Matrix Games Forums

Just a little thing but both California Class Battleships are listed with 12 14 inch guns in 4 turrets. There was only one aft Turret and they only had 9 guns total.

The two Tennessee (BB43) class battleships (of which California (BB44) was one) were in fact armed with 12 14" guns housed in four triple turrets, two forward and two aft.

The North Carolina class BB-55 was the first US Battleship to have less than 4 turrets.

In addition, the Tennessee's and Colorados were virtually the same class, but the Colorados mounted 4 twin 16"/45s.

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

The important thing to note is that the Benson's which first deployed to the Pacific had mount 5/3 removed. Look at the deployment dates and you will realize that these units were now 4 gun Bensons. Most even still shipped 2.50 cal MGs. Many of the Atlantic based units kept their fifth mount a little while longer.

Correct about Ellyson class DMS should show Benson DD graphic, not the Dorsey class DMS graphic.

Ellysion DMS-19! Heh, thanks. Couldn't remember if she was DMS-18 (A Flush Deck) or 19(the first Benson). As to the Bensons, I usually study the Atlantic ones, as they were primarily seen there.

Since Ron seems ot be more up to speed on this, but are all US 5 gun DDs supposed to have 4 in the Pacific? I knew they were removed early on, but I was sure these were mounted at least at the time of PH. These include the Farragut, Mahan, and Sims class.

Also, shouldn't the Flush Deck DMS ships have 3 stacks? I know the AVD and APD versions were 2 stackers, but I thought that the Escort and DMS conversions had 3 stacks (And 3"/50s, not 4"/50s).

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

The important thing to note is that the Benson's which first deployed to the Pacific had mount 5/3 removed. Look at the deployment dates and you will realize that these units were now 4 gun Bensons. Most even still shipped 2.50 cal MGs. Many of the Atlantic based units kept their fifth mount a little while longer.

Correct about Ellyson class DMS should show Benson DD graphic, not the Dorsey class DMS graphic.

Ellysion DMS-19! Heh, thanks. Couldn't remember if she was DMS-18 (A Flush Deck) or 19(the first Benson). As to the Bensons, I usually study the Atlantic ones, as they were primarily seen there.

Since Ron seems ot be more up to speed on this, but are all US 5 gun DDs supposed to have 4 in the Pacific? I knew they were removed early on, but I was sure these were mounted at least at the time of PH. These include the Farragut, Mahan, and Sims class.

Also, shouldn't the Flush Deck DMS ships have 3 stacks? I know the AVD and APD versions were 2 stackers, but I thought that the Escort and DMS conversions had 3 stacks (And 3"/50s, not 4"/50s).

Many had 4 guns by Dec 41. I could have left the Mahans with five guns but I thought it best that they start that way. Somemay disagree but imagine the comments if the ships all got 10-15 pts sys damage on Dec 8, 41!

Ooops, I apologize. The Ellysion DMS 19 uses the correct graphic. What I meant was the Robert H. Smith class DM, which is a modified Sumner/Gearing. It uses the Flush Deck APD graphic. Im making my own for it.

Oh, Ron, kinda interesting, I am zooming in on the graphics to make a new Robert H. Smith one, and I noticed, the Benson graphic shows 5 guns, the No. 3-5 gunhouses in open mounts. Since the OOB reflects only 4 guns, they might wanna change this.

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Ooops, I apologize. The Ellysion DMS 19 uses the correct graphic. What I meant was the Robert H. Smith class DM, which is a modified Sumner/Gearing. It uses the Flush Deck APD graphic. Im making my own for it.

Oh, Ron, kinda interesting, I am zooming in on the graphics to make a new Robert H. Smith one, and I noticed, the Benson graphic shows 5 guns, the No. 3-5 gunhouses in open mounts. Since the OOB reflects only 4 guns, they might wanna change this.

Don't think they aregoing to frig around with the graphic art too much. Might be modded by a player though.

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Ooops, I apologize. The Ellysion DMS 19 uses the correct graphic. What I meant was the Robert H. Smith class DM, which is a modified Sumner/Gearing. It uses the Flush Deck APD graphic. Im making my own for it.

