CSI Sweep: US Navy Campaign 1941-1946

[bru888]

By invitation from Erik. Version 3.0.

I laid out the Campaign Tree in a spreadsheet in order to visualize it and to ask if certain portions of it are what you intended.

Campaign Tree.jpg (138.32 KiB) Viewed 2444 times

1) Any Defeat at Midway will require the player to play Hawaii.

2) Any Victory at Midway will allow the player to proceed directly to Guadalcanal.

3) Any Victory or a Draw at Hawaii will allow the player to continue to Guadalcanal. *

4) In Guadalcanal, any Victory or a Draw will allow the player to continue to Santa Cruz, then Rabaul, etc.

5) The ONLY way the player will ever play Eastern Solomons will be if he suffers a Minor Defeat at Guadalcanal. **

If these were your intentions, then all is good.

* Technically, there is a time regression in going from Hawaii to Guadalcanal.

** Looking at these two scenarios, they appear to be sequential; i.e., Eastern Solomons is a follow up to Guadalcanal, rather than an alternative scenario. If so, you have an error in the Campaign Tree: the Outcomes for Guadalcanal should be Defeat/Guadalcanal/Eastern Solomons/Eastern Solomons/Eastern Solomons

You usually have an introductory event in your campaigns - there is an event_intro.png file in the folder - so perhaps you overlooked it here:

Screenshot 1.jpg (180.28 KiB) Viewed 2444 times

[bru888]

Pearl Harbor v. 3.0

In the official U.S. Pacific DLC, they didn't care about the outcomes of their Pearl Harbor. Everybody moved on to War Plan Orange, regardless:

Screenshot 2.jpg (185.62 KiB) Viewed 2433 times

But in your case, in your Campaign Tree, you provide for different outcomes at Pearl Harbor. A Major Defeat means campaign over, whereas a Minor Defeat means replay the scenario.

These outcomes will never happen, however, because you lack at least one AI objective for it to achieve and thereby defeat the human player. When I say this, I always have this grid in mind:

Image0157.jpg (115.32 KiB) Viewed 2433 times

I keep mentioning this just in case you do wish Defeat to happen. Perhaps not; it's up to you. (I looked ahead and found Midway does have an AI objective which makes Defeat possible, else the Hawaii scenario would never see the light of day.)

[bru888]

Pearl Harbor v. 3.0 (continued)

Just a suggestion: It would be nice if the six main islands of Hawaii could be named and displayed with non-VP flags so that they show. If you are worried about too many flags, take them away from the airfields (the place names don't show anyway because you have hangars on them). You have no VP's on this map anyway.

Here's how I would do Oahu (you didn't leave much open land, though):

Screenshot 5.jpg (226.01 KiB) Viewed 2430 times

Screenshot 7.jpg (271.62 KiB) Viewed 2430 times

Also, these islands look somewhat barren. How about a bit of greenery here and there?

Even though it's mentioned in the briefing, and pointed to at that time, perhaps in the description for the Secondary Objective "Do not lose any battleships," it would be a good idea to append as follows: "Note exit location in the southeast corner of the map" (you are already using the objective unit pointer for the battleships). The player sees the briefing only once, it's a big map, and there's a lot of blue sea hexes.

I believe this "objective" needs to be marked as completed at the beginning. It looks like it's intended to show the U.S. naval deployment areas (if so, best to place the objective location hexes right in the middle of the deployment areas; these four are only generally placed and don't show up well if the map is zoomed in) which is a good idea but without any way of "completing" this "objective," it will remain open and deprive the player of a Major Victory if earned otherwise:

Screenshot 8.jpg (168.43 KiB) Viewed 2430 times

[bru888]

Pearl Harbor v. 3.0 (continued)

This trigger is superfluous. The objective is already marked completed at the beginning of the scenario, only to be failed by the trigger above it if a US carrier is sunk. In any event, I am guessing that this was supposed to be Scenario Turn Limit:

Screenshot 9.jpg (210.69 KiB) Viewed 2426 times

No Unit Owner (Japan) designated here:

Screenshot 11.jpg (218.55 KiB) Viewed 2426 times

Technically, the U.S. player could allow his own Lexington to be sunk, and win the scenario!

