1 Tutorial
2 Rising Sun: 7 Dec 41 - 16 Mar 42
3 Coral Sea: 1 May 42 - 15 May 42
4 South Pacific (Hypothetical): 1 May 42 - 28 Feb 42
5 Guadalcanal: 4 Aug 42 - 7 Feb 43
6 Marianas: 6 Jun 44 - 29 Aug 44
7 Manchuria: 8 Aug 45 - 31 Aug 45
8 The First Year: 7 Dec 41 - 31 Dec 42
9 The Turning Point: 1 May 42 - 30 Sep 43
10 Campaign 45: 1 Jan 45 - Jun 30 46
11 Campaign 44: 1 Jun 44 - Jun 30 46
12 Campaign 43: 1 Jun 43 - Jun 30 46
13 Campaign 42A: 1 May 42 - Jun 30 46
14 Campaign 42B: 1 Aug 42 - Jun 30 46
15 The War in the Pacific: 7 Dec 41 - Jun 30 46
What makes scenario 4 "hypothetical?"
Probably because the game goes backwards through time in that scenario... [;)]
Ah, the famed "Final Countdown" scenario!? But shouldn't that start - or maybe end - on December 7?
I don't understand why people are criticizing the historical innaccuracies of someone's hypothetical...
I don't think what Paulchen said could ever happen, but so what? Let the boy build his own scenario. Who cares? You don't have to play it if you don't want!
Thank´s for your help.
Let the boy build his own scenario.
And this was only my question. Is my scenario possible with the editor?
I don't understand why people are criticizing the historical innaccuracies of someone's hypothetical...
I don't think what Paulchen said could ever happen, but so what? Let the boy build his own scenario. Who cares? You don't have to play it if you don't want!
Too true.
In my experience, true Grognards can be a vicious lot.
"If you knew your history (you worthless little slime ball) you would know that a Mk 1 Tiger had 120.0015 mm average front armour on the hull, not just - as you so wrongly state (you @$%&* moron) - 120 mm! That extra .0015 mm was what made the Tiger so much more durable than..."
Hi, To save time on my first turn set up I am investing a load of time editing scenario 15.
I'm only changing the starting locations of ships etc I'm not modifing any strength or experiance. The turn will be designed to allow the Japanese player to select the scenario enter password save and send to allied player who enters password and returns. Turn one will be historical but unlike the "offical" turn 1 there will be no landings on Dec 7.
On turn 2 the Japanese player creates his TF's and game is from then on normal.
Most of my changes are moving transports to bases. (They are scattered all over the map.)
I do move IJN units about. I've collected all the scattered subs and placed them into TF of 6 boats each. The player will then on turn 2 form TF and send each boat where he wants. The higher the endurance the further from home port I place the subs. There is a northern group for Dutch Harbor area, a West Coast Group off San Fran, A group around Hawaii, Midway, Wake, Then the SRA has 4 groups (Malaccua strait, Java, PI, Borneo
A group in the IO and a South Pacific group.
I move the Home Defense Units but they all remain in the Home Islands.
If you use the turn and then do non historic turn 1 the Japanese player does not really gain any added advantage over the offical turn 1 because everything I do can be done on turn 1. (The reason for making the changes is to save 12 hours everytime I start a game)
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Might be an interesting way to "test" the AI's abilities as well. Some time when you
are going to bed, run your start bringing all the Japanese assets together in effective
and effecient packages, then let the AI play turn two. Be interesting to see if it makes
use of the new situation, or just wastes the turn scattering the assets all over again.
I think what would make for some initial good scenarios, would be to tweak a few of the stock ones, to be playable as only one side, and then tweak the AI's forces to give the player a tough challenge. This could be achieved by boosting the AI's forces and placing its starting forces in different locations.
I think what would make for some initial good scenarios, would be to tweak a few of the stock ones, to be playable as only one side, and then tweak the AI's forces to give the player a tough challenge. This could be achieved by boosting the AI's forces and placing its starting forces in different locations.
This is basically the process that most designers adopt for their "difficulty settings"---it
becomes more of a question of how much do you want to let the AI "cheat". The AI
never gets any "smarter", or adopts a clever strategy..., it just gets bigger, better, and/
or more units to play with.
The best way to ensure a scenario is balance is to have one person make it and then have the other choose which side he wants to play. For example, I'd feel more than comfortable playing the allies in any scenario mdiehl made.
Definitely thats for sure Since i know that my wirlaways, B-18s, and my p-36s' would rip them japanese J7W's up to pieces and any other remaining japanese force on the map from 1941.
If you want to toughen up the challenge, it is VERY simple. Place a Oil resource size 1,000 in Tokyo and increase the size of the Manpower resource already there. These are the two issues that bring Japan to her knees eventually: Replacements and Fuel.
