of this and then try to match it to the same number of planes delivered if not touched!
C) Upgrades and Variants of Japanese Planes
- A6M7 was completely different plane to the regular "fighter" variants - it should be separated from the tree as is!
- A6M2 Sen Baku was a bomb carrying version of the regular A6M2 - thus should follow similar line as Ki-27 - allow it to carry a central mounted bomb instead of a drop tank, but this bomb should get available at later date
- A6M2-K was a two-seat training version completed to different specification, so also should be a standalone.
- A6M5d-S was also result of a different specification so should also be left out of the basic tree.
- A6M2-N was a rebuild of the basic A6M2, but as this is also an off-shoot of the main line this should also be left alone.
My idea of the development line should be A6M2 - A6M3a - A6M3b - A6M5a - A6M5b - A6M5c - A6M8

Just My2c

Thanks Barb, I will look into that too.

_____________________________

(in reply to Barb)

Post #: 40

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 11/23/2019 1:03:53 AM

Enforcer

Posts: 320
Joined: 3/14/2002
From: New Smyrna Beach, Fla
Status: offline

I am looking forward to playing this mod!

_____________________________

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 41

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 12/1/2019 7:48:10 PM

viberpol

Posts: 838
Joined: 10/20/2005
From: Gizycko, Poland, EU
Status: offline

OK. Hmm... being a WITP JFB for almost two decades and having 2 PBEM grand campaigns that took nearly 10 years (with 3rd finishing now...) under my belt, I can tell you that from Japanese perspective:

1. There's nothing more frustrating than having your forces annihilated regularly by Allied 4Es in the clear/open terrain (even more frustrating in '44+). IMHO map correction to eliminate almost all clear hexes is a must. It works both ways actually. If there were any way to introduce a "dual map system".... <dreaming> (I mean an exchange of map hexes file in 12.43 or so with some changes). Because while in '42 a handful of planes can deal some damage in clear terrain, but when in 44 you're attacked by hundreds of big payload 4Es you're simply evaporating.

2. I never ever managed to collect enough fuel in HIs. In 10-11.44 the economy is on the verge of collapse no matter what and you have to CHOSE your production. Last PBEM we took a standard "poor supply" scenario as a PBEM with crsutton and I hoped, damn... I though: "I know the economy soo good..." ;) but heck, now in 10.44 I see the supplies dwindling. Japan is starving! I don't think I have 500k supplies left. That's said I think your trial to redo the economy is a right decision. I believe AFBs are not aware we have to pay for every change/upgrade of devices (even a mediocre 70mm Bn gun for 75 mm in an LCU) in supplies! I just don't get the "you make Japan even stronger" comments...

3. I really hate only one rule of the game mechanics: moving LCUs in reserve. I think it should be made impossible by the engine when that LCU is going towards enemy. I've seen that spoiling the game and atmosphere between PBEM players. (An explanation: unit moving in reserve mode doesn't get movement points limited, when you move in "move" mode and get attacked f.e. from air your LCU is switched into combat mode.). I never seen reserve is switched into combat. Its like... "Hey troopers... its an important hex edge you have to take before enemy to cancel his movement. Lets all go into reserve, run and pray for the best!". Its ridiculous.

4. Japanese LCUs need some major reworking to respond to enemy tanks flood end game. Id est. JFBs need some upgrade of that mediocre 47 mm AT guns (maybe introduce 57 mm that was in development?) and more of them. Check the AntiARM/SOFT values of INF units that (but only SOME) divisions which get that '43 upgrade, and even then the anti armor capability of that squad is somehow funny... Some, if not most, doesn't change it's values since '41.
In '44 a capable allied leader can throw your forces in Burma or China around at will with 10 ARM brigades.
It can be fixed by device upgrades or LCUs upgrade (bringing some extra AT guns or changing type and number of squads at cost of supplies!).
OK, one may say that we'are here in "what if zone"... Yes, but after 3 years of the war we at least could make some reasonable changes in the economy and prepare for the final stages. I think its safe to say, that JFBs want some chance to live longer. Not just replay the history.
But hey, IMHO this is for the sake of playability in the end months of the game.
Ask AFBs if they really want a weak enemy that late in the game or one that actually CAN do something for this game to last longer...

