RHSCVO Level 7 Observations

[okami]

Just a few observations.

Axis Hawk art is wrong looks like Ki34.
Canton has an aircraft factory indicator but no aircraft factories.
The Japanese have no AD type ships and therefore can not replenish Destroyers with Torpedoes accept at high level ports. Question was this intensional? Historical?

[witpqs]

The supply sinks still mess things up:

Nauru, defended by 'civilians' eats up the invasion.

Big one - Singapore, supplies get sucked out of Singapore at a prodigious rate and deposited in Kuala Lumpur. There they are captured by the Japanese forces, not used for defending a siege at Singapore.

[okami]

In every test I have done Nauru falls on the day of the invasion or the day after. I use Maizuri(?) from Kwajalein with almost no prep.
Didn't know about the problem in Malaya.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: okami

Just a few observations.

Axis Hawk art is wrong looks like Ki34.

REPLY: There are several art sets. It may be you don't have the right one installed. Others say it is wrong as well - but still a Hawk. Is it is RTAF colors?

Canton has an aircraft factory indicator but no aircraft factories.

REPLY: Actually correct. The factory moved to India - where you will find it. But the plant itself - and most workers - remained behing. [Hindustan Aircraft - formerly China Aircraft - still exists - still builds fighters] It can be expanded from 0 - but in CVO family it takes some time for enough HI points (or something) to collect to permit it. I intended it as dysfunctional chrome - but it actually works. It comes up building the Axis Hawk at 0 when it appears - but you can change it to a Japanese type and expand it.

The Japanese have no AD type ships and therefore can not replenish Destroyers with Torpedoes accept at high level ports. Question was this intensional? Historical?

REPLY: Historical. Japan had only one true AR, and a few auxiliary ones, several AS and a few auxiliary ones (several were lost by conversion to CVL/CVS), and no AD. I cannot rationalize changing that - so I didn't.

[okami]

Thanks for the reply on the other topics, as to the Axis Hawk, no it is the same grey transport aircraft art as the K-34. No color to it at all. Just started my game with Mistmatz and will post any peculiarities here for comment and as maybe a heads up if you find that something is wrong. What are the chances I can steal an AD from the allies.[:D][:D][:D]

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

The supply sinks still mess things up:

Nauru, defended by 'civilians' eats up the invasion.

REPLY: Nauru is a small problem: it defends slightly more than I like. But not for long. It will fall to the original landing party if you either wait it out or if you support the landing with air strikes/serious ship bombardment. Or you can send a larger/second landing party. I wish they would fix this problem - but I am not sure if it will be done in the final patch - or not? It is very tolerable now: I saw Hong Kong fall in one day in one test! [Which must be a die roll - usually it lasts longer than history - Christmas Day] I don't see what more we can do - other than say "free supplies are free to screw things up" or remove the resources? Besides - it is good discipline to build proper attacks against places with clever engineers around - witness IRL events on New Guinea screwed up by much smaller numbers of "civilians".


Big one - Singapore, supplies get sucked out of Singapore at a prodigious rate and deposited in Kuala Lumpur. There they are captured by the Japanese forces, not used for defending a siege at Singapore.

REPLY: This is not entirely under my control. They have addressed this in AE - with player settable buttons. But at least Kauala Lumpur is not hard to take any more - and you can actually use those supplies yourself - if you FIGHT FOR the place instead of run. Singapore fell in 100 days - are you sending reinforcements TO Malaya - and holding out that long?
You should do better than history - as the real commander was perfectly awful. Sending less forces - running for Singapore instead of fighting - is not exactly the fault of the system. Kuala Lumpur should be a place you want to defend for political and economic reasons - and if this effect makes you need to do that - I am not sure it is not a boon - even if it is not exactly what I want either.

[witpqs]

The original landing force on Nauru was wiped out, by attrition I think. I realize this is both minor and an issue of chance - Okami had Nauru fall promptly. I had Wake fall promptly, which sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't.

Regarding Singapore and KL, I know those game mechanics are not under your control. However, the problem is caused by all the extra 'civilians' in the unit at KL. Your comments about fighting for the place etc., have nothing to do with this. KL pulls almost all the supplies out of Singapore. Singapore will not hold out as long when the LCU's starting there and retreated there all begin starving practically right away. Let alone last 100 days.

