The PERFECT WAR Mod

Please post here for questions and discussion about scenario design, art and sound modding and the game editor for WITP Admiral's Edition.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

mike scholl 1
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:20 pm

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by mike scholl 1 »

ORIGINAL: MateDow

Have invasion forces following the KB with the targets of Midway, Kauai and Hawaii. The KB should be able to knock out the fleet at PH, contain the air resources of Oahu and prevent the US carriers from intervening. If the US carriers do intervene, that is their loss. Utilize this chain to transfer aircraft into the theater. This will set up a blockade that will starve the US forces in PH. It should also provide a path for resupply that is protected by air cover. Use the battleships that are currently held in reserve in Japan for fire support and to engage any US battleships that might be stupid enough to try and sortie to interfere.


This would pretty much "put paid" to ANY chance of "First Turn Surprise". While it's perfectly feasible to slip a well manned and trained force of warships across the northern Pacific in December, it's quite another to slip several large, waddling convoys of troopships through those seas. They would have to come farther south into the trade lanes, be spotted, and give away the whole show because there is no earthly explanation for their presense except war.

User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by JWE »

I agree Mike. Also disagree with;
The troops for this movement would come from the Philippines invasion. The Japanese would realize that the air forces based in the Philippines are no threat to the seaborne supply lines and use the troops and transports from those operations to support the Hawaiian operations. Use the light carriers assigned to those invasions to cover the Malay operations and maybe a mini-PH at Singapore.
Japan was very concerned with having the Philippines on the flank of their movement South. They would have had to hit the PI regardless of whether or not they hit PH. This was 1941, and the capabilities and limitations of modern weapons systems were still nothing but theory. Japan was scared poopless by the thought of large numbers of long-range bombers based in the locked and loaded Philippines. Whatever else happens, the PI ops are mandatory for Japan if they wish to go South.
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9891
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by ny59giants »

I have talked with John 3rd about what additional roads and rails will be available at start in China, but we did not get into details. What would be feasible?? What about later war having the Burma RR completed to connect Moulmein with Bangkok?? Will new map panels be needed along with modified Pwhex files??

Too much re-positioning of Japanese forces or having too many at sea on Dec 7th would have been picked up via radio intercepts. IMO, you cannot go too far in this direction.
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by JWE »

Hi, ny59giants.

China is a dicey proposition because there's several factors that come into play. Look at manual 4.2.1.1 and you see that clear-developed, clear-cultivated, urban, etc., hexes are "assumed" to have major or secondary roads going in all directions. If you hit the "R" key you will see this has been done explicitly in the map data and most of China looks like a spider's web of roads already.

The problem with dinking with it is that you have several algorithms working (movement, supply flow, (and stacking)). Some are coded in accord with 4.2.1.1, others look at the pwhexe data. If they don't match up, things may not work as desired. So please be very judicious with your changes.The Law of Unintended Consequences is seriously waiting to bite someone on the butt, on this one.
kfsgo
Posts: 446
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:06 pm

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by kfsgo »

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

I have talked with John 3rd about what additional roads and rails will be available at start in China, but we did not get into details. What would be feasible?? What about later war having the Burma RR completed to connect Moulmein with Bangkok?? Will new map panels be needed along with modified Pwhex files??

It depends what the starting situation is, really. There may be more, but there also may be less - the railways between Canton and Kukong, Changsha and Wuhan, Loyang and Xi'an may be damaged to a greater or lesser degree depending on how far the Japanese have reached - there is the point to bear in mind that the Chinese would generally rip them up ahead of Japanese advances, so repairing them may or may not be sensible. Japan may also have been able to get more or less done in two years of war vs four, so you might have gaps in Japanese-occupied areas.

If graduated pwhex files are an option, you also have options in Burma - the Thailand-Burma and Burma-Yunnan railways, and the Ledo, Arakan and Tiddim roads - and India (upgrades to the railways through Assam etc) along with Alaska (ALCAN) and stuff like improvements to the Alice Springs-Darwin land routes, the Pakanbaroe railway in Sumatra, the removal of the eastern railway in Malaya...

Rivers are another possibility. At the moment you either have navigability to 15,000t ships or none at all - there's no helping that, but you can fudge it a bit with coral reefs - add some in an appropriate place and you've got a river with a limit of 100t on navigation, which is not perfect but would at least permit usage by barges, MGBs etc, along with 'fudged' larger river gunboats. Useful in China (the upper Yangtze from Hankow-Changsha-Hengyang and Hankow-Ichang-Chungking), Burma (Irrawaddy), Vietnam (Mekong) and probably others I can't think of. Caveat is that I'm not sure whether navigable rivers are distinct from major rivers for combat purposes - that might be an issue, or it might not.

