A delay of 9999 generally means that the "item" is not available in that particular scenario.
Some of the later scenarios would have this set if the pilot had been killed off at some earlier time (before the start of the scenario).
If there is some other philisohpical reason, pry would neeed to answer.
Michael
Scen 15 pilots should not have this then. And there are many many pilots that do. Including many of the bigger historical aces who DID start the war on the 7th. The pilots OOB is a BIG MESS in Scenario 15.
Check out my mod for Strategic Command American Civil War!
Oh, I almost fogot. As I recall, there are some knuckle-heads in Singapore, a BaseForce, that are prepped 100 for Hong-Kong. Mistake? Maybe should be prepped 100 for Sing (who cares, it's a baseforce anyways). Or were they really a glutton for punishment, and really planning on going to help relieve Hong Kong?
-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me
How About including the Thai Navy for Japans side? Here's what I have, not sure if it saw much (if any) action, but it would be nice for historical interest to include it I think.
Ratanakosindra and Sukhothai (886 tons)
PG, 12 knots, 2x6inch guns and 4x3 inch DP guns.
British built gunboats, extremely compact and more thickly armored than many cruisers (2.5 inch belt armor). The 6 inch guns fired 100lb shells to 20,430 yards.
Sri Ayuthia and Dhonburi (2,265 tons)
PG, 15.5 knots, 4x8 inch guns and 4x3 inch DP guns.
Japanese design from same theory as the Ratanakosindras and similar in appearance, but much enlarged. the 8 inch mounts may have had 45 degree elevation; with 4 inch turret armor, they quadrupled the thickness given to Japanese cruiser turrets.
Taksin and Naresuan (5,500 tons)
CL, 30 knots, 6x6 inch guns and 6x3 inch guns, 6x21 inch TT, 2 AC.
CL design from Italy (retained there as Etna and Vesuvio) with armor thinner than in the gunboat classes. the 6 inch guns would probably have been the latest Italian 55cal model.
Sinsamudar, Vilun, Machanu and Blajunbol (370/430 tons, Displacement Surfaced/Submerged)
Costal subs, 14.5/8 knots, 1x3 inch DP gun, 5x21 inch TT.
Japanese built coastal subs; Their gun armaments may have consisted of ligght weapons only.
Tachin and Meklong (1,400 tons)
MSW, 17 knots, 4x4.7 inch guns, 4x21 inch TT.
Japanese built sloops used for minesweeping and training, a sluggish but otherwise sound design. The 4.7 inch shells weighed 45 lbs.
Phra Ruang (1,035 tons)
DD, 35 knots, 3x4 inch guns, 1x3 inch DP gun, 4x21 inch TT.
Thornycroft "R"-class DD purchased after WWI. The main guns fired 31 lb shells.
Chow Phraya (840 tons)
PG, 16 knots, light guns.
Ex-British "Hunt" class sloop used as gunboat.
Bangrachan and Nhongarhai (368 tons)
ML, 13 knots, 2x3 inch DP guns, 142 mines.
Italian built ML.
Trad class (318 tons)
MTB, 31 knots, 3x3 inch DP guns, 6x17.7 inch TT.
Nine Italian built TB; one of the only Thai orders with high speed.
Kantan, Takbai and Kyongyai (110 tons)
MTB, 19 knots, 1x3 inch DP gun, 2x17.7 inch TT.
Japanese built TB.
Sarasindhu, Thiew Uthock and Travane Vari (50 tons)
PC, 9 knots, light guns.
Fishery protection vessels designed in italy but built in Bangkok.
Thailand bought two batches of 55 foot Thornycroft boats, 1-5 (11 tons, 2x17.7 inch TT, 37 knots) and the slightly updated 6-9 (16 tons, 2x17.7 inch TT, 40knots). The Thai's themselves may have completed boats numbered 10-12 to a Thornycroft design.
The above was taken from Richard Worths book "Fleets of World War II".
The CS Nisshin was able to carry 700 mines in exchange for her aircraft. This makes her the fastest,largest Japanese minelayer. I think this capability should be available in the game.
Taksin and Naresuan (5,500 tons)
CL, 30 knots, 6x6 inch guns and 6x3 inch guns, 6x21 inch TT, 2 AC.
CL design from Italy (retained there as Etna and Vesuvio) with armor thinner than in the gunboat classes. the 6 inch guns would probably have been the latest Italian 55cal model.
You wouldn't want to include these, as they never saw service with the Thai navy. In a "What if" scenario, yes, but in standard game scenarios no.
Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med
Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.
I have to agree with Mr. Brady about the defenses at Prince Rupert. Many of the bunkers and gun emplacements are still there to this day(minus guns of course), so they did exist.
