RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Like To Try It?

Matrix Games Forums

Ageod takes you back to the Civil War

Battle Academy iPad and PC 50 per cent off!

Close Combat Last Stand Arnhem v5.60.53 update

Allied Corps Walkthrough playlist and AAR

Conflict of Heroes: Ghost Divisions Released!

Pandora Beta Playthrough Videos

Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941 Announced!

Great Battles Medieval coming to your tablet with a 50 per cent off launch sale!

Matrix Games / Slitherine / AGEOD are recruiting AGAIN!

Battle Academy: Blitzkrieg France Let's Play Video

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Like To Try It?

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Classic (Free) Games] >> Pacific War: The Matrix Edition >> RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Like To Try It?

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Lik... - 5/7/2013 10:28:43 PM

zeke99

Posts: 338
Joined: 11/26/2005
Status: offline

The Cptn is right, I meant per turn.

I checked last turn #117
A6M production 47, Ki43II production 55
oil 198000, resources 888000

I take the A6M as example as they are training only. I should get 47 ac per turn but the pool increases by max 10 per turn. It looks like the production does not get into the pool or only a fraction of factory capacity is produced.

Anyway, the effect is that the game becomes totally frustrating as nearly no ac action is possible

(in reply to bradk)

Post #: 31

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Lik... - 5/8/2013 1:30:16 AM

Skipjack_

Posts: 164
Joined: 12/7/2008
Status: offline

quote:

4) I"m not sure what version the two of you are playing. However, after sereral games playing both sides and with input from players some aircraft production was adjusted in later versions. Also I believe I have the non usable factor problem fixed.

I also wonder if we are playing an older version of the scenario. I noticed this in the "Details of Changes" document:

quote:

Bases
Anchorage - Juneau - Seattle march paths removed.

I started a game vs the computer to test out how the scenario works, and I see the march paths in Alaska are indeed gone. In our game, they are present.

Zeke, does the version of the scenario appear on the scenario select menu when you bring it up?

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Skipjack_ -- 5/8/2013 1:33:49 AM >

(in reply to zeke99)

Post #: 32

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Lik... - 5/8/2013 3:59:14 AM

zeke99

Posts: 338
Joined: 11/26/2005
Status: offline

No, my is Version 1.00 which is strange as I recall that we swapped the version zip at the start to avoid playing different versions

Just checked, I have an other folder with Brad's Version 1.05 D12

< Message edited by zeke99 -- 5/8/2013 4:01:41 AM >

(in reply to Skipjack_)

Post #: 33

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Lik... - 5/8/2013 12:10:48 PM

bradk

Posts: 270
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline

V 1.00 very experimental. I'm to 1.061 now.

Since Zeke is playing IJ, his obc controls.

First turn production

A6M2

V 1.000, two factories, 18 and 15, total 33
V 1.061, two factories, 21 and 15, total 36

Ki 43

V 1.000 14
V 1.006 24

Total aircraft factories
V 1.000 20
V 1.061 22

Lots of variation in what happens in a game. I ran probably a dozen AI vs AI games (with production set to human) to try to determine some sort of average results.

It would take probably an hour or more to get the data but I after evaluation of early versions I also increased the number of aircraft in to be activated airgroups.

Rough estimate is between higher initial production and an additional fighter factory (one of the additional factories mentioned is a bomber factory) that the newest version in 190 turns produces about 3000 more IJ fighter aircraft than produced the in Zeke/Skpjack game. I can't even make a rough estimate of how many more are available due to increases in the number of aircraft new airgroups activate with but its much less than the production increase.

----------------

Initial Allied Production.

F4F
V 1.000 23
V 1.061 21

P39
V 1.000 23
V 1.061 21

P40
V 1.000 20
V 1.060 22

P39 Export
V 1.000 1
V 1.061 3

P40 Export
V 1.000 1
V 1.061 3

I can see why Zeke is highly unhappy and Skipjack somewhat unhappy. Obviously I was unhappy with it after testing, which is why the changes were made.

I hope its noticed here that coming up with initial production numbers like 18, 21, and 22 is indicative of a close study and evaluation. I think it a lot of cases a decision would be made that "its about 20, let's make it 20". I wanted to be more precise than that.

(in reply to zeke99)

Post #: 34

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Lik... - 5/9/2013 3:40:31 PM

Fishbreath

Posts: 22
Joined: 2/2/2012
Status: offline

As before, I'm always happy to host files should you release another version.

(in reply to bradk)

Post #: 35

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Lik... - 5/9/2013 8:54:39 PM

Capt. Harlock

Posts: 3690
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

What's that airfiled in the So Pac that can be built up to level 8? Don't remember the name.

