Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: A couple of new screenshots

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: A couple of new screenshots Page: <<   < prev  16 17 [18] 19 20   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/21/2008 12:59:13 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		As you can see devices numbers are a lot higher in units this is especially true in allied formations where the increased device count increases supply usage.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 511
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/21/2008 12:59:57 AM   
Jim D Burns


Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline 		Did you get a chance to address the command HQ's not drawing supplies to themselves? In my current PBEM it's costing me bigtime, I had to pull out my airforce from a critical theatre just as KB appeared because they were not drawing replacement air frames.

So far it looks like Malay HQ, SWPAC and SEAC are affected on the allied side. Japan's Home island HQ and northern China HQ (don't know their exact names) also may be affected.

Jim


_____________________________


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 512
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/21/2008 1:08:02 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Its not an issue in AE we looked for it but couldn't replicate it Jim

The fact is you can manully draw forward the same amount of supply i.e. 25k so it wont be an issue

(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 513
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/21/2008 6:40:24 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Part 2 after the TOE change to lighten it for Jungle work







Andy,

Pre upgrade,
Which Aust units used the 3.7" howitzer?
Do the Marmon Herrington A/cs represent anything else?
I think you have over motorized them, the Aussie Divs went most place on their feet, maybe somewhere between this figure and what you have for the Jungle TO&E

I dont think that any Australian AT units upgraded to 6pdr AT guns in the Pacific theatres.

The Australian AT Rgts became known as Tank Attack Rgts, & I doubt ever uses RAA as a prefix to their title.


_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 514
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/21/2008 12:20:25 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		At work so don't have my source books.

Div Cav Regt for Aus Divs mostly used Carriers so MH are from the Brit Div TOE that the Div Recce regt was pointed to (I did Aus/Brit Divs at same time !!!)

3.7" I will need to check when I get home and have my sources in front of me

Motorisation assumptions are tied to the number of Bren Sections and Guns in the Div i.e. the number of vehicles used to transport guns.

Cannot stop AT Guns upgrading without changing whole structure (the later TOE is actually the TOE of the Div - the actual unit is still using 2 Pounders because of the lack of guns)

Andy

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 515
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/21/2008 1:43:51 PM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1829
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

At work so don't have my source books.

Div Cav Regt for Aus Divs mostly used Carriers so MH are from the Brit Div TOE that the Div Recce regt was pointed to (I did Aus/Brit Divs at same time !!!)

3.7" I will need to check when I get home and have my sources in front of me

Motorisation assumptions are tied to the number of Bren Sections and Guns in the Div i.e. the number of vehicles used to transport guns.

Cannot stop AT Guns upgrading without changing whole structure (the later TOE is actually the TOE of the Div - the actual unit is still using 2 Pounders because of the lack of guns)

Andy


Andy,

AIF Divisional Cavalry Regiments were different from British recce ('unique'). 2/6th and 2/7th had received some Vickers tanks in 1940 and 2/9th used Stuart tanks at El Alamein (but otherwise you're correct, most of their vehicles were Bren carriers).

Can send you TOE's for them tomorrow. But I don't know if they really took their equipment back to Australia, TOE's are for the MTO.

K


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 516
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/21/2008 2:03:02 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		I think from memory I used the MH as a proxy armoured car in place of Stuarts/Vickers Light Tanks for the Aus Div Cav but it should have been a mix of Bren Sections and Ard Cars (which ironically is what the Brit Recce Rgets have at start.)

My assumption is that when they arrive they are at ME TOE and then they lose the Div Cav in 42 when they get the lighter TOE. The Div Cav become either the Cavalry Commandos or inf/ard replacements for other units

To late for next testing build I will amend for next submission

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 517
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/21/2008 3:08:55 PM   
Blackhorse


Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

One of the books on the defense of Wake - but the officer commanding (who for some reason is not given the glory given to a less senior officer) - gives a different organization - and says there were not supposed to be enough men for all the weapons - you could go from position to position and the weapons were already there. The pre war organization which existed in Dec 1941 included



Wake Island's defenses were still in the process of being set up. The detachment of the 1st Defense Battalion, at Wake, was not the permanent garrision of Wake, just a care-taker unit during installation. Once all weapons were in place, the men were to leave and men from another unit (3rd or 4th, one of the units then at Pearl Harbor) was to rotate in.




