Pry's New Scenarios

[Sardaukar]

First serious combat is starting at Clark Field, Feb 18 1942. Wake is still going strong, with several air and land units..and 1047 mines...[:D].

Some interesting combat from Jan:

Night Time Surface Combat, near Laoag at 45,49

Japanese Ships
ML Washizaki, Shell hits 16, and is sunk
PC Ch 1, Shell hits 3
AK England Maru, Shell hits 2, heavy damage
AK Erie Maru, Shell hits 5, heavy damage
AK Kagu Maru, Shell hits 4, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
AP Kumagawa Maru, Shell hits 2, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
AK London Maru
AK Taketoyo Maru, Shell hits 6, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
AK Yamazuki Maru
AP Yasukuni Maru
AP Tsuruga Maru
AK Uzan Maru, heavy damage
AK Shiganoura Maru
AP Peking Maru
AP Miyako Maru

Allied Ships
PT PT-31
PT PT-33
PT PT-34
PT PT-35

Those PT-boats have been quite valuable in slowing down IJN so far. I'd have hated to be on that minelayer...first it was hit by B-17s and then finished by 20 mm & .50 cal from PT-boats [:D].

Cheers,

M.S.

[Sardaukar]

March 3 1942 and I still hold Clark F. Manila and Bataan. Palembang has been lost and there are probably soon invasions to Java. Also, AI did kick me off the Burma Road quite rudely, but I hold Akyab quite strongly. Some AI combat activity near Indochina border but otherwise China is silent. Lae, Salamaua etc. have been lost and AI has invaded some islands NW of Lunga..nothing much I can do about it unless I want to commit CVs...and I don't until upgrades and when Zero-bonus is gone.

Scen plays quite well, AI has been slower than in Scen 16. I got ejected from Philippines and Singapore *very* fast in that campaign. Also, 2nd Marine Div is still in San Diego, due to it been assigned to West Coast..good idea ! I have enough PPs to get it to fight, but I want to see what AI is up to next.

I've not noted any "bugs" or needs for modification yet in this last version as Allies.

Cheers,

M.S.

[Grotius]

I'm playing Scenario 31 as Japan, Pry, but I'm still only in December 1941. RL has caught up to me over the past week. I should be able to rattle off some turns in a day or two.

[treespider]

bump

[Sardaukar]

Clark F. fell in early April, San Marcelino few days later. There is now combat in Bataan, which I suppose won't last too long due to fact that most of the supplies are gone. Same with Manila, even though it's not invaded yet. IJA is steamrolling bases in PI with one 70 000 troop "monster". It's now 4/11/1942, and I've managed to keep Soerabaja still, even though IJA has landed there. I rushed extra Dutch regiment there..and with some lucky hits to invasion TF, Dutch still fight on.
I managed to extract the last two fighter squadrons from PI into China !! Never thought that before..but I think it was a good idea. China is lacking fighter cover anyway..and even Philipino FS with P-39Ds can do well there.
Wake hasn't been invaded at all, I bet that AI sees it's already too strongly defended. If it continues like this, I'll start to use it and Kiska as forward sub bases..just need couple more AS to arrive.
Good scenario so far, I'm still impressed.

Cheers,

M.S.

[Sardaukar]

Bataan fell 4/18/1942. It's now 4/21/1942 and last defenders are under siege in Manila. Soerabaja is getting more Japanese troops, but is still holding. Most of the air units, including ones evacuated from Singapore (they helped a lot against IJN landing so far) are gone...0 planes. Batavia was just hit with IJN Bombardment TF, 1400+ casualties. I think Japan will get Java within month.

Cheers,

M.S.

[pry]

A Note, as a result of testing the Japanese side in moving the 33rd back to Shanghai has proven to be an error (the ole historicaly correct verses what the the game engine can and can not do theory). The AI will not use the division as intended so in the next update i will instead have the 33rd division arrive as a reinforcement in Bangkock somewhere around 1/1/42...

Not a big deal with two human players but when relying on the AI a little help now and again is in order, so allowing the 33rd to come in as a reinforcement in the zone it was used will continue to 1.) slow down the Japanese advance in Burma by delaying its arrival and 2.) allow the AI to utilize the unit in the historic area by plopping into Bangkock sometime in January.

[stonefoot]

Small Database issue in Scen 31, Are not the Colorado's forward guns supposed to be marked as forward??? Do these now work as 360 guns?? Or just don't work at all??[;)]

[Sardaukar]

Small "bug" in Scen 31, I think...ABDA HQ has Port Moresby as base for preparation points.. I don't think that's intentional [:)]. Probably Batavia would be more likely, not that it does effect gameplay that much.

