Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

War in the Pacific Release thread

 
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] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII: World at War >> MODS and Scenarios >> War in the Pacific Release thread Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/13/2021 10:16:43 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 823
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
Version .815

Version Notes .815

OBSOLETE Hotfix version .814

[Forgot to increase turn lengths in the description below from an early alpha value. Also recalculated the expected tech times in accordance with the correct # of turns per year.]

~~~~~

Strategic Command WitP Beta Version Notes
-----------------------------------------------------

OK, here it is, the long-awaited Pacific Theatre scenario. I copied over and changed a bunch of default scripts, and added a few of my own; it is quite likely some may have the wrong countries, hexes or dates or something, so just bear with the process.

Files:

* Put the Campaign Folder & Campaign Files into your MY Games Campaign USER folder for SC: WaW (i.e. NOT into the default game directory, which is for official campaigns that came with the official install).

* The Land Combat Table is simply an easy way to see the land combat changes that I've made.

* Vanilla AI Files: Pacific AI scripts from the default 1939 campaign copied over AS IS (i.e. will require quite a bit of work to convert them to this map & scenario).

* This file

* Listing of militia spawn events (typically triggered only by the close approach of one or more enemy units)



OK, here it is, the long-awaited Pacific Theatre scenario. I copied over and changed a bunch of default scripts, and added a few of my own; it is quite likely some may have the wrong countries, hexes or dates or something, so just bear with the process.

***TWO IMPORTANT NOTES***:

1. There are **NO AI scripts** (as explained below). If you attempt a game vs. the AI, it basically won't do much of anything other than short range attacks, reinforcements, and upgrades.

2. This is essentially a beta at the moment, and will need some additional playtesting to get the balance right and squash any remaining bugs.

3. I am using SIPRES' counter set for Crispy's Fall Weiss series of scenarios (since the scale is corps & divisions). The use of any other counter set may have weird effects with units having the wrong NATO symbols...


Changelog

1. The map. This is officially been built upon the efforts of samspackman, who in turn based it off of Gary Grigsby's War in the Pacific AE map. The hex grain is opposite in SC than it is in WitP, but he did a good job reconciling the two schemes. I basically added all the ports, roads and railroads, quite a few new island bases, and used lake hexes to create atolls, which visually worked out pretty well I'd say. For playability reasons I made Borneo a separate country to give it is own convoy line; this will minimize the issues of the DEI's oil being in one basket, but will provide yet another target for Allied subs outside of the 8 lane highway in the South China Sea. Korea is now a conquered country, also allowing for a convoy route.

The scale is 40 statute miles per hex. The United Kingdom is on the map-in the extreme NE corner of the map, with 2 sets of 4 loop hexes each. Decided adding Germany would be too much of a pain, given that her contributions to the Pacific involved just a few commerce raiders & u-boats. Italian East Africa was British by the start date.

2. Weather. Based this as best I could off of Wikipedia data for all major cities. You'll likely find China to be much wetter than in vanilla; it may not be raining a lot on any given day, per se, but in quite a few areas there was often fog to deal with. I put in the Intratropical Convergence Zone (the equator itself is indicated by a red line across the map); basically +/- 4 hexes north and south of the equator will get a lot of rain and mud. Zones were extensively interconnected; interesting to see how that works out.

3. 9 day turns, alternating, so effectively 18 days between each player turn, 20 turns per year per player. Simultaneous gives a huge edge to the first player (Axis) in terms of knowing what his opponent's weather will be like, and, unlike in say WiF, there is no mechanism for the initiative to flip. Income has been normalized to 28 days; the US will outproduce Japan (at the latter's high water mark) at about a 2:1 ratio (500 to 250), which is likely Japan-friendly and thus subject to a US-favorable tweak in the future.

4. Tech operates on 32221 for levels 1-5 respectively, either 2 or 3 max chits depending on the tech, price reduced a bit per chit to compensate (~70-80% of vanilla's costs). I disliked vanilla's all or none approach to the key techs; sometimes you want a tech to percolate along at a low but not null level when other things have more priority (this is actually how SC used to operate note, with up to FIVE chits possible per category). Vanilla's 2nd chit also was too unbalancing, allowing one to get something in ~6 months. Correlated to the turn length, 1 chit progression [for levels 2-4] will be ~2 years, ~9 months slower than vanilla's single chit; 2 chits will take ~1 year, 3 months faster than vanilla's single; 3 chits will take ~8 months, ~2 months slower than vanilla's 2.

Japan has some early advantages, such as w/ Long-Range Air & Naval Weaponry (reflecting the Long-Lance and derivatives), while the US gets an edge in Spying & Intelligence as well as in the industrial techs. Catchup & S&I bonuses will count for more proportionally than in vanilla given the lower chit % levels. Since the 2 chit investment will be more expensive than the vanilla single chit investment AND I left the maximum MPP investment levels more or less unchanged, this will require more judicious choices and will hopefully cut down on the "everybody has Level X in every key tech" syndrome that so often happens late in games.

