CHS Pending Change List

Please post here for questions and discussion about scenario design and the game editor for WITP.

Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
Kereguelen
Posts: 1474
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 9:08 pm

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Kereguelen »

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


Thanks - I'll align these with the static base forces and add the appropriate amount of Infantry (36 squads per Bn, right?)

I may go ahead and put the units at Lahore and Rawalpindi as adding them to an immobile base force will tie them down anyway.

Question on Akyab - was the battalion there pre-war??

I have got to win the lottery so I can buy "Loyalty & Honour" by Chris Kempton!

Don

P.S. Any data on Cox's Bazar?? I did find it on a map and noticed the spelling (only one "a" between "z" and "r").


Akyab: Not sure about this, Kempton says it was (between September 1941 and 4th May 1942): "Training then Akyab Garrison [Evacuated to Chittagong by sea on 4th May]".

"Cox's Bazar" is the correct spelling. Don't know if it had any port facilities, but 123rd Indian Brigade reached it via sea transport on 21st Sept 1942 and given the condition of roads in Arakan I guess that most supplies were transported to it by ship.
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5190
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Don Bowen »

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen

Karachi: 4 Battalions (15/10th Baluch Rgt, 4/7th Gurkha Rifles, 25/10th Baluch Rgt, 25/14th Punjab Rgt)
Added these to the Karachi Base Force, which is immobile
Bombay: 2 Battalions (26/4th Bombay Gren., 27/4th Bombay Gren.; interestingly these Bn. later formed 1st and 2nd Ajmer Rgt)
Now Part of Bombar Base Force (immobile)
Hyderabad: 1 Battalion (5/6th Rajputana Rifles; actually at Secunderabad because Hyderabad was a State)
The Base force at Hyderabad is the 11th Indian Air Base Force. This is a mobile formation with a TOE of 2064 Indian AF Base Force. TOE 2064 had 40 Squads in Weapon Slot 8 but none of the deployed Base Forces had them yet. Added the 36 squad to the Hyderabad Base Force (slot 8) right away and also changed the TOE to 36 squads.
Bangalore: 1 Battalion (9/9th Jat Rgt)
There's no base force or garrison in Bangalore. Will probably ignore this. Other option is to add a Base Force here - ideas??
Madras: 2 Battalions (25/9th Jat Rgt, 25/12th Frontier Force Rifles; Baria Rangit Infantry, ISF was also present but I'm not sure if it had any combat value, 25/9th Jat Rgt arrived 14 Dec. 1941)
Added three battalions (108 squads) to the immobile Madras Base Force
Calcutta: 1 Battalion (25/11th Sikh Rgt., garrison of the fortress)
A 2064 TOE unit, added 36 squads.
Chandpur: 1 Battalion (6/9th Jat Rgt.; actually at Chittagong)
An immobile Base Force, added 36 squads.
In Assam, no exact locations, LoC-troops, maybe suitable for the base forces there: 4 Battalions (1st Assam Rgt, 1st Bihar Rgt, 5/9th Jat Rgt, 25/18th Royal Garhwal Rifles)
I've already added the 1st Assam Rifles, that should be enough. No base force at Kohima so I'll probably make the Assam Rifles a one-of-a-kind unit with more integrated support.
Akyab (yes, I know it's in Burma): 1 Battalion (14/7th Rajput Rgt)
Waiting for confirmation on pre-war deployment, there's a BRITISH base force at Akyab whose TOE had British Squads. May just fudge this and grant full British citizenship to the Rajput troops.

<<<< Edit: I see Kereguelen posted a reply while I was busy typing. I will just add the British Squads to the Akyab base force (in alignment with the TOE) and call it macaroni. >>>>
Some explanations:

There were also garrisons at Lahore and Rawalpindi, but I think they should not be included because they were needed there, not vs. the Japanese.
There's a 2064 Base Force at Rawalpindi so I added a battalion to it and called it square.
There were two more battalions at Madras (2/3rd and 3/3rd Madras Rgt) but they were soon converted to training and POW guard units and I think they were never combat ready.

