Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

2nd USMC Para Btn

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> 2nd USMC Para Btn Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/5/2006 5:58:40 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
There is something messed up with the 2nd Marine (USMC) Para Btn. Using scenario 154, at start of scenario the unit shows as due to arrive in 1 day at San Diego. It does not arrive and drops off the intel list of ground unit reinforcements.

The other USMC Para Btn's and the Raider Btn's all arrive okay. In a CHS game I have that's been running a long time I noticed it was missing but figured it was just a 'disappearing LCU' and I hadn't noticed when it disappeared. Tonight I got curious and decided to run a quick test.

EDIT: Okay, I found out what's happening. When the scenario begins, there is a field artillery unit set to arrive in 2 days, but it arrives at the end of the Dec 7th turn. This means that the 2nd Marine Para, set to arrive in 1 day, 'misses it's chance' and never arrives.

This is probably a bug in the code, but the result is that all units (at least LCU's, I haven't checked ships & planes) arrive 1 day early, and any slated to arrive just 1 day after scenario start will not arrive at all.

(in reply to Monter_Trismegistos)
Post #: 61
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/5/2006 6:14:19 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
EDIT: Okay, I found out what's happening. When the scenario begins, there is a field artillery unit set to arrive in 2 days, but it arrives at the end of the Dec 7th turn. This means that the 2nd Marine Para, set to arrive in 1 day, 'misses it's chance' and never arrives.

This is probably a bug in the code, but the result is that all units (at least LCU's, I haven't checked ships & planes) arrive 1 day early, and any slated to arrive just 1 day after scenario start will not arrive at all.


WIll have to add that to the list of things to look at...

Andrew

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 62
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/5/2006 7:21:03 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
FYI, I checked scenario 155 (extended map) and same thing happens.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 63
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/8/2006 12:34:01 AM   
Monter_Trismegistos

 

Posts: 1359
Joined: 2/1/2005
From: Gdansk
Status: offline
Mayasan Maru and Tamatsu Maru are doubled (same arrival date) - once as LPD/AP/AK Shinshu Maru class (correctly) and once as Small AP.

< Message edited by Monter_Trismegistos -- 2/8/2006 12:36:07 AM >


_____________________________

Nec Temere Nec Timide
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 64
RE: Commonwealth LCU's - 2/8/2006 12:59:00 PM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline
A major group of Land Units missing are the Australian Armoured/Motorised Divisions.

1st Armoured Division AIF at 7 Dec 1941
2/11 Armd Car Rgt
16 Fd Rgt
108 AT Rgt
1 Armoured Bde (Greta, nr Newcastle, NSW)
2/5, 2/6 & 2/7 Armoured Rgts
2 Armoured Bde – Vic
2/8, 2/9 & 2/11 Armoured Rgts

At the end of 1941, 2 Cavalry Division became 2 Motor Division

6 Armoured Bde
12, 13 & 14 Armoured Rgts
3 Motor Bde
4,26 & 101 Mot Rgts
& 6 Arm Car Rgt(probably a Motor Bn at this point)

As at 9/42
1 Arm Div – 1 Arm Bde (2/5, 2/7 & 2/10 Arm Rgt) disbanded 7/1/44. 3 Motor Bde (4,26 & 101 Mot Rgt) disbanded 4/43. 2/11 Arm Car Rgt
2 Arm Div – 6 Arm Bde (12,13 & 14 Arm Rgt, 9 Mot Rgt) 2 Motor Bde (15,17 & 20 Motor Rgt) 6 Arm Car Rgt Div disbanded 2/43.
3 Arm Div – 2 Arm Bde (2/4, 2/8 & 2/9 Arm Rgt) 1 Motor Bde (5,11 & 16 Motor Rgt) disbanded 3/7/43 12 Arm Car Rgt
3 Army Tank Bde – 1,2 & 3 Army Tank Bn Bde disbanded 26/9/43, 1 Bn in late 44, 2 Bn 3/44
4 Arm Bde – 1 AT Bn, 2/6 Arm Rgt & 2/9 Arm Rgt (formed in mid 43??)

