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: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas

 
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 >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas Page: <<   < prev  16 17 [18] 19 20   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas - 10/9/2011 5:28:58 AM   
Don Bowen


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

You wrote you will put a PBY squadron in wake, I think a detachment might be more appropriate. Wakes not that big There are two detachments already in the game. Don't remember which squadron is broken up but just take 2 more from that one and that should be good.


Although the long term plan for Wake was to have a NAS and a full PBy squadron. Also a sub base capable of handling half a dozen boats. Memory fails, maybe some PTs too.

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 511
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas - 10/9/2011 7:54:49 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
I like the way it looks John.  One thing that I see is that, if you have a fully loaded TF at Manila unloading on the 7th its toast.  Maybe have 2 sqds flying cover for them. 

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 512
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas - 10/9/2011 4:01:00 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

You wrote you will put a PBY squadron in wake, I think a detachment might be more appropriate. Wakes not that big There are two detachments already in the game. Don't remember which squadron is broken up but just take 2 more from that one and that should be good.


Although the long term plan for Wake was to have a NAS and a full PBy squadron. Also a sub base capable of handling half a dozen boats. Memory fails, maybe some PTs too.



So if one wanted to make a mod with Wake fully ready, what would you suggest modifying the base stats to? Port 3 AF 3 Forts 3?

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 513
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas - 10/9/2011 4:13:00 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
One cannot know for certain but I think Pt-2, F-3, with the AF where it is normally works well. Raise the supply some, add some fuel (for SS), a squadron of PTs for local defense, and you are ready to go. Fortress Wake!

The PBY's flying there are only 6 in number I believe. Still have the Wildcats as well...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 514
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas - 10/9/2011 4:39:25 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

One cannot know for certain but I think Pt-2, F-3, with the AF where it is normally works well. Raise the supply some, add some fuel (for SS), a squadron of PTs for local defense, and you are ready to go. Fortress Wake!

The PBY's flying there are only 6 in number I believe. Still have the Wildcats as well...



Sounds reasonable to me.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 515
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas - 10/9/2011 5:46:52 PM   
RevRick


Posts: 2617
Joined: 9/16/2000
From: Thomasville, GA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

I like the way it looks John.  One thing that I see is that, if you have a fully loaded TF at Manila unloading on the 7th its toast.  Maybe have 2 sqds flying cover for them. 


Knowing sailors, and their offices, you can probably be assured that the convoy would have arrived for a liberty call on Friday PM. The convoy would have been unloaded on Saturday at overtime rates, and then would have been in port with basically some remnants of the supply onboard, and most of the stuff crated in Manila. Also, since the strike on Manila happened sometime after the Pearl Harbor raid, I would imagine that Tommy Hart would have had his fighting ships manned and underway somewhere - probably to rendezvous with Houston and Boise.

_____________________________

"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 516
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas - 10/9/2011 7:41:31 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
Going with RR suggestion, have the warships based at Manila, but start the game in the Bataan hex headed south. Thus, the Japanese player will need to decide what surface and air assets to be devoted to go after them. If they can survive and join up with Boise and Houston, the Americans can have a decent SC TF in the SRA.

_____________________________


(in reply to RevRick)
Post #: 517
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas - 10/9/2011 10:05:17 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
OK. Could simply start with the TF fully unloaded with the troops, supply, and aircraft at Manila. Might be fun to have the B-25 and A-20 fully disabled reflecting them being just offloaded. Have to be put back together before being used! Yes: the JFB finds this sort of funny.

Michael's idea has some real merit.

Have the entire day tomorrow at home ALONE! Plan to can Salsa, play turns, and work on the Mod. Just bought a new set of notebooks so I can create a complete Change Log to put onto the Forum.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 518
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas - 10/9/2011 10:12:34 PM   
Don Bowen


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

The historian in me has to interject. You could get a copy of Racing the Sunrise and check out all the assets that were in the process of moving to the Philippines. Assume everything was a few months ahead and it all arrived by 12/6.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 519
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas - 10/9/2011 10:56:48 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Concur. Have looked at that book and want to order it. You are correct Don. We'll go that path.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 520
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas - 10/10/2011 4:32:30 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Just ordered Racing the Sunrise!

