Page 8 of 17
RE: Aircraft upgrade Errors
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 11:25 pm
by McNaughton
ORIGINAL: pad152
OOB - Errors
Campaign 15
Aircraft upgrades
Unit
1169 - 246 Squadron FG (Buffalo I) wants to upgrade to Datokas?
1166 – 273 Squadron TB (Viderbeest IV) wants to upgrade to Hurricane II?
They are SORT of errors.
246 Squadron was a Sunderland Squadron in England until 1943, and then disbanded. Reformed as a Liberator I, then York transport squadron for VIPs.
273 Squadron was a Vildebeest squadron, then upgraded to Fulmars (which saw action during the Japanese raid on Colombo), then to Hurricanes.
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 11:36 pm
by Admiral DadMan
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
We know...should have been fixed before release. Same with SWPAC HQ with Mac as head honcho (should arrive in April I think). Could use some sub HQs as well like COMSUBPAC etc...Lockwood, Christie, Fife etc need jobs so they don't get used as combat Admirals...beauracrats should not get sea commands.
I would love to have had a whole section of code written to portray sub warfare (particularly USN) as it worked during the war. Three SubComs, one for each USN theater, with boundries and all
ok, somebody slap me now...
RE: Accululated stuff
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 11:56 pm
by Ron Saueracker
ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
The work in the allied Naval OOB is flat-out excellent. Especially impressive is the detail in the merchant shipping. I've gone through much of it and found only minor items. Have not started the major warships yet - the volume is daunting and what I've glanced at seemed good.
The ability to specify ship upgrade paths is fantastic and there are lots of empty slots to do it in. Duplicating some classes for differing upgrade paths seems very attractive - like multiple Flush Deck copies for the upgraded DD, DE Conversion and APD Conversion.
Here is an accumulation of what I've found so far. Much of this has already been posted but I gathered it all together.
Flush Deck DDs Waters, Schley and Ward defined as DD (3682, 3684, 3685) and duplicated as APD (4093, 4095, 4100). An excellent place for the DD -> APD upgrade class.
Old British Submarines Porpoise (4691), Clyde (4692), Rorqual (4693) were fairly large. If their own class is not worth while they should be "T" class instead of "S".
Misspellings:
(3661) DD Aylwin is misspelled Alwin (this same error was in UV and must be in an on-line source)
(4268) AV Norton Sound is misspelled Norten Sound
The River class is defined and split into British built (1366) and Australian built (1367) - very nice. However, I can not find any ships assigned to either class. There were 8 or 10 Australian, with 6 completed in 1943-1945 and the rest post-war. Don't know about the British
Missing Ships:
Indian Sloops:
Indus (Grimsby Class - in WITP as Swan class)
Hindustan, Jumna, Sutlej, Narbada, Godavari (Bittern class and variants, class not defined WIPT)
Indian Minesweepers:
Bengal, Madras, Bombay, Punjab (Bangor)
Old US AKs: Regulus (AK-14), Sirius (AK-15), Spica (AK-16), Vega (AK-17)
AK Gold Star (actually an General Auxiliary - AG - but that has a different meaning in WITP) - attached to Asiatic Fleet and used as cargo ship.
Large Dutch Gunboat Soemba
Dutch Naval Minelayer William van der Zaan.
APDs Tattnall (APD-19) and Roper (APD-20)
Lapwing Class AVPs Avocet, Teal, Swan (Heron is there but as an AVD)
Large Coast Guard Cutter Taney (at Pearl with Reliance and Tiger)
Ex-Cutter AGCs Bibb, Ingham, Spencer
ex-Barnegat AGC Biscayne (AVP-11 -> AGC 18)
Large Transport Orizaba (AP-24)
US Army Transport Etolin. And, if you really wanted to get picky - USAT President Harrison
Large British Transport Sarpedon
Large Dutch Cargo Ship Abbekerk
Norwegian Tanker Norden
Australian Naval Oiler Karumba
The very large US APs Wakefield (AP-21) and Mount Vernon (AP-22). West Point (AP-23) is there but as a L-AP (US). I would vote for a new class.
Aircraft transports - Kittyhawk, Hammondsport, Lakehurst and the British Athene. Not sure if WITP could handle them but their net effect might be simulated by a CVE with no aviation ordance or by a very large AK. Just wouldn't want them cluttering up the CVE lists.
Philippine Army Offshore Patrol PT boats Q-111, Q-112, Q-113, Q-114, Q-115 (Thornycroft Type) at Manila
British MTB Squadron 2 at Hong Kong: MTB 7,8,9,10,11,12 (British Power Boat) and 26, 27 (Thornycroft)
All the British Tenders.
First impressions (not yet researched)
A lot of small dutch ships, especially the KPM ships, are missing (some are there). Ships did valuable work in NEI and Australia/New Guinea.
All of the old British "C" class are shown in their CLAA conversions. A couple were still in their original CL configuration when the war began.
Can't seem to find the late war Japanese landing ships of the "ES" and "Type 1" types. The "Type 101/103" series might be worthwhile as well.
