Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: 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 >> RE: War in the Pacific Release thread Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/4/2021 9:24:09 AM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4869
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Elessar2

.805 10-1-21:
---------------

First major update. LOTS of changes:

1. The Australians are now a major country (replacing Italy, tho I can't get rid of the pesky Italian flag at the moment). This will allow them to get a Lend-Lease convoy line and to focus their own tech in a different direction than the UK.



A great list of changes!

On making Australia a Major, the quickest and simplest method to do so in the Editor is:

With the campaign open, go to Campaign -> Edit Major Country IDs data

Select Australia, add it to the list of Major Country IDs, and then edit the exact order to ensure that the correct countries are Allied or Axis.

You can also select its Bitmaps here. The UK uses 1, India 7.

This doesn't require any flags or other localization to be changed, it's simply a way of designating who is a Major and who is a Minor in a campaign.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 61
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/4/2021 5:33:55 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 862
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
Hmm that is a good idea. Only worry vis a vis regular air units incl. Maritime Bombers is whether the player would want to use an island slot for a unit which has little combat value. In an area like the Marianas or Marshalls there are enough islands to go around; in a place like Johnston Island there isn't. If we could stack then yeah I'd definitely consider it. Yeah, could give most every island 2 hexes (more than a few do), may do so for some more.

(in reply to kirk23)
Post #: 62
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/5/2021 5:20:26 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 1070
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
After repeated hotseat tests, and both the current (8.07) and previous (8.03) multiplayer tests with you, Elessar...I can not break into Moulmien or even cross the Salween River. Its a supply desert.)

Then I noticed that HQ's can't be chained as in the current WiE and WaW versions. That would solve this problem.
Also its possible that maybe a 5 supply town between Ban Tha Din and Moulmein would help.

Jazon had this similar problem in an earlier version of the Polish-Soviet War Mod for SC-WW1. He made changes in on the map in selt places..but importantly..added the last version so that HQ's can chain supply. Problem solved but still left tough supply situations if another HQ wasn't brought into the critical sector to apply the boost.

For example with chaining..if I had an HQ in Ban Tha Din...and one HQ (Gen.Iida for example) forward just behind my troops that are encroaching on Moulmein..I might have enough supply to break any force down eventually.
In our current 8.07 test..even with complete strateic bombing down of Pegu and Moulmein to 0...my troops at supply 3 to 1 can do little to no damage.

HQ Supply boosting would fix this...globally. Adding towns is a tedious measure but in select cases like this..maybe necessary.

cheers..that's why we beta test




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 10/5/2021 5:34:12 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 63
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/5/2021 6:04:40 AM   
HarrySmith

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 8/6/2019
Status: offline
Hi guys,
Really enjoying playing WITP beta version 8.03. I am playing as Allies against Panzer Rommel playing Japanese.
A few observations made thus far,

Christmas Island you have positioned in The South Pacific where in reality it is South Of Java in the Indian Ocean.

For some reason cant seem to upgrade any Canadian units land or naval.

Built a fort in china with 2 sides and it only has an entrenchment value of 3 instead of 4 in WAW. Not sure if intentional but if so seems strange?

Ports dont seem to offer the same protection as WAW and CVs have a lot more punch with ground attack on land units in reducing their strength. As you have stated the naval bombardment is more effective apart from de-entrenching units, also can reduce unit strength. This seems to work well at this stage.

China appears hard for Japanese player to make a lot of headway.

Overall the game is playing well.

_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 64
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/5/2021 9:42:52 AM   
kirk23


Posts: 2880
Joined: 10/15/2010
From: Fife Scotland
Status: offline
Elessar2

Hmm that is a good idea. Only worry vis a vis regular air units incl. Maritime Bombers is whether the player would want to use an island slot for a unit which has little combat value. In an area like the Marianas or Marshalls there are enough islands to go around; in a place like Johnston Island there isn't. If we could stack then yeah I'd definitely consider it. Yeah, could give most every island 2 hexes (more than a few do), may do so for some more.