Time to get to work on the Mod. Am going to tackle the Convoy at Manila first. Decided to do the right thing and we'll work along the line that the TF arrived on December 5th, unloaded, and is leaving the harbor. This will allow the Allied player the ability to give it orders on Turn One. It will have Pensacola and 4 Clemson DDs as the escort for the Convoy.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 521
RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas - 10/10/2011 5:39:39 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
New Changes:

1. 4 Clemson Added to Pensacola TF: Rathburne, Lawrence, King and Sands. TF 47 starts at hex 76,85 (eastern Sulu Sea) heading SE.

2. Manila: A-20 and B-25 Squadrons available with 12 of 16 planes in each. LCU from Pensacola TF: 147th FA, 260th FA, 131st FA, 148th FA, 45th Base Group

3. Base Changes (new air bridge going south):

a. Christmas Isle: 4th Marine Defense Bn, 2nd Marine Pioneer Bn, 1,500 Supply, 350 Fuel, and Ft-1
b. Pago Pago: 1st Marine Pioneer Bn, Ft-1, 1,500 Supply, 3,000 Fuel, AS Fulton, and 4 S-Boats

< Message edited by John 3rd -- 10/10/2011 9:06:17 PM >


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 522
US--Brit Naval Changes - 10/10/2011 9:05:55 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Continuing down the list:

US Fleet Changes:
Decided to have Colorado upgrading (as normal) AND Tennessee/California getting their first upgrade early. The latter two are at San Francisco.

To Pearl Harbor goes BBs Idaho, New Mexico, and Mississippi: Total of 9 BBs at Pearl.

Ten new US DDs added with the first six in SF and the remaining 4 in San Diego:
1. Porter Class: McKee and Stribling
2. Mahan Class: Hart, Paulding, Harwood, and Cone
3. Farragut Class: Delphy, Woodbury, S.P. Lee, Oreleck

British Changes:
Force Z: BB Prince of Wales, BC's Repulse and Renown, and 7 DDs (4 K-Class)

TF 422 (18th ID) CL Caledon escorting APs/AKs carrying 18th Inf Div just off of Cochin India

CV TF (Cover Force for 18th ID): CV Indomitable, CL Belfast, and 4 DDs.

Other Changes:
1. Filled out several of the Buffalo Squadrons at Singapore and ADDED 1 Squadron (#232-P) of Hurricanes
2. Raised Forts to 2 at Kluong and Mersing reflecting the beginning of a Defensive Line above Singapore

This is about as far as I will get today.

Comments?


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 523
RE: US--Brit Naval Changes - 10/11/2011 12:06:11 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline
I think it will work. What port size did you plan for Pago Pago?

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 524
RE: US--Brit Naval Changes - 10/12/2011 4:32:17 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
The extra BB might keep more ships from being sunk on Dec 7th.  I kinda like that.  Then again the Japanese opponent has alot more targets to worry about.  Be interesting to see what the opening moves are now. 

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 525
RE: US--Brit Naval Changes - 10/12/2011 6:02:47 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Thank Guys. Didn't get anything worked on today. Hope to tomorrow.

I have strong concerns that we've done too much for the Allies at the start. LOTS of new ships, aircraft, and units added. Once all this first round of tweaks is done then I will Post totals. Need to talk with FatR to see if he has exactly what has been added to the opening for Japan.

VOLUNTEER NEEDED: Does anyone want to figure out China within the parameters of this Mod. We're going to start the China War two years later then historically and need to establish the lines, units, and condition of things. It will be a MAJOR deal. It would be a great job with lots of work, research, and tons of commentary (good and bad) from the Forum.

Anyone? Anyone?? Bueller??? Ferris Bueller????


