RE: The Revamped BIG FOUR

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: The Revamped BIG FOUR

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: The Revamped BIG FOUR

Page: << < prev 19 20 [21] 22 23 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Revamped BIG FOUR - 10/26/2011 9:17:48 AM

CaptBeefheart

Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline

My attitude is that anything I send to Malaya or the DEI is just fish food--there to provide VPs for the Japanese. Therefore, I like your thinking, John 3rd.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 601

RE: The Revamped BIG FOUR - 10/26/2011 3:01:26 PM

mike scholl 1

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Here is a proposal as I think on this: What about taking the 18th British ID out of the initial que and have the Aussie 9th ID rounding the southern tip of India under the protection of Indomitable and Company? The 18th could then be slated to arrive later as a reinforcement...

Why would this be happening if the 9th Division had never been sent to N. Africa in the first place?

If the 9th Aus. goes to Singers, and the 18th Aus. stays to cover Australia..., then the 18th British going to Burma simply completes a general Empire "bulid up" of the defenses of East Asia.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 602

The Empire Build-Up - 10/26/2011 3:40:04 PM

John 3rd

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

Mike: That makes sense as well. I am simply trying to think this through and come up with something viable that might work.

Have to admit that I am somewhat confused. The Australian IDs that are pulled back from North Africa are the 6th and 7th---RIGHT? We then have the British 18th ID that was rushed into Singers just to then surrender. What is the 18th Australian? Do you mean the 8th? My knowledge base for the Allied LCU Order-of-Battle is very thin and want to make sure we are discussing the right things.

Do like Mike's comment about a general Empire 'build up' prior to and at the start of the war.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to mike scholl 1)

Post #: 603

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/26/2011 6:45:03 PM

mike scholl 1

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Have to admit that I am somewhat confused. The Australian IDs that are pulled back from North Africa are the 6th and 7th---RIGHT? We then have the British 18th ID that was rushed into Singers just to then surrender. What is the 18th Australian? Do you mean the 8th? My knowledge base for the Allied LCU Order-of-Battle is very thin and want to make sure we are discussing the right things.

6TH and 7TH are correct..., the 9TH jumped into the conversation when I tried to compare it's performance during the first siege of Trobruk with it's potential for defending Singapore. Mea Culpa for the confusion. As with the 8TH Division (not the 18TH) in Malaya. Trying to do too much off the top of my head.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 604

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/26/2011 6:58:53 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

How much of a build up would have taken place in Malaya?? Could resources have been sent to Malaya vs Hong Kong?? With more of a build up, would the three "bird" battalions have been sent to Malaya so the 8th Aussie Division could be rebuilt there?? Back in old WITP days there was a mod called "Iron Storm" that had a built up Malaya which require more troop investment by Japan to capture.

_____________________________

(in reply to mike scholl 1)

Post #: 605

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/26/2011 7:45:10 PM

John 3rd

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

That could be done but if the Birds go to Malaya what replaces them elsewhere? I know they had limited value but would that work?

Thanks Mike! I live my life confused (as Michael would tell you) so that is OK.

How about this then for thinking:
1. We start with the 6th Aussie ID in Malaya (creating an Aussie Corps?)
2. The 7th is in Columbo with the Indomitable TF at Columbo ready to load and deploy...somewhere...
3. The Brit 18th ID is at Karachi and ready to move by rail or TF

Thoughts to that idea?

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 606

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/26/2011 8:42:49 PM

mike scholl 1

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

That could be done but if the Birds go to Malaya what replaces them elsewhere? I know they had limited value but would that work?

Thanks Mike! I live my life confused (as Michael would tell you) so that is OK.

How about this then for thinking:
1. We start with the 6th Aussie ID in Malaya (creating an Aussie Corps?)
2. The 7th is in Columbo with the Indomitable TF at Columbo ready to load and deploy...somewhere...
3. The Brit 18th ID is at Karachi and ready to move by rail or TF

Thoughts to that idea?

If I understand the premise of your scenario (no guarantee there), the situation in N. Africa is more resolved and requires
fewer resources than IRL. So the question becomes what would a rational Commonwealth Commander have done with the freed up assets to deal with a potential Japanese threat?

