Matrix Games Forums

New information and screenshots for Pike & ShotDeal of the Week Pride of NationsTo End All Wars Releasing on Steam! Slitherine is recruiting: Programmers requiredPandora: Eclipse of Nashira gets release dateCommunity impressions of To End All WarsAgeod's To End All Wars is now availableTo End All Wars is now available!Deal of the Week: Field of GloryTo End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied

 
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: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 5/22/2010 2:57:20 AM   
OSO


Posts: 335
Joined: 5/28/2006
From: The Greater Chicagoland Area, USA
Status: offline
Downfall version 3:

CV Saratoga & Enterprise are listed in the editor as being at Pearl Harbor. The list all ships window also shows them there. I could not access either of them through Pearl Harbor's port nor am I allowed to form an Air Combat TF at Pearl Harbor.

_____________________________


(in reply to Reg)
Post #: 91
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 5/22/2010 5:36:06 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 9114
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
In Downfall, is the Japanese radar N-6 on the C6N1-S Myrt a air-search radar to pick up planes?
If it is, then it is currently set to be a ground search radar as the device attribute 'Air search mode' is off.


_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to OSO)
Post #: 92
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 5/22/2010 5:57:29 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 13796
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
Ta guys I will fix em all on the next update when I get back

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 93
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 5/23/2010 3:54:25 PM   
OSO


Posts: 335
Joined: 5/28/2006
From: The Greater Chicagoland Area, USA
Status: offline
Downfall Version 3:

The RAAF seems to be absent. They are present in the editor but cannot be accessed in game. None show up in the reinforcement list either. Changing the nationality to something other than Australian allows them to be used.

_____________________________


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 94
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 5/25/2010 12:42:30 PM   
ART_11

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 7/27/2009
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OSO

Downfall version 3:

CV Saratoga & Enterprise are listed in the editor as being at Pearl Harbor. The list all ships window also shows them there. I could not access either of them through Pearl Harbor's port nor am I allowed to form an Air Combat TF at Pearl Harbor.



Try to create Escort TF and after that change to Air Combat.
Regards
ART

(in reply to OSO)
Post #: 95
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 5/26/2010 12:20:33 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 13796
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
Aye its just the 1000 ship limit can you try to get a few TF's formed and moving

(in reply to ART_11)
Post #: 96
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 5/26/2010 12:33:26 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 13796
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
I am now on my way home from NY when I get home I will take any feedback on any of the scnes so far and try to reissue over the weekend

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 97
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 5/26/2010 2:26:08 AM   
OSO


Posts: 335
Joined: 5/28/2006
From: The Greater Chicagoland Area, USA
Status: offline
1713 - VBF-6 should be on the Enterprise.

_____________________________


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 98
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 5/26/2010 3:29:16 AM   
Knavey

 

Posts: 2968
Joined: 9/12/2002
From: Valrico, Florida
Status: offline
Andy,

Getting prepped to start Marianas enhanced. I don't have feedback for the Japs, but my opponent may.

Initial look at US forces - comments below.

Not all allied ships are fully fueled at the start.
VD-4 has recon skills in the 30s. Other recons are good.
VC(F)-10 low skills
VC(T)-10 low skills
VC(T)-3 low skills
most sub XP is around 55. This may be a little low for that time of the war. Not sure though.
III US Amphib is only 70% prepped for Guam.
Most HQs have no target. Scenario length is only 2.5 months so no way to really prep effectively before scenario ends.
Armor is mostly prepped.
Several units have a withdrawal in 3 days flag at the very beginning of the scenario.
715th Amphib Tank
1 USMC tank
708 Amphib Tank
98 AA
Johnson USN CPNAB

10th Amphib tractor only has support squads.

Need to have forces prepped better that are invading the different islands. Most units will never see decent prep levels for an invasion due to scenario length. Japanese may be in the same boat so it may even out. I do not know since I haven't looked at their OOB.

Just some things I found going through my units.

Going to continue to play with these as is. Will provide feedback as we come across issues.

Thanks for making this one.

edited to remove comments about V amphib. Noticed they are different names and I thought they were the same.

