What's changed in CHS? (Full Version)

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



Message

Oldsweat -> What's changed in CHS? (9/21/2005 6:41:52 PM)

I've seen a number of mentions regarding the CHS on the board and was curious about the orders of battle changes in it. Has anyone compiled a spreadsheet or anything comparing the CHS to the stock database?
One of the things that got me wondering is the Australian minelayer Bungaree which, I believe (game is at home) appears as an minesweeper in the stock datatbase but apparently had a capacity for 423 mines in reality.



Don Bowen -> RE: What's changed in CHS? (9/21/2005 6:47:10 PM)


It's in there... With two "mine rails" the ammo loadout of 200 equals 400 mines.

There have been a number of "change lists" for the various updates of CHS but no complete list is available (to my knowledge). Producing one would be a bitch, maybe even a bitch and a half.



[image]local://upfiles/757/DE79B2618EDD41579372D8275A01269A.jpg[/image]



treespider -> RE: What's changed in CHS? (9/21/2005 9:03:51 PM)

quote:

There have been a number of "change lists" for the various updates of CHS but no complete list is available (to my knowledge). Producing one would be a bitch, maybe even a bitch and a half.


The change list for v1.06 was 26 pages long in the format I submiited to Andrew. In RTF format I imagine it is even longer. I would suspect that the change list for CHS v1 is as long if not longer....



Slaughtermeyer -> RE: What's changed in CHS? (9/21/2005 9:09:43 PM)

Would play balance in a PBEM game using CHS differ significanly from a stock scenario 15 game?



treespider -> RE: What's changed in CHS? (9/21/2005 9:16:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Slaughtermeyer

Would play balance in a PBEM game using CHS differ significanly from a stock scenario 15 game?


Maybe...maybe not...Some people have expressed concern over the Allied transports in the South China Sea at start serving as free points for the Japanese...all in all I don't think it will differ too much.

One thing to keep in mind...CHS is the Combined "Historical" Scenario...it is not being developed with play balance in mind, but to give the players the historical tools they had available. IMO the scenario (and the game for that matter) is not designed to handle the Japanese-Russian strategy some have proposed...



Slaughtermeyer -> RE: What's changed in CHS? (9/23/2005 3:46:54 PM)

How about play time, would the turns in CHS be significantly longer to do due to the number of added units? Roughly how many units have been added to each side?



aletoledo -> RE: What's changed in CHS? (9/23/2005 11:40:26 PM)

quote:

Maybe...maybe not...Some people have expressed concern over the Allied transports in the South China Sea at start serving as free points for the Japanese...all in all I don't think it will differ too much.
isn't an AK only worth like 1 or 2 points anyway? I think those transports make it a lot more realistic, since its like there was regular daily commerce going on when the japanese attacked.



Bradley7735 -> RE: What's changed in CHS? (9/23/2005 11:47:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: aletoledo

quote:

Maybe...maybe not...Some people have expressed concern over the Allied transports in the South China Sea at start serving as free points for the Japanese...all in all I don't think it will differ too much.
isn't an AK only worth like 1 or 2 points anyway? I think those transports make it a lot more realistic, since its like there was regular daily commerce going on when the japanese attacked.


It is more realistic. but quite a few of those ships are 15 pointers. A lot are 2 to 7 pointers as well. I think the CHS works well when not allowing the japanese player free reign on turn 1. taking those large airfields on turn 1 really racks up the points on merchies in the DEA.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
9.140625