Also the Japanese Army Landing ships, Shinshu Maru, Akitsu Maru class, etc.
The search in the new editor is always from the beginning (UV one was from current point onward). Makes it hard to find duplicates.
Don
P.S. Got to stop for a while - too much WITP causes eyestrain, stiff neck, and a sitter's problem known as f'tass.
Right on Don. Glad you approve. I've asked if I can add a few more classes like Porpoise, River and V class SSs, AS Maidstone, AS Adamant, AS Lucia. Thanks for all the extras.!!![:D]
I would like to see the work Mogami has done for Japanese OOB.
More Scenario 6 stuff
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 1:53 am
by HawaiiFive-O
Tired of me yet? [8D]
Scenario 6, USN CVL Belleau Wood, VF-24. This squadron has 26 planes in it (21 normal, so 5 reserve). Problem is, VT-24 has 9 planes, meaning this CVL has 35 planes on board. Normal capacity 30, so she's over the 115% rule.
So she won't fly missions, unless you realize what's wrong and shuffle things around.
I checked the scenario editor, it's wrong in there, so I don't think it was just a fluke in my game.
Database.....
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:25 am
by Richrd
In database Yamato has 3 main gun turrets fwd, 3 main gun turrets aft. Likewise the 6 in guns have too many turrets. The King George V has ten 14 inch rifles in ten turrets, all forward.
RE: Database.....
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:56 am
by pry
ORIGINAL: Richrd
In database Yamato has 3 main gun turrets fwd, 3 main gun turrets aft. Likewise the 6 in guns have too many turrets. The King George V has ten 14 inch rifles in ten turrets, all forward.
The term is a little confusing but Turrets refers to the number of guns housed in each turret... just think of turrets as number of guns in each mount
Yamato's DB entry is 6 guns, 3 turrets forward which would translate into 2 mounts each housing 3 guns each facing forward and 3 guns, 3 turrets rear which translates into 1 mount with 3 guns facing aft.
KGV is
4, 4 forward (1 mount with 4 guns)
2,2 forward (1 mount with 2 guns
4,4 forward (1 mount with 4 guns) this is correct except for the facing which is in error and is already on the list to be changed to rear facing
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 3:17 am
by vonmoltke
Might just be me, but I got, on 1/20/1942, the USS Mississippi with her October '42 AA loadout.
RE: Database.....
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 3:18 am
by Brady
Note: The coments refering to many of the Japanese Ships that are missing was discused some time ago and at great leangth, realy their are literly thousnads of Japanese Merchants (and other types) missing from the game, particualy and most notably absent are the Standaradised types.
Below is just one of many threads on this:
tm.asp?m=580558&mpage=1&key=japanese%2Cmerchant?
Doing a search with MY name as author and the term: Japanese Merchnats brings up several of these topics covering various missing units.
...............
It should be noted that their are still several Allied types absent as well.
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 7:50 am
by Svar
Because the Scenario #15 USAAF fighter unit OOB will not give the historical composition of forces in mid 1945 I have modified my start as follows.
Edited because I just found out that the 6th FS at Clark is a Philippino unit so here is a revised USAAF fighter unit OOB for Scenario #15.
The following units were deleted; the 54th FG, the 407th FG, the 34th FS, the 45th, 46th, and 47th FSs. The last 3 FSs make up the 15th FG. The 24th FG was switched to the 15th FG and moved to PH. The 15th FG should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Dec 44. The 24th FG was replaced with the 23rd FG in Manila which should be upgrade to P-51Ds in Dec 44. The 35th FG was switched to P-39Ds and moved to Clark, it will end the game as a P-38J FG. The P-51D replacement for the historical 35th FG will be the 81st FG which will enter the game when it did originally but equipped with P-47Ds that should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Mar 45. Three FSs were modified, the 3rd FS was changed to the 2nd FS and will enter the game 12/15/44 with P51Ds. The 21st FS which was changed to the 4th FS will enter the game 12/15/44 with P51Ds. Finally the 78th FS was changed to the 6th FS. The 18th and 49th FGs were changed to P-39Ds so they will end the game as P-38J FGs. The 21st FG should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Jan 45. The 80th FG was changed to P-47Cs and 33rd FG was changed to P-47Ds. The 311th FG will upgrade to P-51Bs and the 348th FG should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Mar 45. Finally the 51st FG should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Dec 44.
These changes will give the final composition of the USAAF fighter units as follows; These are P-51D units the 15th, 21st, 23rd, 51st, 81st, 311th, 348th, and 506th FGs plus 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th FSs. These are P-47D units the 33rd, 58th, 80th, 413th, 414th, 507th, and 508th FGs plus the 5th FS. These are the P-38J units the 8th, 18th, 35th, 49th, 318th, 347th, and 475th FGs plus the 6th FS. These are the P-40N units the AVG, 14th, 20th, 55th, and 343rd FGs plus the 18th FS.
There is a thread where I discussed this but I can't provide a link due to ignorance sorry.