Singapore was regarded as the "key" to the Commonwealth position in SE Asia. India was the "crown jewel'..., but no British leader thought the Japanese could get that far in 1941. On the other hand, Hong Kong was indefensible..., so we can assume that a rational commander wouldn't have stuck 6 bns of excellent Canadian troops there to be destroyed. The Australians and New Zealanders concerns were with the area from Singapore East, where a direct threat to their homelands could occur---while the British were more concerned with the area from Singapore West, where a threat to India might arise.

This is why I don't see the ANZACS supporting commitment of any of their Divisions West of Malaya..., leaving the British and their Indian troops to cover Malaya/Burma. One possibility that hasn't entered the discussion yet was that one of the Indian Divisions in Middle East might have been sent home or to Burma. I could see the Malaya/Singapore garrison recieving at least one of the well-trained Aussie Divisions, and perhaps one of the two Canadian Brigades from Hong Kong. The British 18th (or maybe the 4th Indian Div) would go to Burma, perhaps with the other Canadian Brigade. The ANZAKS realized that they could be threatened from the North from Japanes posessions from the Palaus to the Marshalls---so if they had more troops available I see them reinforcing their mandates in the Bismarcks (Rabaul) and preparing to help the Dutch (better to fight in the DEI than in Australia itself.).

Anyway, those are my thoughts.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 607

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/26/2011 9:03:44 PM

Don Bowen

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

Just an aside, but a few more old ships could be made available by a slight bend of history.

The US Asiatic Fleet reached it's high point in destroyers about 1931. At that time it had a full squadron of destroyers using the old 6-ship divisions. That was 19, three divisions and a leader. Then the divisions were reduced to 4 ships each and the six released ships returned to the US. These ships were: MacLeish, McCormick, Tracy, Truxton, Borie, and Simpson. Only one of these ships was in the Pacific during the war - Tracy (as a destroyer-minelayer). In addition, the destroyer Smith Thompson was disposed of after collision damage in 1936 (she was replaced by Alden). A little tweak to history would give the Asiatic Fleet six more destoyers: MacLeish, McCormick, Truxton, Borie, Simpson, and Smith Thompson. A slightly larger tweak would be required to keep Alden as well.

The Australian navy have six World War One destroyers duirng the 1920s/30s. They were disposed of due to material conditions or financial issues. These were the leader Anzac and five S class: Stalwart, Success, Swordsman, Tasmania, and Tattoo. Certainly useful as ASW ships or general escorts - similar to the Eastern Fleet's "S" class.

(in reply to mike scholl 1)

Post #: 608

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/26/2011 11:14:51 PM

kfsgo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

That could be done but if the Birds go to Malaya what replaces them elsewhere? I know they had limited value but would that work?

Thanks Mike! I live my life confused (as Michael would tell you) so that is OK.

How about this then for thinking:
1. We start with the 6th Aussie ID in Malaya (creating an Aussie Corps?)
2. The 7th is in Columbo with the Indomitable TF at Columbo ready to load and deploy...somewhere...
3. The Brit 18th ID is at Karachi and ready to move by rail or TF

Thoughts to that idea?

Hmm.

I think although we have to bear in mind that the Japanese are on steroids and will therefore be advancing much faster than usual - the opposing force doesn't necessarily know that before the war starts. The Mediterranean remains a bit of a narrative 'gap' - if Vichy France doesn't exist, the Italian position in Libya will not be long for the earth, and absent a Libya campaign - what are the Allies doing in the Med 12/41 ? Maybe messing around in the Dodecanese or Sicily, Corsica, Sardinia? Lots of potential trainwrecks for everyone involved - so maybe they're doing something daft or maybe they're just arming a hundred thousand Senegalese and biding their time a little. Still, it's an active theatre, so you have a draw of troops into the Med. You certainly have a draw of ships into the Med - Indomitable should be meant to be off to work over the even-more-cautious-than-historical Regia Marina, for example, not escort troop convoys - the RN has those nice old R-class battleships for that. At the same time, you also have a flow of troops away from some key places - there's no need to occupy Madagascar, Syria, Iraq or Lebanon, for example so the troops involved in that don't need to be there. So, thoughts about what you could do with some key CW units, plus background for why:

6th Australian Div: [In Malaya, apparently]
7th Australian Div: Aden, arriving late December 41 - that's about two months earlier than usual, reflecting that they're probably not really At The Front in the way they were in reality.
8th Australian Div: Complete in Malaya, garrison duties being taken over by independent Australian units. Absent part of a year and a half of really heavy warfare in the Med Australia has somewhat more manpower to toss around.
9th Australian Div: Aden, arriving late spring 42 - in reality kept in the Med for El Alamein and then released home. Here there's no Libya campaign and the threat to Australia is likely to be greater, so they can shove off earlier.

