USMC Campaign v0.9, released 25 Mar 2012

[El_Condoro]

Finished Munda Point with a 16/18 MV. Took me by surprise, actually, because I was just about to take Munda Point when the MV screen displayed. It's as intended - the victory conditions say take all but one objective - but it's unusual. Another fun scenario that I would never have won without the destroyer armada!

Speaking of which, the DD Greaves and Fletcher classes have AA ability but no animation or obvious effect occurs when firing at a plane.

[bebro]

The game is using the "C-47" and not the "US C-47" icon for transporting.
http://www.gamefront.com/files/21586383 ... x+USMC.zip

Thanks again. Sorry if I made you double-work

Finished Munda Point with a 16/18 MV. Took me by surprise, actually, because I was just about to take Munda Point when the MV screen displayed. It's as intended - the victory conditions say take all but one objective - but it's unusual. Another fun scenario that I would never have won without the destroyer armada!

Speaking of which, the DD Greaves and Fletcher classes have AA ability but no animation or obvious effect occurs when firing at a plane.

Yeah, that's something I didn't think of then - there are no fx for ship AA yet, but maybe we could use some of the stock gfx. Overall the DDs aren't terribly effective with AA, only some str point here and there at best, but it can be helpful to weaken enemy air esp. when you have several of those DDs. I didn't want to make their AA overly powerful.

Some CL classes are a bit better in that regard.

(Edit: thinking about it again - it may be a tad more problematic then I thought to have correct fx for naval AA since the "normal" ship fx are all geared towards naval combat, so unless you make the AA thing as switch it might not be easy)

As for the VH, I always thought the north would be more difficult - that was also the case historically, the first attempt to get Bairoko failed. Maybe I change it so that I define more clearly the one VH as Bairoko, so that the player *has* to take the rest.

Thx for the feedback again, it helps me alot. But if you make it to Tarawa soon, take care of that monitor

[El_Condoro]

As for the VH, I always thought the north would be more difficult - that was also the case historically, the first attempt to get Bairoko failed. Maybe I change it so that I define more clearly the one VH as Bairoko, so that the player *has* to take the rest.

I found Bairoko relatively easy to take because there are less artillery and less Japanese units overall. The southern island was fairly easy, too, but Mulda air field and Point were hard to get to and so took longer to subdue. Like I said, I don't think I would have taken them without the destroyers; I used them to knock out 2 artillery and 2 AA units as well as suppress other targets. I noticed they didn't do much against the planes so switched back to ground targets.

[airbornemongo101]

Bebro..

Just an FYI the Atlanta Class light cruisers were designed from the keel up as AA platforms to escort the Essex class carriers and the Iowa class BB's.

All three classes were in design b4 WW2,but the Atlanta's were laid down 1st. The namesake of the class ,the USS Atlanta, and the 2nd in the class ,Junea (pronouced Juno), both fought at Guadacanal.

The Atlanta's were simply awesome in the amount of firepower they could put into the air.

They (the Atlanta and Junea) actually shipped out w/ the new 5" proximity fuses ,which later in the war were used to such great effect,in their magazines so the fuses could be combat tested.

I have always loved the Atlanta's. I think they,along w/ the Fletcher class DD's, are some of the most overlooked and best ships in the war.

[bebro]

Thx for the info I knew the Atlantas were dedicated AA cruisers, but wasn't aware of all those details. It seems to me that the original allied cruiser units from PzC resemble pretty much the look of the Atlanta class.

[airbornemongo101]

Yes sir they do,,and I love em'

[bebro]

Just some general info:

I'm slowly closing in on making a Japanese campaign based on the material done for USMC. That is I've done some initial work, worked out basic ideas like a rudimentary campaign path, looked for reference material like maps etc etc.

There's still a long way to go, I a nowhere near a release.


Basic ideas so far (could still change of course):

- integrate it together with USMC into a bigger "pacific mod" having several campaigns

- I'll leave out the war vs. China
- As with the USMC no big naval or air-naval battles, so no Pearl Harbour or Midway

- A rough campaign outline would maybe 1941/42 Malaya - Singapore - end stage of Dutch East Indies; 1943 South Pacific, drive towards Australia; Lake Khasan and Nomonhan vs. the USSR could be included as some kind of "prologue". The Malaya advance will be broken up into several smaller scns, so that the campaigns starts off small, but it is growing (map and core-wise) constantly, esp. post-1942

- a possible "what iffy" victory path would end with a successful invasion of Australia, I don't plan for a major US invasion, since that is IMO too much of a stretch - otoh Australia was at least in reach

- the other "losing" path with the Allies beating back the empire and move closer towards Japan - there could be still a "minor victory" option in there, though the later path remains still to be worked out

When I have some real preview I'll probably start an extra thread for this, to separate coments for this and the USMC campaign. But as said, this will take time

[El_Condoro]

- a possible "what iffy" victory path would end with a successful invasion of Australia, I don't plan for a major US invasion, since that is IMO too much of a stretch - otoh Australia was at least in reach

It is still contentious whether the Japanese were going to invade but there is a very strong case to suggest they would. Australia was pretty convinced they would in early 1942 and some have suggested the Battle of the Coral Sea thwarted the plan. So, the idea of an invasion of Australia is very plausible.

