Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Gary Grigsby's strategic level wargame covering the entire War in the Pacific from 1941 to 1945 or beyond.

Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

Post Reply
User avatar
Fallschirmjager
Posts: 3555
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:46 am
Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by Fallschirmjager »

The 75mm B-25 needs to be added.
Rockets for the Commonwealth nations and Americans despertaly need to be added.

The 75mm B-25 was produced in fairly large numbers and heavily used.
Also add the fact that a 75mm armed B-25 is one of the most kick ass planes of WW2

Why rockets were never included is beyond me.
Hundreds of thousands of air to ground rockets were fired in the Pacific Theater.
Knavey
Posts: 2565
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 4:25 am
Location: Valrico, Florida

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by Knavey »

The CO of the SS Dolphin was G.B Rainer.

Source:

Dolphin's Pearl Harbor AAR
x-Nuc twidget
CVN-71
USN 87-93
"Going slow in the fast direction"
User avatar
Tenzan
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 5:39 pm

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by Tenzan »

Okay: here's a list I compiled from 'fixing' the 006Marianas scenario:

First ,
3255-Birmingham (this is the British Brimingham) It snuck alongside with the USN one..Needs removing.

Missing USN:
3030-CVL Langley: Listed as sunk in 42? It was laid down in '43. Should be in TF58.4

CL's Houston and Vincennes (Cleveland class) not to be confused with the older ships..
Slots 3292 and 3293 are good places to add them ..Again in 58.4

3154- BB New Mexico is missing from TF52.10

and the DD's
3607- Ralph Talbot
3522-Wadliegh
3463-McDermutt
3561-Bailey
3483-Halsey Powell



And..For the IJN!

151-Naganami

IJN's in there pretty tight! A few missing oliers, but, pretty much all combat units accounted for.


Another odd thing:Marc Mitscher automatically shows up as a TF commander when Yorktown And Hornet are chosen for a tak force-when auto command select is OFF-but, he's not ever in the commander list....mysterious Mitscher...the ghost in the machine....





My source for OOB correction:
History of USN operations in WWII
Vol.VIII
Samuel E. Morrison
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: Narwhal stats

Post by Ron Saueracker »

ORIGINAL: Knavey

The SS Narwhal is a little undergunned.

The Narwhal should have 4 MORE! torpedo tubes than is actually listed.

"Not readily visible on NARWHAL were the "deck-firing" torpedo tubes, also carried on 8 other U.S. submarines built between 1900 and 1936. NARWHAL was equipped with only 6 submerged tubes but also carried 4 pressure-proof surface-only tubes in the superstructure half-deck amidships. Adjacent to each was a storage tube to provide one reload. One-third of NARWHAL's torpedoes were carried topside." - Narwhal Description

She actually had a pretty impressive war record and I am sure those tubes contributed to it.

Hmmm...I'll have to check on this but I believed the extra tubes were added in the refits. Look at Narwhal refits. Porpoise class gets 2 external as well.[&:] A booboo that is not a typo for a change...I'll see it gets fixed if incorrect. Thanks!
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
Hipper
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:21 pm

Where's the carrier?

Post by Hipper »

Hi chaps just looking at the starting setup for scenario 15

Yoiu seem to have missed out HMS Indomitable from the indian ocean in 42!!!
you give her a reinforcement date of 430 days .. early 43, when in fact she spent the first months of 42 transporting hurricanes to java and then was in Somervilles task force when facing the Indian Ocean incursion by KB ! granted she was then withdrawn for Malta convoys in the second half of the year.. Give the RN a break guys its hard enough for them without missing out their best ship in 42.

by the by you take a few liberties with Royal navy airgroups in the game, dont blame you much as |I dont think any two carriers had similar airgroups
but here is a slightly simplified guide to indomitable's Air group History

November 1941: 45 aircraft - 9 Sea Hurricanes, 12 Fulmars, 24 Albacores
This is what she had on board in mid 42 when facing KB!

