RE: Back by Popular Demand (Full Version)

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



Message


Symon -> RE: Back by Popular Demand (2/13/2013 6:55:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: henry1611
Lest you think your persistence and enthusiasm goes unnoticed, it does not. I, for one, much appreciate it. I am in the middle of Frank's Guadalcanal and am really looking forward to this version of the scenario.

Henry

Thank you very much for your kind words, Henry. I too have Frank's Guadalcanal in front of me and am making every attempt to force August conditions on scenario gameplay, whether against the AI or H2H.

I see the hit and download stats for the Babes site and understand that our efforts are indeed noticed. The Babes paradigm is not something that fits well into the typical main forum discussions, so you won't see much about it in that venue. But given that the main forum is populated by 20-30 individuals, and over 115 people have downloaded the Guad scenario, I'm not too unhappy.

Notwithstanding, there are a couple more Babes scenarios in the hopper. A directed DEI offensive, and a PI offensive. What we are learning about AI scripting will play nicely with these two. Sam Natalionis is putting a major April '42 scenario together and will be using everything we learn from this one.

Nice to hear from a grog that understands what we're trying to do and appreciates our efforts.




berto -> RE: Back by Popular Demand (2/13/2013 8:14:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Symon

Notwithstanding, there are a couple more Babes scenarios in the hopper. A directed DEI offensive, and a PI offensive.

YES!!

(A Papua New Guinea centric scenario would be terrific too.)




Alfred -> RE: Back by Popular Demand (2/13/2013 8:31:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Symon

... given that the main forum is populated by 20-30 individuals ...



That many![:)]

I could have sworn with the repetitive nature of the usual chorus line, it was populated by fewer individuals but many more followers.[:D]

Moving right along, I'm very pleased to see that you haven't given up on the AI. Although I will admit you did have me worried there for a while.[;)]

Alfred




Symon -> RE: Back by Popular Demand (2/13/2013 9:14:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: berto
quote:

ORIGINAL: Symon
Notwithstanding, there are a couple more Babes scenarios in the hopper. A directed DEI offensive, and a PI offensive.

YES!!

(A Papua New Guinea centric scenario would be terrific too.)

Actually, Berto, although I refer to it as the Guadalcanal scenario, and spend much time discussing the arrangements in the Solomons, Scen 34 is very much a Papua scenario as well. New bases have been added at Wanigela and Pongani to support irl ops. The roads ,radiating from PM and Buna, have been reduced to trails, and the Kokoda hex is now coded as Mtn. The initial scenario was developed as a South West Pacific "Strategic Problem" and grew from that. Oh yeah, Papua is a major part of this scenario. Just been talking about the Solomons part because that's what people want to hear about, but Papua is a major part of the scenario. Will be talking about it soon as the Guad AI gets done.

Just as much thought has gone into the Experience/Morale numbers of US/Aus units available for deployment to New Guinea. There's lots of them, but their initial experience numbers make the Chinese look like Navy SEALS. Gotta keep them in place and train them up or they will get squashed. Can anyone say IRL?

And then there's some peripheral operations conducted by 6th BF, on Kwaj, under command of 4th Fleet, that just might float your boat.

Think you might like this small map scenario, once we're done with it. Hope so, anyway.




berto -> RE: Back by Popular Demand (2/13/2013 9:37:27 PM)


I am thinking of a New Guinea Campaign scenario extending beyond the Guadalcanal/Solomons Campaign time frame, i.e., from 1942 into 1945 -- the whole shebang. Although maybe that stretches the scenario paradigm rather too far. Would WITP:AE model well scenarios lasting not months but several years?

I'm not complaining, though. Having Guadalcanal/Solomons, DEI & PI scenarios is fantastic. (Especially the PI scenario, as I've lived in the Philippines for six years, and have visited many places in the islands.)




BigDuke66 -> RE: Back by Popular Demand (2/14/2013 1:55:27 AM)

My opponent pointed me to this scenario, currently we are playing the stock scenario but errors keep piling up.
Now I just checked this one and it really looks interesting. The bigger map is already great as the stock map is too small for my screen and when scrolling the map keeps bouncing left and right like a hooker, makes you crazy after a while.

But I wonder about some points you mentioned here:
-Can't find Wanigela or Pongani on map, not even on the base list.
-Roads around Buna an Port Morseby are still secondary roads.
-Kokoda Trail is still JR(Jungle Rough I suppose).
So are those changes for a new/next version? I downloaded the one from "Jan 21, 2013".

Another Point, where the Gilbert Island really free of Japanese forces?
Usually maps showing the occupied area incorporate the Gilbert Islands into the "Japanese perimeter", so I wonder if this was really only because of some Japanese on the most Northern part of the Gilbert Islands.
Also that Nauru and Ocean Islands are not occupied despite being so rich in Phosphate looks strange, weren't the Japanese in need of this to raise food production?




