Reluctant Admiral Feedback

[Misconduct]

Stupid question, is this mod able to be played Ai vs Allies? or would rather be Japanese vs AI? thanks

[ny59giants]

What has to be looked at for the Allies is how would they have reacted to Japan's earlier build up of Naval assets??

If Japan is getting more carriers earlier, how long would it have taken Allied intelligence to spot this and what lag time would there be before they did something to counter it??

Would the Allies get a few ships or a class of ships out sooner??

Would the Wildcat been out in greater numbers??

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: Misconduct

Stupid question, is this mod able to be played Ai vs Allies? or would rather be Japanese vs AI? thanks

It is not very different from Scenario 1, so it should be playable vs. AI on both sides. As AI ignores all economic difficulties, nothing should go wrong.

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

What has to be looked at for the Allies is how would they have reacted to Japan's earlier build up of Naval assets??

If Japan is getting more carriers earlier, how long would it have taken Allied intelligence to spot this and what lag time would there be before they did something to counter it??

Would the Allies get a few ships or a class of ships out sooner??

Would the Wildcat been out in greater numbers??

As was mentioned before, USN intelligence in RL expected Japanese to have more Shokaku-class carriers that they did. So, even though here Japanese buildup is somewhat bigger, I doubt that the US fleet building program will be expanded radically. Ranger might be added to the fleet in 1943, though (after Operation Torch). British might withdraw less capital ships. More squadrons might be kept active in the Pacific (although be careful with that, this can create an unstoppable force way too early). A bit more planes might be sent to Pacific, particularly level bombers (fighters Allies already have in surplus).

Giving Allies a brigade loaded on transports to reinforce what they want in South Pacific is a good idea too.

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

What has to be looked at for the Allies is how would they have reacted to Japan's earlier build up of Naval assets??

If Japan is getting more carriers earlier, how long would it have taken Allied intelligence to spot this and what lag time would there be before they did something to counter it??

Would the Allies get a few ships or a class of ships out sooner??

Would the Wildcat been out in greater numbers??

Wouldn't the most likely event be a longer war? The Allies were still building a lot of ships and A/C when the historical war ended, and moving troops to the Pacific. If Japan does better early, wouldn't the real result be that they would have been pounded by more and for longer? The real winner in such an event would probably be the Soviet Union..., and the big loser a more radioactive Japan.

[RedLancer]

John & Stan

Happy to do the work - just need some clear orders on what you want - I'm working on something else at the moment so I'm not tuned to your needs.

John

[John 3rd]

I'm not too big of fan of sweetening the pot for the Allies too much. Most of what we have done would never have reached Allied intelligence.

Specifics:
1. FatR is correct in pointing out that Allied Int had always thought there was a 3rd Sho-Class CV. With cancelling the Shinano and Taiho the Japanese basically gain one additional flight deck. Certainly can make the argument that Shinano would never be built in AE, however, we're focused on building here.

2. Adding something different to the Allied OOB is certainly easy enough to do. Placing a TF carrying troops is easy enough. Moving a CTF as a Cover unit could work too.

Crazy IDEA: What about having Ranger providing Escort for a convoy going somewhere in the Pacific and give a withdrawal date? This would reflect Torch and the Atlantic but put an additional asset out there for the Allies. The CV could have a small escort of a couple of cruisers and 5-6 DD.

3. Thanks John for the artwork thinking. FatR--What do we need to get done?

[John 3rd]

Juan--Is Stan right here about your Mods and China being stronger? Am trying to figure out how this occurred within the Mod.

[John 3rd]

I'm thinking we have got to do something to bring engines up to what is being produced by Japanese Naval Air at the start of the game. It is only logical that both would be expanded together. Simply have to deduct more supply and fuel to reflect the changes.

Stanislav--What do you think engine production should be raised to?

I increased Production in the following planes: Zero (100/month), Emily (starts in production at 24), Val (35), Kate (35), and Betty (cannot remember but it is I think 25-30 higher). Did not touch Army stuff whatsoever for the start.

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

3. Thanks John for the artwork thinking. FatR--What do we need to get done?

I'll edit the aircraft file (can do it on the next week), restoring the old models to their places and placing new ones into their slot, then, I assume the position of new planesides/tops in their respective jpgs must be changed according to their new bitmaps, and the new ones restored to their places.

[JuanG]

China is stronger in my mods, but I made no changes here.

My guess is that when the new IJN land based AA guns were added to TOE's, someone accidentally hit some button that filled out ALL the units to their TOE, or something like that. I'm not very familiar with the land unit editor, sorry.

[John 3rd]

Sounds like we've work to do.

Stan--Do you want to start on the plane files?

Additionally did you keep notes on the engines? We need to get that in-line for the start of the war. Perhaps stronger research for the later engines on the new models of Naval Aircraft? Questions/Thoughts there?

I'll assign myself to getting the China LCU issue dealt with. I don't know too much with ground units but will figure it out. Was truly shocked when I tried to clear out a hex around Ichang and found over 3,500 AV in Chinese there. YIKES! How do the Chinese troops normally start? Is it around 50% strength and then able to fill out?

Has anyone found other issues within the Mod?

What shall we do for the Allied player? No one has really responded to ideas thrown out there...

[JuanG]

One thing to consider for the allies is to add in a few of the ships that were cancelled by the imminent end of the war.

So possibly expand the '45/46 naval OOB by including another Iowa or Alaska, and another Essex or two.

