Post Map and OOB Comments Here

[McNaughton]

British/Commonweath equipent varied to an extent, even though main weapons were retained.

Rifle
Lee Enfield (this gun had gone through a sieres of revisions, making it a very good bolt-action rifle)
+1.75 Soft Attack/Gun

LMG
Bren (a true and modern LMG, capable to fulfill the role, albiet magazine fed limited ROF, not as much as the BAR)
+4.5 Soft Attack/Gun
Vickers Berther (not quite as good as the Bren, this gun equipped most Indian formations)
+4 Soft Attack/Gun

SMG
Thompson
+4 Soft Attack/Gun
Owen (fantastic SMG, very useful and reliable for Pacific Warfare)
+5 Soft Attack/Gun


British/Canadian squads of 1941 were notoriously low in SMGs. The British tended to be well equipped with US supplied Thompson SMGs, resulting in a squad of 8 Lee Enfield Rifles, 1 Thompson SMG, and 1 Bren LMG.

1941 Squad
Anti-Armour: 5 (Boyes Anti-Tank rifles were generally issued)
Anti-Soft: 23


By 1943, more likely 1944, better Anti-Tank weaponry was issued. Individual squad firepower didn't increase much, usually by the addition of SMGs to support units (such as platoon HQs, Mortar Teams, etc.)

1943 Squad
Anti-Armour: 75 (representing the PIAT, very powerful AT-projectile)
Anti-Soft: 26 (additional SMGs)


----------

Indian/Ghurka Squads

Comparable to British squads, except that early on they tended not to recieve SMGs.

1941 Squad
Anti-Armour: 0 (Rarely would they have any AT support)
Anti-Soft: 20 (no SMGs, and a slightly poorer LMG)


There was very little difference between a 1943 British and 1943 Empire Squad.

1944 Squad
Anti-Armour: 75 (representing the PIAT, very powerful AT-projectile)
Anti-Soft: 26 (additional SMGs)


----------

ANZAC/Squads

In 1941 they were generally copies of British squads.

1941 Squad
Anti-Armour: 5 (Boyes Anti-Tank rifles were generally issued)
Anti-Soft: 23


In 1942 ANZAC forces started to rely on their own equipment in some areas, notably in regards to SMGs.

1942 Squad
Anti-Armour: 5 (Grenade launchers replaced Anti-Tank Rifles)
Anti-Soft: 24


Like British squads, more SMGs were incorporated into Platoon units, but no Anti-Tank weaponry.

1943 Squad
Anti-Armour: 5
Anti-Soft: 26

ANZAC forces were later to recieve heavy anti-tank weapons, mainly from the US.

Anti-Armour: 55 (Bazookas)
Anti-Soft: 26

[McNaughton]

The TOE of Japanese squads really didn't change much as a whole during the conflict, however, at any given time there could be a series of different squads, some over strength, some under strength. It is best to look at the average squad.

Japanese weaponry tended to be fairly 'inferior' in regards to power and reliablility.

Rifles
Arisaka, a horrid rifle
+1.25 Soft Attack/Gun

LMG
Type 96, an unreliable LMG
+3 Soft Attack/Gun

Mortar
Type 89 (usefull in both attack and defense)
+4 Soft Attack/Gun

Typical Japanese Infantry Squad was this. A platoon had 3 rifle squads, and 1 heavy weapons squad. The Heavy Weapons squad could be split up among regular squads (making 3 strong squads), as firepower would be oddly split, causing the needed creation of a Heavy Weapons squad. A 'combined' squad would consist of 13 Rifles, 1 Light Mortar, 1 LMG.

IJA Squad
Anti-Armour: 5 (limited to mortar)
Anti-Soft: 23


SNLF squads were very similar, except if anyone was to recieve any form of SMG, it would be them (however, in very small numbers).

SNLF Squad
Anti-Armour: 5 (limited to mortar)
Anti-Soft: 26

The only reason Japanese squads come close to British firepower is that they have 15 men per squad, compared to 10.