Now, this trigger you do need in order to award the specialisation points at the end and it's correctly set for Scenario Turn Limit:

Screenshot 12.jpg (205.92 KiB) Viewed 2426 times

[bru888]

Pearl Harbor v. 3.0 (continued)

I am concerned about the Hex assignment for these three Setup AI Team Effects for this trigger; they point to the map origin hex and are set for 0 Distance. Frankly, it appears that you neglected to set them:

Screenshot 13.jpg (199 KiB) Viewed 2423 times

Screenshot 14.jpg (207.23 KiB) Viewed 2423 times

Screenshot 15.jpg (209.12 KiB) Viewed 2423 times

Only one exit hex for the Japanese fleet, and way off in the north-east? (I would have thought north-west but perhaps yours is historical.) In any event, that's going to be quite a logjam for the fleet to be exiting through; perhaps a couple more hexes would be in order. Also, having the hex on the extreme edge of the map may not be conducive to its actually working:

Screenshot 16.jpg (279.73 KiB) Viewed 2423 times

The random selections are missing for this trigger:

Screenshot 17.jpg (194.69 KiB) Viewed 2423 times

[bru888]

Pearl Harbor v. 3.0 (continued)

I thought I was done with Pearl Harbor but I noticed one more thing. Just a design note, perhaps.

This trigger will activate only if the player does not deploy the PBY during the Deployment Phase:

Screenshot 20.jpg (320.17 KiB) Viewed 2418 times

But naturally, the player will deploy that PBY to start the scenario. The deployment hexes that you provide are limited:

Screenshot 19.jpg (226.04 KiB) Viewed 2418 times

Whereas, in one play-through that I did, the random trigger placed the PBY over the island in the middle of the map which is much more advantageous, of course. (It also does not take up a deployment hex needed for the player's fighters.)

It's a nice touch, to have a PBY up there, patrolling, at the beginning of the scenario (the other three PBY's are hangared at Hickam) but instead of doing it this way, I would spawn this PBY VP-21.

Thread to be continued . . .

[Erik2]

Quick note on random deployment of units.

The best/simplest way is to use the Deploy Unit effect.
But this means that the units in question will start as undeployed (reserve) units in the deployment phase and thus may be manually deployed by the player (as you noted). My experience is that the Random trigger will redeploy these units on turn-1. In all later scenarios I mention this re the US subs in the US briefing.

I tried using spawn units, but the scripting workload increases a lot and this process is more prone to scripting errors.

[bru888]

Quick note on random deployment of units.

The best/simplest way is to use the Deploy Unit effect.
But this means that the units in question will start as undeployed (reserve) units in the deployment phase and thus may be manually deployed by the player (as you noted). My experience is that the Random trigger will redeploy these units on turn-1. In all later scenarios I mention this re the US subs in the US briefing.

I tried using spawn units, but the scripting workload increases a lot and this process is more prone to scripting errors.

Acknowledged. I wonder, then, if doing the random deployment at Scenario Start or Check Turn = Deployment Phase would work better than Check Turn = 1? Just so the player is not confused by manually deploying only to see the unit(s) suddenly moved elsewhere.

[bru888]

Wake Island v. 3.0

No AI objectives means human Defeat is not possible.

The airplanes in the hangars are fine but these three AA guns are "orphans":

Screenshot 1.jpg (182.47 KiB) Viewed 2367 times

Design suggestion (Yes, I know, I'm straying again; you may have to fire me): Instead of wiping out all of the US installations on Wake with the first transport, maybe split it in half. That is, say for example when the Kinryu arrives, remove only two of the four US units. When the Kongo arrives, remove the other two units. It doesn't matter what order they arrive in but it may seem more realistic that US forces are still battling for Wake after the first transport arrives but succumb with the arrival of the second.

[bru888]

Rainbow v. 3.0

No AI objectives means human Defeat is not possible.

Scenario Name: "Rainbow 5 - Hypothetical"

Briefing: "Specifically, you are to relieve the Philippines."

It probably doesn't matter since it's so close, but the date for Rainbow is 1-2-1942 in the campaign editor and 2-2-1942 in the scenario editor.

