Typhoon of Steel - Version 3

[eric_A]

Read my lips, NO new UNITS for V3.05!

I will take a look at increasing the time to build railroads.

Also I'll make sure guerillas have stealth attack against workers.

 

[El_Tigre]

Read the posting time: x-post.

 

[Misfit_travel]

Let's face it, you won't be able to "fix" the China theatre in v3.05. Anything you do will be tweaks.

Japan does need some light tanks at game start because their lack of oil means they won't be able to build any unless they quickly secure Rangoon. (Without tanks they won't secure Rangoon very quickly either).....

Its a bit of a catch 22...

Misfit

 

[aksully]

Yup it is. I would think that Eric is trying to create a historically correct scenario and we've given him a bit to think about over the past couple of days. Maybe we should let him press on with 3.05, and see how it shakes out after the playtesting??? I'm impressed with what I see so far.

I've been looking at completed mods some today and there are a lot that have crashes galore. This is a pretty solid mod from the git go!

Sully

 

[El_Tigre]

You're probably right, both of you. Before making more suggestions I want to
do some research on the Sino-Japanese War anyway. So far, I have looked
at the situation in China only from a gameplay point of view, without knowing
much about the war. Maybe history itself offers some helpful ideas. For
instance, I'm curious what kind of tanks and planes China had, and how many
of them.

Let me know if you guys know any online resources.

 

[eric_A]

According to the West Point military atlas, the railway from
Hanoi went to Nanning, I assume things went by river barge to
point "A". I added some battle damage, the red lines show where
the intact railways were:

 

[Misfit_travel]

Those changes will be pretty effective Eric_A. Severing the rail connections between Manchurian area production centers and Southwestern production centers will slow down lateral movement by the Japanese.

If I were the Japanese player, playing on this map, I'd devote far more attention to building a few worker units. Even then it will take a considerable amount of time to "fix" the rail linkages.

Once the Japanese player commits to an offensive (say against Kumming), he wont' be able to pull out quickly and strike somewhere else. That's a good thing.

That should have the desired gameplay effect.

Misfit

 

[eric_A]

WARNING: These are preliminary, I hope to finalize them by Monday.

Kamikazes:
Now have stealth attack against all types of surface ship, except PT boats.
Range increased to 6 and rate of fire now 2.

Guerillas:
Added Anzac infantry and American GI as stealth targets.

Ship Costs:
After much research I have made several adjustments to the costs of the
various ship units. Note that in TOS some units represent more than 1
ship, but the tonnage given is for a single ship of that type.

Ship type Tonnage/ship Shield cost ships/unit
------------------------------------------------------
Battleship (35,000 tons) 250 1
Fast Battleship (45,000 tons) 320 1
Super Battleship(60,000 tons) 350 1
Fleet Carrier (24,000 tons) 200 1
Light Carrier (15,000 tons) 140 1
Heavy Cruiser (12,000 tons) 175 2
AA Cruiser (8,000 tons) 115 2
Destroyer (2,000 tons) 65 4
Advanced Dest. (2,500 tons) 85 4
Submarine (2,000 tons) 75 4
Advan. Sub (2,000 tons) 95 4
Transpor (10,000 tons) 100 10
Attack Trans. (10,000 tons) 150 10

Subs:
I have turned off the "see invisible" flags for the 3 basic sub types,
I-boat, US Submarine and the submarine and the 2 basic destroyer types,
the Allied destroyer and the IJN destroyer. This means subs are completely
invisible at the start of the scenario. The following units, which become
available as the appropriate tech is researched, can "see" subs:
1. Advanced Submarine
2. Advanced Destroyer
3. Destroyer Escort
4. ASW Aircraft

Combat Factor adjustments:
In order to keep subs from dominating the game I have reduced the attack
and defense factors for subs by 1. Same for Advanced subs. Also increased
defense factors for transports by 1. To summarize:

Type attack defense moves
-------------------------------------
Sub 7 5 5
Advan. sub 11 8 6
Transport 1 3 5
Attack Trans. 2 6 6

Tech Changes:
Submarine Warfare - I have merged sub tactics and antisubmarine warfare
into one mega-tech with a cost of 170.
Attack Transports - Changed the tech requirement from naval tactics to
amphibious warfare. This means these ships will be available earlier in the
scenario.

Map Changes:
Added 4 new VP locations - Wake, Tarawa, Bougainville and Noumea.
Midway Island - reduced in size to 2 tiles from 3.
Noumea and the Airbase at Espirtu Santos: now belong to the USA at the
start of the scenario. These were Free French territories which were used
by the USA during the war. During the Guadalcanal campaign the airbase was
a B-17 base and Noumea was a base for the Hornet and Enterprise task
forces. This will allow the USA to repair ships in the South Pacific.
China: Changed the railways system in southern China to match historical
maps. Added battle damage, since China and Japan had been at war since
1937.