Madras is somewhat special in many aspects because it harboured lots of battalions from the 3rd Madras Rgt during the war (the 3rd Madras started forming battalions from territorial troops in Sept 1941, it did not exist before), but I think mostly for training purposes.

All battalions named were regular troops, no territorial stuff.

Of course most of the battalions located to other locations during the war, but mostly they were replaced by other battalions.

Most of this is from "Loyalty & Honour" by Chris Kempton.

K
Just ignored the extra units at Madras.

Thanks again!
[/quote]
User avatar
Tristanjohn
Posts: 3027
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
Location: Daly City CA USA
Contact:

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Tristanjohn »

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Pry, others,

On the radar the sets on Kitikami & Oi was NOT type 13; it was the prototype for a type 13. The prototype for many things exists two years before full production but in a rapidly changing industry that prototype is not as good as the production model two years later.

That is why i feel we should leave it out. Sorry PanzerJaeger.

I will comment on pilot numbers ad nauseum later so Trist can quit annoying Don who deserves no annoyance.

Mike

Mike, I didn't know I was "annoying" Don. And to use the phrase ad nauseam in conjunction with the pilot pool question is to my mind going a bit far. Do you know what ad nauseam means to say? Well, I'll tell you now. Webster's defines it as "to a sickening dregree: so as to disgust."

Is that where you're really coming from? This issue is so clear to you, your position is so sound and well-grounded, and anyone opposed to your position is so unwise and mislead, that it would "sicken and disgust you" to have to discuss it further?

Listen. Your attitude could use some adjustment. You took personal exception to my rather detailed analysis of the "Martlet/Wildcat" issue back in the AAR thread, then blew me off with a useless remark as to how your "sources" indicated something else, with no actual reference to those sources, meanwhile I'd gone to the trouble of posting the link to a very good source I used, indeed, the site of the unit actually involved! Since then you've disturbed at least one other person around here who asked you not to take critical feedback so personally.

Now all that is a matter of public record. And here you are again apparently looking for more trouble.

I'd say there is entirely too much ego and agenda at work here. Ego and agenda doesn't help research. At best they hinder research, often enough lead to poor research results.
Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Ron Saueracker »

Hmmm...we seem to be getting sidetracked guys. No point in slamming each other as we are on the same side I suspect. C'mon. Let's play nice. If ya want to pick on someone, that's what Frag is for.[;)]
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
Hortlund
Posts: 2162
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Hortlund »

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Pry, others,

On the radar the sets on Kitikami & Oi was NOT type 13; it was the prototype for a type 13. The prototype for many things exists two years before full production but in a rapidly changing industry that prototype is not as good as the production model two years later.

That is why i feel we should leave it out. Sorry PanzerJaeger.

Well, I have to disagree. It would seem a consensus is forming that the radar sets were there on Oi and Kitikami. They were prototypes, yes. And maybe they were not as good as the type 13 that went into mass production. We dont know whether the prototypes were better or worse than the mass produced type 13 however.

I guess my point is, they were there, we dont know if they were better or worse than the mass produced type 13's, but they were there. And the japs need every break they can get. It is not the end of the world for the allies to have two japanese ships with radar in 1941. And they can be worth their weight in gold for the japanese.

So I think everything speaks for them to be included.
The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Ron Saueracker »

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund
ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Pry, others,

On the radar the sets on Kitikami & Oi was NOT type 13; it was the prototype for a type 13. The prototype for many things exists two years before full production but in a rapidly changing industry that prototype is not as good as the production model two years later.

That is why i feel we should leave it out. Sorry PanzerJaeger.

Well, I have to disagree. It would seem a consensus is forming that the radar sets were there on Oi and Kitikami. They were prototypes, yes. And maybe they were not as good as the type 13 that went into mass production. We dont know whether the prototypes were better or worse than the mass produced type 13 however.