Another orphaned AA gun here:

Screenshot 2.jpg (207.66 KiB) Viewed 2359 times

We've seen this before but I don't recall the cause. Both sides have indications of being short in air supply:

Screenshot 3.jpg (195.56 KiB) Viewed 2359 times

Screenshot 4.jpg (219.31 KiB) Viewed 2359 times

Yet when I run the scenario, neither side's planes are suffering. Both sides have too many planes to be supplied by carrier, but you have each set for Off-Map Air Supply Source. Yet again, I can find no Exit Hex / Allow Redeploy for aircraft on either side. So I'm stumped on this one. There was some other explanation but I forget what it was.

The "Do not lose any transports" linked units is missing the Crescent:

Screenshot 6.jpg (204.43 KiB) Viewed 2359 times

There's going to be quite a logjam around that single hex off Wake Island which is the target for up to 8 American transports. Only one ship can arrive and be removed per turn so theoretically it will take 8 turns or one-third of the scenario to clear them all. Suggest making the "Check Unit(s) near Hex" Distance = 1.

The "Remove Unit" effects seem redundant in that you are already requiring there to be no Japanese land units on the island, but I guess no harm done:

Screenshot 7.jpg (230.39 KiB) Viewed 2359 times

However . . . the Trigger Event is Capture VP and that's going to happen only once, when the first U.S. transport (or even a warship) arrives on that hex. Once that is done, there will be no more Capture VP events to fire this trigger when the Scenario Variable count reaches 8. Better make this Move Event or Any Event.

[bru888]

Rainbow v. 3.0 (continued)

The "US CVs survive" and "US BBs survive" triggers are redundant in that both Primary Objectives are set as completed in the beginning of the scenario and you don't reward anything for not failing them in the end. However, in case you change your mind, both of these triggers are set for Turn = 1 instead of Scenario Turn Limit as would be required.

The triggers for the Secondary Objectives "Sink all enemy Replenishment oilers" and "Sink all enemy Main Support oilers" have a couple of issues. Notice how one of these objectives is completed the moment the first combat occurs:

Screenshot 13.jpg (435.96 KiB) Viewed 2356 times

That's because the triggers need to be set for Amount > 1 or Amount = 2:

Screenshot 11.jpg (223.58 KiB) Viewed 2356 times

Screenshot 12.jpg (228.73 KiB) Viewed 2356 times

Why didn't both objectives get marked as completed, then? Because the second one is updating the wrong objective:

Screenshot 14.jpg (226.06 KiB) Viewed 2356 times

By the way, it might be good to identify which ships are Replenishment oilers (Shiretoko, Notoro) and those that are Main Support oilers (Sata, Shiriya) in the mission descriptions so that the player knows the difference.

Thread to be continued . . .

[Erik2]

Quick note on random deployment of units.

The best/simplest way is to use the Deploy Unit effect.
But this means that the units in question will start as undeployed (reserve) units in the deployment phase and thus may be manually deployed by the player (as you noted). My experience is that the Random trigger will redeploy these units on turn-1. In all later scenarios I mention this re the US subs in the US briefing.

I tried using spawn units, but the scripting workload increases a lot and this process is more prone to scripting errors.

Acknowledged. I wonder, then, if doing the random deployment at Scenario Start or Check Turn = Deployment Phase would work better than Check Turn = 1? Just so the player is not confused by manually deploying only to see the unit(s) suddenly moved elsewhere.

I think I tested (can't remember 100%) random deployment at scenario start and found that it didn't work. The deployment needed to be at least 1 turn after the random trigger.

[bru888]

Coral Sea v. 3.0

No AI objectives means human Defeat is not possible.

Briefing: "A Japanese invasion force consisting of troop transports . . ."

I'm not sure if it pertains but there is no air Exit Hex with Allow Redeploy which is my (not too firm) understanding to be necessary for "Off-map Air Supply Source." Likely there are enough carriers and airfields so that this is not necessary.

There's no reason why not, I suppose - it will still work - but using the Marine Corps faction for the two Japanese Port Moresby Fleets is somewhat jarring. Use the alternate Imperial Japan faction instead?:

Screenshot 1.jpg (431.12 KiB) Viewed 2301 times

You have a total of 13 ships in the two Port Moresby Force AI teams but you have only 11 ships listed in the "Moresby transports" folder. You are missing the Eiko Maru and I'm not sure whether the ML Tsugaru, a support ship, is supposed to count.

