What's changed in CHS?

Gary Grigsby's strategic level wargame covering the entire War in the Pacific from 1941 to 1945 or beyond.

Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

Post Reply
Oldsweat
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 8:12 pm

What's changed in CHS?

Post by Oldsweat »

I've seen a number of mentions regarding the CHS on the board and was curious about the orders of battle changes in it. Has anyone compiled a spreadsheet or anything comparing the CHS to the stock database?
One of the things that got me wondering is the Australian minelayer Bungaree which, I believe (game is at home) appears as an minesweeper in the stock datatbase but apparently had a capacity for 423 mines in reality.
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: What's changed in CHS?

Post by Don Bowen »


It's in there... With two "mine rails" the ammo loadout of 200 equals 400 mines.

There have been a number of "change lists" for the various updates of CHS but no complete list is available (to my knowledge). Producing one would be a bitch, maybe even a bitch and a half.



Image
Attachments
Bungaree.jpg
Bungaree.jpg (116.79 KiB) Viewed 131 times
User avatar
treespider
Posts: 5781
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:34 am
Location: Edgewater, MD

RE: What's changed in CHS?

Post by treespider »

There have been a number of "change lists" for the various updates of CHS but no complete list is available (to my knowledge). Producing one would be a bitch, maybe even a bitch and a half.

The change list for v1.06 was 26 pages long in the format I submiited to Andrew. In RTF format I imagine it is even longer. I would suspect that the change list for CHS v1 is as long if not longer....
Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910
User avatar
Slaughtermeyer
Posts: 156
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 11:40 am
Location: Pennsylvania

RE: What's changed in CHS?

Post by Slaughtermeyer »

Would play balance in a PBEM game using CHS differ significanly from a stock scenario 15 game?
We must not allow ourselves to be drawn into a trial of the causes of the war,for our position is that no grievances or policies will justify resort to aggressive war.It is utterly renounced and condemned as an instrument of policy. R.Jackson,1945
User avatar
treespider
Posts: 5781
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:34 am
Location: Edgewater, MD

RE: What's changed in CHS?

Post by treespider »

ORIGINAL: Slaughtermeyer

Would play balance in a PBEM game using CHS differ significanly from a stock scenario 15 game?

Maybe...maybe not...Some people have expressed concern over the Allied transports in the South China Sea at start serving as free points for the Japanese...all in all I don't think it will differ too much.

One thing to keep in mind...CHS is the Combined "Historical" Scenario...it is not being developed with play balance in mind, but to give the players the historical tools they had available. IMO the scenario (and the game for that matter) is not designed to handle the Japanese-Russian strategy some have proposed...
Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910
User avatar
Slaughtermeyer
Posts: 156
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 11:40 am
Location: Pennsylvania

RE: What's changed in CHS?

Post by Slaughtermeyer »

How about play time, would the turns in CHS be significantly longer to do due to the number of added units? Roughly how many units have been added to each side?
We must not allow ourselves to be drawn into a trial of the causes of the war,for our position is that no grievances or policies will justify resort to aggressive war.It is utterly renounced and condemned as an instrument of policy. R.Jackson,1945
User avatar
aletoledo
Posts: 827
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 6:51 pm
Contact:

RE: What's changed in CHS?

Post by aletoledo »

Maybe...maybe not...Some people have expressed concern over the Allied transports in the South China Sea at start serving as free points for the Japanese...all in all I don't think it will differ too much.
isn't an AK only worth like 1 or 2 points anyway? I think those transports make it a lot more realistic, since its like there was regular daily commerce going on when the japanese attacked.
User avatar
Bradley7735
Posts: 2073
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:51 pm

RE: What's changed in CHS?

Post by Bradley7735 »

ORIGINAL: aletoledo
Maybe...maybe not...Some people have expressed concern over the Allied transports in the South China Sea at start serving as free points for the Japanese...all in all I don't think it will differ too much.
isn't an AK only worth like 1 or 2 points anyway? I think those transports make it a lot more realistic, since its like there was regular daily commerce going on when the japanese attacked.

It is more realistic. but quite a few of those ships are 15 pointers. A lot are 2 to 7 pointers as well. I think the CHS works well when not allowing the japanese player free reign on turn 1. taking those large airfields on turn 1 really racks up the points on merchies in the DEA.
The older I get, the better I was.
Post Reply

Return to “War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945”