Call for change input (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design



Message


Don Bowen -> Call for change input (4/12/2005 8:48:51 PM)


If anyone has any changes for the CHS, please get them to me as soon as possible. An update process will begin as soon as V1.5 is released and I would appreciate it if all OOB changes could be in by the time it is released. Artwork changes can come in a little later.

Planned update process is:

1. Merge V1.5 changes into CHS.
2. Make CHS specific updates (see current list below).
3. Make changes for ship re-spawn problem.
4. Rework Chinese Air Force (might slip into next update)

Thanks





Jo van der Pluym -> RE: Call for change input (4/12/2005 9:07:27 PM)

Don

I have look to you list of changes. And I have see that you have made a type error by a New Dutch unit.

You have used the word Mariners. The Dutch word for Marines is Mariniers. The Dutch abrev is Marns.




Don Bowen -> RE: Call for change input (4/12/2005 9:11:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jo van der Pluym

Don

I have look to you list of changes. And I have see that you have made a type error by a New Dutch unit.

You have used the word Mariners. The Dutch word for Marines is Mariniers. The Dutch abrev is Marns.


Thanks - fixed!




Jo van der Pluym -> RE: Call for change input (4/12/2005 9:13:52 PM)

Then another thing about the Mariniers Brigade.
The name of the Commanding Officer is
de Bruyne and his rang was Colonel




Don Bowen -> RE: Call for change input (4/12/2005 10:34:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jo van der Pluym

Then another thing about the Mariniers Brigade.
The name of the Commanding Officer is
de Bruyne and his rang was Colonel


Jo

We are currently NOT doing any work on leaders. The leader file is almost full and adding additional leaders has been postponed. Perhaps, at some time in the future, a complete revision of leaders might be done.





CobraAus -> RE: Call for change input (4/13/2005 2:29:03 AM)

I would like to see added to Devices a Sona Dipping Device AN/CTR-1 (1941) upgraded to AN/CRT-4 (1944/45) + a Mad Device

Cobra Aus




Don Bowen -> RE: Call for change input (4/13/2005 3:12:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CobraAus

I would like to see added to Devices a Sona Dipping Device AN/CTR-1 (1941) upgraded to AN/CRT-4 (1944/45) + a Mad Device

Cobra Aus


Sorry Peter, I do not know how to do sonar. As far as I know it can not be done.

Don




CobraAus -> RE: Call for change input (4/13/2005 3:37:41 AM)

ok already have working as surface radar as there is no sub surface Type and using with experimental H02s Choppers which appeared in 1941 in some numbers using sona dipping only and
this working. not useing anything other than AN/CRT-1 device and trying out at Pearl (not Historic - only test ) I am using following values R=10 A=50 E=50 P=250 LC=1 BR=5

the values may need trimming but this is fully Historic for 1941 with the AN/CRT-4 available 1944/195 maybe Ron will have some input but is tied up with ASW variations

Cobra Aus




Herrbear -> RE: Call for change input (4/13/2005 7:31:22 AM)

#152 Beaufighter Mk 21 -- I thought it first flew in May, 1944. I thought Aus squadrons equipped with Beaufighter VIC until then.




CobraAus -> RE: Call for change input (4/15/2005 2:27:11 AM)

if you want them to pad out the Allied ships (respawn problem) I have about 20+ class art done for Russian navy still waiting for Subchasers data

Cobra Aus




bstarr -> RE: Call for change input (4/15/2005 4:02:51 AM)

Don,
Wouldn't the Jap 35th Bde be at 1/2 strength since it's actually only one regiment of the 18th Division?
bs




Subchaser -> RE: Call for change input (4/15/2005 9:56:26 AM)

Cobra, that data was sent two or three weeks ago. I’ll resend it when I’ll be back home tonight. Sorry, probably my fault.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CobraAus

if you want them to pad out the Allied ships (respawn problem) I have about 20+ class art done for Russian navy still waiting for Subchasers data

Cobra Aus




Lemurs! -> RE: Call for change input (4/15/2005 3:36:05 PM)

The 35th brigade is at correct strength. 168 squads is one regiment in strength. Plus one AAA battery.

Mike




Kereguelen -> RE: Call for change input (4/15/2005 6:29:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

The 35th brigade is at correct strength. 168 squads is one regiment in strength. Plus one AAA battery.