< Message edited by Knavey -- 5/27/2010 1:25:55 AM >


_____________________________

x-Nuc twidget
CVN-71
USN 87-93
"Going slow in the fast direction"

(in reply to OSO)
Post #: 99
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 5/28/2010 2:01:42 AM   
NAVMAN

 

Posts: 401
Joined: 12/31/2002
Status: offline
Andy: I was reading up on P-47N ops, and the book stated that P-47N units stationed
on Saipan were able to escort B-29s roundtrip to Japan. Tried this in Downfall but
c/n because the range was too great even w/drop tanks. Is this something that can
be addressed in your next version?

Thx.

(in reply to Knavey)
Post #: 100
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 5/29/2010 3:52:58 AM   
LowCommand

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 8/14/2002
From: VA
Status: offline


Comments and AAR for Buccaneer

First Impressions

This scenario really accomplishes one of its primary objectives Ė showing why Buccaneer never happened! Lord, talk about a lash-up! The first thing that hit me was the pathetic nature of the British Invasion Attempt. The land based AC available are pathetic: Everything except the Liberators is ridiculous or short ranged (well, maybe not the Wildcats). A few of them are both.

Then there are the land units assigned the job of taking Port Blair. Itís a rather weird collection of units. The numbering of the Brit battalions suggests that maybe they are a once or future division. The other stuff is just weird. By US standards there isnít anywhere near enough engineering support available, nor artillery. Still, itís enough to get the job done, that is if you can get it on the ships. Then get the ships to Port Blair without getting them sunk. I managed against the AI, but a human player could have made it tough.

Finally there is the Brit carrier force Ė the AC available just arenít really up to the task. Almost all the fighters are sea hurricanes. That means that the attack AC will go in without escort at anything beyond knife range. Dealing with that is something I didnít handle well at all.

I was surprised at the effectiveness of the one Brit engineering unit. It did allow me to upgrade the airfield at Port Blair with reasonable speed.

The lack of transport available also surprised me. The lack of beaching craft always was the big show stopper. Still, the lack of everything else surprised me. All the transport is xAP and xAK except for the LSTís on loan. And then it still isnít enough to lift everything in one trip. Well, not at the default settings anyway. Thatís a part of AE that I must learn more about.

What I Did

First turn, I started loading up all the combat units I could, formed up the surface and air TFís and began heading for Port Blair. I bombed the place as best as I could while the invasion was forming up and on the way. The bombing was quite unsuccessful.

Once my invasion TF was in range I told my surface TF to be a bombardment TF. That worked quite well. My forces landed and had little trouble capturing the place. Then those sneaky Nips did a night attack. I was quite shocked when they just sailed right by half the Royal Navy and went and shot up my invasion TFís at Port Blair. I simply ass-sumed that the Glorious Royal Navy would do an interception if required. HA! Iím not sure if the problem was simply bad luck or some kind of mistake on my part. Perhaps something like running out of ops points or the surface TF commander feeling like he didnít have enough ammo for a fight. What ever the reason, my combat TFís never reacted to the Japs during the scenario. As you might expect, the big Jap TF with lots of DDís and 2 BB shot the BLEEP out of my invasion TFís.

Then there was the big carrier battle. The mini-KB showed up and attacked from a, for the Japs, lovely distance. To my vast surprise, they didnít manage to do much of any damage, just a hit or two on one CA. My TBís went in, they mostly didnít come back. They didnít hit anything. In the future, Iíll set all the Sea Hurricanes to high CAP percentages and the Wildcats to zero CAP but I wonít expect much. The Brit CVís have got to get into knife range to escort the very vulnerable TBís.

After that, it got kind of tame. Only one big land attack came in and was easily handled by the AC from the combined CAP.

Once the airfield at Port Blair got to 5 I brought in some Liberators and tried bombing. Donít send your AC over Rangoon at 7 thousand. I managed a few raids but only hit U88 down south and a few hits on the BBís at Rangoon.

My experience with WitP definitely spoiled me. I held on to the Flying Tigers and rescued some Dutch units so I had enough long-range air to function reasonably well in the CBI. This scenario shows how it was IRL. The Brits had crappy, short ranged AC and not many of them until much later in the war.


Errors

Three Walrus II show up off the Brit CLís ---

"No. 700 Sqn FAA-S-15 moved ashore from Birmingham at Colombo." I got the same message from Glasgow and Newcastle (CL's).

This doesnít look like it was intended. It appears to be a consequence of the fact that they have search planes assigned by default but in this scenario they have been upgraded to the point they canít carry them anymore.


