Banzai - campaign beta test
Moderators: Order of Battle Moderators, The Artistocrats
Banzai - campaign beta test
It is time to pick up the samurai sword and head into battle again.
This is a collection of Japanese scenarios from 1939-1941. You will be fighting against Chinese, Thai, British and US forces.
There are quite a few larger maps/number of units here, so probably not for small-scale tinkerers
But a few smaller scenarios inbetween should give you some respite.
PM me if you'd like to test it.
Ready, Colonel?
This is a collection of Japanese scenarios from 1939-1941. You will be fighting against Chinese, Thai, British and US forces.
There are quite a few larger maps/number of units here, so probably not for small-scale tinkerers
But a few smaller scenarios inbetween should give you some respite.
PM me if you'd like to test it.
Ready, Colonel?
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
( ) Yes, I am!
Okay, you can now directly send me the download link via PM. Then, I'll try to find some relevant elements, as well as maybe some very little details here and there.
-
- Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 11:45 am
- Location: Brazil
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
Me too!
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
Ahh, this campaign looks great, with interesting historical campaign events and so on...
So, 00Shanghai:
-> Very little details: In scenario descr, the comma before the brackets could be removed. & In brief, either write something after the last comma or replace it by a point.
-> Add a note (or two) at the end of the briefing, because as it's early in this campaign (1932), there is yet no core (units) available in this scenario - but better letting the player know it's normal, right? And, as well, to inform that engineers and tanks are expected to show up soon...
-> Maybe add an event at t3 when the first reinf begin to appear on the battlefield? (Just the first time.)
-> About our very last reinforcement... well, it's nice but I've found it rather useless: in two different playthrought, they've never seen action... I think they could safely be removed from this scenario.
(Poor Chiang Kai-Shek! )
*******
01Manchukuo:
Well, so far I haven't found anything to report there.
Eventually an aux recon plane to be added?
*******
02Nomonhan1:
A splendid scenario; most of our troops are to advance, mostly in a column formation, but at the (high) risk of being outsupplied - but when, from where? That's great!
1. I think one letter is now missing in the text of the event "Tanks Spotted!" is "Soviet tanks are spotted heading for the battlefield. |Note your new order: You need to destroy at least 4 of these units.", as "Yo need" sounds a little strange to my ears...
2. Nice sec obj, but... are there really 4 tanks on this battlefield?
Three BT-7 at some point, that's 3 tanks. The recon armored car in principle doesn't count as "tanks", that's still 3. The two SU-1-12 are mobile raiding artillery... and does actually count as artillery (according to the Unit Navigator), so that's still 3. I've checked with #orbitalcommand and in the Editor, but I'm still finding 3 tanks only... so, unless I've missed something, there is no possibility to achieve this sec obj to destroy at least 4 of them in there is not even 4 on the map...
Either there is something one need to explain to me, or I suggest to change this in a "destroy at least 2 of these units".
Otherwise, no serious issue found so far.
So, 00Shanghai:
-> Very little details: In scenario descr, the comma before the brackets could be removed. & In brief, either write something after the last comma or replace it by a point.
-> Add a note (or two) at the end of the briefing, because as it's early in this campaign (1932), there is yet no core (units) available in this scenario - but better letting the player know it's normal, right? And, as well, to inform that engineers and tanks are expected to show up soon...
-> Maybe add an event at t3 when the first reinf begin to appear on the battlefield? (Just the first time.)
-> About our very last reinforcement... well, it's nice but I've found it rather useless: in two different playthrought, they've never seen action... I think they could safely be removed from this scenario.
(Poor Chiang Kai-Shek! )
*******
01Manchukuo:
Well, so far I haven't found anything to report there.
Eventually an aux recon plane to be added?
*******
02Nomonhan1:
A splendid scenario; most of our troops are to advance, mostly in a column formation, but at the (high) risk of being outsupplied - but when, from where? That's great!
1. I think one letter is now missing in the text of the event "Tanks Spotted!" is "Soviet tanks are spotted heading for the battlefield. |Note your new order: You need to destroy at least 4 of these units.", as "Yo need" sounds a little strange to my ears...
2. Nice sec obj, but... are there really 4 tanks on this battlefield?
Three BT-7 at some point, that's 3 tanks. The recon armored car in principle doesn't count as "tanks", that's still 3. The two SU-1-12 are mobile raiding artillery... and does actually count as artillery (according to the Unit Navigator), so that's still 3. I've checked with #orbitalcommand and in the Editor, but I'm still finding 3 tanks only... so, unless I've missed something, there is no possibility to achieve this sec obj to destroy at least 4 of them in there is not even 4 on the map...
Either there is something one need to explain to me, or I suggest to change this in a "destroy at least 2 of these units".