I guess my point is, they were there, we dont know if they were better or worse than the mass produced type 13's, but they were there. And the japs need every break they can get. It is not the end of the world for the allies to have two japanese ships with radar in 1941. And they can be worth their weight in gold for the japanese.

So I think everything speaks for them to be included.

My big problem is that radar on any ship helps with Carrier ops. Perhaps another device called the (Fighter Direction Team) should have been added to CVs (and other historical available platforms) as they became available to differentiate between the vast difference between a ship having rudimentary radar for it's own use (not a CIC either) and dedicated equipment and personel used for coordination of CAP.

I'd ditch the radar on the O and K simply because of this.
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
Tristanjohn
Posts: 3027
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
Location: Daly City CA USA
Contact:

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Tristanjohn »

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


Thanks - I'll align these with the static base forces and add the appropriate amount of Infantry (36 squads per Bn, right?)

I may go ahead and put the units at Lahore and Rawalpindi as adding them to an immobile base force will tie them down anyway.

Question on Akyab - was the battalion there pre-war??

I have got to win the lottery so I can buy "Loyalty & Honour" by Chris Kempton!

Don

P.S. Any data on Cox's Bazar?? I did find it on a map and noticed the spelling (only one "a" between "z" and "r").


That's the correct spelling, Don. Here's an interesting site for how that part of Bangladesh is divided up today in terms of government: Chittagong Division



Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
User avatar
Tristanjohn
Posts: 3027
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
Location: Daly City CA USA
Contact:

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Tristanjohn »

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund
ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Pry, others,

On the radar the sets on Kitikami & Oi was NOT type 13; it was the prototype for a type 13. The prototype for many things exists two years before full production but in a rapidly changing industry that prototype is not as good as the production model two years later.

That is why i feel we should leave it out. Sorry PanzerJaeger.

Well, I have to disagree. It would seem a consensus is forming that the radar sets were there on Oi and Kitikami. They were prototypes, yes. And maybe they were not as good as the type 13 that went into mass production. We dont know whether the prototypes were better or worse than the mass produced type 13 however.

I guess my point is, they were there, we dont know if they were better or worse than the mass produced type 13's, but they were there. And the japs need every break they can get. It is not the end of the world for the allies to have two japanese ships with radar in 1941. And they can be worth their weight in gold for the japanese.

So I think everything speaks for them to be included.

I doubt the prototypical units would be better than the production runs. That makes no sense to me. The purpose of installing prototypes is to find flaws and come up with improvements, not the other way around.

The only good reason to include such radar would be if someone could demonstrate that these radar sets were used in 1941 by the Japanese in any meaningful operational sense. Otherwise they're eye candy. As Dirk points out, and I've alluded to, as the game engine treats all radar the same (as far as I know), then to assume these experimental sets (which isn't even known by us for sure were actually installed in 1941) were as useful as Allied operational radar of the same period is somewhat of a stretch.

Also, I'm not sure what you mean to say by ". . . the japs need every break they can get." What does that mean? Are we trying to give the Japanese "breaks" or is our purpose to come up with a more accurate simulation?

Gary already has this game confused with all sorts of Japanese "breaks." That's his specialty. Leave it him.

Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
User avatar
Tristanjohn
Posts: 3027
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
Location: Daly City CA USA
Contact:

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Tristanjohn »

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Hmmm...we seem to be getting sidetracked guys. No point in slamming each other as we are on the same side I suspect. C'mon. Let's play nice. If ya want to pick on someone, that's what Frag is for.[;)]

Well, I'm not so sure "we" are on the same side any longer. It seems to me there are the same bad pressures being brought to bear with the CHS project as were apparently brought to bear with the original game, and I see no good coming from that. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't know. The signs are not good at present.


Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
User avatar
Tristanjohn
Posts: 3027
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
Location: Daly City CA USA
Contact:

RE: Cox's Bazaar

Post by Tristanjohn »

ORIGINAL: Iron Duke

Hi,

Does anybody know which was of greater importance during the war Chandpur or Chittagong? In every map showing the India/Burma theatre I've only ever seen Chittagong on the map - just curious.

cheers

That's an excellent question.

