A Modest Proposal

[corbulo]

To increase playability for the Japanese in scenario #17 I suggest the following:
1- substitute a6m5s for a6m2s(on carriers)
2- substitute n1k1s for a6m2s(land based airgroups)
3-jills for vals
4-judys for kates
5- g4m2s for g4m1s
6-ki-67s for g3s
7-ki-84s for ki-43s
Install bofors 40mm AA guns on all carriers
increase 14" guns to 16" guns on Kongo/Fuso class battleships

This should make the game more playable.

[CapAndGown]

And for Shokoku class CVs substitute Essex class.
:p

[zed]

Yes, I think that would be best:
4 X 5/38
2 X 40 mm Bofors AA
2 X 20 mm Oerlikon

also, give the armament to AKAGI, KAGA, HIRYU, SORYU

Just trying to even things up a bit.

[tanjman]

corbulo,

1- substitute a6m5s for a6m2s(on carriers)
Can be done now with the editor.

2- substitute n1k1s for a6m2s(land based airgroups)
Can't be done with the editor because there are no replacement aircraft for the N1K1.

3-jills for vals
Can't be done with the editor because the arrival date of replacement Jills would need to be changed.

4-judys for kates
Can't be done with the editor because the arrival date of replacement Judys would need to be changed.

5- g4m2s for g4m1s
Can't be done with the editor because the arrival date of replacement G4M2s would need to be changed.

6-ki-67s for g3s
What is the G3? Can't be done with the editor because the arrival date of replacement Ki-67 Helens would need to be changed.

7-ki-84s for ki-43s
Can't be done with the editor because there are no replacement aircraft for the Ki-84.

Install bofors 40mm AA guns on all carriers
increase 14" guns to 16" guns on Kongo/Fuso class battleships
Both can be done with the editor.

Maybe I'll modify what I can with the editor and see what happens.

[Admiral DadMan]

How about trade Yamato and Musashi for 4 or 5 more Shokaku class carriers? You'd have to make up names for the ships (borrow from the future?), and you'd have to add 3 Air Groups for each carrier.

Or release Akagi, Kaga, Soryu, and Hiryu (with escorts) earlier, like 1 May 42?

[zed]

Tanjman,

Thanks for the wonderful exposition about the possibilities. G3 is the NELL. Is there any way to get replacements to N1K1,KI-84, JILLS and KATES?

[tanjman]

zed,

The editor is limited in what it can do. You can't add new aircraft or ship classes, and you can't modify the aircraft replacement rates. Both would have to be done by Matrix/2by3.

I'm thinking about doing the following for a modified scenario 17:

1)A6M3 carrier based only.
2)A6M2 shore based only. Since the upgrade path for the A6M2 is now to the A6M5 instead of the A6M3 I feel that the range of the A6M2 is need to escort the G3M & G4M Daitai.
3)Add some D3A Val shore based Daitai.
4)Remove Yamato and Musashi and replace them with 4 more Shokaku class carriers (thanks for the suggestion Admiral DadMan). I do need suggestions on what to name them.
5)Improve the IJAAF. Open to suggestions on this.
6)Increase Base Forces by creating a mirror IJN base force for every IJA base force. i.e. change 14th Base for to 14th Army Base Force and create the 14th Naval Base Force.

I know the above is not historical, but would like to do it anyway as a form of alternate history. I'm open to suggestions on what further changes to make to both sides.

[Finnegan]

Originally posted by tanjman
I do need suggestions on what to name them.

Ryukaku for one of the Shokaku class. I had made a scenario that used several of the Unryu class since they were essentially repeats of the Hiryu class, and the Hiryu is represented here. The names for the Unryu class both built and proposed are:

Unryu
Amagi
Katsuragi
Kasagi
Aso
Ikoma

Hope I spelled those right!!

[Yamamoto]

I made a scenario when I added four more Shokaku class carriers and four more Yorktown carriers. I named the Shokaku ones Ryukaku, Zenkaku, Kikaku, and Dankaku. I named the Yorktown ones after four more revolutionary war battles.

If it were possible to change the rates of replacements for airplanes, what would you change them to? Scenario 19 has different replacement rates for the planes than scenario 17 does.

I believe Unryu was not just like the Hiryu class. It has an armored flight deck and it had tons more AA guns.


