Well, I just finished playing a full 41 campaign as the US. My first time playing this game in over 10 years! Had a great time, just a few things occurred that caused an eyebrow raise or two.
- When assigning a destination for a task force, sometimes they are forced off the map and GONE for a quite a while....
(ie- I gathered up the UK CVs about June '42 and tried to send them in support of a landing on Andaman... assigned a leader, home base, move options...the whole nine yards.... next turn...FOOF! they're gone! only to return almost a year later at Columbo, where they started....)
- The old Memory error when inspecting an Air Group on a CV. I'm playing this on Win2K workstation, so memory really shouldn't be an issue... was hoping this one had been fixed, since I remember this one from the old SSI original....
BTW-> Fully patched in windows and the game.
Anyone else having these problems?
Errata and Undocumented Features
I think the British carriers are withdrawn at some point and return later, which is really inconvenient but evidently they are needed in the Atlantic or something. That isn't a bug, it's planned.
"Money doesnt talk, it swears. Obscenities, who really cares?" -Bob Dylan
"Habit is the balast that chains a dog to it's vomit." -Samuel Becket
"He has weapons of mass destruction- the world's deadliest weapons- which pose a direct threat to the
"Habit is the balast that chains a dog to it's vomit." -Samuel Becket
"He has weapons of mass destruction- the world's deadliest weapons- which pose a direct threat to the
Here's a strange one......
Created a replenishment taskforce, sent it out to service
a surface combat TF, all is well..... replenishment TF returns
to Rennel Is. and I just automatically selected disband TF,
wasn't even really paying attention.... selected Y for disband
and suddenly my Surface combat TF was there in port??
It teleported the TF into port when the disband command
was issued???
This was in the 41 campaign and I've been able to replicate
this several times.
I seem to recall there was an old teleport bug in the game
but this had been fixed, is this another undocumented FEATURE.
Regards,
Steve
Created a replenishment taskforce, sent it out to service
a surface combat TF, all is well..... replenishment TF returns
to Rennel Is. and I just automatically selected disband TF,
wasn't even really paying attention.... selected Y for disband
and suddenly my Surface combat TF was there in port??
It teleported the TF into port when the disband command
was issued???
This was in the 41 campaign and I've been able to replicate
this several times.
I seem to recall there was an old teleport bug in the game
but this had been fixed, is this another undocumented FEATURE.
Regards,
Steve
No, it's the same old teleport bug. I don't know that anyone ever claimed it was fixed, though I seem to recall some discussion about people looking into it: I think it turned out that fixing this problem, if possible at all, would require significant rewriting of code, so it isn't terribly likely to happen at this point. You'll just have to trust yourself (and any PBEM opponents) not to abuse this bug.
Some days you're the windshield.
Some days you're the bug.
Some days you're the bug.
A couple of other things ......
The Brits are way to strong in this version, their land forces
especially. I admit that playing a human is infinitely more challenging than playing the AI but still... I captured all of Malaya,Saigon, all of Philipines before Nov 1942.
My usual go to guys in the South Pacific were still battering away at Rabaul (That is the USA and Aussies).
Once I took Manila I transfered it back to Mcarthurs control and a couple of turns later 3 Aussie Divisions turned up in Manila!!
Including an Armoured one.
I know in earlier versions you could get enemy formations turning up in your HQ on your roster but this was very strange.
Anyone else seen this kind of thing?
All those troops and no transports to move them!! Still Manila will never fall now.
Still one of the best programs despite this!!
Regards,
Steve
The Brits are way to strong in this version, their land forces
especially. I admit that playing a human is infinitely more challenging than playing the AI but still... I captured all of Malaya,Saigon, all of Philipines before Nov 1942.
My usual go to guys in the South Pacific were still battering away at Rabaul (That is the USA and Aussies).
Once I took Manila I transfered it back to Mcarthurs control and a couple of turns later 3 Aussie Divisions turned up in Manila!!
Including an Armoured one.
