Guadalcanal scenario - winning conditions (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room



Message


Galahad78 -> Guadalcanal scenario - winning conditions (2/14/2010 8:21:48 PM)

I understood from the briefing of the scenario that it would finish on 6th February, 1943. It is 15th February in my game and it won't stop. I have conquered Tulagi, Lunga, Tassafaronga and Rabaul. Do I need to seize Buna or any other bases for the scenario to finish? [&:] The briefing is not clear enough.




Lifer -> RE: Guadalcanal scenario - winning conditions (2/15/2010 3:49:59 AM)

It ends around 2 Apr according to the config button.  Top row second from the left.




Knavey -> RE: Guadalcanal scenario - winning conditions (2/16/2010 8:25:29 AM)

240 turns




Galahad78 -> RE: Guadalcanal scenario - winning conditions (2/16/2010 4:43:41 PM)

Thanks guys!!! Guess I've still some time left to grab some bases [:D]




Lifer -> RE: Guadalcanal scenario - winning conditions (2/16/2010 5:37:18 PM)

Have you seen or noticed that when you spend the PPs to go from Australia Command to SW Pac that you pay a reduced cost but when you change from So Pac Rear to So Pac you pay full cost?  Really slow things down in the eastern campaign for me.  My question for those reading the thread is this WAD?

Greg




Knavey -> RE: Guadalcanal scenario - winning conditions (2/16/2010 5:41:56 PM)

Can't speak for WAD, but I know it has balanced the scenario for my PBEM. If I could have all the troops on the map, I would have won long ago. If my opponent had fuel, he would have won long ago. I think lack of PPs on the Allied side and fuel on the Japanese side makes the scenario balanced.




Lifer -> RE: Guadalcanal scenario - winning conditions (2/16/2010 5:53:51 PM)

What is confusing me is that the manual says that moving units within a command pays a reduced cost.  Full cost is paid outside command.  I just find it odd that Australian assigned units going to SW Pac pay the reduced cost and not SoPac Rear/SoPac side.  I love this scenario as Allied.  A lot of fun planning the PP expenditure and hoarding supplies/fuel for that next push.  Also fun getting bent ships to repair point and scheduling and moving ships into/out of the shipyard at Sydney. 

Another side issue is with some ASW ships not replenishing Mk 20(or is it 22) Mousetraps.  I've got ships wandering around without them in November.




Rob Brennan UK -> RE: Guadalcanal scenario - winning conditions (2/16/2010 6:51:09 PM)

Drat -- I'm in a PBEM mid october and i learn this now ! [:D]..

Time to check out the aussie divisions on the mainland as paying for Noumeas infantry is a PP killer esp if like me you tinker with commanders too much [;)]




Knavey -> RE: Guadalcanal scenario - winning conditions (2/16/2010 8:37:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lifer

Another side issue is with some ASW ships not replenishing Mk 20(or is it 22) Mousetraps.  I've got ships wandering around without them in November.



I have noticed that my SC type ASW ships do not replenish the Mousetraps either.




Halsey -> RE: Guadalcanal scenario - winning conditions (2/16/2010 8:42:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Knavey


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lifer

Another side issue is with some ASW ships not replenishing Mk 20(or is it 22) Mousetraps.  I've got ships wandering around without them in November.



I have noticed that my SC type ASW ships do not replenish the Mousetraps either.



Might want to put this in the tech thread.

Apparently the ship data wasn't upgraded.
Mousetraps, and other asw weapons were mistakenly set on 99 for replenishment.
This one must've slipped through the cracks.
Nice catch.[;)]




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.015625