Pry's New Scenarios

[Grotius]

Thanks for your replies.

No worries, I'll save up any further comments for later. I'm kind of in crunch time too.

[Grotius]

Well, I can't resist posting a couple more comments.

1. Midway is a size 6 airfield at game start? I didn't check the stock game, but that doesn't sound right. Also, Wake is already a 1(1) Port, 3(2) Airfield.

2. I made some AK-only TFs on Dec 8 to carry only supply. On Dec 9, they were all full, often with as much as 30-40K supply! They seem to be loading much faster than normal. Maybe I'm missing something, but my AKs usually sit in port for 3-4 days before they have that much supply loaded. Hmm.

[Kereguelen]

ORIGINAL: Grotius
2. I made some AK-only TFs on Dec 8 to carry only supply. On Dec 9, they were all full, often with as much as 30-40K supply! They seem to be loading much faster than normal. Maybe I'm missing something, but my AKs usually sit in port for 3-4 days before they have that much supply loaded. Hmm.

Maybe because of reduced transport capacity?

[tsimmonds]

2. I made some AK-only TFs on Dec 8 to carry only supply. On Dec 9, they were all full, often with as much as 30-40K supply! They seem to be loading much faster than normal. Maybe I'm missing something, but my AKs usually sit in port for 3-4 days before they have that much supply loaded. Hmm.

Depends on the size of the port.

....but then you probably knew that already.

[bstarr]

I just checkout the database on #33. Where'd the pilots go? [&:]

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: bstarr

I just checkout the database on #33. Where'd the pilots go? [&:]

pry
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 1229
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dukemourn

I noticed there are no pilots in the editor of your scenario but this has no noticable effect in the game. What purpose do the pilots that exist in the editor of stock games play?

The pilots specified in the pilots data base are assigned to specific groups, for instance Sakai and Thatch, I just removed them all and let the computer assign the names after doing a total rewrite of the aircraft data base I did not feel up to also having to do the pilots to get them back to the right groups.

[Kereguelen]

The pics for the P-38F and the Lancer are not uploading in the stock-map 8th Dec scenario (did not check the others). Only blue skies visible!

[bstarr]

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

ORIGINAL: bstarr

I just checkout the database on #33. Where'd the pilots go? [&:]

pry
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 1229
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dukemourn

I noticed there are no pilots in the editor of your scenario but this has no noticable effect in the game. What purpose do the pilots that exist in the editor of stock games play?

The pilots specified in the pilots data base are assigned to specific groups, for instance Sakai and Thatch, I just removed them all and let the computer assign the names after doing a total rewrite of the aircraft data base I did not feel up to also having to do the pilots to get them back to the right groups.

missed that one. thanks.

[Grotius]

Depends on the size of the port.

....but then you probably knew that already.

Hehe, yep, I knew that. I was insta-loading in ports like Amami, Takao, and Camhranh bay, none of which are size 9 or 10 ports. In each case, the Transport TF had left port with full cargo holds after turn execution. I don't remember being able to load from these mid-size ports this quickly. I mean, usually I will load for a turn, then "cancel load supplies" and send the AKs on their way half-full or so. This time, they left on the very turn I started filling 'em up. These were AKs of all sizes, all the way up to the big 5500 ones.

It may just be that because transports are smaller, they are full quicker. I hope that's all it is. The paradox here is that a feature designed to slow me down may actually speed me up.

More testing called for! Back at it.

[Grotius]

One more thing to report. Again, I'm playing scenario 31, the December 8 start. On December 10, I got this result on my first assault at Hong Kong:

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 12/10/41

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Hong Kong

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 48767 troops, 606 guns, 17 vehicles

Defending force 13109 troops, 114 guns, 4 vehicles

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 5

Japanese assault odds: 9 to 1 (fort level 5)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Hong Kong base !!!


Japanese ground losses:
181 casualties reported
Guns lost 8

Allied ground losses:
7366 casualties reported
Guns lost 104
Vehicles lost 1

----------------------------------------

All I did was move two divisions in from Canton; I used the 18th Division to garrison Canton (both to satisfy the garrison requirement and prevent any Chinese advance into the city) while this happened. As I recall, the 18th used to start elsewhere in the stock game, and you've moved it to Canton because that is its historic starting location. That's fine by me. But the natural tendency of players, who know far more than Japan did historically, will be to beef up the attack on Hong Kong by allowing the 18th to support it one way or another.

