Your are welcome. It is version .902Elessar2 wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 2:13 am eriador08, that is MUCHO appreciated. What scenario version # is it?
That makes it clear now. But that is a bit of a problem, because it is hard to soften it down to 4, when you cannot get close to it with land units. Could later also be a problem with the Japanese Costal Guns, when fighting breaks out on the Home Island.Elessar2 wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 2:13 am Aarrgghh, I know why you couldn't get into Vladivostok. The Coastal Gun has a ZoC penalty of 10 iirc. Idea was to make them have teeth and slow down movement-in vanilla you'll never allow your ships to be shot by one unless you're not paying attention or you swamp the thing during a big invasion. The editor however doesn't differentiate between naval and land units, alas. Just soften it down to 4 and you can move past it.
That is ture. I would be down to a little damaged fleet now, even if i won bigger at the start.Elessar2 wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 2:13 am Unless Congress raises a huge stink and/or FDR resigns, I think the results of this match demonstrate pretty conclusively, it is safe to say, that the IJN ideal of the Decisive Battle [Mahan style] was a pipe dream even if they won big. Note quite a few damaged ships of theirs never got repaired before the war ended. Both sides lost 4 of their prewar fleet flattops: even if Japan wins the early clashes 6:0 they will be in deep trouble by mid-44 t the latest.
I cant think of anything big. The only thing that bothered me is the question, if it is intended, that civil unrest breaks out in Burma every turn that the allies occupy it?
I took Army Mobilization, because i wanted to focus on land warfare after the first clashes. It was especially needed for smaller Units to keep Partisans occupied. I in fact build a new occasional Maritime Bomber here or a Fighter there or rebuild sometimes but nothing big. Cash was low.Elessar2 wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 2:13 am I see you bought 2 levels of Army Mobilization, but as you said you had no chance for any new ship (or presumably air) builds, which again is more or less historical, tho they pumped out the Taiho and 3 Unryus + the Shinano conversion. [Go Quiet China
and you could probably spring for them]
In an orderly engagement you can say that carriers were very effective and big boys were too slow and hitting not hard enough. If i remember correctly, I was surprised sometimes, how little damage big ships made. But in smaller engagements and when everything was chaos, they could make a hit or two.Elessar2 wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 2:13 am Were carriers king, or could the big boys get in their licks?
Yes, if it was the intention that Japan should have a good shot for a nice start and a very, very hard time after, you nailed it. We had a great game anyway. If you want to tip the balance for playability a bit, I would however try to favor Japan. Decreased ship repair costs would be something, that would have helped me. Should the game be realistic or balanced? Maybe some clearer Vicotry Conditions would be nice, like: Japan - Try to survive!Elessar2 wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 2:13 am Tooting my own horn looks like I got the balance pretty close to spot on. I may decrease ship repair costs (they are eating me up in my vanilla derived test scenario). Again, thanks a ton.
I will answer some more questions you had before in another post.
I played this great mod a bit in hotseat (with some conclusion that in 1944 decomposition of Japan forces due to lacking MPPs seemed to be waaay more rapid than historical), but had no occasion to try multiplayer. So if there is anyone interested in PBEM, I would gladly play. I have lots of experience with SC series multiplayer, but none in this much-changing mod, so would prefer to take Allies side against some good opponent, but in other cases could also try Japanese.