Got some new tech goodies in store tho. I used Crispy's Production techs to good use, replacing his Armor one with a Naval one. This means that if you want more planes or ships, you will have to spring for these techs. This will model the Japanese issues involving pilot training & engine shortages on the one hand, and limited slipway/dock availability for new ship construction & existing ship upkeep on the other. Amphib Tech will also increase the build limits of Special Forces. Fighters now have Ground Attack capability (with some antiship bonuses), and Subs have AA (at half the effectiveness as surface ships, but with 3 levels available). HQ's have Infantry Weapons, in case they end up having to act as defenders somewhere.

Tech descriptions are now much more specific, esp. in terms of the numerical bonuses provided.

I decided to use an otherwise empty slot for Radar Technology (2 levels for the moment, max 2 chits 140 cost per chit). US & the UK start with level 1. This provides several benefits to certain units:

Fighters get a +0.5 bonus per level to their attack factors vs. Bombers and Carriers (but not other fighters). Since 90% of the time this will be during interceptions, I think that will work out ok even tho it would also give them extra power when strafing/bombing said units. [The game makes no distinction between either, tho terrain can help with defense]

Surface combat ships get a +0.5 bonus per level to their Naval Attack levels vs. other surface ships (to reflect the advantage of gun-laying radar directors).

Carriers get a +0.5 bonus per level to their Defense against all air units. [I considered applying it to their attack factors but unlike fighters those are used in both interceptions, escorts, AND bombing, which would make it too unbalancing. But Carriers don't get any AA OR Fighter Tech bonuses, so this provides a way to maintain their survivability as the war goes on.]

Submarines get a +0.5 bonus per level to their Naval Attack ratings against all other surface ships, + 2 MPP Raid Multiplier/+5 National Morale loss per level, AND a 20% evasion chance per level as well [as of .815]. Turns out that this roll is applied to ANY attack against the sub (reflecting for ex. the US SD & SJ radars).

5. In a fit of pique I took off all at-start tech chits, leaving each power with a large pool of MPPs to spend on pretty much anything the heart desires. I disliked in vanilla being stuck with suboptimal choices which didn't fit my strategy, was too confining, which made for predictable play. Now you don't know if your opponent will buy a bunch of ships, tech, or what have you (tho the graphs can give you clues of course). If this proves to be too unbalancing I'll put in a few single chit "must-haves".

6. China: as indicated in some comments I've made about this, there are a LOT more partisan hexes, both supply hits (32; all those are on resources) as well as spawns (71; yes you read that right). Note the front lines are historical; Japan has much less territory than in even the 1939 vanilla scenario. There are a lot of Japanese garrisons available, but of course you likely need many of those for island defense. This will force some tough choices for the Japanese player in terms of where to allocate his limited manpower (the ability to expand the number of front line units is limited, which is historical-toyed with making a Production tech for that, will implement for next version).

7. MPP income: still tweaking this: Japan will need to be increased some based on testing, the Commonwealth nations decreased a bit. The US has a lot more room in terms of Industrial Tech to grow, however. [Went with +15% vs. +25% respectively as of .815, other countries also tweaked, see .815 notes]

8. I also disliked teleporting MPPs; whenever humanly possible, I made a convoy route. The only exceptions are from unconquered countries like Japanese-controlled resources in China. This means tons of targets for Allied subs, but with some for the Japanese to raid as well. [Note I haven't added all Allied routes for countries within the Japanese high-water mark area yet.] Note Japan's numerous convoys do NOT benefit from Industrial Tech...

[There is a bug which has significantly decreased convoy income, will have to wait on the devs for that fix...]

9. Australia has been made a major country. I've gone back and forth on this; one benefit is giving them a Lend-Lease US convoy line, but one pain is that they would have to rely on their own tech, and not the UK's (tho catchup bonuses will help). India is basically in the same boat but I left it at the default vanilla major status (again for now). Thanks to a recent forum post which reminded me that all Aussie supply sources are secondary, made Sydney a primary one (thus allowing full ship repair & refit).

10. Pearl Harbor. I made the start date the historical December 7, 1941 date, with Kido Butai in the historical position 200 miles N of Oahu. An alternate scenario that starts in say October is doable at some point, if the Japanese player wants to avoid a Pearl strike & do something else with his carriers.

11. Land units: corps and divisional level; note the IJA called their larger formations "armies" but in terms of size they were typically the same as the corps in western formations. I wanted to narrow the gap between corps and divisions, so there is currently no distinction between "soft" and "hard" infantry units (i.e. stats are the same against both). Stats certainly subject to tweaking as playtesting indicates; Special Forces may be overpowered but have to balance them against corps and divisions. Note SF build limits can be increased by the Amphib Tech. Garrisons now have 6 hit points not 5 (should make them more hardy when acting as island defenders).