< Message edited by viberpol -- 12/1/2019 7:59:25 PM >

_____________________________

Przy lackim orle, przy koniu Kiejstuta Archanioł Rusi na proporcach błysł

(in reply to Rising-Sun)

Post #: 42

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 12/2/2019 8:11:51 AM

Barb

Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline

Hi Viberpol,

I cocnur with some of what you write (especially 2&3) but can not really agree to the numbers 1 and 4.

Resioning:
1. Allies very very very rarely used their 4e planes to attack ground troops. There were SOME cases in Pacific like - B-24s making pre-landing bombardment of beaches but were not making daily runs on enemy troops - reason: bombing inaccuracy - either the Japanese units were far away and thus hardly spotted in jungles, etc. or they were close to allied troops (not European-close, but Jungle close). But the game also lacks a really meaningful interdiction targets that were attacked IRL (warehouses, rail heads, river ports, bridges). In the WITPAE I can regularly see B-24s/B-17s/B-29s attacking ground troops on daily basis.
Thus there should be tweak in allied side, not Japanese, to decrease targeting accuracy of bombs by bomber category (LB/FB/DB highest, heavies piss-poor). Also IRL the air as well as artillery should result mostly in suppression (morale/disruption), not in actual kills/damages).

4. Allies should be hard pressed to keep 10 ARM Brigades in the field in Burma - IRL Slims army was kept just barely supplied by air drops. Arakan front was practically separated from the Central Burma in all means except air and Ledo-Road was barely sufficient to keep their units supplied. Yet we can see allies in each game to keep 20-30 division+armor equivalent marching through Burma without flinching at supply. (IRL central Burma campaign was basically 5 Infantry + 3 Arm Bde effort with basically all supplies airdropped).
Thus Allied Armor should be deadly as is, but the supply distribution is simply crazy especially in the jungles.

_____________________________

(in reply to viberpol)

Post #: 43

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 6/1/2020 8:55:58 AM

Mandai

Posts: 18
Joined: 10/11/2016
Status: offline

Thanks to Covid 19 lockdown, I finally have time to mod a scenario.

My variant is based on grand campaign scenario 1 version 5 by Andy Mac. Notably, Andy has updated the original scenario by putting more bases in Malaya, Burma, etc so as to improve the AI and thus I chose this version.

As I want to retain play against the AI, I have restricted changes to the Map / locations as far as possible. On Japanese plane upgrades, the starting R&D models remained the same as the AI needs it.

I have straighten the upgrade paths for various Japanese plane models. Eg. the insertion of other zero models into path will lengthen the research time for later models but save time as R&D factories do not need to start from scratch. This is done with the objective of letting more models coming into play earlier.
Players can elect to play this scenario with PDU off will just get the planes arrival at the historical date (which I think will be boring). At times, the insertion of other models (eg. A6M2 Sen Baku, A6M5d-S) along the upgrade path may slow R&D for the final model A6M8 unless the Japanese player skipped such models. Players will have to decide before game play.

Where possible, I have created prototype for the some of Japanese planes. Player that research prototype plane (denoted by (x)) will get their R&D factories repaired faster before proceeding to the actual models. If players think this is gamey, they can research the actual model directly which is the stock scenario. Other than Ki-44 which is a prototype used in the stock scenario, I do not recommend Japanese player produce (x) models for air groups, it is just a feature to repair the R&D factories faster and does not fill the regular units. Eg. Ki-44 models are not really deployed on a large scale.

British has invaded Vichy French Syria in Jun 1941. When the Japanese attacked the allies in Dec 1941, Vichy France allowed Japanese to attack British forces in Malaya from Indochina. Thailand started as a neutral but sided with the Japanese. �Bending a Knee� creates a variant which allowed these two nation/regime to play a larger role in the game on the side of Japan. The Thai and French units introduced are from War Options � Scenario 39 by Skyland. Vichy French Navy include a CVL, CS, CA and 4 CL.

Due to limitation of the game engine, players will have to address certain game aspects with house rules. eg.

a) Withdrawal dates of Thai / Vichy is event based
b) Availability of R&D factories to prototype (X) models to repair R&D factories faster
c) Tagging a HQ unit to AV Akitshushima so that it can support Mavis / Emily on dot bases for raid on Allies shipping
d) Introducing Ship Repair Yard to Bangkok and Truk.etc

Alfred has highlighted that having house rules are not conducive for game play. I agree with him, but all games will have limitation. The aim of this mod is to allow players to have a broader experience of stronger japan. In early war, the additional units will help Japan to attempt invading India and Australia.