So, yeah. Options! None of them are capital-C Critical, but it's nice to have'em, since you can take them as far as you want. Personally what I'd do in China is expand navigability on the Yangtze and then deteriorate the road network, which would slow non-rail routes down and push stuff onto boats, but I'm not sure how you'd keep the Japanese from just sailing up to Chungking - Chinese armed junks?
User avatar
MateDow
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2002 12:00 am

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by MateDow »

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1


This would pretty much "put paid" to ANY chance of "First Turn Surprise". While it's perfectly feasible to slip a well manned and trained force of warships across the northern Pacific in December, it's quite another to slip several large, waddling convoys of troopships through those seas. They would have to come farther south into the trade lanes, be spotted, and give away the whole show because there is no earthly explanation for their presense except war.


Why not transports? No different that running convoys across the North Atlantic in December in terms of stationkeeping and vessel damage.

Position them north of their targets to descend on Day 4 or whenever. Even with the increase in US vigilance, there won't be anything in the area to oppose them. Surveillance from KB will ensure that there are no merchant vessels in the area to detect their approach.

Even if there is no surprise, if assume that the US had two days of notice, what would they have been able to do? Recall the Enterprise and Lexington? Once again, you have the US carriers rushing to their doom. Sortie the battleships? Battleships without sufficient air cover trying to engage KB would be suicidal. Air losses for the Japanese would have been more severe, but probably wouldn't change the probability of success.

We always hear what a gambler Yamamoto is; this would allow him to prove it. Success would allow the Japanese to keep the US at arm's length into 1943 as the US strives to build up their carrier fleet. This would allow the Japanese to finish some of that new construction, and keep the US away from the Home Islands longer.

Would it change the ultimate outcome? Probably not, but the Allied player would have to play a much more careful game with all of those new toys.
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9891
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by ny59giants »

The Law of Unintended Consequences is seriously waiting to bite someone on the butt, on this one.

John - 6 years in USN followed by another 6 building part of the fuel systems for the B-1 & B-2 bombers for a government contractor taught me this Law very well. [:D] I will not be doing any of these changes myself, but wanted to mention the possibility of them happening.
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
MateDow
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2002 12:00 am

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by MateDow »

ORIGINAL: JWE

I agree Mike. Also disagree with;
The troops for this movement would come from the Philippines invasion. The Japanese would realize that the air forces based in the Philippines are no threat to the seaborne supply lines and use the troops and transports from those operations to support the Hawaiian operations. Use the light carriers assigned to those invasions to cover the Malay operations and maybe a mini-PH at Singapore.
Japan was very concerned with having the Philippines on the flank of their movement South. They would have had to hit the PI regardless of whether or not they hit PH. This was 1941, and the capabilities and limitations of modern weapons systems were still nothing but theory. Japan was scared poopless by the thought of large numbers of long-range bombers based in the locked and loaded Philippines. Whatever else happens, the PI ops are mandatory for Japan if they wish to go South.

I'm not saying that they ignore the Philippines. Use the real life air assets to suppress the Philippine air fields. After one week, those airfields would be incapable of effective operations. Plus the knowledge that 4E bombers are not effective for anti-shipping operations, would help in this regard. There is no reason to use a large quantity of troops to occupy the ground in the early stages of the war.

Keep the focus on capturing resources and oil quickly, that is what the war was about.

With Malaya and the DEI occupied, there will be no way to keep the Philippines supplied with aircraft and fuel in the quantities needed.

If we assume that the time used for Malaya and the DEI takes until April 1942, would that decrease the chances of the Japanese to capture the Philippines? I don't think it will.
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by FatR »

Answering the non China-related questions first...
ORIGINAL: John 3rd
4. Should there be changes to Japanese equipment? We've had Tank Proposals and some comments about different guns... What is good, solid and dare I say realistic things that could be done?
The thing to remember here - all weapons in the game just cost points in the armaments pool. As the result, once a device is available, it will very quickly fill all available slots. Consequently, Japanese forces will have a lot of Type 1 medium tanks and modern radars in 1943 already... This can be counteracted by only allowing a handful of units to use new devices.

Simplest and most logical ways to utilize the certain increase in production capacity that we postulate I can think of:

1)Speeding up replacement of 6.5-mm infantry weapons with 7.7-mm ones.