I'd always assumed that Chandpur was the main installation in this area, but I can't tell you why. The name just sticks in my head, I guess. But one day when I was studying the war college maps I noticed that Chandpur wasn't even listed, but Chittagong was. That got me to wondering, but my search didn't turn much up. Now this note from you made me wonder again, but yet another search failed to enlighten again.

This theater isn't one I've paid much attention to over the years and the only source I have at home is Tuchman's "Stillwell" work. Not good.

I think this should be looked into. Do you have any sources?


Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Ron Saueracker »

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Hmmm...we seem to be getting sidetracked guys. No point in slamming each other as we are on the same side I suspect. C'mon. Let's play nice. If ya want to pick on someone, that's what Frag is for.[;)]

Well, I'm not so sure "we" are on the same side any longer. It seems to me there are the same bad pressures being brought to bear with the CHS project as were apparently brought to bear with the original game, and I see no good coming from that. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't know. The signs are not good at present.



I wouldn't go so far as to say "pressures", it is more simply a lack of any real historical data. And, even if we had the right numbers, who can guarantee one way or another that the game mechanics model the ops correctly (I for one think that too many pilots die during simple ops aircraft losses), making the issue subject to questions. If we are losing too many pilots due to the game mechanics, then the historical pilot figures won't jive.

We need to start somewhere, and because of the weird pilot eating monster which came with the game, the numbers of pilots needed to be increased. How much is yet to be determined but we have to start somewhere. Nothing is written in stone here.
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
jwilkerson
Posts: 8255
Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 4:02 am
Location: Kansas
Contact:

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by jwilkerson »

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund
ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Pry, others,

On the radar the sets on Kitikami & Oi was NOT type 13; it was the prototype for a type 13. The prototype for many things exists two years before full production but in a rapidly changing industry that prototype is not as good as the production model two years later.

That is why i feel we should leave it out. Sorry PanzerJaeger.

Well, I have to disagree. It would seem a consensus is forming that the radar sets were there on Oi and Kitikami. They were prototypes, yes. And maybe they were not as good as the type 13 that went into mass production. We dont know whether the prototypes were better or worse than the mass produced type 13 however.

I guess my point is, they were there, we dont know if they were better or worse than the mass produced type 13's, but they were there. And the japs need every break they can get. It is not the end of the world for the allies to have two japanese ships with radar in 1941. And they can be worth their weight in gold for the japanese.

So I think everything speaks for them to be included.


And I have to disagree back - everything does not speak for them to be included for example the source MARC posted in the K&O threads a couple of weeks ago - which I reposted above - and now repost again ... this indicates first IJN shipborne radar installed on ISE in 1942 ...

Further have you actually seen these radar's do anything ? I ran 10 tests on CAP over KB with K&O in the TF ... and 10 more without K&O in the TF .. and actually the CAP was a little bit thicker w/o K&O in the TF though the difference was within the margin of error ( this was under stock 1.4 ).

And it probably isn't even worth our discussion because there are many more important fish to fry !




Image
Attachments
radar.jpg
radar.jpg (186.1 KiB) Viewed 333 times
WITP Admiral's Edition - Project Lead
War In Spain - Project Lead
User avatar
Tristanjohn
Posts: 3027
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
Location: Daly City CA USA
Contact:

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Tristanjohn »

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Hmmm...we seem to be getting sidetracked guys. No point in slamming each other as we are on the same side I suspect. C'mon. Let's play nice. If ya want to pick on someone, that's what Frag is for.[;)]

Well, I'm not so sure "we" are on the same side any longer. It seems to me there are the same bad pressures being brought to bear with the CHS project as were apparently brought to bear with the original game, and I see no good coming from that. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't know. The signs are not good at present.

I wouldn't go so far as to say "pressures", it is more simply a lack of any real historical data. And, even if we had the right numbers, who can guarantee one way or another that the game mechanics model the ops correctly (I for one think that too many pilots die during simple ops aircraft losses), making the issue subject to questions. If we are losing too many pilots due to the game mechanics, then the historical pilot figures won't jive.

