Korea 50-53

[larryfulkerson]

I found this at Rugged Defense and ran it through the editor to import the eqp file so it's not been tested
for balancing but at least it's 184 turns long. I need somebody to test this bad boy for us.

[m10bob]

Thank you immensely for this!!...have added to my scenario folder, will work it now...[:D]

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: m10bob
Thank you immensely for this!!...have added to my scenario folder, will work it now...[:D]

Can you be talked into doing an AAR for this bad boy?

[TheeWarLord]

nvm

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

ORIGINAL: m10bob
Thank you immensely for this!!...have added to my scenario folder, will work it now...[:D]

Can you be talked into doing an AAR for this bad boy?

Larry, I had wanted to try this out on my OPART III before purchasing the newest version, (IV)..

The scenario will not show up at all, (and I am pretty adept at finding directories, modding, swapping files, etc, lol)..

Still unable to see the scenario in any of the lists...I am now downloading the game from the server, lol..
(I always recommend getting the box version as well because nowadays computers are basic 2 year throw-aways, and still cost less than my first Atari 800!!![:D]

Hope to get this bad boy running shortly.....I really liked the very old CONFLICT KOREA and will be judging this scenario based on that game.(DOSBOX is like the "bolt assist" on the original M-16's!!!)...

[larryfulkerson]

Here's a version that will run on TOAW III.

[m10bob]

After installing this great version of the game, I opened the file and could not find a "scenario folder!...Dunno if the scenarios defaulted into the scenario folder of the older OPARTOFW version 3, but the folder for version 4 definitely has no scenario folder???''I did copy paste the Korea 50-53 scenario folder which you sent me,directly into the version 4 folder itself, and then when choosing scenarios the new game asks if I wish to "obtain" my scenario from another source..I went to that new Korea 50-53 folder and it loaded perfectly and I played a couple of turns, successfully.

I have never done an AAR before but have done reviews, so please let me do that.

As I stated earlier, I am familiar wit the old game CONFLICT;KOREA...and this scenario is that same game...on steroids!...The map covers the same areas. to include the same areas of Japan for arriving units and air assets, and the units themselves use the same NATO counters, (which all real wargame grognards would appreciate, lol)..

Hovering the cursor over units allows the player to get detailed info on the status of the unit,(fatigue, ready, routed, etc.)and you can also see the troops, planes, or equipment employed by each unit.

I love chrome and the only thing missing here are the nice colored side views of the planes which CONFLICT;KOREA had, (as blocky as they were, IMHO they still gave some flavor to the game.)

The map itself is far more detailed than that earlier game and has many more roads and secondary trails for movement of land units. Different terrain also affects both movement and combat defense factors, as in any of the better "boardgames."

Each turn in this scenario is a full week, and can be broken down into several separate increments, so the player who wants to play "General" has a serious chance to do so with this classic encounter.
While I only played a couple of turns, I detected the AI seemed to be making moves countering moves I had made, which is interesting because the N.Koreans and CHICOMS used Soviet tactics...and in those days, once committed to a plan, the Soviets NEVER deviated from a set plan...even when cognizant of running into traps.
In those days, they literally felt moving in waves "like the ocean" was enough to keep the momentum going.
(Dad saw this in Korea and saw those 'waves" shredded by NAPALM and "willy-pete")

The scenario has something like 180+ turns, so this is definitely NOT a "beer and pretzel" affair, but rather one which you will be returning to on a regular basis...(which helps off set the cost of the game, making each days turns a matter of pennies on the dollar.)
(Owners of WITP-AE know a price tag approaching $100 is peanuts compared to the YEARS spent playing and replaying it.)

Personally, I started wargaming with Avalon Hill in the late 1950's as dad owned a hobby shop, and he was a combat vet of two wars, so military simulations were as natural as rain...I played them while serving overseas, and have used sand tables larger than ping pong tables.
Finished DRANG NACH OSTEN and TERRIBLE SWIFT SWORD a couple of times as well.

IMHO, Operational Art Of War IV is a "must have" for serious gamers and this particular scenario might be considered for "advanced" players, and not just for "intermediates", depending on how many selectable options you choose...

[Shiva the Destroyer]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

Here's a version that will run on TOAW III.

Thanks for this!!! btw, It convinced me to finally purchase the game.

I have question(s) about installation however...

Since this is/was a TOAW III design, the .zip folder contains mostly files to be located in a sub-folder (i.e. \Korea 50-53\). Observation of the My Documents\My Games\The Operational Art of War IV\... folder(s) convinced me that these subfolder files would more properly be located in the \Graphics Override\ subfolder which I did and that removed the "wrong .eqp file error" warning. So I presume that was a correct decision (Correct me if I was wrong.)

The remaining files are mostly .bmp files and I noticed that other scenarios are using the format .gif for instance. Should these .bmp files be converted to .gif format to head off other errors or will the TOAW IV engine accept the .bmp format?

[larryfulkerson]

Bmp files are just fine. Either with work I think. Keep me posted on whatever
questions you have and I'll see if I can't help you.

[judah]

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Thank you immensely for this!!...have added to my scenario folder, will work it now...[:D]

So it is applied for T4, right?

I have also done a adapted version for 3.4, since it is a V3.2 scenario, how do you deal with the port supply points when you adapted it to T3.4 and T4?

[larryfulkerson]

I'm not aware of any changes to the scenario so they work like
they always have I think. I ran the scenario through the editor
to adapt it to T4 but made no changes so it's the stock scenario.