Mike


168 rifle squads? Are Japanese LCU's even stronger in the CHS than in "vanilla" WITP? A regular Japanese regiment (of a Japanese square division like the 18th Division of which 35th Brigade was part of; Independent and Mixed Brigades were somewhat differently organised) should have 108 rifle squads, strengthened regiments 144 rifle squads (WITP seems to have most (or all?) regiments as strengthened regiments).





Lemurs! -> RE: Call for change input (4/15/2005 6:51:30 PM)

The 35th Brigade is strengthend.
And, yes, i did increase regiment squad numbers for both the Allies and Japan.

I did not do this out of any perceived 'problem', I had just been looking at TOEs and felt the Matrix numbers were incorrect.
I counted combat squads that Matrix missed, and counted light mortars and medium MGs as a half squad a piece.
Also, you will notice that virtually every Japanese division and all of the naval landing forces have totally different OOBs now especially in non-squad items.

Mike




mogami -> RE: Call for change input (4/15/2005 7:03:37 PM)

Hi, I don't want to butt in but units like the 35th Bde IMO should be left out and the parent unit should be made correct. If the Japanese (or Allied) player wants to split divisions that should be where Bde come from. (unless they are not part of a larger formation)
My choice would be to have all units that are part of larger formations removed from starting OB. Otherwise you end up with them being counted twice. (You have a full strength 18th Div and a full strength 35th Bde)
Since you can't deploy Div A/B/C at start and you can never reform a unit deployed as Bde at start it gives more flexabilty to have the units begin full strength. (choice of location might be tricky) Where units begin split and not all components units are on map have the parent begin below strength. (Like 6th Aussie Div. Only 2 of the 4 Bde arrived Ceylon early in war. While full div went to NG in late 42. I'd have half strength 6th Div arrive Ceylon. It would be up to Allied player if unit grew or not and where growth took place )
Pardon the interuption




Kereguelen -> RE: Call for change input (4/15/2005 7:29:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

The 35th Brigade is strengthend.
And, yes, i did increase regiment squad numbers for both the Allies and Japan.

I did not do this out of any perceived 'problem', I had just been looking at TOEs and felt the Matrix numbers were incorrect.
I counted combat squads that Matrix missed, and counted light mortars and medium MGs as a half squad a piece.
Also, you will notice that virtually every Japanese division and all of the naval landing forces have totally different OOBs now especially in non-squad items.

Mike


Did not want to criticize here. Was only curious because I'm interested in TOEs since old PACWAR. Work with the "Japanese Army Handbook" and other sources (especially Niehorster's orbats) did not bring truly convincing results as sources about Japanese TOE's are quite confusing. Not sure which division (or regiment) truely belonged into the "strengthened" category. This seems to have changed alot during the course of the war (ostensibly the Japanese were quite flexible with this).

Guess that I should download CHS now!

K




Andrew Brown -> RE: Call for change input (4/16/2005 2:26:51 AM)

Something else that I am thinking about: Should we change the way that the Japanese start, so that they do not invade the Philippines on turn 1 (except Batan Island)? In the same way that Pry did in his latest scenario? I believe that this would be more historic.




mogami -> RE: Call for change input (4/16/2005 3:39:01 AM)

Hi, I think Japanese players would be happy if all LCU began unloaded.




TIMJOT -> RE: Call for change input (4/16/2005 10:38:06 PM)

Hello Don

A few things I noticed.

1) 70th FS starts the game with P-39s. I think this should be changed to P-36s and upgrade to P-39s, because the squadron was flying P-36s up to embarking on Dec 5, 1941. As you know it was to upgrade to P-40E upon reaching the PI. According to the 70th unit history none of the pilots had ever seen a P-39 until they uncrated them on the beach in Fiji in February 42.

2) The 68th FS enters the game equiped with P-39s. Historically it deployed to the PTO with P-40E.

3) The 11th BS equiped with A-24s[&:]. This unit was part of the 7th BG (Hvy). Along with its sister units the 9th & and 22nd BS it was to be equiped with B-17Es and sent to the PI. However at the outbreak of war there were not enough available and it was instead equiped with LB-30s and deployed along with the other two Squadrons of the group(B-17Es) to the NEIs via the South America/Africa/India ferry route. Curiously in 43 it changed over to B-25s and was re-designated a Medium BS but remained under the 7th Heavy BG organisational umbrella. Perhaps this is why you have them starting out with A-24s. IMHO the 11th LB-30s upgadeing to B-25s is the historical way to go and if they are going to retain SE Asia HQ then they should enter the game peicemeal at Karachi starting in early January.