2)Introducing a maximally simplified and spartan SMG model into mass production. As a note, a change like this most like requires a serious initial investment into building a large factory to start paying off, a design suited for speedy mass production won't be easy to make in small workshops and factories. Together with the change #1 it should serve to make firepower reduction of the Japanese infantry squad in 1943 less severe.

3)Disbanding separate mortar units and attaching mortars to regiments/batallions normally (introduce them into infantry TOEs, I think primarily to second-rate divisions in place of extra artillery they don't have). This is not so much a change in production as adopting a more sensible approach to deployment.

4)Standardizing weapons calibres and ammo used between IJA and IJN when possible. In Scen 70 we already started doing it, regarding airplaces. Probably accept Army-type flanged 7.7 cartridge (and rifle-calibre machineguns of IJA design for aircraft), 13.2 as the unified HMG calibre for various purposes (as IJA already used some 13.2 weapons, why keep rounds of different calibres in production?). I'm not sure about what calibre use for light AA guns. For those who didn't know, the only relatively mass-produced IJA flak machinecannon, 20mm Type 98, was very similar to IJN's 25mm Type 96, derivative of the same Hotchkiss design in fact. But even Type 98 was produced in really small numbers, less than 1/10th of Type 96 production run, so I'm inclined to think that just developing a mobile carriage for the Type 96 barrel might be the most efficient decision.

5)Continuing this policy, the new 76/60 AA gun roughly based on the design of guns that were installed IRL on Aganos, whuch is discussed in my fleet armament proposal above, probably should be adopted by the Army instead of copying the old German 88mm gun that became Type 99. However, producing this relatively cutting-edge design won't be as simple, so at the beginning of hostilities IJA probably should have only a couple of these guns, much fewer than Type 99s in stock, with the numbers gradually increasing over the war. Considering deficiencies in fire control, this gun won't have more than mediocre stats, but considering what pieces of junk old Japanese 76mm AA guns are...

6)Adding a bit more of AA machinecannons and 47mm Type 1 AT guns to TOEs, particularly in 1943 and later. Don't bother with bigger dedicated AT guns (at least with producing them in numbers warranting inclusion in the game), due to their relatively low priority - extra resources will be better spent producing AA guns. Also, small and relatively easily transortable guns are more suited for conditions of the theatre. Following the same logic, produice more infantry AT weapons, including 20mm Type 97 AT rifles, and Type 4 rocket launchers (the latter entered mass production IRL, but produced units were hoarded for the mainland defense and apparenrtly saw no real combat), giving late-war Japanese infantry squads slightly higher anti-armor rating as well.

7)As about tanks, placing the barrel from 47mm AT gun on the chassis of the obsolete Type 95 can probably be done earlier than 1945, with addition of the resulting SP gun to Japanese armored units (primarily those that don't have Type 1 tanks) around early 1944. Don't really see much changes here - armor is not only low on the list of priorities, but expensive as well. The game already gives Japanese more than they had, particularly if a player rebuilds all three (four in Scen 2) tank divisions.

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
1. A more air-minded Army that has two additional years to see development across the world before launching its attack into China in 1939. More R&D for airframes that might emerge in 1941/42 perhaps?
More on that when I finally gather enough strength to finish the preliminary air proposal.
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by JWE »

ORIGINAL: ny59giants
The Law of Unintended Consequences is seriously waiting to bite someone on the butt, on this one.
John - 6 years in USN followed by another 6 building part of the fuel systems for the B-1 & B-2 bombers for a government contractor taught me this Law very well. [:D] I will not be doing any of these changes myself, but wanted to mention the possibility of them happening.
Oh, yeah. You know.

I'm not saying it's a bad idea, just providing a caution. Lots of people have good ideas, but the Law raises its ugly head in many areas. Frankly, I think your idea is a good one; we have played with some similar things, but didn't want Babes to depart that far from standard.

But if you are willin', and if John 3rd is willin', then I'm willin'.
Just give me weed, whites, and wine, and show me a sign.

If it is something you think important to do, I would be pleased to walk you through the ins and outs of stuff. Just shoot me a pm. I'll be your huckelberry.

Ciao. John
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17627
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

The IJA Army

Post by John 3rd »

Damn. I work nine hours, come home. play with the kids and wife and then find a flurry of activity having occurred on the Thread.

GREAT!

The question that JWE and Michael are getting at (I assume) is doing modified :Pwhex files. Right?

I will be stupid and ask---just what exactly would it entail to have several updates through the time in the Mod? Would this be exceedingly difficult. It is beyond my paygrade but I--personally--like the idea of the map changing once or twice during the course of the war to reflect the engineering that was done. Thus, the answer is YES I'd like that but I don't know how big of deal it would be...

