OOB Comments

[strawbuk]

ORIGINAL: Brad Hunter

USMC Raider and Parachute Battalion info:

NOTES:
2) 1st Raider Battalion – activated 1/6/42 in Quantico, VA as “1st Separate Battalion.” Redesignated
1st Raider Battalion 2/16/42. Disbanded 2/1/44 at Guadalcanal (became 1st Bn., 4th Marines).
Redesignated 2nd Raider Battalion 2/19/42. Disbanded 1/31/44 at Guadalcanal (integrated into 4th Marines).
4) 3rd Raider Battalion – activated 9/20/42 in Samoa. Disbanded 2/1/44 at Guadalcanal (became 3rd Bn., 4th Marines).
5) 4th Raider Battalion – activated 10/23/42 in Camp Linda Vista. Disbanded 2/1/44 at Guadalcanal (became 2nd Bn., 4th Marines).


NOTES:
1
5) All Parachute Battalions were used as cadres to create the 5th Marine Division.

[

Brad

Excellent stuff but don't your notes highlight the problem for WITP engine - many of these units get folded into new rgts/divs coming along later? Same problems with some NZ and Indian units? So the OOB design decision is whether to have them early as smaller units or later as big ones. Having both is not on.

Even if it were possible to hardwire in withdrawl of various units (actually , why not, like ship withdrawls...? anyway..) in advance of their new 'parents' appearing on map, you could get game play problems a. unit in middle of key operation for you b. if you have split or 'cadre'd unit how does withdrawl work?

[Montbrun]

I've suggested a "Wish List" item giving us the capability of "disbanding" LCUs. This would allow us to set up House Rules, being able to disband units at the appropriate times. This would also allow the disbanding of units to keep the front line units up to strength - not at all ahistorical...

Brad

[mikemike]

ORIGINAL: mikemike

If we are talking about late war aircraft, there are several British types that should be included:

I must confess I did that post off the cuff, and a lot of it was really off! So I´ve searched my references and came up with a list of aircraft that were delivered to front-line units about the end of the war and so didn´t see combat. They are all missing from the WitP database. There were also some types missing that did see combat. This is the list:

Avro Lincoln
four-engine heavy bomber, successor to Lancaster.
First deliveries May 1945 to Tiger Force units for service in the Far East
2xBrowning 0.5 F
2X20mm Hispano TT
2xBrowning 0.5 R
16000 lbs of bombs
Top speed 295
Cruise 215
Range 2250 miles with full bomb load - should that be 6750 max.?
Ceiling 30475

Blackburn Firebrand TF.4
single-seat single engine carrier-capable torpedo fighter (no kidding!)
From May 1945
Armament: 4x20mm Hispano F, 1 Torpedo
Top speed 340, cruise 256
Range 740
Ceiling 28475

Boeing F8B-1
Single-seat single engine long-range carrier-capable escort fighter
From September 1945
Armament 6x0.5 Browning F or 6x20 mm F, 3.200 lbs of bombs
Top speed 432
Cruise (long-range, I think) 190
Range 2800
Ceiling 37475

de Havilland Hornet F.1
single-seat, two engine long-range fighter
From February 1945
Armament 4x20 mm F, 2000 lbs of bombs
Mvr probably 35-36
Top speed 472
Range 3000
Climb 4600
Ceiling 35000

Hawker Tempest II
single-seat, single engine fighter
From August 1945
Armament 4x20 mm F, 2000 lbs of bombs
Top speed 440
Range 820
Climb 3600
Ceiling 37000

Lavochkin La-9
single seat, single engine fighter (Soviet)
From April 1945
Armament 4xShVaK 20mm F or 4xYVa 23mm F
Top speed 428
Mvr (guess) 36-37
Range 400
Climb 3800
Ceiling 36000

Also missing:
Avro Lancaster
Grumman F7F Tigercat
Grumman F8F Bearcat
Republic P-47N Thunderbolt
NA P-82 Twin Mustang

and from the Japanese side:
Kyushu Q1W Tokai
ASW patrol aircraft
Two Hitachi engines
armed with depth charges
Speed 145, range 830
was apparently successful against U.S subs trying to pass into the Yellow Sea due to a towed MAD sensor (means Magnetic Anomaly Detector, not what you might think), but I guess you can´t model that in WitP.

