The PERFECT WAR Mod: Allied Side

[Terminus]

You'd miss that dock in Singers with an expanded Force Z.

[oldman45]

The shipyard had a dock big enough for a BB, I am not really sure why they sent two of the floating docks there.

[DOCUP]

If the French keep Indo-China, does the treaty between Japan and Thailand still happen?
 
doc
 

[Skyland]

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

If the French keep Indo-China, does the treaty between Japan and Thailand still happen?

doc

I think so, their collaboration started in 1940. Only Japan can support them in achieving their regional territorial ambitions against Indochina.

[John 3rd]

Skyland: If we were to take a Da Bases Master File would you be willing to put in your Thai and IndoChina changes? The more I've thought about this the more interested I become in a completely a-historic start point.

It is beginning to appear that we have the Kaigun more-or-less settled for the start of the war as well as tentative construction ideas. In a lot of ways the Imperial Fleet is stronger but not by that much. Still need to wrap my mind around the changes in force structure. Keep in mind we haven't settled on anything more then Fleet units at the moment. Still have a long way to go past that.

For the Frenchies within the Forum I think we could add a squadron of 1 CA, 2 CL, 4 DD and a few support ships starting in Saigon or Cam Rahn Bay. Some air units along Skyland's view would be cool plus his LCU. All the Thai additions would be cool and then we could see what happens.

[RedLancer]

I thought that I'd throw in a few Brit centric ideas that I developed for my Britannia Mod which may have some traction.
Obviously adding all of them is way too much but it may provide food for thought.

Ships.

1. The Admiral Class (Hood etc) are not scrapped on the slipways. Hood and Howe are completed as expected. Anson and Rodney are completed as carriers (a foil to Lex/Sara/Amagi/Kaga). Eagle and Argus are scrapped early but Furious, Glorious and Courageous are converted.

2. To balance the 3.5 WNT increase allowed for Japan - Australia / New Zealand are 'exempted' from the treaty and keep Australia, New Zealand, Lion (renamed Dominion) and Princess Royal (re-named Commonwealth) as a Pacific BC Squadron - upgraded with time - look at the pics in the Royal Navy Section here: [link http://wolfsshipyard.mystarship.com/Mis ... rious.html[/link]

3. Nelson and Rodney are not built but 2 x F3 (Triumph & Trafalgar) are built - as in JuanG's Mod. This creates the Triple 15'/45 turret design used from then on.

4. KGV Class of 4 ships (KGV, DoY, PoW & Princess Royal) but completed with 9 x 15" with 10 x twin 4.5". (2nd London Treaty has no 14" clause)

5. Lion Class of 4 ships (Lion, Temeraire, Conqueror & Vanguard) completed with 12 x 15" with 12 x twin 4.5". All earlier BBs/BCs are modified by Dec 41.

6. At the first London Treaty no additional battleships are scrapped (both Wyoming and Arkansas available in game) and the UK is permitted more Hvy Cruisers but at the expense of Lt Cruiser tonnage. During the early 30s the UK scraps all the C & D Class cruisers in order to build more modern ships and begins to put its capital ships through a modernisation programme with the secondary armament standardised on 4.5"/45 twin mounts. The surviving Hawkins Class are converted to seaplane carriers.

7. In response to the building of the Deutschland class GB invokes its escalation clause in the WNT and builds the Union Class heavy cruisers - armed with 9 x 9.2" guns.

8. In response to the building of the Scharnhorst class UK builds Bellerophon Class of 4 ships (Bellerophon, Thunderer, Monarch & Dreadnought) with 6 x 15" for'ard and 6 x 9.2" astern.

9. From the mid 30s onwards GB construction (in line with Treaties up to 1937) is as follows:
CVs: 2 x Ark Royal, 2 x Indomitable, 4 x Implacable, 4 x Audacious, 4 x Malta. (slightly modified airgroup sizes).
CVLs: 2 x Pegasus (a modified Unicorn), 4 x Colossus, 4 x Majestic, 4 x Centaur.
CVEs: Numerous Vindex Class and Empire MAC class (slightly modified airgroup sizes).
CAs/CLs: As history Dido & Bellona Class completed with twin 4.5"s not 5.25".

Aircraft

10. Engines. The GB standardises on the number of engines - Bristol devote their focus to the Pegasus, Hercules and Centaurus development line. Rolls-Royce focus on the Merlin and Griffon and Napier on the Sabre. Better focus and co-operation and limiting the number of production lines aids development and production.

11. FAA. The Fleet Air Arm remains separate from the RAF and enters the war with capable aircraft such as a Sea Hurricane with folding wings. British naval aviation doctrine is different and focuses on a twin track approach of protect (fleet defence fighters, ASW and naval patrol) and project (strike fighters and torpedo bombers). This leads to the development of the following aircraft types:
Fleet Defence Fighters: Sea Hurricane, Seafire, MB5(known in game as the Seahawk) and Sea Venom.
Night Fighters: Fulmar, Firefly, Sea Hornet
ASW Patrol: Swordfish, Barracuda, Firefly
Strike Fighters: Sea Hurricane, Sea Tornado, Firebrand & Firecrest.
Torpedo Bombers: Swordfish, Spearfish, Sturgeon & Sea Mosquito.