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 526
RE: US--Brit Naval Changes - 10/12/2011 3:05:35 PM   
Misconduct


Posts: 1864
Joined: 2/18/2009
From: Cape Canaveral, Florida
Status: offline
Is it Christmas or is John3rd just coming early this year? Can't wait to test this mod out

_____________________________

ASUS Maximus IV Extreme-Z Intel Core I7 2800k Corsair Hydro Heatsink Corsair Vengeance DD3 24GB EVGA GTX 580 Western Digital 1.5TB Raid 0 Windows 7

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 527
RE: US--Brit Naval Changes - 10/12/2011 4:59:10 PM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 446
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Thank Guys. Didn't get anything worked on today. Hope to tomorrow.

I have strong concerns that we've done too much for the Allies at the start. LOTS of new ships, aircraft, and units added. Once all this first round of tweaks is done then I will Post totals. Need to talk with FatR to see if he has exactly what has been added to the opening for Japan.

VOLUNTEER NEEDED: Does anyone want to figure out China within the parameters of this Mod. We're going to start the China War two years later then historically and need to establish the lines, units, and condition of things. It will be a MAJOR deal. It would be a great job with lots of work, research, and tons of commentary (good and bad) from the Forum.

Anyone? Anyone?? Bueller??? Ferris Bueller????



I'd be willing to try, with the caveat that I'd be starting from a comparatively limited base of knowledge and dependent on what the university library can provide, which should - not will - be enough documentation but probably not "a lot". If someone who actually Knows China comes along, that'd be preferable, but open offer (from later in the week, anyway)

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 528
China Volunteer - 10/12/2011 5:07:07 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I LOVE volunteers! You are accepted. Have you done any work in the Editor at all? For a good, clear idea of what has been talked about jump onto the Japanese side of the Threads and find the details regarding the China War there. I will try to do that and paste it here.

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 529
Editor Question - 10/12/2011 5:07:50 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
How do I add planes to the pool? Haven't done that and am not sure where in the Editor it can be done.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 530
RE: Editor Question - 10/12/2011 5:21:58 PM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 446
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline
quote:

Have you done any work in the Editor at all? For a good, clear idea of what has been talked about jump onto the Japanese side of the Threads and find the details regarding the China War there. I will try to do that and paste it here.


quote:



How do I add planes to the pool? Haven't done that and am not sure where in the Editor it can be done.



I've probably spent more time farting around with it than I have actually playing the game, so it's not an issue. It's pretty simple - I don't get why people find it so confusing; as with any new and frightening software you just need to spend a bit of time playing with it, really.



Insert your desired # of pool aircraft in there.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 531
RE: Editor Question - 10/12/2011 5:41:38 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
HAH! Thanks. Just re-read the entire Japanese Thread to this Mod. That took some time. Doing a bit of copy and paste.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 532
China - 10/12/2011 5:45:45 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
kfsgo--Here is what Blackhorse put together at the front of this Thread. IT is pretty good and gives a starting point for China:

Well, OK. If the "kindler, gentler" Japanese simply must hold most of the Chinese economic centers at game-start, then how about this:


A BRIEF REVISIONIST HISTORY OF THE START OF THE "WAR OF RESISTANCE" AGAINST JAPAN

All through 1937 and 1938, Japan consolidates its hold in Manchuria, continues to support friendly warlords and collaborationists, and keeps political pressure on the KMT regime to advance Japan's China Autonomous Movement policy.

The first series of agreements banned the KMT from a political or military presence in the provinces ranged between Beijing and Manuchuria and Mongolia. Although the Japanese did not occupy these provinces, the political vacuum made it easy for them to establish friendly collaborationist regimes. In China, Chiang is willing to trade space for time, as his focus is on making the National Revolutionary Army a professional force, and his hope is to defeat the Communists before engaging Japan in open warfare.