I included a text file in the zip showing the relative land attack & defense ratings in a convenient table.

The Japanese player now has a chance to build some Thai infantry units, which, given the IJA's manpower issues, may be desirable.

Engineers have been given more front-line oomph, good on defense, -2 De-entrenchment.

Scorched Earth is more stringent than in vanilla: cities etc. 50-70%, resources 40-60%.


12. Air units: I had a series of tough decisions to make in terms of aircraft ranges, esp. scout ranges. Right now scouting distances are pretty liberal, going 5/7/9/11/13/7 for fighters/tactical/medium/strategic/maritime/carriers, then +1 per Long Range tech, tho I recently reduced them down to these levels. The issue is that scouting is purely binary: detect everything inside the radius (except for submerged subs), detect nothing outside, but in bad weather detect nothing.

I may cut down said ranges even more if they prove to be too unbalancing, esp. if subs have the unenviable decision to go in fast and be detected, or go in submerged but slow. [Any AI that is developed will thus likely struggle w/ its subs] Naval scouting is also an issue vs. Ampibious Transports, so I set it such that even at +5 tech even Maritime Bombers can't spot a Long-Range Amphib at its maximum movement range from an enemy target (20 + tech). Note one can still scout twice manually, and strike ranges are longer for all land-based air, giving you a chance of spotting units outside of the default scouting radius. All air units have 2 actions; this is to balance them against fleet carriers who have their default two.

I did give all air units more Action Points to make it easier to rebase them, but lowered escort ranges a bit (vanilla gave some very silly extended ranges, kept driving me crazy when a fighter halfway across the map kept escorting my bombers).

13. Ships. Each capital ship counter represents one individual vessel. For Cruisers they represent 2; for Destroyers ~4-6, Subs ~5-8. Escort Carriers were replaced with Light Carriers (switching in Naval Weaponry for Anti-Sub tech; Naval Warfare will still give both types of carriers some small tech bonuses against subs), so there is basically no room for CVE's, which is fine since I dislike having say 20 of the buggers swarming around the map. That was the main issue behind doing double cruisers and etc.; put too many ships down and it will become a massive spamfest. Decided that all of the "tween" Japanese carriers (e.g. Hiyo and Junyo) were to be considered to be Light, not Fleet CVs; they typically didn't operate with Kido Butai due to their slow speed. Japanese carriers have a -0.5 defense penalty to reflect the subpar Japanese damage control. Carriers across the board now have +0.5 extra ground unit attack capability, +5% morale loss, +0.5 for both per each level of Naval Weaponry tech (Resource attack too). I wanted to ensure that they would be effective in softening up enemy-held islands. Naval Weaponry has 3 levels now, note.

The Kongos are now Battlecruisers; the Yamatos are Dreadnoughts, with +1 superior stats vs. default Battleships (Didn't like vanilla's +2 Experience on top of a regular Battleship which would vanish if they took any heavy damage). The US can build their own DN units if desired (the Montanas), also gave the British the Lions but they were virtually equivalent to the Iowas. Battlecruisers were renamed Fast Battleships [.810: to help differentiate the slower prewar US BB's from the faster modern ones]. Ships from Destroyers on up now have overlapping Zones of Control for 2 or more vessels, -8 movement penalty for any enemy which sails into said Zones (as do Coastal Guns). [Thanks to Hairog for his idea here.] As playtesting may reveal, the penalty is subject to either an increase or switching all applicable vessels to single ZoCs. This alas meant that I had to eliminate single unit ZoCs for major land units, which is more than an equitable trade given the heavy naval emphasis in this scenario and the lack of army-sized units on the ground. However, note there are no evasion chances for any ship, including transports (except for shore bombardment, where I have already reduced damage received back). I may expand the number of destroyers to provide the needed screening units. [.815] I instead modded Motor Torpedo Boats to be Destroyer Escorts, giving countries a cut-rate alternative to protect convoy lines.

Discovered that Shore Bombardment by surface ships in vanilla was basically almost completely worthless, so progressively beefed up everything from Light Cruisers on up. All Capital Surface Ships do -1 entrenchment when performing shore bombardment, attack ratings against land targets now range from +0.5 for cruisers up to +1.5 for Battleships & Dreadnoughts. Cruisers now have a better chance of doing damage to installations, and naval defense of (regular) ports has been lessened from 2 to 1 (found it silly to have the larger ships lose 2 points per attack, esp. when cruisers wouldn't do any damage at all). Any units on a resource now have a base 40% chance of being hit when bombarded (or bombed by Strategic Bombers), +10% for each level of Naval Weapons and Strategic Bombers respectively.