Australia has a lesser commitment to the Mediterranean and is probably the biggest "winner" from that, proportionally. AIF squad replacement rates should probably be somewhat higher - or start them out with more in the pool. Swings and roundabouts - either way they've not been off getting themselves shot to such an extent - and of course anything in Malaya is probably dead meat, so you need a cushion for that. Australia also has a lot of pilots being sent to the UK independent of units - their pilot replacement rate could be bumped a little, though I doubt it's critical.

6th, 7th and 9th Divs should be slightly less experienced than they are in stock as they've not had 18 months of pushing the Italians around - maybe bring them down to the national training peak of 65. 8th Div might be worth bumping to 55 or 60 - they could've had a chance to mingle with 6th Div, though how much good it'd do I don't know.

New Zealand Div might as well remain in the Med, given stronger Australian presence.

18th Brit Div: An inexperienced desert-trained-and-equipped unit is not what you want if you have no other options - and there are other options, at least in theory. There again - it's likely to be not-desert-trained-and-equipped if there's no need for it in the desert - so perhaps bump up its experience slightly and its morale significantly. It would probably still start around the Cape - or Mombasa, if you're feeling frisky.

You have potential additions from units involved in Madagascar - 5th Brit Div, 29th Brit Bde, 27th Rhodesian Bde, 7th South African Bde - the question is where they'd be needed and when. There's almost certainly no Iraq revolt to demand a large garrison there, but there's still the worry of a German movement into the Caucasus...so probably limit to:

29th Brit Bde: Accelerate arrival from 1/43 to 12/41. This is a part of 36th Indian/Brit Div, and without Madagascar it's not got much to do. Somewhere in India, just because if you do that you can give it a restricted HQ - usable on defense, but has to be bought out to leave India or combine with its division.

6th Indian Div: At present it never enters the game unless India is invaded - it's just arrived in Iraq and is still rather new and inexperienced. Displace it with 5th Brit, add some % disablements and move it to Delhi, or Hyderabad, or wherever, and pretend it's getting high-level training. Same principle - restricted HQ, and it's a full-strength division so Expensive to buy out. Or you could perma-restrict it - no harm in that, since it was never involved anyway.

You can almost certainly justify releasing a new Brit or Indian division or two from Persia after Stalingrad, but the necessity of it is up in the air. 8th and 10th Indian Divs arrive 4/45 and 10/45 currently, 5th Brit never arrives, 56th Brit isn't in the database.

Other useful things you could do...add 2-4 9.2in CD guns to TOE 2876 (Major Port Fort) - the units won't have them to start with, but some can be deployed as needed. Up the build rate on device 1037 (9.2in CD Gun) from 1/month to 2/month - that's an extra 12 over the life of the game.

I would agitate for upping build rates on a few key devices:

1000-1002 Brit Inf Sect - these all bring in 12/month. Historical, but makes Brit Divs very brittle - and there's a lot more free manpower without a big Med. Maybe up to 24, 22, 20 for the 41, 43, 44 versions and extend the life of the 44 version to 10/45 or so.
1008 Vickers Section - this is a key cross-CW unit (every Div has 16-32) and rate is currently 12/month. You could double that without upsetting anyone, I think.
1009 Bren Section - same, except 16/month rather than 12.
1031 2pdr AT Gun - Currently 36/month - I don't think there's really a shortage of these, but you'd have much lower losses of them in North Africa and limited need for them afterwards as 6pdr proliferates in Europe.
1040 3" Mortar - Currently 18/month - this doubles to 36/month with device 1042 on 6/43, so perhaps raise it to 24. I always wonder a bit at running out of mortars...
1072 25pdr Gun - Currently 28/month - Unlike the 2pdr this will remain a need post-Africa, but a few extra can probably be spared to rebuild those two destroyed Australian Divs, especially as Australia produces its own.
1087 Matilda II - Currently these pretty much all arrive with supply convoys. There's plenty of them, but absent a North Africa there will be more - perhaps 15-20/month
1088 Valentine III - Same-o, except there are never really enough of these.

