Structure of CAW 1944 campaigns

A Project to model the 1944 Carrier air battles of the Pacific
Post Reply
Moggy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 4421
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 12:52 am
Location: A slit trench near RAF Gravesend
Contact:

Structure of CAW 1944 campaigns

Post by Moggy »

The main problem which seems to confront us in the construction of the campaigns for CAW 1944 is restricting the available targets to those actually relevant to the campaign. We can easily specify the bases from which our campaign squads are operating, but not easily the enemy objects of their attention.

My idea is this. There is a way making targets appear and disappear from the map and that is by using the year bytes in airfield.dat - if you cross out any given year for any given target or base, it doesn't appear in that year.

EAW uses four years, which the various text files tell it to call "1940", "1943", "1944", and "1945". What if we divide the targets in the CAW 1944 map into four groups, depending on their chronological requirement - say for the sake of argument

(1) Truk/Yap etc

(2) Saipan/Tinian/Phippine Sea/Guam

(3) Leyte Gulf

(4) Phillippines

and assign each of those sets of targets to only one of the EAW years. Then edit the text files so that EAW actually calls all of those four years "1944". The extra useful thing would be that the day and month part of the dates could be preserved.

We could then have in one setup with no swapping required, a "camp40" set of campaign files that dealt with Truk/Yap, a "camp43" set of campaign files which dealt with the Mariannas/Phillipine Sea, and a "camp44 moving frontline campaign which dealt with the Leyte Gulf/Phillipines.

Comments?
Last edited by Moggy on Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Pobs
Chairman of the Code Committee
Chairman of the Code Committee
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2004 2:02 pm
Location: North Wales, UK

Post by Pobs »

Sounds excellent, and we can move the carriers between phases as described in another thread using the year too by making different airfields available as the carrier fleet sites for each year...

certainly worth trying to see if it works ...


cheers,


Pobs
Captain Kurt

Post by Captain Kurt »

Whatever you guys think would work best.

Cheers
Post Reply