CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Please post here for questions and discussion about scenario design and the game editor for WITP.

Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
Bradley7735
Posts: 2073
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:51 pm

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by Bradley7735 »

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown
ORIGINAL: Jo van der Pluym



Now is the Flowerclass a PG. Is't better to made it and other corvettes a SC. This because the Flowerclass corvet was builded as escorts for convoys as ASW vessel. As SC can it be included in automatic convoys.

OK. Can anyone think of a reason NOT to do this?

I think it's a great idea. I wish you could add all ASW ships to the auto convoy system. But, since you can't, making them SC's (which might be historically correct anyway) is a good option.

bc
The older I get, the better I was.
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5190
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by Don Bowen »

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Btw, I did discover that some subs had their SJ radar coverage set as F (as front) in 1.06. Is that OOB typo/error or intentional ? Appears for couple of upgrades in Classes (just don't remember now which ones). Noticed since I do mod the SD/SV radars into game too..[8D]

I believe this is a typo - all radars should be "A" (I think!).
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5190
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by Don Bowen »


USS Barry arrives in early 1945 so the last Manley class is best (Class #1325)


Wickes/Clemson:

I have simply broken these two classes based on endurance. You can select any available "empty" class for the two additional classes:

Existing:
Class 264, Wickes/Clemson, upgrades to Class 1314. Endurance for 264 is 4000.
Class 1314, Wickes/Clemson (42/01), upgrades to Class 1319 (Manley APD on 42/10). Endurance for 1314 is 4400.


Notes: There were several actual variances in the Wickes/Clemson class based on design and builder. Most of the least efficient ships had been stricken or converted by 1941 so (effectively) there were only two variations:

Wickes: 290 tons fuel giving only 3500 endurance. Same armament as existing #264
Clemson: 390 tons fuel giving 4100 endurance. Same armament as existing #264

The Clemsons were somewhat heavier but had the same military charateristics (and the same armament).
Both Classes were upgrades in early 1942 (the current upgrade date of 42/01 is fine), when one boiler/stack was removed and fuel increased. The actual fuel increase was greater in the Wickes group, which adopted some of the additional fuel storage already implemented in the Clemsons - the classes became almost identical. Both subsequently convert to Manley APD and all differences disappear.

Wickes: 385 tons fuel, 4500 Endurance and 30 Knots. Same armament as existing #1314
Clemson: 457 tons fuel, 4600 Endurance and 30 Knots. Same armament as existing #1314
(class lists at bottom)



Bangor/Bathurst:

The original Bangor were fairly short-ranged. There were three subgroups (based on propulsion) but only one appears to have served in the Pacific. The Bathursts were slightly enlarged for Pacific service and had greater range. One problem with endurance is the cruise speed. All my reference works give endurance at 10kts but the WITP standard is 12kts (scenario 15). I do not know how to convert endurance from 10 to 12 knots but I know it is not linear. Lemurs had a formula for this, based on power percentage, but I do not have a copy of it. Therefore I have set the cruise speed for both classes to 10 knots - which might not be popular. Note that Scenario 15 gives 1500 Endurance at 12 knots for the combined Bangor/Bathurst Class.

I have also guesstimated armament. All these vessels had armament variations, with a mixture of 3 and 4 in main guns and varying light AA. I have arbitrarily assigned a 3" gun to the Bangors and a 4" gun to the Bathursts.

Bangors: 2800 Endurance at 10 knots on 160 tons of fuel.
Bathurts: 4300 Endurance at 10 knots on 170 tons of fuel.
(class list at bottom)


All the data for the Wickes/Clemson groups came from Friedman's U.S. Destroyer Design History book, the Bangor/Bathursts from British and Dominion Warships of World War II.


Wickes (all available 41/12/07):
Chew
Crane
Crosby
Dent
Kennison
Kilty
Rathburne
Schley
Talbot
Ward
Waters

Clemson (all available 41/12/07)
Alden
Barker
Brooks
Bulmer
Edsall
Fox
Gilmer
Hatfield
Humphreys
John D. Edwards
John D. Ford
Kane
King
Lawrence
Litchfield
Parrott
Paul Jones
Peary
Pillsbury
Pope
Sands
Stewart
Whipple


Bangors:
Nation Ship Delay
British Cromarty 411206
British Cromer 411206
British Poole 411206
British Romney 411206
Canada Bayfield 420226
Canada Bellechasse 411213
Canada Caraquet 420402
Canada Chignecto 411206
Canada Courtney 420321
Canada Guysborough 420422
Canada Miramichi 411206
Canada Outarde 411206
Canada Quatsino 411206
Indian Baluchistan 420605
Indian Bihar 421007
Indian Carnatic 421121
Indian Kathiawar 420805
Indian Khyber 420505
Indian Konkan 421114
Indian Kumaon 421005
Indian Orissa 420814
Indian Oudh 420603
Indian Rajputana 420814
Indian Rohilkand 430522
Canada Canso 420603
Canada Igonish 420805
Canada Kelowna 420502
Canada Lockeport 420527
Indian Deccan 440721
Indian Malwa 440921