I know in earlier versions you could get enemy formations turning up in your HQ on your roster but this was very strange.
Anyone else seen this kind of thing?
All those troops and no transports to move them!! Still Manila will never fall now.
Still one of the best programs despite this!!
Regards,
Steve
I read postings such as Steve's and wonder how some allied players can advance so quickly in 1942. An advance up the Solomons and across PNG is one thing, but invading the Philippines is another. I would be interested in knowing how it’s done, especially given the rather limited number of allied CVs and LCUs available in 1942. For a 1943-44 invasion of the Philipines, the allied player has numerous fast carrier TFs to blunt Jap air power along with air-groups of P-47s/P-51s to maintain air superiority. Achieving this with a small number of carriers (w. Wildcats) and P-40s seems almost impossible.
Malaya seems (to me) to be a tough nut to crack, given the terrain and supply situation. Take Rangoon for instance: the Japanese can garrison the base with several divisions, making it very difficult/costly to take. In my current AI game (v3.1) the British units are not strong enough to drive the Japanese across Indochina!
I must be missing something - maybe my game-play lacks aggression? I think I might run a new game and go for broke.
Cheers
Dan
Malaya seems (to me) to be a tough nut to crack, given the terrain and supply situation. Take Rangoon for instance: the Japanese can garrison the base with several divisions, making it very difficult/costly to take. In my current AI game (v3.1) the British units are not strong enough to drive the Japanese across Indochina!
I must be missing something - maybe my game-play lacks aggression? I think I might run a new game and go for broke.
Cheers
Dan
Nomad is correct, take Jitra and Malaya will fall.
I usually evacuate what I can from Singapore to Palembang at the start and will send in my fighters to singapore for about six turns....usually until just before it falls to the japs, this builds up the fighters experience, these then get sent to East Indies.
I use the transports the Brits have to rush troops to Rangoon, by the time the japs arrive I can usually hold it, all Battleships etc are sent there on Bombardment to help hold Jap readiness down.
Then I will make a landing at the base just south of Rangoon, the Japs commit three divisions to Rangoon and if you identify these in place at Rangoon then the base just south is undefended...and
so you have just effectively removed three divisions from the Jap forces.
Singapore/Malaya is the same...small landings on empty bases,
the japs move the guards division in, you cut it off, its out of the game.
None of this will work against a human opponent, trust me you'll be given a fair hiding.
My point was about the imbalance in the British theatre of operations, with previous versions of the game I could never achieve much in the Indian Ocean theatre,it ended up pretty much as a stalemate until late in the war (just as it historically was). But now the strongest drive is from this theatre..trust me
the Poms taking the Philipines seemed a little weird!!
I would like to see that base to the south of Rangoon either removed or made landlocked so that landings there are not possible, it would then serve the Japanese as a supply depot to
help there drive and not end up as the door to a trap that effectively ends their war in India.
These are only minor gripes and against a human player most will make no impact at all, its just to help the AI that little bit more.
By the way I would be interested in hearing other players opening gambits and ideas for helping the AI that little bit more without necessarily resorting to hamstringing the player.
Things like changing that base, spreading the oil amongst a few more bases, maybe increasing airfield size in a few key areas for the AI would help??
Still, this is a brilliant game....its a shame no one has come up with anything close in over ten years.
Regards,
Steve
I usually evacuate what I can from Singapore to Palembang at the start and will send in my fighters to singapore for about six turns....usually until just before it falls to the japs, this builds up the fighters experience, these then get sent to East Indies.
I use the transports the Brits have to rush troops to Rangoon, by the time the japs arrive I can usually hold it, all Battleships etc are sent there on Bombardment to help hold Jap readiness down.
Then I will make a landing at the base just south of Rangoon, the Japs commit three divisions to Rangoon and if you identify these in place at Rangoon then the base just south is undefended...and
so you have just effectively removed three divisions from the Jap forces.
