Info about 2.3 Patch

Ranger-75 · Post by **Ranger-75** » Wed Oct 17, 2001 1:39 am

Jeremy / Maj Tom,

Is 2.3 going to address the over-effective IJN torpedo planes in the Pearl Harbour historical attack? You know where most of the time the entire US battle fleet gets sunk by torpedoes, when in fact only 3 of the BBs there were even vulnerable to torpedoes because of positioning and other ships in the way <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0">

LST has a good solution, make the air groups have only 9 undamaged Kates each. That brings the sunk totals down to 1-3. Remember that even the Oaklahoma could have been repaired but being an old BB when carriers were the weapon of choice, the Navy decided not to bother. The only really unrepairable BB was the Arizona; her forward magazine exploded.

LargeSlowTarget · Post by **LargeSlowTarget** » Sun Oct 21, 2001 9:48 pm

Mike,

I have to decline the honor, I didn't came up with the idea of damaging the Kates in the PH attack. My solution was a post-PH first turn with Arizona and Oklahoma sunk, Maryland, Tennessee and Pensylvania damaged in port and California, Nevada and West Virginia turning up in 43/44 as reinforcements.

LST

Dean Robb · Post by **Dean Robb** » Fri Oct 26, 2001 7:27 pm

Originally posted by Mike Santos:
I must come down firmly on the side of "he names himself after the floating wreck that spent nearly a year in Japan getting repaired" (Mogami).

There should be a "base" NW of India separated by a 15 hex front of land (whatever is needed to prevent the permanent isolation bug) with no march path, thereby not invadable / bombable (new word I made up) labelled "British Isles" That's where the British factories should be. Then, as MC hammer said "you can't touch this".

Commonwealth / Empire reinforcements would have a priority of appearance locations, so long as one place was still under Allied control (you want to try and take all of Australia mr Japanese game exploiters?) then no Commonwealth reinforcements would be lost., likewise any dutch or Australian reinforcements would have a appeaance location priority.

A non interdictable overland supply from the new "base to the India base would allow routine supply to India in the event of "isolation" of India by successive air attacks.

The marching through burma to india can be made much less desirable with additonal level 9 bases in the march path, taking the ones that Mogami suggests removing in China. You want India?, you need to take 4 level 9 hexes now, not 1, and you still won't destroy any factories or remove the British reinforcement locations.

The LA factories should be moved one hex inward with no land march path, no more wrecking US production. Call it Southern US. LA would retain the shipyards and maybe one factory only.

SF can be "garrisoned" with 4 Coastal artillery "divisions" with say 1000 squads, 1000 artillery, 500 AFV, 99 exp, ent 9 and 99 readiness (each). Come and get it, if you dare.

These items would make game system exploits less likely or desirable and I think they are feasible without major code changes - Any comment especially from Mike Wood or Rich Dionne???

And I would still limit splitting of units to 10 per side, unless the parent can be made to never expand beyond it's new size.

While the splitting limit is a good idea, I don't think that it's right to beef up the British capabilities too far. Remember that India was NOT the Brit's highest priority in WWII. There main effort was against Germany, with whatever leftovers they had going to India. With the European and Mediterranean theaters active, there just wasn't much available to send to the CBI.

Ranger-75 · Post by **Ranger-75** » Fri Oct 26, 2001 7:45 pm

Indeed, India was at the bottom of the priority list for Great Britain. That would remain true until it was in grave danger of being lost. Then, a lot more of the 39 British Army divisions (only 3 of which were assigned to the CBI theatre) along with all the African (east, south, west) and any Canadian divisions not in combat (probably a total of 10-12 Commonwealth divisions, not including any Australian divisions) would have rapidly found their way into India.

India itself had 16 (later 18) divisions. And I don't think these are all in the game. I'll check my current game to get a count later.

LargeSlowTarget · Post by **LargeSlowTarget** » Sun Oct 28, 2001 2:07 pm

Re the India base:

I doubt India can be made landlocked with no port, since it is the main port for resupplying the other SEAC bases (hence should have lots of MCS and escorts). I even have the impression that the supplies for India arrive via routine convoy from the off-map area.