[bebro]

Yep, that's what I thought too

Though I will depart from the usuaul historic ath here. Not only by including the invasion at all, but also the path leading towards it. Because I don't want to end the victory path in 1942, that would be a tad too soon for me, and would leave out some interesting battles/scenarios.

My idea is that Japan gets "a second chance" to hit Australia so to speak if the player succcessfully ends certain scns that were historically lost. For example, one of those would be the Battle of Henderson Field, which could here be played from the Japanese side. A DV leads further down the "major victory" path, an MV puts you on the losing/minor victory path. I'd put the Australia scn somewhere into 1943 then.

[El_Condoro]

By 1943 the US build-up in Australia was immense. They were mostly in Brisbane but also Sydney and Melbourne. Actually, the 'war' was often between US and Aussie servicemen! The popular saying of the time about the US troops was 'Over paid, over-sexed and over here'. The resentment came from the way they were able to woo the Aussie girls - they had better uniforms and more money to go with their exotic accents. The Aussie men were often in the Mid East or New Guinea and so running brawls occurred in Melbourne and Brisbane as the Aussies and Yanks fought it out (fueled by too much alcohol, of course). One brawl in Melbourne saw 2 men killed. Anyway, I digress...

I'm not sure if MacArthur was still HQed in Melbourne in 43 - he was in 42 - but the US forces were very strong by then and the Japanese would have had quite a fight to get far.

[bebro]

Just the right thing for the "finale" (in case victory is achieved)

However, I still have to think this through. Maybe I give the player Australia as a choice scn, with the option to stay out of this for the historical reason. Then there would be no decisive victory, but the other path will be longer and so maybe more interesting for campaign players anyway.

Good thing this time is that I can re-use some PG2 maps - for example I found one of Singapore which I converted for PzC using Wino's nice FPGE tool. I made only some small changes.

[nikivdd]

Just the right thing for the "finale" (in case victory is achieved)

However, I still have to think this through. Maybe I give the player Australia as a choice scn, with the option to stay out of this for the historical reason. Then there would be no decisive victory, but the other path will be longer and so maybe more interesting for campaign players anyway.

Good thing this time is that I can re-use some PG2 maps - for example I found one of Singapore which I converted for PzC using Wino's nice FPGE tool. I made only some small changes.

There are some good old PG maps that could help in your endeveour. For example, the attachment contains a PG map for Philippines 1941, if that would fit into your plans.

[El_Condoro]

Good thing this time is that I can re-use some PG2 maps - for example I found one of Singapore which I converted for PzC using Wino's nice FPGE tool. I made only some small changes.

I remember this tool being introduced a while back but can't find it. Do you have a link to it somewhere?

[Edit] Just did a Google search - is this it?

[nikivdd]

Good thing this time is that I can re-use some PG2 maps - for example I found one of Singapore which I converted for PzC using Wino's nice FPGE tool. I made only some small changes.

I remember this tool being introduced a while back but can't find it. Do you have a link to it somewhere?

[Edit] Just did a Google search - is this it?

In this thread you can also grab it: http://panzercentral.com/forum/viewtopi ... 98&t=45127

[bebro]

Thx for the map

El_C, yes, that's it. I found the usage a bit tricky first, and PG2 support is IIRC only in the more recent versions. It can do alot of things, like converting whole scenarios from several games of the PG line, incl. PGF, PG2 etc. But I think the map conversion alone can save a lot of work, provided you find a map suitable. But esp. for PG2 there are a lot out there.

[El_Condoro]

Yes, I finally figured out how to export/import a PG2 map and it will save a huge amount of work. I haven't done it correctly, though, because it didn't convert the tiles right. However, I was able to create a BMP, which I used to match to the hex grid in the PzC editor (after a bit of mucking around). Even not using it fully the FPGE is saving me time!

[bebro]

A little preview of things to come:


The gun in that pic is made out of an 3d model provided by Kerloc, who has also given me some more that will be included. Thanks for those!

I have decided to keep the IJA and their air service separate from the IJN's SNLF land forces and naval air forces like it has been in the USMC campaign.

So this will be a campaign focusing on the Japanese *Army* mainly. With the bonus mechanism hopefully better working than for the (allied) USMC I may give some Navy air and land forces as "elite" units - after all small detachments of SNLF troops fought with the army from time to time. In case the IJN plays a bigger role in certain scns it will appear as aux units when needed (for example the ships).

The difference for the player is mainly in the equipment, and mostly with air units: the Japanese army air force had different planes than the navy, while tanks and other eqp in SNLF use was often the same. Navy fighters may be given as bonus as well, since many of them were still were land based (like their US counterparts).

Early campaign goes (roughly):

1938/39 vs. the USSR
1940 short intermezzo vs. Vichy France in Indochina
1941 Pacific War as outlined earlier, though there might be some changes in details

[dan_hnnng]

Looking good.

[Ballermann]

A little preview of things to come:

Ohh that looks good a Holland-Bomber

[Kerloc]

niiiiiiceee ^^