Matrix Games Forums

I have decided to go with 3 releases this time around:

The hardcore historical one that I have been working on-yeah Japan likely cannot win that one decisively, but the focus will remain on historical realism. I will be tweaking incomes up by about 25%, incl. raising Japan and the US while lowering India and Australia (since your opponent didn't even bother with any Lend Lease to them),

The 2nd will greatly decrease the Normalization period thus increasing income all around pretty substantially (iirc about double), but will otherwise be identical to #1 above. I can tweak incomes via either that mechanic or by adjusting each country's base Industrial Modifier-the reason I have not used the latter is that they would end up pretty tiny for the 4 subsidiary majors and they already are rather low. I'll need to increase income from scripts the same % tho before I release it.

#3 will borrow heavily from John 3rd's alternate universe scenarios, which mainly gave the IJN a number of new capital ships. It is quite ahistorical because (a) they would have required a crapload of extra iron ore that I don't think Japan could have traded for prewar even assuming they had the funds, (b) several new huge slipways for all of these extra ships, and (c) a less obstructive IJN old-guard contingent. Once the war starts they really do end up in fantasyland since now all that ore would be cut off, and was (c.f. the long 2 1/2 years between the Shokakus and the Taiho), but I applaud the attempt. John 3rd's point-of-departure was having Yamamoto himself become appointed to become the Navy Minister and be given carte blanche in his build plans. Note Japan already had their various Circle plans in various stages of completion when the war started.

I think I'll keep the techs the way they are-the morale boosters are meant to simulate training. I'm not sure it is worth it to free a slot just for bumping up ship movements; if I were to redo the entire map to a smaller scale I would tho.

Slight correction to my plans-Scenario #2 will double incomes-turning off Normalization more than tripled them, overkill... #1 will increase them by c. 25%.

Anyway, here's some screenies with SIPRES' new counters!

I see you have re-worked the geography of the Hawaiian Islands. Looks quite good!

As we spoke earlier yesterday....I like the fact that you will have three versions available.

Oh course, I'm a masochist, so next time I play, I will insist on the 'Historical Scenario' as the Japanese. More reason to really go for broke early and often on the US fleet.........


Like the new remake of the counters too. I see Diamond
Head has docks now....haha just kidding.

Keep up the good work, Strider.

Yeah, Oahu needed a 2nd hex for all those ports but each hex needed to have 1 open side for invasions. I tried realigning it NW-SE, but ehh it's fine this way. Truk has been reworked in a similar way.

New Partisan map for China (and Manchuria tho no partisan changes there, tho I did add some towns and streamlined the road/rail network):



It will probably require the same number of garrisons as before but is now much less cluttered.

WitP Version .950 now available:

https://www.mediafire.com/file/cjg9lzdl ... 0.zip/file

As well as Nihon Kagun, my alternate history scenario:

https://www.mediafire.com/file/xxzjyw18 ... 0.zip/file

I decided against the other alternate version with oodles of income, just seemed like it would distract from these other versions.

So choose whatever floats your boat, and enjoy!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

January 29,2024

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

War in the Pacific .950

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Scenario creator: Elessar


CHANGELOG:

Biggest changes involve major alterations to the starting build limits. The US starting allowed builds are lower than before, but all 3 of their Mobilization techs (and both Production and Industrial tech) now can get 4 chits (vs. 3 before), which will take about 6-7 months to pay off. US has 1 level in Ship Production so that their next level will gain the benefit of a lot of half ships, as does their Army Mobilization. Otherwise their starting allowed builds are much lower than before, requiring significant investments in the Mobilization techs to ensure their forces are sufficiently robust by 1944-45. Max Tech investment for the Americans increased to 4,000 MPPs (from 3250) to allow for all these extra chits, and they are given 550 more starting MPPs to help jump-start their economy.

Japan now has 2 levels in each of the 3 Mobilization techs, reflecting that they have been at war with China for several years and had already commenced their various Circle ship building programs. China has had their available starting builds significantly restricted so that if Japan decides to go quiet in China the latter won't be able to launch a major offensive right away; they also only get a maximum of 2 chits in the 3 Mobilization techs.