Otherwise, no serious issue found so far.
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
While playing 00Shanghai the first time, as I had no engineer (and wasn't sure there would be some of them), I started to clear minefield using the Soviet method... that's why I've replayed it later.
So, I'm indeed convinced that it would be better if the player know that some engineers (and tanks by the way) should show up soon!
So, I'm indeed convinced that it would be better if the player know that some engineers (and tanks by the way) should show up soon!
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
Damn, "so far" indeed!ColonelY wrote: ↑Thu Sep 03, 2020 4:26 pm [...]
02Nomonhan1:
A splendid scenario; most of our troops are to advance, mostly in a column formation, but at the (high) risk of being outsupplied - but when, from where? That's great!
1. I think one letter is now missing in the text of the event "Tanks Spotted!" is "Soviet tanks are spotted heading for the battlefield. |Note your new order: You need to destroy at least 4 of these units.", as "Yo need" sounds a little strange to my ears...
2. Nice sec obj, but... are there really 4 tanks on this battlefield?
Three BT-7 at some point, that's 3 tanks. The recon armored car in principle doesn't count as "tanks", that's still 3. The two SU-1-12 are mobile raiding artillery... and does actually count as artillery (according to the Unit Navigator), so that's still 3. I've checked with #orbitalcommand and in the Editor, but I'm still finding 3 tanks only... so, unless I've missed something, there is no possibility to achieve this sec obj to destroy at least 4 of them in there is not even 4 on the map...
Either there is something one need to explain to me, or I suggest to change this in a "destroy at least 2 of these units".
Otherwise, no serious issue found so far.
I've had a "Draw" with nothing completed nor failed!
Only the blue "?" for "Open" everywhere...
1. Well, about the tanks it's normal as it can't be completed rigth now. But it should be considered as "failed" anyway, so that's first a little something to add.
2. Pri obj -> at least two flags to control (out of 3)... I had 2 (it's even written 2/2) but it's not considered as completed...
Well, maybe putting a "Turn Start" (at scenario end limit) instead of a "Capture VP Event" in the triggers may fix this issue?
3. In the triggers, about the "Tank survive" -> one trigger "Set Objective State" as completed must be added, otherwise nothing change (except the +1 spec pt)...
Humm... sorry, I should have waited a little longer before putting the previous feedback, but with the enthusiam and the time spent checking this story of tanks... well, anyway...
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
The tanks that saved the Japanese day are mentioned in either the scen desc or the briefing. I'll add that engineers are on their way.ColonelY wrote: ↑Thu Sep 03, 2020 4:40 pm While playing 00Shanghai the first time, as I had no engineer (and wasn't sure there would be some of them), I started to clear minefield using the Soviet method... that's why I've replayed it later.
So, I'm indeed convinced that it would be better if the player know that some engineers (and tanks by the way) should show up soon!
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
Yes, in the scen descr, but not in the briefing... or not yet, at least!
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
How large are we talking about?Erik2 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:50 pm It is time to pick up the samurai sword and head into battle again.
This is a collection of Japanese scenarios from 1939-1941. You will be fighting against Chinese, Thai, British and US forces.
There are quite a few larger maps/number of units here, so probably not for small-scale tinkerers
But a few smaller scenarios inbetween should give you some respite.
PM me if you'd like to test it.
Ready, Colonel?
I´d really love a change back to the original AO, but in the past have been a bit overwhelmed by some of your scenarios.
Its a campaign, right? How many missions?
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
Some of the Manchurian scenarios have large maps and medium to large number of units. Nothing overwhelming IMO.
The rest are small-scale.
Scenarios:
The rest are small-scale.
Scenarios:
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
Again on 02Nomonhan1:
I've done another test to try to see clearer what may be the problem(s) there...
So, let's start back with this quote, shall we?
Few comments about these points (from the quote):
1. It does really seem that mobile artillery units aren't considered as tanks, so that's a total of "only" 3 enemy tanks units on this battlefield. Am I right on this point?
If yes, then a "at least 2" instead of "at least 4" shall fix this! (In obj label & triggers, of course.)
2. I've found why it wasn't considered as achieved:
In order to allow for an early Major Victory, you check with this pri obj if the sec obj about these tanks has been completed/validated... And that's why it stayed on "open" for me (as this sec obj wasn't validated, I mean)... So, making this sec obj about enemy tanks achievable should automatically fix this part about the pri obj as well.
3. I do confirm about this last point; in the trigger "Tank survive", a "Set Objective State" is definitely required...
I've done another test to try to see clearer what may be the problem(s) there...
So, let's start back with this quote, shall we?