After some back-and-forth on ship speeds, I have gone back to vanilla's Naval Cruise setting of 2.0; I was concerned about the "Warp Speed" feature (where an entire fleet can be rapidly zipped over to threatened areas), but discovered during editing that there is a hard cap on normal ship movement of 25 spaces (destroyers). Ship movement rates have been tweaked for average ship class speeds based off of the 25 figure (~.70 of average top speeds, so 23 for a heavy cruiser, which usually could go ~33 knots). Subs as per the historical record are now slower than the combat surface ships, note.

There are no longer any "surprise" penalties, land OR sea--if there is one "traditional" SC feature that I've come to loathe, it's that (the editor misleadingly calls it the "hidden attacker readiness bonus"-should be "hidden defender"). Aside from the silliness of trying to model a low-level tactical situation on a large-scale strategic simulation, units on war footing were very rarely tactically surprised just by sailing or moving into unscouted areas (this is why they had radar, recon units/planes and support ships like destroyers): historically it was MUCH more likely that the "nonmoving" side would be surprised, not the moving, since the latter is typically looking for a fight. The only exception is for subs because of their stealthy profile; cranked from the default 25% to 50%, which seems apropros and will make them more dangerous. In addition, ships no longer get a readiness bonus if they attack before they move (land units still benefit from prepared attacks of that sort however).

I wrote some new decision events, including one on the first turn for the Japanese player to choose 4 more Fleet Carriers over the 1st 3 Yamatos (albeit with a fairly large national morale penalty and a moderate MPP penalty). I also allowed Japan to convert the 2 Chitose-class submarine tenders to Light Carriers.

14. Atomic bombs. I _was_ going to have them replace Rockets & the associated tech (1000 MPP per chit!), until I found out that they are, inexplicably, NOT transportable by sea. Then after testing it (and writing a teleporting script), found out that the range penalties reduced the damage to pitiful levels at the distance from the Marianas to Japan. So I had to go back to using events, but now instead of a ridiculously cheap 600 MPP cost charged in the summer of 1945 when the war is all but over anyway, the US player will have to fork over 3000 MPPs total (-50 over 60 turns) starting in 1942. He also now gets 1 decision per bomb (3 total, including one destined for Osaka in September).

15. Diplomacy will be of limited use in this scenario, so I may limit or even eliminate the number of chits available per side (there typically wasn't the massive kind of wheeling and dealing that happened in Europe, not by the historical start date at least, and w/ most key countries already at war the opportunities would be scarce in any event). Costs per chit have been doubled across the board.

16. AI. Right now none of the AI files have been converted/modified/created. I am deeply skeptical that even a marginally challenging noncheating AI can be made for this scenario, even if I slave away on the Fleet scripts to my satisfaction. [Tech & Purchase scripts & bonus units are easy peasy by comparison] An example of one issue that no script can remedy is that damaged ships will beeline towards the nearest friendly port for repairs, even if they are supply 5 ports which can only repair up to strength 8. US ships often end up parked in Russian ports as well-in both cases they'll simply languish there (Aleutians too) for the rest of the game if they are far enough away from the main battle areas. With the necessary reduction in turn income the AI may be less inclined to buy expensive stuff (i.e. carriers and battleships). Even if you don't peek at the Fleet scripts the AI in vanilla is pretty predictable, and the time put into crafting a bunch of new ones isn't likely to be worth it.

I decided to provide the Pacific-only AI vanilla scripts in a separate zip, if someone is interested in converting them over. As said the Purchase and Tech ones would need a major reworking, the Fleet & Amphibious a lot of careful thought (and tons of coding) to guide the AI to its objectives successfully.

17. Future: may add synthetic oil capacity for the Japanese along with a penalty to MPPs and/or supply if the DEI is retaken by the Allies (based off of some Crispy scripts). In addition to an October '41 version & a 1937 one, I may add an ahistorical alternate scenario akin to John the 3rd's ones for WitP which give the Japanese quite a few more ships. 2 Ironman ones (for each side) may also be done, but only if those pesky AI scripts get any work by someone...

18. Design limitation frustrations: The biggest one is no stacking. I fully grasp why Hubert did it the way he did it, but it means that a large task force will take up many hundreds of square miles on the map, affecting things like spotting ranges and so on. Already mentioned automatic spotting.
--Elessar 9-13-21


--Elessar 10-17-21

Thanks:

samspackman for his map.

Crispy for giving me permission to use some of his scripts.

SIPRES for his divisional counter set.