[juliet7bravo]

The omission of the "Q1W1 Lorna" is pretty serious because it and the associated specialist ASW air units attached to Grand Escort Command HQ are about the only new tool the IJN player would have available to fight the Allied subs. With an availability of Sept '43, with research a Japanese player could have it into production in early-mid '43...conceivably in time to do some good before his industry/war machine completely collapses due to lack of fuel/resources depending on how his war is going. Didn't have a big impact IRL for various reasons...untrained crews, sitting ducks for Allied fighters, threw away attacking USN ships, to few/to late, ect. Sound aircraft design and concept though, doesn't have to be that way.

The MAD unit (not very good historically, but neither was the Allied version) could be modeled by giving the Lorna's surface search radar a slightly greater effectiveness rating. Of course, since (IIRC) airborne surface search radars aren't modeled in the game, it's a moot point. Don't think that Grand Escort Command HQ or the air units are included anyway...

"The Japanese were making progress in submarine detection. By 1944 they had introduced planes equipped with radar and with magnetic airborne detectors (MAD) and air-dropped, circular running torpedoes. However, so few MAD equipped planes were available that they were called only after lookouts or radar had already sighted a submarine.30 Had the Japanese vigorously pursued more efficient anti-submarine warfare (ASW) methods very early in the War and placed more emphasis on the development and deployment of these new technologies, it might have taken a different turn."

[SpitfireIX]

ORIGINAL: SpitfireIX

Scenario 15, version 1.21

Yorktown Class 1943 upgrade

First of all, this upgrade should be available starting in 8/43. The Enterprise arrived at Bremerton on July 20, and entered drydock two days later. The upgrade and repairs of old battle damage required three months. The old battle damage was a minor issue, however--the overwhelming majority of the yard work involved the upgrade.

(See Chapter 15 of The Big E by Edward P. Stafford)

Fuel capacity was increased from 4270 tons to 4814 tons, according to Norman Friedman's U.S. Aircraft Carriers: An Illustrated Design History. However, her endurance should probably stay about the same, as her full-load diplacement increased from 25,484 tons to 29,882 tons. (thanks to Rich Matheson from cv6.org for looking this up for me, as I don't have any of Friedman's books (yet).)

Post-refit armament is somewhat problematic. This is my best guess, from looking at diagrams and photographs. There's a diagram at cv6.org, but the number of 20mm mounts shown doesn't agree with the number given. Stafford agrees that the total number post-refit was 50, and looking at photos from 1944 there are clearly more single 20s than are shown on the diagram.

My opinion, after looking at photos and comparing with the diagram:

Quad 40s: 2xForward, 2xStarboard, 2xPort, 1xAft

Twin 40s: 1xForward, 2xStarboard, 2xPort

Single 20s: 31xStarboard, 15xPort, 4xAft

I'm afraid I'm not familiar with exactly what the firing arcs given in the game are (although I can guess at some of them). The quad 40mm just aft of the island is tough to judge, because part of its arc is obstructed by the crane. I saw one photo that shows it appears to be mounted to fire starboard--there's not even a splinter shield on the port side.

I've had a couple of additional e-mails from Rich Matheson recently, correcting a couple of my misapprehensions and providing additional information. He also sent me an annotated copy of the 1944 armament diagram, which I include here. Two important points: First, the 40mm next to the crane is a twin, and not a quad. Rich stated that installation of a quad was considered, but rejected, as that would have necessatated removal of the crane. Second, among the guns added were 1x2 and 1x3 20mm, but these were quickly removed, for some reason. Even considering this removal, the diagram doesn't quite agree with the numbers given by Friedman and Stafford, but this seems to be the best information available, absent the discovery of a large number of new photos of Enterprise from 1944. One thing I would suggest is adding 3x1 20mm port and 2x1 20mm starboard; some photos of Enterprise suggest to me that the starboard galleries each held an additional 20mm, and the two aft port galleries did likewise.