Indeed, these 3 obj should all have the "option", or possibility, to be considered as failed (rather than just still open) if not completed...ColonelY wrote: ↑Thu Sep 03, 2020 4:57 pm [...]
1. Well, about the tanks it's normal as it can't be completed rigth now. But it should be considered as "failed" anyway, so that's first a little something to add.
2. Pri obj -> at least two flags to control (out of 3)... I had 2 (it's even written 2/2) but it's not considered as completed...
Well, maybe putting a "Turn Start" (at scenario end limit) instead of a "Capture VP Event" in the triggers may fix this issue?
3. In the triggers, about the "Tank survive" -> one trigger "Set Objective State" as completed must be added, otherwise nothing change (except the +1 spec pt)...
[...]
Few comments about these points (from the quote):
1. It does really seem that mobile artillery units aren't considered as tanks, so that's a total of "only" 3 enemy tanks units on this battlefield. Am I right on this point?
If yes, then a "at least 2" instead of "at least 4" shall fix this! (In obj label & triggers, of course.)
2. I've found why it wasn't considered as achieved:
In order to allow for an early Major Victory, you check with this pri obj if the sec obj about these tanks has been completed/validated... And that's why it stayed on "open" for me (as this sec obj wasn't validated, I mean)... So, making this sec obj about enemy tanks achievable should automatically fix this part about the pri obj as well.
3. I do confirm about this last point; in the trigger "Tank survive", a "Set Objective State" is definitely required...
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
I really like this senario; it reminds me a bit of a western movie, where a cavalry column is advancing in Apache territory without really knowing if the flanks are safe or not... nor its supply base!
-
- Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 11:45 am
- Location: Brazil
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
I'll not repeat Coloenel's notes, which are precise. On my part, I appreciated the correct identification os Japanese marine forces present at Shangai scen and I'd like to see a roster list with the involved units in every other scen in this campaign too.
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
You'll see named for thos Japanese units that are spawned. That is just about Shanghai, I think.
The rest of the scenarios use purchased units as I believe most players prefer to roll their own rosters.
The Allied units should have proper names during teh whole campaign.
The rest of the scenarios use purchased units as I believe most players prefer to roll their own rosters.
The Allied units should have proper names during teh whole campaign.
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
03BainTsagan1:
Another very good scenario.
So, let's dive now in some feedback, shall we?
(You've noticed that, to save time, I like to sometimes use a semi-telegraphic style...)
-> First a detail (or almost ): 3 of the 4 pri obj hexes have no name... perhaps add some name for each and every one of these golden star flags?
-> Sec obj "Eliminate at least 10 MG nests" -> use of course as "Check Unit Count" a ">9" instead of a ">0" (otherwise it's completed after the first MG-foxhole destroyed )
-> In the triggers -> "Jap":
1. "2005" -> "Change Income" -> fine, BUT then select the (Jap) flag, please...
2. "Tanks deployed" -> add a short event, informing the player (among others) about the new sec obj ("Do not lose any tanks")
-> Soviet artillery units spawning on turns 2 & 3:
1. They have no AI team right now...
2. One of them has a custom name (t2) but not the other (t3)... I don't know if it's on purpose; otherwise, both units may perhaps have the same name?
-> I only got a Minor Victory (turn 20 out of 24) because the sec obj "Do not lose any tanks" has NOT been considered as completed...
The blue "?" stayed as if it was still "open". Two times, but nothing changes. Perhaps because I've finished this scenario before the 24th turn?
An idea to fix it (which has been successfully tested, thanks to the Editor): maybe select the option to "check from the start" this sec obj and just remove, or desactivate, the trigger "Tanks survive"... About this point, then keep all the rest as it is now!
So, like this it would start as checked/completed "so far" and can only be switched to failed if a Japanese tank unit is destroyed (via the trigger "Lost tank" as it is now).
Another very good scenario.
So, let's dive now in some feedback, shall we?
(You've noticed that, to save time, I like to sometimes use a semi-telegraphic style...)
-> First a detail (or almost ): 3 of the 4 pri obj hexes have no name... perhaps add some name for each and every one of these golden star flags?
-> Sec obj "Eliminate at least 10 MG nests" -> use of course as "Check Unit Count" a ">9" instead of a ">0" (otherwise it's completed after the first MG-foxhole destroyed )
-> In the triggers -> "Jap":
1. "2005" -> "Change Income" -> fine, BUT then select the (Jap) flag, please...
2. "Tanks deployed" -> add a short event, informing the player (among others) about the new sec obj ("Do not lose any tanks")
-> Soviet artillery units spawning on turns 2 & 3:
1. They have no AI team right now...
2. One of them has a custom name (t2) but not the other (t3)... I don't know if it's on purpose; otherwise, both units may perhaps have the same name?