India, UK, and Australia by contrast have had few changes in their starting builds.

2nd biggest set of changes involve income, which has been adjusted upward by about 25% by reducing the Normalization period from 28 to 22 days, but India and Australia both given a 10% drop in their Industrial Modifiers (to 40% in both cases), which just barely gives them c. 5 extra MPPs/turn, thus incentivizing more Lend-Lease spending by the US. US starting IM dropped from 140% to 125% but their Industrial Tech increased from 25% to 30% (equalizing the former way at L3). Income scripts adjusted up by +25% in most cases.

Terrain in SE China beefed up with numerous forested mountain and hill hexes, but with some valleys in between.

ZoC changes-smaller ships and second-line land units require 2 units, +1 for land (both categories), +10 for ships (both). Subs I put in the 1st (single) category.

Kamikazies' cost is now 75 (was 100) base, demoralization damage is now 50 (was 25), +10% per Naval Weapons level, +1 per level for all Naval Attack parameters (switched off of Ground Attack where I had mistakenly applied it). However, they cannot be built before June 1 1944, and take 3 months to build (vs. 1).

Subs: Subs: Biggest change is that they now have Naval Weapons as their third tech slot, with all offensive upgrades copied over from Advanced Submarines, the latter tech now reflecting operational and tactical capabilities unrelated to their weapon performance (Naval Defense vs. surface ships changed from +0.5 per level to +1.0). US given L2 in that tech as compared to the Japanese (L1), but the US Navy is still at L0 for NW (Japanese L2).Subs' retreat distance is now 13, retreat % 50%, and they suffer no supply loss when attacked. If that doesn't work out, I'll go even farther, basically disable diving altogther (tho it will still be selectable by the sub's controller) and have them solely rely on Retreat to get away from enemies, with maybe some Evasion percentages as well.

Rivers will provide higher defense bonuses, from 20-35% for regular Rivers to 30%-50% for Major Rivers

Oahu made a primary supply source.

Bomber ranges will be equalized (Japan's lowered) for all countries so one side can correctly gauge the other sides' ranges. Japan will instead get an extra level (now L3). Medium bomber's base Strike Range Lowered to 11 (was 13), but get +2 per tech level of Long Range.

Deleted the 2nd [N] port off of Honaria in the Solomon's (blocked an invasion route to Tulagi).

Fixed some road/rail errors.

Fixed some unit errors (tech levels, entrenchments, etc.)

Set Australian chits to the same as the other majors (32221).

Note added to the general tech info in Infantry Weapons, noting that at least 2 maybe 3 chits are possible for all techs, and 4 for the American economic ones.

Thailand HQs given Infantry Weapons upgrade capability.

Ship Bombardment levels for cruisers on up against AA units equalized to those for all other land targets.

Heavy and light cruisers no longer get a Sub Attack bonus per ASW tech level.

Regular port defense vs. carriers lowered to 1 from 2, but Major Port carrier defense increased to 2.

Communist China given an Engineer build, placed in build queue and due on April 1 1942. They are also given 1 more infantry division at start.

Various warning symbols added with text mouseovers for warnings about triggering Indian/New Zealand/Australian/Chinese/Japanese militia units. Several added for the USSR Naval Zone of Exclusion. I could not however make these active (as in flipping colors in the symbols if violated). Minor errors fixed in various militia spawns.

Some of these militia events consolidated into single scripts. Couple of kamikazie spawns added to the Japanese home island militia events. Edits to militia spawns for all sides: all show up at 10 strength but with no research. Other minor unit spawn edits made.

Positive American National Morale liberation scripts added for several key locations which normally will be lost early in the war: Manila (+3000), Davao (+1500), Honaria, Wake Island, and Guam (all +1000).

Storm Damage tweaked up a bit: cruisers guaranteed -1, capital ships 50:50 0 or -1, DD/DE 50:50 -1 or -2. This is mainly intended to discourage fleets from always being at sea.

Truk and Oahu made much smaller (their original designs were carryovers from vanilla), with all ports radiating outward, avoiding the issues with the ports not flipping control.