Debatable Points

There doesnít seem to be enough Jap land air power. According to the intelligence summary, they have been staging in for weeks. Somehow I never got attacked by land air all that much. Was I just lucky, had too much CAP for the AI, or what?

The experience of the various units didnít seem high enough. These units have supposedly been in combat for most of a year. I havenít checked yet, but by behavior, the Japs have the same problem.

Then there is the big item unloading problem at small ports. This is a feature with AE not the scenario but it bit me big time. Itís rather annoying. Yes I know its realistic but it still is more than a little annoying.

Operational losses seem to be high.

Maybe Point Blair should be somewhat damaged at the start. Presumably the Brits have been pounding the bleep out of the place for some time.

Apparently there are different version numbers for some of these scenarios. I spent a few minuets looking, but I didnít spot a version number. Would it show up somewhere?


Summation

Thanks again for a well-done scenario of a bit of not well-publicized history.

The U boat(s) is a nice touch! For some reason Iíve never read anything about the Germans who served in the Pacific other that a bit about the Raiders. I wonder if it might have something to do with the high losses and difficulty in getting home. Still, it would be interesting to read about the German, Japanese interactions, how well the boats were maintained and shore leave, etc.

Points for a reasonable intelligence summery Ė this is a glaring omission from other scenarios. Now a few more details would be nice, but at least there is something.

I would like to see something in these scenarios like:

The operational order for this attack calls for you to launch an attack on xxx by xxx. The Japs have massed approximately xxx aircraft and xxx ships to counter your attack. The primary threat will be fromÖ




_____________________________

"Mines reported in the fairway,
"Warn all traffic and detain,
"'Sent up Unity, Cralibel, Assyrian, Stormcock, and Golden Gain."

(in reply to NAVMAN)
Post #: 101
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 5/29/2010 7:54:30 PM   
LowCommand

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 8/14/2002
From: VA
Status: offline


The above comment are aparently for version 1. I still haven't found the version numbers in the scenario. I just downloaded version 3.

_____________________________

"Mines reported in the fairway,
"Warn all traffic and detain,
"'Sent up Unity, Cralibel, Assyrian, Stormcock, and Golden Gain."

(in reply to LowCommand)
Post #: 102
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 5/30/2010 11:53:53 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 13796
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
ok thanks for the comments i will wait for the next set of comments

(in reply to LowCommand)
Post #: 103
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/5/2010 9:41:29 PM   
NAVMAN

 

Posts: 401
Joined: 12/31/2002
Status: offline
Andy, Will you be addressing the combat report issue on the next update?

Thx

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 104
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/7/2010 11:41:11 PM   
LowCommand

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 8/14/2002
From: VA
Status: offline

Buccaneer v3 Possible Corrupted File Weirdness

I played a very strange Buccaneer scenario. I think I somehow corrupted the save file. Maybe the time I opened the game in a window then killed the entire window in one shot. Anyway, I ended up with two Landing Craft TFís consisting of one or two xKAís. Those TF had an interesting game. One (xAK Silversides) took on the airbase defense unit at Port Blair. It shot itís troops ashore very well, often getting 4 or 5 runway hits in the process. Pretty good for a single 4Ē. Then my TBís managed to sink the BB Muashi with only 4 torps. As I say, it was interesting. Iím going to try again before I make any serious comments about version 3. Being retired I can play the whole thing in one or two days. The down sides are Ė One, Iíve lost enough weight that I canít sit in one spot too long any more. And two Ė I have a collection of filk, yes, foxtrot India, lima, kilo music CDís that are going bad. I need to copy what I can save to DVD and hard disk. Filk music is the Science Fiction equivalent of folk music. There is some up on YouTube and the rest of the web. Weird stuff, but I like it. As a result, I donít get to play AE quite as much as Iíd like.




_____________________________

"Mines reported in the fairway,
"Warn all traffic and detain,
"'Sent up Unity, Cralibel, Assyrian, Stormcock, and Golden Gain."