The fleet is interesting. You have a very deep pool of shipping to draw on - if you look at ships whacked on the Malta convoys alone (which won't be necessary to anywhere near the same extent without a Vichy France):

CVs Illustrious and Ark Royal will probably be available 12/41
CV Eagle will probably be available 3/42
CV Wasp will not be needed in the Med
CLs Southampton, Manchester, Neptune, Aurora and Penelope can probably be made available as required
Destroyers, corvettes, freighters...god, who knows?
Now - those ships not needed in the Med will still be needed for Russian convoys - perhaps the Tirpitz gets taken out quicker? What I'd do is...

- Bring in Ark Royal instead of Illustrious in early 42. The former is better suited to Pacific ops than the latter, conceptually. Withdraw it briefly about 4/43 for the invasion of Italy, return about 7/43.
- Bring in Illustrious at its usual "return" date - 1/44
Don't bring in Eagle - by the time it'd be available I suspect it'd be a bit knackered.
- Bring in CL Neptune 2/42, withdrawing 4/44 for D-Day and returning 9/44
- Bring in CLs Soton and Manc 7/43, one of them withdrawing 4/44 and returning 9/44
- Bring in CLs Aurora and Penelope 9/44
- Bring in CM Welshman and Latona at some point in mid-42
- Don't withdraw DDs Pakenham, Paladin, Panther 6/42. They were off on Malta convoys - no longer necessary.
- Don't withdraw DDs Fortune, Foxhound, Griffin, Hotspur, Inconstant, Isis 42/43 - these mostly went over to the RCN as far as I'm aware - you can just displace ships closer to home instead.
- Trickle in a dozen or so Flower KVs through 1942. With the extended map there'll be more of a need for convoy escorts in the IO, and they're easily made available through the Mediterranean.
- Bring in some merchants through Aden mid 42-mid 43. The Med is not "open", but it is passable - and shipping shouldn't dry up for an entire year. Maybe a couple dozen xAK, half a dozen Dominion Troop (cl. 2469) xAP and xAP Imperial Star and Sydney Star (cl. 2429 - converts to LSI).
Really in this scenario the UK-Aden link should be available from day 1 for warships, but we'll get by. You could add monthly supply convoys to Aden - maybe 10-15kt per month.
- Bring in half a dozen larger minesweepers through 1942 - cl. 210 Algerine would be ideal, with the extra bonus of being pretty useless at ASW.

You could do a lot more than that fairly reasonably - but that keeps things restrained while keeping up the appearance of a more potent force.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 609

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/26/2011 11:24:11 PM

kfsgo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

If I understand the premise of your scenario (no guarantee there), the situation in N. Africa is more resolved and requires
fewer resources than IRL. So the question becomes what would a rational Commonwealth Commander have done with the freed up assets to deal with a potential Japanese threat?

Singapore was regarded as the "key" to the Commonwealth position in SE Asia. India was the "crown jewel'..., but no British leader thought the Japanese could get that far in 1941. On the other hand, Hong Kong was indefensible..., so we can assume that a rational commander wouldn't have stuck 6 bns of excellent Canadian troops there to be destroyed. The Australians and New Zealanders concerns were with the area from Singapore East, where a direct threat to their homelands could occur---while the British were more concerned with the area from Singapore West, where a threat to India might arise.

This is why I don't see the ANZACS supporting commitment of any of their Divisions West of Malaya..., leaving the British and their Indian troops to cover Malaya/Burma. One possibility that hasn't entered the discussion yet was that one of the Indian Divisions in Middle East might have been sent home or to Burma. I could see the Malaya/Singapore garrison recieving at least one of the well-trained Aussie Divisions, and perhaps one of the two Canadian Brigades from Hong Kong. The British 18th (or maybe the 4th Indian Div) would go to Burma, perhaps with the other Canadian Brigade. The ANZAKS realized that they could be threatened from the North from Japanes posessions from the Palaus to the Marshalls---so if they had more troops available I see them reinforcing their mandates in the Bismarcks (Rabaul) and preparing to help the Dutch (better to fight in the DEI than in Australia itself.).

Anyway, those are my thoughts.

Two Canadian Bns, remember, not 6 - maybe you could remove them and replace them with a single Canadian Bde at Singapore, or at sea off New Zealand, or something along those lines?

I kind of agree on Australian commitments westwards up to a point, but to what extent are we aware that Japan is about to start a war? If things are desperately tense troops in the M.E. can be returned - but there's going to be a lot of pressure to keep them there politically until the balloon goes up, even absent a really hot war.

