CHS v1.07 Submissions

[DuckofTindalos]

Mine wasn't actually done in CHS, as you can probably tell. I forget where I stole the art from, but it looks like Cobra's...

[Blackhorse]

No luck at all on HQ and probably not airgroups. Remember that the last 200 airgroup slots are used during game execution for splitting air groups (of both sides). CHS is already right up to the edge of the last 200 (exactly - 2199 out of 2399). Every additional slot used is one less for splitting. If one were to use the last 200 slots than groups would not be able to split at all. Russian and Japanese air OOB still contain groups and, of course, Russian activation would happen by the time you are interested in.

Well ain't that a kick in the teeth . . .

Instead of breaking down Groups into Squadrons, let me try the opposite approach and propose consolidating the 1945 Allied European air reinforcements into Wings. There would be 13 in total, Five Heavy Bomber Wings flying 196 B17s each (1, 13, 92, 93, 95 Wings); Five Very Heavy Bomber Wings flying 196 B29s each (2, 14, 20, 96, 304 Wings); One Bomber Wing equipped with 256 A26s (97 Wing); and two Fighter Wings, one with 216 P47s (100 Wing), the other with 216 P51s (306 Wing).

To make room for the big wings, I suggest consolidating the 20 Lancaster squadrons of "Tiger Force" in the CHS database arriving in late 1945 and early 1946 into their two Groups (equivalent of a US Wing); the 5th RAF Bomber Group and the 6th RCAF Bomber Group, each with 200 Lancasters.

While not ideal, this approach would allow us to fairly represent the approximately 3000 Allied aircraft and experienced pilots from the ETO that would have joined the Pacific War if Japan had not surrendered in September of 1945.

It also frees up five additional slots (20 squadrons deleted, 13 US Wings added, 1 RAF Group added, 1 RCAF Group added) in case you need to add squadrons to that Midway-class carrier! [;)]

Oh, one final question. If we consolidate all of the Brewsters into a single unit, would we call that a "Buffalo Wing?"

[CobraAus]

there are one or two empties around the "bomb" section but I do not know for sure if they can be used.

I use them last night last two slots and they came into game

Cobra Aus

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse
Treespider, Don, Andrew, what say you? Are there enough LCU (17), air group (54, or 200, if by squadrons), HQ (8) and leader (25 for all divisions and HQs) slots available to accomodate the 1945 European Theatre reinforcements?

From memory, when discussing LCU slots we decided that we could reserve 50 or so potential slots for future work on the Japanese OOB, 50 for the Soviets, and 50 for "contingency" purposes. Using 17 LCU slots should be OK.

I will leave the rest of this discussion to the experts, but one comment: I agree with the end of 1945 cutoff for arriving units. Certainly no later than that.

Andrew

[Sardaukar]

In stock scenarios, radars for example Oi and Kitikami are totally screwed, having penetration value of 0 instead of 500. Former makes them surface to surface radars when latter indicates surface to air radar. Is that already corrected in previous versions ?

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

In stock scenarios, radars for example Oi and Kitikami are totally screwed, having penetration value of 0 instead of 500. Former makes them surface to surface radars when latter indicates surface to air radar. Is that already corrected in previous versions ?

I do not believe the type 13 radar has been updated....so for anit-air, radar sets need to have a pen value of 500? Is the 500 mark the threshhold? What happens if it is set for 100,200,300 or 400...just curious?

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: treespider

I do not believe the type 13 radar has been updated....so for anit-air, radar sets need to have a pen value of 500? Is the 500 mark the threshhold? What happens if it is set for 100,200,300 or 400...just curious?

Not tested yet. it may be just "on/off switch"..or maybe there are hidden things and effects. GGs games always seem to have ! [8D]
I have not yet had time to try some aircraft radars either. For example some planes need to have radars that detect aircraft..and others to have ones to detect planes. And they seem to be bit screwed up too in original.

It seems that in original scenarios sometimes same radar is used for 2 purposes, and it just doesn't work that way. At least not according to my tests. For example APS-6 (IIRC) is used in both night fighters and torpedo bomber !! Latter should get a radar that detects surface ships, not planes !! Or maybe it was vise versa, but that's the general idea.

Anyhow, Pen value seems to set the type of target radar detects. Effect will set how well it detects. I have to check those navigation radars that are in database to see what values they have. There are H2S and Oboe bomber navigation radars in database that seem to be unused.