We need to start somewhere, and because of the weird pilot eating monster which came with the game, the numbers of pilots needed to be increased. How much is yet to be determined but we have to start somewhere. Nothing is written in stone here.

I agree, there is a dearth of good historical data. Never enough of that.

In principle I like your argument, Dirk. However, the way to approach this problem is to find ways to overcome the engine's tendency to run the game too fast. Unfortunately, adding yet more trained pilots does just that: it allows (encourages) the Japanese player to continue to run his air operations too fast.

I've just finished reading the following two threads. I missed them the first time around as I was absent from the forum when they were current. I ask everyone here to please read these threads again (or for the first time), and also please pay close attention to the analysis offered by Mogami, which I find to be enlightening:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Japanese pilot pool thread 1

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Japanese pilot pool thread 2

Re operational losses: these are down from historical levels as far as I know. In fact, from what I've seen of ingame statistics posted, operational losses ingame amount to no more than a fraction of historical operational losses. I don't have data on the number of pilots killed due to these losses, just the aircraft themselves. Does anyone know where to go for data on pilot losses due to these mishaps?

Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Ron Saueracker »

However, the way to approach this problem is to find ways to overcome the engine's tendency to run the game too fast.

Good luck...[8D]

I agree with you on this as well. But I was concerned more with the initial problem of the filling out of airgroups decimating the pilot pool in the first month or so. I suppose a simple solution would be to find an average total of pilots being "sucked up" by this filling out period and adjusting the pool accordingly.
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
jwilkerson
Posts: 8255
Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 4:02 am
Location: Kansas
Contact:

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by jwilkerson »

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
However, the way to approach this problem is to find ways to overcome the engine's tendency to run the game too fast.

Good luck...[8D]

I agree with you on this as well. But I was concerned more with the initial problem of the filling out of airgroups decimating the pilot pool in the first month or so. I suppose a simple solution would be to find an average total of pilots being "sucked up" by this filling out period and adjusting the pool accordingly.


Also my ( IJA/IJN ) airgroups tend to "overfill" on some occasions ... and I've never been able to figure out what makes them do that ... for example I have one Kate LB group now on Lunga in one game ... it had 27 Kates and 27 Pilots ( full strength ) when I flew it there ... now it has 36 planes and 36 pilots ( though the 9 extra planes are "in reserve ) ... and if history is the judge ... if I transfer this group out of Lunga the "extra" planes and pilots will go longer be in the group ( don't know where they go - hope they go back to the useable pool ) ... but this happens from time to time ... and has from day 1 ...

WITP Admiral's Edition - Project Lead
War In Spain - Project Lead
jcjordan
Posts: 1900
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 8:00 am

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by jcjordan »

Don didn't see it in your list so not sure if you know about it but minor fix, the Fiji unit at Suva not the NZ infantry unit there, should be a base force instead of an infantry unit.

Just back from vacation & getting caught back up only to find 1.5 out!!!
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5190
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Don Bowen »

ORIGINAL: jcjordan

Don didn't see it in your list so not sure if you know about it but minor fix, the Fiji unit at Suva not the NZ infantry unit there, should be a base force instead of an infantry unit.

Just back from vacation & getting caught back up only to find 1.5 out!!!

I think there was actually a reason that was done - I just can't remember it right now. They say the memory is the second thing to go.

Don
User avatar
Andrew Brown
Posts: 4083
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hex 82,170
Contact:

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Andrew Brown »

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: jcjordan

Don didn't see it in your list so not sure if you know about it but minor fix, the Fiji unit at Suva not the NZ infantry unit there, should be a base force instead of an infantry unit.

Just back from vacation & getting caught back up only to find 1.5 out!!!

I think there was actually a reason that was done - I just can't remember it right now. They say the memory is the second thing to go.