The artwork (An...381.bmp) supplied for Destroyer Tender the USS Dixie is incorrect. It is an excellent representation of the OLD Dixie (AD-1) but this vessel was decommissioned in 1922. The Dixie in commission during World War II (AD-14) looked like this:
Yeah Don, I found that a good deal of the Allied artwork is incorrect, or depicts an outdated fit. I was also told beack in July that they weren't going to change the graphics, so the only recourse was to make my own.
The Robert H. Smith DMs, Dorsey DMS, the list goes on and on.
Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med
Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.
Any chance of getting 70th UK Division as an entity with a conversiom option for those that want to convert to Chindit (i.e. I dont particulary want Chindits if I am fighting on the Indian Plain) another UK Heavy Division would be far more use to me there.
PLEASE! Fix "fixed" CD units so they make some historical sense in the game.
ONE They were a great deal more accurate than their brotheren afloat. So either
triple the number of guns in them, or triple the accuracy of the ones there now.
TWO They start the game 0% prepared. This is silly---they haven't moved since they
were built and they aren't going anyplace. Should be 100% at start.
THREE The most rediculous of all. Coast Defense Units DON'T DEFEND ANYTHING!
Any enemy force that enters the hex with a "bombardment" mission should have
to engage them first and formost. If it want's to bombard an airfield instead
of shooting back, fine. But the CD guns would still be shooting at the TF. And
if it sticks around to bombard a port or some ground units, then the CD unit
should continue to fire on it during these activities. The longer it stays, and the
more targets it engages, the more time the CD artillery should have to shoot
back! For that matter, it should be impossible for a TF to attack ships at anchor
or docked without coming under CD fire.
Yeah Don, I found that a good deal of the Allied artwork is incorrect, or depicts an outdated fit. I was also told beack in July that they weren't going to change the graphics, so the only recourse was to make my own.
The Robert H. Smith DMs, Dorsey DMS, the list goes on and on.
Why not add them now? You did them. Unbelievable.[&:]
Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
The artwork (An...381.bmp) supplied for Destroyer Tender the USS Dixie is incorrect. It is an excellent representation of the OLD Dixie (AD-1) but this vessel was decommissioned in 1922. The Dixie in commission during World War II (AD-14) looked like this:
They've known about this for a couple years now. Maybe get a naval buff to do the art for a naval game next time, or at least run it by people before finalizing it.
Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
PLEASE! Fix "fixed" CD units so they make some historical sense in the game.
ONE They were a great deal more accurate than their brotheren afloat. So either
triple the number of guns in them, or triple the accuracy of the ones there now.
TWO They start the game 0% prepared. This is silly---they haven't moved since they
were built and they aren't going anyplace. Should be 100% at start.
THREE The most rediculous of all. Coast Defense Units DON'T DEFEND ANYTHING!
Any enemy force that enters the hex with a "bombardment" mission should have
to engage them first and formost. If it want's to bombard an airfield instead
of shooting back, fine. But the CD guns would still be shooting at the TF. And
if it sticks around to bombard a port or some ground units, then the CD unit
should continue to fire on it during these activities. The longer it stays, and the
more targets it engages, the more time the CD artillery should have to shoot
back! For that matter, it should be impossible for a TF to attack ships at anchor
or docked without coming under CD fire.
Generally I agree with you on these points except for #2. Granted, they should not be 0 but I don't necessarily think that 100% would be correct. These units were used to peacetime duty. I look at 100% as being fully trained. Many of these units were probably understrength due to peace time budgets. used to a "9 to 5" routine and not used to the rigors of a wartime atmosphere. I think 50 to 75% would be more reasonable. This can, of course, be changed in the editor IIRC.
You wouldn't want to include these, as they never saw service with the Thai navy. In a "What if" scenario, yes, but in standard game scenarios no.
Yeah I agree if you're correct they shouldn't be included, but as written it was a bit ambiguous. I wasn't sure if the ships were retained in Italy and renamed or simply the design was retained and 2 additional ships built, so I included it. I didn't have another source to use to check it out for myself. [:(]
As far as I understand it from Conway's, the ships were being built, but were then seized by the Italians. Work continued at a slow rate, until the uncompleted hulls were seized by the Germans in 1943. Never finished, though I do believe they were launched in 1942.
Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med
Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.
When the war began, the navy had three facilities in Alaska: the main naval base, equipped to service destroyers, submarines and seaplanes on Kodiak; an advance base at Dutch Harbor, on Unalaska; and a seaplane facility at Sitka. The army was headquartered on the mainland at Anchorage, and responsible for defending the three navy bases as well.
Legend: (-) remove this unit from this base (+) add this unit to this base
Anchorage / Ft. Richardson / Ft. Raymond: The main army and air base in Alaska
Note: the Anchorage garrison includes units defending Seward, which served as the main military port serving Anchorage. Seward is not a separate base in the game.
