Page 1 of 2
Pacific Campaign 3
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2010 5:56 pm
This one is from the Japanese side and features tim1966's Chi Ha and Ha Go tanks.
3 battles from the island of Luzon in the Philippines. 2 short and easy, 1 longer and tougher.
The US was ill prepared for war and most of the historical action is a fighting retreat. These are fictional battles based on the historical story.
Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 2:16 pm
I guess no one is interested in playing from the Japanese side.
Next one is Brits in Burma.
Posted: Sat Dec 11, 2010 3:44 am
I just downloaded this. I will give it a try at some point.
Posted: Sat Dec 11, 2010 2:04 pm
junk2drive wrote:I guess no one is interested in playing from the Japanese side.
THAT'S NOT TRUE!
Give me just alittle more time!
The tanks and units are looking wonderful!
How did you do the picture of the japanese infantry?
It's looking like a photo of some plastic figure?
THANKS by the way!
Posted: Sat Dec 11, 2010 2:29 pm
google searching images of Japanese wargame I found a page of miniatures photos.
Posted: Sun Dec 12, 2010 8:06 am
Just bought the game and trying to get rid of the slowdown after a few turns - but the Pacific sounds interesting. I've taken the the first one in the download choices within the game.
Posted: Sun Dec 12, 2010 10:49 am
I played this as soon as you released - sorry I forgot to post about it. Really enjoyed it - playing from the Japanese side is interesting.
If I find some time I'll try to sort out Japanses infantry for - and also British/Aussie for Burma. Do you need a Grant/Lee tank for Burma? And a mule
Posted: Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:41 pm
I do remember playtesting a large battle with Grant or Lee so someday that would be nice. Same model would work in NA and lend lease East Front.
Funny you mention mule. A battle that I am looking at has horse drawn wagons and guns. I also thought that someday you would do cavalry for WWI that could be used for early WWII.
Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 11:17 am
The first two battles are a walkover. The stats on the Japanese tanks seem too similar. Am I missing something?
Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:43 pm
Thanks for the input.
I make campaigns with everybody's skills in mind. You may be better at the game than some people and the AI is never going to be as good as a human opponent. Sometimes you get the right dice rolls too.
The first post states that the first 2 battles are short and easy, the third is tougher.
I didn't find any historical battles where the US gave the Japanese a tough time either.
The Ha Go is a light tank with a 37mm gun, I used the stats of the Caro Armato
The Chi Ha is a medium tank with a 47mm gun and I used the stats of the PZIII
Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 8:00 pm
Not meaning to be over critical - it's actually a good training scenario, and things did go Japan's way in this campaign. I have found Japanese armour fun in WW2 games since you need to be careful with it since it is underarmoured.
I understand superior shooting by the Type 95 Ha Go tanks accounted for their initial victory in the Philippines, since the Ha Go's armour was quite weak - its strongest plate was not proof against 50 cal MGs and its weakest penetrable by rifles. The original Type 97 Chi Ha armour was comparable to the M3 Stuart light tank in front but weak on the sides - under 10mm. Sloping matters, but I think this still indicates that the Ha Go armour needs a large step down and the Chi Ha a smaller one to M3 levels. (It looks like the game use a single armour value and rear/side multipliers, or is the armour an aggregate and the stats reflect actual armour levels for turret and hull by front/side/rear?)
In terms of armament, for scaling purposes I took a look at SPWAW main gun ratings, which for the early war pre-upgrade models come out as
Code: Select all
Stats for SPWAW/Scenario HE AP
M3 Light (Stuart) 33 34 70 31
T95 Ha Go 37mm 40 27 69 40
T97 Chi Ha 57mm 50 34 40 37
the Chi Ha Kai with a better 47mm which came in service in 1942 rates a 60/60.
Naturally the stats work differently in different games, and machine guns need to be factored in at closer ranges, but the AP numbers at least suggest that the Japanese need an AP reduction, especially the Chi Ha.
On another note, what is the downside of Banzai?
Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 8:14 pm
I used the SPWAW OOB editor too. Then looked at the squads.csv and Iain's comments in other threads about how he comes up with the numbers. Then I took my best guess at what he would put these two at.
The Chi Ha with the 57mm crappy gun and the 47mm better gun in one tank made me think that the PZIII is probably modeling the 50mm version and this would be a good match. Maybe someday Tim will make us a Shinhoto with the proper turret and I can have two separate stats.
My other thought was gameplay. No sense making a tank that can't take out the enemy at all.
Just in case you haven't found the info, we use Open Office to open the csv, copy it to your My Games folder and edit that for use in user content.
Take a look at the stock stats and my Pacific csv and suggest some numbers for me.
Posted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 6:34 am
These are awesome additions to BA
I hope we get more Pacific theater battles in the future!
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 3:17 pm
I for one prefer to play the japanese side.
I think a few historical scenario against the Chinese would be more interesting.
Do you have some screen shot?
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:02 pm
I know that Richard has done some design work on how we would have the Japanese play, and it would need some new features, ideally, for things like tunnels and so on. Not sure how a Pacific campaign fits in currently with our release plans, but just so you know it is in our thinking
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 7:16 pm
That would be great. I'd love to fight Iwo Jima battle with tunnels (with can be improved to play starship troopers, the 2 movie from Clint Eastwood make me think that the fighting feeling is about the same).
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:16 pm
Overall very enjoyable.
A few questions/points...
I assume this is early in the war, late 1941/ early 1942, if that is the case, what is the reasoning behind using the 57mm gun and the M8 howitzer, neither of which had entered service at that time (I believe the 57mm was just starting to be produced in ealry 1942 but did not come into real service until 1943)?
Again, it was a fun short campaign adn I hope you are able to move ahaed with it and make more scenarios!
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2012 12:58 am
No reasoning, just using what the game comes with rather than make something new. I probably didn't research well enough and used what I had to make a playable battle. It has been a while since I did this.
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2012 2:00 pm
junk2drive wrote:No reasoning, just using what the game comes with rather than make something new. I probably didn't research well enough and used what I had to make a playable battle. It has been a while since I did this.
Makes sense. I like how you got infantry to load on the M3's, kept wondering where all teh infantry was coming from.
Again, I enjoyed playing, hope to see more soon!
Re: Pacific Campaign 3
Posted: Sat May 18, 2013 1:24 pm
i can´t download the link. Error (404) said dropbox. I got the the problem with Pacific Campaign 2.