[tsimmonds]

It is reported in this thread that the air groups that arrive on Japanese carriers do not check to see whether the aircraft types in the units have entered production yet; they seem to just arrive with free planes. If construction of carriers has been accelerated, it could result in a situation where they can operate with advanced models long before they actually are available. However, there will be no replacements available until the Jills, Judys and Zekes actually enter production. This would make it pointless to accelerate Taiho, the Amagis, and any other CV that arrives with a next-generation air group; a carrier with irreplaceable aircraft is not very much more useful than one with no aircraft. Can this be fixed so that either a check is made to see whether the aircraft are actually in production, or that at least these carriers are scheduled to arrive with Zeros, Vals and Kates?

[BPRE]

Hi,

I just noticed that in Scenario 15 1.21 VP-23 appears twice. It's included from the beginning as unit no 1446 and unit no 2309 appears as a reinforcement on January the 20th 1942.

/BPRE

[RevRick]

I don't know, but it seems to me that the USMC F4F squadrons should upgrade to the F4U vice the F6F. I don't have the TOE data, nor an operational history. Has this been checked out. Seems to me that would waste a lot of F4U production, and tax F6F production.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: RevRick

I don't know, but it seems to me that the USMC F4F squadrons should upgrade to the F4U vice the F6F. I don't have the TOE data, nor an operational history. Has this been checked out. Seems to me that would waste a lot of F4U production, and tax F6F production.

This is an excellent point. I helped with some input for the USMC Squadrons but only provided original aircraft assignments. Here are the general upgrade paths for the Marine Fighter Squadrons:

VMF-111: F4F-3, F4F-4, F4U-1, F4U-1D
VMF-112: *F4F-4, F4U-1, FG-1
VMF-113: *F4U-1, F4U-1D
VMF-114: F4U-1
VMF-115: F4U-1, F4U-1D, FG-1

VMF-121: F4F-4, F4U-1, F4U-1D, FG-1
VMF-122: F4F-4, F4U-1, F3A-1, FG-1
VMF-123: *F4F-4, F3A-1, FG-1
VMF-124: F4U-1, F3A-1, FG-1, F6F-3

VMF-155: *F4U-1

VMF-211: F4F-3, F2A-3, F4F-4, F4U-1
VMF-212: *F4F-4, FM-1, F4U-1, F4U-4
VMF-213: F4U-1, F3A-1, FG-1, F6F-5, F6F-3P
VMF-214: FG-1
VMF-215: F4U-1, FG-1, F6F-5
VMF-216: *F4U-1, F6F-3, F6F-5
VMF-217: F4U-1, F6F-5E
VMF-218: F4U-1D, FG-1

VMF-221: F2A-3, F4F-3, F4F-4, F3A-1, FG-1, F4U-1
VMF-222: *F4U-1, F4F-4
VMF-223: *F4F-4, FM-1, F4U-1, F4U-4
VMF-224: *F4F-4, F4U-1, FG-1
VMF-225: *F4U-1

VMF-311: F4U-1
VMF-312: F4U-1D, FG-1
VMF-313: F4U-1
VMF-314: F4U-1, FG-1

VMF-321: F4U-1, F6F-3, F6F-5
VMF-322: F4U-1, FG-1
VMG-323: F4U-1
VMF-324: F4U-1, FG-1

VMF-422: *F4U-1, FG-1
VMF-441: F4F-4, F4U-1, FG-1
VMF-451: F3A-1, FG-1
VMF-452: FG-1

VMF-511: F4U-1, F6F-5/5N
VMF-512: F4U-1, FG-1
VMF-513: F4U-1, F3A-1
VMF-514: F4U-1, FG-1, F6F-3, F6F-5

VMF(N)-531: *PV-1N (Later F7F-2N)
VMF(N)-532: F6F-3N
VMF(N)-533: F6F-3N, F6F-5N
VMF(N)-534: F6F-3N
VMF(N)-541: F6F-3N, F6F-5N
VMF(N)-542: F6F-3N, F6F-5N
VMF(N)-543: F6F-3N, F6F-5N

* indicates earlier types were used for very short periods or prior to deployment to the pacific.

F3A and FG were Corsairs made by other manufacturers.

[pry]

OK Folks, All the data base changes that are going into Patch 1.3 have been turned in for incorporation into the patch. (No I don't know when it will be released but the word soon comes to mind. )

All comments/suggestions in this thread have been archived and the ones not acted upon in this patch for one reason or another may be re- examined for a future patch.