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

In stock scenarios, radars for example Oi and Kitikami are totally screwed, having penetration value of 0 instead of 500. Former makes them surface to surface radars when latter indicates surface to air radar. Is that already corrected in previous versions ?

I do not believe the type 13 radar has been updated....so for anit-air, radar sets need to have a pen value of 500? Is the 500 mark the threshhold? What happens if it is set for 100,200,300 or 400...just curious?

this type of radar was supposed to be fixed in CHS... not sure about the penatration values though...

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

In stock scenarios, radars for example Oi and Kitikami are totally screwed, having penetration value of 0 instead of 500. Former makes them surface to surface radars when latter indicates surface to air radar. Is that already corrected in previous versions ?

I do not believe the type 13 radar has been updated....so for anit-air, radar sets need to have a pen value of 500? Is the 500 mark the threshhold? What happens if it is set for 100,200,300 or 400...just curious?

this type of radar was supposed to be fixed in CHS... not sure about the penatration values though...

My bad i just checkecked the database editor and the Type 13 radr has a pen value of 500

[Dereck]

I noticed in this thread the stats for the Midway class carrier and would like to know if anybody would be so kind as to provide me with the statistics for the 5 inch/54 Mk 16 gun which is listed as a weapon for it?

I would like to add that class to my scenario eventually and I also have a personal reason for being interested in the Midway class.

<---------- (see my picture to the left) [:D]

Thanks!

[Don Bowen]

You Got it!

[FeurerKrieg]

I spent some hours this evening checking over radar specs versus their settings in the database, and their placement on aircraft. I plan to research ships in the near future as well and will post suggestions on that topic also. But here's my first 'solid' suggestion on air radar for Japan.

New device (slot 144?): A.I. Type FD-2 Radar
Range 15, Effect 20, Pen 0, Type Air Radar.

For range I compared specifications of the allied Mk IV, MkVII, and MkX to the database and it seems that 1 KM of range IRL equals 5 range in the database for air interception radars. I used 20 effect as most of the allied radars are 30-40, and supposedly Japanese radar was not as effective.

For bringing this device in I think another aircraft type should be added if there is room, the J1N1-Sr (r for radar equipped). IRL the FD-2 had started development in 1942, and over 100 sets had been built by late 1944. Most of these where put into J1N1-S's. IRL production of this nightfighter stopped in late 44 because the planes were not very capable against the faster B-29s. But in game, if Japan is doing well I see no reason why more of this night fighter could not be produced. The planes actually functioned fairly well against the slower allied bombers using its angle mounted guns, radar and searchlights.

So - J1N1-S available 1/43, as current in 1.06. Thus the first 6 units of J1N1-S should have aircraft available to fill them out. But then I would change all of the J1N1 units that come in from 7/44 and later (5 more units) to J1N1-Sr. Make the J1N1-Sr available for production starting in 5/44. IRL existing J1N1's were fitted with radar sets in June 1944, but I figure starting production in 5/44 will create the same effect. The first new unit of planes for the -Sr would arrive in 7/44, but a player could upgrade his J1N1-S units to Sr's as pools allowed.

I realize slots are tight, but maybe use slot 24 or 76 for the J1N1-Sr. IRL over 100 of these types of planes were built, so maybe that isn't significant enough for inclusion, but I wanted to make the suggestion at least.

Don/treespider, I can PM my sources if you think this suggestion has any merit. Thanks!

Also, on a related topic - I was looking at radar for the H8K and G4M2, of which 1000 sets were built. However, it seems the game does not model aircraft mounted surface detection radar. The TBM-3d is equipped with the APS-6, but IRL this was an air interception radar put on Hellcats and such (and the TBM-3d's). In game it looks just like an air intercept radar so I'm not sure what purpose it serves on a torp bomber like the TBM-3d. In any case, I would be happy to put together some info on the radars that those planes carried as well, if it is beleived they work in a surface detection capacity. If they do, it would certainly help with night bombing by Emilys and Betty's.

- Note, I also plan to check into the radar on allied planes just to make sure it is accurate.

[Sardaukar]

Good stuff, Feurer Krieg !!