Regards




TIMJOT -> RE: Call for change input (4/16/2005 11:17:35 PM)

Since Merchant shipping seems to be a point of emphasis, something to consider. You already have the "VeryLgAPs"(ocean liners) you might want to consider adding a new class "LargeFastAPs". Specifically the famous Matson Liners Mariposa, Lurline, Montery and the President Coolidge.

Now, you already have the Mariposa and Coolidge but as LargeSlow APs. The Mariposa and her sisters were 18,000ton 22knot liners. The Coolidge was the Flagship of the APL and at 21,000tons and 20knots much faster and larger than the rest of her sister President liners.

The Montery spent a lot of time in the ETO and maybe shouldnt be included but the Lurline along with the Mariposa as far as I know spent the vast majority if not all their time in the PTO plying the SF to OZ route.

There is a case that can be made to warrant their inclusion over the VeryLg APs Westpoint and Wakefield historically spent substantial amount of time in the ETO. I understand all three deliveried the 18th Div. to Singapore early in the war but the Wakefield for instance made 23 round trips in the ETO and only 3 in the PTO during the war. The Westpoint no more than 50% of her time in the PTO. Only the Mount Vernon spent the majority of the time in the PTO plying there exclusively until mid 1944 when it was sent to the Altantic to help with the build up on the continent before returning to the PTO.




TIMJOT -> RE: Call for change input (4/16/2005 11:25:55 PM)

The President Coolidge

[image]local://upfiles/3058/5B25E7EDA8684D6C906399CF9962D0A6.jpg[/image]




TIMJOT -> RE: Call for change input (4/16/2005 11:28:01 PM)

A possible President Coolidge for the game

[image]local://upfiles/3058/9752557EE41440A2992811725F55E6D8.jpg[/image]




TIMJOT -> RE: Call for change input (4/16/2005 11:29:15 PM)

The Lurline, Mariposa, Montery

[image]local://upfiles/3058/50ADDDF8DFDF49238BB24E9BF112C478.jpg[/image]




TIMJOT -> RE: Call for change input (4/16/2005 11:30:51 PM)

Possible game version

[image]local://upfiles/3058/0436267F6BF74AC0B7FA0C466DF9EA00.jpg[/image]




Don Bowen -> RE: Call for change input (4/16/2005 11:47:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TIMJOT

Hello Don

A few things I noticed.

1) 70th FS starts the game with P-39s. I think this should be changed to P-36s and upgrade to P-39s, because the squadron was flying P-36s up to embarking on Dec 5, 1941. As you know it was to upgrade to P-40E upon reaching the PI. According to the 70th unit history none of the pilots had ever seen a P-39 until they uncrated them on the beach in Fiji in February 42.

This one has been argued back and forth many times.

Background: The 35th Fighter Group was in the process of being transferred to the Philippines. Two squadrons had already arrived (and were temporarily attached to the 24th Group). Both of these squadrons arrived WITHOUT AIRCRAFT and were both temporarily assigned available aircraft, mostly P-35, until their new P-40s arrived. The 21st Squadron (35th Group) in the Philippines had already been re-equipped with P-40E. The 34th Squadron, 35th Group, had recently arrived and been handed down the tired old P-35s. 18 P-40E for the 34th Squadron were aboard the Pensacola Convoy and, of course, never arrived.

The 70th Squadron had been equipped with P-36 prior to embarkation - it was at sea 12/7/41 enroute the Philippines. The convoy turned around after Pearl Harbor and the squadron re-equipped with P-39 on returning to San Francisco. The question is whether or not the P-36 were still with the 70th while it was at sea. I believe they were not:

  1. The other two squadrons of the 35th were sent to the Philippines without aircraft and equipped there.
  2. The three squadrons of the 27th Light Bomb Group were sent without aircraft and the aircraft sent later (also in the Pensacola Convoy).
  3. Shipping was very scarce and space for 18 obsolete aircraft would be a waste.
  4. A shipment of 55 P-40E left San Francisco 12/15/41 aboard the President Polk (bound for Australia). Some of these aircraft may have been those intended to completely re-equip the 35th Group and perhaps to upgrade the 24th Group as well.