This is true. Also - Admiral Kimmel wanted to form a "Wake Island Militia" - but while it DID fight - it was never legally formed up - and it was a strange and rare case of "semi-officially sanctioned American illegal combattants." The Marines - having lots of weapons and inadequate manpower - used the men of the civilian construction contractors (mainly) - and did so without the slightest effort to give them any "identifying insignia" (an arm band would do - of any color). Lacking a uniform, they were not lawful combattants, and the Japanese were outraged, executing the most blatant offenders summarily (leading to many charges of "atrocity" - although WE do exactly the same thing to unlawful combattants - in every era). Anyway - the force that fought was the caretaker force - slightly reinforced (which was meaningful as it had too many weapons).



There were about 1,000 civilian contractors at Wake when the Japanese attacked. About 400 volunteered to help the Marines, mostly in a support capacity, but some also fought.

The battle-support role of Wake's contractors is abstractly represented by giving the Marines on Wake the ability to man all their weapons, and fight as infantry if the Japanese land. As Don notes, the marines did not have enough "boots on the ground" to do that themselves.

In WitP-AE, the Navy's civilian contractors building airfields on Wake and other Pacific Islands are included as separate engineer units. They disband in early '42. As Sid implies, under the rules of war followed by the US, civilians are prohibited from working in war zones. The Navy phased out their civilian contractors and replaced them with Naval Construction Battalions ("Seabees").

Despite the legend of the "Fighting Seabees", Naval Construction Battalions were not combat engineers. They were outstanding construction engineers, and will appear as such in AE.


_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 518
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/21/2008 9:39:53 PM   
Chad Harrison


Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Got a little taster to share with you its all subject to change still but I figured it was worth a look







Andy, is the top screen, the Sub Editor, going to be available ingame or will it need to be accessed through the editor?

Thanks

Chad

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 519
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/21/2008 10:13:19 PM   
Captain Cruft


Posts: 3652
Joined: 3/17/2004
From: England
Status: offline 		The sub-editor part is quite clearly an in game screen.

Looks good!

(in reply to Chad Harrison)
Post #: 520
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/21/2008 10:27:22 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Its in game and is very usefull !!!

(ps Jeff is correct something has went wront the 40mm's are gone all the devices are out of kilter)

Time to recheck the lot again ......



< Message edited by Andy Mac -- 1/21/2008 10:32:06 PM >

(in reply to Captain Cruft)
Post #: 521
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/21/2008 10:56:41 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		OK this is how it should have looked weird how it went wrong

p.s. dont rat me out to the project team but I am supposed to get permission to post screenies but this is a correction of a previous one so........






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 522
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/21/2008 10:59:11 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		So thats 9 Bns of Inf, 1 Div Recce Regt, 1 MMG Bn, 9 x Art Batteries, 3 x AT Coy, 3 x AA Coy, 3 x Field Coy, 1 x Field Park Coy

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 523
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/21/2008 11:08:32 PM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		Will the AIF Pioneer Bns get represented as a "Corps Troops" unit, if so, shouldnt the AIF MG Bns also get shown in this way.

If you are still going with the 6pdr being available, 9th Divvy should have 6pdrs in its AT Bn when arriving at Aden, I believe the Bn AT platoons still had 2 pdrs.

I will also check up on something K mentioned, I believe some equipment was left in the Middle East, like AFV & Guns.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 524
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/21/2008 11:26:50 PM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1829
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

I think from memory I used the MH as a proxy armoured car in place of Stuarts/Vickers Light Tanks for the Aus Div Cav but it should have been a mix of Bren Sections and Ard Cars (which ironically is what the Brit Recce Rgets have at start.)

My assumption is that when they arrive they are at ME TOE and then they lose the Div Cav in 42 when they get the lighter TOE. The Div Cav become either the Cavalry Commandos or inf/ard replacements for other units

To late for next testing build I will amend for next submission


AIF Divisional Cavalry Regiment TOE 1939-41:

Regimental HQ with 4x Mk.VI Light tank, 2x scout carrier
3x Squadron, each with:
Squadron HQ with 2x Mk.VI Light tank, 2x scout carrier
2x Troop, each with 3x Mk.VI Light tank
4x Troop (7 men), each with 3x Scout carrier, 3x LMG, 3x ATR

Total: 28x Mk.VI Light tank, 44x Scout carrier, 12x Rifle section

2/9th Divisional Cavalry Regiment 1942 (TOE):

Regimental HQ with 2x Tank, 1x Scout carrier
3x Squadron, each with
Squadron HQ with 2x Tank, 2x Scout carrier
1x Troop with 4x Tank
5x Troop (7 men), each with 3x Scout carrier, 3x LMG, 3x ATR

Total: 20x Tank, 52x Scout Carrier, 15x Rifle section

At Alamein the regiment had 15x Crusader and 5x Stuart tanks

Source: British Armies of WW2, The Australian Army, by Ryan, Hughes, Rothwell


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 525
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/21/2008 11:47:09 PM   
Chad Harrison


Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

The sub-editor part is quite clearly an in game screen.