[McNaughton]

I didn't factor in MMGs in most accounts, as usually these were issued in heavy weapons platoons/squads.

It might be worthwhile to add EITHER heavy weapons squads replacing existing mortars (as HW squads contained both MMG and Mortars), or give each nation MMGs in their unit TOEs (M1917 and M1919 Browning MMG, 0.5 Browning HMG, Type 92 MMG, Vickers MMG). MMGs were not part of the squad TOE, so currently they appear to have their effects absent.

The British deployed their MMGs in MG Battalions, usually one such battalion per division, 48 Vickers Guns total. Brigades/Battalions would not have any organic MMGs, but MMGs divided up when the need came for them.

The Americans:

Raider Battalions 16x M1919 Browning.
1941-43 US Army Battalion 16x M1917 Browning.
1943-45 US Army Battalion 16x M1919 Browning, 2x 0.5 Browning HMG.
Marine Battalion 20x M1917-1919 Browning.

The Japanese

IJA Battalion 12x Type 92.
SNLF Battalion varried significantly, probably close to IJA Battalion.

[pry]

Data Collected

[bradfordkay]

Spead I beleave is the Bigest determiner in WiTP(that and or piolet skill), look at the F4U's preformance, this plane is a compleat pig manuaver wise, and yet it is a kiling machine.

This is as it was IRL. Once the american pilots learned that their advatage was in keeping their speed up, the Japanese aircraft were at a serious advantage. To this day combat pilots follow the maxim
: Speed is life.

[JohnK]

The F4U wasn't a complete pig maneuverwise.

There's more to air combat than how tight your turning circle is.

All US aircraft could ROLL much faster than Japanese aircraft, and the advantage in roll rate increased as air speed increased; that's a key component of "maneuverability" and a key part of a wide variety of deadly air combat maneuvers.

And at very high speeds most US aircraft could actually turn better than Japanese aircraft, whose controls locked up.

[DrewMatrix]

Japanese Captain arrived with Yorktown (I don't see this posted elsewhere)

I am playing Scen 15. It is Jan 2 1942 and the Yorktown just arrived in San Francisco. The captain is "W.O. T. Matsuki" and I can't find a T. Matsuki in the Database.

I see a U. Matsuki and an S. Matsuki but no T. Matsuki.

(Me, I think he is giving the crew Sake before every flight and they are trying to keep his presence unbenownst to CINCPAC)

I have this saved game and the turn before if anyone needs it.




Beezle

[pry]

ORIGINAL: Beezle

Japanese Captain arrived with Yorktown (I don't see this posted elsewhere)

I am playing Scen 15. It is Jan 2 1942 and the Yorktown just arrived in San Francisco. The captain is "W.O. T. Matsuki" and I can't find a T. Matsuki in the Database.

I see a U. Matsuki and an S. Matsuki but no T. Matsuki.

(Me, I think he is giving the crew Sake before every flight and they are trying to keep his presence unbenownst to CINCPAC)

I have this saved game and the turn before if anyone needs it.




Beezle

Please send the save (the turn before Yorktown arrives) to pry-witp@houston.rr.com

Thanks

[Andy Mac]

Good data there Mcn very interesting

[DrewMatrix]

Japanese Captain arrived with Yorktown

Actually looking back, the Japanese Captain replaced Buckmaster on the turn run of 12/22/41 (it shows up in the Ship Available listing, even though the Yorktown hasn't arrived. I just didn't notice until the ship arrived).

And it is reproducible (at least on my machine).

I just sent you the relevant save files.

[Warspite**]

1) The Taiho has no upgrade path, which assumes it sinks unlike all the other Japanese carriers.

2) Late war Japanese carriers are equipped with 5" ASW Rockets. All my sources indicate these were actually 4.7" AA Rockets.

[McNaughton]

Currently much of the British AA force is missing from the game.

Usually composed of about 2 light AA and 2 Heavy AA Battalions, its TOE would be...