The mission of "Prevent the capture of Port Moresby" is captioned with "Not a single transport must enter the port." However, this mission is failed only when 6 Japanese transport ships have arrived at Port Moresby:

Screenshot 3.jpg (223.18 KiB) Viewed 2301 times

Also, the first Japanese transport (or warship) that arrives at Port Moresby is going to capture that port VP. Thereafter, succeeding transports will not be triggering a Capture VP Event so that when the sixth transport does arrive, this trigger will not fire. Better make this Move Event or Any Event.

Here's another unwanted design note: You have both the Japanese transports and US oilers both steaming for Port Moresby at the same time. Both are controlled by the AI. That's fine for the enemy but the human player will have no control over the oilers as they possibly, probably, sail into peril. You may get complaints about this - it might be better to allow the human player to control the oilers. If you agree, you would need to change the mission description a bit, mentioning that the oilers must eventually be moved to Port Moresby safely in order to complete the mission.

The Japanese alliance needs to be selected, else this trigger will apply to US carriers as well:

Screenshot 5.jpg (206.63 KiB) Viewed 2301 times

If you had an AI/Japanese objective to win when the human/US objective failed, then this trigger would have been used, I guess. As it is, it doesn't do anything but be careful that it doesn't get activated somehow; perhaps best to delete it if you are not going to use it:

Screenshot 6.jpg (210.37 KiB) Viewed 2301 times

Wrong "Link to Objective" here:

Screenshot 7.jpg (203.07 KiB) Viewed 2301 times

Same here:

Screenshot 10.jpg (224.91 KiB) Viewed 2301 times

Also, this needs to be set for "Scenario Turn Limit":

Screenshot 9.jpg (221.85 KiB) Viewed 2301 times

Were the Air Patrol points omitted for this AI team?:

Screenshot 2.jpg (265.7 KiB) Viewed 2301 times

As with a previous scenario, you may want to provide more than one Japanese fleet exit hex and locate them one hex in from the extreme edge of the map.

One other note that just occurred: You have two sets of random triggers both named "Sub-1, 2, 3," one for Japanese subs and one for American subs. I think the random triggers will fire in order and encounter each set of "Sub-x" triggers correctly, but to be sure, I would rename one set. (This comment would have applied to Wake and Rainbow as well except in those scenarios, you named the Japanese triggers "Subs" and the US triggers "Sub" which works. Maybe do the same thing here.)

Thread to be continued . . .

[bru888]

Midway v. 3.0

Interesting! When I noticed this situation:

Screenshot 9.jpg (185.48 KiB) Viewed 2276 times

I wondered if what I thought would happen actually did happen, so I placed a test US destroyer and found that I was unable to fire upon my supply ship "allies":

Screenshot 8.jpg (164.63 KiB) Viewed 2276 times

while the Japanese fleet began committing fratricide (I didn't linger to witness the massacre which I am sure would have been complete):

Screenshot 7.jpg (174.26 KiB) Viewed 2276 times

The fix, of course, is to make Red Team and Imperial Japan the same team and the United States either another team or no team. Also, it's probably not important but Imperial Japan should have the Off-map Air Supply Source, just in case.

[bru888]

Midway v. 3.0 (continued)

On all of these "Midway transports" triggers, the 10 resources are being added to the Neutral alliance:

Screenshot 11.jpg (217.85 KiB) Viewed 2267 times

As in Coral Sea, the mission of "Prevent the capture of Midway" is captioned with "Not a single transport must reach the port" when in fact seven transports are required for failure:

Screenshot 1.jpg (224.51 KiB) Viewed 2267 times

Also, the first Japanese transport (or warship) that arrives at Midway is going to capture that port VP. Thereafter, succeeding transports will not be triggering a Capture VP Event so that when the sixth transport does arrive, this trigger will not fire. Better make this Move Event or Any Event.

Also, since this is the first scenario so far to have an AI objective, there should be another Effect that completes that objective ("midway") for the AI.

There seems to be a discrepancy regarding the Japanese merchant and supply ships. There are the following:

• 6 ships in AI Team 10 "Invasion Supply" - all supply ships designated as "oilers" - and their assignment is Defend Hex (2,31) which means they are stationary.

• 1 ship in AI Team 12 "Invasion Transport-1" - also a supply ship - and its assignment is to Naval Capture Hex the Midway port VP.