Japanese base Fort build time reduced further to 30 days (was 70 which will be reduced to 60 for all other nations-vanilla is 90 note). Okinawa given a 3rd land hex and port. Iwo Jima, Chichi Jima, and Naha and Kunigami on Okinawa all made Fortified Towns.

Gen. Stillwell spawn event for China added in accordance with the NM event.

Updated NATO counters courtesy of SIPRES and his fine artistic skills, also making for better matches with the 3D ones.

Garrisons' Infantry Weapons upgrade costs halved (from 20% to 10%).

Subs given max level 2 for AA, only +0.5 vs. aircraft per level.

Hump DE now costs the US 30, same as the amount China gets (was 15).

Doolittle Raid now will give a higher National Morale boost (3000 to 5000). Still debating whether 2 US carriers would need to be the North Pacific somewhere to trigger.

Cranked up the number of garrisons available to the Japanese Army per Mobilization level. Japanese minors given at least 1 Garrison build (was an oversight), but otherwise builds generally tweaked downward for most minors.

Decided to stick with the way that the Atomic Bomb has been modeled-main stumbling block is that damage inflicted by a unit (i.e. Rockets) won't do National Morale damage. but added a 4th warhead available that can go off on Oct 1, 1945 on Fukuoka. Damage increased for all 4 events to 8-10 (but 7-9 for Nagasaki thanks to its hills). NM damage increased from 7K to 8K.

India and Australia's NM all dropped from 100% to 90%-UK increased to that level from 87%.

Allied ship transit loops all doubled in capacity from 4 to 8, destination hexes moved north in the West Indian Ocean.

Canadian convoy to the UK added, but efficiency dropped to 50% (postulating that a lot of it was going to the Atlantic theatre).

Regular Amphibious units all eliminated, doubled allowed builds and tech increases of Long-Range Amphibious units. DEI given 2 each of LRA and Transports. US regular Transport base build level increased to 12 from 10, + 1.5 per level of Logistics.

LRA Amphibs given vanilla's attack values (they were mistakenly zeroed out against everything below Soft and Hard units), but ground unit defenses against Amphibs per Infantry Weapons level also set to vanilla's value (+0.5 per level).

Chinese partisans (both Communist and Nationalist) redone, eliminating adjacent ones and thus a lot of clutter, basically maintaining a 3 hex minimum distance between them. Number is now 26 supply events, 31 spawns.

Japanese DE added for synthetic oil plants at Uba, Japan and Fushun, Manchuria. Map changed in SW Japan to add room for the former resource.

Yamato cancellation note made private for the Axis only (turns out NM notes cannot be made private, but popups can).

Nanjing territory extended to the coast, port (Yancheng) opened for a convoy.

Roads and rails in Manchuria cleaned up, some Settlements added on both sides of the Manchurian/Russian border.



Victory conditions clarified, more combinations added.
8 key victory locations: Tokyo, Keijo, Chungking, Delhi, Manila, Rangoon, Canberra, and Singapore.

Axis Decisive Victory if they hold all 8
Axis Major victory if they hold 7
Axis Minor victory if they hold 5
Axis Tactical victory if they hold 4 (which means Allies also have 4, but tie goes to the Axis)
Allied Decisive Victory if they hold all 8
Allied Major Victory if they only don't hold Tokyo
Allied Minor Victory if they hold 6
Allied Tactical Victory if they hold 5

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

January 29, 2024

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

NIHON KAGUN .950

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Scenario creator: Elessar


This alternate history scenario posits that the Imperial Japanese Navy's top brass ensures it is much more realistically prepared for a long war with the United States and allies. It also posits a slightly more liberal Washington Naval Treaty allowing 2 extra battleship/battlecruisers per side. It has the following changes from my base War in the Pacific scenario:

* A more realistic pilot training regimen designed to ensure adequate replacements in case of a long war means all experienced naval and land-based air units and carriers start with normal experience, but Japan now has an extra level in Aerial Warfare (L2).

* Starts with L3 in Ship Production, to model partial implementation of their Circle Five shipbuilding program. This means their future growth will be less since they've so aggressively built up their fleet before the war.