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg

Also, on a related topic - I was looking at radar for the H8K and G4M2, of which 1000 sets were built. However, it seems the game does not model aircraft mounted surface detection radar. The TBM-3d is equipped with the APS-6, but IRL this was an air interception radar put on Hellcats and such (and the TBM-3d's). In game it looks just like an air intercept radar so I'm not sure what purpose it serves on a torp bomber like the TBM-3d. In any case, I would be happy to put together some info on the radars that those planes carried as well, if it is beleived they work in a surface detection capacity. If they do, it would certainly help with night bombing by Emilys and Betty's.

- Note, I also plan to check into the radar on allied planes just to make sure it is accurate.

I've posted about that discrepancy with APS-6. TBM-3d should get air to surface radar, not air to air radar. Penetration value 0 should make radar detect surface ships. Problem is to test that it works also for aircraft radars. Testing that will be quite difficult.

Had to edit, confused pen 500 and 0...[:'(]

[FeurerKrieg]

I would think so as well, but currently all the aircraft based radars are set with 0 penetration so I'm thinking that penetration probably doesn't matter for air mounted radar sets, and that they just aren't modeled to detect surface ships. Either that, or penetration 500 somehow triggers a 'reverse of type' detection - ie surface moutned radars with 500 pen detect aircraft and maybe air mounted radar with 500 penetration detect surface ships?

As you say, difficult to test, maybe someday I'll get to it.

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg

I would think so as well, but currently all the aircraft based radars are set with 0 penetration so I'm thinking that penetration probably doesn't matter for air mounted radar sets, and that they just aren't modeled to detect surface ships. Either that, or penetration 500 somehow triggers a 'reverse of type' detection - ie surface moutned radars with 500 pen detect aircraft and maybe air mounted radar with 500 penetration detect surface ships?

As you say, difficult to test, maybe someday I'll get to it.

You may be into something with that. It'd be also curious to see if values like 200, 300, etc. have effect.

[Tanaka]

Thought this belonged here: A post from Jim Burns...

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

I’ve spent some considerable time studying the situation in China in the new release of CHS, and I have some concerns I thought I’d bring up here. It appears deceptively that China has been strengthened, when in fact they appear to have been critically weakened in several areas.

The most obvious thing is the addition of many new Chinese units. On the surface it appears to have strengthened China, but in fact they are now weaker than ever. In the attached screen shot, I’ve marked down the location of all the fixed non-movable Chinese units (may have missed 1 or 2). In total 45 units start the game in a fixed state.



15 units start outside of base hex locations, 13 of these being Infantry Corps and 2 HQ’s. 21 start in what may be deemed as rear area bases, not in front line positions. 5 being infantry Corps, 6 HQ’s and 10 ART Divs. So there are fully 36 units that are of little to no use to the Chinese army, unless Japan decides to make them of use by attacking them.

Of the 15 units in non-base locations, Japan can ignore all but 3 of them if they wish. The three Japan will have to deal with are all on roads leading east from Changsa. The rest can all be easily bypassed, and turned into POW camps for the entire war. I’ll comment on how these units can be ignored.

Yenen, Sian and Homan can all be attacked from the East, thus making the four units South of Sian along the trail useless. If Japan takes Changsa along the transportation lines from Hankow and Shanghai, only the 3 INF Corps on those lines need be engaged. After that it’s a straight shot to Chungking, thus making the 5 Inf Corps East of Chungking useless as well. What can I say about the HQ unit in the forest hex Northwest of Wenchow, why even bother putting it in Chinas OOB?

Here’s a list of what I think (not sure if this was final changes) the new OOB changes have done:

Previous Chinese OOB
73 Corps
1 Tank regiment
18 divisions

New Chinese OOB
86 Corps (15 static)
20 FA Regt
14 Divisions
14 Guerilla “Corps”

So of the 86 Infantry Corps, 8 can be ignored in their POW camps as I’ve pointed out above, and 5 start in rear area bases. That leaves 6 fixed in front line bases and 67 mobile Corps. But there are a total of 21 bases in CHS vs. the 16 in Standard WitP. Even assuming we ignore the base furthest north, that leaves 20 bases within para drop range that need a garrison in CHS.

Of those 20, 10 have no fixed units in them, so of the 67 mobile Corps, at least 1 goes to each base leaving 57 mobile Corps. There are 9 divisions destined for Burma and 3 divisions fixed in Yenen, so the remaining 2 divisions can relieve 2 Corps from base garrison duty, so CHS has 59 mobile Corps sized units.

