Getting Ready for another CHS Release

[m10bob]

I disagree with Bradley.If it was there and the Japs thought it was a BB,then let it "suck up attacks".

[Bradley7735]

Actually, they thought it was a CV. And, no matter what type it is, it will suck up some attacks (even PT's get attacked). But, as a BB, the targeting priority makes it suck up a lot of attacks. It should only be 4 or so planes attacking it. Not 24. In the several tests I ran, Utah sucked up as many attacks as the other BB's. It seems to suck up too many attacks.

At the very least, put the durability down to 10 so it sinks right away (and so it's not worth the victory points that it currently gives).

I would like to see it stay in the game. But, I currently think it's causing too much of an impact. That's just my gut feel. I haven't done anything like scientific studies on the effect of Utah in the game. I do think changing it to a PG would be more realistic.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

At the very least, put the durability down to 10 so it sinks right away (and so it's not worth the victory points that it currently gives).

I like this idea. Setting durability down will pretty much insure it's loss and reduce the point value, but still leave it in the game for historical value. Anyone else??

[mac5732]

in the CHS mod game, at Koutr Bura (spelling ) on the initial Japenese turn, the bombard fleet is there, the transport fleet is there, but the troops that are supposed to invade are not on the transports instead they are in Canton (l8 Div) also the 4th div, which always started in Japan and used in Phillipines is now starting at Shanghi and the 2nd division starts way over on the farside of Japan... Just thought I'd let you know makes it a inconvenient for Japenses player in beginning as he now has to redo his transport fleets and send them all around picking up these units, Unless this is the way the mod was designed. No offense just my observations so far also Bettys used to have a range of 21, they now have a range of 18 was this done on purpose until they upgrade to better engines ????

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: mac5732

in the CHS mod game, at Koutr Bura (spelling ) on the initial Japenese turn, the bombard fleet is there, the transport fleet is there, but the troops that are supposed to invade are not on the transports instead they are in Canton (l8 Div) also the 4th div, which always started in Japan and used in Phillipines is now starting at Shanghi and the 2nd division starts way over on the farside of Japan... Just thought I'd let you know makes it a inconvenient for Japenses player in beginning as he now has to redo his transport fleets and send them all around picking up these units, Unless this is the way the mod was designed. No offense just my observations so far also Bettys used to have a range of 21, they now have a range of 18 was this done on purpose until they upgrade to better engines ????

These changes were all intentional, although the 18th Div did not work out and is being returned to Taan. Historically the 18th was at Canton and a RCT build around the 56th Regiment was used in the invasion of Kota Bharu. When I moved the 18th away from Taan I forgetted to correct the task force assignment. We don't have the ability to split off a regiment from a division in the editor and then have it rejoin in the game. So we'll just move the 18th back and use it for Kota Bharu invasion, as scenario 15 originally did.

All of the changes derive from the "H" part of CHS and also represent an attempt to slow down the over-rapid Japanese expansion in the early days of the game.

[Lemurs!]

On the Betty range it was deliberate because the range was way too long.
Wait till you see the range of a A6M2 in the new release! No one will call me a Japanese fan boy then! Also will probably get rid of the A6M3a as it is superflous to our needs.

Mike

[m10bob]

Uhhhhh,if ranges of aircraft have been looked at,will the Lockheed Hudson get more range?

[Lemurs!]

What, you want accuracy? Damn nitpickers. [;)]

okay, i am looking right now......

how about 60 minutes more endurance? that will get a bit further.

Mike

[akdreemer]

I would like to see the PBY's get suficient range to fly from the West Coast to Hawaii....

[m10bob]

Big Time!!..Works for me..

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: m10bob




On the Tops - were those white tails on the Wirraway's used in combat?? Kind of an attention drawer.

Don

Ref the "white tails" on the Wirraway...Elf may know something I don't,but I do know for a fact that scheme was used on some Boomerangs,(another variant of the same plane,greatly modified)..In fact,looking at the canopy of Elf's topview of that white tailed "wirraway",I thought it was a Boomerang!..
Love his artwork and I wish he would bring back the B25c..

[/quote]

The white tails seemed to be pretty common on RAAF aircraft. Not certain if it was a "Combat" Scheme or tarining command. Anyone who can shed light feel free.

The B-25C is coming. Work has been busy, lots of travel. Tomorrow its Vegas til Sunday. Should have the Mitchell back next week. I promise![;)]

Thanks for the support m10bob.