* Japan starts with 300 more MPPs (1600 vs. 1300).

A significantly changed build queue for the first two years of the war:

* Japan still gets the first two Yamatos, but the last two are canceled in favor of 2 new battlecruisers in the build queue (Kawachi class, due 6-42 and 4-43 respectively) meant to ultimately replace the Kongos (with more available to build later in the war if desired).

* They also have 3 additional fleet carriers (improved Shokaku class) in their queue for the following two years (7-42/1-43/6-43).

* All 3 light carriers still undergoing trials as of December 7, 1941 have their activation dates moved up c. 6 months.

* Japan gets 2 post WWI heavy units: a 7th older battleship (Tosa), and a 5th battlecruiser of the original Amagi class to supplement the Kongos (Ashitaka).

* 1 additional unit of each class of heavy cruiser (Yoshino), light cruiser (Minase), destroyer (Minekaze), , and submarine (I-121). Another heavy cruiser is due in June '42 (Niitaka), and an additional light carrier (Ryukaku) in Sept. '42.

The Allies however also get some extra units thanks to the changes in the treaties as well as in response to the changes in the Japanese dispositions:

The United States Navy now has the following either on the map or in the queue:

* A post WW1 older battleship (Oregon) and fast battleship/battlecruiser (Constellation), a light carrier (Ithaca), heavy cruiser (Rome), destroyer (Mahan), and submarine (Flying Fish). In addition, the fleet carrier Ranger is sent to the Pacific from the Atlantic in the winter of '43 (February).

* The United Kingdom has the battlecruiser Renown available in their home waters at start, with the battleship King George V transferred to the Pacific in late '42 (vs. late '44). They also get the light cruiser Dido at start and an extra destroyer (Tribal).

Other notes:

Otherwise this scenario has the same settings as my base War in the Pacific scenario, including having no AI for either side.

I owe a definite debt to John 3rd of the WitP:AE forums-when people here asked for an alternate history scenario his efforts were my 1st logical go-to resource.

Oh, my word! Thanks so much for your dedicated work, oh mighty King of Gondor and Arnor!

Oh Strider...you are indeed King. Having two scenarios of this is great.
Question. I assume that the house-rules regarding Carriers are still necessary?
CVs > Mixed and Bomber mode only.
CVLs > All modes allowed including FTR.

Yeah, I would recommend that still.

For newer members, we found out that carriers on fighter mode were very hard to damage and sink.

Hey guys, I know you both have tested the carrier fighter mode issue, but I was wondering…

The basic premise is that carrier fighters are essentially for defensive roles: CAP to protect the carrier against enemy land-based air and carrier air attack, and as escorts for its own carrier bombers when these are on attack missions.

So, given that there is currently no way to mod excluding carrier fighter mode in the editor (well, other than setting to 0 Intercepts, perhaps?, in combination with 0 Range for Intercepts?) is it possible to limit a carrier’s defense factors against enemy land-based air and enemy carrier air attacks even further?

I mean, your house rule is great for multiplayer and for solo hotseat play. I was just considering this for play against the AI. Thoughts?

EDIT: been play-testing carrier vs. carrier battles without Intercepts, without Escorts. Makes carrier warfare similar to regular naval surface combat. There is still a difference between carrier modes, though. Preliminary results are interesting, but are not quite “right”, i.e., carriers on CAP fighter mode will cause more damage to enemy carrier air (good)… but does not properly defend the carrier (bad). More play-testing but it looks like this won’t work correctly.

Curious to know about the criteria for carrier escort missions. In a test, a Japanese light carrier on mixed mode (CAP on auto), launched an attack on an American fleet carrier in fighter mode (CAP on auto). A nearby Japanese fleet carrier on mixed mode (CAP on auto) provided escort. Why did not the Japanese light carrier provide its own escort when it could?

Japanese artillery gets 3 shells/turn, meaning 3 shots per turn, at least in the alternate scenario. Just wanted to ask to be sure, if this is by design?


And what a blatant racism

Birds were vital for the war effort.