Looks good!



Personally, for me, all these changes are of the To Good to Be True category, so I double check on all of them!!

(in reply to Captain Cruft)
Post #: 526
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/22/2008 12:09:52 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		I have slightly different figures but not much

RHQ (1 x Tank and 4 x Carrier)
3 Sqns each of (SHQ 1 x Tank and 2 Carriers)

2 x Troops of 3 Tanks
3 x Troops of 3 Carriers

and

2 Troops of 4 MMG's and 4 Carriers

So total 18 Tanks in Sqns and 4 Tanks in RHQ and 27 Bren Gun Carriers and 8 MMG Carriers (plus 10 Carriers in the HQ)

This gets represented as

9 x Bren Sections (each 3x3 man Bren Teams)
4 x Vickers MMG (each 2 Vickers MMG)
18 or 22 x Armoured Cars/Light Tanks

Source British and Commonwealth Armies Volume 1 by Mark Bevis

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 527
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/22/2008 1:20:15 PM   
Reg


Posts: 2787
Joined: 5/26/2000
From: NSW, Australia
Status: offline 		Andy,

My sources (Handel again) line up almost exactly with Kereguelen, even to the numbers of vehicles (though he doesn't mention captured types).

However, what he doesn't say is that all equipment was returned to British stocks before leaving the Middle East and the Cavalry units re-equipped with Bren Carriers* on return to Australia.

* Including some of these beauties below (are these included in the game??)




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Cheers,
Reg.

(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 528
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/22/2008 1:26:42 PM   
Reg


Posts: 2787
Joined: 5/26/2000
From: NSW, Australia
Status: offline 		And to prove they are real, here is a scan of the workshop manual which someone once kindly loaned me to read.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Reg -- 1/22/2008 1:33:00 PM >

_____________________________

Cheers,
Reg.

(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!

(in reply to Reg)
Post #: 529
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/22/2008 1:42:26 PM   
Reg


Posts: 2787
Joined: 5/26/2000
From: NSW, Australia
Status: offline 		A picture of the 3" Mortar version using the same extended chassis and turntable as the AT variant. Note the ammunition lockers around the sides.

All 400 manufactured were exported in late '43 (Andy, you will see this on the table I sent you) and I'm not sure where they ended up!!




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Reg -- 1/22/2008 1:44:58 PM >

_____________________________

Cheers,
Reg.

(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!

(in reply to Reg)
Post #: 530
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/22/2008 2:57:52 PM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		Reg

At least 1 sample ended up in the museum at Bandiana

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Reg)
Post #: 531
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/22/2008 3:05:26 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		My source is pretty good so I am going to stick with it it is an early 42 TOE I also have the TOE K refers to from the Div in Syria.

One reason for not giving the Cav Crusader Tanks etc is I dont believe these were allowed to leave the M/e

So where a tanks or Armoured Car is required I am giving them a SA build Marmon Harrington A/C as a proxy.

The Div Cav Regts dissapear pretty quickly so a small abstration is not a huge issue here.

Andy

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 532
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/22/2008 4:36:35 PM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1829
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

One reason for not giving the Cav Crusader Tanks etc is I dont believe these were allowed to leave the M/e



Seems to be correct:

http://anzacsteel.hobbyvista.com/Armoured%20Vehicles/Crusader%20Down%20Under.htm

But check out the main page, contains lots of information about Aussie armoured vehicles (including Marmon-Harringtons):

http://anzacsteel.hobbyvista.com/armourframe.htm

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 533
RE: A couple of new screenshots - 1/22/2008 7:53:45 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Aye I used both those web sites when building it !!!

But I took the decision not to include the MH tank or the other low number AFV's they are all represented by the Improvised AFV device.

I had to leave something for the modders to do after all !!!!

Re the Aus Cav I made the broad assumption that the Cav Regts returning from the M/E with their Divisions are using a mix of Carriers with Brens or Vickers and Marmon Harrington Armoured Cars.