However, in the aftermath of the Anti-Comintern Pact (Novemenber, 1936), the Japanese put increasing pressure on the German government to stop assisting the Chinese military reorganization. By early 1938, German equipment shipments had stopped, and its military advisors were withdrawn. By then, 20 divisions had been trained and equipped to German standards, and were led by officers from the Whampoa military academy who were (mostly) loyal to Chiang. As the Germans leave, Chiang turns to the Soviet Union for assistance. Stalin provides aid, despite Chiang's continued pogroms against the communists. Stalin's cold-blooded calculation is that Japan is less likely to attack the USSR if it is tied down in China, and he puts aside ideology to give material support to Chiang.

The KMT-Japanese agreements covering northern China are vague (what does a ban on 'political activity' mean?) and open for dispute. There are incidents, and guerillas organized against Japanese puppet administrators, but the Japanese do not seek to push into Beijing or beyond, and an uneasy truce prevails.

Late in 1938, the Japanese shift the focus of their political pressure to Southern China. Since a 1932 incident, China's military was barred from the Shanghai region. Throughout the 1930s Japan uses its economic and military presence to build a network of dependent local governments. In 1938, Tokyo seeks to extend its China Autonomous Movement to the Shanghai region, and force Chiang to make the same concessions there, as he had in the north. With much of his army engaged in a major campaign to crush the Communists in the north, Chiang agrees, although his policy of appeasing Japan is becoming increasingly unpopular throughout China.

The Japanese install Chiang's former KMT rival Wang Jingwei, as ruler of the Shanghai region. In early 1939, Wang declares his government to be the legitimate government of all of China. Wang is clearly backed by powerful Japanese industrial and military leaders in China, but his proclamation wrong-foots the Tokyo government, which does not immediately rein him in.

Both Wang and Chiang force Japan's hand. Chiang sees Wang as a direct threat to his control of China. Chiang makes a hasty truce with the Communists and sends the 19th Route Army, including two of his German-trained divisions, to confront Wang's collaborationist troops that are moving through Jiangsu province towards the Chinese capital at Nanking. At the Tai Hu incident of August 29th, 1939, the KMT's National Revolutionary Army crushes Wang's troops near Wusih, and follows them on the road to Shanghai. The road is blocked by Japanese marines, and open warfare between Japan and China soon ensues.

Chiang sends the bulk of his German-trained divisions to Shanghai. Initially unprepared for a full-out war, it takes the Japanese ninth months to break the siege of Shanghai; when they do, the flower of Chiang's National Revolutionary Army has been destroyed. The routed KMT troops fall back and try to rally at Nanking, but the city falls in September, 1940. The Japanese troops are less-disciplined than they might be; their 200,000 casualties since the war began include most of the best small-unit leaders. The troops are exhausted by the fighting, maddened by the vicious Chinese opposition, and exhilarated by the prospect that the fall of the Chinese capital will mean the end of the war. It is the perfect recipe for the "Rape of Nanking."

But Chiang does not surrender. He moves his seat of government inland, first to Wuhan, then, after repeated air and naval bombardments, to Chungking. He directs the transfer of Chinese industry to the Chungking area. China's resistance has thrilled and impressed the West. Even before the Germans invade Russia in 1941, Stalin has scaled down his support for Chiang. As the Russians step down, the Americans step up. While America remains isolationist, Roosevelt is concerned by the pace of the Japanese build-up, and interested in developing China as a friendly power. He supports the proposal for an "American Volunteer Group" in China. By November, 1941, the 1st and 2nd AVGs, equipped with early-model P-40 and A-20 aircraft originally destined for England, have arrived at air bases in China and their air crews are ready to enter the fight.

After the capture of Nanking, the Japanese government takes time to reconstitute and reinforce the army, and restore its discipline. The army refits and consolidates its hold throughout 1941. Elsewhere in China, the Japanese occupy the puppet territories of the north, and capture Beijing after a brief, brisk battle. The Navy is engaged with a blockade of China, and bringing troops to occupy Canton and the port cities. By November, 1941 Japan controls the entire coast except for Wenchow and Pakhoi, and the international enclaves at Hong Kong, Macao, and Kwangchowan. The main army, at Nanking, is refit, and preparing for a campaign against Wuhan.