Singapore/Malaya is the same...small landings on empty bases,
the japs move the guards division in, you cut it off, its out of the game.
None of this will work against a human opponent, trust me you'll be given a fair hiding.
My point was about the imbalance in the British theatre of operations, with previous versions of the game I could never achieve much in the Indian Ocean theatre,it ended up pretty much as a stalemate until late in the war (just as it historically was). But now the strongest drive is from this theatre..trust me
the Poms taking the Philipines seemed a little weird!!
I would like to see that base to the south of Rangoon either removed or made landlocked so that landings there are not possible, it would then serve the Japanese as a supply depot to
help there drive and not end up as the door to a trap that effectively ends their war in India.
These are only minor gripes and against a human player most will make no impact at all, its just to help the AI that little bit more.
By the way I would be interested in hearing other players opening gambits and ideas for helping the AI that little bit more without necessarily resorting to hamstringing the player.
Things like changing that base, spreading the oil amongst a few more bases, maybe increasing airfield size in a few key areas for the AI would help??
Still, this is a brilliant game....its a shame no one has come up with anything close in over ten years.
Regards,
Steve
-
pasternakski
- Posts: 5567
- Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2002 7:42 pm
Stay tuned ... Pacific War v. 3.2 is on its way. Jeremy Pritchard, who has been spearheading the revision, hoped that it might be available before Christmas, but I never thought that would be possible.
Yoo-hoo! Jeremy! Any news, pal?
BTW, Jeremy was so good as to provide some extensive information and discussion on what he's been up to. Best among the improvements, to me, is his concentration on upgrading the AI by removing its propensity toward stupid offensive moves and adding various alternative strategies (not known to you until you figure them out from what the computer's forces are doing).
Concerns like those being raised in this thread are being addressed, as I recall. Browse back through the old Pacific War threads for more info. Jeremy has always been very receptive to solid ideas for improvement of PW. I think we are all going to like his work product.
This was what Jeremy had to say on December 8:
Here are how things are going for 3.2...
#1. Scenario files: 99% done, only slight tweaking required.
#2. AI files: 50% done. I have completed the basic AI to just about as good as they can get (i.e., be cautious and capture bases you should capture over complete historic aggressiveness, meant for a good game against the AI)
#2b. The two other AI variants done (Japan attacks India, US goes after Formosa), work suprisingly well. All that I have to do is to encourage the IJN to support the Ceylon landings a bit more (they occasionally send the CV TF's, but not as much as I would like).
#3. I am having some trouble in working with the Japanese AI in attacking Hawaii and attacking Australia (2 separate AI's). I just have to figure out the correct ranking of bases that are to be attacked in order to get these to work. As it stands right now, neither attacks even start.
I am not going to go into detail (so not to give away specific AI targets), but will say that the Two alternate AI's that I got to work, work very well. Except for a bit of fine tuning, they are basically done, and are generaly a suprise (they give no hint to the Human player what the AI strategy is until the AI attacks, or SIGNIT is heavily used, and used effectively).
I would hope that the AI will be completed sometime before Christmas. It really depends on how much troulbe the Japanese Australia and Japanese Hawaii AI gives me.
Yoo-hoo! Jeremy! Any news, pal?
BTW, Jeremy was so good as to provide some extensive information and discussion on what he's been up to. Best among the improvements, to me, is his concentration on upgrading the AI by removing its propensity toward stupid offensive moves and adding various alternative strategies (not known to you until you figure them out from what the computer's forces are doing).
Concerns like those being raised in this thread are being addressed, as I recall. Browse back through the old Pacific War threads for more info. Jeremy has always been very receptive to solid ideas for improvement of PW. I think we are all going to like his work product.
This was what Jeremy had to say on December 8:
Here are how things are going for 3.2...
#1. Scenario files: 99% done, only slight tweaking required.