Symon -> RE: Back by Popular Demand (2/14/2013 1:31:47 PM)

The Guad scen on the website is still the 'original' Babes version. This new one is going to be fully AI compatible, both sides. While working on the AI quite a few things had to be adjusted to keep the AI from doing silly things. Then, some new ideas came up and those are being incorporated as well. The one on the site is ok, but this one will have much more thought put into it and a few AEaster Eggs [;)]




RevRick -> RE: Back by Popular Demand (2/14/2013 5:58:31 PM)

quote:

BTW, see you have a PBEM game coming up. Would be very interested on thoughts about a few areas.

Are there too many or too few transport ships? We tried to make it as actual as possible, but sub ops are waaaay too effective for both sides, especially when players use 20/20 hindsight. So just picking off the limited number of transport/cargo ships could make it way too easy for one side or the other. But just doubling the transports would give both sides the opportunity to do what they never could do irl. Matter of balance. [b]Could just cut the number of subs in half but would like some input on a player's perception of the shipping situation.

Also fuel/supply; too much, too little? That's easy enough to tweak, but player perceptions do play a role in determining how much.

Would appreciate comments. Ciao. JWE [


From my perspective, there are ALWAYS too many submarines - even friendly ones.




Symon -> RE: Back by Popular Demand (2/14/2013 8:08:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RevRick
From my perspective, there are ALWAYS too many submarines - even friendly ones.

LOL. Yeah, mine too. Sub and ASW warfare didn't seem to be that wierd before. It got tweaked in AE and then got bent into oblivion by the screaming sand box crowd. I am sick and damn tired of the typical SubWarInThePacific playskool tantrums skewing things.

I will do my best to make subs as effective as they were. And yes, I will utterly rape them [:)]

FYI, in the new Guad scen, we figured out how to severely limit the number of midgets (a hot button for me). And we have limited subs, and they seem to have an acceptable level of ineffectiveness. Prolly won't work in a GC scenario, but it works well in this one.




Blind Sniper -> RE: Back by Popular Demand (2/14/2013 8:33:03 PM)

Symon, are you willing to share these improvements to all DaBabes scenarios?




BigDuke66 -> RE: Back by Popular Demand (2/15/2013 5:47:01 AM)

Ok some thoughts:

-Any chance 2 versions(similar to the CG where we have the pre PH and after PH version), one which the player is able to make the invasion and one where it already happened? At least I would prefer to start with the invasion still to do. The outcome should shake this a bit up down the road, especially the battle of Savo Island.
-Why do withdrawals don't work in small scenarios? Aren't the political points tight to work with, keeping ships in theater may result in no pp to work with.
-I always feel that the subs simply go too fast on patrol again, I wonder if anyone has some solid numbers on the time between patrols. Feels to me like a houserule is needed.
-On more thing about subs, were all the subs in that area also stationed there? I just wonder if maybe subs from PH or other off-map locations participated in the area that the map covers, maybe these could be left out.
-Any chance for a beta or preview version of the scenario?




Symon -> RE: Back by Popular Demand (2/15/2013 6:46:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Blind Sniper
Symon, are you willing to share these improvements to all DaBabes scenarios?

All the small map/short time scenarios, yes. But the GCs are humungous and take all the available LCU slots, so there's no way to rationally split up units the way it's done with this scenario. Wish it were otherwise, but unfortunately it can't be done.




Symon -> RE: Back by Popular Demand (2/15/2013 6:58:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66
Ok some thoughts:

-Any chance 2 versions(similar to the CG where we have the pre PH and after PH version), one which the player is able to make the invasion and one where it already happened? At least I would prefer to start with the invasion still to do. The outcome should shake this a bit up down the road, especially the battle of Savo Island.

No. We build scenarios as Campaign/Fleet Problems that confront players with the same kinds of decisions that confronted the participants. If you wish something different, then simply use the editor to adjust things to suit your desires.
quote:

-Why do withdrawals don't work in small scenarios? Aren't the political points tight to work with, keeping ships in theater may result in no pp to work with.

Because withdrawals are hard coded at specific locations that may, or may not, be included in the game/map space for that specific scenario.
quote:

-I always feel that the subs simply go too fast on patrol again, I wonder if anyone has some solid numbers on the time between patrols. Feels to me like a houserule is needed.

Your call.
quote:

-On more thing about subs, were all the subs in that area also stationed there? I just wonder if maybe subs from PH or other off-map locations participated in the area that the map covers, maybe these could be left out.

Yes, IJN and US SubRons were as deployed.
quote:

-Any chance for a beta or preview version of the scenario?

Same chance as everyone else has. When it is finished, it will be posted on the website for evaluation. Comments are welcome.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.734375E-02