Bathurst:
Nation Ship Delay
Australian Armidale 420611
Australian Ballarat 411206
Australian Benalla 420415
Australian Bendigo 411206
Australian Bowen 420815
Australian Bunbury 411206
Australian Bundaberg 420912
Australian Burnie 411206
Australian Cairns 411206
Australian Castlemaine 420415
Australian Cessnock 420215
Australian Colac 420106
Australian Cootamundra 420615
Australian Cowra 420615
Australian Deloraine 411206
Australian Dubbo 420731
Australian Echuca 420415
Australian Geelong 420515
Australian Gladstone 420815
Australian Glenelg 421116
Australian Goulburn 411206
Australian Gympie 421104
Australian Horsham 420515
Australian Inverell 420917
Australian Ipswitch 411206
Australian Junee 420615
Australian Kalgoorlie 420407
Australian Kapunda 420715
Australian Katoomba 420715
Australian Latrobe 411206
Australian Launceton 420115
Australian Lismore 411206
Australian Lithgow 411206
Australian Maryborough 411206
Australian Mildura 411206
Australian Pirie 421010
Australian Rockhampton 420915
Australian Shepparton 420615
Australian Stawell 420715
Australian Strahan 421015
Australian Tamworth 420808
Australian Toowoomba 411206
Australian Townsville 411219
Australian Wagga 421218
Australian Wallaroo 420815
Australian Warrnambool 411206
Australian Whyalla 411206
Australian Wollongong 411206
Indian Bengal 420814
Indian Bombay 420425
Indian Madras 420519
Indian Punjab 420305
Australian Ararat 430616
Australian Bathurst 411206
Australian Broome 420729
Australian Freemantle 430324
Australian Gawler 420814
Australian Geralton 420406
Australian Kiama 440116
Australian Parkes 440525
User avatar
TheElf
Posts: 2800
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 1:46 am
Location: Pax River, MD

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by TheElf »

Russian OOB fix to include CD units for Vladivostok, minelayers, naval units, and Russian naval Mine Torpedo air regiments.
IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

Image
User avatar
Andrew Brown
Posts: 4083
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hex 82,170
Contact:

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by Andrew Brown »

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Russian OOB fix to include CD units for Vladivostok, minelayers, naval units, and Russian naval Mine Torpedo air regiments.

Sounds good, but we will need someone to do the research and OOB/TO&E database work. I don't have time to do that. If some of it has been researched alread, so that it is ready to be added to the database, then please let me know.

Andrew
Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

Image
User avatar
Skyros
Posts: 1582
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Columbia SC

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by Skyros »

This might not be the spot for this, but I have been thinking about having the option of getting the Shinano as a BB instead of CV. Is it possible to have the ship set up like a BB, its original design, then have a pre dated upgrade set so if yes it converts to a CV? This would allow the Japanese player to build it as a BB or convert it to a CV after it arrives.

Any thoughts or will this not work.
User avatar
Andrew Brown
Posts: 4083
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hex 82,170
Contact:

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by Andrew Brown »

ORIGINAL: Skyros

This might not be the spot for this, but I have been thinking about having the option of getting the Shinano as a BB instead of CV. Is it possible to have the ship set up like a BB, its original design, then have a pre dated upgrade set so if yes it converts to a CV? This would allow the Japanese player to build it as a BB or convert it to a CV after it arrives.

Any thoughts or will this not work.

I am probably going to do something similar, but in a different way: There will be TWO Shinanos in the ship list. One a BB and one a CV. A house rule is used - the Japanese player can only build one of the ships at any time. The other "ship" must always remain halted. The player can change their mind at any point and switch construction to the other ship, but the first one must then be halted. Also, only one can ever be completed. of course.

I thought about the upgrade idea, but that allows an instant late-war decision to be made as to which version of the ship to have.

I am also coming around to the idea of increasing the aircraft capacity of Shinano (but not adding actual air groups).


Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

Image
User avatar
Bradley7735
Posts: 2073
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:51 pm

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by Bradley7735 »

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

I am also coming around to the idea of increasing the aircraft capacity of Shinano (but not adding actual air groups).

This is what sucks about the AI in the game. If you play as allied vs ai, and you add capacity but not planes to Shinano, all you end up doing is giving more VP for sinking it. The AI isn't smart enough to add additional groups to fill it out. Human VS human and this is the perfect solution, though.

Since I play the AI, I would ask that you increase it's air group.