Anyway, I just thought I'd report it for what it's worth. I'm going to soldier on, though I may also be tempted to try the CHS beta...

[Grotius]

Hehe, I know Pry is away from his keyboard, but I gotta post all these comments before I forget. This one is good news: your ploy for BB Arizona and BB Oklahoma worked like a charm. I peeked at the Allied side's "sunk ship" list.

[michaelm75au]

Hi
Did you d/l and install the new art files for planes? Last file after the first 6 scenario files at front of this thread.

Michael

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen

The pics for the P-38F and the Lancer are not uploading in the stock-map 8th Dec scenario (did not check the others). Only blue skies visible!

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: Grotius

Hehe, I know Pry is away from his keyboard, but I gotta post all these comments before I forget. This one is good news: your ploy for BB Arizona and BB Oklahoma worked like a charm. I peeked at the Allied side's "sunk ship" list.

Yeps, same here. I started the Scen 31 as Allies and found that Ok and Az did sink. Seems to work fine.

And for pry: Some CD units like in Hongkong and Singapore start with no preparation or minimal for their location. I think it'd be realistic if they had at least 50 or even 100 in that. After all, static CD units should know their location they are deployend in. [:D] It might help a bit to prevent premature loss of HK, for example.

Cheers,

M.S.

[treespider]

As I posted elsewhere...

I ran a test....
Sorry no screen shots yet.... just look at Tanakas

AI v AI, Scenario 34 (Pry's Scenario)
Historical (on XP for what its worth)
Jap and Allied Sub Doctrine ON
Weather ON
Historical 1st Turn & December 7 OFF
Player Defined Upgrade - OFF (as if it mattered in AI V AI)

Played through 3/26/42

CBI -
Rangoon- Japanese
Meiktila - contested
Lashio/Taung Gyi have Chinese present

Nanning and Pakhoi - Chinese

PHILLIPINES -

Bataan - Allied
Rest of bases on Luzon - Japanese
Mindanao - All Japanese
Jolo - Japanese
Most bases in central PI around Ilio (Sp?) - Allied

DEI / Malaya

Malaya - All Japanese
Java - All Japanese
Bali, Koepang, Amboina - Japanese
Borneo - all bases except Jesselton and Sandakan - Japanese
Most of Sulawesi - Japanese

PAPUA NG / Solomons

Rabaul, Lae, Finschaven - Japanese
Shortlands, Buin - Japanese
Lunga - Allied troops present, No Japanese

GILBERTS -

All Japanese

WAKE

Still American


SHIP Losses

Allied
BB OKLa, Ariz sunk on Dec 8
3 Allied CA's
10 SS (3 or 4 "at" Manilla and 3 or 4 "at" Soerbaja (at not near)))
Sundry other CL's DD's and various Cargo ships


Japanese
Sundry light ships
5 SS

[Kereguelen]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Hi
Did you d/l and install the new art files for planes? Last file after the first 6 scenario files at front of this thread.

Michael

Oops, no simply forgot it

Thanks!

K

[pry]

ORIGINAL: Grotius

Well, I can't resist posting a couple more comments.

1. Midway is a size 6 airfield at game start? I didn't check the stock game, but that doesn't sound right. Also, Wake is already a 1(1) Port, 3(2) Airfield.

Time for a couple of quick comments

Same as stock game I tend not to mess with base sizes from stock values much because this is one of the cheats the AI uses. The AI does not do a great job of selecting places to attack so the larger size bases and ones with stocks of supply and fuel are incentives for the AI. The the 2 things the AI is not very good at doing are submarine operations and also keeping itself supplied... (so desireable target locations with fuel and supply help)

2. I made some AK-only TFs on Dec 8 to carry only supply. On Dec 9, they were all full, often with as much as 30-40K supply! They seem to be loading much faster than normal. Maybe I'm missing something, but my AKs usually sit in port for 3-4 days before they have that much supply loaded. Hmm.