If someone wants to make it tougher the other way, I'm simply going to laugh at them until they go away in shame. [:'(]
personally Im very excited by the editor
I see myself playing one game against the AI as japan, fully historical
one game against the japanese as allies, fully historical
and one PBEM, hopefully as japan to the bitter end
Purely for fun, and I mean fun I want to play one more game where japan starts with a handful of extra ships and a decent pilot pool.
If (and please guys this is for fun, and hypothetical) Id been dictator of Japan since say 1920, and really got my schlock together, what could I have built, not fantasy, a couple of extra shoka's instead of yamato, or several more CAs?
And just how hard is the editor to use, setting ships up ect?
Go easy on me you gronards, some times we need a bit of fantasy to ease the burden of our miserable lives, especially if Im going to be playing as japan in 1944[8|]
Big seas, Fast ships, life tastes better with salt
personally Im very excited by the editor
I see myself playing one game against the AI as japan, fully historical
one game against the japanese as allies, fully historical
and one PBEM, hopefully as japan to the bitter end
Purely for fun, and I mean fun I want to play one more game where japan starts with a handful of extra ships and a decent pilot pool.
If (and please guys this is for fun, and hypothetical) Id been dictator of Japan since say 1920, and really got my schlock together, what could I have built, not fantasy, a couple of extra shoka's instead of yamato, or several more CAs?
And just how hard is the editor to use, setting ships up ect?
Go easy on me you gronards, some times we need a bit of fantasy to ease the burden of our miserable lives, especially if Im going to be playing as japan in 1944[8|]
Cloning units and adding pilots takes about 30-40 seconds of your time.
When you start talking about inventing an entire new command group, such as the much famed "PH Command" HQ that Japan had in hiding for ruling over the Americans and all the units it had under it's command that things start to get rather complicated [:D]
personally Im very excited by the editor
I see myself playing one game against the AI as japan, fully historical
one game against the japanese as allies, fully historical
and one PBEM, hopefully as japan to the bitter end
Purely for fun, and I mean fun I want to play one more game where japan starts with a handful of extra ships and a decent pilot pool.
If (and please guys this is for fun, and hypothetical) Id been dictator of Japan since say 1920, and really got my schlock together, what could I have built, not fantasy, a couple of extra shoka's instead of yamato, or several more CAs?
And just how hard is the editor to use, setting ships up ect?
Go easy on me you gronards, some times we need a bit of fantasy to ease the burden of our miserable lives, especially if Im going to be playing as japan in 1944[8|]
I think once players have played the game through and know the stratgeies and tendencies of the AI, etc and have beaten it handily, then by all means I think most of us would like to have the capability (through the editor) to really increase the challenge of the AI in hypothetical scenarios.
Imagine if, after the Pearl Harbour strike, the Japanese invade Hawaii.
I wouldn't mind giving the Japanese AI more ships/carriers etc to really make it tough. . .
Is it possible to build a hypothetical scenario, where russia will be defeated by the germans, and japan have take as result the eastern sibiria, before Dec 7.
The hypothetical results are:
1. the transsibiria railroad can supply japan with oil (caucasus) and goods from germany
2. the whole german airforce and army can fight in western-europe and in africa (this will make it much harder for the allys, not so many planes and army in the pacific)
3. a german expidition corps (tank divisions + airforce) can help in china, it will possible that japan conquered china in the year 43
4. it is possible that england will be defeated in the middle east and germany and japan can conquered india
5. After china and possible india fall, the whole japan army (eventually german troops too) can fight in the year 44 in the pacific
In my opinion, this will be a nice scenario, anything is possible
It might be possible to build something like this if you really enjoy TOTAL NONSENSE.
Nazi Germany was NOT going to defeat Soviet Russia in the summer of 1941. No how,
no way. It was impossible to go far enough and fast enough with an army that was 90%
horse drawn to do that. If you think it was, then you've "got your headquarters where
your hindquarters should be". But even if it were:
1) The Trans-Siberian RR would be 4,000 miles of demolitions, sabotage, and Partisans..,
worthless for years.
2) It would take 75-100 divisions of manpower to garrison/occupy/hold down the Russians
for quite a while.
3) LOTS O LUCK See #1 above.
4) Defeating England in the Middle East does is no guarantee (look at your lines of supply)
and if accomplished doesn't guarantee anything vs. India.
5) If China could be conquered (and the "whole japan army" had been trying to do that
since 1937), You would still need most of it to garrison the place.
