Pacific World Campaign

[yolo911]

Very good work. I am enjoying the mod. I am wondering if I am doing something wrong. It is November 1939 and I(Japan) sent an invasion fleet south to Java. I wanted to start out early buy invading that string of islands. I declared war on them but it will not allow me to attack the units that are there, specifically the town of Batavia. Any suggestions? I am plaing the AI by the way. Is there a time restriction that I am violating?

[scottsmm]

Run over Japan with your mouse and take a look at the percentage which should say Japan 50% Axis, in order to invade a country you must first declare war on them (if neutral) but you must also be able to invade them with a country which is totally activated 100% on your side. In other words Japan isn't at war right now so she won't be able to invade any other countries, or take any measurements of war (attacking enemy units, cities, etc). If Japan however was at a 100% Axis then there is a problem with the game/mod. Hope this helps.

[yolo911]

I have the Strategic Command series of war games, and I just read the manual for Pacific Theater, twice, and I did not realize you couldn't just declare war if you wanted to. Thanks for the reply. So I guess that means it is scripted and at a predetermined point the program will change the setting to Axis 100% and I can proceed with my invasion plans?

One more item. As I said, I have read the manual twice and some sections many times but I will never understand supply as long as I live. Every time I think I can predect the supply a unit will get he comes in at a much lower rate. I had just started a new game as Axis(the Nupreal WORLD WAR MOD) and two turns into it I had an armored unit next to Warsaw. I had moved the HQ towards Warsaw and there were a few other ground units nearby. I checked the supply for the Armored unit and was shocked to see a big, fat zero.

I think a great addition would be a hot key to predict what the supply is for each tile that a unit can reach during it's movement phase. Supply is the one thing that keeps me from playing with a human opponent because I wouldn't have a prayer if I was playing against someone who understood supply.

[U8led]

Yolo what probably happened in your Warsaw example is the city relcaimed any vacant tiles around it. This probably cut off any supply route from your armor to the HQ.

Hope that helps.

[Nupremal]

Japan is not active - remember the manual was not written for the mod - for that I have my own set of documents under the docs folder for you to view. The following documents are available for every mod:

1) readme.txt under the main campaign folder - this includes version changes

2) docs folder with Excel files - Diplomacy, Armed Forces, Unit Stats, and Naval Units

the most useful is diplomacy. This tells you each nation's assets (MPPs and all cities), its armed forces if its a minor (majors are under armed forces), its diplomatic status and how it is changed by various events. Japan is designed to activate roughly around the end of 41, but could be earlier or later depending on decisions made.

The unit stats shows how the units are modified, and the naval sheet just shows how I determined the available naval units in the game (the stats are also under unit stats)

[scottsmm]

yolo911, don't worry about it, in my first couple of games I made the same mistake, as I tried to invade Finland with the USSR (right around the winter war starting point), and of course all that happened was the Finnish army was upgraded for Barbarossa, and it was a major pain, because I had to actually keep "decent troops" on the Finnish border to prevent them from making a breakout.

As for supply, you'll find that "practice makes perfect", and eventually you won't make this sort of mistake ever again.

[SeaMonkey]

U8led, supply is not that difficult if you keep a few basic things in mind.

1. Always try to keep a friendly unit adjacent to your most extended units, even just keeping the corners of the tiles touching. Maintain that connection to a supply source, HQ, Cities, Ports.

2. Remember supply is diminished by the amount of the movement penalty for each terrain type, which is negated by roads, roads count only 1.

3. Your primary source of supply (HQs) have to trace a line of tiles, adjusted for terrain effects, back to a supply source no less than the amount of % effectiveness divided by 10 of that secondary supply source(city or port).

Example: Lets say you have an HQ(primary supply) two tiles from secondary supply source(city/port) that is 50% effectiveness and that HQ is 2 tiles from your supply questionable combat unit. If one of the tiles from the secondary supply to the primary supply(HQ) has a terrain movement cost of 2 action points(AP) and one tile is clear or a road(AP=1) then that is a total of 3 AP/tile trace, so 50%/10 - 3 = 2, HQ is in supply and will have supply of 8 or 80%. If the road/clear tile happened to be a mountain(no road) then its AP = 3 and there would be no supply for HQ(HQs always have minimum of 5 supply). 50%/10 - (2 + 3) = 0.

Now from the HQ to the unit you use the same application, but the amount of supply is degraded by the total AP/terrain movement cost of the tiles you trace through to the combat unit. If the HQ had 8 supply(able to trace to secondary >0) and the two tiles it traces supply through are clear or a terrain negated by a road(the one the unit occupies) then supply is 6(8-2) for the combat unit.