Hubert & Bill for helping me to track down & fix some bugs



< Message edited by Elessar2 -- 11/10/2021 11:56:45 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/13/2021 10:17:46 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 823
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
*** IMPORTANT NOTE ***

***** I have included the relevant Pacific vanilla [World at War] AI scripts (i.e. Euro only scripts deleted), copied over _as_is_. *****

***** They will NOT work in the War in the Pacific scenario without significant editing. You have been forewarned. *****


I haven't edited them (other than to delete the Euro ones as said), because I am not sure a remotely competent AI can be made for this theatre. The naval AI basically needs TONS of hand-holding, not all of which can be aided by scripting. On land the AI is relatively more competent, not requiring tons of scripts to be a viable opponent. In particular force composition of task forces is typically suboptimal (whether a fleet carrier joins a tf is essentially a roll of the dice); tactically it can be led into the most obvious of traps; damaged ships typically beeline towards the nearest friendly port, whether it can repair the ship up to 10 points or not, and often if damaged near the Japanese home islands will try to park itself next to neutral Russian ports, where it will typically languish for the rest of the game (if no script to "rescue" them exists). Transports, as directed by their scripts, usually don't have any escorts and are easy prey as they sail into enemy infested waters, again & again; in one vanilla game I sunk over 50 US warships & 40 transports of various sorts, at the cost of the Musashi and a smattering of destroyers and subs. The other main issue is that the naval system runs the same as the land system does, in terms of combat mechanics, making it suboptimal for naval matters in general.

The only real "remedy", other than spending a dissertation's worth of time to perfect the scripts, is to give it a ton of extra units at higher game difficulties (what the WitP subforum people call an "Ironman" scenario). I have always disliked this "drown the human in endless Zerg rushes" approach because it oversimplifies strategy and demands brute-force operational solutions, but may be necessary here.



Script notes & suggestions for those who might edit them to make them compatible with the WitP scenario follow. Note my suppositions as to how the scripts work may not be the Lord's honest truth; I'd suggest asking Hubert & Bill on the Matrix forum if you have any questions.


General: Most of the work will simply involve matching up the relevant hex coordinates with those from vanilla, and changing them to match the ones in WitP-ALL of those will need to be changed, without exception. I discovered recently that you can open two editor windows, making it easy to match up the corresponding locations on both maps. Any Unit lines may need to changed to reflect the ground unit changes I've made; typically Armies (which aren't modeled on this scale) become Corps, Corps become Divisions. Other scripts will involve more work, in some cases a LOT more work. It isn't a project to be undertaken lightly. I would be willing to help with some of these (Unit, Research, & Purchase), however.


AMPHIBIOUS/AMPHIBIOUS MINOR: The key lines here are the #GOAL_POSITION= ones. The first one is the target enemy hex for invasion. The ones below are the waypoints to be followed to get there. I am not sure how close or far apart they need to be to work.

DIPLOMACY: Empty because-surprise!-the amount of Pacific diplomacy investment in vanilla is typically nonexistent. You can put some in if you wish. Note I made chits cost twice than in vanilla.

FLEET: In conjunction with the AMPHIB ones, absolutely crucial to make the AI at least competent. #GOAL_POSITION= (presumably) works the same as in the AMPHIB scripts, with the first hex the task force's target (is often an empty sea hex, typically near an enemy-held area natch). My biggest bugaboo here is the "#NAME= USA Build Up Fleet - San Francisco -> Japan (1945)" one (and related scripts both here and in the AMPHIB file), which directs the US fleet to sail piecemeal into Japanese waters (whether any Japanese-controlled islands to the south have been taken or not), where an astute IJN commander can ambush them repeatedly. For starters, you'll likely have to expand the #SIZE= parameters across the board to reflect the bigger fleet sizes than in vanilla, else the AI will sail in at a severe numerical disadvantage. Make it too big tho and they may never sail. You can model the US island-hopping strategy here, where capturing one objective can then trigger another script to take the next objective in line; likewise with the Japanese ones, going New Guinea/Solomons/Fiji/Samoa say.

FORTIFICATION: You'll have to re-plan exactly where and in what orientation the forts will go, esp. in relation to each other, mainly because of how the map is a polar projection and not the Mercator that vanilla is based off of.

GUARD: For garrisons of crucial locations. This file is a comparative no-brainer, tho you are of course free to add new ones for places that didn't exist on vanilla's map.

OFFENSIVE: For land campaigns. Yep, only 4 vanilla Pacific ones, not sure why. You'd think there would be some ones for China, for Axis AND Allies, Burma & India as well.

PURCHASE: If you are determined to go all-in, these will require the most reworking, from the ground up, given the ground unit changes. The bare bones approach however would be to make one entry for each country for the entire war. Note the most current one per the activation #DATE= will be the ONLY functional one for a given country at that specific time. Some of the pre Pearl Harbor ones can be safely deleted, but make sure a newer entry exists to supersede the older ones. My understanding (for both these as well as RESEARCH entries) is that a given unit type or tech is "rolled" to be selected (if the % chance is above 0), THEN another roll decides if it gets bought or not (based on the % next to that unit/tech). I would keep ALL entries in both files w/ #SKIP_FUNDS_CHECK= 1 ;this is to ensure _something_ gets bought even if the AI is short of MPPs, else the more expensive units may rarely if ever get bought.

