ONLY!!! OOB Comments/Suggestions for Patch 1.4

[pry]

Data Collected


Note,
Again I remind folks that this thread is for OOB and data base comments/suggestions only...
Any game feature changes or additions or tweaks need to be posted in Kid's wishlist thread...

Ron and afspret you will need to repost some of your comments there.

[esteban]

-U.S. 1st and 2nd Marine divisions start under "West Coast Command" HQ

[Tankerace]

As for 2nd USMC, look at the first thread. Its already DOA esteban.

[madflava13]

May 1st Start scenario (42A)- Japanese Air Units 32nd Lt. Sentai (Ki-32) and 65th Lt. Sentai (Ki-30) are based in Mandalay, but under Kwangtung Area control. Player must burn PPs to move them. I'm not sure which HQ they belong to, but this ain't right!


Edit: To add in which '42 scenario...

[Banquet]

Not sure if this is strictly OOB, but 1849-FF880 aboard HMS Hermes in 1.3, scenario 16 is displayed as Sea Gladiator but pic shows a Hurricane.

[jcjordan]

Shouldn't the 6th FS be Phillippine instead of US Army for pilots. It was this way in 1.21 not sure why it changed (Ver1.3 Scen 15)

[fbastos]

I respectfully request to add the 2nd MTB Flotilla in Hong Kong, as a show of respect for their gallant fighting against much superior forces.

F.

[akdreemer]

Well, here goes my list of suggestions.

First, all of the West Coast cities/ports need to have dedicated base forces attached at Dec 7, 1941. For instance, San Diego was home to a major Nave training base, a major Fleet base, a Marine Air Base, among others. In other words large support and administration services. San Francisco Bay area itself probably shipped over 70% of all of the beans and bullets for the entire Pacific. What I have in mind are dedicated base units similar to the ones found in India. Kind of a combination of support, engineers, and air support. Pearl Harbor should also get one by mid-1942.

Second, listed below is the standard munitions load out of american carriers at various dates during the war (Source U.S. Aircraft Carriers: An illsutrated Design History, By Norman Friedman,1983, Page 384-385)

Wartime Fleet Carriers:
Essex 1942 Enterprise Oct 1943 Bennington 1944 Bunker Hill 1945
100lbs GP Bmbs 504 504 508 300
250 " " ----- ----- ----- 50
500 " " 296 288 292 400
" SAP " ----- 288 292 60
1000 GP " 146 378 147 75
" SAP " 129 378 128 -----
" AP " 110 378 110 -----
1600 AP " 19 18 18 -----
2000 GP " 19 18 18 15
325lbs DB " 296 288 292 48
100lbs INC " 296 288 292 240
100lbs F ---- ----- ----- ----
200lbs F ----- ----- ----- 300
Torps 36 36 50 -----
3.5 AR ----- ----- 366 300
5.0 HVAR ----- ----- 4006 1700
11.72 AR ----- ----- ----- 108

Light Carriers and Escort Carriers have similar loadouts.

Several thing become apparent when viewing the above. First, US Carriers carried bombs heavier that 1000lbs, and in doing so would have the means to use them, i.e. there would have been an aircraft loadout for them. Indeed, it seems that they always had a few 2000lbr's on board. Must have used them for something other than ballast!!

Second, Although SAP and AP bombs fade from the picture late war, there is a massive increase in air lauched rockets. This appears to come at the expense of SAP and AP bombs initially, but note that in 1945 there were not any torpedoes on biard. This reflects the changing nature of the air war. As fewer Japanese naval and merchat marine ships are aflost, and carrier rainds aginst the home Islands, large AP and SAP bombs and torpedoes become superfluous.

So from the above there is a case for having loadouts on US Naval Planes for bombs heavier than 1000lbs and that there was an increased use of air launch rockets as the war progressed. Therefore I would like to see this reflected in the game...

The PBY should have sufficient range to fly from the West Coast to Hawaii, as they did it all the time during the war.


Another area that I will examine on a later posting involves endurance of naval vessels. To say the least, the current settings are much to generous. Under wartime service conditions no US Warship ever achieved "designed" endurance. Various factors that reduced endurance included split-plant steaming to limit the effects of prpulsion casualties. Build up of barnacles and other marine growth increased resistence of hulls that in turn made the propulstion system less efficient. Ships would always have some fuel on board that they could not use because of stability concerns ir possible sea-water contamination in fuel tanks ballasted with sea water for stability concerns.

getting late and have to get up early for work.. hope this is not too jumbled

[PeteG662]

Pry,

From the other board on missing leaders....Scenario 7 Russian leaders disappear during operations and become WOs 0/0.

Secondly, the AVD East of Hawaii in Scenario 15 (and I would assume others that have December 7, 1941 in the scenario) is in a REPLENISHMENT TF. First, this class ship is not supposed to be in a REPL TF since you can't add one to a TF in the game. Could we change it to something more obtuse like a transport TF? I change it anyway during turn to make it an ASW since it will pass through the sub infested waters around Hawaii.