(in reply to NAVMAN)
Post #: 105
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/9/2010 7:08:53 AM   
NAVMAN

 

Posts: 401
Joined: 12/31/2002
Status: offline
Hi Andy,
Re; Downfall v3, noticed that w/ No Unit Withdrawal turned "off", there are a number
of ground units that need to be withdrawn. One is at SF but there is no button to withdraw.
At any rate, should any units need to be withdrawn at all for this scen? No air or ship units show as needing to be withdrawn. I think Marianas is still showing units to be withdrawn as
well. In Downfall, there are these "Independant Sailing Supply Convoys" that are shown as needing to be withdrawn under ground withdrawals.

Thx.

< Message edited by NAVMAN -- 6/9/2010 7:20:05 AM >

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 106
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/9/2010 8:42:23 PM   
NAVMAN

 

Posts: 401
Joined: 12/31/2002
Status: offline
Hi Andy,
Re: Downfall. While I was looking at the editor to find a way to determine what ship classes
were eligiable for conversion, I noticed that class 2406, EC2 Liberty Cargo AKs, showed
they could convert to class 2731, EC2 USAT APs. However, none of my Liberty ships
at SF have a "button" for the conversion. Was I interpreting the editor correctly?

Thx.

(in reply to NAVMAN)
Post #: 107
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/10/2010 6:18:36 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 13796
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
I will take a look

p.s. I operate three levels of scenario

1. Normal
2. Hakko Ichiu (typically a bit more balanced but still ok for PBEM)
3. Ironman AI only

(in reply to NAVMAN)
Post #: 108
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/10/2010 7:20:21 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6576
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NAVMAN
Hi Andy,
Re: Downfall. While I was looking at the editor to find a way to determine what ship classes
were eligiable for conversion, I noticed that class 2406, EC2 Liberty Cargo AKs, showed
they could convert to class 2731, EC2 USAT APs. However, none of my Liberty ships
at SF have a "button" for the conversion. Was I interpreting the editor correctly?

Thx.

There is only 1 class of EC2 Liberties that can convert to USATs - class 2406. This class "upgrades" to class 2506 beginning 6/43. Class 2506 does NOT have a conversion option to USAT. By the time of Downfall, you get Generals and Admirals and bears, oh my. Why in the world would you need more USATs?

(in reply to NAVMAN)
Post #: 109
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/10/2010 11:18:36 PM   
NAVMAN

 

Posts: 401
Joined: 12/31/2002
Status: offline
JWE,
Thx. The reason I could use more APs is the huge amt of troops to be moved from US west
coast to PH and thence from PH to either Guam, Manila or to a base I've established in
Japan after invasion. One must also factor in ships that have been, or will be, lost
in invading Japan. Plenty of troops, marginal shipping, in my view. What's wrong with
having too much?

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 110
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/11/2010 2:29:37 AM   
LowCommand

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 8/14/2002
From: VA
Status: offline


Possible missing aei017 files in Buccaneer v3.

While trying to deal with my possibly corrupt Buccaneer scenario, I uninstalled AE and deleted everything, then reinstalled. Now Buccaneer v3 will not load, but everything else works. Looking at the zip and the save of my old AE instillation, I noticed a few files that are in v1 and not in v3. I was stupid enough to delete Buccaneer v1 zip, but my old save contains aei017-01.dat, aei017-02.dat, and aei017.dat that are not in the v3 zip.

I didn't notice the lack of files in the version 3 zip because I just did an overwrite. Since the files don't seem to be in version 3, the old versions didn't get overwritten.

When I copy the aei017*.dat files over, Buccaneer v3 loads.

Did the aei files change between v1 and v3?




_____________________________

"Mines reported in the fairway,
"Warn all traffic and detain,
"'Sent up Unity, Cralibel, Assyrian, Stormcock, and Golden Gain."

(in reply to NAVMAN)
Post #: 111
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/11/2010 6:26:58 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 13796
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
No thats weird thanks I will check

(in reply to LowCommand)
Post #: 112
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/11/2010 7:31:26 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6576
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NAVMAN
JWE,
Thx. The reason I could use more APs is the huge amt of troops to be moved from US west
coast to PH and thence from PH to either Guam, Manila or to a base I've established in
Japan after invasion. One must also factor in ships that have been, or will be, lost
in invading Japan. Plenty of troops, marginal shipping, in my view. What's wrong with
having too much?

Well, that is the witch with speculative scenarios, isn't it. I mean, how many of the Magic Carpet vessels would have been used to pump grunts into the Downfall staging areas? Now I know there were "plans" to do this and that, but the "plans" were made by JCS staff that were primarily Army pukes, who were a teensy bit out of touch with the sheer scale, distance, and logistics requirements of Pac Theater.