#2. AI files: 50% done. I have completed the basic AI to just about as good as they can get (i.e., be cautious and capture bases you should capture over complete historic aggressiveness, meant for a good game against the AI)
#2b. The two other AI variants done (Japan attacks India, US goes after Formosa), work suprisingly well. All that I have to do is to encourage the IJN to support the Ceylon landings a bit more (they occasionally send the CV TF's, but not as much as I would like).
#3. I am having some trouble in working with the Japanese AI in attacking Hawaii and attacking Australia (2 separate AI's). I just have to figure out the correct ranking of bases that are to be attacked in order to get these to work. As it stands right now, neither attacks even start.
I am not going to go into detail (so not to give away specific AI targets), but will say that the Two alternate AI's that I got to work, work very well. Except for a bit of fine tuning, they are basically done, and are generaly a suprise (they give no hint to the Human player what the AI strategy is until the AI attacks, or SIGNIT is heavily used, and used effectively).
I would hope that the AI will be completed sometime before Christmas. It really depends on how much troulbe the Japanese Australia and Japanese Hawaii AI gives me.
Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
-
pasternakski
- Posts: 5567
- Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2002 7:42 pm
Originally posted by stretch
I think it's safe to say that we all love Jeremy (in a platonic sense) for his efforts. I'm going to drop everything and fire up another game when 3.2 comes out. I can't think of any other computer game I have played off and on for 10 years.
Amen to that. UV is what it is, and WITP will be what it will be, but, as Eddington says about Torrey to his snot-nosed kid in "In Harm's Way," "A real sailor like your old man only comes along once in awhile." PW is the real game that only comes along once in awhile.
Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
There wouldn't be to many games in existence that have had the legs of this one, I wonder if Gary Grigsby is aware that it is still going strong?.
I wish he could capture the magic again... Steel Panthers etc were brilliant games but they lack that certain magic that Pacwar has.
Less candy more substance makes for a great wargame (actually any game).I was having a couple of coldies two days ago talking with a few mates about the great stuff that was on the Commodore 64, Apple etc and how many programs today can't cut it.... too much eye candy not enough game was the general consensus on todays releases.
This different AI for different game play is a great idea, I use to dream of a Steel Panthers type game with two CD's one for the game itself and one dedicated to AI routines. I'm sure quite a few of you wouldn't mind the computer taking extra time to execute its move if that move was part of a really good and challenging game, after all playing Pacwar by email or even hotseat can mean waiting quite some time.
On another subject..... removing that US P-40 squadron from Kunming is one of those little changes that could help the Japs.
I send it straight to Singapore along with the Clark Field fighters and with its 75 point experience it sure cuts the Japanese bombers to bits and helps the other squadrons to survive and rebuild.Its removal wouldn't change things dramatically but it would help in the early months. (yes, I could just leave it in Kunming myself as a rule but I'm a weak individual who is easily tempted!!! Jeremy must be strong and remove temptation from me!!).
By the way did that unit ever serve in the pacific theatre other than in China?? I seem to recall many of the pilots went to Europe
when America enterd the war or it could be the other way round...pilots serving in europe before America entered the war may have ended up there.I'm certain someone out there will know.
Regards,
Steve
I wish he could capture the magic again... Steel Panthers etc were brilliant games but they lack that certain magic that Pacwar has.
Less candy more substance makes for a great wargame (actually any game).I was having a couple of coldies two days ago talking with a few mates about the great stuff that was on the Commodore 64, Apple etc and how many programs today can't cut it.... too much eye candy not enough game was the general consensus on todays releases.
This different AI for different game play is a great idea, I use to dream of a Steel Panthers type game with two CD's one for the game itself and one dedicated to AI routines. I'm sure quite a few of you wouldn't mind the computer taking extra time to execute its move if that move was part of a really good and challenging game, after all playing Pacwar by email or even hotseat can mean waiting quite some time.
On another subject..... removing that US P-40 squadron from Kunming is one of those little changes that could help the Japs.
