CHS Scenario update now available - version 2.07

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: VSWG

V2.05:

Ship Class 1356 (AVD Ballard, 4/43) upgrades to 1325 (APD Manley, 3/44). [&:]

Ship Class 1327 (PG Taney, 2/44) upgrades to 1328 (Treasury AGC, 11/44). Not sure about this one.

These ships have always been like this in CHS, so I don't know whether it is correct or not. I will ask Don.

Pontianak (BaseID 500) has ABDA as Command HQ, but "Commonwealth" as nationality?

The bases in Sarawak and Sabah have always been "Commonwealth" nationality. I haven't changed that.

Bagui (BaseID 322) and Lucena (BaseID 323) are the only bases with "Philipines" (sic!) as nationality.

I guess it made sense to me, when the bases were added, that they should be Philippine nationality. But since the other bases in the Philippines are all "US Army" nationality I should probably make these two the same.

Thanks,
Andrew

[Sardaukar]

Andrew, your Experimental mod Scen 160, IIRC, works very well with aircraft, IMHO.

Here is the air combat losses from start to March 29 1942 (AI IJ, Historical difficulty):

A2A: A: 354 J: 275
DoF: A: 371 J: 15
Flak: A: 40 J: 445
Ops: A: 166 J: 551

Not too bad, I'd say. Some parts like Flak-losses and Ops-losses are obviously very slanted towards Allies since I have done no base or city attacks yet with my bombers. And ground attacks have been relatively short-ranged too. But for IJ, I think ratios between different losses for IJ are quite realistic, them being in attack all the time.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar
Andrew, your Experimental mod Scen 160, IIRC, works very well with aircraft, IMHO.

Thanks for the feedback. I wonder what the relative experience levels of the air groups are? There is a larger initial gap in experience between the Japanese and the Allies in the experimental mod, which may or may not reduce over time.

Andrew

[Sardaukar]

What I like most is that top Allied ace has 5 kills after almost 4 months. That is not usually the case in normal mods. It's some guy called Yarra...I think I have read about him...[:D][8D]

I think the reduction of experience accross the board has been very very good thing. Allied squadrons are now from 50 to high 60's. None 70+.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

What I like most is that top Allied ace has 5 kills after almost 4 months. That is not usually the case in normal mods. It's some guy called Yarra...I think I have read about him...[:D][8D]

I think the reduction of experience accross the board has been very very good thing. Allied squadrons are now from 50 to high 60's. None 70+.

That sounds very encouraging indeed.

[Sardaukar]

To add, that is *fighter* squadrons. I have some bombers and patrol units that have 70-80 due to extensive ASW ops and naval attacks. But they gain exp very fast that way. Fighters, OTOH, are just right for me.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: VSWG

V2.05:

Ship Class 1356 (AVD Ballard, 4/43) upgrades to 1325 (APD Manley, 3/44). [&:]

Ship Class 1327 (PG Taney, 2/44) upgrades to 1328 (Treasury AGC, 11/44). Not sure about this one.

These ships have always been like this in CHS, so I don't know whether it is correct or not. I will ask Don.

Pontianak (BaseID 500) has ABDA as Command HQ, but "Commonwealth" as nationality?

The bases in Sarawak and Sabah have always been "Commonwealth" nationality. I haven't changed that.

Bagui (BaseID 322) and Lucena (BaseID 323) are the only bases with "Philipines" (sic!) as nationality.

I guess it made sense to me, when the bases were added, that they should be Philippine nationality. But since the other bases in the Philippines are all "US Army" nationality I should probably make these two the same.

Thanks,
Andrew

About half the AVDs of this class were converted to APDs later in the war so the refit is an option for the player. One does not have to OK refits by the way.

As for the Secretary/Treasury Class conversions to AGCs, this is correct as well.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

To add, that is *fighter* squadrons. I have some bombers and patrol units that have 70-80 due to extensive ASW ops and naval attacks. But they gain exp very fast that way. Fighters, OTOH, are just right for me.

TheElf is reporting that Oscars, Nates and Claudes are underpowered due to the A2A mods. Is that you experience as well? If there is a problem here it will need to be fixed. Probably along the same lies that Nik is using.

Andrew

[racndoc]

I think that Nik discussed TheElf's results and mentioned that they might have been affected by the low number of AC involved and the lack of radar.....ie not as many passes will be made.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: AdmSpruance

I think that Nik discussed TheElf's results and mentioned that they might have been affected by the low number of AC involved and the lack of radar.....ie not as many passes will be made.

We have had some discussion about this, and there may be more to it than that. I would be interested to see AAR results involving these aircraft if anyone has any, which will help to provide some real data. That would be very helpful, I think.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: AdmSpruance

I think that Nik discussed TheElf's results and mentioned that they might have been affected by the low number of AC involved and the lack of radar.....ie not as many passes will be made.