-> I only got a Minor Victory (turn 20 out of 24) because the sec obj "Do not lose any tanks" has NOT been considered as completed...
The blue "?" stayed as if it was still "open". Two times, but nothing changes. Perhaps because I've finished this scenario before the 24th turn?
An idea to fix it (which has been successfully tested, thanks to the Editor): maybe select the option to "check from the start" this sec obj and just remove, or desactivate, the trigger "Tanks survive"... About this point, then keep all the rest as it is now!
So, like this it would start as checked/completed "so far" and can only be switched to failed if a Japanese tank unit is destroyed (via the trigger "Lost tank" as it is now).
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
Now, an idea about 03BainTsagan1: What about adding a second enemy AT unit on this battlefield? After all, we've an obj not to lose any tank(s) but they don't meet much direct threat... Perhaps this second AT unit could cover the two artillery units?
-
- Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
- Posts: 593
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 10:29 pm
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
I'm not the nit picking type but I thought it was a nice campaign. Had to restart a couple of scenarios because I didn't check out the map enough but that's my problem.
Only problem I had was on the last scenario: Wake. It kept giving me a draw after I had taken all of the objectives and such. Couldn't figure that one out.
All in all? Enjoyable campaign!
Only problem I had was on the last scenario: Wake. It kept giving me a draw after I had taken all of the objectives and such. Couldn't figure that one out.
All in all? Enjoyable campaign!
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
04BainTsagan2:
An excellent scenario!
Now, let's debrief, shall we?
Various observations & suggestions:
-> Infos related to the objectives :
1. Let the player know that he'll receive an ace when completing the sec obj related to planes (it's working, but there is yet no obj descr)
2. About the pri obj, give the info that these pri obj flags must be under control at the end of the scenario (so that the player knows that there won't be any possibility of early victory here - and that he's sure to have enough time for completing the various sec obj)
-> Add some immersive names at the golden star flags?
-> The Soviet art spawning at turns 2 & 4 have now the AI of the dogfigthers, with an "Air Seek & Destroy" instruction...
-> It seems that all sec obj can't now be considered as "failed" (only either completed or still open)... a little something to complete...
-> The counter about our lost units isn't working properly for me... adding under unit definition "Category - Land" and selecting "Core" (why not, there is no aux unit anyway - except the Construction Group, of course) may fix it!
-> Finally, two very little details:
1. Scen descr "[...] At 1045 Hours orders were given [...]" -> well, without a capital letter, it would look smoother (like "hours", I mean)...
2. Sec obj "Do not lose more than 5 units." -> As it's the single obj (pri or sec) on this scenario to finish with a point, removing this one may look better...
Et voilà !
An excellent scenario!
Now, let's debrief, shall we?
Various observations & suggestions:
-> Infos related to the objectives :
1. Let the player know that he'll receive an ace when completing the sec obj related to planes (it's working, but there is yet no obj descr)
2. About the pri obj, give the info that these pri obj flags must be under control at the end of the scenario (so that the player knows that there won't be any possibility of early victory here - and that he's sure to have enough time for completing the various sec obj)
-> Add some immersive names at the golden star flags?
-> The Soviet art spawning at turns 2 & 4 have now the AI of the dogfigthers, with an "Air Seek & Destroy" instruction...
-> It seems that all sec obj can't now be considered as "failed" (only either completed or still open)... a little something to complete...
-> The counter about our lost units isn't working properly for me... adding under unit definition "Category - Land" and selecting "Core" (why not, there is no aux unit anyway - except the Construction Group, of course) may fix it!
-> Finally, two very little details:
1. Scen descr "[...] At 1045 Hours orders were given [...]" -> well, without a capital letter, it would look smoother (like "hours", I mean)...
2. Sec obj "Do not lose more than 5 units." -> As it's the single obj (pri or sec) on this scenario to finish with a point, removing this one may look better...
Et voilà !
-
- Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 11:45 am
- Location: Brazil
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
Invasion Guam
Exit units hex is not working. A pity, considering this is a more elaborated map and mission, away from those tedious Mongolian plains.
Exit units hex is not working. A pity, considering this is a more elaborated map and mission, away from those tedious Mongolian plains.
-
- Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
- Posts: 593
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 10:29 pm
Re: Banzai - campaign beta test
I agree about the map, for sure but I didn't have any problem with this scenario. All aircraft came and went as I needed them. Seemed fine to me.Mascarenhas wrote: ↑Sun Sep 06, 2020 11:56 pm Invasion Guam
Exit units hex is not working. A pity, considering this is a more elaborated map and mission, away from those tedious Mongolian plains.
My only problem was the triggers on "Wake" ending the game in a draw, even though I had captured all objectives.