I send it straight to Singapore along with the Clark Field fighters and with its 75 point experience it sure cuts the Japanese bombers to bits and helps the other squadrons to survive and rebuild.Its removal wouldn't change things dramatically but it would help in the early months. (yes, I could just leave it in Kunming myself as a rule but I'm a weak individual who is easily tempted!!! Jeremy must be strong and remove temptation from me!!).
By the way did that unit ever serve in the pacific theatre other than in China?? I seem to recall many of the pilots went to Europe
when America enterd the war or it could be the other way round...pilots serving in europe before America entered the war may have ended up there.I'm certain someone out there will know.
Regards,
Steve
-
pasternakski
- Posts: 5567
- Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2002 7:42 pm
-
Jeremy Pritchard
- Posts: 575
- Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Ontario Canada
The AVG was changed to the 23rd FG once war began and remained in the China-India-Burma theatre throughout WW2. I have heard accounts of it being good in some and mediocre in others.
I don't think I will remove it, as it played an important role in developing Allied Air power in the region in WW2, although it was not a show stopper (the AVG was heavily deployed in the 1942 Burma Campaign but did not do much damage to the IJAAF).
The AVG had most of its success in China, where they were up against comparatively weak IJAAF forces, which by 1941 equalled as many planes as was sent to Burma (however spread out throughout North, Central and South China). It might be that the AVG success was due to their high quality, or the regional quality of China's IJAAF forces.
Possibly the AVG will have lowered experience, to around 70, so it won't be as a tough group. I also might change/fix the USAAC fighter groups at Hawaii that are so large that bringing them up to 90 experience is very easy by early 1942. I will possibly give their planes to another USAAC group (that would appear soon and serve in the same theatre) at Pearl Harbour.
I don't think I will remove it, as it played an important role in developing Allied Air power in the region in WW2, although it was not a show stopper (the AVG was heavily deployed in the 1942 Burma Campaign but did not do much damage to the IJAAF).
The AVG had most of its success in China, where they were up against comparatively weak IJAAF forces, which by 1941 equalled as many planes as was sent to Burma (however spread out throughout North, Central and South China). It might be that the AVG success was due to their high quality, or the regional quality of China's IJAAF forces.
Possibly the AVG will have lowered experience, to around 70, so it won't be as a tough group. I also might change/fix the USAAC fighter groups at Hawaii that are so large that bringing them up to 90 experience is very easy by early 1942. I will possibly give their planes to another USAAC group (that would appear soon and serve in the same theatre) at Pearl Harbour.
-
pasternakski
- Posts: 5567
- Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2002 7:42 pm
After reading a bit on the AVG I guess it should be in there.
If it had only served in China, removing it wouldn't be such a stretch as the Chinese theatre is non existent in the game, but
it did serve in Burma so fair enough. Reducing the experience could be an elegant solution though.
Any chance of Moulmien being made landlocked Jeremy?? It may not be strictly historical but it sure would help the Japs in Burma, as I mentioned earlier it currently makes it fairly easy to trap a sizable chunk of the Japanese forces. Then again you could also garrison it with a nasty surprise for people like me!!
I wouldn't know how hard/easy the change would be but it would be an aid to the AI, and if something helps the AI it makes the game that much better in my opinion.
I'm eagerly awaiting the next installment with the varying AI profiles... Cry Havoc !!! I say.
Regards,
Steve
If it had only served in China, removing it wouldn't be such a stretch as the Chinese theatre is non existent in the game, but
it did serve in Burma so fair enough. Reducing the experience could be an elegant solution though.
Any chance of Moulmien being made landlocked Jeremy?? It may not be strictly historical but it sure would help the Japs in Burma, as I mentioned earlier it currently makes it fairly easy to trap a sizable chunk of the Japanese forces. Then again you could also garrison it with a nasty surprise for people like me!!
I wouldn't know how hard/easy the change would be but it would be an aid to the AI, and if something helps the AI it makes the game that much better in my opinion.
I'm eagerly awaiting the next installment with the varying AI profiles... Cry Havoc !!! I say.
Regards,
Steve