(in reply to kirk23)


It comes down to how individual units are setup via the editor, historically it was the job of Patrol aircraft to do the searching, and it was then the job of the Bomber units to then go in and attack any ships etc that the aerial reconnaissance units found. Now if that is the case and you want to make the scenario historical, then having Reconnaissance units with high naval spotting, and other units like Light, Medium and Heavy bombers much lower spotting ability. Also I noticed that all Battleships, Cruisers etc only have 1 Naval Spotting, most if not all of these ship types carried their own aircraft for searching, so I think Battleships etc should have Naval Spotting of at least 2 just a thought. Excellent mod enjoying it immensely many thanks for creating this.

_____________________________

Make it so!

(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 65
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/5/2021 4:04:27 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 862
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

After repeated hotseat tests, and both the current (8.07) and previous (8.03) multiplayer tests with you, Elessar...I can not break into Moulmien or even cross the Salween River. Its a supply desert.)

Then I noticed that HQ's can't be chained as in the current WiE and WaW versions. That would solve this problem.
Also its possible that maybe a 5 supply town between Ban Tha Din and Moulmein would help.

Jazon had this similar problem in an earlier version of the Polish-Soviet War Mod for SC-WW1. He made changes in on the map in selt places..but importantly..added the last version so that HQ's can chain supply. Problem solved but still left tough supply situations if another HQ wasn't brought into the critical sector to apply the boost.

For example with chaining..if I had an HQ in Ban Tha Din...and one HQ (Gen.Iida for example) forward just behind my troops that are encroaching on Moulmein..I might have enough supply to break any force down eventually.
In our current 8.07 test..even with complete strateic bombing down of Pegu and Moulmein to 0...my troops at supply 3 to 1 can do little to no damage.

HQ Supply boosting would fix this...globally. Adding towns is a tedious measure but in select cases like this..maybe necessary.

cheers..that's why we beta test





I had just PMed you when I saw this post. DO you have a 2nd HQ in Ban Tha Din, and is its rating less than the one near the front? What makes you think chaining isn't working? It would be utterly bizarre for chaining to not work just for this scenario. Feel free to post any screenies with the units included (nothing I don't already know, you have at least 3 planes there).

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 66
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/5/2021 4:27:01 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 862
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HarrySmith

Hi guys,
Really enjoying playing WITP beta version 8.03. I am playing as Allies against Panzer Rommel playing Japanese.
A few observations made thus far,

Christmas Island you have positioned in The South Pacific where in reality it is South Of Java in the Indian Ocean.


That's because there are two islands named that. To avoid confusion tho I recently went with the native name for the Pacific one (Kiritimati, tho it has no installation/port). The other one I did give installations to.

quote:

For some reason cant seem to upgrade any Canadian units land or naval.


You must be using an older build, try DLing .807. Next build tho will free their ships (SC breaks the What You See Is What You Get principle when it comes to certain terrain configurations: two land spaces with small sea areas facing each other, as can be seen N of Vancouver Island, make you think you can sail between them, when you can't. I was aware of this issue, but the original mapmaker may not have been. Thought I gave them a route thru Puget Sound however...).

quote:

Built a fort in china with 2 sides and it only has an entrenchment value of 3 instead of 4 in WAW. Not sure if intentional but if so seems strange?


That is amenable in the editor, adding this to my to-do list. [Somehow got toggled down to 3 tho I have no memory of doing so nor any rationale or intent...]

quote:

Ports dont seem to offer the same protection as WAW and CVs have a lot more punch with ground attack on land units in reducing their strength. As you have stated the naval bombardment is more effective apart from de-entrenching units, also can reduce unit strength. This seems to work well at this stage.


That is all because attacking one hex islands an amphib unit only has one shot while at sea (this was a recent change that I only recently became aware of). In vanilla both surface ship and CV bombardment would be very ineffective (just some morale losses), and if you are also out of range of land-based air, you would basically need to have 3-4 amphib units to take out the defenders (esp. if it was a division or a corps and not just a garrison). Ask Balthazor just how easy it is to take them now (three times now the unit survived his initial assault despite almost a dozen bombardments). An amphib assault was definitely NOT something done casually on a shoestring budget, as the war record clearly indicates (read Ian Toll's trilogy on the Pacific War for all of the gory details).

I did reduce ports' defense 1 point because what I was seeing was ships constantly taking 1-3 damage whenever they tried to bombard (and like I said they had little effect). After 2-3 turns of that your entire fleet is trashed and has to sail back to base, along with the poor amphib unit which also struck out on its only shot. If this was out in say Fiji then it will take them half a year to sail back to Japan, repair, and try again...