FatR: LIKE the ideas you listed above. ALL of it makes sense and since a bunch of it comes from our work in RA I am already on board for the thoughts. When you are able to get back to serious Mod time please let me know and I can shoot the current files to you. Right now I am going through the Allied Opening day list and starting to look at Army and IJN ideas we've spoken about.

The REAL question is what state is the IJA in on Dec 7th in this Mod? They are heavily committed to a China War with two years of additional preparation and building time. Does this mean they start with some additional units in play?

Let me put forth a proposal for the IJA on Dec 7th:

1. The 1st Imperial Tank Corps in China. This unit is comprised of the 1st and 2nd TK Divisions and, perhaps, a pair of TK Brigades. Consolidate all the normal regiments for 1st and 2nd as well as two Mechanized Inf Div. For the Mech Inf I am thinking of something like 2 TK Regiments and an Inf Reg combined into one unit. This could be the equivalent of the of a 'Shock Army. YES--I know the Japanese don't have much transport but this could be there one and only attempt at it. My thoughts would be to build these units out of troops already there. Pull 4 TK Reg and 2 Inf Reg but make a new unit for them.

2. The additional creation of a IJA Amphib Corps. These would be new units. Have the creation of 3-4 Brigades semi-trained in Amphib Operations. Imagine not much heavy Artillery, a bunch of mortars, and good numbers of MG. We would add a new HQ Unit that would 'command' them, however, my thoughts are that they would be attached to Combined Fleet. Let us say they start with 3 of these Brigades on Dec 7th and then get two more during 1942. This would be an addition of about 25,000 men to the OOB. Don't think this would be a huge stretch of the imagination since we are predicating the scenario on a greater degree of Army-Navy cooperation and sharing of weapon systems.

IJN LCU:
1. We've already covered the Atoll Defense units. I propose they come in two sizes:
a. The larger would be build from an SNLF unit, adding CD, and more support to it. We've discussed this. We could call it a Brigade with about 4,000 men. The Inf would come from recalled SNLF with the additional stuff being new forces.
b. The smaller would be built around a reinforced battalion size: two companies of Inf, two companies of CD, and a company of MG: 2,500 men. Call it a Regiment. These would be all new forces that could be build from the smaller Inf units that come into the game as Nvl Guard elements.

2. Work the Base Forces around some. JWE's labor of love he has described interests me but scares the tar out of me due to how much work it would entail.

Take THAT! Does this meet with good or bad thoughts?

Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9891
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: The IJA Army

Post by ny59giants »

How about looking at the "Atoll Defense Unit" from the perspective of what unit(s) would be realistically placed on an atoll to fit under the 6,000 stacking limit?? Would it be just the ADU and normal size BF (Aviation Support 24)?? Or some other combination??
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17627
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: The IJA Army

Post by John 3rd »

We've talked about that and the general thought was that they should be separate. To me, it would make sense to have an 'all in one' type of unit. Should we revisit this topic?
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
mike scholl 1
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:20 pm

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by mike scholl 1 »

ORIGINAL: MateDow

Even if there is no surprise, if assume that the US had two days of notice, what would they have been able to do? Recall the Enterprise and Lexington? Once again, you have the US carriers rushing to their doom. Sortie the battleships? Battleships without sufficient air cover trying to engage KB would be suicidal. Air losses for the Japanese would have been more severe, but probably wouldn't change the probability of success.

Take a quick look t the difference in Japanese aircraft losses between the first wave and the second (30 minutes later) wave of the historical Pearl Harbor strike. They DOUBLED with only 30 minutes warning! Two days would have every single defensive asset manned and ready, full CAP (and no A/C sidlined for maintainence), torpedo nets rigged, ships manned with full watertight integrity intact, etc. KIDO BUTAI would have been crippled by it's air and aircrew losses (and at a time when BN5 Kate production had been ended). As Coral Sea and Philippine Sea proved, you don't need to sink CV's to put them out of action..., just destroy their air groups.
User avatar
MateDow
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2002 12:00 am

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by MateDow »

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

Take a quick look t the difference in Japanese aircraft losses between the first wave and the second (30 minutes later) wave of the historical Pearl Harbor strike. They DOUBLED with only 30 minutes warning! Two days would have every single defensive asset manned and ready, full CAP (and no A/C sidlined for maintainence), torpedo nets rigged, ships manned with full watertight integrity intact, etc. KIDO BUTAI would have been crippled by it's air and aircrew losses (and at a time when BN5 Kate production had been ended). As Coral Sea and Philippine Sea proved, you don't need to sink CV's to put them out of action..., just destroy their air groups.