40x 20mm (Weapon 404)
40x 40mm (Weapon 408)
16x 3.7in (Weapon 416)
88 Support (252)

The following AA Brigades are missing
1st Australian AA Brigade (December 1941)
14th West African AA Brigade (1944)
1st Indian AA Brigade (December 1941, India)
2nd Indian AA Brigade (December 1941, India)
3rd Indian AA Brigade (December 1941, India)
1st Royal Marine AA Brigade (March 1942)
5th Royal Marine AA Brigade (September 1944)
9th AA Brigade (August 1942)
13th AA Brigade (May 1942)
16th AA Brigade (December 1941, Singapore)
23rd AA Brigade (March 1942)
24th AA Brigade (March 1943)

[Jorm]

Just had a bit of a look through the RAF squadrons using "RAF Squadrons - a comprehensive record of the movement and equipment of all RAF squardrons and their antecedents since 1912"
1. bloody good job to who ever did the oOB
2. 152 sqn was not deployed to the pacific/asia till dec 43
3. 60 sqn had Buffalo I's in Oct 41 not Blenheims as listed
4.28 sqn upgraded to Hurucane IIB in dec 1942
5. 54 sqn should start in melbourne not in trincomalee
6. 70 sqn in jan 43 should have hurricane IIb not lysander I's
7. 84 sqn, i thin wa depolyed earlier but need to check
7. still looking but will continue when not so tired,
8. once again , great job to who ever did the original OOB,

cheers
Paul

[Brady]

A long time ago I did some research for a scenario In Aces High, one that took place in the Far east, and we were looking for info on the Huricane squadrons their, as posted before by myself and others on this forum, the Huricanes in the Far east were largely if not entirely Huricane II "A" or "B" models, Not the "C" we have in the game, the diferance of course being the gun package 303's instead of 20mm Hispanos, I had a realy good source on this OOB wise but for the life of me I cant seam to find it.

[McNaughton]

When the next patch comes out (not doing anything that will require all my work to be redone), if they haven't done it I am planning to add my own double set of Hurricanes. One thing I was thinking about, was should the extra plane be the Hurricane IIA, or Hurricane IIB? The IIB was the most used, but the IIA offers the interesting package in that it was a pure fighter (while the IIB was the fighter bomber). Currently, stats for the Hurricane II (which is the Hurricane IIC) are statistics while it was loaded with 2x 250lb bombs (I don't know if other Fighter Bombers have stats reduced assuming payload is always included). I really don't know if the 'new' first Hurricane should be a IIA (Fighter), or a IIB (Fighter Bomber). The IIA would be a MUCH more useful interceptor (its stats are fairly impressive), but the IIB would offer a MUCH more useful fighter-bomber (it has much reduced air-air combat stats, but can carry a hefty payload).

Any suggestions? Hurricane IIA, or Hurricane IIB (with the Hurricane IIC being a replacement arriving in 1943)?

Since the RAF need a good interceptor, I am leaning toward the IIA, but since the IIB was actually used more, it would be historically accurate to have IT modelled! Does anyone have a sorte record of Hurricanes until December 1942 (when the IIC took over) as to the most prevailing mission of the Hurricane? If it performed mostly Fighter-Bomber roles, then a IIB would be better, but, if the Hurricane performed more Interceptor roles, then the IIA would be better representing the early Hurricane as a pure fighter (i.e., better stats, missing the bombs), as even IIB's were used without bombs.

[TIMJOT]

ORIGINAL: McNaughton

When the next patch comes out (not doing anything that will require all my work to be redone), if they haven't done it I am planning to add my own double set of Hurricanes. One thing I was thinking about, was should the extra plane be the Hurricane IIA, or Hurricane IIB? The IIB was the most used, but the IIA offers the interesting package in that it was a pure fighter (while the IIB was the fighter bomber). Currently, stats for the Hurricane II (which is the Hurricane IIC) are statistics while it was loaded with 2x 250lb bombs (I don't know if other Fighter Bombers have stats reduced assuming payload is always included). I really don't know if the 'new' first Hurricane should be a IIA (Fighter), or a IIB (Fighter Bomber). The IIA would be a MUCH more useful interceptor (its stats are fairly impressive), but the IIB would offer a MUCH more useful fighter-bomber (it has much reduced air-air combat stats, but can carry a hefty payload).