Standard WitP has 18 total divisions (9 go to Burma), so 9 can relieve Corps level units from garrison duty. That leaves them with 7 bases that the Corps must garrison, so of the 73 Corps units, 66 are mobile. That’s 7 more Corps sized units than CHS, a very sizable number when you consider people still get blown away in Standard WitP against any kind of competent Japanese play.

But not only has CHS hurt the overall ability of China to defend against Japanese maneuvering, the HQ’s in CHS have had their command ranges reduced to the point they only affect their own hexes because they’re fixed in place with ranges of 5 (KMT), 2 (NCAC) and 1 (Red China) now. No more AV boosts for Corps HQ’s within rang of higher command HQ’s now, don’t tell me that’s not going to have a massive affect in China as well.

By fixing units in open country instead of at base locations, and not reciprocally fixing Japanese units as well, CHS has taken away Chinas ability to react to Japans usual non-historic operational freedom. China now has even less to work with and Japan still has complete operational freedom. You can’t hamstring one side with history if you don’t hamstring the other as well, it throws any kind of balance out the window. Use history for both or not at all.

And for final note, China still only has the same level of supply production they had in Standard WitP, but their usage has increased significantly. Granted their supply production is now secure from strategic bombing, but Japan never really needed to bomb Chinas supply because they never had enough to begin with. Game mechanics demand more than double the level of needed supply be at a base before things like basic supply for units in the open and replacement draw can occur. China has never had enough supply, production should have been at least doubled to make the game mechanics work for China. So you will still never draw from you 600 man a month pools and units outside of bases will eventually dry up and wither away still.

Jim

P.S. Please don’t misunderstand, this is not a bash of CHS. I appreciate all the dedication and hard work that went into CHS and the new changes made. I have just started playing a new PBEM game with this mod and will play to the bitter end, I just wanted to bring up my impressions of the China changes for the group to discuss while I await my turns.

[Sardaukar]

About TBM-3d...2by3 seems to have that actually right...it did carry AN/APS-4:
"Radar set, Airborne intercept, 10000 MHz". It was apparently used as radar picket against night raids too. Kinda early AWACS. WitP just uses AN/APS-6 for both TBM and F6 night variants.

"The Night Fighter planes were specially built with AN/APS-4 and AN/APS-6 radars built into the wings. These radars gave the Hellcat pilots a radar" picture of the battlefield from up to 5.5 miles away"

[JeffroK]

Re Australian Beaufighter Squadrons.

30 & 31 Squadrons should originally appear as being equipped with Beaufighter Mk VIC (The first 72 were British produced Mk1C but Mk VIc can cover this, then came 63 Mk VIc, 20 Mk XIc & 62 Mk X.) Then the Australian produced Mk 21 came into production and 365 were produced. The first was issued to 31 Sqn on Sept 28 1944.

Can these have their origanl aircraft set correctly as currently they come to be equipped with the Beaufighter 21 and the computer re-equips them with Beauforts and the Mk VIc doesnt seem to be an option.

Other Beaufighter squadrons which could be added for any time extension are 92 Squadron, approx May 1945 and 93 Squadron around July 1945.


Also, can the track between Pt Moresby & Lae be deleted, it didnt exist, there should be a short track south of Lae (Stopping 1 hex, maybe 2, short of Pt Moresby with a small base (Lvl 1 max) named Wau(Bulldog) There was no way the Japanese or Allies were going to walk from PM to Lae.

Inland Australia is also devoid of Airbases, I know there is a limit but can something be done so that bases can be built and therefore provide aircover should battles be fought though Central Qheensland, New South Wales & Victoria. The largest airbase in the Southern Hemisphere in 1942-43 was built at Tocumwal on the Murray River, capable of handling Liberators and smaller.

For all of this, and the bugs, I love the game. Well done Guys

[FeurerKrieg]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

About TBM-3d...2by3 seems to have that actually right...it did carry AN/APS-4:
"Radar set, Airborne intercept, 10000 MHz". It was apparently used as radar picket against night raids too. Kinda early AWACS. WitP just uses AN/APS-6 for both TBM and F6 night variants.

"The Night Fighter planes were specially built with AN/APS-4 and AN/APS-6 radars built into the wings. These radars gave the Hellcat pilots a radar" picture of the battlefield from up to 5.5 miles away"

Yes, the OOB is correct in so much as the TBM was equipped with the APS-6, problem is I don't think that air intercept radar in WITP detects ships.