Matrix Games Forums

With the "light" base force, I see there are only 4 engineer squads. In current WitP this would be useless since you need at least 10 non-disabled squads for any building or repairs to get done. Or has this algorithm been changed perhaps?

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

Hi Kereguelen, were/are you able to get any useful data out of Rays of the Rising Sun which I sent? I know most of the info was pretty vague but will the Chinese puppet armies be included in the game?

Thanks.

Hi Gary,

wanted to send you a mail concerning this, but seems that I forgot about this in the pre-Christmas hectic (Sorry!).

'Rays' was really useful and the puppet armies are included now. Still struggling to give them correct TOE's, but actually there're is quite alot of 'hidden' info that (combined with other sources) allows for TOE data that may at least come close to history. And it was a most interesting read, btw.!

If you don't mind, I'll keep 'Rays' for some time until I can finalize the work?

Thanks

K

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen


If you don't mind, I'll keep 'Rays' for some time until I can finalize the work?

Thanks

K

Most welcome. It delights me that I could be of some help on this grand undertaking. I'm in no hurry for the book. Keep it as long as you need. [:)]

ORIGINAL: Chad Harrison

Joel, any detail on the USAAF/USN typical base force layout?

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

You would need to ask Joel that one I can give the RAF equivalent if thats any use

This is the final mid 43 RAF 'normal' Base force . . .

Thanks for the detail Andy. Nice to see the high number of support squads.

Chad,

Three basic types of US Base Forces: Army, Air Force, and Naval

Army: 150 Support, 16 AV Support, 24 Other (Inf, AA)
Air: 100 Support, 60 AV Support, 12 Eng, 26 Other (Inf, AA)
Naval: 100 Support, 30 AV Support, 100 Naval Support, 12 Eng, 26 Other (Inf, AA, CD)

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse

ORIGINAL: Chad Harrison

Joel, any detail on the USAAF/USN typical base force layout?

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

You would need to ask Joel that one I can give the RAF equivalent if thats any use

This is the final mid 43 RAF 'normal' Base force . . .

Thanks for the detail Andy. Nice to see the high number of support squads.

Chad,

Three basic types of US Base Forces: Army, Air Force, and Naval

Army: 150 Support, 16 AV Support, 24 Other (Inf, AA)
Air: 100 Support, 60 AV Support, 12 Eng, 26 Other (Inf, AA)
Naval: 100 Support, 30 AV Support, 100 Naval Support, 12 Eng, 26 Other (Inf, AA, CD)

Cool, thanks for the details. Seems like it will be much easier in AE to round out your base forces to 100% TO&E. Big thumbs up. I would personally rather have smaller base forces that you can actually get to full TO&E than large ones that spend the entire war at Pearl and are still not at a full TO&E.

So, when you naval, do you mean the multiple USN base forces or the few Naval Base froces that we see in stock? They get inherent naval support! Thats awesome.

Got a little taster to share with you its all subject to change still but I figured it was worth a look

Part 2 after the TOE change to lighten it for Jungle work

p.s. before anyone comments I know Rabaul Det. and the Ind Coy's are not part of 1 AUs Corps
 
7th AUs Div is lighter because it starts down the equivalnet of 3 Coy's of Inf which accompanied Black Force to Java

DDDRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLL
 
Have to clean my keyboard now.&nbsp; <continuously repeating "This is gonna be good">.

[:D][:D]

As you can see devices numbers are a lot higher in units this is especially true in allied formations where the increased device count increases supply usage.
&nbsp;

Did you get a chance to address the command HQ's not drawing supplies to themselves? In my current PBEM it's costing me bigtime, I had to pull out my airforce from a critical theatre just as KB appeared because they were not drawing replacement air frames.

So far it looks like Malay HQ, SWPAC and SEAC are affected on the allied side. Japan's Home island HQ and northern China HQ (don't know their exact names) also may be affected.

Jim

Its not an issue in AE we looked for it but couldn't replicate it Jim
&nbsp;
The fact is you can manully draw forward the same amount of supply i.e. 25k so it wont be an issue

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Part 2 after the TOE change to lighten it for Jungle work

Andy,

Pre upgrade,
Which Aust units used the 3.7" howitzer?
Do the Marmon Herrington A/cs represent anything else?
I think you have over motorized them, the Aussie Divs went most place on their feet, maybe somewhere between this figure and what you have for the Jungle TO&E

I dont think that any Australian AT units upgraded to 6pdr AT guns in the Pacific theatres.