• 6 ships in AI Team 33 "Invasion Transport-2" - all merchant ships - and their assignment is to Naval Capture Hex the Midway port VP

So you only have the 1 supply ship and 6 merchant ships heading to Midway. The "Midway transport" folder provides only for the 6 merchant ships to increment the Scenario Variable "Midway" and, as we saw above, the trigger requires Midway > 6 to fail the objective. That appears to be an error.

The Japanese alliance needs to be selected, else this trigger will apply to US carriers as well:

Screenshot 2.jpg (202.17 KiB) Viewed 2267 times

Please refer to the list above and note that the ship in AI Team 12 is a supply ship. That means this ship, the Akebono Maru, must also be destroyed to satisfy this trigger which is supposed to be about the "oilers":

Screenshot 3.jpg (299.47 KiB) Viewed 2267 times

Maybe instead, use a "+Oiler" Scenario Variable. Also, this trigger does not deliver the promised specialisation point.

See my comments in the Coral Sea post about two sets of random triggers both named "Sub-1, 2, 3," - same situation here.

Thread to be continued . . .

[bru888]

Guadalcanal v. 3.0

No AI objectives means human Defeat is not possible.

Briefing: ". . . you have available three of four surviving fleet carriers."

Technically, the Sabine is an "orphan" because all of these Red Team supply and merchant ships are being controlled by the AI:

Screenshot 1.jpg (183.55 KiB) Viewed 2222 times

All of the various airfields on either side show a shortage of air supply:

Screenshot 2.jpg (228.3 KiB) Viewed 2222 times

Screenshot 3.jpg (226.79 KiB) Viewed 2222 times

There is provision for "Off-map Air Supply Source" but there are no air Exit / Allow Redeploy hexes that I could find. Unlike previously, this situation does respond to adding more air supply at any one airfield.

For the U.S. Lunga Point Transport Force, Naval Defend Hex instead of Naval Capture Hex? I don't know enough about the differences between the two to advise (Never mind this; see below):

Screenshot 4.jpg (246.08 KiB) Viewed 2222 times

I noticed something else that I also cannot advise about; the editor says you only have one ship in that AI Team #7 when the map clearly indicates seven ships. You may want to reconstruct that team in case it got corrupted somehow:

Screenshot 5.jpg (242.58 KiB) Viewed 2222 times

No, wait, that's not right but I'll leave it up there just for information. This is the second time that I have noticed the "j" key procedure for indicating AI team numbers on the map can be unreliable when there are an unusually high number of AI teams in the scenario. The Lunga and Tulagi transport teams are actually AI Teams 43 and 44 and they are staffed and tasked correctly:

Screenshot 6.jpg (217.77 KiB) Viewed 2222 times

Going back to the Sabine, then, it must be included with AI Team 45, not 9 as could be misconstrued viewing the above screenshot.

[bru888]

Guadalcanal v. 3.0 (continued)

I believe there are two issues with each of these triggers; one issue I am fairly sure about and one I am questioning:

Screenshot 7.jpg (228.48 KiB) Viewed 2219 times

Screenshot 8.jpg (218.69 KiB) Viewed 2219 times

First, in both triggers the Trigger Event is Capture VP and that's going to happen only once, when the first U.S. transport (or even a warship) arrives on that hex. Once that is done, there will be no more Capture VP events to fire these triggers when the Scenario Variables count reaches the goal . Better make these Move Event or Any Event.

Second, the question is, do you want there to be no Allied land units near the VP's or Japanese land units? The objectives say "You must destroy any land units at Lunga/Tulagi" so this might be an error unless you have something else in mind.

