Matrix Games Forums

Devastator Squadrons still getting replacements. All production of them was finished before the war started. You should have to make do with what you have until Avengers are in production.

If that's the case the the Avenger's should go into production sooner. Instead of 7/42. Weren't there some at Midway? Does anyone know when Avenger's started down the production line?

Hi,

The first TBF came off the production line on 3 jan 1942 for pre -delivery trials and handed to the US Navy on 30 jan 1942. By Aug 1942 145 TBF-1 had been delivered.

ref:- Grumman TBF/TBM Avenger by Terry C. Treadwell

cheers

That looks like an OOB fix to me then. The production screen has 7/42 as first delivery date for the TBF. Thanks for the info Duke!

VT-8, transferring to Saratoga with 16 aircraft on July 7, 1942, was the first TBF squadron to operate from a carrier. An early-arriving detachment of 6 TBFs from VT-8 was deployed to Midway Island on June 1; four days later only one of these remained. For more interesting (if very dry) info, check out this site

Interesting info. Do the production rates coincide with deployment? Or, is it based on production only? Or, has it been tweeked for play balance?

While I agree in a factualy sense to remove Devistator replacements, there are some wrinkles...

a. First USN CV battle (or 2 or 3 skirmishes), and no more torpedo bombers for USN.
b. If it had happened historically, you better believe that more TBDs would have be produced, or some other solution would have arisen, like...
c. There should be carrier-TRAINED SBD replacement squadrons then. Again, nobody would have historically said they were gonna send ther CV TFs around, sans 18 aircraft. "We just can't get the labor guyst to build us any!" If you take away TBDs, you need to give CV Captains something else to put on their carriers, that would be historically possible, like another SBD squadron or fighter sqdn.
d. That being the case, why would you want to encourage the the USN to replace TBDs with SPDs. I would think most USN Captains (at least in game), would welcome this.
e. We can nit-pick US production numbers till the cows come home, because they are well documented, and easily available. But the numbers are not as easily when looking at the Japanese repretoire of equipment. I'm sure you could find similar cases to the TBD, in the Japanese equipment.

Accuracy has to be blended with "what makes sense" in-game (notice that I did not use the word "balance", this has nothing to do with that).

Regards,
-F-

Scenario 15, 4th New Chinese Corps, has objective set to 21st Air Flotilla(100) rather than Nanchang.

For what it's worth, I've always thought that the TBDs should have no production. They were obsolete and out of production for years.

I am in scenario 15, Sep '43, v1.40 but started under v1.30. I was tooling around in the ship availability display and I noticed the following.

CV's Franklin, Hancock, and Randolph are each scheduled to come in with the following loadout:

VF-xx 38 F6F
VB-xx 18 SB2C
VS-xx 18 SB2C
VT-xx 15 TBF
Total of 89 aircraft each

CV's Ticonderoga, Bennington, Boxer, Bon Homme Richard, Antietam, Shangri-La, and Lake Champlain are each scheduled to come in with this loadout:

VF-xx 38 F6F
VB-xx 18 SB2C
VT-xx 15 TBF
Total of 71 aircraft each

They look a bit light on dive bombers. Is this correct? Do they change when they actually arrive, or are there other air units that I am supposed to transfer to them?

The Mogami class is listed as 6-8" F and 4-8" R. Shouldn't it show 4-8" F, 2-8" C and 4-8" R?

Shouldn't Algonquin-3698 be Canadian? (All Scenarios)

ORIGINAL: Splinterhead

Shouldn't Algonquin-3698 be Canadian? (All Scenarios)

Yep

One Indian division fought with UK army in Burma.
25000 Indian soldiers marched to Impar with Japanese troops but 8000 soldiers were killed by UK army

Philippine partisans were as aggressive as Chinese partisan.

After all, Is it impossible to add German U-boats to this game?

One Indian division fought with UK army in Burma.

Just to clarify for folks (as I think English may be your second language). What you're saying is that an Indian Div fought -against- the UK army in Burma. "With" implies beside, as allies, and there were certainly many India Divs that fought beside the conventional UK Divs.

That's quite true (altho I didn't know the numbers, but yes, quite a bit).

I've got the information on my home PC tho (the name of the unit and their leader). Basically, he was a Indian nationalist (self-rule), that went to Japan for help. The number of partisans that fought for him was disappointing to the Japanese (they were hoping the closer he got to the border, that more Indians would revolt), but it was no small number.

I think he was active for Japan in late 42 thru 43. He then saw that Japan wasn't going to win (and was therefore no use to him), so he went back to India, and offered his "services" for the British. The Brits obviously weren't real happy with him, and I don't think they actually lent him any support.

This is gonna bother me tho. I know who you're talking about, and have the info at home, but I want to look the info up for you.

Grrr.
-F-

Hi all,

Has the "British destroyer withdrawal" bug been reported? I noted that someone else had posted it in another thread, but though it worth mentioning here.

The game seems to require an unreasonable number of BR destroyers to be withdrawn. When capital ships arrive they do so singly, when they are withdrawn they require escort (or so it appears). As the game continues it is possible to end up with zero British destroyers, or one or two old ones at the very least.

Mark

ORIGINAL: mark24

Hi all,

Has the "British destroyer withdrawal" bug been reported? I noted that someone else had posted it in another thread, but though it worth mentioning here.

The game seems to require an unreasonable number of BR destroyers to be withdrawn. When capital ships arrive they do so singly, when they are withdrawn they require escort (or so it appears). As the game continues it is possible to end up with zero British destroyers, or one or two old ones at the very least.

Mark

Not a bug. All they need to do is add the OOB additions sent in by me and allow Corvettes, Sloops, Minesweepers, to satisfy the withdrawl requirements at 100 PP instead of 200 for DDs.

I show in two sources that the Fuso (330) should be the Huyo. (Imperial Japanese Navy - Watts and Gordon and http://smmlonline.com/articles/momi/momi.html

Ron, are those additions posted somewhere or could you send me a list at herrbear@hotmail.com.

Thanks.

Ron,

Fine by me!

Thanks,

Mark