Matrix Games Forums

I've discovered some very strange differences in the handling of AGs that are scuttled. Thanks to bstarr for helping me with this.

It appears that barges that are sunk in normal operation are automatically re-spawned in place (using the same slot). This true for all AGs, including the Type SD that we have added in CHS. However, any AG that is scuttled will show in the sunk ship list and will not respawn. This includes any of the four "original" classes of AG from Scenario 15 and the Type SD class added by CHS. I had previously thought that the Type SD would not respawn but this is only because I had scuttled them in my previous tests.

My test consisted of:

1. Create a copy of CHS with a couple of each class of AG badly damaged (99 flood, 99 fire, 99 system) and located at Tokyo.
2. Start a head-to-head game.
3. As Japanese player - form a task force with all of the damaged AGs.

4. Scuttle all of the damaged AGs - result = in sunk ship list and not re-spawned.

5. Restart the game, rebuild the task force, and set it's destination to a nearby port.
6. End the turn and let the game resolve.
7. All of the badly damaged AGs sink at sea AND ARE PROPERLY RE-SPAWNED. I did not take a snapshot of the empty ship sunk list.

I wonder if the same thing would work for MSWs. How were you testing them? I can't recall which MSWs I scuttled and which ones sank outright, but I'm pretty sure I did a little of both.
bs

ORIGINAL: bstarr

I wonder if the same thing would work for MSWs. How were you testing them? I can't recall which MSWs I scuttled and which ones sank outright, but I'm pretty sure I did a little of both.
bs

Unfortunately all my tests show MSW respaning into the next available slot no matter how they are sunk.

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: bstarr

I wonder if the same thing would work for MSWs. How were you testing them? I can't recall which MSWs I scuttled and which ones sank outright, but I'm pretty sure I did a little of both.
bs

Unfortunately all my tests show MSW respaning into the next available slot no matter how they are sunk.

damn

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

Mike Wood very kindly released a change list for V1.5 and it included no OOB changes. Pry did warn us about device changes to support the large AP bombs so we will have some work when 1.5 comes out, but hopefully not too much.

I posted the changes in the same thread Mike posted in.

ORIGINAL: pry

I posted the changes in the same thread Mike posted in.

Thanks - I'll check them against CHS. That Akagi leader one is a bit nasty - and us so short of Japanese slots.

Don

Don
I think [&:] if you make the Leader of the ship in slot #1 a Random one, it does not muck up.

Michael

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Don
I think [&:] if you make the Leader of the ship in slot #1 a Random one, it does not muck up.

Michael

Actually I was thinking of going the other way - put the correct leader for Akagi in slot 19999

Don,
looks like you are going to have to move device #210 "500 kg AP Bomb" because this is the new 2000lb AP bomb.

Used by aircraft #14 D7A Grace
Michael

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Don,
looks like you are going to have to move device #210 "500 kg AP Bomb" because this is the new 2000lb AP bomb.

Used by aircraft #14 D7A Grace
Michael

I think so - waiting for the release to be sure. Also want to check out the changes to squad replacement rates. I THINK we're OK on the rest.

In order to allow re-spawn of Japanese Minesweepers we have to provide additional empty slots within the Japanese section (1-2999) into which the ships may respawn. There are 131 Japanese minesweepers in the OOB. It appears that no number of slots is theoretcially sufficient as all 131 could be lost, respawned, lost again, respawned again, etc. How many empty slots are actually needed depends on the flow of each game. In what is frankly a wild-ass guess (not even a scientific wild ass guess) I have selected the number 66 as a minimum. This would allow proper re-spawn up to a 50% loss of Japanese Minesweepers. After that they would re-spawn into the allied section, be available as allied ships, and have the incorrect bitmap assigned.

Those slots that are higher in the oOB will actually be removed using the editor's remove button and new slots "inserted" after the minesweeper section. This is necessary as the re-spawn function appears to work "forward" and will overflow into the allied section before it will go back an use slots higher up in the Japanese section.

