Confusion over victory conditions

[kverdon]

I was really starting to enjoy Order of Battle US Marines until that is, the buggy scenarios started to hit. First off came the secondary victory condition on New Gerogia of "Cause 20 Damage with Air Units". Well I shot down 4 or 5 Japanese planses (40-50 damage) but did not get awarded the secondary victory. Then game Bouganville. I build the 2 required airfields, right on Cape Torokina and then on Pivu#2 and it did not give me credit for building either airfield! Seeing that these are primary victory conditions, it is GAME OVER. I suppose I could use the cheat code to give me auto-victory (does that also give you credit for the secondary victory conditions as well?). Do you have a patch in the works to address these, pretty obvious, bugs?

[bjarmson]

Same here. Both airfields built in less than 20 turns, but I didn't get credit for either the airfields or for building in less than 20 turns. Pushed the Japanese back on all fronts. At end game I get told it's a defeat. WTF.

While I'm enjoying the Marines' scenarios, I can't say I feel like I'm playing the US Marines. With the stingy RP amounts at the start and per turn and lack of any real reinforcement (in the Bougainville you build two airfields and don't get another plane or even the CPs for one), I feel like suddenly the Italian Marines were magically transported to the Pacific to fight the Japanese. By 43, and certainly by 44, the US should have a huge advantage in ships, aircraft, and AFVs, yet this never seems to be reflected in the later scenarios. I've heard all the balanced gameplay comments I need to hear, but when I'm regularly outnumbered in aircraft it doesn't make the scenarios seem very realistic. Also the damage points given and taken seem as if they've been altered. My ambushes regularly end in a 1/1 or 2/1 exchange between comparable units. If an enemy unit advances next to a hidden unit the initial damage should to 3/1 or greater. That's what ambushes are all about.

Another thing that's beginning to peeve me more with each scenario are the crappy, anecdotal, mostly worthless briefings that precede each scenario. They basically amount to statements that your objective is so and so and be careful out there. I want some actual intelligence. Such as be prepared for air attacks from the southwest, or from where the infantry counterattacks may come from, and particularly which units I'll likely need, at least at the the start in the upcoming scenario (for instance, whether to use your limited CPs to include antiaircraft units to defend against imminent air attacks rather waste them on tanks or antitank units or vice versa).

[Rosseau]

If you have Panzer Corps and would like to see how a DLC can be done, check out the link below. Even the broken English in the briefings adds atmosphere.

This is the first time I may actually finish a campaign, and am curious how the official Soviet Corps add-on will compare to this stellar effort by Russian modders!

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3900302

I have held off getting OOB Marines for now. The game does have a great UI, Editor, etc. But yes, these dlc's could be better.

[mhladnik]

That's unfortunate. I just had the same issue with the secondary goal at Munda Point, but I guess I can live without the fighter ace. If the problem with Bougainville still persists when I reach the scenario, though, that would be quite bad. Hoping for a quick fix!

[zakblood]

instead of complaining without offering any saves so developers can look and reply, not a lot we can do, if there's a problem, as per tech forum posts, please give saves, comment on any subject in any place, but only saves help, impressions and other comments are always welcome as well, so please carry on, but attach saves as well and help out, thanks

[adherbal]

I build the 2 required airfields, right on Cape Torokina and then on Pivu#2 and it did not give me credit for building either airfield!

I just gave it a quick try myself (with AI disabled) and it seems to work fine. Both airfield objectives are checked when the airfields are up and I get a victory at the end of the scenario.

You're mentioning "Pivu #2". That's not the correct location for the 2nd airfield. The airfield must be placed on the Primary (golden) victory points, as marked when you click the "?" icon in the objectives panel. Could that be your issue?


Edit: As for the aircraft damage objective, it turns out the objective description is not specific enough: You need to deal 20 damage to ground units, not aircraft. Apologies for that, will fix the text.
Edit: It turns out bunkers are not valid either, valid target classes are: infantry, tanks, arty, AT and AA guns. Will fix this as well.

[mhladnik]

Thanks! If those are the specifications, then all is well, no bugs

[kverdon]

Thanks Adherbal, THAT is the information I needed. I was not away you could click on the ? in the briefings to highlight the Victory Point locations. I built them as described in the (as pointed out a bit lacking) briefing so had built them ON Cape Torokina and Pivu. Now that I know the correct locations it should work. Bummer about the description for the Air Unit Damage from the New Georgia, not going back through all that to get it. Sometimes, I feel like the victory conditions are more notes for the developers to remind themselves instead of instructions for new players. As pointed out earlier, the game is ok but it does not feel very historical. You have very little air or Naval support in a time when the Pacific was full of US Ships and Planes. It feels like every scenario is Guadalcanal all over again where Fletcher and Turner have bugged out, leaving you to fend on your own.