In mid war, the arrival of better planes can help to delay the allied offensive death star.

In later war, japanese player get to try Jets and long range bomber like Ki-74I Patsy.

I have not played the mod to the end and I could not suggest any victory score cards since allies will win at the end.

Hopefully, this mod will help Japanese player look forward to end of campaign instead of being target practice from 1944 onwards.

All files can be accessed at this link.

https://1drv.ms/u/s!AtcSdH35Yw5FlS4IsRvNAiyslUzm?e=H6tYxf

< Message edited by Mandai -- 6/1/2020 10:14:36 AM >

(in reply to Barb)

Post #: 44

RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1 - 9/6/2021 9:36:30 AM

Rising-Sun

Posts: 2082
Joined: 11/5/2009
From: Clifton Park, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol

OK. Hmm... being a WITP JFB for almost two decades and having 2 PBEM grand campaigns that took nearly 10 years (with 3rd finishing now...) under my belt, I can tell you that from Japanese perspective:

1. There's nothing more frustrating than having your forces annihilated regularly by Allied 4Es in the clear/open terrain (even more frustrating in '44+). IMHO map correction to eliminate almost all clear hexes is a must. It works both ways actually. If there were any way to introduce a "dual map system".... <dreaming> (I mean an exchange of map hexes file in 12.43 or so with some changes). Because while in '42 a handful of planes can deal some damage in clear terrain, but when in 44 you're attacked by hundreds of big payload 4Es you're simply evaporating.

2. I never ever managed to collect enough fuel in HIs. In 10-11.44 the economy is on the verge of collapse no matter what and you have to CHOSE your production. Last PBEM we took a standard "poor supply" scenario as a PBEM with crsutton and I hoped, damn... I though: "I know the economy soo good..." ;) but heck, now in 10.44 I see the supplies dwindling. Japan is starving! I don't think I have 500k supplies left. That's said I think your trial to redo the economy is a right decision. I believe AFBs are not aware we have to pay for every change/upgrade of devices (even a mediocre 70mm Bn gun for 75 mm in an LCU) in supplies! I just don't get the "you make Japan even stronger" comments...

3. I really hate only one rule of the game mechanics: moving LCUs in reserve. I think it should be made impossible by the engine when that LCU is going towards enemy. I've seen that spoiling the game and atmosphere between PBEM players. (An explanation: unit moving in reserve mode doesn't get movement points limited, when you move in "move" mode and get attacked f.e. from air your LCU is switched into combat mode.). I never seen reserve is switched into combat. Its like... "Hey troopers... its an important hex edge you have to take before enemy to cancel his movement. Lets all go into reserve, run and pray for the best!". Its ridiculous.

4. Japanese LCUs need some major reworking to respond to enemy tanks flood end game. Id est. JFBs need some upgrade of that mediocre 47 mm AT guns (maybe introduce 57 mm that was in development?) and more of them. Check the AntiARM/SOFT values of INF units that (but only SOME) divisions which get that '43 upgrade, and even then the anti armor capability of that squad is somehow funny... Some, if not most, doesn't change it's values since '41.
In '44 a capable allied leader can throw your forces in Burma or China around at will with 10 ARM brigades.
It can be fixed by device upgrades or LCUs upgrade (bringing some extra AT guns or changing type and number of squads at cost of supplies!).
OK, one may say that we'are here in "what if zone"... Yes, but after 3 years of the war we at least could make some reasonable changes in the economy and prepare for the final stages. I think its safe to say, that JFBs want some chance to live longer. Not just replay the history.
But hey, IMHO this is for the sake of playability in the end months of the game.
Ask AFBs if they really want a weak enemy that late in the game or one that actually CAN do something for this game to last longer...

Sorry for late reply, yeah that what i though. So the game will be completely different than previous history back then on how the Allies uses their forces.

So playing against the AIs, idk, probably would be bad or not even close as the real thing.

Btw i got board game going, been waiting for that Pacific War (second print) that is on P500, wanted to use that and change alot of rules for engagement. Making it more realistic, like up close naval engagement, etc.

_____________________________

(in reply to viberpol)

Post #: 45

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: Improving Grand Campaing scen#1

Page: << < prev 1 [2]