FYI, when I play the AI, I add air groups (small ones) to those 10 or so CVE's that Japan has. The AI will then use them instead of leaving them at Tokyo for the duration. It makes the game more fun. The AI will make it's own baby KB. I've seen it raid the Indian ocean as well as the South pacific.

Anyway, I'm ok with your decision. I'm just frustrated that the AI will not take advantage of CV's that have excess capacity (Shinano and CVE's alike).
The older I get, the better I was.
User avatar
Sardaukar
Posts: 12747
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Finland/Israel

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by Sardaukar »

How I mod the SD radar is to give it to subs during 4/42 upgrade. That'll give more incentive to actually do that upgrade...[:D]. Easy to implemet too. Same with SV radar, late war upgrade too. Adding surface to air radar to other ships may have serious game balance issues, tho...but to subs they seem to be ideal to tone the sub survivability against air attacks.
"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-

Image
User avatar
Sardaukar
Posts: 12747
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Finland/Israel

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by Sardaukar »

SV info (for example):
http://www.maritime.org/radio-sv.htm

Radars in subs generally:
http://www.fleetsubmarine.com/radar.html
"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-

Image
User avatar
Skyros
Posts: 1582
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Columbia SC

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by Skyros »

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: Skyros

This might not be the spot for this, but I have been thinking about having the option of getting the Shinano as a BB instead of CV. Is it possible to have the ship set up like a BB, its original design, then have a pre dated upgrade set so if yes it converts to a CV? This would allow the Japanese player to build it as a BB or convert it to a CV after it arrives.

Any thoughts or will this not work.

I am probably going to do something similar, but in a different way: There will be TWO Shinanos in the ship list. One a BB and one a CV. A house rule is used - the Japanese player can only build one of the ships at any time. The other "ship" must always remain halted. The player can change their mind at any point and switch construction to the other ship, but the first one must then be halted. Also, only one can ever be completed. of course.

I thought about the upgrade idea, but that allows an instant late-war decision to be made as to which version of the ship to have.

I am also coming around to the idea of increasing the aircraft capacity of Shinano (but not adding actual air groups).



I would think that the conversion to a CV delayed the planned completion of the CV/BB Shinano. THat is, I am making up these dates, if completed as a CV she would be done 1/44 but if converted it delayed completion to 6/44. If this is true can the amount of damage inflicted by upgrading be increased? Although this does not prevent a late in the war switch it still would put in a significant delay.
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by witpqs »

Just a comment on ASW.

I have been using 1.604 (Allies vs AI) since it was released. The ASW changes do seem to make a difference. However, subs still get hit by air attack at a pretty decent rate. Subs are getting hit less hard with each attack in CHS and as a result seem to survive more.

I'm not certain about what are all the ASW alterations in CHS, but it might be a little premature to unwind the CHS ASW mods until there is a lot of experience out there with the forthcoming version 1.7 of WITP.
User avatar
TheElf
Posts: 2800
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 1:46 am
Location: Pax River, MD

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by TheElf »

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: Skyros

This might not be the spot for this, but I have been thinking about having the option of getting the Shinano as a BB instead of CV. Is it possible to have the ship set up like a BB, its original design, then have a pre dated upgrade set so if yes it converts to a CV? This would allow the Japanese player to build it as a BB or convert it to a CV after it arrives.

Any thoughts or will this not work.

I am probably going to do something similar, but in a different way: There will be TWO Shinanos in the ship list. One a BB and one a CV. A house rule is used - the Japanese player can only build one of the ships at any time. The other "ship" must always remain halted. The player can change their mind at any point and switch construction to the other ship, but the first one must then be halted. Also, only one can ever be completed. of course.

I thought about the upgrade idea, but that allows an instant late-war decision to be made as to which version of the ship to have.

I am also coming around to the idea of increasing the aircraft capacity of Shinano (but not adding actual air groups).



A.B.,
What about filling out the Shinano's CV capacity to its potential 120-125 A/C and let that be a House rule as well at game start?

In other words, it will be used historically as a "Mothership", or ahistorically as a Fleet carrier.
IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

Image
User avatar
TheElf
Posts: 2800
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 1:46 am
Location: Pax River, MD

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by TheElf »

See the Soviet OOB thread I just bumped!
IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

Image
User avatar
TheElf
Posts: 2800
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 1:46 am
Location: Pax River, MD

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by TheElf »

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown
ORIGINAL: TheElf

Russian OOB fix to include CD units for Vladivostok, minelayers, naval units, and Russian naval Mine Torpedo air regiments.

Sounds good, but we will need someone to do the research and OOB/TO&E database work. I don't have time to do that. If some of it has been researched alread, so that it is ready to be added to the database, then please let me know.