Don

I did some of the work on the forces in Fiji. The unit at Suva is actually a composite unit that is made up of an infantry component (the Fiji Defence Force) and a CD component. I combined them because the CD component was small, and also I wanted the infantry to be static.

I am not sure whether a unit HAS to be a CD unit to fire at incoming enemy TFs, but maybe it is safer from a game mechanics perspective to make this unit a CD unit instead of an infantry unit.

Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

Image
User avatar
Andrew Brown
Posts: 4083
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hex 82,170
Contact:

RE: Cox's Bazaar

Post by Andrew Brown »

ORIGINAL: Iron Duke

Hi,

Does anybody know which was of greater importance during the war Chandpur or Chittagong? In every map showing the India/Burma theatre I've only ever seen Chittagong on the map - just curious.

cheers

I have been looking at this part of the map a bit more in the last few days, and I think it could do with some revision. The problem is that it is a tricky part of the map that was difficult to draw, and it would be difficult to revise as well.

Regarding Chittagong. It does look to be a fairly major location. It is described as being an important port and industrial centre, and although this may not have applied 60 years ago, it still give us an idea of its relative importance. It is/was also the terminus of the railway from Assam. This is something I overlooked when originally drawing my map. I currently believe that Chittagong was a more important location than Chandpur.

But what to do about it? Due to compromises when drawing the map, Dacca, and Chandpur, are a little offset from their "true" locations. Here is a bit of info on these locations:

On my map, Dacca is actually on the border of hexes 32,24 (its current location) and 31,23.

Chandpur is actually just inside hex 31,24, but I drew it in hex 31,25 so that it was not on the wrong side of the river. Chandpur is described as a "river port", so it seems -on the face of it - that its port value of 8(6) is hugely exaggerated.

Chittagong is on the border of hexes 31,25 and 31,26. It is described as the most important port in Banladesh on some websites. it is also the terminus of the raiwaly from Assam.

Cox's Bazar is on the border of hexes 31,26 and 30,27. It was an airbase large enough for large bombers to use, and it was also a port of sorts, but probably quite small.

So what to do? At the moment we could rationalise the high port value of Chandpur by assuming that it includes Chittagong as well. Unfortunately, on my map, that would make this base too close to Dacca, since Dacca is transposed a little. "Chittagong" would be better placed in hex 31,26, where the new Cox's Bazar base has been located. If it was placed here then the railway should be extended to this hex as well. Also, if it is placed here then Cox's Bazar is probably not required any more.

Since it will be a while before I make a new version of my map, I propose that we leave it as is for now, and just assume that Chandpur incorporates Chittagong as I mention above. Later, when I do a new revision of my map, I will revisit this area to see how it could be adjusted to better incorporate these bases.

Andrew
Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

Image
User avatar
Hortlund
Posts: 2162
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Final ?? CHS Pending Change List

Post by Hortlund »

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

And I have to disagree back - everything does not speak for them to be included for example the source MARC posted in the K&O threads a couple of weeks ago - which I reposted above - and now repost again ... this indicates first IJN shipborne radar installed on ISE in 1942 ...

Further have you actually seen these radar's do anything ? I ran 10 tests on CAP over KB with K&O in the TF ... and 10 more without K&O in the TF .. and actually the CAP was a little bit thicker w/o K&O in the TF though the difference was within the margin of error ( this was under stock 1.4 ).

And it probably isn't even worth our discussion because there are many more important fish to fry !

Image

Sure, disagreement is the mother of all discussion [:)]

Well, if I read your source right, it speaks of the "Type 2 shipborne radar model 1" and when the first prototype of that model was put on the Ise. If we read the other sources, they speak of how Oi and Kitikami had prototypes for the Type 13
radar. It would seem we are talking about two different types of radar. And if that is correct, then your source does not seem to contradict the previous sources.

The issue here is not "what is the in-game effect of these radars", although the tests you report seem somewhat disheartening, but well in line with what one has come to expect of this game. The issue here is "should they be included". And the answer to that question points firmly to "yes".

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design”