Whatever good modeling is being achieved by having that big civilian unit in KL is wiped out and more by the bad modeling of Hoovering all supplies out of Singapore.

BTW, I have a bunch of units in KL defending, and it has not fallen yet. It will, and then Singapore is doomed quickly thereafter. An IJ division made a run down the middle of the peninsula and split the CW forces. Being the AI, the unit then made for the north coast (east in the game). A human player would have been able to seize that opportunity and keep the CW forces split or turning north and hitting KL from two directions. The point is that because the supplies are pulled out of Singapore and stuck in KL, they will be captured there and will not contribute to a 100-day simulation of Singapore holding out (all other things being equal).

I'm not going to belabor the point, just wanted to report that this issue has not changed and does not provide a good simulation of the situation on the peninsula.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: okami

Thanks for the reply on the other topics, as to the Axis Hawk, no it is the same grey transport aircraft art as the K-34. No color to it at all. Just started my game with Mistmatz and will post any peculiarities here for comment and as maybe a heads up if you find that something is wrong. What are the chances I can steal an AD from the allies.[:D][:D][:D]

If only Cobra were alive an well...

We need to check pointers and art - I think the right image is there - maybe I can figure it out?
But I can only fix pointer issues.

We DO have 4 or 5 art issues with the EOS plane art set - I just duplicated the closest art pending the right stuff being plugged in.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

The original landing force on Nauru was wiped out, by attrition I think. I realize this is both minor and an issue of chance - Okami had Nauru fall promptly. I had Wake fall promptly, which sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't.

Regarding Singapore and KL, I know those game mechanics are not under your control. However, the problem is caused by all the extra 'civilians' in the unit at KL. Your comments about fighting for the place etc., have nothing to do with this. KL pulls almost all the supplies out of Singapore. Singapore will not hold out as long when the LCU's starting there and retreated there all begin starving practically right away. Let alone last 100 days.

Whatever good modeling is being achieved by having that big civilian unit in KL is wiped out and more by the bad modeling of Hoovering all supplies out of Singapore.

BTW, I have a bunch of units in KL defending, and it has not fallen yet. It will, and then Singapore is doomed quickly thereafter. An IJ division made a run down the middle of the peninsula and split the CW forces. Being the AI, the unit then made for the north coast (east in the game). A human player would have been able to seize that opportunity and keep the CW forces split or turning north and hitting KL from two directions. The point is that because the supplies are pulled out of Singapore and stuck in KL, they will be captured there and will not contribute to a 100-day simulation of Singapore holding out (all other things being equal).

I'm not going to belabor the point, just wanted to report that this issue has not changed and does not provide a good simulation of the situation on the peninsula.

Well - you could MOVE the supplies OUT of KL - once it is isolated. They can be flown of course - but ship is better. Once the rail line falls I send lots of supplies to Singapore - from Sumatra - and I have had it hold into 1943.

[m10bob]

In my current game, Singapore fell approx 031242 and the Allies still hold Kuala Lumpur on 040142..RHS 7.7872...
I had been having issues with supply even going to inner towns in Australia, but Sid fixed them, (or justified the lousy supply for Alice Springs, which historically was your basic hole in the ground that had to be there)..

[el cid again]

I have an idea. It needs testing. If I send you (WITPQS) a pwhex file, will you tell me if you like the effects - or not? It is an almost invisible change - but it might just do what you want. At the price that - Singapore is more port oriented - less land LOC oriented. I lack the confidence to issue a general change if it does not address this matter in a way you like.

[witpqs]

I think it's impossible to effectively move supplies as you suggest because A) Japanese air power won't allow it, and B) supplies moved to Singapore will promptly leave again. I have proved this in continental USA by trying to air-transport supplies around. It's useless because the rail lines are faster! Shipping them does work, but on the Malay Peninsula the dynamics would cause them to almost immediately flow right back to KL. The ships wouldn't make it through the air gauntlet anyhow.

As far as changing the pwhex, I think that cure would be worse than the ill. Singapore needs to be accessible per historical capability by both attacker and defender. It's really too late to help my current game anyway, which I plan to run for long term (hopefully until the new code is out!). I appreciate the offer, but I'll pass this time around.