IMHO, this is the kind of pipedream that comes frome sniffing too much glue and playing
to much "Risk". No one who's seriously studied the period and the realities of logistics
could possibly come up with it. But if that's what you want to play, then I imagine the
editor can be "bullied" into giving you some sore of replica of the situation you describe.
But WHY?
Why do you give a damn, for Christ's sakes??? This a GAME. Not a simulation for a college level military history class.
Far to many of you people take this crap far too seriously. If I want to make a COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS scenario to try and have more fun than living with the actual history, so what??? And especially since we have been assured the AI is as brain dead as a 1984 Apple II game, we have to have something to be able to make things "different" after a few runs throught the game.
I think what would make for some initial good scenarios, would be to tweak a few of the stock ones, to be playable as only one side, and then tweak the AI's forces to give the player a tough challenge. This could be achieved by boosting the AI's forces and placing its starting forces in different locations.
This is basically the process that most designers adopt for their "difficulty settings"---it
becomes more of a question of how much do you want to let the AI "cheat". The AI
never gets any "smarter", or adopts a clever strategy..., it just gets bigger, better, and/
or more units to play with.
Which is excactly what AI's in 1983 on an Apple IIc game did. Good to see the effort in this area has come so far.....
But if that's what you want to play, then I imagine the
editor can be "bullied" into giving you some sort of replica of the situation you describe.
Why do you give a damn, for Christ's sakes??? This a GAME. Not a simulation for a college level military history class.
Far to many of you people take this crap far too seriously. If I want to make a COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS scenario to try and have more fun than living with the actual history, so what??? And especially since we have been assured the AI is as brain dead as a 1984 Apple II game, we have to have something to be able to make things "different" after a few runs throught the game.
ZOOMIE As I stated in the quote above, I DON'T CARE what you want to play. Toss
in Godzilla and the Martians if you want! I was making a point that the assumptions
I was citing were pretty far-fetched, and if a player was going to look for more realistic
variants to "test his mettle" those weren't them. But if you want to play "Sgt. ROCK and
his Howling Commandos tour the Pacific", be my guest. You pays your money, and you
play your fantasy.
I'm not really sure I understand what all the fuss is about.
I don't think hypothetical scenario design has to be 100% historical nor 100% fantasy.
Rather, the editor will allow us to add enough units for the AI to give players a good run for their money in single play. This is after all what most of us want in a wargame.
If, after playing WiTP for a while, I find the AI too easy, I will be more than happy (with no qualms) to give more ships to the AI (ie the Japanese) and place them in a more advantageous position. I want to be challenged, and the editor will allow us to increase the challenge as we desire.
I will be looking forward to the more skilled scenario designers who will tweak some of the default scenarios so that they will really test our skills as commanders.
When a game idea is decided on for publication, you've got to design the game engine around the idea. In the case of UV, for example, the engine was to have been what the designers saw as an operational-level simulation of theater-level command in WWII South Pacific. Many of the mechanics, such as AI selection of TF targets for air groups on naval attack missions, grew from this design basis.
So far, so good. Then the game was published, and all he11 broke loose. It became apparent that players wanted more control, that they wanted weapons systems to perform differently from the way they were designed into the game, that they wanted to explore more "what ifs" through the editor. Many patches later, the game is in some ways very different from the game that was published.
This trend appears to be prevailing through the course of the WitP development. Now, I have no problem with the direction things are going in except this: the game becomes something different from what was originally intended, leaving me wondering what the game would have been had the original design idea been adhered to.
I hope we all enjoy fiddling around with the editor. I believe, however, that we're only kidding ourselves if we think that the game system is going to allow us to build scenarios that are faithful to rational models of "what if" history by merely changing the characteristics of weapons systems and other items accessible through the editor.
For example, it looks like you will be able to build what appears to be a 1920s war between the U.S. and Japan. Think about the amount of the game system that is focused on aircraft as they performed during the actual time frame of WWII that you will by trying to ignore in doing this. Think about the map and presentation of communication links as they were in the '40s, not the '20s. Ship repair. Troop and equipment reinforcement and replacement rates. The AI (both as opponent and subordinate). How good a simulation will you wind up with? If the game was designed from its inception to present a hypothetical war of this nature set in the '20s, it might have been a good, interesting game. This beast will be nothing but a sad bastardization of a game that was, and is, intended to do something else.
My problem is this. If game design becomes enslaved by those who want nothing but "wargame construction kits," we all lose. I prefer games that remain true to their initial concept. Some flexibility is necessary, of course, in the design process, but I think that modifications "on the fly" should be carefully considered by the design team before being thrown in to satisfy those who refuse to be satisfied with the game as published.
Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
Since i know that my wirlaways, B-18s, and my p-36s' would rip them japanese J7W's up to pieces and any other remaining japanese force on the map from 1941. 