[Noticed that you agreed with me here]

quote:

China appears hard for Japanese player to make a lot of headway.


That is partially by design. But Balthazor in our most recent game has already taken two towns in the south, and is threatening another. If Japan commits to a specific area of front, they can make headway. Note I want to avoid what happened in TAIFUN's recent AAR where China was basically defeated before Pearl Harbor-the amount of partisans in vanilla is very low, and he also used some Motorized units to get over mountain hexes quickly.

Glad you are enjoying it tho.

< Message edited by Elessar2 -- 10/5/2021 4:42:01 PM >

(in reply to HarrySmith)
Post #: 67
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/5/2021 4:39:19 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 862
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

It comes down to how individual units are setup via the editor, historically it was the job of Patrol aircraft to do the searching, and it was then the job of the Bomber units to then go in and attack any ships etc that the aerial reconnaissance units found. Now if that is the case and you want to make the scenario historical, then having Reconnaissance units with high naval spotting, and other units like Light, Medium and Heavy bombers much lower spotting ability. Also I noticed that all Battleships, Cruisers etc only have 1 Naval Spotting, most if not all of these ship types carried their own aircraft for searching, so I think Battleships etc should have Naval Spotting of at least 2 just a thought. Excellent mod enjoying it immensely many thanks for creating this.


Stacking is the bugaboo tho. Even if you have a small island group with 3 land hexes that you MUST hold onto, can you really afford to put a Air Recon on one of them? The Maritime buffs can do double duty. Don't get me wrong it's a great idea, but on this engine isn't going to work, alas. [Plus if I ever add an AI they will likely struggle with the unit]