[mhladnik]

Ah, I reached Bougainville and just realized what the problem is: there is a mistake/misunderstanding in the objective description: it mentions building an airfield at Pivu. There are Pivu #1 and Pivu #2 on the map, while the northern primary VP has no name.

[adherbal]

As pointed out earlier, the game is ok but it does not feel very historical. You have very little air or Naval support in a time when the Pacific was full of US Ships and Planes. It feels like every scenario is Guadalcanal all over again where Fletcher and Turner have bugged out, leaving you to fend on your own.

It's always tricky to balance this with the difficulty levels. If we made is "realistic" on one specific difficulty level it would still be too easy/hard on others. And to be honest, if the US have the superior numbers in artillery, ships and aircraft they had in reality it would become quite dull. The only way to still provide a challenge would be to put a very strict limit on the amount of turns and/or casualties the player can take to beat the scenarios. And that is just no fun.

In the later scenarios the US does have a significantly superior number in ships and aircraft however - simply because the Japanese have none left

PS: Would you mind changing the title of this thread, because IMO it does not give a fair judgement of the expansion's scenarios. Not saying it all 100% bug free, but until now nothing major has been reported.

[bjarmson]

Ok, played through the Bougainville scenario building 2 airbases at the sites adherbal noted. No bugs, a victory, but I must say the briefing and Victory Conditions listed for this scenario are atrocious, particularly regarding the airbase building sites. One of the airbase sites is supposed to be on Cape Torokina, which on the map is shown to be the bronze hex next to the gold hex. There are 2 Pivas shown on the map, but neither is the correct place to build, it's the unnamed gold hex to the north. How one is supposed to suss out this from the information provided is unknown. Better just to say build 2 airbases on the 2 gold hexes, or better yet forget the hexes and just say build 2 airbases. Playing through a full game to a point where you know you've won only to lose because of obscure technicalities (where exactly the 2 airbases have to be built) is frustrating. Please give specific, understandable Victory Conditions in the future.

Again with the balanced gameplay mantra. Maybe it would be better to be able to select from two scenarios, one with the actual historical conditions and units or one with "balanced gameplay". According to facts listed online the battle was fought by 144,000 American troops and 30,000 Australian troops against 45,000-65,000 Japanese ones. There were 700+ US planes versus about 150 for the Japanese. Sure isn't reflected in the scenario we are playing. So I'm beginning to assume we are playing mostly hypothetical scenarios (even those not specifically listed as hypothetical), not actual historical ones. Come on, even with huge superiorities in all areas by late 1943, it was still a long bloody slog to a Japanese surrender. IMO the scenarios are trivializing what the Japanese were able to accomplish given so few resources by 1944 on. Please, a little more creativity when building scenarios would be appreciated. Emplacements and multiple supporting fortified positions in multiple defensive lines are how the Japanese gave the US a tough fight, not large-scale offensive operations against US positions. The US used its vastly superior firepower to blast Japanese positions and only then used infantry to assault them. I agree with kverdon, every scenario I've played so far—through Bougainville—feels like Guadalcanal redux, what with arbitrarily limited US resources and the Japanese still in the game (so to speak).

[mhladnik]

I would play more before judging on the point of Japanese counterattacks. Their tactics changes later to in-depth defences, as was indeed the case, and as advertised in the expansion blurb.

[adherbal]

No bugs, a victory, but I must say the briefing and Victory Conditions listed for this scenario are atrocious, particularly regarding the airbase building sites.

The questionmark icons in front of each objective very clearly point out the location of the required airfield positions. I wouldn't know we we can make it even more understandable.

Bougainville—feels like Guadalcanal redux, what with arbitrarily limited US resources and the Japanese still in the game

Actualy there were several similarities between Guadalcanal and Bougainville in reality:
- Establishing a limited defensive perimeter to protect several airfields
- strong japanese presense on the island, but slow to realise the intends of the US forces
- several heavy japanese counter attacks launched against the US position

Once you progress further into the campaign you will clearly notice a difference in Japanese tactics and (much stronger) defensive positions.

I'm now closing this thread because of the confusion about so called "bugs" which clearly aren't.