RESEARCH: Also a lot of major surgery required, if you are game for it. Again like with PURCHASE entries the newest one overrides the older ones. Hubert/Bill used a cute trick that they called "Forced Research"--for those entries note the small number of techs with any nonzero numbers, typically with "100 [1]" at the end of them. This is to ensure that critical techs periodically get bought, vs. relying on the lottery in the more typical entries. You can do the same for PURCHASE scripts too, to ensure critical units get bought (CV's...). I'd change a lot of those "[1]" parameters to [2] or maybe even [3] since I added 1 extra chit across the board for most techs. Again a bare bones approach, one entry per country, would be (minimally) adequate.

TRANSPORT/TRANSPORT_MINOR: Relatively easy, just a lot of tedious hex/unit conversions...

UNIT: I already have my edited file in the main scenario folder, for the outcomes of decision events and whatnot; at the bottom you can add as many extra AI units as you wish as you edit the ones I copied over here and/or make you own. (just don't change my entries above the note I put in the main file!). Hubert & Bill's design philosophy is for the "Intermediate" level to be equivalent to what a human player would get (in terms of MPPs & units, as in few freebies, and those mainly no brainers that a human would spring for but the AI may not). Veteran & Expert (for the #LEVEL= parameter 3 & 4 respectively) would allow you to add extra free AI units (in conjunction with the #AI= line), tho the vanilla file I copied them from have some 1's & 2's as indicated. As said, I know they would need a lot of extra ships for starters, carriers & battleships especially; vanilla at Expert only gives the US & Japan AI ONE extra fleet carrier each. Note that some may be obsolete date-wise, but I left them in in case you want to modify the date or location or unit or such. Again, Armies-->Corps, Corps-->Divisions.


If you decide to give these a go of it, please post on the Matrix forums and/or PM me there.

---Elessar

(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 2
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/14/2021 8:52:30 AM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4773
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
Looks like great work here, though unfortunately I can get it into my Dropbox, but can't move/copy/download it from there to place it on my PC. Confusing.

Is anyone else succeeding or getting the same?

_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 3
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/14/2021 1:27:44 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 823
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
Like I said they don't spell out anywhere what the capabilities are (or aren't) of a basic (free) membership. Crispy uses this site which is why I tried it. Will happily switch to another site if their arcane policies inconvenience anyone.

(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 4
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/14/2021 6:58:37 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 823
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
Sigh. I had made a last-minute check of Japanese income by changing their default Industrial Modifier, but forgot to change it back. That's ok, because it will give me a chance to try another site (good ol' Mediafire) which hopefully won't do any more baiting & switching on us:

WitP .801

PLEASE notify me if you got it (or got a runaround or dead end).

(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 5
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/14/2021 8:26:47 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Looks like great work here, though unfortunately I can get it into my Dropbox, but can't move/copy/download it from there to place it on my PC. Confusing.

Is anyone else succeeding or getting the same?

Hmmm..no luck here either.
btw great work Elessar2!
Been waiting for a long time...can wait a little longer :)

_____________________________


(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 6
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/14/2021 11:38:47 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 823
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

Hmmm..no luck here either.
btw great work Elessar2!
Been waiting for a long time...can wait a little longer :)


Try the Mediafire link (unless they also play silly games with access).

Willing to playtest as the Allies (I want to try some things from that side, plus the Japanese side should be massive fun for yes about 6 months...).

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 7
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/15/2021 1:37:34 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
MediaFire worked with ease for the transfer. We are close...

but got an error: FAILED (set_information_map):no such file or directory

Its possible I may not of placed something correctly..not sure. However I have been successfully down loading, placing in the right location, playing and testing Crispy131313 Fall Wiess mod (WiE), Jazon's Polish-Soviet War Mod (WW1) and MdSmall's Balkan Variations and Arab Revolt mod (WW1) with all the iterations during development and in PBEM matches.

Will include 3 images attached.

Like I said..we are close. Maybe its 'driver' error on my part...not sure. Cheers!

Image#1 Opening Scenario screen..hooray so far.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 9/15/2021 1:43:55 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 8
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/15/2021 1:38:31 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Image#2 Opening Screen
btw made 5 attempts..first 3 this error didn't pop up till after I got to picking sides/option page.

FAILED (set_information_map):no such file or directory





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 9/15/2021 3:12:26 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 9
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/15/2021 1:39:40 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Image #3 File Location




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 10
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/15/2021 8:41:10 AM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4773
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
Downloaded it fine thanks, so it must be dropbox was just being a pain.

