CHS Release 1.02

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
Consciously or subcosciously all you CHS guys care is *significantly* improving Allied player chances of winning the game and/or simply giving him more toys to play with. You will always find some reason or another not to add, not to care and not to research Manchu forces, not to improve this or that if it would belong to Jap player. Or if you reluctantly add it to your project you'll make sure to "compensate" by adding 10x more stuff to Allied players aresenal.

Oleg, I have refrained from commenting previously, but what you have said is simply not true, at least as far as I am concerned. Speaking for myself - a bit player in CHS - I am interested in making the game as accurate as possible. I have no idea why you think "all care is *significantly* improving Allied player chances of winning the game...". If you want to criticise our work, please stick to factual criticism rather than inventing innacurate motives for the contributors.

Andrew

[paladin333]

Thank you for answer Mike.

I understand that you are trying to do the best edition of this game. And I think you are successeful at many parts of your challenge. Also I have the same point of view toward CHS as you. That is why proposed Manchukou and such staff, to make it Completly Historical. Maybe my explanation was not enough, what I was thinking of is
Make Manchukou forces(at start 100k soldiers, at the 1945 200k) static and put them as garrisons around Manchu and North China.
Re-create Thai Army and put it on garrison duty(Japanese player cant use it through the war). If Allied unit steps inside of Thailand, Thai Army becomes active(present Soviet Army rule) and Japanese player could command it.
Purpose of this improvements:
What if? Really simple.
What if Japanese player decide to fight to the bitter end.

I think you dont think much about fighting until bitter end situation, but if you remember the numbers of dead and wounded GI which was calculated using simulation of situation in which war continue going after A-bomb was dropped you understand what I am talking about. All this means a lot of new toys to play around for Japanese and Allies. Jets, electric subs, super heavy bombers, tanks and so on.

[testarossa]

ORIGINAL: Ron James
I see this complaint all the time, I just started a new chs game with jap AI and they sunk 3 BB and 1 DM and heavily damaged 5 other BB plus various other damage, I cant see what the problem is

Neither do I. I was just asking if it's all the same in historical start. If it's not than the question is answered. It is CHS 1.02. PBEM. I tried twice and got the same replay twice. To the last landing casualty.

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown
Oleg, I have refrained from commenting previously, but what you have said is simply not true, at least as far as I am concerned. Speaking for myself - a bit player in CHS - I am interested in making the game as accurate as possible.

Andrew AFAIK you "only" did the map CHS happen to be using. Your map is fine work which can be, and is, used by other scenarios as well, including "stock" #15 modified for your map - so my comment wasn't aimed at you personally, nor your fine map.

I have no idea why you think "all care is *significantly* improving Allied player chances of winning the game...". If you want to criticise our work, please stick to factual criticism rather than inventing innacurate motives for the contributors.

I was about as "factual" as one can get in a given situation.

There were numerous situations when someone (Brady, Tomo etc.......) drew attention of CHS members to some source about, say, Manchurian units (like in this thread), or IJN midget subs, or changes in Japanese OOB, or collaborationist Bose focres etc etc. etc. only to be dismissed as "unnecessary" or simply totally ignored by CHS guys.

If you analyse what Lemurs posted couple posts above, that is in essence CHS stand on anything Jap-related, and may be summed up as "shut up, this stuff is not relevant or important for the game" for this reason or another.

In one of my games I almost had Manchuria overrun by Chinese - so in THAT case Manchu units Lemurs dismissed as "unnecessary" would come handy to me. (I won that game anyway BTW)

But never mind that, right?

OTOH, when someone asks for any Allied vessel or unit, no matter how small, insignifciant or perhaps even redundant it may be, be sure Don will hurry to add it to database in matter of minutes. Never mind if it didn't - to paraphrase Lemurs - "fire a shot during the whole war" (most ships or units didn't anyway).

This is the reasoning CHS guys use:

If it's Allied stuff => we gotta have it for "historical reasons", adding "the chrome" blah blah etc.

If it's Chinese or Russian or Dutch stuff => it would be nice to have it so that we may stop the Japs more easy (but let someone else research it cause we have no time nor will to do it)

If it's Jap stuff => who cares. It's irrelevant for some reason or other.

Yes, this is all my (somewhat) subjective opinion, and is as "factual" as I can get. Just read thru CHS threads...

Oleg

[Bradley7735]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown
Oleg, I have refrained from commenting previously, but what you have said is simply not true, at least as far as I am concerned. Speaking for myself - a bit player in CHS - I am interested in making the game as accurate as possible.

Andrew AFAIK you "only" did the map CHS happen to be using. Your map is fine work which can be, and is, used by other scenarios as well, including "stock" #15 modified for your map - so my comment wasn't aimed at you personally, nor your fine map.

