CHS questions, comments & feedback

[jwilkerson]

This is getting a little strange. I ran 10 tests at Fort Level 50 and got Hong Kong to fall between 19 and 30 December. Perhaps my computer is in a different time zone??

I'd appreciate knowing from any players when the see Hong Kong fall.

Don

What forces exactly did you use [ I'm using 38 ID, and the 4 Arty and 2 Eng Regt, and also the Army HQ that start at Canton ] ? Did you change leaders [ I didn't ] ? What air support are you using [ dedicated 1 Sonia Chutai and 1 Sally Daitai ] ? At what rate did you run down the fort levels ? Musta been about 2 per day.

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Jwilkerson,
Have you noticed the changes to the Japanese land OOB? What do you think? Is it changing the ground dynamic?
Do we have a paradigm about to bite us in the butt? [;)]

Mike

Too early to tell yet ... 18 ID is stalled at Khota Bharu ... but that isn't so unusual. Is 5 ID is crawling towards Alo Star ( did we change something here - normally this takes one move as the 5 ID ... is "riding on the rail " - maybe Andy's LCU anti-catapult movement thingee got in here - I didn't overtly install it - but maybe it is baked in ... anyway at this rate it will be another week before 5 ID arrives from Sinpora to Alo Star ]. Combat in China will heat up shortly and that should give some good testing of the IJA..

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

2. Andy - big one for you. In Burma the "Southern" trail from Bankok to Moulmein ... is a trail on the map ... but a railroad underneath ... the 55th Division reached Moulmein lickity split

I will take a look when I get a chance.

There have been two problems found with version 3 map data so far. I will probably fix them then upload a corrected data file to my website. That will take a few days though - real life is too busy for me at the moment...

Andy - I wouldn't rush to fix this stuff yet ... give us another week at least to shake out more issues then make one change ... or at least one release ... of course you can go ahead and do whatever in YOUR environment ... I'm just saying din't do releases too often ... that will get us more confused ... and we do appreciate the support !

[Lemurs!]

Yea, just remember that my changes SHOULD (i hope) have nothing to do with movement rates.

I would be interested in commentary from some of our users on how land combat is going.

Mike

[Andrew Brown]

Andy - I wouldn't rush to fix this stuff yet ... give us another week at least to shake out more issues then make one change ... or at least one release ... of course you can go ahead and do whatever in YOUR environment ... I'm just saying din't do releases too often ... that will get us more confused ... and we do appreciate the support !

I agree. I am going to wait a while and see what else is found before making an update (which also suits my lack of free time right now). One good thing about map data updates is that they can be used with existing games.

And you are right: my "anti-catapult" movement mod is "baked in" to my map. Interesting to see its effects...

[Tanaka]

hey guys is there no allied code name for the Ki-83???

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

hey guys is there no allied code name for the Ki-83???

Not in my references - but I'd say call it Steve ... since Steve ( Ki73 ) never happened ... of course Ki83 only had 4 prototypes ...

[33Vyper]

Been playing quite a bit now with the new mod.....noted that ASW stuff. Have to admit it is a bit confusing when you see multy depth charges or air attack and check later 'no damage'....but I guess it is like the FOW issue with other things.

Love the new plane tops....all the new ships...Hong Kong fell on the 23rd.

Dont know about the map extension yet though....its a bit of a toss up with me so far. I love the new bases etc...but do not like the art itself on the map. Find all the lines a bit confusing.

Bottom line.... so far so good [&o]

[Hipper]

Hi Chaps

just a quick comment Re Martlet fighters

Do you realy want an start date of 12 42 or is that a typo

a start date of march or april 42 would seem reasonable
50 Martlets arrived in India in March and another 50 in April 42 according to the FAA archive !

top work though !

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Hipper

Hi Chaps

just a quick comment Re Martlet fighters

Do you realy want an start date of 12 42 or is that a typo

a start date of march or april 42 would seem reasonable
50 Martlets arrived in India in March and another 50 in April 42 according to the FAA archive !

top work though !

Yup - that's a Mark I booboo. Should come in around Feb or March 1942 with 20 production so enough are available to upgrade Indomitable and Formidable as soon as British Squadrons can update on May 1, 1942. That's the best we can do with the restricted British update rule (now why did they do that??).

Thanks

[Andrew Brown]

Dont know about the map extension yet though....its a bit of a toss up with me so far. I love the new bases etc...but do not like the art itself on the map. Find all the lines a bit confusing.

To be perfectly honest I am not sure about the "extended" map either. And I made the map! It is an interesting idea but I am not sure that the extra functionality and gameplay that the map provies is worth the confusion of having yet another WitP map. That is why I am determined to make a second version of CHS that works with my "normal" map.