Hopefully AE will greatly improve this mechanism.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: m10bob
In my current game, Singapore fell approx 031242 and the Allies still hold Kuala Lumpur on 040142..RHS 7.7872...
I had been having issues with supply even going to inner towns in Australia, but Sid fixed them, (or justified the lousy supply for Alice Springs, which historically was your basic hole in the ground that had to be there)..

I definitely could defend Malay better than in my current game. I decided to try a middle-ground strategy this time. It's really just the supply vacuuming issue I wanted to report, the rest is context.

It looks like the supply movement issue will be improved in AE. Also, if they get the improved CS convoy system working the way they hinted at the player's task load will be a whole lot less to move around all those resources, et al in the rear areas.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I think it's impossible to effectively move supplies as you suggest because A) Japanese air power won't allow it, and B) supplies moved to Singapore will promptly leave again. I have proved this in continental USA by trying to air-transport supplies around. It's useless because the rail lines are faster! Shipping them does work, but on the Malay Peninsula the dynamics would cause them to almost immediately flow right back to KL. The ships wouldn't make it through the air gauntlet anyhow.

As far as changing the pwhex, I think that cure would be worse than the ill. Singapore needs to be accessible per historical capability by both attacker and defender. It's really too late to help my current game anyway, which I plan to run for long term (hopefully until the new code is out!). I appreciate the offer, but I'll pass this time around.

Hopefully AE will greatly improve this mechanism.

If we code Singapore as road instead of as RR - the supplies won't flow OUT as fast. But everything will flow IN just fine. Further - Singapore is a conjested place - so it might be good simulation. I note that Kyushu and Hokkaido have no primary RR at all - and neither does Shikoku - but things flow adequately. I decreased the RR from primary to secondary to help supplies not leave major cities so fast - and it worked.

What is the point of saying "we have a problem" if you don't want it to be addressed? AE is a different game - granted it is related. WITP will remain - and if we can make it work better - why not?

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: el cid again
What is the point of saying "we have a problem" if you don't want it to be addressed?

For the benefit of others. As I mentioned, it's too late too make any difference in the game I am currently running. I do not want to restart right now.

[el cid again]

Don't do a restart. Do a quick and dirty test - local units only - using your earlier save game files - to get a sense of it. you know what you saw you didn't like - I want to know how a single hex change affects that?

[okami]

Is there respawning in CVO? I just sank the Marblehead and Boise and I wonder if I will see them down the road.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: el cid again
Don't do a restart. Do a quick and dirty test - local units only - using your earlier save game files - to get a sense of it. you know what you saw you didn't like - I want to know how a single hex change affects that?

Eh, I only save three versions back. Unless I'm testing something specific that is. Malay is gone already.

If you want me to test I'll be happy to fire up a new game and test 10 or 20 turns or something. Let me know.

[1EyedJacks]

Hi El Cid,

In a stock game with DBs, when you fly them at targets in a high altitude they attack in strings of 9 (for the most part). When I attack around 9k I normally get DB groups of 3 planes.

My preference normally is to run the DBs so they attack in groups of three but I'm finding the AAA murderous over PH. Any suggestions in attaing smaller attack groups w/o getting creamed by flak?

Just curious - do the flak guns have an accuracy level? If we reduced the accuracy level a little of AAA guns what would be the effect on flak losses?

When attacking enemy shipping what was the standard doctrine with TBs and DBs? Was the intent to perform a High/Low attack with DBs and TBs to split the number of AAA guns and make them choose between DBs and TBs?

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks

Hi El Cid,

In a stock game with DBs, when you fly them at targets in a high altitude they attack in strings of 9 (for the most part). When I attack around 9k I normally get DB groups of 3 planes.

My preference normally is to run the DBs so they attack in groups of three but I'm finding the AAA murderous over PH. Any suggestions in attaing smaller attack groups w/o getting creamed by flak?

I think you do know, but if you don't (or for others), the number of DB's attacking together IS dependent on the altitude you attack from. The larger plane groups will attack from 16,000 ft+, but the lower altitude attacks (with smaller number of planes) have a higher percentage to hit, (if you are willing to take the AAA risk).
It is a trade off.