Once we get the OK I will post the full list of changes to the data bases for Patch 1.3 which covers 114 topics with many thousands of individual changes/corrections spread across all 16 scenarios as they apply. Rich Dionne and I did as much as we physically could in the time available to us and are now due for a short well deserved R&R to catch up on lots of lost sleep.

We will close this thread and start a new one after you all have had a chance to digest the changes in 1.3

The only issues that are not subject to be revisited are the ones labeled DOA on page 1 of this thread.

Thanks to everyone who provided comments and suggestions to help fix errors and make this game even better for all of us.

[Bradley7735]

Pry....

You da man!! [&o][&o]

[pad152]

Pry

Is there a OOB issue with Para units with 37mm ATG that can't be airlifted? In UV Para units had mortars and 75 mm Pack Howitzers that could be airlifted.

[bgibs]

The CVE Block Island has no air group. Did anyone catch this?

[BPRE]

Don't know if this counts as an OOB issue or something else but the Replacement rate for the P-70 Havoc is set to 100 in version 1.21. For the P-61 it's only 20.

I found a website, http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p70.html, that lists the total amount produced and converted from other models as approximately 260 aircraft.

Isn't a rate of 100 a bit too high?

Regards
BPRE

[pry]

ORIGINAL: pad152

Pry

Is there a OOB issue with Para units with 37mm ATG that can't be airlifted? In UV Para units had mortars and 75 mm Pack Howitzers that could be airlifted.

Not that I am aware of... any device with a load cost of 7 or less should be able to be airlifted, and the 37mm AT is only 5 so it should be getting transported with the rest of the unit if it is not then that may be a bug... Got a save???

[pry]

ORIGINAL: bgibs

The CVE Block Island has no air group. Did anyone catch this?

No you are the first... it's now on my new list for 1.4...

[pad152]

ORIGINAL: pry

ORIGINAL: pad152

Pry

Is there a OOB issue with Para units with 37mm ATG that can't be airlifted? In UV Para units had mortars and 75 mm Pack Howitzers that could be airlifted.


Not that I am aware of... any device with a load cost of 7 or less should be able to be airlifted, and the 37mm AT is only 5 so it should be getting transported with the rest of the unit if it is not then that may be a bug... Got a save???

Pry

The issue is this, the 1st and 2nd Japanese Para units (starting location in Kiungahan) in Scen#15 start out with a 37mm ATG (load cost 5) they quickly upgrade to a 47mm ATG (load cost 7). The 47mm ATG can not be moved by air!

[Ron Saueracker]

Just noticed...no big deal. AV 1 Wright was a unique class, yet is listed as a Curtiss.

[pry]

ORIGINAL: pad152

ORIGINAL: pry

ORIGINAL: pad152

Pry

Is there a OOB issue with Para units with 37mm ATG that can't be airlifted? In UV Para units had mortars and 75 mm Pack Howitzers that could be airlifted.


Not that I am aware of... any device with a load cost of 7 or less should be able to be airlifted, and the 37mm AT is only 5 so it should be getting transported with the rest of the unit if it is not then that may be a bug... Got a save???

Pry

The issue is this, the 1st and 2nd Japanese Para units (starting location in Kiungahan) in Scen#15 start out with a 37mm ATG (load cost 5) they quickly upgrade to a 47mm ATG (load cost 7). The 47mm ATG can not be moved by air!

OK got ya the 47mm is the problem will check into this

[bgibs]

ORIGINAL: pad152

ORIGINAL: pry

ORIGINAL: pad152

Pry

Is there a OOB issue with Para units with 37mm ATG that can't be airlifted? In UV Para units had mortars and 75 mm Pack Howitzers that could be airlifted.


Not that I am aware of... any device with a load cost of 7 or less should be able to be airlifted, and the 37mm AT is only 5 so it should be getting transported with the rest of the unit if it is not then that may be a bug... Got a save???

Pry

The issue is this, the 1st and 2nd Japanese Para units (starting location in Kiungahan) in Scen#15 start out with a 37mm ATG (load cost 5) they quickly upgrade to a 47mm ATG (load cost 7). The 47mm ATG can not be moved by air!

There is something wrong with this rule. I air transported an entire aviation support unit from Dacca to Mandalay. Aviation support has a load cost of 10 in the database and the Support has a load cost of 20. Both are above the rule limit.