Oh, Ron, kinda interesting, I am zooming in on the graphics to make a new Robert H. Smith one, and I noticed, the Benson graphic shows 5 guns, the No. 3-5 gunhouses in open mounts. Since the OOB reflects only 4 guns, they might wanna change this.

Are you making graphics to suit your taste? Posta few when done, would ya?

2nd Marine Division and 3rd New Zealand Division

(Reposting on this thread so it's recorded.)

Finally found some excellent web sources (Official histories of the USMC, and the NZ WWII Armed forces, on the web)

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USMC/I/

http://www.nzetc.org/etexts/WH2Paci/index.html

and have sorted this thing out, I think.

The problem with the Marines is being scattered all to hell, and units borrowing stuff from other units.
In the case of the Kiwis, it's that the 8th Brigade was the nucleus for the 3rd NZ Division; but the 3rd NZ Division was purely fictional in January 1942...those troops simply didn't exist to be deployed in 1942, especially with the extremely high morale and experience they get when they arrive in WITP in January 1942.

Marines

The major units of the 1st and 2nd Marine Divisions are the three infantry regiments in each division, so we've got three to track.

A big fly in the ointment is 1st Marine Division borrowed a Regiment (2nd Marine Regiment) from the 2nd Marine Division for the Guadalcanal invasion.

Heres the sequence of when each Regiment left the US:

Jan 1, 1942: 8th Marine Regiment, 2nd Marine Division ships out from the US to garrison Samoa

April 2, 1942: 7th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division ships out from the US to garrison Samoa

June 1942: 5th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division ships out from the US for NZ

June 22, 1942: 1st Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division ships out from the US for NZ

July 1942 - 2nd Marine Regiment, 2nd Marine Division ships out from the US for NZ

October 1942 - 6th Marine Regiment, 2nd Marine Division (having been in Iceland till March 1942) ships out
from the US for Guadalcanal

A clear mess. Two Marine Divisions, and when to make them avaliable. WITP is actually pretty generous even with 1st Marine Division, having it appear in the US in the middle of May 1942.

Players can use "house rules" and split each Division into thirds and do a pretty accurate simulation of the above...

Just use 2nd Mar Div and send A out in Jan, B out in April.....but leave C in the US till October.

With 1st Mar Div, you can send the whole thing out in June or July.

3rd New Zealand Division

The 8th Brigade was PART of the division; not an extra brigade. The 8th Brigade was, of course, in Fiji prior to the war starting.

So it's a problem for WITP to later have the division arrive when the 8th Brigade still exists.

The Kiwis reinforced 8th Brigade with another Brigade in Jan. 1942....but even AFTER that reinforcement, the force in Fiji was still only about 7,600 men....NZ was short on manpower, and the priority for full strength and reinforcements remained the 2nd NZ Division in the Mediterranean, even AFTER the war started.

And looking at the strength of the WITP 8th Brigade, it's stronger than the 8th Brigade was in reality at the start of the war, but about as strong as the TWO brigades in Fiji in Jan. 42.....so, seems to be a reasonable "fudge" to have it at the stronger strength.

However, the fully manned and massively experienced 3rd NZ Division that arrives in early Jan. 1942 ready for Sopac deployment in WITP is an utter fiction; no such force REMOTELY existed.

There was nothing called 3rd Division till May 1942; and that referred to the two brigades on Fiji that already existed. And the NZ history speaks of constant manpower shortages, men being taken away for 2nd NZ Division in the Med, training problems, etc.

The NZ force on Fiji was relieved in early June 1942 by the US 37th Infantry Division and went back to NZ.

It spent the next 4th months expanding, reorganizing, and training in NZ.

The 3rd NZ Division, as a force with a strength actually resembling a real division, wasn't deployed outside of NZ till it went to New Caledonia from Nov. 1942 to Jan. 1943.

Of couse, New Caledonia was very much a rear area at that time, and then then spent their time training some more...no way they were an 80 EXP unit when they left NZ....

