MARIANAS SCENARIO v1 NOW PLAYABLE

[chesmart]

Thanks Andy will send You a Mod soon So you can look at it.

[Andy Mac]

Did anyone try out the latest version I need to guage interest I am not going to waste time on another scenario if no one wants small scens.
 
It takes to long to do them !!!

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Did anyone try out the latest version I need to guage interest I am not going to waste time on another scenario if no one wants small scens.

It takes to long to do them !!!

Andy, a suggestion. I suggested months ago that the moderators develop a different way to point to finished small scenarios than this sub-forum entitled/aimed at DEVELOPERS of scenarios. It might be that the newbies, who seem to want small scenarios, never come in here because the idea of developing new scenarios when they can barely play yet is daunting.

So, perhaps you should post this in the main forum with a "Hey! New Guy! And Old Guy! Try this!" title, explaining that it has AI included, is 99% done, etc.

I might have some time to try it this weekend. Major winter storm heading in tonight.

I appreciate all the work you do when you could be playing your own PBEM game(s).

Also, If you have any pull with Terminus through private dev channels, could you see if the Downfall scenario is dead, dormant, on life-support, or thriving? And if it's something he's lost interest in, if he would be willing to post what he had done so maybe others can work on it? That historical what-if is really interesting to me, and one of the reasons I bought the game out of the gate. But only one.[:)]

[Andy Mac]

Will do now back working on the Allied Ironman scenario would like to get that finished next before I try another small one as they are so much work

[Andy Mac]

The main isuse with small map scenarios is they are a PITA to create not sure if I have te energy to do another one

[NAVMAN]

Andy,
I have been trying this one(Marianas) out. One of the items which caught my eye was the
relatively low morale for US air units. They range from 50-70. I would have thought
that at this point in the war, morale would be somewhat higher. Any thoughts
on this? I think small(er) scenarios are a worthwhile addition. The time investment
needed for the main scenarios may not always be available or inviting.
Your efforts are appreciated. Is the 1/13/10 version the latest one?
Thx.

[Andy Mac]

The one above in post 94 is the most recent version I am making no changes until I see some feedback if anyone feels like doing an AAR to test it out v the Ai it would be appreciated might help me pick up some details - either side is good !!!

[NAVMAN]

Andy,
Thx. If I can, I'll delve a bit more into this scen.

[Andy Mac]

Still need feedback on how it plays out v the AI cannot really make more improvements until I do

[chrisol]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Andy, a suggestion. I suggested months ago that the moderators develop a different way to point to finished small scenarios than this sub-forum entitled/aimed at DEVELOPERS of scenarios. It might be that the newbies, who seem to want small scenarios, never come in here because the idea of developing new scenarios when they can barely play yet is daunting.

So, perhaps you should post this in the main forum with a "Hey! New Guy! And Old Guy! Try this!" title, explaining that it has AI included, is 99% done, etc.

Yes - Bullwinkle is quite correct (for me at least). I lurk around the main forum, AAR and the War Room picking up tips but rarely come here... just picked up a link from the main forum now.

Very interested in smaller scenarios to get to grips with things, but can't really help with development at all due to complete lack of knowledge. But I do appreciate the work going into it.

Thanks
Chris

[bretg80]

just picked up the scenario. Will give feedback as soon as I get some time to play it. Thanks for putting it together.

[Andy Mac]

Thansk guys the more its played the betterr the AI will be

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Thansk guys the more its played the betterr the AI will be

Andy:

In case you're not reading the general forum, I did some PR on the scenario and there may be some players trying it out.

Question: when does it end, or is that a secret? I could see leaving it up in the air to motivate the Allied player hurrying, or not. Just wondering how much time I have to get back that huge pile of VPs the Japanese start with.

I have a couple of small comments, but I'll wait until I finish. Overall I really like how stripped down the scenario is. It was a good decision to remove Rabaul, New G. and the Solomons from the equation.

[NAVMAN]

Andy,
Cpl of observations re:Marianas. I noted that units 5047,5049 and 5050 are shown to be withdrawn in three(3) days at the start of the scen. Is that correct?
Also, unit 2868 is shown as a "VD" unit(no pun intended).Should be VB perhaps?
Looks like all Army Bombardment Groups are shown as Bombardment Force.
Thx.