Starting Forces:
Removed workers from island airbases, they were relocated to other
locations, Hawaii, Truk, etc..
Replaced some of the starting infantry and light tanks in China
(on both sides) with machine guns.
Added historical names for some of the US and Commonwealth infantry
divisions.
Moved a lot of the allied submarines. Japan does not have to worry
as much about getting its' transports blasted out of the water on turn
one. However, there are still allied subs near Manilla and Singapore.
Brought US and Japanese navies up to strength in DDs and subs.

Airlift:
Removed paratroopers ability to airlift, they can still do paradrops.
The reason for this can be found the TOS V3.02 PBEM test thread.
Extended the airdrop range to 8.

Anachronisms:
There are some units present at the start of the game which could not
be built because the Civ does not have the required tech. In TOS techs
are more than simply the know-how to build a particular type of
unit, they also represent the expansion of manufacturing and training
facilities required to build or train units in quantity. These units
are also important historically. The units are:

1. The fast battleship Prince of Wales
2. The super battleship Yamato which was undergoing sea trial when the
war started.
3. The first division of the US Marines.
4. The anti-aircraft cruiser Atlanta, which represents the USS Atlanta and
the USS Juneau, both of which were lost during a night battle near
Guadalcanal.
5. Burma Guerillas, (forgot the name of the group, I'll have to look it up).
These guys fought for Japan during the initial invasion, then changed sides
when they found out the Japanese were far worse than the British!

P.S. (forgot these);
Governments:
Reduced draft limit for monarchy to 1 per turn.

General:
Drafting now upsets citizens for 40 turns, was 20.

Units:
Fixed upgrade problem with IJD DD.

Added missing entries to civilopedia.

 

[El_Tigre]

Looks terrific!

Combat Factor adjustments:
In order to keep subs from dominating the game I have reduced the attack
and defense factors for subs by 1. Same for Advanced subs. Also increased
defense factors for transports by 1.

Good idea! That should balance the sub vs. sub-hunter battle in the Pacific.

 

[Misfit_travel]

Fleet carriers are cheaper than light carriers. I'm guessing the numbers are reversed?

Removing paratroopers airlift capability will also have the interesting effect of reducing their proliferation as you'll have to build them somewhere, then navally transport them to an airbase / airport before dropping them.

Nice work Eric_A.

Definitely looking forward to the next rev......

Misfit

 

[El_Tigre]

Ship type Tonnage/ship Shield cost ships/unit
------------------------------------------------------
Battleship (35,000 tons) 250 1
Fast Battleship (45,000 tons) 320 1
Super Battleship(60,000 tons) 350 1
Fleet Carrier (24,000 tons) 200 1
Light Carrier (15,000 tons) 320 1
Heavy Cruiser (12,000 tons) 175 2
AA Cruiser (8,000 tons) 115 2
Destroyer (2,000 tons) 65 4
Advanced Dest. (2,500 tons) 85 4
Submarine (2,000 tons) 75 4
Advan. Sub (2,000 tons) 95 4
Transpor (10,000 tons) 100 10
Attack Trans. (10,000 tons) 150 10

That's a drastic decrease in cost for all smaller ships! Shields for subs and
DDs almost halved! (I assume that the Light Carrier for 320 shields is a typo)

 

[Misfit_travel]

I thought ASW aircraft couldn't see invisible units. I thought this was a bug in CIV3?

Misfit

 

[El_Tigre]

They can, but only 2 tiles around the carrier/airbase they are stationed on, and
not in the recon zone.

 

[eric_A]

That's a drastic decrease in cost for all smaller ships! Shields for subs and
DDs almost halved! (I assume that the Light Carrier for 320 shields is a typo)

Yes, DD and SS are much cheaper and transports cost more. I should
thank Rocoteh and Alder17 for digging up figures on warship costs.

The light carrier should be around 140, thanks for pointing that out.

 

[aksully]

Looks good Eric! Here's a link for Order of Battles (OOBs) for those interested.

http://www.niehorster.orbat.com/index.htm

And Eric..if there are things you need researched then maybe we can divy it up and reduce your workload?

I really like the unit icons you've matched up with the different ship classes. I was messing with Rocoteh's WWII global last nite which is a great piece of work and effort. But its striking when you select a unit (like transport) which shows the regular Civ3 icon. It certainly takes a great deal of effort to put these sort of things together!

Now...I want to see just how many light tank units Japan had in China circa 1941. Also, I was noticing this morning as I was messing with TOS that there are no workers at all in China? I know you mentioned that you moved some around...did any make it to China? I would think there would be some due to all the captured???

Sully

 

[aksully]

11th Hour Stuff Guys!
I don't expect Eric to do more than he has at this date before we test 3.05. Here are things I've found in play today as Japan in the MP Long Version. This is about several things.

First, each turn is based upon a two week period.

Second, Eric made some unit changes (primarily to transports-extra turns in reef/shore areas that make sense but now limit the opening turn ability compared to historical events). Here's what I've found.