I have gone back and forth on the surface ship sea spotting thing; likely the Japanese at least can get a boost there since their doctrine used them for just that purpose. Note tho my philosophy is 1-2 ships per counter (vs. vanilla where they are ostensibly task forces), and I doubt 2-8 floatplanes will have the search coverage that a full CV has. But I'll likely bump them up +2 across the board, +4 for the Japanese.

~~~~

Just wanted to add that any sufficiently large land-based air unit is going to have recon elements.


< Message edited by Elessar2 -- 10/5/2021 6:29:21 PM >

(in reply to kirk23)
Post #: 68
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/5/2021 6:09:19 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 1070
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elessar2

I had just PMed you when I saw this post. DO you have a 2nd HQ in Ban Tha Din, and is its rating less than the one near the front? What makes you think chaining isn't working? It would be utterly bizarre for chaining to not work just for this scenario. Feel free to post any screenies with the units included (nothing I don't already know, you have at least 3 planes there).

Most peculiar. I must be wrong but this these are my observations. In previous tests..I landed Terauchi (6) behind Yamashita (7) in Malaya..and never saw the boost mechanic (Yellow Hex) pop up around Terauchi. Check supply too and it didn't seem to affect Yamashita with a bonus.

In our current MP test ongoing..I didn't send Terauchi up to Thailand...because in earlier hot seats I didn't see a boost either. Now its possible I got Iida (5) mixed up with Terauchi (6) in Ban Tha Din. That probably what happened.

Read your PM about the possibility that the industrial modifier of India may need to be modified down a bit. The starting Allied units in Burma seemed to plug up the Moulmien corridor.


_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 69
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/5/2021 6:21:12 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 862
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
Just tested it, 2 HQs can get front line units up to 7-if all on the road. They go down to 4 if in the jungle/hills however, and it gets worse the farther out they move. Make sure the boosting HQ is in the town, however. Yeah I was unsure of exactly how that worked for the longest time, but the boosting one gets the max supply distributed (other HQ AND units) if it is on a population center. Turns out they can boost other HQs for a fairly healthy distance, 5 hexes I want to say.

I was able to take out an 8 strength (no-HQ, zero entrenchment) Indian corps there, with help from the air force of course.

< Message edited by Elessar2 -- 10/5/2021 6:25:10 PM >

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 70
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/5/2021 6:32:15 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 1070
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elessar2

Just tested it, 2 HQs can get front line units up to 7-if all on the road. They go down to 4 if in the jungle/hills however, and it gets worse the farther out they move. Make sure the boosting HQ is in the town, however. Yeah I was unsure of exactly how that worked for the longest time, but the boosting one gets the max supply distributed (other HQ AND units) if it is on a population center. Turns out they can boost other HQs for a fairly healthy distance, 5 hexes I want to say.

Roger. So...I would have had to drop Terauchi (6) in front of Iada (5)...but get Iida positioned to boost Terauchi at Ban Tha Din in Thailand. I bet I got them mixed up on the road. My apologies here..I guess I needed some military police to sort traffic. :)

_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 71
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/5/2021 11:04:31 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 862
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
Maybe I can loan you General Patton to be your traffic MP...

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 72
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/6/2021 8:34:13 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 862
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
Another build out for the weekend (fingers crossed), after Balthazor & I noticed some issues.

The #1 change will likely be reconceptualizing Motor Torpedo Boats as Destroyer Escorts. I realized I almost certainly will have to do this after he said he would be buying some for anti-sub warfare purposes. I'll have to admit that I have not paid much attention to them, very rarely bought any in vanilla, and simply envisioned their use in my scenario as some budget combatants which might be able to favorably swing a surface battle a bit here or there.

It was only after Balthazor indicated that he would be springing for some that I checked the editor, and saw, to my shock, that they have a 3 ASW default attack rating! But only a 1 Naval/Carrier attack rating (3 vs. Transports tho), and 1 Sub defense rating. I had assumed they were modeled after the American PT boats, which were most useful softening up opposing surface ships. Never dreamed that they were that optimized for ASW. Now, the PT guys would typically bolt on any weapon that they could scrounge up, including rocket launchers, mortars, anti-tank guns, Bofors 40 mm AA guns, and yes an occasional depth charge. But they certainly weren't optimized for ASW in any capacity.

So I could either mod them to be most effective against surface ships, or vs. subs. Except that in the editor they get +1 vs. subs per level of ASW tech, a value which is greyed out (hardcoded), and thus unchangeable. So they'll become DE's. I'll now have to change all of the names around for each country that had them. In combination with that, there will be more subs AND they'll have a default dive % of 40% (which is what Crispy changed them to). Another option would be to disable ASW for them completely, but we likely will have an issue where there may not be enough fleet destroyers to go around when the big battles become joined.

They'll likely be 1.5 ASW to start (level 0), vs. regular DD's which are 1.0; both increase 1 Sub Attack per level, tho I'll likely cap their max levels in Naval Weapons and AA below that of DD's. Speed 18 vs. subs which can go 16, Destroyers 25 recall...