I have no idea why you think "all care is *significantly* improving Allied player chances of winning the game...". If you want to criticise our work, please stick to factual criticism rather than inventing innacurate motives for the contributors.

I was about as "factual" as one can get in a given situation.

There were numerous situations when someone (Brady, Tomo etc.......) drew attention of CHS members to some source about, say, Manchurian units (like in this thread), or IJN midget subs, or changes in Japanese OOB, or collaborationist Bose focres etc etc. etc. only to be dismissed as "unnecessary" or simply totally ignored by CHS guys.

If you analyse what Lemurs posted couple posts above, that is in essence CHS stand on anything Jap-related, and may be summed up as "shut up, this stuff is not relevant or important for the game" for this reason or another.

In one of my games I almost had Manchuria overrun by Chinese - so in THAT case Manchu units Lemurs dismissed as "unnecessary" would come handy to me. (I won that game anyway BTW)

But never mind that, right?

OTOH, when someone asks for any Allied vessel or unit, no matter how small, insignifciant or perhaps even redundant it may be, be sure Don will hurry to add it to database in matter of minutes. Never mind if it didn't - to paraphrase Lemurs - "fire a shot during the whole war" (most ships or units didn't anyway).

This is the reasoning CHS guys use:

If it's Allied stuff => we gotta have it for "historical reasons", adding "the chrome" blah blah etc.

If it's Chinese or Russian or Dutch stuff => it would be nice to have it so that we may stop the Japs more easy (but let someone else research it cause we have no time nor will to do it)

If it's Jap stuff => who cares. It's irrelevant for some reason or other.

Yes, this is all my (somewhat) subjective opinion, and is as "factual" as I can get. Just read thru CHS threads...

Oleg

Oleg, did you happen to notice that CHS filled up all Japanese ship slots? So, go ahead and add all the midget subs. Oh, wait. You can't. CHS selfishly filled up all the slots with as many historical ships that they could. Boy, that sure stinks of "Allied fanboyism". They sure didn't give the Jap ships any thought.

Oh yeah, the also handicapped the Japanese player by making him build all sorts of hypothetical planes like the Liz and late war fighters that never existed beyond a prototype or drawing board. Boy, what a bunch of selfish cheaters.

[testarossa]

Well, I really like IJN AMCs. Big thanks to Don for that. And British Q-ships are awesome.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

OTOH, when someone asks for any Allied vessel or unit, no matter how small, insignifciant or perhaps even redundant it may be, be sure Don will hurry to add it to database in matter of minutes. Never mind if it didn't - to paraphrase Lemurs - "fire a shot during the whole war" (most ships or units didn't anyway).

Oleg

You betcha Oleg, please let me know if I missed any.

[treespider]

If it's Chinese or Russian or Dutch stuff => it would be nice to have it so that we may stop the Japs more easy (but let someone else research it cause we have no time nor will to do it)

I have volunteered my time to update the Chinese OOB. Oleg why don't you do the same for the Japanese and their minor allies?

[jwilkerson]

Here, here !

Oleg.

CHS is essentially an Open Source Scenario for WITP which is pegged to Andrew's map ( which as Andrew says was not made specifically for CHS - it is the other way round ). Things get changed according to the contributors knowledge areas and priorities. Don acts as "Maintainer" ( in Open Source Speak ). I first volunteered to work on China as long as Don/Lemurs! would give me time to get moved first - then Treespider stepped up and said he could start on it right away - and we said go forth ! So that is the power of Open Source !!!

And I'll requote my previous signature line ( which by the way is a quote from the same individual as my current singature line and point out that if you have the energy to snipe, you have the energy to research !!! )

"Be the change you want to see in the world" !!!


( can anyone guess who said both of these things ? )

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: treespider
I have volunteered my time to update the Chinese OOB. Oleg why don't you do the same for the Japanese and their minor allies?

I made this very suggestion the last time Oleg criticised CHS, but have not seen any useful input yet. Oleg - please feel free to dig up any useful info you may have on the Manchukuo army. Do some research and present the results.

I will modify one comment I made previously about the Manchukuo army - it is perhaps too restrictive to say that they should only be considered if they fought outside Manchukuo. If they didn't do so, but could have, then in my opinion they may be worthy of consideration. When I say "could have" there are a number of things to be considered. Most important of these is whether the Manchukuo forces were effective combat formations that would not have melted away or collapsed if faced with serious opposition. This is not only a question of morale, but also of political will (especially relevant in the case of forces of a puppet regime, e.g. Vichy France). I have no knowledge of such things, beyond the comment that Mike made that they were not effective forces. Is there evidence to the contrary?

Andrew

[treespider]

Better far than cowardice is killing and being killed in battle.

Mohandas Ghandi

Google is at least good for something....