One edit: The CVEs in (I believe Scenario 13) following the Carrier TFs northward around the PI......their squadrons are rated at 25 experience level. Is this realistic? They get plastered by the Betties and all the other land based stuff. The squadrons are NOT replacement squadrons as designated on these carriers. I will post specifics if you would like. Seems like MOST late war CVEs have 25 experience levels on their inherent assigned squadrons which means they are relatively useless except as ferries.

Thanks

[BPRE]

Hi,

As bgibs noted in another thread ships of type LSM have their capacity listed as A/C Capacity instead of Cargo Capacity. This is also valid for the types LCI(R) and LCI(M). I'm posting this in the OOB thread although I suspect it might be a code fault so in case I should report in the support forum please let me know.

Regards
BPRE

PS. I've checked this for the two scenarios 10 (Campaign 44) and 11 (Campaign 45).

[Pascal_slith]

USMC 7th Defense Battalion should be in San Diego on Dec. 7th, not on any island.

All New Caledonia bases should be under Australian command on Dec. 7th and only the Noumea base should exist.

The pic for the 'Singapore' type aircraft is WRONG. Check the OOB thread generated before patch 1.3, someone generously produced the correct graphic to modify the Allied planeside BMP file (plus a few others that were excellent).

There are many others errors I corrected after 1.21, but I'll have to go through my list again. These were the first that I noticed.

[jcjordan]

I second about the 2MTB as well as adding the Brit Power class MTB as they had several in SE Asia but none are there, only a few US PT boats. Scen 15 ver 1.3. This may be along the lines of a wish but Kid's wish list is locked. Also the Brit ML Redstart in HK would be nice.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: jcjordan

I second about the 2MTB as well as adding the Brit Power class MTB as they had several in SE Asia but none are there, only a few US PT boats. Scen 15 ver 1.3. This may be along the lines of a wish but Kid's wish list is locked. Also the Brit ML Redstart in HK would be nice.

Those minelayers/minesweepers in HK are really small harbor MLs. If we start sticking vessels of this size in we are going to have to model Chinese Junks and Sampans.[:D]

[fbastos]

Base 735 "Goodenough island" upper case the "island".

[michaelm75au]

The A6M3a cannot operate from a carrier.
This aircraft is in slot 8 of the database (using scenario#16). Only aircraft in slot 1-7 and 15-23 can operate from carriers, as per editor.

The upgrade path from A6M2 (slot3) to A6M3a (slot8) to A6M5 (slot5) takes the aircraft from carrier capable to not back to can.

IIRC slot 8 was blank in v1.2 and this aircraft was added in v1.3. It probably needs be moved to slot range 15-23 if can operate from carriers.

Michael

[BlackVoid]

We need Oscar II upgrades for the japanese.

[rtrapasso]

Here is a problem I listed in another forum:

you are holding Clark Field. You are short of supplies. The Japanese bomb your airbase, so your engineers stop construction on your desperately needed forts, and instead repair your airfield... an airfield you would like to blow up, so the Japanese can't use it if/when Clark Field falls. Your supplies are used to make sure the Japanese have a nice smooth field when they capture it. Is there anyway to at least to stop repairs to the airfield/port facilities in a base that is likely to fall? I know you can turn off repairs to resources/factories, etc.

From comments from other players, I think there is no way to do this. How about in version 1.4?


Also in that other thread (Supplies draining from large base to empty bases) from Sredni:

I've been reinforcing Port Moesby, and part of that has been dumping supplies into it. I had around 25k stored, and I've been sending little 9k supply runs into it as I could put them together, and I just checked to see what I was at... and it's down to 17k. Check the little empty bases nearby and Buna is up to 9k supplies.

Buna that will quickly fall to the japs, buna that has never had any allied units. Why is PM sending supplies to a port for the japanese to take? Do I have a japanese sympathiser in my supply core? Can I shoot the damn traitor?

In other words is there any way to stop this from happening? I don't want to supply the japanese when they start taking small bases. Allready Buna is a juicy target that'll supply a months worth of japanese offensives. I need to build up the supplies in PM while I still can before he starts running mad with mini KB's and subs between PM and townsville.

I am reposting here because I guess that is what we are/were supposed to do to get official attention to these problems.

[Ron Saueracker]

Torres Strait Light Infantry Battalion (Thursday Island). Saw this at www.anzacday.org.au/history/ww2/bfa/isl ... nders.html

[Admiral Scott]

This may have or have not been asked before.
I wish when I read the signal ops report, I can click on a radio transmission detetected at a coordinates or a base, and I would go to that exact spot on the map.
Sorry if this has been asked before, or if this is the wrong place to post this.

Thanks

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: Admiral Scott

This may have or have not been asked before.
I wish when I read the signal ops report, I can click on a radio trasnmission detetected at a coordinates or a base, and I would go to that exact spot on the map.
Sorry if this has been asked before, or if this is the wrong place to post this.

Thanks

Been asked for many times. Kid has said that it is not possible.