I believe the 70th had shed it's P-36 and it's intended P-40s were to be shipped separately. Since it was fully equipped with P-39 within a week I have decided it to appropriate to so equip it on the first day of the war.


quote:

2) The 68th FS enters the game equiped with P-39s. Historically it deployed to the PTO with P-40E.

The 68th was the Squadron that went to Tongatabu in early 1942. It's squadron history lists P-36, P-40 and P-43 in 1941 and P-38, P-39, P-40 and P-400 in 1942. Apparently it spent a few months in Australia working up and delivering P-39 and P-40 before going to Tongatabu in May. I have seen several reports of a mixed P-39/P-40 complement prior to Tongatabu but the squadron apparently converted to P-40E on or immediately after arrival. I do not now recall why I decided on P-39 but inertia is on the side of leaving it that way.

quote:

3) The 11th BS equiped with A-24s[&:]. This unit was part of the 7th BG (Hvy). Along with its sister units the 9th & and 22nd BS it was to be equiped with B-17Es and sent to the PI. However at the outbreak of war there were not enough available and it was instead equiped with LB-30s and deployed along with the other two Squadrons of the group(B-17Es) to the NEIs via the South America/Africa/India ferry route. Curiously in 43 it changed over to B-25s and was re-designated a Medium BS but remained under the 7th Heavy BG organisational umbrella. Perhaps this is why you have them starting out with A-24s. IMHO the 11th LB-30s upgadeing to B-25s is the historical way to go and if they are going to retain SE Asia HQ then they should enter the game peicemeal at Karachi starting in early January.


This is a mistake - should be B-17E.




Don Bowen -> RE: Call for change input (4/16/2005 11:51:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TIMJOT

Since Merchant shipping seems to be a point of emphasis, something to consider. You already have the "VeryLgAPs"(ocean liners) you might want to consider adding a new class "LargeFastAPs". Specifically the famous Matson Liners Mariposa, Lurline, Montery and the President Coolidge.

Now, you already have the Mariposa and Coolidge but as LargeSlow APs. The Mariposa and her sisters were 18,000ton 22knot liners. The Coolidge was the Flagship of the APL and at 21,000tons and 20knots much faster and larger than the rest of her sister President liners.

The Montery spent a lot of time in the ETO and maybe shouldnt be included but the Lurline along with the Mariposa as far as I know spent the vast majority if not all their time in the PTO plying the SF to OZ route.

There is a case that can be made to warrant their inclusion over the VeryLg APs Westpoint and Wakefield historically spent substantial amount of time in the ETO. I understand all three deliveried the 18th Div. to Singapore early in the war but the Wakefield for instance made 23 round trips in the ETO and only 3 in the PTO during the war. The Westpoint no more than 50% of her time in the PTO. Only the Mount Vernon spent the majority of the time in the PTO plying there exclusively until mid 1944 when it was sent to the Altantic to help with the build up on the continent before returning to the PTO.


Thanks - I'll look into this but the Japanese Fan Boys will bitch. Could you please send me the bmp versions of your two icons?

Don






TIMJOT -> RE: Call for change input (4/17/2005 1:00:30 AM)


quote:

The 70th Squadron had been equipped with P-36 prior to embarkation - it was at sea 12/7/41 enroute the Philippines. The convoy turned around after Pearl Harbor and the squadron re-equipped with P-39 on returning to San Francisco. The question is whether or not the P-36 were still with the 70th while it was at sea.



No longer saying they must be embarked, but they were flying P-36s up to 12/5/41 so if they are going to be in SF on December 7th then IMHO they should be so equiped. The US deployement is overly quick as it is without an additional early upgrade.




quote:

A shipment of 55 P-40E left San Francisco 12/15/41 aboard the President Polk (bound for Australia). Some of these aircraft may have been those intended to completely re-equip the 35th Group and perhaps to upgrade the 24th Group as well.