Any suggestions? Hurricane IIA, or Hurricane IIB (with the Hurricane IIC being a replacement arriving in 1943)?

Since the RAF need a good interceptor, I am leaning toward the IIA, but since the IIB was actually used more, it would be historically accurate to have IT modelled! Does anyone have a sorte record of Hurricanes until December 1942 (when the IIC took over) as to the most prevailing mission of the Hurricane? If it performed mostly Fighter-Bomber roles, then a IIB would be better, but, if the Hurricane performed more Interceptor roles, then the IIA would be better representing the early Hurricane as a pure fighter (i.e., better stats, missing the bombs), as even IIB's were used without bombs.

Hello McNaughton,

I would say it should be a Hybrid, a little of both. All the Hurricanes sent to SE Asia in the first few months of the war were IIBs fighter bombers armed with 12 x .303s but most if not all were quickly modified by removing 4 of the outer guns to increase fighter performance which for the first few months of the war defensive CAP was the most pressing need.

So I would use the IIB bomb configs (bomb racks and loads) but IIA gun configs.
(8 x .303s), manuever and climb rateings. With slightly increased bomb range to account for the 4 gun weight savings at max loadout. This should give you roughly what they were fighting with.

HoweverAnother thing keep in mind was the historic extreme shortages of of suitable bombs available, which should further hamber the a/c use in a FB role. So in the end maybe just a straight IIA version would be more historically accurate.

[JohnK]

Back again with more questions about the vast array of Allied unrestricted command INF units avaliable early in the game.....

As I noted back on the Marine threads, Americal Division avaliability seems about right.

But I have some more headscratchers:

1) 40th Division is avaliable for CENPAC at the beginning of the game. It didn't ship out from the US till 23rd August 42, and even then trained for a long time before entering combat in 43.

2) A minor variance - 161st RCT is in Seattle unrestricted at the beginning of the game...but it didn't sail till 16 December 41.

3) 27th Division arrives on the West Coast unrestricted 14 days after Dec. 7 1941. This Division didn't even ARRIVE in Hawaii till May 21, 1942.

4) 111th RCT....a real headscratcher here, avaliable 37 days in the game, but didn't sail from San Francisco till 9 November 1943.

5) I can't find any reference to a 102nd RCT or Regiment in the Pacific in World War II....even checked Cavalry...listed as arriving in the game 54 days after Dec. 7th....

I really would suggest a review of Allied INF arrival times.....

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: JohnK

Back again with more questions about the vast array of Allied unrestricted command INF units avaliable early in the game.....

As I noted back on the Marine threads, Americal Division avaliability seems about right.

But I have some more headscratchers:

1) 40th Division is avaliable for CENPAC at the beginning of the game. It didn't ship out from the US till 23rd August 42, and even then trained for a long time before entering combat in 43.

The 40th was held in California as a reserve until released by General Marshall. It was sent to the Hawaii in 8/42 were it underwent amphibious training. Initial assignment of this unit to West Coast Command seems a good idea.


2) A minor variance - 161st RCT is in Seattle unrestricted at the beginning of the game...but it didn't sail till 16 December 41.

The 161st had been designed pre-war as a reinforcement for the Philippines. It was already alrerted for movement to San Francisco, where it was to embark.


3) 27th Division arrives on the West Coast unrestricted 14 days after Dec. 7 1941. This Division didn't even ARRIVE in Hawaii till May 21, 1942.

The 27th was designated as a reinforcement for Hawaii just after Pearl Harbor. It's delay in movement to Hawaii was due to shortages of shipping. During Jan-Mar 1942, 50% of available transport shipping and 33% of cargo shipping was dedicated to Australia and the South Pacific (and, initially, to attempted reinforcements for the Philippines).


4) 111th RCT....a real headscratcher here, avaliable 37 days in the game, but didn't sail from San Francisco till 9 November 1943.