While some of these are portrayed as independent Armoured Bns, having 3 Heavy, Armoured Divisions on hand would help to put off any untoward movements by the Japanese.



_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Monter_Trismegistos)
Post #: 65
RE: Commonwealth LCU's - 2/8/2006 5:19:37 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

A major group of Land Units missing are the Australian Armoured/Motorised Divisions.

1st Armoured Division AIF at 7 Dec 1941
2/11 Armd Car Rgt
16 Fd Rgt
108 AT Rgt
1 Armoured Bde (Greta, nr Newcastle, NSW)
2/5, 2/6 & 2/7 Armoured Rgts
2 Armoured Bde – Vic
2/8, 2/9 & 2/11 Armoured Rgts

At the end of 1941, 2 Cavalry Division became 2 Motor Division

6 Armoured Bde
12, 13 & 14 Armoured Rgts
3 Motor Bde
4,26 & 101 Mot Rgts
& 6 Arm Car Rgt(probably a Motor Bn at this point)

As at 9/42
1 Arm Div – 1 Arm Bde (2/5, 2/7 & 2/10 Arm Rgt) disbanded 7/1/44. 3 Motor Bde (4,26 & 101 Mot Rgt) disbanded 4/43. 2/11 Arm Car Rgt
2 Arm Div – 6 Arm Bde (12,13 & 14 Arm Rgt, 9 Mot Rgt) 2 Motor Bde (15,17 & 20 Motor Rgt) 6 Arm Car Rgt Div disbanded 2/43.
3 Arm Div – 2 Arm Bde (2/4, 2/8 & 2/9 Arm Rgt) 1 Motor Bde (5,11 & 16 Motor Rgt) disbanded 3/7/43 12 Arm Car Rgt
3 Army Tank Bde – 1,2 & 3 Army Tank Bn Bde disbanded 26/9/43, 1 Bn in late 44, 2 Bn 3/44
4 Arm Bde – 1 AT Bn, 2/6 Arm Rgt & 2/9 Arm Rgt (formed in mid 43??)

While some of these are portrayed as independent Armoured Bns, having 3 Heavy, Armoured Divisions on hand would help to put off any untoward movements by the Japanese.




There are a number of points here.

Australian never fielded a complete armoured division and, in fact, barely a complete Brigade. The handful of Armoured Regiments (Battalion sized units) were frequently moved between various command organizations. Only Regiment or smaller sized units ever went into action. In CHS, only the Battalion level units are implemented and they give a reasonably accurate picture of the true armoured strength.

The 1st Armoured Division was never fully formed. A structure for a 2-Brigade, fully Armoured Division was laid out prior to Dec/41 with the intention of its use in North Africa. Tanks were not yet available and, once the AIF was concentrated in the Pacific, all thoughts of using 1st Armoured in Africa were abandoned. There was insufficient need for large armoured formation in the Pacific to justify 1st Armoured and it never fielded a complete division. It became “Mixed”, with only a single Armoured Brigade plus a Motor Brigade transferred from one of the Cavalry Regiments.

2nd Armoured was a conversion of 2nd Cavalry and was to be a British-style mixed Division - one armoured Brigade and one Lorried Infantry Brigade. It was never fully converted and, as you say, was disbanded. It was briefly designated 2nd Motor Division between being “Cavalry” and “Armoured”. It’s Armoured Brigade was the converted 6th Cavalry Brigade and it’s Motorized Brigade the converted 3rd Cavalry Brigade.

3rd Armoured was a partial redesignation of 1st Cavalry and was barely begun, then partially disbanded. By the time 3rd Armoured was formed all of the Armoured Divisions had become Mixed. The Armoured Brigade in 3rd Armoured had originally been in 1st Armoured and the Motor Brigade in 1st Cavalry. 3rd Armoured was just a new command organization over existing units.

3rd Army Tank Brigade was a command organization set up over three of the Australian Army (i.e. non-AIF) independent tank Battalions. It was purely administrative and was disbanded in 1943. It’s battalions were either transferred to other Brigades or became independent.