But this assumes that the US Fleet stays in port. If they are there, they aren't interfering with the landings. The KB has done its job of ensuring that the landings are a success.

Even with heavy aircraft losses, the US Fleet would be heavily damaged. The best thing would be to pull the US Fleet out of the noose to the West Coast, at least that way you have it, but would that be a politically viable solution? Reality says that Halsey groups his three carriers together and tries to interdict. Remember that he wanted to hunt the KB with only the Enterprise historically. Even if you gather four carriers together, you are still handing the Japanese a 1.5-1 advantage in strength, not counting the CVLs or experience gap.

US land-based airpower would be limited to what was on hand, there would be no way to get fighters in place, and there weren't any additional heavy bombers to transfer in. They would also be at a severe disadvantage against the Japanese pilots in terms of experience.

This is a gamble for the Japanese, but one that is commiserate with the fact that they are attacking the US to begin with. At no point in the game will this opportunity exist. The US will rush aircraft and LCU reinforcements to the Hawaiian Islands. At the beginning, you are fighting what is in place, which is relatively little, with the reward of neutralizing the primary US position in the Pacific. Clausewitz or Mahan would approve of the operation and the risk.

If they destroy the US Fleet from the outset, there will be time for new aircrew training. The Japanese were able to rebuild their pilot corps following Midway and Santa Cruz. If they don't lose the precious carriers, they will have the chance to hold the US at arms length. We are assuming that the Japanese have implemented a rationale training scheme, this will help minimize the impact of losses.

All of this assumes that the US gets that all important firm intelligence with two days notice. Actually sees the carriers, not just increased radio traffic. Without the sighting of Japanese forces, you are back to Kimmel and Short making the same preparations that they made historically, and that results in the US Fleet being caught unprepared in port with little air cover.

To replicate the increased radio traffic in game, make the default setting "no surprise" which will allow for additional CAP and response. That will increase the Japanese losses significantly, but will be countered by the increased combat power available to the Americans.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17627
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by John 3rd »

Matedow: I love your outside of the box thinking but this is not a practical suggestion. If someone wants to try and take out PH with an invasion then that is their choice. I've tried it in my current game and might be willing to try it again, however, I don't think players should be forced into it.
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
mike scholl 1
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:20 pm

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by mike scholl 1 »

ORIGINAL: MateDow

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

Take a quick look t the difference in Japanese aircraft losses between the first wave and the second (30 minutes later) wave of the historical Pearl Harbor strike. They DOUBLED with only 30 minutes warning! Two days would have every single defensive asset manned and ready, full CAP (and no A/C sidlined for maintainence), torpedo nets rigged, ships manned with full watertight integrity intact, etc. KIDO BUTAI would have been crippled by it's air and aircrew losses (and at a time when BN5 Kate production had been ended). As Coral Sea and Philippine Sea proved, you don't need to sink CV's to put them out of action..., just destroy their air groups.

But this assumes that the US Fleet stays in port. If they are there, they aren't interfering with the landings. The KB has done its job of ensuring that the landings are a success.

They don't have to interfer with the landings..., that's what Oahu's CD batteries are for. And you are planning landings in December, when the North Coast of the islands get's it's heaviest surf of the year. Ever see a surfing contest on the "Banzaii Pipeline"? Imagine trying it in a Daihatsu! You'ld have 10,000 drowned before the first man ever struggled to shore (and was immediately shot by the deployed garrison). The only practical landing beaches in December are on the South shore---straight into the teeth of all the CD batteries. ROTS a RUCK, Chuck. Why do you think the Japs landed 100 miles North of the Manilla Bay CD defenses..., or 250 miles North of the Singapore CD's?
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by JWE »

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Matedow: I love your outside of the box thinking but this is not a practical suggestion. If someone wants to try and take out PH with an invasion then that is their choice. I've tried it in my current game and might be willing to try it again, however, I don't think players should be forced into it.
Does beg the question, John. Are you thinking of any tweaks to the AI, or are you looking at a PBEM "but I'll take whatever the hell I can get from the AI" kinda model?
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17627
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by John 3rd »

I have always felt that Mods were mostly designed for PBEM. The AI can only do so much. What do you think on that?
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision?

Post by JWE »

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
I have always felt that Mods were mostly designed for PBEM. The AI can only do so much. What do you think on that?
I do agree with you on that John, I was just curious. No worries Bro.
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design and Modding”