Cheers,

M.S.

[Sardaukar]

"Bug" I found may just be my doing...I changed ABDA under SWPac HQ... Just did wonder why ABDA had 100 prep for Port Moresby. It may have gotten it from the change.

Cheers,

M.S.

[Sardaukar]

Pry:
Any plans to modify ASW/subs in way the CHS-folks are doing ?? I don't mind the ASW as it is, though, playing against AI exclusively. But toughening subs or something might be a good idea. Or have you already done that ?

Cheers,

M.S.

[pry]

ORIGINAL: stonefoot

Small Database issue in Scen 31, Are not the Colorado's forward guns supposed to be marked as forward??? Do these now work as 360 guns?? Or just don't work at all??[;)]

dont work at all will fix, good catch.. same problem also exists in the official 15 and 16 scenarios... Error will correct itself after the class upgrades in 4/42

[pry]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

"Bug" I found may just be my doing...I changed ABDA under SWPac HQ... Just did wonder why ABDA had 100 prep for Port Moresby. It may have gotten it from the change.

Cheers,

M.S.

Yep you did that...

[KittyHawk]

Pry,

First, I would like to thank you for your great 31 scenario.

I have noticed that the three A-24 squadrons that were part of the Pensacola convoy are carrier trained. Just wondering if this is intentional or an oversight as the 16th, 17th, & 91st are Army bomber squadrons.

Thanks,
KHawk

[pry]

ORIGINAL: KHawk

Pry,

First, I would like to thank you for your great 31 scenario.

I have noticed that the three A-24 squadrons that were part of the Pensacola convoy are carrier trained. Just wondering if this is intentional or an oversight as the 16th, 17th, & 91st are Army bomber squadrons.

Thanks,
KHawk

Limitation in the game engine any group that starts on a ship is automatically carrier trained, Will require a house rule not to use these 3 groups off of carriers... If a player really wanted to exploit this these groups will eventually upgrade to B-29's that would be carrier trained... Now that could be interesting [:D]

[pry]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Pry:
Any plans to modify ASW/subs in way the CHS-folks are doing ?? I don't mind the ASW as it is, though, playing against AI exclusively. But toughening subs or something might be a good idea. Or have you already done that ?

Cheers,

M.S.

nope...

I have never seen the carnage constantly reported by the same few folks over and over again in these forums in games I play. Of course I play in a rather dull historical manner and don't drive my subs up to the beach near every base on the map in an attempt to blockade the base (That is a bad habit left over from UV that some folks have yet to unlearn). I also don't use a-historical mega ASW taskforces or mega escorts for transport missions... all of which are exploits of the game engine...

Nik and I spent weeks working on sub/ASW balance and even trying to sink subs we never got anywhere near the carnage reported.

[Halsey]

Make one a B-25 and we could have Dolittles Group.[;)]

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: pry


nope...

I have never seen the carnage constantly reported by the same few folks over and over again in these forums in games I play. Of course I play in a rather dull historical manner and don't drive my subs up to the beach near every base on the map in an attempt to blockade the base (That is a bad habit left over from UV that some folks have yet to unlearn). I also don't use a-historical mega ASW taskforces or mega escorts for transport missions... all of which are exploits of the game engine...

Nik and I spent weeks working on sub/ASW balance and even trying to sink subs we never got anywhere near the carnage reported.

I haven't seen any carnage either. I guess it's really all about playing style.

BTW, Manila fell 5/23/1942 and Batavia about week and half later. AI seems to work lot more methodically and slower than in stock scenarios. And I'm having vastly more trouble from KB than I have had earlier. In previous games it's been around in Dutch East Indies..now they are taking pleasure cruises around New Guinea..sinking my convoys trying to reach Port Moresby.

I'm having very good time with this game !!

Cheers,

M.S.

[akdreemer]

Congratulations everyone who worked on this... I just recently downloaded and installed the CHS and the overall impression was very positive. [&o]

I love the map.. great to see Anchorage in its correct locationamd okat base stats, however i would make the Port of Anchorage airfield potential a 9. There were at least one main field (Elmendorf), and several auxillary fighter fields (one being located at Cambell creek, the other at Birchwood that I know of) and plenty of flat space to contruct additional fields, etc.