12. RAF. Some of the aircraft that might be added are:
Fighters / FBs / NFs: Hawker Tempest V, Gloster Reaper, Gloster Meteor, B-Paul Defiant, Westland Welkin, Hawker Typhoon.
LBs etc: Bristol Buckingham, Bristol Brigand, H-P Halifax, Vickers Warwick.
Misc: Avro York, dH Albatross, AW Albemarle
Float: Spitfire, Swordfish
Patrol: Seaford & Shetland

[Skyland]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Skyland: If we were to take a Da Bases Master File would you be willing to put in your Thai and IndoChina changes? The more I've thought about this the more interested I become in a completely a-historic start point.

Ok for me, i will complete your master file.

[John 3rd]

Thanks Red Lancer and Skyland. Good to see you Post John.

Got to think on RL's British building. Skyland: Please stay in the loop and we'll see where things go with the continued development.

[oldman45]

I think it might be better to have Indochina in Japanese hands when the game starts. Little selfish on my part but I play AI and there would have to be script changes for it to work.

To make the case for this, there are no treaties in the pacific so if Japan waits until the France falls, it would be a simple matter of showing up with the their toys and in no uncertain terms tell the colonial governor that Japan will be providing security for Indochina. What few ships that are in the area can simply flee for friendly ports.

[John 3rd]

You could certainly go that way. Once might also make the argument that the Japanese Army, once unleashed, takes the bit between its teeth and charges down the coast of China straight into IndoChina.

What would readers and contributors like to do here? Can we get a vote as to keep Indochina French with some aircraft, a TF, and some LCU

OR

IndoChina be Japanese and move some of the aforementioned to New Caledonia and Tahiti?

[Skyland]

The initial intention of the governor was to resist to any japanese invasion, even after the fall of France.
It is only because of :
- the british blocade prevented any reinforcement from North Africa, Somali and West Indies,
- the US decision to not sell planes, weapons and ammunitions,
- the japanese Canton army attack (and withdraw) at Langson in end 1940,
that the governor decided to make some concessions to the japanese, but always with the idea to keep the french sovereignty.

[John 3rd]

What sort of concessions?

EDIT: Is there a decent book on this subject I could read?

[Skyland]

Usage of airfields and usage of Haiphong port for troops in transit to China.

Some books in english (available on the net in pdf or on google book, legally of course[:)]:
The United States and Vietnam, 1787-1941, Diane publishing, 1990.
Paradise in peril: western colonial power and Japanese expansion in south-east Asia, 1905-1941, Universiteit van Amsterdam, 2001.

[John 3rd]

Paradise in Peril sounds yummy. I'll look for it.

Could we start with Haiphong controlled by the Japanese (if we go with an independent Indochina)?

[John 3rd]

Nothing at B&N or Amazon. Do you have the ISBN?

[DOCUP]

I dont envy your decision on Indochina.  I like to have it in French hands but its your mod yo do with it as you please.  It is your mod, and I like the way its going.  The only thing that scares me is the new Japanese ships are getting better guns and ASW.  It seems like the Allies will need alot of heavys to take on some of the lighter ships.  I'm not complaining.  I don't want to see an equal Allied force early in the war it wouldn't right, they need to be at a disadvantage.
 
Also if the Japanese have to take Indochina it gives the Allies time to set up defenses.  Thats a trade off right there.  Writing scripts and stuff, dosen't sound like much fun.  Either way you go your going to hear compliants.  I do not envy you all on that part.  You have tried to put up a good equal sided mod here.
 
doc
 

[John 3rd]

It sucks. Definite trade-off. Personally I like the idea of having to take Indochina because that would be SOOOO different but we shall have to see.

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

It sucks. Definite trade-off. Personally I like the idea of having to take Indochina because that would be SOOOO different but we shall have to see.

You also open a political "can of worms", as it was the occupation of French Indo-China that triggered the US oil embargo against Japan. No occupation = ??????. On the other hand, without the Indo-China bases, the invasion of Malaya is virtually impossible for lack of air support. Any time you start changing pre-war occurances you have to expect a myriad of "then whats?" that all have to be nailed down.

[Skyland]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Nothing at B&N or Amazon. Do you have the ISBN?

http://dare.uva.nl/record/86412

and

http://books.google.fr/books?id=YGeSU1v ... &q&f=false

[Skyland]

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

It sucks. Definite trade-off. Personally I like the idea of having to take Indochina because that would be SOOOO different but we shall have to see.

You also open a political "can of worms", as it was the occupation of French Indo-China that triggered the US oil embargo against Japan. No occupation = ??????. On the other hand, without the Indo-China bases, the invasion of Malaya is virtually impossible for lack of air support. Any time you start changing pre-war occurances you have to expect a myriad of "then whats?" that all have to be nailed down.

It can be compensate by Japan by using Thailand as base for operations against Malaya and Burma. This japanese force deployment in Thailand can also trigger the US oil embargo.