4th Armoured Brigade was a command organization formed around the time of the disbanding of 2nd Armoured Division and contained no new units. The unit listed above as “1st AT Bn” was 1st Army Tank Battalion and not an anti-tank unit.

The December 7th authorized strength for Australian Armoured was 10 battalions, with insufficient tanks for a single company (Squadron). Note that a British-style armoured regiment was actually battalion sized, with three company sized units (called Squadrons).

1st thru 4th Army Tank Battalions were assigned to the Australian Army (non-AIF) – not all yet formed.
2/5 thru 2/10 were assigned to the 1st Armoured Division (but had no tanks).
11th was an Armoured Car regiment that was later renamed 2/11th.
12th thru 14th were conversions of Light Horse Regiments and a redesignation of one tank battalion.
Also some of the remaining Light Horse regiments were converted into light arourmed reconnaissance units – primarily armoured cars and Bren Carriers.

The 4th Tank Battalion went through a series of re-designations and ended up as the 14th Armoured regiment in the 6th Brigade, 2nd Cavalry. A new 2/4 Regiment was formed from existing reconnaissance units.

The units numbered 1 thru 10 represented the effective strength and CHS includes 8 of them. Some units remained in rear areas throughout the war and were never combat effective – functioning primarily as training/reserve units. Australia had considerable difficulty filling out the units that were authorized, both in terms of equipment and trained personnel, and never actually achieved it’s paper strength.

We did a thorough review of the Australian Tank Corps some time ago and selected units to represent it’s actual strength (with special attention to units that actually entered combat). I just do not feel that any additional units are warranted.

If there is an area that needs work it is the 4th Army Tank Battalion and 2/4th Armoured Regiment. These are the same unit, redesignated. We originally had another unit (2/5 if I recall) but changed it to 2/4 at the last minute due to that unit’s service in New Guinea. A change of name of one of these units might be more accurate but would have no affect on the available strength.


(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 66
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/8/2006 8:32:55 PM   
timtom


Posts: 2358
Joined: 1/29/2003
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline
Just leafed through the USAAF BS' and was wondering about some of the upgrade paths, which on the face of it looks odd to me. This of course could only an issue if you - like me - refuse to go anywhere near PDU.

Slot Aircraft Upgrade

1140 B17E -> B29
1150 LB30 -> B29
1157 B17D -> B29
1159 B17D -> B29
1168 B17E -> B29
1169 B26B -> B29
1170 B17E -> B29
1174 B17E -> B29
1178 B17E -> B29
1179 B17E -> B29
1231 B26B -> B24J
1232 B17E -> B29
1240 LB30 ->B29
1241 B17E -> B24J
1628 SBD -> TBF

_____________________________

Where's the Any key?


(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 67
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/8/2006 9:41:12 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

1140 B17E -> B29
6th Bombardment
This squadron flew B-17s until 1943, then a mixture of B-17 and B-24 in 1944 before converting to B-29 in 1944 and moving to Guam for attacks on Japan. Since the upgrade path for B-24J does not proceed to B-29, a squadron upgrade was used to move the Squadron directly from B-17 to B-29, skipping the brief period of partial B-24 use.


1150 LB30 -> B29
21st Bombardment
This squadron flew a mixture of aircraft including A-29, LB-30, and B-24 in the North Pacific before being disbanded in late 1943. A new 21st Bombardment was formed in the spring of 1944 with B-29s.


1157 B17D -> B29
28th Bombardment
Decimated during early operations in the Philippines/Java/Australia and carried, without aircraft, on the records from mid-1942 until 1944, then reformed with B-29.


1159 B17D -> B29
30th Bombardment
Decimated during early war operations and returned to the U.S. in 1942. Listed with B-17 until 1944 when re-equiped with B-29.


1168 B17E -> B29
43rd Bombardment
Flew B-17s until 1943, then a mixture of B-17 and B-24 in 43/44 until re-equiping with B-29 in 1944 for the air offensive against Japan. B-24 upgrade path does not lead to B-29 so the B-24s were skipped.


1169 B26B -> B29
44th Bombardment
Flew a mixture of aircraft including B-17, B-24, and B-26 until converted to B-29 in 1944.


