Matrix Games Forums

For a more general explanation: The devices, their type, number, facing and ammo are given twice: once in the ship setup and once in the class setup. Normally these should match, otherwise odd things can happen. This is because some info (for example the maximum ammo or the mounts of the device when fully repaired) are taken from the class and some info (like the current ammo and mounts) from the ship description. If the weapon setup doesn't match you end up with 2/18 torpdoes that can't be reloaded or load 36 out of 18 mines.

An example for such a ship (the Otori class escort in iron man 102):


In no device does the starting ammo actually match the maximum ammo. The torpedoes can be reloaded fully which is slightly unrealistic: 30 reloads of an almost 3 ton torpedo on a < 1000 ton escort vessel. The second depth charge rack on the other hand size is a one shot thing having max ammo 0 (the device is empty in the class).

ORIGINAL: General Patton

Some AV type ships have float planes that can carry bombs. That's your sorties.

The problem isn't that the AVs have sorties, it is the fact that the ships have no sorties, but their classes have sorties. I did testing on the Japanese side and the ships are able to conduct bombing missions, despite no sorties beeing shown. No way of repairing or reloading the sorties to display.

What scenario are you playing anyway.

I'm playing scenario 102 from this thread (post 3).

You can if you want, move the devices around. I don't think it needs to be done.

I've already reset all the ships I listed to their class (which resets the device setup to match) in a personal copy of the scenario. I just wanted to post the findings since Andy was asking for feedback. While these things are not game breaking, not beeing able to reload the dutch subs befor repair is an unintended bug. Neither do I think that E class above works as intended.

Scenario 100, Allies

Found this demoralised BF unit in India. Guess they have to be cheered up to value 10. After all, they do have elephants to do the hard work, right?

Whelp..... this looks like the latest and greatest AI scenario.
This forum is all over the place, hard to find stuff (at least for me).

OK, 2 questions, same idea.

I want historical or the AI to get some "oomph" reinforcement, but no star wars please like TF happily bombing USA mainland 1st day of campaign or Kriegsmarine main units showing up in DEI. Something grounded in reality.

Having said that, I would like to know which scenario to download and play

1) as Allies vs AI
2) as Japan vs AI

Depends upon which side you want to play ... both AI are working, neither AI has invade USA scripts in it. Both are fairly 'vanilla'. Enjoy.

Is Andy still out there? I'm looking for the location of the latest rendition of scenario 100, as I want to play against the Japanese AI.... thanks. Hal

Forum is all other the place my fault too many threads with scenarios in them I will try to rationalise if I get some time

Manic at day job right now

Scenario 102, Jap side.

If you start the scenario as the Japs, Kwajalein has fuel stocks well above the spoilage limit. Is this WAD?

Ironman Allied Ai where, link pls?

Downloaded the beta.exe and scenario updates several times over the years, including today without issue.
I ran across this thread for the first time as it's been awhile.
When I download these in IE Explorer and save as exe as discussed in forum they trip Smartscreen.
If I turn off Smartscreen completely, they download and run, but the message is:

This app will not run on your computer. Contact seller for correct version (or some such)

I'm running windows 10 64 bit.

any comments appreciated

Post it in the Tech Support forum.

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Yes its playable but AI not updated yet

Hi
Does somebody understand this? Is the ALLIED AI for scenario 100 older than scenario 33?
Is the Allied AI for scenario 100 the same as for stock scenario 1?

Thank's

Andy

ORIGINAL: morphin

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Yes its playable but AI not updated yet

Hi
Does somebody understand this? Is the ALLIED AI for scenario 100 older than scenario 33?
Is the Allied AI for scenario 100 the same as for stock scenario 1?

Thank's

Andy

Look at the graphic in this post. You can see the AI file date for 100 is newer than 33. Likewise the stock AI for Scen 1 is from 2010 (see the dates in post #1). The AI for 100 is MUCH more recent.

ORIGINAL: Kull

ORIGINAL: morphin

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Yes its playable but AI not updated yet

Hi
Does somebody understand this? Is the ALLIED AI for scenario 100 older than scenario 33?
Is the Allied AI for scenario 100 the same as for stock scenario 1?

Thank's

Andy

Look at the graphic in this post. You can see the AI file date for 100 is newer than 33. Likewise the stock AI for Scen 1 is from 2010 (see the dates in post #1). The AI for 100 is MUCH more recent.

Thank's, I know it is newer, but also for allied AI or only for JAP AI?

As i understood Andy he only adapted the part for JAP AI (player is allied) in sceario 100 (HIs answer was "Yes its plaable but AI not updated yet).... But maybe i'm wrong, english is not my native language.....

ORIGINAL: morphin

Thank's, I know it is newer, but also for allied AI or only for JAP AI?

As i understood Andy he only adapted the part for JAP AI (player is allied) in sceario 100 (HIs answer was "Yes its plaable but AI not updated yet).... But maybe i'm wrong, english is not my native language.....