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: TheElf

ORIGINAL: m10bob

The white tails seemed to be pretty common on RAAF aircraft. Not certain if it was a "Combat" Scheme or tarining command. Anyone who can shed light feel free.

The B-25C is coming. Work has been busy, lots of travel. Tomorrow its Vegas til Sunday. Should have the Mitchell back next week. I promise![;)]

Thanks for the support m10bob.

Hey Elf..I don't know about the Wirraway,but I know the Boomerang saw combat service with that white tail..It may have been a "squadron thing",I'm not sure,but Airfix made a model of the plane back in the mid 60's and one of the schemes was that plane(Boomerang with white tail)..
A magazine of the day,"Flying Review International" from England used to devote a section to modelling with accuracy,and always included at least 6 color side views of the subject aircraft..The white tail unit was in an issue devoted to the Boomerang,(a truly great ground support weapon).
The white tail might have also been used to keep friendly ground troops from shooting it down!!!(That would be a MAJOR concern in ground support ops)..[:D]

http://www.studenten.net/customasp/axl/ ... 476&page=0

and here are a lot of pertinent aircraft for your collection....

http://www.studenten.net/customasp/axl/ ... p?cat_id=3

and the bottom of this page has Japanese planes:

http://www.studenten.net/customasp/axl/ ... ?cat_id=10

These are all the same website,just thought I would save you time "flipping the pages"..

AND FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Here is your "WHITE-TAILED" WIRRAWAY!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-air ... rraway.htm

[Ron Saueracker]

Hey all.

I'm a big Utah fan as ya well know. Please retain it as it has historical significance. Lowering durability is fine and perhaps even a class change to PG or AG (AK) is warranted, but it should be left in.

[Don Bowen]

AND FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Here is your "WHITE-TAILED" WIRRAWAY!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-air ... rraway.htm

Good link! I do notice that the Wirraways pictured as having just returned from a combat mission do not appear to have the white tails.

[Halsey]

IT'S ALIVE!!![:D][:D][:D]

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Hey all.

I'm a big Utah fan as ya well know. Please retain it as it has historical significance. Lowering durability is fine and perhaps even a class change to PG or AG (AK) is warranted, but it should be left in.

There you are laddie - we missed you!

Don't worry, I'm not one to discard such fine artwork as was done for Utah. I'm leaning toward a BB with very low durability - attracts attention and goes down easily (which seem like generally admirable attributes).

[Tomo]

Some IJA units still have staff officer.
Could anybody send me a list of staff officer units?
I have some very nice books about IJA. I can help some officers' names.
Maybe,Japanese commanders' names are tiny things but everybody have own name.

[Lemurs!]

Tomo,

Do you have any info on location of Japanese heavy coast defense guns, the 14", 12" etc?

Also, do you have any sources which specify what gun was used as the light gun in the Japanese anti aircraft regiments?
I know which regiments had the 75mm gun and which had the 105mm gun but they also had lighter guns in the unit.
I had made most of those lighter guns 25mm but the more i read the more 40mm AA guns i find listed in Japanese sources.

Thanks for any help, we appreciate it!

Mike

[Captain Cruft]

Hong Kong MTBs

Just had a thought about these. Minor point I know.

According to a book in my local library (can't remember the name, sorry) these boats were used solely in the local defence of Hong Kong. Specifically, they attempted with some small success to interfere with the movement of Japanese troops across the Straits in barges etc. Some were taken out by air attack and those remaining were scuttled prior to or after the surrender. There was no question of the boats attempting to escape, presumably because they were not "ocean-worthy".

Since those particular Japanese amphibious operations are not modelled in the game might it perhaps be better to exclude the MTBs?

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

Hong Kong MTBs

Just had a thought about these. Minor point I know.

According to a book in my local library (can't remember the name, sorry) these boats were used solely in the local defence of Hong Kong. Specifically, they attempted with some small success to interfere with the movement of Japanese troops across the Straits in barges etc. Some were taken out by air attack and those remaining were scuttled prior to or after the surrender. There was no question of the boats attempting to escape, presumably because they were not "ocean-worthy".

Since those particular Japanese amphibious operations are not modelled in the game might it perhaps be better to exclude the MTBs?

I know - it bothers me to see them successfully run for Pakhoi. Still, my fingers tremble and heart pounds whenever I even think of removing something from the historical OOB. Come on guys - talk me into it!