1170 B17E -> B29
45th Bombardment
Flew a mixture of aircraft, including B-17, LB-30, B-24, and B-26 in Panama before converting to B-29 and moving to CBI. If anything, this squadron should change to LB-30 -> B-29


1174 B17E -> B29
52nd Bombardment
Flew B-17s until 1943, then a mixture of B-17 and B-24 until converted to B-29 for the air offensive against Japan. B-24 does not upgrade to B-29.


1178 B17E -> B29
61st Bombardment
Flew B-17s at the start of the war, then B-24 until 1944 when converted to B-29s. B-24 path does not lead to B-29.


1179 B17E -> B29
62nd Bombardment
Flew B-17s at the start of the war, then B-24 until 1944 when converted to B-29s. B-24 path does not lead to B-29.


1231 B26B -> B24J
408th Bombardment
Flew B-25 and B-26 in SWPac until re-equipped with B-24 in 1944.


1232 B17E -> B29
411th Bombardment
Flew A-29 (41-42), B-27 (39-43) and B-24 (43-44) before upgrading to B-29 in 1944. B-24 path does not lead to B-29 so the B-24 were skipped.


1240 LB30 ->B29
435th Bombardment
Formed as the 40th Heavy Reconnaissance Squadron in early 1942 with LB-30. Redesignated 435 Bomb (Heavy) and converted to B-17, then to B-29 in 1944. B-17 upgrade path goes to B-24 and stops before B-29.


1241 B17E -> B24J
436th Bombardment
A squadron upgrade is not specified for this squadron (I'm looking at CHS 1.06). The normal upgrade path for B-17 is to B-24.


1628 SBD -> TBF
VMSB-232
One of several Marine Corps squadrons that upgraded from Dauntless to Avenger and was actually redesignated VMTB-232 in 1943.


(in reply to timtom)
Post #: 68
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/9/2006 11:49:24 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline
Don,

While the 1st Aust Arm Div may have been a dream on 7 Dec 41, by Sept 42 the Armoured Force was substantial.

The 1st Arm spent a lot of time in West Australia as a complete Division on the British scale of 1 Arm Bde & 1 Mot Bde and equivalent in size to an American Armd Div

They must have found somewhere to hide the 656 M3 Lee/Grant and 244 M3 Stuarts which arrived by August 1942 PLUS the "at least" 140 Matilda II which arrived in July 1942.

2/5 Arm Rgt was equipped with M3 Lee/Grant by 23/4/42 with the other units following.

While you may have decided to show this force at Rgt (Bn) level, the extra weight of them being combined in a Division structure (from say 6/42) takes away at least one viable unit (And if I want to break it down thats my decision, not forced upon me)

http://home.st.net.au/~dunn/ausarmy/ausarmyapr1943.htm



_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 69
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/9/2006 7:29:51 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
DMS Long starts the game in her 8/43 refit guise. Look out Bill!

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 70
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/9/2006 7:43:22 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

A proper answer for this requires that I break out my books and do some study - which I am not in the mood for right now. So, until I get around to it, let me give a brief answer from memory (and a few quick peeks at some tables).

The Australian Armoured Corps went through several stages during World War II. I understand them to be:

1. North African Fixation. AIF infantry units went to North Africa early in the war. There were no armoured formations but each infantry division included a British-style reconnaissance regiment. These units were normally equipped with armoured cars and bren carriers but the AIF did operate a few British supplied tanks. The 1st Australian Amoured Division was ordered formed for use in North Africa against the Africa Corps and was designed as a British style fully Armoured Division - two armoured brigades totaling 6 armoured regiments (battalion sized units). The division was still forming as of 12/7/41 and had a total of eight obsolete British Mark IV light tanks as of that date. Plans also included one Army Tank Battalion for each of four infantry divisions in Australia (only three actually formed).