[Nemo121]

Feedback:

I played this scenario blind as the Allies. I didn't check to see what the Japanese dispositions were etc. I decided to route my forces via the Marshall islands to allow refuelling etc of transports before a high speed dash into the Marianas. I decided that the bases at Peleliu and Badeldaob were the obvious places for the IJN fleet to be based at and figured a high speed dash in to destroy the fleet while my transports were replenishing etc at the Marianas would be worthwhile.

Anyways I arrived at Peleliu and Babeldaob and parked my CVs 1 hex offshore. I sent SC TFs centred around BBs into the waters off both bases and waited. The IJN spawned out of Babeldaob on the first night and in vicious surface fighting my SC TF managed to seriously damage Nagato and Yamato ( multiple 16 inch penetrations ) as well as sinking one CVE and heavily damaging two others. A few support ships and DDs also went down. Total cost, a single 18 inch hit on Iowa.

The SC TF at Peleliu managed to convince the IJN to stay in port for the first day. I thus port attacked it. Unfortunately only a small port attack went in but it was still enough to land between 1 and 4 bombs on about 6 CVs and a few BBs ( as well as lots of support ships ). The CVs weren't really seriously damaged but every bit helps.

The next day the IJN sortied from Peleliu, exchanged air attacks with my CV TFs, managed to get 4 torpedo hits into 3 separate CVEs while my force managed put torpedoes into pretty much every IJN CV or CVL going.

The day after that I put more surface TFs into Pelelie and Babeldaob and bombarded the bases to try and destroy whatever had ported. In addition I launched further strikes on whatever was at sea.... I then stopped the scenario t check the damage.


Basically after 3 days of combat the IJN had lost 49 ships including the following:
CVs: Junyo, Hiyo, Shokaku, Zuikaku,
CVLs Ryuho, Chitose, Chiyoda,
CVEs: Unyo and Shinyo
BBs: Nagato and Haruna

Aerial losses were 570 with some 200 of those being aboard sunk carriers. Taiho and Kaiyo are still afloat but with flotation and system damage in the 60s and 70s that won't last. Kongo and Musashi are still afloat ( my reports of Yamato must have been Haruna or something ) and they still have a solid core of CAs and DDs.


Nonetheless the IJN's CV fleet is utterly destroyed, Allied aerial losses are 150 and it looks like a single CL may sink while the BB Iowa will have to be docked for repairs. In addition I might as well dock the 3 CVEs which took torp hits just to be on the safe side.


There's precious little the IJN can do to withstand any landings at this stage and once the USN ships refuel and reprovision at Eniwetok etc I'll run north, meet with the transports and land. Total Japanese planes remaining come to about 430 or so, something I should brush aside in an afternoon.



Now, my basic point is that perhaps the AI should get hard-coded to more carefully search for a left hook attack from the south like this. It is sneaky and not all that direct but it was the first thing I thought of which seemed like a good way of removing the IJN from the picture... I would suggest that the AI be hard-coded to base lots of planes on naval search at Truk to prevent staging through the Marianas and coming at Peleliu from an unforeseen direction and replicating these results. It is just too easy to bottle up the IJN and utterly destroy their carrier airpower this way, especially since I actually managed to remove a fair bit of their combat power through port attacks and actual surface combat.


I might take the Japanese side. I have a few ideas about how to penetrate USN CAP I want to put into practice... Question.... Are kamis active in this scenario? If not it might be nice to make them active to give a Japanese defender more options.

[Puhis]

This scenario looks interesting. My first observation: japanese don't get CVL Zuiho. But they should get it, right?

[Andy Mac]

Thats an error I will fix it on next update

ORIGINAL: NAVMAN

Andy,
Cpl of observations re:Marianas. I noted that units 5047,5049 and 5050 are shown to be withdrawn in three(3) days at the start of the scen. Is that correct?
Also, unit 2868 is shown as a "VD" unit(no pun intended).Should be VB perhaps?
Looks like all Army Bombardment Groups are shown as Bombardment Force.
Thx.

[Andy Mac]

Nemo nothing I can do if the player camps the Japanese spawning base.
 
The scneario just isnt sophisticated enough for that as I cannot randomise the Japanese starting location

[Andy Mac]

kamis are not active.
 
I have 4 alternative Japanese AI scripts ready to go for the next release that will give more variability but if you hit them at Peliau before they are in a TF nothing I can do !!

[Nemo121]

But could they not start the scenario in a TF ?

I just ask because I wasn't even intent on camping, I was just doing my usual "Hit them from a direction and a time they aren't expecting."