(in reply to mike scholl 1)

Post #: 610

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/27/2011 12:03:56 AM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

I am going to disagree here, just because the Italians are pushed around in late 40, they are not out of the war nor is their navy not a threat. The troops you are talking about taking out, would most likely be used in the invasion of Sicily in late 42. The carriers will still be needed to cover the invasion until land air is in place. Dan Bowens idea is good as it only adds a few WWI ships to the Australian and the US. Once the Italians are knocked out which I see happening sometime in 43 then we could see an exodus of ANZAC troops and some brit ships coming to the pacific.

I really think its a bad idea to front load the allies because looking at the Japanese thread I don't really see a big tweek that will allow them to overwhelm in 41/42.

_____________________________

(in reply to kfsgo)

Post #: 611

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/27/2011 12:27:06 AM

mike scholl 1

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kfsgo

Two Canadian Bns, remember, not 6 - maybe you could remove them and replace them with a single Canadian Bde at Singapore, or at sea off New Zealand, or something along those lines?

I stand corrected. Only two of the bns. in Hong Kong were Canadian. Two more were British, and the other two were Indian Army. Plus all the necessary support units. Still amounts to two Brigades worth of good troops totally hung out to dry.

(in reply to kfsgo)

Post #: 612

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/27/2011 12:32:09 AM

mike scholl 1

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

You obviously have a lot more OB material at hand than I do. I thought your analysis was thoughtfull and complete.

(in reply to kfsgo)

Post #: 613

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/27/2011 12:54:07 AM

kfsgo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

I am going to disagree here, just because the Italians are pushed around in late 40, they are not out of the war nor is their navy not a threat. The troops you are talking about taking out, would most likely be used in the invasion of Sicily in late 42. The carriers will still be needed to cover the invasion until land air is in place. Dan Bowens idea is good as it only adds a few WWI ships to the Australian and the US. Once the Italians are knocked out which I see happening sometime in 43 then we could see an exodus of ANZAC troops and some brit ships coming to the pacific.

I really think its a bad idea to front load the allies because looking at the Japanese thread I don't really see a big tweek that will allow them to overwhelm in 41/42.

Well, this is why I say we have a narrative gap. The decision was made to nix Vichy France - but keeping Free France around effectively requires maintenance of French control of North Africa (or else what is Free France, really?) - and that is something whose real effects we're probably not even close to modelling. I mean, ultimately it's all alternate history, with all the tragic consequences that follow from that, and you can write what you like, but still.

The Italians are not out of the war - but I can't see any way they're not out of North Africa. Tripoli to the Tunisian border is...70 miles? 80? It's nothing compared to the distances involved in western Libya, and you've essentially got a reversal of the real-life interdiction situation (beseiged Malta/passable Tripoli vs beseiged Tripoli/passable Malta - fast ships can do Tunisia-Malta overnight, pretty much) right off the bat - and this with the Marine Nationale to contribute to strangling things, which is pretty stand-up versus the RM by itself though obviously handicapped through being cut off from spares and repairs in metropolitan France. I don't know how Alternative North African Campaign would go, but given that we have no requirement to invade Syria, no requirement to invade Iraq, no reinforcements available to oppose advances through eastern Libya from the west after the initial Italian trainwreck (since they're tied up facing the French)...maybe you'd have the beseiged remnants of the Italian Army holed up for a death stand in Tripoli, but that seems a little out of character.

Now - the flipside to this is that:

- The Italian and German armies will also suffer less in North Africa - the Germans if I recall correctly basically tossed away a whole army group reinforcing Tunisia after Libya fell - so any successful invasion of the "mainland" territories will require a greater effort and more time on the part of the Allies. Some of this can be met by the French, some of it will have to come from the US & UK - but it can probably done without actively hobbling the Pacific.

- The Regia Marina is likely to be even more conservative and cautious than it was - heaven knows how - and therefore the shipping potentially released isn't what it might be, bearing in mind that we theoretically have the MN to balance things out.

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 614

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/27/2011 4:33:57 AM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

The Regia Marina would be the same threat that the Tirpitz was to the north Atlantic. As long as it existed it would have to be countered. That's not saying we can't accelerate allied reinforcements to the Pacific, but I would be careful that we don't send too much at the start or 42 because Japan will not stand a chance.