----------------

This scenario gives Japan at-start control of:
All the Chinese coastal cities (+ Canton) that they normally have
The cities along the line Shanghai-Nanking, plus all adjacent cities
The northern cities along the line Tienstin-Peiping-Kalgow-Tatung-Kweisu-Paotow and everything to the (map) east

China gains control of:
The Wuhan area (Hanchow + Wuchang) and the surrounding inland cities (Ichang, Anking, Nanchang)
The northern inland area bounded by Sinyang, Suchow and Chengting

China's military strength ends up about the same as is stock AE. The better-trained army fights longer and harder, but is eventually chewed up as badly as IRL.

China should have more industry in Wuhan and Chungking -- in this scenario Chiang has a lot more time to evacuate factories inland.

. . . and China gets both AVG groups (P-40Bs, and A-20As) deployed in China at start. China should also get earlier reinforcements for its own air force.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 533
Changes - 10/12/2011 6:06:40 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Continuing down my list:

Australia:

1. Sydney Repair Yard (40: 20 at start with 20 to repair) An ARD now arrives in late-42 to make the repair facilities pretty good.
2. Two Wirraway Squadrons now start as A-24. A-24 production numbers added to slightly.

Added numbers to older planes for the Pool. Nothing too dramatic but certainly there. Touched on Dutch, British, American, and Aussie numbers...

Pilot Starting Experience:
1. Raised IJN to match RA Mod with improvement in 1941, 1942, 1943, and collapsing in 1944/1944.
2. Improved US starting experience in all areas: US Navy, Marines, and Army.

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 534
RE: Changes - 10/12/2011 6:36:45 PM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 446
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline
Ok. It'll take me a little while to go through the lit stuff I have and longer to go through the stuff I don't, so might take a couple of weeks to put something solid together. If you'd asked me to do this three months ago...right now I'm trying to do a dozen things at once, heh. I'm presuming that the situation DB-wise is exactly as per DBB stock right now, so alterations will be in light of that; correct me if I'm wrong there.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 535
RE: Changes - 10/12/2011 7:07:45 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
You are correct. We will be talking about IJA stuff in the other Thread pretty soon. Any changes done through that discussion wil impact things but I don't see a lot of major changes. When you are ready for the Mod files PLEASE let me know.

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to kfsgo)
Post #: 536
RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: Allied Side - 10/15/2011 4:24:30 AM   
RevRick


Posts: 2617
Joined: 9/16/2000
From: Thomasville, GA
Status: offline
John...
While I have been sitting around doing battle with bronchitis.. I have been fiddling with the Big Five..again.

I have some art work done in rough fashion for an extended hull version which could support the re-engining process that was broached earlier. I am still fascinated by there being five or six of the power plants for the 1922 South Dakota class lying around, and don't see why we couldn't take a realistic look about what would happen with the SHP tripled. I mean, if they could shoehorn a 302 Chevy Z28 engine into a 240Z....

I'll send them to you on the morrow!!

_____________________________

"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 537
RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: Allied Side - 10/15/2011 1:33:15 PM   
MateDow


Posts: 218
Joined: 8/6/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RevRick

John...
While I have been sitting around doing battle with bronchitis.. I have been fiddling with the Big Five..again.

I have some art work done in rough fashion for an extended hull version which could support the re-engining process that was broached earlier. I am still fascinated by there being five or six of the power plants for the 1922 South Dakota class lying around, and don't see why we couldn't take a realistic look about what would happen with the SHP tripled. I mean, if they could shoehorn a 302 Chevy Z28 engine into a 240Z....

I'll send them to you on the morrow!!


I believe that the engineering plants from the South Dakota were used in the reconstructions of the battleships in the 1920s. These would have been the boilers used to convert the Florida, Utah, Arkansas and Wyoming to oil fuel I believe. This also wouldn't be to big of an advantage for the Colorado-class ships since their design is fairly contemporary to the South Dakota already. If the US was going to replace machinery, it would make sense to use the high temperature/high pressure boilers that were designed for the North Carolina and generators designed for those conditions.