Yes these aircraft and the 18 P-40E in the Pencecola convoy, were initially intended to be ferried to the FEAF in the PI via Darwin, Timore, Celebes, Mindanao. Several dozen pilots from the FEAFs 24th group were airlifted from the PI to do so. But the fall of Menado. Kendari, Ambon in succession pretty much nixed the idea. They were instead used to fill out the 5 provisional squadrons formed in Oz in early 42.




quote:

I believe the 70th had shed it's P-36 and it's intended P-40s were to be shipped separately. Since it was fully equipped with P-39 within a week I have decided it to appropriate to so equip it on the first day of the war



I am curious were did you find that they had been fully equiped with P-39s within a week? The 70th FS history states none of the pilots had seen or flown a P-39 before uncrateing them on the beach in Fiji. They didnt re-embark and sail for Fiji until the 2nd week of Janaury.

OH BTW, I think I may have stumbled upon the 70th FS missing aircraft. Just been reading Bartch's "Doomed at the Start" and he has, as we knew the 34th FS's 18 P-40s sailing on the Pencecola convoy. Expecting to arrive in the PI on January 3rd. BUT, he also states that an additional 20 P-40Es were aboard the SS Lundington schedule to arrive a week later on January 10th. Now since the Pencecola convoy was around Canton on December 7th. Wouldnt a ship arriving a week later put it close to the departure of the Johnson convoy from SF on the December 5th? Havent been able to find much information on the Lundington other than it was perhaps a Great lakes type Freighter. Do you have any sources that would have additional info on the Lundington's history? I never came accross the Ludington as being one of the ships bringing initail aircraft to Oz. I am going to guess it may have been diverted to replenish the PH fighter squadrons.




quote:

The 68th was the Squadron that went to Tongatabu in early 1942. It's squadron history lists P-36, P-40 and P-43 in 1941 and P-38, P-39, P-40 and P-400 in 1942. Apparently it spent a few months in Australia working up and delivering P-39 and P-40 before going to Tongatabu in May. I have seen several reports of a mixed P-39/P-40 complement prior to Tongatabu but the squadron apparently converted to P-40E on or immediately after arrival. I do not now recall why I decided on P-39 but inertia is on the side of leaving it that way



The USAAF history of WWII and 454th FG history has them deploying to Tonga with P-40E after you correctly state ferrying duties in Oz. Since its first operational deployment was the P40E I would think that would be the proper aircraft to start with, but perhaps an upgrade to P-40E would do as well.




quote:

This is a mistake - should be B-17E



Why B-17Es? Edmunds "They fought with what the had" Shores " Bloody Shambles II and the 11 BS history site has them deploying to SEA with LB-30s. I would think one of the main advantages of breaking airgroups down to squadrons is to allow for the historical mixed aircraft compliments within groups. The 11th BS did fly LB-30s operationally in the NEIs campaign afterall.




Halsey -> RE: Call for change input (4/17/2005 1:07:34 AM)

Why should there be a complaint?[;)]

As it stands now Japan never has to return the extra merchant shipping that it borrowed from the civil authorities at the start of the war.

Thanks TIMJOT.

I've posted more than a few threads about adding the liners, but was always shot down by the Matrix groupies. So I gave up. Something absurd about using the QE and QM in amph assaults.[;)]




TIMJOT -> RE: Call for change input (4/17/2005 1:24:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Halsey

Why should there be a complaint?[;)]

As it stands now Japan never has to return the extra merchant shipping that it borrowed from the civil authorities at the start of the war.

Thanks TIMJOT.

I've posted more than a few threads about adding the liners, but was always shot down by the Matrix groupies. So I gave up. Something absurd about using the QE and QM in amph assaults.[;)]


Well they do have a point to an extent regarding some of the liners. Wereas the QE and QM made some important contributions they simply didnt spend enough time in the PTO to warrant their inclusion, without any sort of withdrawl requirement for them. The same argruement can be made for the Wakefield and Westpoint. They took part in some very important convoys in the PTO and IO but the Wakefield in particular spent only very limited time in the PTO and probably shouldnt be included. The Westpoint only about have the time and can be argued either way. But there is really no arguement that can be made against the inclusion of the Mnt Vernon, Mariposa, Lurine and President Coolidge as Fast Liners.

I dont think any player would be crazy enough to use these valuable fast troop movers for amphib assault but just in case maybe a very limited AA armament and high VP price would further disuage player abusing them in this manner.




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.203125