Mainly you just have to have an understanding about terrain cost for movement and HQ(primary) supply knowing that HQs can have only 3 levels of supply, 5(all by themselves, cut off from secondary), 8(secondary connection <=5) or 10(secondary >=8).

Now just sum/add the terrain movement cost(APs)of connecting tiles from(subtract) the HQ's supply level and you have the combat unit's supply level assuming it is not cut off by enemy unit's Tiles/Zones of Control(ZoCs).

Simple!

[yolo911]

First, I would like to thank everyone who took the time to reply.

I will do some experimentation to see if I can put into practice what you explained to me. I guess I missed the part about ZOC's. I didn't know that enemy occupied cities could negate an adjacent unit's supply chain and reduce it to zero. I think I am going to continue to be surprised and a little frustrated with a units calculated supply.

Thanks again.

[U8led]

U8led, supply is not that difficult if you keep a few basic things in mind.

Mainly you just have to have an understanding about terrain cost for movement and HQ(primary) supply knowing that HQs can have only 3 levels of supply, 5(all by themselves, cut off from secondary), 8(secondary connection <=5) or 10(secondary >=8).

SeaMonkey not sure why you directed that post at me, I understand supply completely.

As a matter of fact I see a mistake in the last line of your quote above.

The last number you wrote '8' should be '=>6'.

HQ = supply 10(secondary >5)

(HQ would have to be in the city if it at60%, 1mp away at 70% etc..)

[SeaMonkey]

A slight oversight on my part U8, sorry, thanks for the corrections:).............at work, third 14 hour day in a row, got a little distracted trying to escape into the SC realm.

Should have used "efficiency" also instead of effectiveness.

Hey....but at least we get it!

[SeaMonkey]

It seems that in Taiwan, the corps that is there with an AP=1(supply =<50%) can enter the mountains, terrain cost = 3?

Explanation please!

[Nupremal]

how would I know? It is a garrison not a corps.

I notice some very weird stuff. For example I captured Rabaul w/Japanese corps and travelled around in the jungle some to capture it all - should not have since I think eventually it turns to yours anyway if there are no friendly resources, though again the timing of that seems odd to me it sometimes happens sometimes not. Anyway I could go but then got stuck and could not get back. I do hate the "stuck" that happens. If you don't move for a turn and no enemies are adjacent, you should be able to somehow be able to, the following turn, move 1 no matter what. Would be nice to see in future.

Could be I added a road? That is what I plan to do for New Britain and why there are roads in places sometimes where there would not otherwise be.

[LarryP]

Nupremal;

I tried getting your campaign through cmmods.com but am having trouble with the webring part of joining. Is there an easier way to get this campaign that I hear is so wonderful?

SeaMonkey has been telling the folks over at Matrix how good this campaign is, and I want a piece of this action.

[SeaMonkey]

Dang it Larry, I could just send you the 50 meg Zip file, forgot I had it on a flash drive.

I'm sure Vypuero wouldn't mind?

Send me an email, bradtap@aol.com and I'll send it on along.

[Nupremal]

of course. A new version is coming I will put in the repository this time. I am making some fairly large changes. I decided to add MPP values to a lot of the Pacific to make the islands worth taking - granted they have no true resource value, but this will make them "political will" in a manner of speaking. The alternate would be to use a victory point system, but its not built in the game (i.e. counting values and such) so that might be an alternate for the future, but for now the MPPs will work. I also made changes to lower range/spotting of units which gets out of hand later and deleted Panama loop so the US carriers have to stay in the Pacific (they can still travel the map - and so can the Japanese) through the India/ME areas. Loops are updated with the required position to hold indicated.

[SeaMonkey]

That ought to do it, finally a reason to get the islands into play. I don't care if its not exactly realistic, the effect is.

What about the Italians using the Suez before their entry?

Were they "locked out" historically?

[jon_j_rambo]

Yeah, I made the same point. Open up the loops to whosoever has the fuel, ships, and will!

[Happycat]

...and deleted Panama loop so the US carriers have to stay in the Pacific (they can still travel the map - and so can the Japanese) through the India/ME areas. Loops are updated with the required position to hold indicated.

Nup, why are you doing this? The Americans should have the strategic flexibility of moving carriers wherever they want to. Primarily, I would want to be able to move carriers from the Atlantic, not the other direction. If I had a couple of carriers sunk in the Pacific, moving assets from the Atlantic might be very important.

If I was the Japanese player, and the Allied player decided to move CV's to the Atlantic, I would be quite happy to see that. I cannot, however, imagine any Allied player being foolish enough to do this, provided that the Japanese CV's are still a threat. And if the American has sunk them all, then what rationale is there for forcing him to keep his carriers in the Pacific?