I honestly don't see where you got that idea. Nothing in this thread (that I could find) indicates that only only side had it's AI updated. Only one variant, yes, but nothing about "Japan only"

Morphin, the AI is good for both sides in scenario 100.

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Morphin, the AI is good for both sides in scenario 100.

Thank's for all the answers

I will have a look at scenario 100..
Maybe i can add the AI for scenario 199 from bigB. I will see

Andy

Currently running revised Allied Ironman Tier 1 Scenario 10 (see post #3) as (A) on Dec 25th 1941.
(J)Ironman has done a couple of things that have caused concern. Issues:

1. High air losses: (J)477, (A)324 Most have come from unrelenting (J) bombing of Rangoon.
Moved AVG and a few Buffaloes to Rangoon and now have 145 Kills at Rangoon.

2. Suicide Singapore Minelayers: (J)MLTF tried to mine Singapore and was "repulsed" by some
(A)ML on ASW Patrol. (J) Minelayers sunk in the AM by (A)LBA Torp Bombers.

Thanks to Andy for all the hours on this project.

-Mark

Scenario 100, Allies.

Andy, Wirraway and C-12 Boomerang need database changes.

The discussion (starting from post #41)
tm.asp?m=3852047&mpage=2&#4441649

Scen 100, Allies

Seems Pearl Harbor on Dec 7, 1941, has some ships that were not present there during the Japanese attack.

AV Wright
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Wrigh ... r_II,_1941

World War II, 1941
Wright departed Pearl Harbor on 20 November, bound for Wake Island, arrived at that advanced base on the 28th, and landed Comdr. "Spiv" Winfield S. Cunningham, who took command of the naval activities on the vulnerable isle, Major James "Jimmy" Patrick Sinnot Deveraux, USMC and Lt. Col Walter L.J. Bayler, USMC. Other passengers who went ashore from the seaplane tender included asphalt technicians, other construction workers, and other Marine Corps officers. The ship also delivered 63,000 gallons of gasoline to Wake's storage tanks before setting course for Midway. There, she delivered a cargo that included ammunition and disembarked passengers that included men reporting for duty at the NAS and with other Marine Corps ground units. Then, with military and civilian passengers embarked, Wright departed Midway on 4 December and headed for Pearl Harbor. While en route, she received the electrifying news that the Japanese had attacked Pearl Harbor on the morning of 7 December. Word of the attack arrived shortly after 0800 that day, and Wright cleared for action and manned her battle stations. Fortunately for her, she never crossed the path of the Japanese striking force. After reaching Pearl Harbor the day after the Japanese attack, Wright got underway on 19 December to transport 126 Marines of the 4th Defense Battalion, with their gear, to Midway. She returned to Pearl Harbor on the day after Christmas with 205 civilians embarked.

AK Alchiba
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Alchiba_(AKA-6)

1941
Alchiba was assigned to the Naval Transportation Service and sailed to Charleston, South Carolina, for shakedown training. She then carried out training exercises along the East Coast through early October and sailed — via Quonset Point, Rhode Island — for Halifax, Nova Scotia, to take on cargo and personnel for transportation to Iceland. She departed Halifax on 22 October in convoy HX 156 and reached Reykjavík, Iceland, on 30 November. The vessel discharged cargo there before sailing back to the United States. She reached New York City on 26 December, and was briefly drydocked there for repairs.

AG Aries
http://www.shipscribe.com/usnaux/ww1/ships/ak51.htm

USS Aries, a 1881 ton (light) displacement freighter, was completed at Duluth, Minnesota, in August 1918 as S.S. Lake Geneva. She served as USS Lake Geneva (ID # 4215-B) from September 1918 to July 1919, carrying coal from the United Kingdom to France, then reverted to merchant service and operated on the Great Lakes as S.S. John J. O'Hagan from 1925 to 1941.
The other two, AG-37 and AG-38 (USS Matinicus), were ordered converted to cargo ships (AK 51 and AK-52) for the Naval Transportation Service and were renamed Aries and Gemini. Aries completed conversion to a cargo ship -- including installation of two pairs of kingposts to handle cargo -- at East Boston, Massachusetts, in May 19

AE Mauna Loa
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Mauna_Loa_(AE-8)
USS Mauna Loa (AE-8) was laid down by Tampa Shipbuilding Co., Tampa, Fla., 10 December 1942; launched 14 April 1943; sponsored by Mrs. Robert E. Friend; and commissioned 27 October 1943, Comdr. George D. Martin in command. She is named after Mauna Loa, a large shield volcano on the Island of Hawaii.

Found another one:

xAP St. Mihiel
https://www.history.navy.mil/research/h ... ihiel.html

Then transferred to the Navy, she was commissioned as St. Mihiel (AP-32) on 22 July 1941, Comdr. Edward B. Rodgers in command.

Having operated as a transport between the west coast and Alaska, with occasional runs to Hawaii, prior to her transfer to the Navy, St. Mihiel performed the same duty after commissioning. Into 1943, she called regularly at ports on mainland Alaska and in the eastern Aleutians. In May 1943, she participated in the occupation of Attu; then resumed more routine transport duties.