Same with every scenario on turn 1 hyper (100% load bonus on turn 1 if enough is present at base and base size permits it) load is in effect, always been there.

[pry]

ORIGINAL: Grotius

One more thing to report. Again, I'm playing scenario 31, the December 8 start. On December 10, I got this result on my first assault at Hong Kong:

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 12/10/41

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Hong Kong

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 48767 troops, 606 guns, 17 vehicles

Defending force 13109 troops, 114 guns, 4 vehicles

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 5

Japanese assault odds: 9 to 1 (fort level 5)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Hong Kong base !!!


Japanese ground losses:
181 casualties reported
Guns lost 8

Allied ground losses:
7366 casualties reported
Guns lost 104
Vehicles lost 1

----------------------------------------

All I did was move two divisions in from Canton; I used the 18th Division to garrison Canton (both to satisfy the garrison requirement and prevent any Chinese advance into the city) while this happened. As I recall, the 18th used to start elsewhere in the stock game, and you've moved it to Canton because that is its historic starting location. That's fine by me. But the natural tendency of players, who know far more than Japan did historically, will be to beef up the attack on Hong Kong by allowing the 18th to support it one way or another.

Anyway, I just thought I'd report it for what it's worth. I'm going to soldier on, though I may also be tempted to try the CHS beta...
[/quote]

Your are attacking with double the force that was historically used at 100% enabled against unprepared defenders, you throw any historical time context out the window...

Anyway, I just thought I'd report it for what it's worth. I'm going to soldier on, though I may also be tempted to try the CHS beta...

Variety is good... have at it

[pry]

ORIGINAL: Grotius

Hehe, I know Pry is away from his keyboard, but I gotta post all these comments before I forget. This one is good news: your ploy for BB Arizona and BB Oklahoma worked like a charm. I peeked at the Allied side's "sunk ship" list.

Problem is that about 5% of the time one of them will not sink and will eventually repair... Never seen both make it but sometimes 1 actually does

[pry]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar
And for pry: Some CD units like in Hongkong and Singapore start with no preparation or minimal for their location. I think it'd be realistic if they had at least 50 or even 100 in that. After all, static CD units should know their location they are deployend in. [:D] It might help a bit to prevent premature loss of HK, for example.

Cheers,

M.S.

Easy thing to do I'll add this

[pry]

ORIGINAL: treespider

As I posted elsewhere...

I ran a test....
Sorry no screen shots yet.... just look at Tanakas

AI v AI, Scenario 34 (Pry's Scenario)
Historical (on XP for what its worth)
Jap and Allied Sub Doctrine ON
Weather ON
Historical 1st Turn & December 7 OFF
Player Defined Upgrade - OFF (as if it mattered in AI V AI)

Played through 3/26/42

CBI -
Rangoon- Japanese
Meiktila - contested
Lashio/Taung Gyi have Chinese present

Nanning and Pakhoi - Chinese

PHILLIPINES -

Bataan - Allied
Rest of bases on Luzon - Japanese
Mindanao - All Japanese
Jolo - Japanese
Most bases in central PI around Ilio (Sp?) - Allied

DEI / Malaya

Malaya - All Japanese
Java - All Japanese
Bali, Koepang, Amboina - Japanese
Borneo - all bases except Jesselton and Sandakan - Japanese
Most of Sulawesi - Japanese

PAPUA NG / Solomons

Rabaul, Lae, Finschaven - Japanese
Shortlands, Buin - Japanese
Lunga - Allied troops present, No Japanese

GILBERTS -

All Japanese

WAKE

Still American


SHIP Losses

Allied
BB OKLa, Ariz sunk on Dec 8
3 Allied CA's
10 SS (3 or 4 "at" Manilla and 3 or 4 "at" Soerbaja (at not near)))
Sundry other CL's DD's and various Cargo ships


Japanese
Sundry light ships
5 SS

General flow looks OK to me, AI is rotten at doing sub Operations so in an AI to AI game the losses will be higher than you would expect, AI also tends to let subs get bombed in ports... Over your entire test looks much like the ones I ran flow wise and I see nothing out of whack. If you are still running this test I would be interested in the Japanese Pilot pool and experience level of the Japanese air groups...