I believe you're thinking of Espirtu Santo. Note, though, that Fiji also fits that description, and it's not out of reach for an aggressive/skilled Japanese player. Having both those and stocked with Netties would really put a crimp in the Allied counter-attack!

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to bradk)

Post #: 36

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Lik... - 5/10/2013 4:05:57 AM

bradk

Posts: 270
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishbreath

As before, I'm always happy to host files should you release another version.

Thank you. Will send when available. I expect to return to work on this at some point.

I received a suggestion to increase the exp of Indian LCUs. I was doing some experimentation with that when real life got in the way. Hate it when that happens!

Athough not an issue except with an aggressive and successful IJ player, Matrix changes placed Seattle in the Artic combat zone, air bascially doesn't work. I suspect is a side effect of drawing a box that includes the northern Japanese islands. I inquired whether anyone kenw how to fix that (apparently requires and exe edit) but have had no luck with that.

Would also prefer some suggestions from those who have played the latest version.

(in reply to Fishbreath)

Post #: 37

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Lik... - 5/10/2013 4:07:08 AM

bradk

Posts: 270
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

quote:

What's that airfiled in the So Pac that can be built up to level 8? Don't remember the name.

I believe you're thinking of Espirtu Santo. Note, though, that Fiji also fits that description, and it's not out of reach for an aggressive/skilled Japanese player. Having both those and stocked with Netties would really put a crimp in the Allied counter-attack!

I know there's something down there but didn't check prior to posting.

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)

Post #: 38

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Lik... - 5/10/2013 10:52:50 PM

bradk

Posts: 270
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skipjack_

On the plus side, getting the F6F in April was a big improvement.

The F6F activating on carriers before it could be selected for production is an error not in all Matrix scenarios, but apparently in the ones people prefer to play. The production availability date for all scenarios I've checked is the same BUT the carrier activation dates are different.

What I think happened is there was a base scenario from which others were derived, and the carrier activation date in some was changed. It was not noticed that the new activation date of carriers with F6Fs was before the production availability date of F6Fs. One of those things that happens when a change affects other things.

There's an IJN carrier that has a similar problem, which I fixed at some point by giving it an older aircraft that was in production.

In the newest version, when a new aircraft activates the first few airgroups activate with their maximum number of aircraft. Over time, new airgroups with that aircraft activate with fewer aircraft, and fill out from production. The change occurs gradually, for example, USMC fighter groups have 24 of a new aircraft shortly after activation, after a few months get 14, and then eventually activate with 4.

SSI uses a similar method. Matrix scenarios give almost all Allied airgroups a full complement upon activation which adds something like 10,000 aircraft to the game versus SSI, while leaving IJ on the SSI method.

(in reply to Skipjack_)

Post #: 39

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Lik... - 5/10/2013 10:56:53 PM

bradk

Posts: 270
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline

Although availability has been increased since V 1, I'm wondering how the two of you are doing on patrol aircraft.

For those not familiar with the scenario, there are no factories for patrol aircraft. The game automatically produces one per turn even with no factory, and the rest are provided by an initial pool and those that come with new airgroups. There are no combat losses on these aircraft, however, they can be destroyed in a air attack on a base. Also, if a base where they are located is captured, many are lost. I estimated enough to cover a couple of catestrophic events (like loss of a base) a year.

(in reply to bradk)

Post #: 40

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Lik... - 5/13/2013 3:11:29 AM

Skipjack_

Posts: 164
Joined: 12/7/2008
Status: offline

I have been careful (and fortunate) to not lose patrol squadrons when bases fall. So no issues with PBY availability.

(in reply to bradk)

Post #: 41

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Lik... - 5/13/2013 10:39:52 PM

bradk

Posts: 270
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skipjack_

I have been careful (and fortunate) to not lose patrol squadrons when bases fall. So no issues with PBY availability.

Cool. That's consistent with, for example, with Nimitz instruction that if Midway was in danger of falling to bring out the heavy stuff. This is the sort of behavior the scneario is intended to encourage.

Thank you for the information. The number of patrol aircraft to provide was a very difficult estimate.

(in reply to Skipjack_)

Post #: 42

RE: Multi Dimensional Scenario Available, Would You Lik... - 6/17/2013 7:11:07 PM

Ranger-75

Posts: 587
Joined: 6/29/2001
From: Giant sand box
Status: offline

I looked at the aircraft chart and I don't know where you decided on the ludicrously short ranges for the USN carrier planes from. Ex the F4F's range of 845 mi was 2/3 of the A6M 1260 miles, but you have the F4F at 1/2 the range. And it gets worse.

_____________________________

Still playing PacWar (but no so much anymore)...

(in reply to bradk)

Post #: 43