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:49 pm
by Brady
Svar, the only way I have yet to manage to get a link to a thread posted is to creat a shortcut to it on my destop and then copy the url in the propertys box, and then paste that, it is a pain in the pooper but it works.
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 10:46 pm
by Pascal_slith
Is that unnamed and undotted island west of Nauru supposed to be Ocean Island? Shouldn't it at least have a green dot on it? Sorry if this has come up already.
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 10:49 pm
by Pascal_slith
Repeated from the thread on the Australia map.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Kid
Word from Developers is that this would be a major piece of work affecting play balance and a host of other things. I've been told to keep it on the list but as a low priority. Please feel free to keep the discussion going so if we decide to take the plunge everything is worked out.
Wouldn't this just affect games against the AI? If it is a PBEM game wouldn't it be possible to make these and other map inaccuracies modifications?
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 2:27 am
by TIMJOT
Just wanted to reiterate that the 1942 UK CV oob is incorrect.
The Indomitable as mentioned in an earlier post should definitely enter in Jan 42 not the current 251 days. Also the UK CV airgroups are off the mark.
HMS Indomitbble 1942
880 Sqd. 9 x Sea Hurricanes (not in the oob)
800 Sqd. 12 x Fulmers
827 Sqd. 12 x Albacores (not in the oob)
831 Sqd. 12 x Albacores (not in the oob)
HMS Formidable 1942
888 Sqd. 16 x Martletts
818 Sqd. 12 x Albacores (not in oob)
820 Sqd. 12 x Albacores (not in oob)
HMS Hermes 1942
814 Sqd. 12 x Swordfish
Sea Gladiators on the Hermes?[&:] Not sure why even Sea Gladiators on in the oob? Can we get rid of them and replace them in the oob with Sea Hurricanes or at least with Albacores neither are currently in the game but should be?
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 2:36 am
by TIMJOT
RAF arrival date errors.
No. 84 Sqd. and 211 Sqd. should start arriveing in January 42 with Blenhiem IV Bombers. The currently arrive 433 days and 612 days respectively. They were historically part of the 225 Group.
Correspondingly the 225 Group HQ and 225 Aviation unit should also arrvive in January 42 not the current 402 days. Also the 226 Group HQ and Aviation Unit should also arrive in January but it is apparently not currently in the OOB even though the fighter units assign to it, are.
No. 215 Sqd. 16 x Wellington III should arrive in April 42 not the 251 days currently in the game.
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 2:44 am
by TIMJOT
SOME UK AIR UNITS OMMITTED IN THE CURRENT OOB.
No. 242 Sqd. 16 x Hurricane II arrive Feb 42
No. 60 Sqd. 16 x Hurricane II arrive March 42 *
No. 261 Sqd. 16 x Hurricane II arrive March 42 *
No. 803 Sqd. 12 x Fulmers arrive Jan 42
No. 806 Sqd. 12 x Fulmers arrive Jan 42
* Odd since both 60 and 261 Sqds. made up No. 222 Group and 222 Group HQ is currently in the game and enters within the historic timeframe.
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 2:45 am
by Ron Saueracker
Thanks for the RN corrections Timjot. The squadron mixes for these CVs were very unique and in constant flux. I can't see Albacores on Illustrious ever. I do agree that the Sea Gladiators should go as Hermes was down to 12 Swordfish at this time. I think replacing Sea Gladiators with Sea Hurricanes in dbase might be the way to go.
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 2:54 am
by TIMJOT
USAAF ARRIVAL DATE ERRORS
US 49th and 8th FGs arrive too late ( 98 days )
The 49th FG left US for OZ Jan 12, 42 arriving on Feb 1, 42
The 8th FG left US for OZ late Jan 42 arriving on March 6, 42
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 3:02 am
by Ron Saueracker
Glad you have decent sources for this stuff. Be interesting if withdrawl dates could be supplied for those units which transfer out of the Pacific. Perhaps a withdrawl requirement could then be added to make it less overwhelming for Japan than it already is. Not necessarily for specific units, but the equivalents.
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 3:04 am
by TIMJOT
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
Thanks for the RN corrections Timjot. The squadron mixes for these CVs were very unique and in constant flux. I can't see Albacores on Illustrious ever. I do agree that the Sea Gladiators should go as Hermes was down to 12 Swordfish at this time. I think replacing Sea Gladiators with Sea Hurricanes in dbase might be the way to go.
No problem Ron,
I dont know about the Illustrious but Albacores were definitely on the Indomitable and Formidable in the spring of 42. If need be substiuting the proper number of and strenghts Squadrons with Swordfish would surffice since there is little difference in performance. Also by 1942 the Indomitable and Formidable capacity was approx. 45 a/c
Just wondering what is the official reason or reasoning for the Indomitable entering the game so late ( 251 days)?
Regards
RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here
Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 3:15 am
by Ron Saueracker
Indomitable arriving late? Probably an OOB error. I got to the RN rather late as I missed about 6-8 months dev time for health reasons. Probably going to find alot more as I play with the naval OOBs and dbases for a possible Med game.