Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget
According to some sources, the Teapa was the ex USS Worden while the USS Putnam was converted into a fourth "Banana boat" called Tabasco. She was wrecked on a reef in 1933. But as long as the three survivors are in AE with their correct names - who cares .

Regarding the bases sizes - I share the concerns about overbuilding bases like Kokoda. But I understand that DaBigBabes is designed for Human vs. Japanese AI or human vs. human, so all that would be needed is self-restraint resp. a house rule.

Actually base sizes are my biggest "gripe" concerning AE at the moment. In my personal DBB variant I have added the above mentioned bases, but at the same time also downgraded existing ones. Ontong Java as prime example has an airbase potential of 2, which I consider as being way too generous. I also downgraded the dot bases in the Solomons - otherwise the Allies could just seize one or two undefended dot bases (since Japan cannot possible defend all the locations), build size 6 airbases and move on without the epic struggle for Guadalcanal ever taking place. Problem is that we have 20/20 hindsight and know a lot more about the local topography, while in 1942 little was known about the area and potential airbase locations had to be discovered first. Today there are airfields almost everywhere, but I like to narrow down the choices and "force" the use of the historical locations. But that is a matter of taste.

quote:

One last thing: In AE, I miss the small coastal craft ("schooners") from CHS. I find them useful for early war evacuations (they have been used for this in the PNG area) and as "ersatz"-barges for the Allies, until the landing craft arrive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

They are in the Art pack, just not in the OOB. Maybe set some up as xAP types with a 200 troop cap - that would also give ya a 33 ton cargo cap with cross loading. About right for a 120' topsail schooner. Aim to please.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse

quote:

ORIGINAL: Central Blue

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Central Blue
I notice that the MAG's are pulling their commanders from a list of generals rather than colonels, however that works.

IRL, they were colonels, as shown in the task organization and command lists in the History of U.S. Marine Corps Operations in World War II.

My dad's look at the elephant came on Guadalcanal, and in the Solomon's on the staff of MAG 14, where his boss was a Lt. Col. Cooley.

I don't really know what the big impact would be. Maybe not as much opportunity to micro-manage since there aren't many USMC generals. Few of them have any air skill to speak of, if that means anything. Given Marine air doctrine, I would think that they were at least good administrators, and more than a little aggressive, whatever air skill means for them.

Another wierd one is Marine Generals were very fungible. Roy Geiger commanded 1st MAW (as a 1 star), then the Cactus Air Force (as a 2 star), and then the 1st Phib Corps (as a 3 star). Maybe we should just give all Marine leaders a 90 - 90 - 90 rating, just to be safe (except if there was an Arty rating, we would have to give Pedro a 130 for that)

There's the game, and then there was real life -- guys like Geiger. Came in as enlisted man, did sea duty, the Caribbean, China, volunteered for aviation, was part of putting together close air support in Haiti, got into officering somehow . . .

They're all riflemen. So, I like your hypothetical rating.

And Geiger goes into the history books as the only Marine (only non- US Army General for that matter) to command a US Army -- the 10th Army, on Okinawa, after Buckner's death.

Default 90-90-90, eh? No bias there.

In AE you will note a deliberate bias -- virtually across the board, Marine Generals have been given higher aggressiveness ratings than their Army counterparts. And Horse Marine Chesty Puller is the highest-rated US small unit leader in the game.

As an Army guy, that might have given me some heartburn. But as a cavalryman, I have to give props to anyone on a horse . . .

USS St. Louis firing on Guam, July 1944. The Cardinals and Browns faced each other in the World Series that year

quote:

ORIGINAL: Central Blue
BTW, some of the US Army leaders could probably use a better rating, but the only one I know enough about is Gen. Alexander Patch.

quote:

ORIGINAL: drw61
JWE,
Just noticed that the 30th Australian Bde (unit 6041) comes in at 420315 with an experience level of 90 morale 90, is this as intended?
The Brit Lt Arm Rgt 41 (2671) upgrades to 2672 which is blank.

I'm not sure if these are an issue....
The Indian 41 (2 Brit) OOB (2776) has a TOE ID of 2743 instead of 2776
Chinese (Red) (2644) has a TOE ID of 2643 instead of 2644
Chinese AA (2663) has a TOE ID of 2658 instead of 2663

Thanks for all the hard work on this Mod

Added -

Device USA 43 Rifle Squad (1103) and the USA 44 Rifle Squad (1104) have the same stats, is this as intended?

quote:

Ok, all fixed up

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley

quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman
Please forgive my ignorance but I am curious as to how you guys make such changes in the game. Do you make updates/change etc. as you go along and then periodically update the Babes scenarios on page one of this thread ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget
Any chance to get a "certainly-not-general-gaming-public-but-rather-harcore-realism-fanatic" version - maybe in connection with DaBigBabes?

quote:

We did put in a number of features that should reduce cross loading. One is the "Temporary AP" conversion of Japanese Freighters. Another, far less obvious, is a preference for "normal" loading in the automatic load routines (including the AI and Human auto TF build and auto add-a-ship function).