Unfortunately I've had the same error message on trying to start to play. I've asked Hubert about it.

PS Love the splash screen!



_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 11
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/15/2021 12:48:02 PM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 5117
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
Hey, just looking at the folder structure try moving all the files/folders shown there into the '_War in the Pacific AE.801' subfolder except for the campaign CGN and DAT files.

That should resolve it.

< Message edited by Hubert Cater -- 9/15/2021 12:49:05 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 12
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/15/2021 3:35:21 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 823
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
Including all of the subfolders as well as the Campaign & Localization files. [the extras I'd recommend dropping into another folder outside of the Campaign one]

Glad to hear that Mediafire is working.

(in reply to Hubert Cater)
Post #: 13
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/16/2021 4:21:35 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Well..I did everything as instructed...and got the same error after the second screen popped (picking sides etc)
Its super late..will fiddle with it tomorrow. Perhaps if a screen shot of the exact placement of the extra files is posted..that may help me. Wondering if anyone else was successful and got into the mod?
We will do this thing!

_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 14
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/16/2021 2:06:48 PM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 5117
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
Hi OCB,

The folder structure should look like this and then work as expected, or at least it should as I can confirm I can load it properly on my end when set up like this:


image share


image share

Hope this helps,
Hubert

< Message edited by Hubert Cater -- 9/16/2021 2:07:48 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 15
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/17/2021 12:39:58 AM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 5117
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
It looks like the additional issue is that the campaign name was likely renamed in the File Explorer window and not from within the Editor itself via a SaveAs command.

What happens when you do a SaveAs is the filename of the campaign is stored within the campaign and used to help sort out some path information.

Internally it looks like the filename is still 'War in the Pacific AE', and not 'War in the Pacific AE .801'

If you rename the campaign file, and the subfolder to 'War in the Pacific AE' this should resolve it.

Then in the Editor if you use SaveAs to rename the campaign, that would resolve it going forward.

_____________________________


(in reply to Hubert Cater)
Post #: 16
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/17/2021 2:45:36 AM   
Elessar2


Posts: 823
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
Yep, aarrgghh (I had been saving it in the editor as the default name except when backing it up). OK uploading again...

New version linked in the OP.

< Message edited by Elessar2 -- 9/17/2021 3:16:43 AM >

(in reply to Hubert Cater)
Post #: 17
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/17/2021 3:29:35 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elessar2

Yep, aarrgghh (I had been saving it in the editor as the default name except when backing it up). OK uploading again...

New version linked in the OP.

Was just battling this again lol
Well...I will do a complete uninstall and give it a whirl...late again tonight here in the Pacific NW...glad I just caught this Ellesar2

_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 18
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/17/2021 5:32:03 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Got it!!! Luscious.

Ellesar2....I have been following this work for over 2 years. Great job!
Also samspackman for the initial map work, Bill and Hubert for helping this project along. btw, Ellesar2, coming up with lake tiles for atolls was brilliant.

Want to soak this all in, but I am open to do a multiplayer beta test soon if wanted. (Will be wrapping up a YT beta test multiplayer with Jazon's Polish-Soviet War Mod ver.2.0, and a 7 month WaW YT multiplayer epic campaign with Gaming With The Colonel that should end in a week {gametime May 1947 bitter-end possible stalemate}, and just started another WaW YT match with another YouTuber.) Should have the 'desk' cleared for a new project soon.

Again..this looks fantastic... Thanks

PM me anytime Ellesar2 if interested in a test near future.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 9/17/2021 8:14:59 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 19
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/17/2021 4:50:40 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 823
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
Roger Dodger, glad I got it working. As said I want to play the Allies.

Note there are a lot of new mechanics to test. One concern is that I may have beefed up warship's ground support too much, but in vanilla they're so ineffective it's simply not worth it in most cases (a simple blockade will take down ports and thus land supply without doing any damage directly to your ships, which can end up being -2 strength points each time). I was shocked when I tried bombarding some units which weren't on a resource, and even the bloody Yamato couldn't do any damage to them (other than some minor morale and readiness hits).

In the meantime I am back working on the Euro 20k map (once I iron out the kinks in Italy, which is driving me insane with its crazy coastline).

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 20
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/17/2021 7:34:19 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Regarding Capital Ship detrenching....yeah this will be interesting to see the effects. I have to say that in SC-WW1, I have used Entente DN's bombardment on entrenched Ottoman infantry on the Gaza front for example, with great effect. While not detrenching them, the poor Turks under the guns of repeated shore bombardment can suffer devastating morale hits. It sometimes is just enough, when then combine with land attacks...to dislodge them.