They didn't actually enter combat till September 1943.

So, 3rd NZ Division really shouldn't arrive till Nov. 1942 at the minimum, and one could make a plausible case it probably shouldn't appear in the game till July-August 1943.

And the Morale and Experience of the unit seems wildly inflated; not saying it was a BAD unit, there were very experienced officers taken from the 2nd NZ Division, but an arrival morale and EXP in the 65-70 range may be more realistic.

And of course it INCLUDES 8th NZ Brigade, so as a house rule players may consider withdrawing 8th Brigade when it appears.

Overall point is, the uber-strike force of 2nd Marines and 3rd NZ Division that the Allies have in Jan. 42 didn't exist; when I started playing the game, and saw those troops and their avaliabilty, I felt NONE of the "scrambling for troops" feeling the real Allies had. The presence of both of these units so early in the game would seem to make a Japanese Caledonia-Fiji-Tonga attack strategy totally unworkable....and make a vicious Allied land counterattack a viable possibility much earlier in the war than in reality.

Of the OOB stuff I think these two divisions have by far the most game impact; a lot more than specific guns on ships or models of Zeros.....

Pascal,

Excellent source material - had a hellava time finding my set....

ORIGINAL: JohnK

---snip---

Re: 3rd NZ Division

What I did for PacWar with this SAME dilemma (both the 3rd NZ and 8th NZ existed in this game) was go scrap the Division completely and just use the brigades. AFIK it never fought as a single unit, as the New Zealanders could not afford to have TWO complete divisions in action (remember the 2nd NZ, heavily engaged in NA/Italy). Usually only about a brigade at a time was deployed, and usually for containment/post invasion duty. AFIK as well, it only contained two Brigades, the 8th and the 14th. I say, do what was done with the 8th Australian Division, split it into two Brigade Groups. This will solve the problem about an over-representation of actual force (i.e., currently the NZ force is equivalent to FOUR brigades, not TWO), as well as what to do with the 3rd Division and 8th Brigade.

Hi all,

I just noticed this...
Didn't the British send a West African or East African brigade to Ceylon as garrison shortly after the war started? And remember, this brigade was combat experianced.

I am unsure of whether to add it as i do not know if it is incorporated in the East & West African divisions that enter in '44.

Mike

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Hi all,

I just noticed this...
Didn't the British send a West African or East African brigade to Ceylon as garrison shortly after the war started? And remember, this brigade was combat experianced.

I am unsure of whether to add it as i do not know if it is incorporated in the East & West African divisions that enter in '44.

Mike

It was the 21st East African Brigade, brought up in around March 1942.

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

The two Tennessee (BB43) class battleships (of which California (BB44) was one) were in fact armed with 12 14" guns housed in four triple turrets, two forward and two aft.

The two Tennessee (BB43) class battleships (of which California (BB44) was one) were in fact armed with 12 14" guns housed in four triple turrets, two forward and two aft.

I stand corrected, cool 3 more guns for me[&o]

Sure thing. Basically, I am planning on moding a few of the DD and AVP graphics, and also see if on the modified subs if I can give them new conning towers (cigarette decks, tower cut down for light AA).

Hi all,

I just checked; the British brought 1 East African & 1 West African Brigade into Ceylon in March '42.

Should they be added? Are they subsumed into later reinforcements?

Mike

I'm having a problem in Scenario #10 keeping the number of A/C below the 103 limit that is allowed for US fleet carriers. That is the number they enter the war with in 1945 and the minute you rearm them the VB squadron increases from 15 to 18 running you over the limit of 103 and all air operations stop. This only effects the US player in 1945 when the old VS squardron is replaced with a 36 A/C VBF squadron and the VB squadron is reduced from 32 A/C to 18. If it were reduced to 15 there wouldn't be a problem. My personal fix will be to increase the A/C capacity of the carriers to 92 so 105 A/C can be carried without exceeding the 115% rule. In Richard Worth's book he states that the Essex class were capable of 108 A/C of the newer larger designs although the normal complement was 100. I have seen other references that state they carry 100 A/C.

