Between the Storms

[John 3rd]

Hey Bill. I will run with that.

If you find more info PLEASE keep me up on it.

[ny59giants]

If you could send John and me the info on the PBY-5A and the SBD-4s, then we could look at them. The easy solution on the PBY-5As would be to add them to the CS convoys that come into Cape Town monthly and add them into the pool at beginning of month when they disband.

Screenshot info from
http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft ... aft_id=297

We could use data from A-24A banshee as that was the Army's version of the -4.

[wdolson]

I'll dig it out.

You could also add aircraft by having a squadron show up in the Eastern US once a month with a withdraw date a few days later. The player would have to withdraw them manually, but it is another way to pump airframes into the game.

Bill

[John 3rd]

Got the Charlotte conversion done. Decided to make her conversion into its own class. They are similar to the Independence-Class CVL but unique. To keep confusion at bay, they are named after the second ship in the class. Nothing is set. If you have opinions---sound off:







NOTE: I changed the arrival date to as early as 10-42.

[DOCUP]

Looks good guys.  I do like the Penn showing up on Dec 8th idea.  I was thinking what about uping the PPs 55 or 60 for both sides and what about increasing mine production for both sides?

[John 3rd]

The biggest concern I have with pulling Pennsie is that the Japanese divert their attacks from her (in normal attack) to other ships...

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

I'll dig it out.

You could also add aircraft by having a squadron show up in the Eastern US once a month with a withdraw date a few days later. The player would have to withdraw them manually, but it is another way to pump airframes into the game.

Bill

We COULD add them to the off map bases and they could be 'bought out.' Naaaw...better to have them trickle in.

Raising the PP to 60 would be OK with me.

[DOCUP]

True, she does suck up some TTs and bombs that would prob screw up the Dec 7 results.

[ny59giants]

The last version of RA had PP set for 55 while the one I was playing was 60. I like the 60 as it gets me to upgrade leaders more frequently. The AI likes to assign the worse to some units. [;)]

[John 3rd]

Sounds like 60 is a plan.

Working on the g.6 right now.

[John 3rd]

We were talking about Sea Gladiators for the HMAS CLV Melbourne. Does anyone have a Mod with them in use?

[John 3rd]

Here is a first crack at the G.6 Japanese CLV:

[wdolson]

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

True, she does suck up some TTs and bombs that would prob screw up the Dec 7 results.

You could delay the Pennsylvania, but put the Utah back in.

Bill

[John 3rd]

That is a good thought as well.

Back to work on the G.6. If it carries 38 planes then what should the mix be? Figure two elevators for the shortened deck. Should we go 21 Zero and 18 Kate? 24 Z and 15 K? 27 Z and 12 K? or a balanced Air Group of 15 Z, 12 V, and 12 K?

[ny59giants]

It should be similar to Allied types. If the Allies cannot carry torpedoes, neither should G6. If you go with torpedoes, then the number of Kates should be two full strikes worth, IMO. Make sure they have enough torpedo carts. [;)]

[Kitakami]

I think it should somehow be a mix that shows why the future CVLs had the load they had. With that in mind, I see arguments for any and all of the above. But if we consider the loadout of G.6 a learning step, then I'd vote for either 27 Zeroes and 12 Kates, or the balanced air group of 15 Zeroes, 12 Vals, and 12 Kates, although I favor the first.

[ny59giants]

If you continue with the concept of 2 CV and a CVL, then the 27 Zero and 12 Kates goes with her role being TF CAP provider and possible ASW platform. Another possibility would be 27 Zero, 9 Kates, and 3 recon.

[JuanG]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

It should be similar to Allied types. If the Allies cannot carry torpedoes, neither should G6. If you go with torpedoes, then the number of Kates should be two full strikes worth, IMO. Make sure they have enough torpedo carts. [;)]

I would say 27 Zeros and 12 Kates, with 24 torpedoes would be fair. I don't think they need to parallel the Allied CVLs directly, especially considering how much more powerful the SBD's are compared to the IJN DB's. Not to mention all those CVE's the allies get from late '42 onwards come with 24 torpedoes too.

[John 3rd]

My 'gut' feeling leans in the direction of the F--TB Group with then adding the Vals once the conversion occurs. The SBDs reflect the American use of them as Scouts as well as their favored 'delivery' package. The Kates fit the same role within Japan. Though I do have to say that Kitakami's point carries some serious weight with it being an intermediate design. Shouldn't it then have an intermediate air group? Keep tossing out ideas team!

I've been busy. Here comes a HOSTE of screenshots...

[John 3rd]

Here is the G.6 Conversion. The ship still reflects her Mogami 'roots' but makes a jump in the Soryu's direction. Not quite Soryu's Air Group but still substantial.