I played your mod with SeaMonkey and was hugely impressed. But this proposed change has me scratching my head

[Happycat]

That ought to do it, finally a reason to get the islands into play. I don't care if its not exactly realistic, the effect is.

What about the Italians using the Suez before their entry?

Were they "locked out" historically?

I agree, neutrals should be able to transit any loop. Don't know if the game engine can support the distinction between belligerent and non-belligerent, but if it is do-able, it would be nice.

[jon_j_rambo]

Nup, why are you doing this? The Americans should have the strategic flexibility of moving carriers wherever they want to. Primarily, I would want to be able to move carriers from the Atlantic, not the other direction. If I had a couple of carriers sunk in the Pacific, moving assets from the Atlantic might be very important.

If I was the Japanese player, and the Allied player decided to move CV's to the Atlantic, I would be quite happy to see that. I cannot, however, imagine any Allied player being foolish enough to do this, provided that the Japanese CV's are still a threat. And if the American has sunk them all, then what rationale is there for forcing him to keep his carriers in the Pacific?

I played your mod with SeaMonkey and was hugely impressed. But this proposed change has me scratching my head

Ah, actually dude, I did do that as Allies. I moved the Pacific Fleet to Northern France & opened up the Nazis Yeah, the Japs were given the Pacific as their private pond, but I was dancing in Berline in September 1944.

[Nupremal]

Also you will be able to move Ranger if you want to the Pacific (via Indian Ocean) but not via versa.

The extra firepower of the carriers is too much for the European theatre - it is meant to reflect their power at sea and for the island battles.

[Nupremal]

Oh it is now uploaded into the repository

[Colin I]

Seems to me the issue with global SC, highlighted by the carrier issue in nupremal's mod, is one of flexibility of command structure.

SC lets you concentrate air and Naval force to an extent that was rarely done (but was possible, think of D-Day). This issue is more serious in global modifications.

So one possibility is its OK. Perhaps limit the range of OP move (see below). Then perhaps the issue with US carriers is they are too powerful against land-based forces.

Another is we divide the world into Theatre of Operations. You can only OP move between adjacent theatres. Additionally, we might want to simulate strategic limitations and force structures - perhaps some variant on garrison's?

Actually I favour the unconstrained approach with historical penalties. You can do anything you want but if it was stupid in WWII it will be stupid in this game. If we ask can the US move their carriers to the ETO, think they can. I would make a script though - if too many US carriers appear then trigger increased Japanese readyness (and perhaps Italian or Spanish drift to Axis) or some other penalty that matches the real historical reason this was not a good idea.

[SeaMonkey]

Vypuero, Colin is right on with this one. I understand you want balance, we all do, but you have to examine each individual gamey occurrence and make the adjustments.

Why was Rambo able to use carriers so effectively? If it was because of their land unit attacks then that needs to be curtailed, much like you did with artillery. I'm playing Rambo at the moment and I made a special note to follow his artillery with my fighters and bombers where ever they are attacking. Seems a good counter for me to train my airforces(artillery has no air defense) by attacking them at every opportunity, I built extra air just for this. You think artillery is devastating with experience, get a load of my AFs with experience!

See, was it because his opponent failed to produce a counter that was available? I'm assuming you were his opponent, the specifics of each incident needs to be examined.

Obviously you and Rambo are playing this scenario numerous times from both sides and that is great, but I for one would like some more insight to what is happening in each game as far as what needs adjusting or what y'all think needs adjusting. Don't need the AARs, just a reflection on what might be gamey circumstances.

Essentially that is why I would like to get more of the community involved in this scenario as it is the future for SC. We can hash these things out now before the "official" version comes out. I'm trying to play this campaign as much as possible and make notes, but its hard to devote the time.

Your decision events are very good, I'm really impressed, but the consequences of them perhaps needs to tweeked a bit also as they are hypothetical for the decision that wasn't actually taken. An historical community is a must for this, I wish Jersey John was here playing this thing, Desert Dave too, pzgndr...where are you?

We all need to be looking at the Vypuero campaign, this is a wonderful opportunity for SC development. Happycat are you ready for another game?

[Baron]

I just wanted to take the opportunity to point out that if the game were changed so that air or sea attacks from ships could not destroy the last factor of a ground unit this wouldn't be an issue.

With the exceptions of islands I would not even allow surface warships to even attack aircraft on land and if they can then they should not be able to destroy the whole unit.

Just make it so that land units can attack a coastal hex from sea and advance if victorious - that is what Marines did in WW2.

Now I'm not a programmer so there might be very good reasons why these changes can not be implimented but I would love to see these changes at least play tested if it is possible. Or at least a response saying no this is not possible.

The Pacific Fleet taking out France is priceless - JJR is certainly creative!