_____________________________

(in reply to kfsgo)

Post #: 615

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/27/2011 6:20:30 AM

John 3rd

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

kfsgo: (what is your first name Sir?) EXCELLENT Post! I did some serious thinking (very dangerous) while at work. I agree that there is danger in front-loading the war with additional Allied troops. This is the reason why I've gone back over to working on the Japanese so I can keep some sort of feel for the balance of both sides for the Mod.

Thoughts:

Malaya
1. We start with a fully intact Aussie 8th ID in Malaya. This means pulling the Bird units and deploying them there so the 8th can fully assemble. It will add some strength to that unit.
2. As stated earlier we add the two roundout Brigades to the Indian ID in Burma. Not much experience but more warm bodies.

Figure boosting the Malay defense about 150-200 points. Not to bad.

6th ID
The 6th is in the Theatre but broken into component Brigades. Place one at Rabaul, one at Port Moresby, and one at Darwin. How about that to cause some potential chaos??!!

7th ID/9th Aust ID
Enter as described by kfsgo

18th ID starts at Aden ready to be loaded and deployed.

Move 29th Brit Brigade as described and restrict it.

As to the very specific proposals put forth in kfsgo's Posting I agree about bumping some of the replacement rates. Need to give some very specific thinking to Naval Reinforcements so I'll comment on that later.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 616

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/27/2011 12:30:39 PM

MateDow

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

I do like the idea of having more replacements rather than adding entire units to the Allied OOB. It allows an Allied player to be agressive with the existing units, or sit back and wait for stronger units. For the Japanese, it makes that time factor relevant... yes they have new toys, but the Allies get stronger faster.

There is also the subtlty of using replacements that aren't blatently obvious when scanning the map.

kfsgo: I love your breakdown of the "history" and the effects as to why certain units would be where.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 617

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/27/2011 4:48:33 PM

kfsgo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

The Regia Marina would be the same threat that the Tirpitz was to the north Atlantic. As long as it existed it would have to be countered. That's not saying we can't accelerate allied reinforcements to the Pacific, but I would be careful that we don't send too much at the start or 42 because Japan will not stand a chance.

It would be a threat, but not in the same way - I mean, the Tirpitz was a big scary problem because the route from the UK to Murmansk/Archangelsk looks something like this:

Big wide swing into the Arctic Ocean, hundreds of miles from land bases with no real air cover except what the convoy can carry with it.

The route from, say, Algiers to Suez is a little different:

Much more confined - but you're essentially doing it all along a developed, friendly coast - so you have air cover all the way whether there are carriers around or not - you have Malta as a nice foil for the point of maximum vulnerability, and there are a bunch of more or less defended ports shipping can duck into if something big and scary shows up over the horizon.

The RM is a threat in the same sense that the IJN is a threat after 1943 or so - if it shows up off the invasion beaches you've got a Big Problem unless you've brought the kitchen sink, but the supply system is more or less defensible. So, you can displace ships to the IO through 1942 - they'll just have to head back for a while whenever the invasion of [large landmass] goes ahead.

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 618

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/27/2011 5:08:35 PM

Shark7

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

The problem I see here is that you have a real choke point between Sicily and Tunisia. And while the RN was able to resupply North Africa quite effectively during the real war, your mod seems to assume a much more prepared enemy.

So I have to ask a question or two.

1. Are we assuming that the RM would similarly be more prepared?
2. Is it possible that the RM would be more active than it historically was?
3. With the situation with France and the inability to resupply its East African holdings, would Italy not move some of those assets back to the Mediterranean in an attempt to stabilize the situation there.

The RM had 7 DDs and 8 SS in the Red Sea that could be sent back to the Med by going around the Cape of Good Hope. Risky, but possible. Also a number of auxiliaries would have been available if the Red Sea/East Africa had been left to its fate. Search: Red Sea Flotilla or refer to your reference books for info.

Also there is a possibility of those ships escaping to Japan and fighting along side the IJN...in the case of the Auxiliary Cruiser Ramb II, it made it all the way to Kobe and continued to operate as a freighter until Italy's surrender. Now this option depends on whether you want to keep the historical distrust between the Axis powers, or have them more cooperative with each other.

Just pointing out some possibilities.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to kfsgo)

Post #: 619

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/27/2011 5:48:22 PM

kfsgo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Just pointing out some possibilities.