There is one actual empty slot in the Japanese OOB. I have identified 71 "easy" choices for removal:

1. Remove all 20 of the slots that have been reserved for additional Japanese Warships. Removing these slots will also move the Chitose/Chiyoda and Ise/Hyuga back into the correct slots for their ship-specific upgrade after I accidentally moved them by inserting the extra slots in the first place:
Slots 10-11 (NEW Taiho 1 and 2)
Slot 47 (NEW Akitsushima)
Slot 60 (NEW Yamato)
Slot 75-76 (NEW Mogami 1 and 2)
Slot 85 (NEW Oyodo)
Slot 90 (NEW Agano)
Slots 121-124 (NEW Akitsuki 1-4)
Skits 145-152 (NEW Yugumo 1-8)


2. Remove 28 Japanese Ships completed after August 1, 1945 (some of these were not actually completed and were added by CHS):
Slot 256 (Tachibana Class DD Wakazakura)
Slot 257 (Tachibana Class DD Azura)
Slot 258 (Tachibana Class DD Sakaki)
Slot 259 (Tachibana Class DD Kuzu)
Slot 260 (Tachibana Class DD Hishi)
Slot 392 (Mikura Class PC Urumi)
Slot 393 (Mikura Class PC Murotsu)
Slot 394 (Mikura Class PC Tomishiri)
Slot 486 (Type C Escort Class PC-105)
Slot 489 (Type D Escort Class PC-116)
Slot 503 (Type D Escort Class PC-160)
Slot 1176 (Type ST Class SS I-204)
Slot 1177 (Type ST Class SS I-205)
Slot 1179 (Type ST Class SS I-207)
Slot 1180 (Type ST Class SS I-208)
Slot 1184 (Type STo Class SS I-404)
Slot 1237 (Type STS Class SS Ha-207)
Slot 1238 (Type STS Class SS Ha-208)
Slot 1239 (Type STS Class SS Ha-209)
Slot 1240 (Type STS Class SS Ha-210)
Slot 1241 (Type STS Class SS Ha-216)
Slot 1255 (Type D1/2 Class SS I-374)
Slot 1663 (Type 2A Cargo Ship Class AK Daii Maru)
Slot 1682 (Type 2A Cargo Ship Class AK Eiho Maru)
Slot 1739 (Type 2A Cargo Ship Class AK Tatsuise Maru)
Slot 1742 (Type 2A Cargo Ship Class AK Wayo Maru)
Slot 2826 (Type 103 LST Class T 164)
Slot 2827 (Type 103 LST Class T 165)


3. Remove 23 of the smallest AK and AP class. Note that the two class leaders (Nati Maru and Mayati Maru) have been retained because I put so much work into them:
Slot 1343 (Nati Maru Class AP Kogane Maru)
Slot 1344 (Nati Maru Class AP Kurenai Maru)
Slot 1345 (Nati Maru Class AP Midori Maru)
Slot 1346 (Nati Maru Class AP Murasaki Maru)
Slot 1347 (Nati Maru Class AP Muro Maru)
Slot 1349 (Nati Maru Class AP Nishiki Maru)
Slot 1350 (Nati Maru Class AP Ryohu Maru)
Slot 1351 (Nati Maru Class AP Sumire Maru)
Slot 1352 (Nati Maru Class AP Tatibana Maru)
Slot 2067 (Mayati Maru Class AK Fuki Maru)
Slot 2068 (Mayati Maru Class AK Heiei Maru #7)
Slot 2069 (Mayati Maru Class AK Horaisan Maru)
Slot 2070 (Mayati Maru Class AK Kaifuku Maru)
Slot 2072 (Mayati Maru Class AK Nittsu Maru)
Slot 2073 (Mayati Maru Class AK Noborikawa Maru)
Slot 2074 (Mayati Maru Class AK Ryoyo Maru)
Slot 2075 (Mayati Maru Class AK Senkai Maru)
Slot 2076 (Mayati Maru Class AK Shinai Maru)
Slot 2077 (Mayati Maru Class AK Tairyu Maru)
Slot 2078 (Mayati Maru Class AK Tateyama Maru)
Slot 2079 (Mayati Maru Class AK Tetsuzan Maru)
Slot 2080 (Mayati Maru Class AK Toyo Maru)
Slot 2081 (Mayati Maru Class AK Unyo Maru #2)


If additional slots are needed, we have some additional choices:

1. Remove 13 Amakasu Maru AK (again retaining the class leader)
2. Remove the 13 additional Type D1/D2 Cargo submarines
3. Remove some or all of the 96 additional LST (25 Type ES, 6 Type 101, 64 additional Type 103)


Unfortunately we have to do something and these are my specific recommendations. Comments??