The USA West Coast ports received their own base units. However, the forts guarding the US West COast Ports are sadly defecient. I find it interesting that some effort was made to improve the Commonwealth Forts in both Canada and Australia, meanwhile the forts protecting Hawaii and the US West Coat lanquished. As an example Puget Sound/Seattle was protected by three major forts, the locations of which allowed for triangulation of targets in the kill zone. These forts were Fort Flagler, Fort Casey, and Fort Worden, not to mention other forts located along the Juan de Fuca Straits at the mouth and along the south shore. Maybe there is insufficient space for adding these, and some justification at least for the West Coast Ports of not having any of them there at all. There is no way the Japanese can ever truely threaten amhibious assault on the West Coast. I would suggest either beefing them up or removing them and instead add additional forts located on Oahu, primarily Fort Ruger at Diamond Head and Fort Hase at Kaneohe Bay in north Oahu. See:

http://www.cdsg.org


On TO&E error is incorporating 4.2" mortars into the organic TO&E of the US Army Infantry units (I originally commented on this during the early comment phase). This weapon was exclusively under the control of the Chemical Corp in the form of Chemical Mortar Battalions. I would like to know just where in the historical Divisional organization in WWII there were organic 4.2" mortars??? In fact the first use of the 4.2" mortars in combat was in the landings in Sicily in 1943 by the 2nd and 3rd CMB. What is interesting is that the mortar is not even listed in the US Army standard ordnace catalogue for 1944. For more information see the following webpages, as well as the US Army Official Histories covering the Chemical Corps in WWII:

http://www.4point2.org/
http://www.olive-drab.com/od_infweapons ... _heavy.php

There needs to be a sperate upgrade path for the US 37mm ATG. The largest organic Divisional ATG used by both the Army and Marines was the 57mm. In the Pacific there was a delay in converting to the 57mm by both the Army and Marines because the 37mm was found to be both adequate in defeating Japanese armor and that the gun was easily transportable in the jungle.

On a side note has there been any discussions on how to get the CHS to include mulitble choice aircraft upgrades given to us in patch 1.5???

Again thanks guys for all the hard work. I am going to enjoy spending hours with this baby... [&o] [&o] [&o]

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

Congratulations everyone who worked on this... I just recently downloaded and installed the CHS and the overall impression was very positive. [&o]

I love the map.. great to see Anchorage in its correct locationamd okat base stats, however i would make the Port of Anchorage airfield potential a 9. There were at least one main field (Elmendorf), and several auxillary fighter fields (one being located at Cambell creek, the other at Birchwood that I know of) and plenty of flat space to contruct additional fields, etc.

The USA West Coast ports received their own base units. However, the forts guarding the US West COast Ports are sadly defecient. I find it interesting that some effort was made to improve the Commonwealth Forts in both Canada and Australia, meanwhile the forts protecting Hawaii and the US West Coat lanquished. As an example Puget Sound/Seattle was protected by three major forts, the locations of which allowed for triangulation of targets in the kill zone. These forts were Fort Flagler, Fort Casey, and Fort Worden, not to mention other forts located along the Juan de Fuca Straits at the mouth and along the south shore. Maybe there is insufficient space for adding these, and some justification at least for the West Coast Ports of not having any of them there at all. There is no way the Japanese can ever truely threaten amhibious assault on the West Coast. I would suggest either beefing them up or removing them and instead add additional forts located on Oahu, primarily Fort Ruger at Diamond Head and Fort Hase at Kaneohe Bay in north Oahu. See:

http://www.cdsg.org


On TO&E error is incorporating 4.2" mortars into the organic TO&E of the US Army Infantry units (I originally commented on this during the early comment phase). This weapon was exclusively under the control of the Chemical Corp in the form of Chemical Mortar Battalions. I would like to know just where in the historical Divisional organization in WWII there were organic 4.2" mortars??? In fact the first use of the 4.2" mortars in combat was in the landings in Sicily in 1943 by the 2nd and 3rd CMB. What is interesting is that the mortar is not even listed in the US Army standard ordnace catalogue for 1944. For more information see the following webpages, as well as the US Army Official Histories covering the Chemical Corps in WWII:

http://www.4point2.org/
http://www.olive-drab.com/od_infweapons ... _heavy.php

There needs to be a sperate upgrade path for the US 37mm ATG. The largest organic Divisional ATG used by both the Army and Marines was the 57mm. In the Pacific there was a delay in converting to the 57mm by both the Army and Marines because the 37mm was found to be both adequate in defeating Japanese armor and that the gun was easily transportable in the jungle.

On a side note has there been any discussions on how to get the CHS to include mulitble choice aircraft upgrades given to us in patch 1.5???

Again thanks guys for all the hard work. I am going to enjoy spending hours with this baby... [&o] [&o] [&o]

dont get Pry's scenarios and the CHS confused. these are two different types of scenarios. ill move your comments so the CHS guys can see them....