In-game the Med opens May 14th 1943 - the day after Axis forces in Tunisia surrendered. Tunisia-Sicily is a chokepoint, sure, but it's still 80 miles wide - you can get shipping through there if you put your mind to it. Remember, with the French still in the war you effectively have an addition to Allied naval forces of:

1* old CV/CVL
2* modern BC
1* modern BB and the shell of a second
3* old BB
3* very old BB (probably not much practical use, but they can herd convoys around)
7* heavy cruisers
10* light cruisers
30ish large destroyers
40ish smaller destroyers
50ish submarines
god knows what else in misc smaller ships - sub chasers, minesweepers, launches etc

That's practically a mirror of the RM; obviously not all of them will survive the war, some of them did make it into Allied service after 1943, and I don't know what's supposed to be in the Pacific, but it's still a huge addition to forces available.

quote:

The RM had 7 DDs and 8 SS in the Red Sea that could be sent back to the Med by going around the Cape of Good Hope. Risky, but possible. Also a number of auxiliaries would have been available if the Red Sea/East Africa had been left to its fate. Search: Red Sea Flotilla or refer to your reference books for info.

Er...even if you can get a 1000t destroyer 8,500nm around Africa (and I suspect you can't), what happens when they have to make the jump between the Atlantic and Mediterranean? There is the small issue of Gibraltar...or Singapore, if you shoot for Japan. The subs can do it - but then they did, as far as I'm aware, and then operated out of occupied France.

Ramb II is actually in-game as Ikutagawa Maru (ship #2142), I think - arriving 21/2/1944; maybe you could have it start out armed at Kobe instead.

< Message edited by kfsgo -- 10/27/2011 5:49:02 PM >

(in reply to Shark7)

Post #: 620

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/28/2011 1:49:40 AM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

Don't get me wrong kfsgo, you make an eloquent argument and some enjoyable reading. The thing that concerns me, Japan really is not getting a big bump at the start, and they get some goodies around 43. If we keep to the fall of Italy sometime in late 42 I have no problem with Allied forces coming into the Pacific late 42 or early 43. Also, with the fall that soon, Germany would have serious issues trying to cope with allied troops mid 43 in Italy not to mention the problems in Russia. I don't believe that Germany had the resources to create some of the formations they did any sooner than they did in real life. Having Italy surrender in 42 or early 43 could conceivably end the war a year early.

_____________________________

(in reply to kfsgo)

Post #: 621

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/28/2011 3:38:37 AM

kfsgo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Don't get me wrong kfsgo, you make an eloquent argument and some enjoyable reading. The thing that concerns me, Japan really is not getting a big bump at the start, and they get some goodies around 43. If we keep to the fall of Italy sometime in late 42 I have no problem with Allied forces coming into the Pacific late 42 or early 43. Also, with the fall that soon, Germany would have serious issues trying to cope with allied troops mid 43 in Italy not to mention the problems in Russia. I don't believe that Germany had the resources to create some of the formations they did any sooner than they did in real life. Having Italy surrender in 42 or early 43 could conceivably end the war a year early.

Oh no, I totally get what you're getting at, so to speak - although given that the situation in China will likely be cooler (I have a couple of Plans for China at this point that are I guess waiting for the IJA stuff to be completed before I do anything with them) potential diversions can probably be engineered from there. It's just - I'm not sure how you work things narratively to not have a wave of stuff show up at Aden in early 1943 or so.

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 622

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/28/2011 6:04:40 AM

John 3rd

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Don't get me wrong kfsgo, you make an eloquent argument and some enjoyable reading. The thing that concerns me, Japan really is not getting a big bump at the start, and they get some goodies around 43. If we keep to the fall of Italy sometime in late 42 I have no problem with Allied forces coming into the Pacific late 42 or early 43. Also, with the fall that soon, Germany would have serious issues trying to cope with allied troops mid 43 in Italy not to mention the problems in Russia. I don't believe that Germany had the resources to create some of the formations they did any sooner than they did in real life. Having Italy surrender in 42 or early 43 could conceivably end the war a year early.

[/quo

Fully concur with this spirit. This is the reason I backed off the earlier deployments (except for 1 Aussie ID being available). Things might be too tough for the Japanese at start. FatR's changes to the Fleet adds a couple of BB and upgrades the Carriers but doesn't add much past that. Going down the line with American, British, French, and Dutch aircraft and naval additions makes me pause a bit.

We'll truly find out when the Mod going into testing.

kfsgo: I will have the IJA changes done tomorrow if all goes well. I've made the Mobile Army and that will be it for tinkering within the China OOB. Got to make the IJA Amphib Corps and then I'll be done there. This unit will be the only true Infantry addition to the OOB for the IJA.