2. Post-Pearl Harbor panic. The armoured force was to be expanded by conversion of cavalry units but no additional tanks were available until spring 1942 (except some ultra-light Marmon-Harrington tanks taken over from Dutch shipments). By April enough U.S. tanks had arrived to outfit the 1st Armoured, although the tanks were of various models and often in need of maintenance and final assembly. Many of the tank Jeff is asking about were "hiding" in maintenance depots - often for months. 1st Armoured began training with it's new equipment around Narrabri (between Sydney and Brisbane). The first units were combat ready in the fall of 1942. At about the same time the three Australian Army Tank Battalions received British Matilda Infantry Tanks.

3. Adjustment Period. Following Coral Sea and Midway it was realized that the chances of a Japanese invasion were minimal and that a large armoured force was not needed. All three of the planed armoured divisions were converted from armoured (2 armoured brigades) to mixed (one armoured and one motorized infantry). A fourth army tank battalion was cancelled and converted into motorized infantry.

4. Mid-war reductions. The Australians were having great difficulty in providing trained personnel for the armoured units and no longer saw them as a priority item. The various armoured divisions ceased to exist and some of the ex-cavalry units were disbanded or converted to infantry. Some smaller armoured units (company sized) saw action in New Guinea.

5. Late war reductions. Armoured force reduced to one brigade plus one independent armoured regiment by September, 1944. Final strength (July, 1945) was 4 AIF Armoured Regiments (battalion sized), 1 Army Armoured Regiment (battalion sized), 1 armoured amphibious squadron (Company sized), and one special equipment armoured squadron (reinforeced company sized - had a mixture of flame thrower tanks, 'dozer tanks, and bridgelaying tanks).

The Australian Tank Corps fielded a total of 14 battalion sized units at some time during the war:
1st-4th Army Tank Battalion (4th never fully formed)
2/4 thru 2/10 AIF Armoured Regiments
12th-14th Army Armoured Regiments (converted cavalry units assigned to the short-lived 2nd Armoured Division and were never fully activated).

The primary organizations were 6 AIF armoured regiments in the 1st Armoured Division (and it's successors) and 3 army tank battalions (with Infantry Tanks). When 2/6 armoured was sent (in company sized units) to New Guinea, an new formation was built by absorbing parts of other units, named 2/4 Armoured, and assigned to 2nd Armoured Brigade.

Nine or ten armoured formations at most are justified. The CHS guys reviewed this in some depth and decided on 8 with emphasis on those that actually entered combat. If there is an error it is most likely around the 4th Australian Army Tank Regiment (Battalion), which was retained from the original Scenario 15 OOB and probably should not have been.

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 71
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/20/2006 1:30:01 PM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
I have now incorporated most of the confirmed errors into the latest CHS draft.

If anyone knows of any more errors, please let us know ASAP as the draft will hopefully be completed soon.

Andrew

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 72
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/21/2006 3:52:53 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
The IJN PG Aikoku Maru (one of the two commerce raiders) will not reload torpedoes at Kwajelein, despite the presence of an AD and a port size of 5 (maybe 4, but 3 is th critical size anyway). I'm posting this because maybe there's something in the ship definition? If so, sister ship PG Hokoku Maru might also need fixing.

By the way, pulled of a mid-ocean intercept with them in May '42. Trashed a small convoy.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 73
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/21/2006 4:14:03 AM   
rockmedic109

 

Posts: 2390
Joined: 5/17/2005
From: Citrus Heights, CA
Status: offline
I am not sure, but I think AD will only replace torps on a DD.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 74
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/21/2006 5:43:12 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
AD will also replace torps on cruisers, so I figured it should work for 'all warships'. Don't really know, of course.

(in reply to rockmedic109)
Post #: 75
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/21/2006 8:12:38 AM   
rockmedic109

 

Posts: 2390
Joined: 5/17/2005
From: Citrus Heights, CA
Status: offline
Maybe PG's are not considered warships? They come with the low exp crews, so maybe they are hard coded as paramilitary?

I never realized they had torps. Only seen them sinking an AK on 12-7-41 in Society Islands. Never saw a torp launch.

Awaiting the new release of CHS to start another time.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 76
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/21/2006 9:47:31 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
Yeah, that's why I'm only posting it here for Andrew 'just in case'. It might be an artifact of the game engine that they need to go to a size 8 port or something.