For me the main advantage of the extended map is that the British have a fallback position if India is seriously threatened. Panama is not as important to have IMHO, although it is interesting to see what effect its presence has on the game.

Anyway if there are two versions of the scenario then people can decide which one they prefer. I am a believer in player choice.

As for the map art - well as I have said many times, I am no artist. I will be making a "no lines" version of the map with hexes available soon.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

This is getting a little strange. I ran 10 tests at Fort Level 50 and got Hong Kong to fall between 19 and 30 December. Perhaps my computer is in a different time zone??

I'd appreciate knowing from any players when the see Hong Kong fall.

Don

What forces exactly did you use [ I'm using 38 ID, and the 4 Arty and 2 Eng Regt, and also the Army HQ that start at Canton ] ? Did you change leaders [ I didn't ] ? What air support are you using [ dedicated 1 Sonia Chutai and 1 Sally Daitai ] ? At what rate did you run down the fort levels ? Musta been about 2 per day.

I play only against the Japanese AI. It used the 38th Division only, as I recall.

[Halsey]

If Panama got enough supply support from the Gulf Coast and the East Coast to make it as important as San Diego, then it would be a useful addition.

If supply has to be transported from the West Coast for it to supply an alternate link to the South Pacific, then it's a waste of assets. The same can be accomplished using West Coast facilities already. So why bother with doubling the work to transport supplies to Panama and then to Aus/NZ?

The ME base is in the same category. It's only useful if you're playing against sci-fi Japanese player. One who wants to conquer India. Other than that it's just a lot of extra work.

Players really enjoy the choices that you've given us. The map options allow gamers a chance to decide how they are going to play.

[eMonticello]

To conserve shipping, the US military made the decision to use only Pacific ports to supply the Pacific Theater, with the exception of India. India was shared by the Gulf, Atlantic, and Pacific ports (primarily because the return shipping from India and Africa provided needed raw material for the war effort). Early in the war, Los Angeles was supplying Panama due to high shipping losses in the Caribbean. Panama and Aden is useful if you adopt house rules that require withdrawing US combat and Allied shipping assets.

[Halsey]

Makes sense. Thanks for the input.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Halsey

If Panama got enough supply support from the Gulf Coast and the East Coast to make it as important as San Diego, then it would be a useful addition.

If supply has to be transported from the West Coast for it to supply an alternate link to the South Pacific, then it's a waste of assets. The same can be accomplished using West Coast facilities already. So why bother with doubling the work to transport supplies to Panama and then to Aus/NZ?

The ME base is in the same category. It's only useful if you're playing against sci-fi Japanese player. One who wants to conquer India. Other than that it's just a lot of extra work.

Players really enjoy the choices that you've given us. The map options allow gamers a chance to decide how they are going to play.

I disagree on Middle East/Aden. Since British and some other reinforcements arrive at these two bases instead of in India the Allied player is required to transport them to India, Ceylon, etc. Panama is less useful in this regard as reinforcements already require shipment from U.S. West Coast bases. But it does give some historical accuracy for reinforcements that arrive there - and we intend to add more when we get a chance to do the research.

Don

[TheElf]

I'll go on record as saying I like the new bases. If nothing else it adds depth to the game, and gives The Brits a place to retreat to.

You are BOUND to have at least a % of IJ players who WILL press India in sucha way that Aden/ME are necessary. Just my 2 cents.

[Halsey]

All of you have done a great job on this scenario.[8D]

I'm just hoping that an alternative one will be devised for Andrew's map, without the off map bases. Playing only PBEM, the off map bases add extra effort for small returns. I'm sure a lot of gamers will really enjoy having them.

I just want to streamline my gameplay to make room for more PBEM games.[;)]

[pad152]

One would think a level 27 fort would last longer[&:]
--------------------------------------------------------------

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 12/12/41

Ground combat at Hong Kong

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 44235 troops, 389 guns, 24 vehicles

Defending force 13751 troops, 111 guns, 4 vehicles

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 27

Japanese assault odds: 29 to 1 (fort level 27)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Hong Kong base !!!


Japanese ground losses:
397 casualties reported
Guns lost 8
Vehicles lost 1

Allied ground losses:
16573 casualties reported
Guns lost 68
Vehicles lost 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: pad152

One would think a level 27 fort would last longer[&:]
--------------------------------------------------------------

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 12/12/41

Ground combat at Hong Kong

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 44235 troops, 389 guns, 24 vehicles

Defending force 13751 troops, 111 guns, 4 vehicles

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 27

Japanese assault odds: 29 to 1 (fort level 27)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Hong Kong base !!!


Japanese ground losses:
397 casualties reported
Guns lost 8
Vehicles lost 1

Allied ground losses:
16573 casualties reported
Guns lost 68
Vehicles lost 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------

WOW! I wonder if the computer is using loaded dice??