Another problem I have is the size of the air group on the Independence class light carriers. In "The Independence Light Aircraft carriers" by Andrew Faltum he lists the air group changes in the appendix. The original air group was established at 24 Wildcat fighters, 12 Dauntless dive bombers, and 9 Avenger torpedo bombers, with the fighters assigned to a VF squadron and the dive and torpedo bombers to a VC squadron. When the new, larger Hellcat replaced the Wildcat, fewer fighters could be carried. In October 1943, the authorized complement for CVL air groups was officially established at 12 fighter (VF), 9 dive bomber (VB), and 9 torpedo bomber (VT), but the dive bombers were eventually eliminated and the light carrier air group complement was revised in November 1943 to 24 VF and 9 VT and remained at that level through the war. The change was actually made earlier in the PTO. In August 1943, in the forward area of the Pacific, the Independence, Princeton, and Belleau Wood had their Dauntlesses detached and 12 plane Hellcat detachments from VF-6 added until the official organization changed. So the VFs aboard the CVLs should be 24 A/C not 21 and the capacity of the CVLs increased to 33. This is another easy change for me to make.

ORIGINAL: McNaughton

What I did for PacWar with this SAME dilemma (both the 3rd NZ and 8th NZ existed in this game) was go scrap the Division completely and just use the brigades. AFIK it never fought as a single unit, as the New Zealanders could not afford to have TWO complete divisions in action (remember the 2nd NZ, heavily engaged in NA/Italy). Usually only about a brigade at a time was deployed, and usually for containment/post invasion duty. AFIK as well, it only contained two Brigades, the 8th and the 14th. I say, do what was done with the 8th Australian Division, split it into two Brigade Groups. This will solve the problem about an over-representation of actual force (i.e., currently the NZ force is equivalent to FOUR brigades, not TWO), as well as what to do with the 3rd Division and 8th Brigade.

Yep, as it turns out 3rd NZ Division never got over two Brigades.......

You're probably correct as to the solution; ditch the Division. I'd start 8th Brigade in Fiji understrength and build it up, and bring the second brigade in...geez.....late 42 I guess. (Even though it technically existed much earlier.)

And as it turned out the New Zealand economy was collapsing due to manpower shortage and they disbanded 3rd division in 1944, to keep 2nd Division up to strength in Europe and to release men for industry in NZ....they didn't have the manpower even to keep it remotely up to strength.

However....here's a bigger mystery...

I am unable to find ANY evidence of anything called the "5th New Zealand Brigade" EVER serving in the Pacific in World War II. It currently shows up for SOPAC service in Feb. 1942.

It was part of the 2nd Division and as best I can tell it fought in North Africa and Italy the whole war.

What's it doing in WITP? Am I missing something?

The 5th Brigade was sent home(?), somewhere, to be the cadre for a mechanized or armour division that was never formed.

I do not know at the moment where they were sent for this rearming & training.

The 2nd NZ fought in Italy with 2 brigades.

Mike

Since someone mentioned German U Boats, I'll second that request. A bit of a wishlist item, more for 'chrome' than anything, but what the heck!

According to a book on the subject that I have(1) there seems to have been about 19 German U Boats that made it to the far east. Of these, a number travelled back to Axis controlled Europe (and so can be discounted) giving a net number of U boats operating in the far east of about 11 boats. These were mostly type IXC, IXC40 or IXD2, but three of them were ex-Italian subs (!). There was one type VIIF but it was a transport sub which was sunk, so it too can be ignored. Also one type XB - not sure what that was - I am no sub expert.

The subs operated out of Penang mainly, since they had special maintenance needs (not being of Japanese manafacture) but I don't see how that would be included in the game.

Maybe a job for the editor? is there room to add another 'Japanese' sub class or two and a few boats? if anyone is interested I can provide U boat numbers and arrival dates from the book(1).

(1) 'U-Boat Far From Home. The epic voyage of U862 to Australia and New Zealand, by David Stevens.