August 1942: 55 aircraft - 31 Sea Hurricanes, 24 Albacores
February 1943: 55 aircraft - 40 Seafires, 15 Albacores
June 1944: 48 aircraft - 24 Hellcats, 24 Barracudas
December 1944: 50 aircraft - 29 Hellcats, 21 Avengers


Hmm you seem to have left out sea hurricanes too,
never mind thats what the editor is for !!!


Air group source Fleet air arm archives

http://www.fleetairarmarchive.net/
"Gefechtwendung nach Steuerbord"
HawaiiFive-O
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:21 pm
Location: USA

Marianas Scenarior

Post by HawaiiFive-O »

Marianas, Scenario 6

1) Japan has one ML, but no way to restock their mines. No problem, I can understand if you don't want the IJN sowing the seas with mines.

2) No starting minefields. I'm really surprised about this. I've dove those islands, and I seem to remember the tour operator mentioning mines at least on Tinian. It follows that Guam and Saipan would be mined as well.

3) 3 IJN CVEs have no airgroups. This is probably historical (aircraft shuttlers), but it does seem like some sort of cruel joke. [:)] At least give us the option to send them away out of harm's reach. There's nothing to prevent the USN from sailing up and Truk-erizing Palau. Why do I have to keep these ships around when a) they are no use, and b) they gonna die? Or maybe I'm missing how to send them back?

4) IJN subs are one shot weapons for two reasons. Allied ASW doesn't miss. No way to restock their torpedoes. Once again, it'd be nice to be able to send them back to Tokyo once they've expended their ordnance (arguing they survive the attack run).

edited to make it obvious what scenario I'm talking about
Image
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: Where's the carrier?

Post by Don Bowen »

Spot on. Here's her history:
http://www.fleetairarmarchive.net/Ships ... table.html

And, on the subject of the British Carriers, they had their aircraft capacity expanded during the war (by deck park and outriggers). The final capacity was:

Illustrious class - 54
Indomitable - 56
Implacable class - 81


Don
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

Wakefield, Mount Vernon, West Point

Post by Don Bowen »

The very large US Transports Wakefield, Mount Vernon and West Point are missing. These were very large ships, ex ocean liners, with huge capacity. If included, they should be a new class - Very Large AP.

These ships carried most of the 18th British Division to Singapore. They, and three other US transports, were enroute the Middle East with the 18th when war broke out. They were diverted to Bombay, where the three other transports (Orizaba, Leonard Wood, Joseph T Dickman ) unloaded and returned home. Mount Vernon then joined a convoy with three British ships and dropped her troops at Singapore. Two weeks later the Wakefield and West Point followed with the last of the 18th Division's troops (most of the division's equipment was lost when the accompanying Empress of Asia was sunk). They were escorted by Exeter, Durban, Dragon, and destroyers Express and Electra. Wakefield took a bomb hit but both ships retired and returned to the U.S.

Mount Vernon made 18 additional voyages to the South Pacific - all unescorted (due to her speed)

Wakefield - also unescorted - took part of the 1st Marines to New Zealand. She later suffered a major fire, underwent repairs, and made another 26 passages - 3 to the Pacific

West Point - also took Marines to New Zealand and made several voyages to India, New Caledonia, Australia, and New Zealand.


Don
User avatar
Feinder
Posts: 7177
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:33 pm
Location: Land o' Lakes, FL

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by Feinder »

Didn't the Free French have a single destroyer based at Noumea on 12-07-41?

The Le Triomphant...


And there was a Free French btn there also, but I'm having trouble Googling the actual name... :^)

-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

Image
User avatar
Don Bowen
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Georgetown, Texas, USA

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by Don Bowen »

The French Pacific Battalion was made up of volunteers from New Caledonia and Tahiti. It left in 1940 and fought in North Africa and later Europe. As far as I can tell there were only constabulary level troops in New Caledonia in 1941.

Don

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Didn't the Free French have a single destroyer based at Noumea on 12-07-41?

The Le Triomphant...