The Australian AT Rgts became known as Tank Attack Rgts, & I doubt ever uses RAA as a prefix to their title.

At work so don't have my source books.

Div Cav Regt for Aus Divs mostly used Carriers so MH are from the Brit Div TOE that the Div Recce regt was pointed to (I did Aus/Brit Divs at same time !!!)

3.7" I will need to check when I get home and have my sources in front of me

Motorisation assumptions are tied to the number of Bren Sections and Guns in the Div i.e. the number of vehicles used to transport guns.

Cannot stop AT Guns upgrading without changing whole structure (the later TOE is actually the TOE of the Div - the actual unit is still using 2 Pounders because of the lack of guns)

Andy

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

At work so don't have my source books.

Div Cav Regt for Aus Divs mostly used Carriers so MH are from the Brit Div TOE that the Div Recce regt was pointed to (I did Aus/Brit Divs at same time !!!)

3.7" I will need to check when I get home and have my sources in front of me

Motorisation assumptions are tied to the number of Bren Sections and Guns in the Div i.e. the number of vehicles used to transport guns.

Cannot stop AT Guns upgrading without changing whole structure (the later TOE is actually the TOE of the Div - the actual unit is still using 2 Pounders because of the lack of guns)

Andy

Andy,

AIF Divisional Cavalry Regiments were different from British recce ('unique'). 2/6th and 2/7th had received some Vickers tanks in 1940 and 2/9th used Stuart tanks at El Alamein (but otherwise you're correct, most of their vehicles were Bren carriers).

Can send you TOE's for them tomorrow. But I don't know if they really took their equipment back to Australia, TOE's are for the MTO.

K

I think from memory I used the MH as a proxy armoured car in place of Stuarts/Vickers Light Tanks for the Aus Div Cav but it should have been a mix of Bren&nbsp;Sections and&nbsp;Ard Cars (which ironically is what the Brit Recce Rgets have at start.)
&nbsp;
My assumption is that when they arrive they are at ME TOE and then they lose the Div Cav in 42 when they get the lighter TOE. The Div Cav become either the Cavalry Commandos or inf/ard replacements for other units
&nbsp;
To late for next testing build I will amend for next submission

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: el cid again

One of the books on the defense of Wake - but the officer commanding (who for some reason is not given the glory given to a less senior officer) - gives a different organization - and says there were not supposed to be enough men for all the weapons - you could go from position to position and the weapons were already there. The pre war organization which existed in Dec 1941 included

Wake Island's defenses were still in the process of being set up. The detachment of the 1st Defense Battalion, at Wake, was not the permanent garrision of Wake, just a care-taker unit during installation. Once all weapons were in place, the men were to leave and men from another unit (3rd or 4th, one of the units then at Pearl Harbor) was to rotate in.

This is true. Also - Admiral Kimmel wanted to form a "Wake Island Militia" - but while it DID fight - it was never legally formed up - and it was a strange and rare case of "semi-officially sanctioned American illegal combattants." The Marines - having lots of weapons and inadequate manpower - used the men of the civilian construction contractors (mainly) - and did so without the slightest effort to give them any "identifying insignia" (an arm band would do - of any color). Lacking a uniform, they were not lawful combattants, and the Japanese were outraged, executing the most blatant offenders summarily (leading to many charges of "atrocity" - although WE do exactly the same thing to unlawful combattants - in every era). Anyway - the force that fought was the caretaker force - slightly reinforced (which was meaningful as it had too many weapons).

There were about 1,000 civilian contractors at Wake when the Japanese attacked. About 400 volunteered to help the Marines, mostly in a support capacity, but some also fought.

The battle-support role of Wake's contractors is abstractly represented by giving the Marines on Wake the ability to man all their weapons, and fight as infantry if the Japanese land. As Don notes, the marines did not have enough "boots on the ground" to do that themselves.

In WitP-AE, the Navy's civilian contractors building airfields on Wake and other Pacific Islands are included as separate engineer units. They disband in early '42. As Sid implies, under the rules of war followed by the US, civilians are prohibited from working in war zones. The Navy phased out their civilian contractors and replaced them with Naval Construction Battalions ("Seabees").

Despite the legend of the "Fighting Seabees", Naval Construction Battalions were not combat engineers. They were outstanding construction engineers, and will appear as such in AE.

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Got a little taster to share with you its all subject to change still but I figured it was worth a look

Andy, is the top screen, the Sub Editor, going to be available ingame or will it need to be accessed through the editor?

Thanks

Chad

The sub-editor part is quite clearly an in game screen.

Looks good!