The exact mix can be argued with depending on which day you choose to take the TOE from (they changed devices dependent on what was availoable and what was required by the Ard Bdes pretty much every other week)

I have chosen to take the 22 Armoured Car, 35 Carrier fighting TOE (plus RHQ and SHQ vehicles classed as Mot Support)

I am sure others will take different views

Andy

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 534
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/22/2008 8:25:10 PM   
Chad Harrison


Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Got a little taster to share with you its all subject to change still but I figured it was worth a look







Just noticed something that again is under the To Good to Be True classification. The infantry bde's of the 6th Australian Division in your screen are NOT named simply A/B/C as they are in WitP, but have their actual, correct names!! (16th, 17th and 19th Infantry Bde)

Is this typical for all divisions ingame now? If so, will the Bde/Rgt have different arrival dates, or will the division show up as a whole?

To be more specific, if in WitP:AE I split up the 2nd Marine Division, I will get the 2nd, 6th and 8th Marines instead of generic A, B and C of the 2nd Marine Division?

If so, will a late war Marine division have five components: 3 rifle regiments, 1 armored Bn and 1 artillery regiment? Or will the artillery be tied as equal parts into the rifle regiments?

Getting excited about this may seem silly for some people, but its the little things like this that make me love this game.

Thanks

Chad

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 535
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/22/2008 9:00:34 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Ooo, I hadn't caught that.  That would be really nice to have. 

(in reply to Chad Harrison)
Post #: 536
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/22/2008 10:04:49 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Sorry guys no can do if a Division arrives broken down you can name it anything you like in the Editor and we have tried to make it historic but after you recombine it for the first time that data is lost.

So for the CW at start most non Indian Divs are set to arrive as either Bdes or in some case Bdes and Bns (so all Aus Divs are broken down most British)

1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th Aus DIvs arrive pre broken down
2nd, 18th and if my memory is correct 5th British arrive broken down

70th British Doesnt as its to hard because of the Chindit conversions

36th Indian/Brit Div arrives broken down as its a weird unit that changes nationality

9th/11th/14th/17th and 1st Burma Divs are all broken down to cover historic deployments.

3rd NZ Div is broken down but does not have a recombine option because of its weird nature

1st RM/ 3rd British/ 6th Canadian (All X Corps 11/45) 4th/8th and 10th Indian (All late 1945)  and 5th/6th (only if India is invaded) /7th/19th/20th/23rd/25th/26th Indian and 9th Australian arrive as whole Divisions without the named breakdown

Basically most early war forces arrive as named Bdes and Bns

After its combined for the 1st time if you want to split it down in future you get the A/B/C split

The 1st 9 months of the war are at Bde scale more or less so most units arrive as Bdes but after that the game is really a Divisional game as Bdes are no longer sufficient so forces tend to arrive as Divs.

(Also the Indian Divs were just to much grief as so many Bdes moved around)

p.s. its not possible to upgrade the broken down sub units TOE so you will need to combine them to get the benefit of upgraded TOE's

Andy

< Message edited by Andy Mac -- 1/22/2008 10:05:26 PM >

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 537
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/22/2008 10:16:00 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Ah well.  It was nice to dream for a bit.  Thanks Andy.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 538
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/22/2008 10:39:49 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		A -II item.

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 539
RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread - 1/22/2008 10:58:23 PM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		re Aust Div Cav Rgts

6 Div Cav left its Mk VII Lt Tanks in the ME, it only took its carriers back to Aust.  In Aust after leave it only operated in the traditional role for a short time before retraining as Infantry (To the Green Fields Beyond - Unit History)

Aust Field Rgts - speed of movement.
2/7 Fd Rgt (9 Div) left its Guns and Transport in Egypt.
Left Ismailia 1/2/43 on Nieuw Amsterdam
Refuelled Addu Atoll 10/2/43
Arrived Fremantle 18/2/43
Convoy was Queen Mary, Nieuw Amsterdam, Aquitania, Queen of Bermuda, Isle de France and carried to entire 9th Div.
Arrived Melbourne 23/2/43

Division reformed Atherton Tablelands 17/4/43

2/7 Fd Rgt received its first guns on 11/4/43

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 540
Page:   <<   < prev  16 17 [18] 19 20   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: A couple of new screenshots Page: <<   < prev  16 17 [18] 19 20   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

1.953