[jwilkerson]

You're a researcher alright - so - you're hired !!!

( ah - but you were already hired !? )

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

I am amazed that twits like Oleg can snidely comment that 'we at CHS don't touch these minor forces because all we care about is the big countries'.

Gosh Oleg...Compare CHS with the stock WITP and you will see these guys have added *hundreds* of units to the Japanese OOB's !!!!!
How in the hell can you say they are trying to improve just one side or another ??..
Your comments have been decidedly one-sided and ritualistically wrong for quite some time now.
At first,some months ago,I actually felt you were an intelligent sort, and being "tongue in cheek" with some of your comments,but now I am convinced you truly believe the "stuff" you are saying !!!![:-][&:][&:]
Not quite.

Consciously or subcosciously all you CHS guys care is *significantly* improving Allied player chances of winning the game and/or simply giving him more toys to play with. You will always find some reason or another not to add, not to care and not to research Manchu forces, not to improve this or that if it would belong to Jap player. Or if you reluctantly add it to your project you'll make sure to "compensate" by adding 10x more stuff to Allied players aresenal.

For you there will always be some important reason why XYth Indian garrison batallion was or is more important to the game than similar Manchu, or Mongolian, or Bose collaborationist unit. Just look at your post(s). You basically said that in black and white!

[Not to mention that Allied player is already in great advantage in this game (by the very design and the nature of the conflict the game is depicting.)]

That is my opinion based on reading this forum and you may well call me "twit" because of that (I am not easy to insult). [:'(]

Oleg

[Banquet]

So far I'm very much enjoying CHS. I'm only up to 1 Jan 42.. but already it's been refreshingly different. The Japanese are storming through Malaya. I assume this is because the new river crossing rule mean they need to bring more force to bear on Singapore. Will be interesting to see how long it lasts (they're almost at the river now!)

Getting my CV's out the way of KB after PH was also rather exciting!

The reduction in supplies also means I have to be a little less slap dash about distribution. Lots of other changes.. all great stuff! Thanks for all the effort you guys have put in

[mwalker]

I've been looking over the database for CHS and I think I've uncovered a small error. The Hurricane IIB is presently listed as having 8 browning 303s when in fact it was 12. My refernce is Bloody Shambles Vol. I p. 297. Another point, I think I've read around here at some point that this should be the best early war Allied fighter. According this this excerpt the extra 4 guns badly affected the Cane's manuverability. I'd say at the very least, the extra guns should be added, though perhaps a tweak to manuverability as well.

Mike

[Lemurs!]

mwalker,

In 'jungleizing' the Hurri 2 the British removed the 4 out board MGs
to lighten the aircraft.

As it stands the Hurri2 has the best mnvr rating of any allied fighter till the Spitfire V.

Mike

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

OTOH, when someone asks for any Allied vessel or unit, no matter how small, insignifciant or perhaps even redundant it may be, be sure Don will hurry to add it to database in matter of minutes. Never mind if it didn't - to paraphrase Lemurs - "fire a shot during the whole war" (most ships or units didn't anyway).

Oleg

"You betcha Oleg, please let me know if I missed any."

** Uhhh...Don...How about a special "Bob Hope" USO troupe unit with transportation of it's own built in, which will increase morale of any units it stacks with for several days ???
I mean,....I think Oleg has given his permission for any special Allied units which *might* have been...especially since the current Jap OOB's contain *SEVERAL* totally fictitious "might-have-been" units.............[8D]

[Bradley7735]

Hi Don,

Check out the air groups to the USS Block Island. I think the TBF's have 112 planes on that little CVE. With player defined upgrades, a person can upgrade them and reduce them to normal size, but it's still something that might need to be fixed for the next release. (this is version 1.02)

(of course, it could be some corruption with my version.)

thanks!!

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

Hi Don,

Check out the air groups to the USS Block Island. I think the TBF's have 112 planes on that little CVE. With player defined upgrades, a person can upgrade them and reduce them to normal size, but it's still something that might need to be fixed for the next release. (this is version 1.02)

(of course, it could be some corruption with my version.)

thanks!!

No - that's a typo. Or perhaps a finger stutter, VMTB(CVS)-233 should have 12 planes, not 112.

Thanks

[Bradley7735]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

Hi Don,

Check out the air groups to the USS Block Island. I think the TBF's have 112 planes on that little CVE. With player defined upgrades, a person can upgrade them and reduce them to normal size, but it's still something that might need to be fixed for the next release. (this is version 1.02)

(of course, it could be some corruption with my version.)

thanks!!

No - that's a typo. Or perhaps a finger stutter, VMTB(CVS)-233 should have 12 planes, not 112.

Thanks

I was just going to increase the aircraft capacity of the Block Is. Wouldn't that be cool to see 100 torpedo bombers on attack?

(just kidding)