The Japanese alliance needs to be selected, else this trigger will apply to US carriers as well:

Screenshot 9.jpg (217.55 KiB) Viewed 2219 times

Every one of the Jap oiler triggers subtracts resources from the Neutral alliance:

Screenshot 10.jpg (212.45 KiB) Viewed 2219 times

On this trigger, it should be set for "Scenario Turn Limit":

Screenshot 11.jpg (199.27 KiB) Viewed 2219 times

And it awards 2 specialisation points when the objective stated "Get 1 specialisation point.":

Screenshot 12.jpg (215.12 KiB) Viewed 2219 times

Same with this trigger and objective:

Screenshot 13.jpg (224.27 KiB) Viewed 2219 times

It's not overly important in that the count is so low (one or zero to complete) but you may still want to link this trigger to the objective. Also, you are awarding a specialisation point which you don't mention in the objective:

Screenshot 14.jpg (209.08 KiB) Viewed 2219 times

[bru888]

Guadalcanal v. 3.0 (continued)

The third "Random sub" alternative is not listed while the first alternative has two chances:

Screenshot 15.jpg (200.99 KiB) Viewed 2218 times

See my comments in the Coral Sea post about two sets of random triggers both named "Sub-1, 2, 3," - same situation here.

The list of alternatives for this "Random carrier" trigger are missing altogether:

Screenshot 16.jpg (192.08 KiB) Viewed 2218 times

You will know this: Does a unit on Air Patrol do anything without Patrol Points or does it idle?:

Screenshot 17.jpg (246.91 KiB) Viewed 2218 times

Thread to be continued . . .

[bru888]

Eastern Solomons v. 3.0

No AI objectives means human Defeat is not possible.

Suggestion, with one qualification: You have 58 AI Teams in this scenario but 23 of them are empty. As we have seen, beyond a certain amount of teams (35?) not only are the "j" number assignments likely to be blank but the ones that do show on the map may in fact be false readings. Consolidate when you can? Qualification: I know that it's not advisable to ever delete an AI team, so don't do it! Sometimes, when things change, it's better to just blank teams out. My advice is to try to organize and economize from the start in order to ensure accurate and efficient results.

So, here's an issue, perhaps. AI Team 1 is comprised of a mix of units, as follows:

Screenshot 2.jpg (240.99 KiB) Viewed 2198 times

DD Hatsukaze (model: DD Kagero)
DD Akigumo (model: DD Yugomo)
DD Akizuki (not renamed)
CV Shokaku (not renamed)
CV Zuikaku (model: CV Shokaku)
3 radar stations

It's unimportant (it's not like the three radar stations are going to uproot themselves and walk out to sea! ) but perhaps reassign them to AI Team 29 where you have the others.

Once again, that situation of short air supply for both sides and once again I don't recall the cause/resolution. I did find out one additional fact: The situation can be alleviated by adding air supply to an airfield but only if it's without a land unit (air strip or hangar) on it. What that means and whether "Off-map Air Supply Source" with no air Exit / Allow Redeploy hexes has any effect, I don't know:

Screenshot 1.jpg (350.62 KiB) Viewed 2198 times

Please disregard these three screenshots below. I started talking about something and then realized that I was completely on the wrong track. As we have come to know, Slitherine is never going to fix their faulty forum image attachment module so that images can be edited or deleted:

[bru888]

Eastern Solomons v. 3.0 (continued)

Regarding land supply, this guy has none:

Screenshot 11.jpg (312.01 KiB) Viewed 2195 times

and these folks are short:

Screenshot 14.jpg (435.93 KiB) Viewed 2195 times

. . . unless this is intentional.

Do you want these to Undeploy or Exit, the latter being the usual practice so far? The reason is, couldn't the AI redeploy these ships, making things a bit awkward? (Actually, only the Boston and the Taifuku are set to Undeploy; the Kinyo is set for Exit):

Screenshot 2.jpg (218.39 KiB) Viewed 2195 times

I do suggest that you make these Distance = 1 for "Check Unit(s) Near Hex." Reason: There are three warships in the same AI Team as these transports. One of those warships is likely to perch on the VP hex and thwart the trigger.

Same recommendation for the Zenyo Maru: Exit instead of Undeploy. I see, however, that here the Distance is set for 1 which I think will work better. One other thing for good housekeeping; you should remove the QF Bofors 40mm Mk.I as well as the hangar and radar station:

Screenshot 3.jpg (217.13 KiB) Viewed 2195 times

This man is on vacation?!? This is a crucial battle! Cancel all leave immediately! :

Screenshot 4.jpg (220.28 KiB) Viewed 2195 times

No Target Hex or Unit assigned to this AI Team:

Screenshot 5.jpg (238.05 KiB) Viewed 2187 times

See my comments in the Coral Sea post about two sets of random triggers both named "Sub-1, 2, 3," - same situation here.