In this start they made the 12/7 intercept. Then I sent them to the shipping lanes, no luck. So I sent them to Noumea. They trashed some ships in harbor and chased more away. One of the pair got some damage, so off to Kwajelein to repair. Then headed south to the shipping lanes. On the way they ran smack into a small convoy and wasted it. Now headed back to Kwajelein for more repairs!

(in reply to rockmedic109)
Post #: 77
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/21/2006 3:02:13 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

If anyone knows of any more errors, please let us know ASAP as the draft will hopefully be completed soon.


48th US Fighter Squadron was ETO - NEVER PTO.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 78
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/21/2006 3:33:15 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
1.I am using CHS and have in 1/1944 captured most of northen Japan.
Shikka now has a Russian I 16mod24 squadron, which is assigned to the "Far East Command".(I never got any messages indicating it was coming.)
By the time it showed up, I already had been there a couple of months and I have American and Canadian units there.
The Soviets are not active..
I had taken this city from Japanese forces.
I use Andrews' ext map mod.
2.One of my American replacement units a few months ago was the 56th fighter group.
IIRC, this was Hub Zemke's famous unit, part of the 8th A.F., in ETO..
Please correct me if I am wrong?

_____________________________




(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 79
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/21/2006 5:51:42 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

If anyone knows of any more errors, please let us know ASAP as the draft will hopefully be completed soon.


48th US Fighter Squadron was ETO - NEVER PTO.



The 48th Fighter was one of a large number of squadrons that spent some time on the U.S. West Coast before moving to Europe. In this case it was for the first half of 1942 at Hamilton Field, March Field, and at San Diego. In CHS we selected a sample of these squadrons for inclusion because:
1. At any given time there were a few of them on the West Coast.
2. In the event of attacks they would have been available.
3. There is no American withdrawal so units must be either in or out.

The squadrons retained (and omitted) were purely subjective. We tried to select from the earliest arriving squadrons and then omit later ones. Therefore you will find a number of squadrons that spent some time on the West Coast that are "in" and others that were also there but are "out".


(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 80
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/21/2006 5:53:22 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

1.I am using CHS and have in 1/1944 captured most of northen Japan.
Shikka now has a Russian I 16mod24 squadron, which is assigned to the "Far East Command".(I never got any messages indicating it was coming.)
By the time it showed up, I already had been there a couple of months and I have American and Canadian units there.
The Soviets are not active..
I had taken this city from Japanese forces.
I use Andrews' ext map mod.
2.One of my American replacement units a few months ago was the 56th fighter group.
IIRC, this was Hub Zemke's famous unit, part of the 8th A.F., in ETO..

Please correct me if I am wrong?


The 56th Operated out of California in May-June, 1942, then from Nome and later Anchorage for the rest of 1942. See answer above.


(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 81
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/21/2006 6:33:42 PM   
timtom


Posts: 2358
Joined: 1/29/2003
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline
Hi Don,

Could I possibly ask you to post the WC squadrons in CHS later to serve in Europe?

Thanks,

Tom

_____________________________

Where's the Any key?


(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 82
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/21/2006 8:09:23 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: timtom

Hi Don,

Could I possibly ask you to post the WC squadrons in CHS later to serve in Europe?

Thanks,

Tom


Sorry, I have retired from the CHS team. Perhaps the current guys will take a look ....



(in reply to timtom)
Post #: 83
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/22/2006 3:38:14 AM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

1.I am using CHS and have in 1/1944 captured most of northen Japan.
Shikka now has a Russian I 16mod24 squadron, which is assigned to the "Far East Command".(I never got any messages indicating it was coming.)
By the time it showed up, I already had been there a couple of months and I have American and Canadian units there.
The Soviets are not active..
I had taken this city from Japanese forces.
I use Andrews' ext map mod.
2.One of my American replacement units a few months ago was the 56th fighter group.
IIRC, this was Hub Zemke's famous unit, part of the 8th A.F., in ETO..

Please correct me if I am wrong?


The 56th Operated out of California in May-June, 1942, then from Nome and later Anchorage for the rest of 1942. See answer above.