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

Takes 12-14 6000 capacity ton xAKs (let’s say an ordinary EC2 Liberty) to transport an Army or Marine Division: 66,000 capacity tons for cross loaded troops (11,000 troops at 6x) and 11,400 capacity tons for weaps, vehs, and supply. Regardless of how they are “actually” distributed across individual ships, you could “rationalize” in terms of fitting 11,000 troops in 14 ships = 800 “men” per ship. And that ain’t bad. And you would need more ships for an Amph TF since they don’t load to 100% (80% iirc).

If ya use xAPs (let’s say a USAT converted EC2 Liberty) ya get 1500 troop cap and 2000 cargo cap, so you will need roughly 8 of these: 12,000 troop capacity for the 11,000 troops, and 16,000 cargo capacity for the 11,400 tons o’ stuff. In both cases, we’re assuming the (x) ships are simply transporting and people (and stuff) are packed in like weevils in a bread bag.

This also works pretty well for a division assault from AP/APAs. You will need 10. The “standard” MarDiv TransRon was about 12 ships in 3 TransDivs, each TransDiv carrying a combat assault Regt (+ attachments). TransDiv was usually 3x AP and 1x AK. So we’re in the ball park for these puppies too.

So cross loading isn’t quite the bad thing it seems to be. Has defects, but Babes make it better – next post.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
And the difference in assault unload rates makes a huge difference. Forget about how many xAK/xAP you can use to carry that unit, because the unload rates when not at a friendly base are:

250 points per day for xAK/xAP

600 points per day for AK/AP

3,000 points per day for AKA/APA

I've also found the loading routines a little squirrelly. Take a division and spread it across a huge number of xAP and xAK so it will unload fast and you will often find that at least one ship was loaded deep and will take several turns to unload. That ship will have the parent fragment, meaning that the 95% of your division on the beach will be commanded by a random colonel. Just another incentive to use the right ships for the job.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Thanks for the additional info - didn't know that AK/AP and AKA/APA were so close IRL.

Google doesn't know what is a "Wellin" and, sadly, neither do I.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Thanks for the additional info - didn't know that AK/AP and AKA/APA were so close IRL.

Google doesn't know what is a "Wellin" and, sadly, neither do I.

Made by Wellin Davit Co. A yank'em-crank'em-landing craft deployment machine gun. Load 'em-drop 'em, load 'em-drop 'em; fast as the boys can scramble on board. It was a revolver and had "significant" weight capacity.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
I think a lot of readers in the main forum would like to see this pic. I'd never heard of a Wellin.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Thanks for the additional info - didn't know that AK/AP and AKA/APA were so close IRL.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE
Takes 12-14 6000 capacity ton xAKs (let’s say an ordinary EC2 Liberty) to transport an Army or Marine Division: 66,000 capacity tons for cross loaded troops (11,000 troops at 6x) and 11,400 capacity tons for weaps, vehs, and supply. Regardless of how they are “actually” distributed across individual ships, you could “rationalize” in terms of fitting 11,000 troops in 14 ships = 800 “men” per ship.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE
In the great, grand, scheme of things, using the right ships for the right jobs will put you in the 2 or 3 sigma ball park as to historical practice, and make the game play out in a very realistic fashion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
I think a lot of readers in the main forum would like to see this pic. I'd never heard of a Wellin.

Help yourself Moose. No worries.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Thanks for the additional info - didn't know that AK/AP and AKA/APA were so close IRL.

Oh yeah. Many APs just became APAs under the new classification system. This is Leonard Wood (as AP-25) in Sept ’42, reclassified as APA-12 in Feb ’43. Dickman in the background. Same with the Bell, Liggett, Legion, Zeilin, that whole bunch.

Even in Sept, they already had their Welins, and radar, and full boogie gun suite, oh my! Each had 4 Welin triples per side, so 24x LCPL/LCPR/LCVP could put an assault Bn of 850 troops in the water in 37 minutes. Looks like Dickman is doing load exercises. Her boats are at the rail ready for filling. Also kept the deck space clear for 6 LCMs (sometimes including 6 more LCVPs nested in the LCMs). And this was while they were still called APs.

The bottom pic is a plan view of APA-44. 28x LCPL/LCPR/LCVP, and up to 6x LCMs. The plan shows 3 LCPL/LCPR/LCVP mounted fore-and-aft over hold #2, but these were often replaced by 2 LCMs mounted athwart ships. The LCMs all have LCPL/LCPR/LCVP nestled inside. So not much different at all from the Leonard Wood. LCMs were good for Arty batteries and lt tank platoons, so ships got what they needed, depending on what they were loaded with.

AK and AKA was the same deal, except they would have more heavy-lift LCM at the expense of LCP.

So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pascal
Great stuff. Did you get the diagram from Friedman's book on amphibious ships?

quote:

ORIGINAL: PresterJohn
Bit of a newb question but could someone briefly either point me in the right direction to read myself or give me a quick answer to what the various engineer types do? So far ive seen Construction engineers, construction labour, shipping engineers and engineers.

I'm enjoying the game i'm playing but need a better in depth understanding of the changes and building bases is kinda important!!

thanks

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Another nit-pick:

In DBB, I US Amphib Corps is at San Diego on Dec. 7 1941, MGen Upshur commanding.

IRL, this unit was created on October 1st, 1942 with MGen Vogel commanding.

Furthermore, it was called I Marine Amphibious Corps, not US.