What about making the land path between Dacca and India semi-permeable, i.e. having a path from India to Dacca, but none vice versa. The editor allows this, and although no path is shown on the map, units can be marched from India to Dacca (but not in the other direction). This would make India uninvadeable by land. The only problem is that friendly units too cannot be withdrawn to India by land for rebuilding or I&I ... I mean R&R. And it will still be vulnerable to amphib assaults.

Ranger-75 · Post by **Ranger-75** » Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:07 pm

I just thought of a possible alternative - to the India vulnerability problem, What about units that sat in India and couldn't move, sort of like national defense units?.

How would one go about doing this? Simple, add 3 or 4 Indian divisions (the ones that do not seem to be in the game anyway) full strength, 75 or so readiness, and make them attached to the Nat China HQ. This makes them completely immobile.

No forget that, you only have to change the base of Imphal to Nat China and then you can move the units I just tested it further and oh well...

Perhaps an additional "restricted" HQ that you can't change to base to.

Or, like in the "eastern US" base, make the factories in the US behind seattle - Vancouver and not reachable by any game mechanics expoliter.

What ever happenned to India as being a source of supply???

mogami · Post by **mogami** » Thu Nov 01, 2001 7:08 pm

Greetings sports fans, I don't want us to totally eliminate the possibility of Japan conducting operations against the British. However every PBEM game I played in the past 8 months before this discussion began saw the Japanese landing on Ceylon/India in the first 3-6 weeks of the war. It was some how possible for Japan to conduct their PI and Sinapore operations with just a few LCU's and send the rest into the South Pac Cen Pac and India. Prehaps just having the CW and US units there recieve a massive PP/supply bonus on Feb 1 1942 would make Japan actully try to kill them first.

GET TRANSPT · Post by **GET TRANSPT** » Sat Nov 17, 2001 3:14 am

Hi guys. I haven't posted on this list in a while but I noticed last year when I played ver 2.2 the Brits (actually Free French) Fantasque DD had been severely dowgraded from the old PACWAR!

Version 2.2 has only 4 x 5.5 guns., 1 lousy 4/45 DP gun, and 2x 2 pdrs

Now looking at both Jane;s (and my recollection of old Pacwar) these super fast, DDs had:

5 x 5.5 guns (refitted in the US in 1942-44 Jane's says. I bet they were DPs!), 8 x 40 mm and 10 x 20mm!!
Also, 6 x 21.7 inch torpedo tubes, tripled( i;m not an expert on torpedoes, but rhey were probably no worse than the British types)

What happened??

The values in Old PacWar seemed accurate. Why give this superior French prewar design crappy British aramanent in ver 2.2?

Cheers

Sergio,
aka Serge on my French passport

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Mon Nov 19, 2001 9:42 am

I was just wondering, will there be a 2.3 patch?
any news on availability?

K G von Martinez · Post by **K G von Martinez** » Mon Nov 26, 2001 1:33 pm

Well, Sergio, it's not that wrong. There was only one Fantasque-class contretorpilleur which actually served against the Japonese: "Le Triomphant". It started in the Pacific in March 1941 and had at that time after a refit in Great Britain 4 x 138 mm, 1 x 102 mm AA Mk V, 2 x 40 mm Vickers AA, 4 x 37 mm AA, 8 x 13,2 mm Hotchkiss AAMG, 2 x 8 mm Hotchkiss AAMG, 9 x 550 mm TT. Only with the rebuilding in the US (April 1944 to March 1945) "Le Triomphant" received the standard armament you mentioned (but as far as I know with their old main guns; are there any American 138 mm??) and went to the British Eastern Fleet arriving in May 1945.

David Heath · Post by **David Heath** » Mon Nov 26, 2001 7:49 pm

Hi Guys

Its going to be a long time before or if we ever release v2.3. Everyone is hard at work on Uncommon Valor and War in the Pacific.

Jeff Norton · Post by **Jeff Norton** » Fri Nov 30, 2001 5:54 am

dang... <img src="frown.gif" border="0">

madflava13 · Post by **madflava13** » Fri Dec 07, 2001 12:45 am

I'm disappointed too, but can you imagine UV/WITP? Pacwar on steroids... And smart. And pretty. Like those girls in high school.