Have been rereading all the pertinent notes on this mod. The China A.O. looks very well done. One of my concerns early on with WaW was how weak China is against the Japanese. So...yeah...here, it doesn't look like China will be such a walk over.

Going to be doing hotseat both sides to get familiar with everything, particularly the naval element....which looks real interesting. ZOC's..good.

Also...Research changes and additions look real good. Also like the change with the pool of MPP's at start.

First test will be to make sure the PBEM server accepts the mod. It should.
However..we both have to have the exact version. One time last spring..when getting ready to multiplayer test a version of mdsmall's Balkan Variations Mod...he had made a miniscule change after sending his latest file. We couldn't get the server to recognize the mod...took a few days before he realized what had happened...sent me a new file with the added tweek... and off to the races we went. :)

Looking forward to rampaging with the Japanese. Maybe a flash in the pan, but who knows what can happen once the guns fire!

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 9/24/2021 6:30:08 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 21
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/18/2021 1:23:32 AM   
Elessar2


Posts: 823
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
I basically exaggerated quite a few of my settings, for more obvious effect. If the sub ambush bonus of 50% is too strong, I can just dial it back. Likewise on shore bombardment or land bombers getting two attacks (in China may be overpowered. On a Pacific island may be underpowered). I will likely be reinventing the wheel as I notice stuff that Hubert's playtesters did several years ago.

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 22
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/19/2021 8:49:30 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Looking real good so far...running hotseat both sides 20 hours +
Shore bombardment realistic. So far sub ambush seems ok.
China real difficult for the Japanese....perfect!
Malayan campaign opening up historical..

Weather around the equator hot humid wet, so bad...as should be. Very complex weather zones. Nice.

Next week should be clear for a pbem test.


_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 23
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/19/2021 11:36:44 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 823
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
As PM'ed locked and loaded.

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 24
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/20/2021 4:29:02 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elessar2

As PM'ed locked and loaded.

We just got a little more training to do....
No worries....We are coming!




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 25
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/21/2021 12:08:39 AM   
Elessar2


Posts: 823
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline

.803 9-20-21:
------------------

Revised some build times & costs (note anything which is not explicitly identified as a corps is considered as a divisional-level unit):

Special Forces 140 MPP
Infantry Corps 160
Cav Division 85
Cav Corps 170
Recon 75
Tank Corps 270
Mech Div 110
Mech Corps 220

Cav Div 3 months
Recon 3 months
Fighters 6 months

Changed the MPP cost for the 4 Shokaku choice from 200 to 350, 4 turns to 7 (since I had added a destroyer to the deal)

Changed the Japanese Industrial Technology bonus per level from 10% to 15% (since so little of their income is from non-convoys)

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 26
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/22/2021 10:17:55 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Elessar2

PM'd password and some additional observations. Flight decks are full of planes and eager pilots. :)




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 9/23/2021 12:03:25 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 27
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/23/2021 8:33:36 AM   
HarrySmith

 

Posts: 27
Joined: 8/6/2019
Status: offline
Hi Guys,
As the Strategic command games are my passion, i was wondering are you still after any beta testers for this Pacific game? Sounds a great game as a smaller scale interest me a lot. I was reading through some of your notes and as an Aussie, historically Australia produced aircraft, ships etc on quite a reasonable level. Therefore perhaps it should be more along the lines of India? I know Tech was used from both Britain and the USA for aircraft etc.

I was wondering if you where thinking also of a divisional/corps scale for Europe or the Eastern front?

Another thought I had was the Korean war or perhaps a more modern conflict like the Israel/Arab wars, cold war etc.
though variations/mods for the existing games sounds good.
Anyway just a couple of thoughts
Regards
Harry

_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 28
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/23/2021 5:34:48 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 823
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
Yes, I have gone back and forth on Australia as indicated in my notes. If close allies could actually share tech, and not just get a piddly bonus while waiting X turns to finally get a level, I'd likely make the switch.

Right now Balthasor & I are about to begin one, but feel free to find another kindred soul and give it a go if you wish.

Oh, wayyy ahead of ya on Europe-I have started work again on the 20k Euro map, specifically trying to get all of the Russian locations down as best I can locate them. Already planned to be run with only divisions. Some screenies coming up there in a few minutes...

(in reply to HarrySmith)
Post #: 29
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 9/23/2021 11:55:36 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Planning to feature the MP mod beta test (from the Japanese p.o.v.) on YT later on. Also going to do a couple of video tours of the mod and put them up sooner.

1st turn was epic! It isn't going to be easy taking down the Allies...but we have plans..yes we do!




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII: World at War >> MODS and Scenarios >> War in the Pacific Release thread Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   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

1.086