This Mod looks like it is leaning towards a Scenario Two feel, however, the Allies get lots of toys right from the very start.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 623

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/29/2011 12:03:58 AM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

Adding the ships to the Allies is not really that big a deal unless the IJN player misses a convoy and allied ships get in among them. Lets face it, most allied ships early on are torpedo magnets for the nells and bettys. Of the 6 capital ships I added to my mod, 5 of them are in the yards getting major repairs from torp hits, either airborne or long lance. Its adding in the allied troops that really concerns me unless they are showing up in 43.

_____________________________

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 624

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 10/29/2011 5:55:29 PM

John 3rd

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

You might be right regarding that Oldman. The ships are targets but the troops could be major issues. I really like the idea f making Rabaul, PM, and Darwin stronger but not by a TON of troops. Think a Brigade would serve at each to...make it...more...interesting...

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 625

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 11/2/2011 5:02:45 PM

John 3rd

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

I just Posted on the other Thread that I am revamping the troops and aircraft in the Philippines due tot he arrival of the Pensacola TF. There will be A-24's present and so the Americans will have Dive-Bombers available within days of the war starting. The XP of these two or three Squadrons will be low but they will climb and become quite useful (translation: DANGEROUS) to the Allied player.

Will downgrade the Malay AF as we have discussed too...

_____________________________

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 #: 626

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 11/2/2011 8:00:06 PM

MateDow

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

With the expansion of Japanese power there is a real good chance that the US will still be isolated to the area around Hawaii well into 1943. With that in mind, can we make it so that B-36 bombers will be available in late 1945? The initial production order was made in 1943 (100 planes), but with the apparent lack of need, there was no priority given to the design.

The design should have a low reliability rating, but with a 4,000+ mile combat radius it would allow a US player to utilize bases in Hawaii for bombing of the Home Islands.

We would need a B-36B graphic (without the jet assist) unless there is one that I don't know of. It is a tool that reward an Allied player for playing deep into the game, but would probably have been a realistic reaction to the US not having access to bases for the B-29 in 1944.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 627

RE: The Empire Build-Up - 11/3/2011 6:26:58 AM

John 3rd

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

That might be do-able. FatR handles the air stuff so I'll refer this one to him.

As I've been reading Racing the Sunrise I think the improved Port and Base facilities going southwards should be Canton. This is the base the Navy/Army planned to expand before the war started. Pago Pago makes better sense with AE hindsight but that is not the case IRL. Need to think on that a bit...

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to MateDow)

Post #: 628

The Convoy - 11/3/2011 7:04:48 AM

John 3rd

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

After going through the notes for the Pensacola TF that now arrives in Manila prior to the war starting, I have made the following changes:

1. The 16th, 17th, and 81st Bombing Squadrons start with A-24 Banshees. They may only have 2-4 ready but they may repair their planes to 16 each. All three Squadrons start in Manila. Like other Philippine planes they must withdraw by 06/01/42.
2. The 34th Pursuit Squadrons starts with P-40E instead of P-35. They are also mostly disabled on Dec 7th but can repair up to 18 planes in the Squadron. The P-35 are thrown back into the pool.
3. Reflecting the arrival of all those 75MM Howitzers, the Philippine ID may have 12 of these instead of the original 8.
4. The LCUs brought with the convoy begin at Manila as well.
5. As detailed earlier the Convoy's ships have left Manila and are about a day's steaming to the SW heading for Tarakan.

_____________________________

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 #: 629

Malaya Base Changes - 11/3/2011 7:09:04 AM

John 3rd

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

Went through the Malaya Bases and did the following changes:

Alor Star AF reduced from 4 to 2
Georgetown AF left at 4 (planes spread around the north will be concentrated here at this somewhat protected base)
Taiping AF reduced from 3 to 1
Kota Bharu AF reduced from 4 to 1
Kuantan AF reduced from 4 to 1
Kuala Lumphur AF left at 2
Johore Bharu Forts raised to 3
Kloung and Mersing Forts raised to 2

Georgetown serves as the main northern base with all other planes concentrated at Singapore or Johore Bharu. If worked on quickly, the Allied player ought to be able to create a defensive line in the south PRIOR to Singapore.

_____________________________

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 #: 630

Page: << < prev 19 20 [21] 22 23 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: The Revamped BIG FOUR