Specific recommendations;

1. After the release of Plan Orange, see of Matrix is interested in doing a CHS expansion!

2. With or without a CHS expansion, let's see if Matrix is able to provide a little help (like add or move 500/1000 slots from allied to japanese control? Never hurts to ask!


Question:

Don, is the respawning slot specific or ship & slot specific? Example: Put a Japanese DD in know respawn slot, sink it and see if it respawns!

Comments:

1. I would hate to lose the Japanese cargo subs! [:(]

2. Would like to see a 100 or so Japanese MTB's added to CHS! [;)]

Don, I think your list is good. Personally, if I were playing Japan, I would rather have more transports than MSW's. I just don't think I'd lose that many. So, I think 66 is a good number to have for respawn. Remember that DD's and PC's destroy mines as well.

Whatever you decide to do, I'll be happy with the result.

Don,

I like your ideas, they are great. This is going to be a bit of a pain for mwe as i am going to use those first 20 slots for Japanese shipbuilding options.

I will probably just remove all 64 type 103 landing ships.

I have always felt that they were the most useless addition to the game considering when they arrive, subchaser forgive me!
Japan actually wasting the resources to build these in the real war just blows my mind. I mean, jeez, they could have built escorts instead, who were they invading in 44 or 45?

Mike

ORIGINAL: pad152

Specific recommendations;

1. After the release of Plan Orange, see of Matrix is interested in doing a CHS expansion!

2. With or without a CHS expansion, let's see if Matrix is able to provide a little help (like add or move 500/1000 slots from allied to japanese control? Never hurts to ask!

Unlike WPO, CHS is just a scenario update and not in any way related to program updates. I have no relationship with Matrix and no mechanism (other than the forum) to ask for any program changes. However, what I have seen on the forum does not lead me to believe that Matrix would be favorable to such a request.

Question:

Don, is the respawning slot specific or ship & slot specific? Example: Put a Japanese DD in know respawn slot, sink it and see if it respawns!

Comments:

1. I would hate to lose the Japanese cargo subs! [:(]

2. Would like to see a 100 or so Japanese MTB's added to CHS! [;)]

Re-spawning appears to be entirely type specific for the Japanese: AG and Minesweepers. For the Allies it is a mixture of type (MSW, landing craft) and Class/nationality (CV, some types of CA). A few Japanese ship upgrades are slot specific (Chitose/Chiyoda and Ise/Hyuga).

I'd also love to have some Japanese PTs - we had some in the early versions of CHS but they lost out when we ran short of slots. No worries - the Japanese PTs were underpowered and historically were little used.

All this talk about needing more empty slots takes me back to the old PacWar days and trying to squeeze slots out of that engine to change the OOB just a tweak. I never was involved in the changes its just they were running up against a stonewall (albeit a much smaller wall) much as you are today.

The more things change the more they are the same.[:)]

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

Don, I think your list is good. Personally, if I were playing Japan, I would rather have more transports than MSW's. I just don't think I'd lose that many. So, I think 66 is a good number to have for respawn. Remember that DD's and PC's destroy mines as well.

Whatever you decide to do, I'll be happy with the result.

This seems like a good idea. Perhaps we could pull some number of the minesweepers. There are seven of the Wa 101 class that were actually Dutch ships captured while under sonctruction and probably should not be there anyway. Perhaps a few others. Every little bit helps - thoughts??

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

All this talk about needing more empty slots takes me back to the old PacWar days and trying to squeeze slots out of that engine to change the OOB just a tweak. I never was involved in the changes its just they were running up against a stonewall (albeit a much smaller wall) much as you are today.

The more things change the more they are the same.[:)]

Yeah - except in PacWar the ship re-spawn was in place - which would have eliminated most of our problems. In WITP the sunken ships are retained in the ship array - apparently only to support the sunk ship list. But then, if it had been done the other way it would not have solved the problem - just transferred it to some sort of sunk ship array.