Use the weight saved to counteract some of the increased weight from additional deck armor, improved fire control equipment, and increased DP AA battery. The improvement in SHP would probably balance out the additional drag from the anti-torpedo bulging.

I don't see the US "jumboizing" their battleships, outside of the fact that it was against treaty requirements that limited improvements, for the fact that it would have been far cheaper to just build a new ship. This isn't a tanker like the Cimarron that is simple to add in a section to lengthen the vessel.

(in reply to RevRick)
Post #: 538
RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: Allied Side - 10/15/2011 2:09:49 PM   
MateDow


Posts: 218
Joined: 8/6/2002
Status: offline
OK, based on the previous post I have thought about a couple of alternatives for the reconstruction or refit of the Tennessee and Colorado classes of battleships.

Plan A- Full Reconstruction in 1935-ish
Assuming that Congress continued to approve funding for full reconstructions along the lines of the New Mexico-class battleships
  • Additional 2" (80#) of STS deck armor (based on 70% effectiveness that would add 1.4" to the deck armor in game)
  • Anti-Torpedo Bulge adding 2,000 tons of displacement to restore buoyancy (would add 8 points of durability in game)
  • Replace boilers with newer models for weight compensation and to add space for additional fire control equipment below decks (no effect in game)
  • New fire control equipment and superstructure improvements along the lines of New Mexico-class (no effect in game)


Plan B - Full Reconstruction in 1939-ish
Assuming that Congress voted funding in response to worsening political situation.
  • Additional 2" (80#) of STS deck armor (based on 70% effectiveness that would add 1.4" to the deck armor in game)
  • Anti-Torpedo Bulge adding 2,000 tons of displacement to restore buoyancy (would add 8 points of durability in game)
  • 1.1" AA Battery additions (4 quad 1.1" mounts)
  • Replace boilers with newer models for weight compensation and to add space for additional fire control equipment below decks (no effect in game)
  • New fire control equipment and superstructure improvements along the lines of North Carolina-class (no effect in game)


Plan C - Partial Reconstruction in 1940-ish (Historical Option)
Assuming Congress approved some fund and Navy did not want ships out of service for 2+ years.
  • Anti-Torpedo Bulge adding 2,000 tons of displacement to restore buoyancy (would add 8 points of durability in game)
  • 1.1" AA Battery additions (4 quad 1.1" mounts)


Plan D - Full Reconstruction in 1940-ish
Congress approves the funding and the Navy incorporates lessons from European theater (King Board) into reconstruction, while accepting the loss of the ships for 2+ years.
  • Additional 2" (80#) of STS deck armor (based on 70% effectiveness that would add 1.4" to the deck armor in game)
  • Anti-Torpedo Bulge adding 4,000 tons of displacement to restore buoyancy (would add 16 points of durability in game)
  • Replacement of 5" battery with enclosed DP mounts (add 8 Mk. 12 EBR twin 5" Mounts)
  • 1.1" AA Battery additions (add 4 quad 1.1" mounts)
  • Replace boilers with newer models for weight compensation and to add space for additional fire control equipment below decks (no effect in game)
  • New fire control equipment and superstructure improvements along the lines of New Mexico-class (no effect in game)


As I noted, the US went with Plan C, and we could assume that they finished those refits, but I am under the impression that we are looking for something a little more intensive, so I listed the other options.

< Message edited by MateDow -- 10/15/2011 2:10:07 PM >

(in reply to MateDow)
Post #: 539
RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: Allied Side - 10/15/2011 4:36:26 PM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
Rev Rick hope you feel better. Don't let it turn into a Pnuemonia.

I like MateDows Plan D.

(in reply to MateDow)
Post #: 540
Page:   <<   < prev  16 17 [18] 19 20   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: Tentative Allied Summary of Ideas 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

2.953