Another option is to consider allowing the allies to make conversions like in my CV variant, allowing for some further Sangamon class tanker-CVE conversions. You could also give the allied player more options for how they upgrade their old battleships, instead of basing it off the historical upgrades.

[John 3rd]

Juan--Those are good ideas. I like the CVE Option and possibly the old BB Upgrade possibilities. What are those in your Mods?

Michael's thoughts regarding starting with more F4F might be possible as well.

[ny59giants]

For the Americans I would like to see three Naval training squadrons permanently restricted to the West Coast at San Diego. One each for fighters, dive bombers, and torpedo bombers. Small size to start (18 planes) and then expands after mid-42 to 36 planes. Use the obsolete planes. The Americans don't really have a way to train up Naval pilots. I have Marine squadrons, but not Naval.

[eloso]

Ranger TF:

CV Ranger
CA Augusta (Northampton class)
CL Brooklyn (Brooklyn class)
CL Savannah (Brooklyn class)
DD Mayrant (Benham class)
DD Trippe (Benham class)
DD Rhind (Benham class)
DD Ludlow (Gleaves class)
DD Ericson (Gleaves class)

CV Ranger Air groups:
VF-5 F4F-3
VF-41 F4F-3A
VBF-41 F4U-1D (delayed)
VS-41 SBD2U-3
VS-42 SBD2U-3
VT-4 TBD-1

I've got everything set in a mod for my own use already including leaders for the capital ships. They appear in Eastern USA on 21 DEC 41 and must withdraw on 01 SEP 42. CV Ranger did appear as a ferry in 44 so I have her returning on 11 JUL 44. All the information that I could find indicated that she was used in the early war to ferry aircraft in the Atlantic theater.

Art Suggestion

I set up my aircraft art for custom aircraft as outlined in michaelm's word document found here:

tm.asp?m=2405660

The downside is they won't show in the editor with the show art checkboxes selected. The good thing about this method is that I can use Cathartes excellent air-tops mod without having to re-do all the work to embed all of the air art files into those large bitmaps. Also the other result is the mod is much smaller for distribution.

[JuanG]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Juan--Those are good ideas. I like the CVE Option and possibly the old BB Upgrade possibilities. What are those in your Mods?

Michael's thoughts regarding starting with more F4F might be possible as well.

In the current version of the CV mod, the remaining USN Cimarron/Neosho class AO can upgrade into more Sangamon class CVE's.

The Standard BB's have two upgrade lines, one without rebuilds and major upgrades, and one with a rebuild and upgrade to 5in/38s - this allows the allied player to put the more damaged ones into complete overhaul, while using the others if needed in an active role. In the new version I'm working there will be 3 (basic, AA upgrade, complete rebuild) or even 4 upgrade 'paths' for each of the Standard BBs, to allow further flexibility.

The nice thing is that as the allies have essentially unlimited 'industry', the fact that conversions cost nothing is not a limiting factor as it is for the Japanese, and one can have a lot of fun with options here.


I second the suggestion about moving to the new aircraft art format for mods - I'm doing this for the next version of AltWNT and it is much more flexible and user friendly.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: JuanG
One thing to consider for the allies is to add in a few of the ships that were cancelled by the imminent end of the war.
..
Another option is to consider allowing the allies to make conversions like in my CV variant, allowing for some further Sangamon class tanker-CVE conversions. You could also give the allied player more options for how they upgrade their old battleships, instead of basing it off the historical upgrades.

Hi Juan. In Da Babes we completed the build and deployment of the Commencement Bay class and I would suggest that as a more reasonable late war alternative. They weren't much externally different from the Sangamon. They were on the T3-S2 hull and used the same engineering plant, but rather than being a make-do 'conversion', they were a full up design. Darn near the same flight deck, but had designed-in catapults and a lot of interior restructuring, and could (and did) host F4U, F6F airgroups with ease and efficiency.

These were laid down in late '43, and the lead ship was launched 5/44 and commissioned 11/44, so there should be no problem with "what if" considerations. As to 'conversions' to Sangamons, the only available T3 hulls are the Cimmaron class AOs. The Sangamon CVE conversion was usually done during construction, but a few (I believe 3) were converted after launch, but before fitting out. It took these three an average of 6.2 months to convert to the CVE configuration after launch as an AO. If a T3 is operational as an AO, I think it likely that the conversion time to a CVE would be in the 8 - 9 month ballpark.

Just my humble opinion. [;)]

[John 3rd]

Navy Training Squadrons sound good to me.

The BB Options sound good too. Those only make sense to me and aren't too out there.

The CVE conversions could work. How many ships are we talking about?

Ranger would be fun to add (thanks OSO) but we would need to have some sort of withdrawal date. What would happen if it was sunk? Does the American still need--no matter what--to pull a CV and escorts from the Pacific for Torch? Interesting thoughts...

[eloso]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Navy Training Squadrons sound good to me.

The BB Options sound good too. Those only make sense to me and aren't too out there.

The CVE conversions could work. How many ships are we talking about?

Ranger would be fun to add (thanks OSO) but we would need to have some sort of withdrawal date. What would happen if it was sunk? Does the American still need--no matter what--to pull a CV and escorts from the Pacific for Torch? Interesting thoughts...

I think I mentioned that they had to withdraw. As far as if she was sunk prior to that, it would have to be some sort of mutual house rule agreement between the players. I don't know if that's really kosher either. There are hundreds of ships that have to withdraw for one reason or another but there isn't a penalty if they're sunk other than the victory point loss.