Malaya Operations-Historical
8 Dec: 28 transports & supporting warships from Saigon made 8 landings using 3 regiments & 3 divisions in Malaya.
TOS
Week 1 (Dec 7-21): I could make only one landing on Malaya.
Result: The Jap player cannot accomplish the historical "first moves" assault landings on Malaya due to insufficient transports,movement restrictions, load unit>transport unit>unload unit.
Solution: Pre-place units at site of landings on turn one for all scenarios; and/or increase transports, remove coastal tile restriction from transports. Transports in gameplay represent not only the larger ship but landing craft capability.

The Jap player must be able to load, transport, and attack the same locations on turn one as historically occurred. Whether the human chooses to do so is another thing. But in fact, historically... Japan's initial Dec 1941 assaults were the best they made! In the current version of TOS..they can't be made.

PI Theater
The same applies here as well. Here's what I found.
Palau Islands: have one transport. They need 2. Troops from Palau made 2 different landings in Week one of the scenario...12 Dec: troops land at Legaspi and on 19 Dec troops from Palau land at Davao.
Because of limitations and units...the Jap player can't so this. In fact, the Jap player as the scenario stands...cannot load assault troops, transport, then attack Davao in the first week of play.

The other thing I want to throw out there is land unit representations..again for your consideration and discussion. As I look at units there are places where there are several formations of "units". Let's say infantry. On Formasa you might find a Jap Inf and a Jap Division, both with the same A/D/M numbers. They should actually be Inf Div and most likely Inf Regiment with a different A number at least, D maybe, and M same. A Divison should definitely carry a higher A number than a smaller unit.
Eric did a good job spelling out the naval side of things with capital ships, cruisers, destroyers, and subs. My suggestion would be to consider the same thing for land units.
If its labeled the 28th Inf Division it should be stronger than a Regiment/Battalion.
Looking at my resources today...most assaults involved moving a division and/or regiments.

I hope this isn't too off base and if it is....tell me. Thanks!
Sully

 

[El_Tigre]

The Jap player must be able to load, transport, and attack
the same locations on turn one as historically occurred. Whether the human
chooses to do so is another thing.

I'm sure eric_A will think about changes in the initial unit placement if you can
provide him with the according data. However, there's more to consider: what
happens to those units as the scenario progresses? Are those changes going
to imbalance the game? For instance, adding more Japanese transport in the
Singapore area would enable Japan to rapidly advance towards Australia,
which would be historic inaccurat. Furthermore, the Dutch and British
position is already very weak. Strengthening Japan would probably be more
realistic, but may result in an untenable - and unrealistic - situation for the
Allies just a few turns later.

The other thing I want to throw out there is land unit
representations..again for your consideration and discussion. As I look at
units there are places where there are several formations of "units".

I'm not against creating more (land) units in principle, but keeping things
simple will earn you the gratitude of everyone who plays the scenario for the
first time. When I loaded TOS for the first time, I was very confused by all
those units with different names (especially the infantry with "motorized" in
their name). I thought they had different stats, too, until I learned to look at
their ADM values in order to identify them in stacks.

eric_A, I remembered another bug in V3.01: the IJN Destroyer cannot be
upgraded to an Advanced Destroyer, as promised in the readme. The Allied
Destroyer however is upgradeable.

 

[eric_A]

I'm sure eric_A will think about changes in the initial unit placement if you can
provide him with the according data. However, there's more to consider: what
happens to those units as the scenario progresses? Are those changes going
to imbalance the game? For instance, adding more Japanese transport in the
Singapore area would enable Japan to rapidly advance towards Australia,
which would be historic inaccurat. Furthermore, the Dutch and British
position is already very weak. Strengthening Japan would probably be more
realistic, but may result in an untenable - and unrealistic - situation for the
Allies just a few turns later.

I'm not against creating more (land) units in principle, but keeping things
simple will earn you the gratitude of everyone who plays the scenario for the
first time. When I loaded TOS for the first time, I was very confused by all
those units with different names (especially the infantry with "motorized" in
their name). I thought they had different stats, too, until I learned to look at
their ADM values in order to identify them in stacks.

eric_A, I remembered another bug in V3.01: the IJN Destroyer cannot be
upgraded to an Advanced Destroyer, as promised in the readme. The Allied
Destroyer however is upgradeable.

I have fixed the destroyer upgrade issue.

I might add some smaller infantry units in V4. For now I just use
green infantry units to repesent brigades/regiments.

 

[eric_A]

Here's a screen shot of the Solomons with the new VP location
on the east end of Bougainville. The locations at the lower right
marked in yellow are now US possesions.

 

[eric_A]

Here it is, there are 2 scenario files which go in the conquests\scenarios
folder and also a civilopedia .txt file which goes in the
conquests\scenarios\Tos_v3\text folder.

Give it a try in single player mode if you have time. I expect to
start the PBEM in a couple of days.