The rest of the changes are going to be bug fixes and various little optimizations: fix Vancouver Island to free the Canadian Navy; flip a few places to Japanese control, check whether artillery needs to be a bit cheaper (default 200 right now), lower Indian income and starting land forces, increase surface ship spotting ranges a bit (IJN +2 over that), lower Russian starting readiness to 10%, and some unit swaps and adds. Good news is that I saw a radar-equipped US sub evade an air attack thanks to its radar (since it apparently doesn't work when a surface ship attacks a sub, I'll likely raise the evasion % there).

Appreciate the bug reports.


I somehow missed this post by Bill:


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

A great list of changes!

On making Australia a Major, the quickest and simplest method to do so in the Editor is:

With the campaign open, go to Campaign -> Edit Major Country IDs data

Select Australia, add it to the list of Major Country IDs, and then edit the exact order to ensure that the correct countries are Allied or Axis.

You can also select its Bitmaps here. The UK uses 1, India 7.

This doesn't require any flags or other localization to be changed, it's simply a way of designating who is a Major and who is a Minor in a campaign.


Sigh. Wish I knew that before I changed it all around (not blaming you! I looked and looked for a way to do what you say here, to no avail, assumed the top 8 countries were all hard-coded). Welp it will take me about an hour to reverse all of that, but no big deal.

(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 73
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/7/2021 1:47:53 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 1070
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Elessar...another map fix is in order for Puget Sound so that sea movement between Vancouver and Seattle can be done. 2 images are going up here. The hex indicated needs to be removed. Its actually the San Juan Islands (where I grew up I must add) The rail lines run along the water anyway..so this fixes that too.

I made a second image using MS-Paint for brevity. If there is a Sea Tile that has a smidgeon of islands..that would be good. But any Sea Tile that fits would work.

I am aware of the north Vancouver Island fix..but this solves Puget Sound..in case you weren't aware. Massive sea traffic goes through there and the islands. There shouldn't be any impediment with that hex to any maritime traffic.

cheers [8D

Image 1 hex in question for revision:




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 74
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/7/2021 1:49:10 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 1070
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Image 2 San Juan Islands-Sea Tile needed: (Artist redention-any Sea Tile will do )




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 10/7/2021 1:54:05 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 75
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/7/2021 5:37:25 PM   
Jazon


Posts: 114
Joined: 8/18/2020
Status: offline
HI!
I have been looking for this MOD with utmost interest. So much, that I can't resist to try even BETA version...anybody wants to play multiplayer with this brilliant scenario? I would like to play for Allies. I am rather good with land combat and green with Naval, but I don't mind. I just want to get the impression of this Pacific Theater. Please PM me folks.
Cheers
Jazon

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 76
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/7/2021 5:47:53 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 862
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
Wait for the weekend update (planned version # .808). Would love to see another AAR, understand.

< Message edited by Elessar2 -- 10/7/2021 5:48:22 PM >

(in reply to Jazon)
Post #: 77
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/7/2021 6:31:45 PM   
CaesarAug

 

Posts: 150
Joined: 6/23/2015
Status: online
A very promising mod, sir! Nicely put together.

One question: I notice that certain ship classes have ground attack ratings, though some with .5 fractional values.
I also checked all tech research and seemingly, no tech gives any bonuses to those fractional values.
As .5 values are rounded down by the game engine, I don’t understand why some ships have .5 ground attacks, which won’t be counted upwards.

But maybe I’m missing something… Can you please explain the reasoning behind it? Thanks!

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 78
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/7/2021 9:25:23 PM   
Elessar2


Posts: 862
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
My understanding is that the fractions DO get used by the combat algorithms, but it is possible that I am mistaken. That would be a question for the devs then. It seems like they do: Balthazor has done innumerable shore bombardments, and cruisers with their new 0.5 ground unit attack factor do get more hits than destroyers with their zero (have yet to see a single one inflicted by the latter), but less than battleships with 1. On my end, figured that no tech will increase the effectiveness of shore bombardment (fire directors are more useful vs. a constantly changing solution against another ship, tho radar might help maybe).

< Message edited by Elessar2 -- 10/7/2021 9:26:25 PM >

(in reply to CaesarAug)
Post #: 79
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/7/2021 10:17:31 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 1070
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elessar2

My understanding is that the fractions DO get used by the combat algorithms, but it is possible that I am mistaken. That would be a question for the devs then. It seems like they do: Balthazor has done innumerable shore bombardments, and cruisers with their new 0.5 ground unit attack factor do get more hits than destroyers with their zero (have yet to see a single one inflicted by the latter), but less than battleships with 1. On my end, figured that no tech will increase the effectiveness of shore bombardment (fire directors are more useful vs. a constantly changing solution against another ship, tho radar might help maybe).

Yeah..the Cruiser's can get hits with the 0.5 ground attack factor. Its perfectly working actually. While the DD's don't..they are perfect for spotting by shelling a town..to see if you get a responce(and see if a unit is there).
There might be a very slight morale hit on the land unit from a DD shore bombardment.

_____________________________


(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 80
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/7/2021 11:06:12 PM   
CaesarAug

 

Posts: 150
Joined: 6/23/2015
Status: online