I put those silly tags into the script files on a lark , not realizing that they would show up in the game. Almost all are only for when Japan gets a convoy from unlikely places they will rarely conquer. For the moment enjoy them for the Easter Eggs that they are.

I believe 3 is the vanilla setting for artillery-and for the IJA given the thicker terrain I added in China will likely prove helpful if not necessary.

Elessar2 wrote: Tue Feb 13, 2024 2:39 am I believe 3 is the vanilla setting for artillery-and for the IJA given the thicker terrain I added in China will likely prove helpful if not necessary.

Well, 3 is vanilla max shells, but vanilla replenishment is 1 shell/turn, I guess? But yeah, it is really needed for Japs. I asked, because Chinese artillery gets just standard 1 shell/turn. Anyway, even with all these shells it took me whole 1942 + couple more months to break neck of Chinese army and start steamrolling past Changsha/Sian/communist capital, so probably ok.

Hmm, just checked, I see a max of 3 for both Japan and China-note the replenishment is hard-coded at 1.

Since you are in the middle of a game, would like to know how you're handling all the partisans, since that is something that other Japanese players have questioned, tho one J. player did as you have and captured a big chunk of China. I assume you did at least 2 levels of Army Mobilization for all the necessary garrisons?

Elessar2 wrote: Wed Feb 14, 2024 12:48 am Hmm, just checked, I see a max of 3 for both Japan and China-note the replenishment is hard-coded at 1.

Since you are in the middle of a game, would like to know how you're handling all the partisans, since that is something that other Japanese players have questioned, tho one J. player did as you have and captured a big chunk of China. I assume you did at least 2 levels of Army Mobilization for all the necessary garrisons?

Well, replenishment on IJA artillery units in alternate scenario is 3/turn... Though indeed not sure how to check this in editor. I know one can set 'min shells' to achieve similar effect, but it is not the case here.

I did not take inland China yet (Dec 1942), situation was like this:

But after year of fighting land was easy to take, with Chinese army depleted, my HQs on xp 3, IJA with 3 artillery units and getting inf weapons 2, so now only steamroll left. Unless mass US bombers could spawn, hm.
(I am bit afraid that upgraded heavy bombers can stop land offensives anywhere, tbh, and cost is not an issue for US)

I did not use mobilisation tech on Japs, just divisions (reconnaissance/div/cav div/mountain div...), costs 75 to 90, so reasonable. Have a dozen possible left to build, should be almost enough for central China. For now, there were enough garrisons, and some damaged starting divisions were also left behind. I think partisan situation is manageable, there must be some costs. But yeah, in 1943 at least one more level of army mobilisation would be optimal, just have not purchased it earlier.

I cannot find any such setting for altering the shell replenishment rate, unless I am missing something obvious somewhere. OK, I see how it can be done, by setting Min Shells to 3, but it is clearly 1 in both scenarios. I'll summon a mod in here. Should be the same for both scenarios since the alternate scenario is just piggybacked off of the main one.

I see Mao is (barely) still in the game. I guess given your heavy investment in China that you didn't invade either Australia or India? How is the Japanese Navy doing, has China sucked income from that useful vs. the USN?

Elessar2 wrote: Thu Feb 15, 2024 1:13 am I cannot find any such setting for altering the shell replenishment rate, unless I am missing something obvious somewhere. OK, I see how it can be done, by setting Min Shells to 3, but it is clearly 1 in both scenarios. I'll summon a mod in here. Should be the same for both scenarios since the alternate scenario is just piggybacked off of the main one.

I see Mao is (barely) still in the game. I guess given your heavy investment in China that you didn't invade either Australia or India? How is the Japanese Navy doing, has China sucked income from that useful vs. the USN?

I checked in the main scenario, I also have 3 shells a turn for Japs heavy artillery there. And do you not?

Yeah, no move against India or Australia. Navy stopped after usual advances, that is, amphibs got New Guinea and Solomons capitals and that was it. If I am to guess, Japs can conquer any single one of China/India/Australia, but not two. So... China looks most obvious and beneficial, at least for me. IJN got one carrier and one sub in queue, plus tech research, ok plus all maritime bombers, but that is it.