Andrew

This is what Subchaser posted on the CHS wishlist Thread a while back.


Pacific Fleet 12/41 (without Amur Flotilla Aviation Corps)

None of these ships left Pacific before 12/41, more ships (Dalzavod and Komsolmolskiy SSZ built) were commissioned during this period.

2 Flotilla leaders (Baku, Tbilisi)
7 Destroyers (Samson, Voikov, Razyashiy, Rastoropniy, Rezviy, Recordniy, Ryaniy)
6 Guardships (Vyuga, Metel, Burun, Grom, Zarniza, Molnia)
8 Minelayers (Argun, Astrakhan, Voroshilovsk, Gigeega, Merezha, Kapitan Makeev, Arsenal, Vokhtoga)
2 Net layers (Gromoboy, Yeletsk)
19 Patrol gunboats and subchasers
76 minesweepers
135 PT-boats (mostly G-5, SH-4 types)
85 Submarines (37 “M” class, 35 “Scsh” Class, 13 “L” class, so the real strength was 48 ocean subs)
23 Transports *
12 Tankers. *

* These ships were assigned directly to Pacific fleet, total Soviet merchant capacity in the Pacific was much larger of course.

VVSTOF (Pacific Fleet Air Force) 22/06/41

Il-4 – 87 (74 ready)
SB-2 – 99 (83)
I-16 – 173 (154)
I-153 – 69 (69)
I-15bis – 93 (82)
MBR-2 – 218 (174)
MRD-6 – 8 (6)
R-6 – 3 (2)
R-5 – 8 (0)

758 aircraft total, 650 aircraft ready for combat.

From june ’41 till December ‘42 VVSTOF received 119 new aircraft, 61 IL-4 (including 32 IL-4t in april 42 when 14th BAP (army unit) was reassigned to VVSTOF, 57 MiG-3 and one MRD-6 flying boat. During the same period VVSTOF suffered 73 operational losses because of intensive training program, so strength raised only on 46 aircraft.
IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

Image
User avatar
ragtopcars_slith
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 11:33 am

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by ragtopcars_slith »

AB and company, what are your thought to upgrading to the WITP version 1.7 when the official is available? I'm assuming at this point that the ASW routines might not work well with CHS 1.6...
I would also assume that CHS 1.7 will address that...

thanks again for this awesome mod!

derek[&o]
User avatar
jwilkerson
Posts: 8255
Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 4:02 am
Location: Kansas
Contact:

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by jwilkerson »

This one is of the nature of a "bug" or typo ...

The George is arriving 4306 .. but the Toyoda engines are arriving 4309 ( per the database ) ... hence George's cannot really be built until 4309 ... so ... these should be synch'd .. either move George back to 4309 ... or move Toyoda engines up to 4306 ...

As Japan ... after playing from 4112 .. .all the way to 4306 ... and gearing up to produce lots of George ... and then finding out I had to wait another 3 months ... I was a bit "excited" !!!

WITP Admiral's Edition - Project Lead
War In Spain - Project Lead
User avatar
Andrew Brown
Posts: 4083
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hex 82,170
Contact:

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by Andrew Brown »

ORIGINAL: ragtopcars

AB and company, what are your thought to upgrading to the WITP version 1.7 when the official is available? I'm assuming at this point that the ASW routines might not work well with CHS 1.6...
I would also assume that CHS 1.7 will address that...

thanks again for this awesome mod!

derek[&o]

There shouldn't be a problem running the current CHS version (1.06) with the new 1.7 patch.

It might be best to leave the CHS subs as is (with the exception of adding air search radar for the US subs) until more is known about the new ASW routines in patch 1.7.
Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

Image
Halsey
Posts: 4688
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 10:44 pm

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by Halsey »

So far the 1.7 ASW is looking very good.[;)]

Some escorts will drop their entire load of DC's, and I have not witnessed more than 4 escorts attacking in a phase.
Haven't seen an outright sub kill yet.
User avatar
TheElf
Posts: 2800
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 1:46 am
Location: Pax River, MD

RE: CHS 1.07 Suggestions so far

Post by TheElf »

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

This one is of the nature of a "bug" or typo ...

The George is arriving 4306 .. but the Toyoda engines are arriving 4309 ( per the database ) ... hence George's cannot really be built until 4309 ... so ... these should be synch'd .. either move George back to 4309 ... or move Toyoda engines up to 4306 ...

As Japan ... after playing from 4112 .. .all the way to 4306 ... and gearing up to produce lots of George ... and then finding out I had to wait another 3 months ... I was a bit "excited" !!!


Which George? The N1K1 or N1K2? Lemurs! is probably the best person to answer this question, but if I had to guess the date of the plane's arrival is probably the most correct. The engine must be a typo.
IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

Image
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design”