Yes this is true, that the engagements I've had with Oscars in small groups (about 50-60% of all Oscar Combats) have included Zero firing pulses. No combat. THIS is a result, as Nik said, of the low number of aircraft. For example:

Day Air attack on TF, near Kota Bharu at 24,45

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ib Oscar x 9

Allied aircraft
Blenheim IV x 3

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
Blenheim IV: 1 damaged This was caused by AAA

AND

Day Air attack on TF, near Kota Bharu at 24,45

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ib Oscar x 7

Allied aircraft
Blenheim I x 3
Hudson I x 8

No Japanese losses

No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
AP Fukko Maru, Bomb hits 1
AP Miike Maru

AND

Day Air attack on TF, near Kota Bharu at 24,45

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ib Oscar x 7

Allied aircraft
Blenheim I x 3

No Japanese losses

No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
AK Nittatsu Maru

All these attacks were in the same Hex on the same day. Range of CAP was medium. Oscars are 70ish EXP and had less than 10 Fatigue, morale was high. In these cases there were no Firing pulses for either side

But I have had a handful of Squadron size 27+ Oscars vs 10-15 Buffalos, and after 7 game days only two Oscar pilots are on the board with a kill each.

[Jagdfluger]

Andrew, any estimate on 2.06?
 
Very nice job with CHS, by the way.  Thank you for all your work.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Jagdfluger
Andrew, any estimate on 2.06?

It will be delayed by a few more days, as I decided to add in some USAAF recon and transport squadron updates (again based on some excellent research by timtom), and I am currently only about halfway through that.

I have also been slowed down by some testing I have been doing on "static" LCUs. Prompted by another report that these move around, I decided to do some testing. It seems that "static" infantry LCUs (i.e. the static Chinese Corps) will be moved by the AI, as if they were not static at all. This is not due to the device being used to "fix" them - the new "Fortification" device - they will move just as well with a bunch of big fixed CD guns allocated to them. It is because they are Infantry LCUs. Static CD units don't seem to suffer from this problem, so the only LCUs affected by this are the "static" Chinese Inf Corps (and maybe the artillery LCU in Chungking - I forgot to test that).

Note that this is AI only. Allied players cannot move them - they only move if the Allies are being played by the AI. So I am not really bothered by this - the only effect it will have on the game is that a human Japanese player will have a slightly tougher time in China if playing vs the Allied AI, but the AI needs all the help it can get.

I am also probably going to make some changes to the A2A mod versions, so that will take a few days as well I think. I was not expecting to have to do this but it looks like it may be necessary.

Andrew

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

To add, that is *fighter* squadrons. I have some bombers and patrol units that have 70-80 due to extensive ASW ops and naval attacks. But they gain exp very fast that way. Fighters, OTOH, are just right for me.

TheElf is reporting that Oscars, Nates and Claudes are underpowered due to the A2A mods. Is that you experience as well? If there is a problem here it will need to be fixed. Probably along the same lies that Nik is using.

Andrew

Not seeing any major problem...but one could get around that by adding accuracy to their puny MGs. After all...they *were* "underarmed"...

[Ron Saueracker]

[&:]

The Middle East base is missing on my map...not even a base flag which would show for scenario 155 version 2.05. Is this a first turn issue like having no ship availability toggle?

[Nomad]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

[&:]

The Middle East base is missing on my map...not even a base flag which would show for scenario 155 version 2.05. Is this a first turn issue like having no ship availability toggle?

That's good Ron, it has been removed. [8D]

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

[&:]

The Middle East base is missing on my map...not even a base flag which would show for scenario 155 version 2.05. Is this a first turn issue like having no ship availability toggle?

I'm guessing from this comment that you don't read the documentation Ron? [:)]

[treespider]

What effect are all of the light AAMG having on:

A- The Air War?

B- The Ground War?

[Sardaukar]

Well..it might not be such a good idea to strafe against multitude of M2 AAMGs...even tho those are heavy MGs...

[Andrew Brown]

I have now updated CHS to version 2.06. This update contains quite a lot of fixes, plus a small number of additions and changes. Many of the fixes are for problems that date back to the earliest versions of CHS, so people seem to be more observant now.

The Nik Mod scenarios (157 and 158) are now better aligned with the data changes included in the latest Nik Mod variants (6.0+).

I have also made changes to the experimental scenarios (159 and 160), with air-launched torpedoes now 25% less accurate.

The scenarios are available from my CHS Download web page.

As usual, if you find any errors, please let me know.

For a list of the updates included in CHS 2.06, please see the list on my website:
CHS Revision History.

Andrew