Thank you Don..I did not know of their deployments prior to maybe 1944.
I have explicit trust in the work you did.
Ref my other problem, (Soviet unit at Shikka).. Is it possible Shikka is supposed to be a Soviet base and somehow the Japanese were there "wrongfully"?


_____________________________




(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 84
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/22/2006 4:24:21 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob
Ref my other problem, (Soviet unit at Shikka).. Is it possible Shikka is supposed to be a Soviet base and somehow the Japanese were there "wrongfully"?


I don't think that is a CHS specific problem. I think that some bases "default" to a certain ownership when they are captured, but I am not sure of the specifics.

Andrew

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 85
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/23/2006 3:55:26 AM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
I had read several other threads where people thought the North Pacific theatre was a waste of time. I wanted to see why.
I have eliminated much Japanese industry by taking the northen islands, (as large as Great Britain, I would imagine so !).
Maybe this is the first time this has ever been seen as an issue?
Playing against the AI, I believe it should be showing more "response-agression" than what I have encountered.

_____________________________




(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 86
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/23/2006 1:11:28 PM   
timtom


Posts: 2358
Joined: 1/29/2003
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline
Just wondering about the F-4, F-5A replacement rate. The Allied player starts with one F-4 sqd and receives another at D+54. These two sqds have to be sustained with a repl rate of 2 - ie the these sqds can affort to lose roughly 1 aircraft pr month, anything else will push you in the red. The F-5A repl rate is 1, starting 06/42. One F-5A sqd arrives on D+185, and the 82nd TR sdq, equipped with B-18s, upgrades to the F-5A (PDU OFF) So, presuming no F-5A losses at all, the 82nd will be able to upgrade about mid-43. The situation will remain critical with regards to dedicated Allied recon assets until the arrival of the F-5C and the F-6C in the autumn of '43. In other words, one would do well to hold onto the Dutch CW-22's, not because they theoretically upgrades to F-5A's, but because they have a repl rate of 5. Working as designed?

_____________________________

Where's the Any key?


(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 87
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/23/2006 2:05:38 PM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: timtom

Just wondering about the F-4, F-5A replacement rate.
....
Working as designed?


That is a question for Mike, but the rates do look a bit low.

Andrew

(in reply to timtom)
Post #: 88
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/23/2006 4:34:36 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: timtom

Just wondering about the F-4, F-5A replacement rate. The Allied player starts with one F-4 sqd and receives another at D+54. These two sqds have to be sustained with a repl rate of 2 - ie the these sqds can affort to lose roughly 1 aircraft pr month, anything else will push you in the red. The F-5A repl rate is 1, starting 06/42. One F-5A sqd arrives on D+185, and the 82nd TR sdq, equipped with B-18s, upgrades to the F-5A (PDU OFF) So, presuming no F-5A losses at all, the 82nd will be able to upgrade about mid-43. The situation will remain critical with regards to dedicated Allied recon assets until the arrival of the F-5C and the F-6C in the autumn of '43. In other words, one would do well to hold onto the Dutch CW-22's, not because they theoretically upgrades to F-5A's, but because they have a repl rate of 5. Working as designed?


There is a factory at the United States Base building Five CW-22 Falcon recon planes per month. In Jan/42 the CW-22 and the factory convert to F5A Lighting. Then in May/43 the F5A (and the factory) convert to F5C.



(in reply to timtom)
Post #: 89
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn - 2/24/2006 4:03:49 AM   
akdreemer


Posts: 1028
Joined: 10/3/2004
From: Anchorage, Alaska
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

I had read several other threads where people thought the North Pacific theatre was a waste of time. I wanted to see why.
I have eliminated much Japanese industry by taking the northen islands, (as large as Great Britain, I would imagine so !).
Maybe this is the first time this has ever been seen as an issue?
Playing against the AI, I believe it should be showing more "response-agression" than what I have encountered.


Yeah, and eraly grab by the Allies for Marcus Island can really set up the Japanese for some nasty surprised when playingagainst the AI, and even PBEM if the Japanese fail to reinforce it. Marcus is importan because it is an excellent left flank postition for the North Pacific Advance.

_____________________________


(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> 2nd USMC Para Btn Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.484