(-) 106th USN Base Force: Should be a USAAF Base Force. Anchorage was the main Air Force base (Elmendorf Field) in Alaska, and HQs of the Army’s Alaskan Defense Command. There were no naval installations at Anchorage or Seward.
(+) New USAAF Base Force. This unit should start at full TO&E strength, but without radar.
(ok) 4th Infantry Regiment: In the database, this Regular Army regiment is over strength in 155mm artillery and engineers and support. These additions accurately reflect the presence of the 81st Field Artillery Battalion (155mm) and one company of the 32nd Engineers that were stationed in Anchorage, but not included as separate units. The 17 Stuart tanks of B company /194th Tank Battalion stationed here should also be added to the regiment’s TO&E.
(-) 37th Infantry Regiment: This unit started on Kodiak
(+) 153rd Infantry Regiment, Arkansas National Guard: Should start at 2/3rd strength. The First and Third battalions were stationed at Seward, the port serving Anchorage. The Second battalion was in Washington state awaiting orders. The database has two 153rd RCTs: #2758 starts in Nome, and #2884 arrives as a 4/42 reinforcement. See the 37th Regiment on Kodiak for comments about experience and morale.
(ok) 75th Coastal Artillery (AA) Regiment: No change.
(-) 215th Coastal Artillery (AA) Regiment: This unit started on Kodiak
(ok) 250th Coastal Artillery Regiment, California National Guard: This over strength unit (36x 155mm) should be reduced to normal size (24x 155mm) and start at ½ normal strength (12x 155mm). One battalion was here; the other battalion was split between Dutch Harbor and Sitka and should be incorporated in their base forces. The database has two 250th C.A. Regiments: #2746 starts in Anchorage; #2702 starts in Los Angeles.
(ok) 802nd Engineer Aviation Battalion: No change. This unit actually started on Annette Island, an airfield guarding the approaches to Canada’s Prince Rupert. As Annette Island is not a separate base in the game, Anchorage is a good starting point.
Kodiak / Ft. Greely: The main navy base
(ok) 112th USN Base Force: No change
(+) 37th Infantry Regiment, Regular Army: Should start here instead of Anchorage. Unit starts at 2/3rd strength. One of the three battalions was stationed at Dutch Harbor. An additional 12x 75mm howitzers and 12x support squads should be added to the regiment, as the 98th Field Artillery Battalion was stationed on the island but not included as a separate unit. The 37th should probably flip-flop its experience and morale ratings (60/60) with the two National Guard regiments (55/55). The 153rd and 201st were both on active federal duty for nearly a full year when the war broke out; the 37th was not formed until August, 1941.
(ok) 201st Infantry Regiment, West Virginia National Guard: Should start at 2/3rd strength. One of the regiment’s three battalions was garrisoning Sitka and should be incorporated in that base force. See the 37th Regiment for comments about experience and morale.
(+) 215th Coastal Artillery (AA) Regiment, Minnesota National Guard: Should start here instead of Anchorage.
Dutch Harbor / Ft. Mears: The navy’s forward base
(ok) 108th USN Base Force: Base force strength should include one battalion of the 37th infantry as well as the headquarters and 2 batteries of the 250th Coastal Artillery Regiment stationed here.
(+) 206th CA (AA) Regiment, Arkansas National Guard: Should start here instead of Los Angeles. Should start at ½ strength. One battalion was here, the other was in Washington state awaiting orders.
Sitka / Ft. Ray: A Navy seaplane base
(ok) 111th USN Base Force: Base force strength should incorporate one battery of Coastal Artillery (250th), one battery of Anti-Aircraft (205th), and one battalion of the 201st Infantry, stationed here.
Nome: No forces
(-) 113th USN Base Force: Nome had no naval installations at start.
(-) 153rd Infantry Regiment: At start, the Nome garrison consisted of a single infantry company. Most of the 153rd was based in Seward, near Anchorage.
Juneau: No forces
(-) 110th USN Base Force: Juneau had no naval installations at start. The nearest garrison was two companies of the Alaska National Guard (297th Infantry Regiment) at Chilkoot barracks in Skagway, about 50 miles away. The 297th Regiment never had more than four companies, (HQ and the other two companies were in Anchorage) and likely was not front-line quality as it was not activated until September 1941. It is probably best to think of it as part of the Anchorage base force.
Missing
Apart from the 297th “Regiment” the only other ground unit in Alaska at start that is not accounted for is the 151st Combat Engineers Regiment of the Alabama National Guard. The companies of the first battalion are scattered at Kodiak, Dutch Harbor, Seward, and Sitka, and can be considered part of the base forces. The second battalion arrived from Louisiana in the spring, and was sent to reinforce Nome in June when there were fears that Japan might invade after taking Attu and Kiska. There is no shortage of US engineer units in the game, and it is hardly essential to account for this missing 1/2 of 1 regiment.
WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff
Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change? Moriarty: Crap!