I believe the unit arriving in 37 days is the 111th Aviation Regiment (scenario 15). The 111th Infantry was on the East Coast until 8/43.


5) I can't find any reference to a 102nd RCT or Regiment in the Pacific in World War II....even checked Cavalry...listed as arriving in the game 54 days after Dec. 7th....

The 102nd Infantry, along with 2 Coast Defense Regiments and a CB battalion sailed from the East Coast in January. The units were split up to form garrisons on Bora Bora, Canton Island, and Christmas Island.

I really would suggest a review of Allied INF arrival times.....

Primary resource is my memory, plus Global Logistics and Strategy 1940-1943 from the Official U.S. Army history.

Don

[TIMJOT]

ORIGINAL: JohnK

1) 40th Division is avaliable for CENPAC at the beginning of the game. It didn't ship out from the US till 23rd August 42, and even then trained for a long time before entering combat in 43.

I think perhaps the 40th was inadvertantly flipped with the 41st NG Div. In the game it is restricted but historically it was designated ready for deployment prior to Dec.7th and was offered as possible Philipine Reinforcement. It was the first US Division deployed in the Pacific, leaving for the Australia at the end January IIRC.

I would change 40th to restricted and 41st unrestricted, but in the end its a wash as long as one of the NG Division is deployable on Dec.7th.

As Don pointed out the 27th was also designated for deployment immediately just that shipping was not available.

Regards

[McNaughton]

ORIGINAL: TIMJOT

Hello McNaughton,

I would say it should be a Hybrid, a little of both. All the Hurricanes sent to SE Asia in the first few months of the war were IIBs fighter bombers armed with 12 x .303s but most if not all were quickly modified by removing 4 of the outer guns to increase fighter performance which for the first few months of the war defensive CAP was the most pressing need.

So I would use the IIB bomb configs (bomb racks and loads) but IIA gun configs.
(8 x .303s), manuever and climb rateings. With slightly increased bomb range to account for the 4 gun weight savings at max loadout. This should give you roughly what they were fighting with.

HoweverAnother thing keep in mind was the historic extreme shortages of of suitable bombs available, which should further hamber the a/c use in a FB role. So in the end maybe just a straight IIA version would be more historically accurate.

Good ideas here. I was thinking about your statement about a shortage of bombs, and maybe instead of having the Hurricane IIB capable of carrying it's full bomb weight (i.e., 1x 500lb, or 2x 250lb) that it should carry just one 250lb bomb.

I have found a website which corresponds (remarably) with the stats of the Hurricane II in WitP, http://www3.mistral.co.uk/k5083/T_MK2.HTM and it 'appears' that the stats for the Hurricane II are based off of the Hurricane IIB Fighter Bomber carrying 2x 250lb bombs.

As you can see from the site, the Hurricane IIA has SUBSTANTIALLY better statistics, with a max altitude of 41 000 (vs 30 000), speed of 340 (vs 320), and climb rate of 3150 (vs 2300). One thing that I noted from most of the readings of the Hurricane II during the early stages of the war was that it was very capable at fighting at par with all Japanese fighters (including the Ki-43 and A6M), but in its current state it isn't.

Possibly, since that the role of the FIRST Hurricane shold be geared more to that of Interceptor, while that of the LATER Hurricane (the IIC version) be the Fighter Bomber? Since the IIC was used almost exclusively as a FB, while the IIA/B was used significantly as an Air Superiority Fighter (it did perform ground attacks) that the pure fighter version is a better choice. When the IIC arrives, so too does the Spitfire VIII, giving the UK a good FB and ASF, however, before the Spitfires the only ASF the British have are the Mohawk IVs and the Hurricane IIA/Bs. Better to also differentiate between the two versions of the Hurricane II, with one being a good air-air fighter, while the other being a good air-ground fighter.


(Also, a general question about fighter bombers. AFIK, whenever one should happen to engage an enemy fighter in combat, standard procedure was to drop ordinance, wasn't it? However, in WitP, aircraft stats combat stats (fighter bombers, that is) are based off of a loaded aircraft, assuming that aircraft do not jettison their loads before combat.)