To do a real Downfall scenario, one would need to put as much time and effort into the OOB (Ships, and LCUs and bears, oh my!) as for opening day. Absent that, what you see is pretty much what you get.

Da Babes does extend through the Downfall time frame, and has a lot more transport/assault capable ships, but way fewer than might actually have show up to play. Thing about Downfall, is one needs to open the entire Western map area. The Ozzies were smiling and dialing in the DEI: the Brits were hankering after Malaya: the Sovs were doing Korea, and gosh all hemlock if they decided to do a bit of amphib "assistance" here and there: there was Yamashita in the hills of Luzon tying down Eichelberger (or Krueger, whoever): and then there was China ... Shoot happening everywhere and all of it wanting to pull stuff from the main Ops, and all of it political so it wasn't just a case of rack'em, stack'em, and then whack'em.

No, a real Downfall scenario would take months to put together, and have a Ship (and likely LCU) OOB that is totally different from what ya gots now. And you wouldn't believe the special HQs and the hard, permanent, restrictions that would have to happen.

Woof !!!

(in reply to NAVMAN)
Post #: 113
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/11/2010 9:47:21 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 13796
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
And until someone wants to do a 'real' downfall scenario I guess you are stuck with mine but if John or anyone wants to do a better arttempt feel free

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 114
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/11/2010 11:25:41 PM   
JeffK


Posts: 5157
Joined: 1/26/2005
From: Back in the Office, Can I get my tin hut back!
Status: offline
Andys scenario is fine, good material for AFB who have played the first year of AE and are tired of getting smashed every time. You get some nice toys to play with too.

Plus,  if the Allied AI is up to it, a very challenging scenario for a JFB to try and smash an Allied invasion.

Worry about the minor detail JWE mentions later.


_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 115
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/12/2010 2:02:00 AM   
Knavey

 

Posts: 2968
Joined: 9/12/2002
From: Valrico, Florida
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

And until someone wants to do a 'real' downfall scenario I guess you are stuck with mine but if John or anyone wants to do a better arttempt feel free


And I look forward to playing it!

Gotta finish Marianas first.



_____________________________

x-Nuc twidget
CVN-71
USN 87-93
"Going slow in the fast direction"

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 116
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/12/2010 2:13:27 AM   
NAVMAN

 

Posts: 401
Joined: 12/31/2002
Status: offline
JWE, Andy, et. al.: I like Downfall! It provides an opportunity for the "greatest" what if
that, fortunately, never took place. I was just trying to figure out how to get more sealift
capability. I think Andy has done a fine job. I have a "Babes Lite" going now, but it will
be a long time till I get to 1945 in that one. Was not trying to ruffle anyone's feathers.
Andy: Using the word "stuck" in your post is doing yourself an injustice.
I don't need a more complicated Downfall version right now. This is quite sufficient for
my limited capabilities.

(in reply to Knavey)
Post #: 117
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/12/2010 4:07:50 AM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6576
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
Andy's is great. Far better than our efforts. I was just saying that the details for a monster like that are immense. Very hard to take one step without taking a bunch of others - and I wouldn't touch that with a ten foot pole. Way beyond me.

(in reply to NAVMAN)
Post #: 118
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/12/2010 11:13:09 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41377
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
Speaking as someone who has actually touched it with a ten-foot pole, I say enjoy Andy's Downfall scenario. It was a nightmare to put the "more complicated" (nice understatement) scenario together, and it's basically unplayable. Too much stuff crammed into too little real estate.

That's why my attempt at Downfall became my own downfall, and why it never made the offical scenarios list.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 119
RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied - 6/12/2010 3:32:53 PM   
Grit


Posts: 142
Joined: 4/7/2010
From: North Carolina
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

And until someone wants to do a 'real' downfall scenario I guess you are stuck with mine but if John or anyone wants to do a better arttempt feel free


Downfall is great fun, isn't that what it's suppose to be about? It's the most fun I've had playing the game.

People can criticize all day. If you can do better then fire up the Editor.

_____________________________

Retired Cop

Yes, I do enjoy a tasty jelly donut every now and then.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: Downfall, Buccaneer and Marianas and Ironman Allied Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
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


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.117