Oh, how interesting. Thank you both.

You see, I’ve read on these forums that .5 values are rounded down by the game algorithms, hence my query about .5 fractional ground attack values for naval units.

The fact that there are no tech bonuses is fine, it was the .5 base values that intrigued me.

Hopefully a dev might chime in and provide some comment…

< Message edited by CaesarAug -- 10/7/2021 11:07:26 PM >

(in reply to Elessar2)
Post #: 81
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/8/2021 4:20:02 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 1070
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: CaesarAug

Oh, how interesting. Thank you both.

You see, I’ve read on these forums that .5 values are rounded down by the game algorithms, hence my query about .5 fractional ground attack values for naval units.

The fact that there are no tech bonuses is fine, it was the .5 base values that intrigued me.

Hopefully a dev might chime in and provide some comment…

Actually I have read the same thing..back last year when a bunch of us were working behind the scenes to modify the Uber-Arty in SC-WW1 before some dev patches helped tone them down a bit. So I am curious too about this.

_____________________________


(in reply to CaesarAug)
Post #: 82
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/8/2021 7:52:06 AM   
Komeiji_koishi

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 4/27/2021
Status: offline
Excuse me

Only I have this... Bug? Or some kind of compromise?

In the 3D model and 2D counter, the Soviet Union looks like Germany and Japan looks like the Soviet Union

For example,the logo on the 2D counter special forces when using the 2D counter (especially sickle hammer on JP) and the soldiers and vehicles when using the 3D model (such as SOV's German tanks and gray infantry) .It looks strange

(Forgive my poor English, English is not my mother tongue, sorry)


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 83
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/9/2021 12:11:18 AM   
Elessar2


Posts: 862
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline
Yeah "compromise" is the perfect word. It's all because in the tile mod I am using there are mismatches between the NATO sets and the 3D sets. I am using a Euro-only counter set which didn't alas craft a red NATO set for the Russians to use, nor a Yellow set for the Japanese (the counter maker decided to make Yellow for the Russians, oddly enough). I personally use the NATO counters and there Japan looks beyond weird in grey; there is only 8 sets of NATO counters (2 duplicates), one of which (also yellow) hasn't even been converted to the divisional scale.

Notice that the yellow NATO set has a red 3D set (Russians). If I had another divisional-scale set to use that would work well for both graphics modes I would. At best I guess I can craft two versions, one with appropriate units for NATO, another for 3D.

For those eagerly awaiting a new version, had a huge snafu yesterday where the Japanese & Australians got their country IDs all screwed up, then when I thought I fixed all of that the scripts for those 2 countries stopped working. All because I wanted to make Australia a major (which in preliminary playtesting was working great).

(in reply to Komeiji_koishi)
Post #: 84
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/9/2021 6:22:46 PM   
roy64


Posts: 230
Joined: 6/9/2015
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

Hi Harry.
Just to let you know this mod is primarily designed for multiplayer. Take a look at Elessar's notes further up this page and you will see how daunting doing Naval AI scripts will be to do. He says doing his expanded European conflict map mod will be easier to script..

Elessar can weigh in better about this subject and SPing this mod.
I can say hot seating this mod both sides with FoW on works pretty good..just like the old days of solitaire play on the board games. This game is vast enough that not everything can be remembered fully..unless of course..if one has an eidetic memory.

I've tried hot seating but I find it very hard not to cheat I was wondering do you have any house rules that you use to make it more playable?

_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 85
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/9/2021 9:52:39 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 1070
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: roy64

I've tried hot seating but I find it very hard not to cheat I was wondering do you have any house rules that you use to make it more playable?

Rather hard to do since its primarily a Navy oriented mod....you could step away for a day and return for the other side..hopefully being fuzzy of what you did the day before.


_____________________________


(in reply to roy64)
Post #: 86
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/9/2021 9:58:32 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 1070
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Some map changes for South-East Asia...including adding Vientiene, Chang-Mai and dirt roads in the Golden Triangle.
Courtesy of Elessar. I have been testing. It helps ameliorate the Moulmein bottle neck with better supply.
Still very difficult terrain..will take careful planning to conduct operations here




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 87
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/9/2021 9:59:49 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 1070
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Supply Overlay of this area (New Map Change)




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 88
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/10/2021 7:22:19 PM   
Pavia

 

Posts: 41
Joined: 7/8/2021
Status: online
What a barbarity of land. The line of advance towards the capital seems crazy.

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 89
RE: War in the Pacific Release thread - 10/10/2021 8:01:28 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 1070
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
It will still be hard to get to Rangoon..as it should be.
Good planning by the Japanese player can make it happen though.

If Rangoon falls...the curtain drops on Allied units in Burma..and they will have to run like Slim and Vineger Joe Stilwell did to India

_____________________________


(in reply to Pavia)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  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 >> RE: War in the Pacific Release thread Page: <<   < prev  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

0.227