And there was a Free French btn there also, but I'm having trouble Googling the actual name... :^)

-F-
mjk428
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 3:29 am
Location: Western USA

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by mjk428 »

Somehow, I was able to load the Dutch 2nd, 4th & 5th Naval base forces - I paid for them of course. After they arrived in Oz, they became "fixed" thanks to their 150mm CD guns. Even if not fixed they shouldn't have each fit in a single 4k AP.

I pity the fool that dares to invade Darwin by sea. :)
User avatar
kaleun
Posts: 5144
Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 10:57 pm
Location: Colorado

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by kaleun »

Gili Gili...sounds so much better. Gili Gili sounds Silly Silly.
If you speak Castilian Spanish, Gili sounds even funnier![:D]
Appear at places to which he must hasten; move swiftly where he does not expect you.
Sun Tzu
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by Brady »

Le Triomphant is in the Game, and has Type 271 radar as of Dec. 7th 41.


............

This was mentioed before, but New Caladonia should realy not be maned at all IFC, certainly not by US troops at the start.
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
jcjordan
Posts: 1900
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 8:00 am

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by jcjordan »

Just found an error concerning Dacca. In the 42A Campaign it has several ships assigned to it at start but no port. I formed a TF but it won't go anwhere so the ships are landlocked & once you form the TF you can't disband it nor can you build a port. I looked at Dacca in the editor & it is setup as an airfield. Should it be a base instead so that you can build a port or is Chandpur it's port instead. These ships need to be moved as well as any others that come into Dacca later on as well as other scenarios if Dacca is to be an airfield only.
Another thing on the map, is that Ndini is that way when looking at the base but the map says Nendo, is this incorrect??
User avatar
sprior
Posts: 8294
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2002 11:38 pm
Location: Portsmouth, UK

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by sprior »

I see the Flower Class corvettes as PGs (Which I don't have a problem with) but would like to be able to add them as escorts in the auto-convoy system so I can use them as intended.
"Grown ups are what's left when skool is finished."
"History started badly and hav been geting steadily worse."
- Nigel Molesworth.

Image
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by Ron Saueracker »

ORIGINAL: sprior

I see the Flower Class corvettes as PGs (Which I don't have a problem with) but would like to be able to add them as escorts in the auto-convoy system so I can use them as intended.

Missed that one as I added these after testing auto convoy system! Thanks.[:)]
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by Ron Saueracker »

ORIGINAL: Brady

Le Triomphant is in the Game, and has Type 271 radar as of Dec. 7th 41.


............

This was mentioed before, but New Caladonia should realy not be maned at all IFC, certainly not by US troops at the start.

Le Triomphant had another type of radar mounted in UK at this time but it is not modelled ( Type 290?) so used 271. Refitted in US later and got American suite.
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
Admiral DadMan
Posts: 3407
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by Admiral DadMan »

ORIGINAL: mccavage

US ships that would have been available by 1946 and in a variable arrival game could be useful in 45.

CV Midway was completed on September 9, 1945
CV Rooseveldt (renamed from Coral Sea which became the third unit in class) completed on october 27, 1945
What you quote are Commission Dates.

Typically, a carrier would need about 4 to 6 months shakedown time before being deployed. About the earliest that Midway would have been on the line would be around February 46 and Franklin D. Roosevelt around April 46.
Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:
Image
User avatar
Admiral DadMan
Posts: 3407
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by Admiral DadMan »

ORIGINAL: Tenzan

...Another odd thing: Marc Mitscher automatically shows up as a TF commander when Yorktown And Hornet are chosen for a tak force-when auto command select is OFF-but, he's not ever in the commander list....mysterious Mitscher...the ghost in the machine....
Here's why Mitscher shows up: Look at Hornet. When you bring up her ship info panel, you'll see that he's her CO. Hornet is made the flagship, the flagship's CO automatically becomes the TF CO, and there you are...
Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:
Image
McNaughton
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 9:40 pm

RE: Post Map and OOB Comments Here

Post by McNaughton »

Should the 14th, 17th, 20th, 23rd and 26th Indian Divisions have TOE's of Infantry Brigades instead of Divisions?
Post Reply

Return to “War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945”