Yamamoto

[zed]

The Katsuragi sank at Kure Naval Yard, along with the Aoba and several others in 15 October 1944. There are pictures posted on this Forum showing those pictures. I myself saw them in a book "History of Naval Operations in WW2" in the library. Very impressive. All the ships look so small. One wonders how planes took off from the Deck. The Aoba was the flagship of Goto at Cape Esperance, Oct 1942.
The largest Aircraft Carrier the IJN built "Shinano" , was torpedoed by a submarine and sank in 29 nov 1944.

http://www.ww2pacific.com/japcv.html

[Admiral DadMan]

Originally posted by Yamamoto
...I believe Unryu was not just like the Hiryu class.

Yamamoto

According to Warships1 and Combined Fleet sites, Unryu class were much like Hiryu class, but not exact, namely fewer planes

...(Unryu class had) an armored flight deck and it had tons more AA guns.

You're thinking of Taiho Combined Fleet, Warships1

I made a scenario when I added four more Shokaku class carriers and four more Yorktown carriers. I named the Shokaku ones Ryukaku, Zenkaku, Kikaku, and Dankaku. I named the Yorktown ones after four more revolutionary war battles.

I'm thinking of one with just along those lines, with the extra four Shokaku class showing up late 1942 and into 1943. No more Yorktowns, but speeding up some of the Essexes and adding 2 that were available in PH in 43 as well like Bon Homme Richard (CV-10 renamed Yorktown) and Cabot (CV-16 renamed Lexington, which I renamed Concord).

[Finnegan]

Originally posted by Yamamoto
I made a scenario when I added four more Shokaku class carriers and four more Yorktown carriers. I named the Shokaku ones Ryukaku, Zenkaku, Kikaku, and Dankaku. I named the Yorktown ones after four more revolutionary war battles.

If it were possible to change the rates of replacements for airplanes, what would you change them to? Scenario 19 has different replacement rates for the planes than scenario 17 does.

I believe Unryu was not just like the Hiryu class. It has an armored flight deck and it had tons more AA guns.


Yamamoto

Nice names for the Shokakus. Prolly steal 'em.

I usually end up backing up scenario 19 and re-naming a new scenario to 19 to use the increased A/c production rates for the Japanese. Sure hope the WITP editor can be retrofitted to UV.

[Admiral DadMan]

Originally posted by Yamamoto
I made a scenario when I added four more Shokaku class carriers and four more Yorktown carriers. I named the Shokaku ones Ryukaku, Zenkaku, Kikaku, and Dankaku. I named the Yorktown ones after four more revolutionary war battles.
...

I like the IJN names you came up with. The "Crane" class.

Some suggested US CV names:

• Shiloh
• Cold Harbor
• Gettysburg
• Concord
• Manassas
• Bull Run
• Shenandoah

[zed]

Originally posted by Admiral DadMan
I like the IJN names you came up with. The "Crane" class.

Some suggested US CV names:

• Shiloh
• Cold Harbor
• Gettysburg
• Concord
• Manassas
• Bull Run
• Shenandoah

FOr some reason, probably regional sensitivities, Civil War Battles were not used. ALso, I am hoping someone will add the
ME-262 to the list of available Japanese Army Fighters in mid-1943.

[angus]

Originally posted by zed
For some reason, probably regional sensitivities, Civil War Battles were not used. ALso, I am hoping someone will add the
ME-262 to the list of available Japanese Army Fighters in mid-1943.

CV-36 Antietam. My cousin George really screwed the pooch there. I think there was a Vicksburg but I'd guess that was after the town and not the siege.

As for the Kikkas, I don't think UV can cope with aircraft that needed new engines every ten running hours

BTW, if it's of any interest I came across some interesting articles on the US Naval War College Review website :-

A good article by S.E. Morison on WWII naval strategy :-
http://www.nwc.navy.mil/press/Review/19 ... t6-w98.htm

And two very interesting articles on Midway :-
http://www.nwc.navy.mil/press/Review/20 ... t3-Su0.htm
http://www.nwc.navy.mil/press/Review/20 ... d1-su1.htm

Cheers,

Angus

[mogami]

Hi, I am staying out of this. Except to point out Bull Run and Manassas are the same battle.

[Admiral DadMan]

Originally posted by Mogami
Hi, I am staying out of this. Except to point out Bull Run and Manassas are the same battle.

Depends on you geography, my friend.

There were actually 2 battles on the same ground, labelled "First" and "Second". The place Name (Bull Run or Manassas) depended upon your colors...

[mdiehl]

Mighty kind of the USN to name their ships after battles fought by the US (or Continental) army. Other ideas: USS Mobile Bay, Manila Bay (would we have to use them for CVEs?), USS Lake Erie (after the 1812 engagement), USS Hampton Roads (after the Monitor vs. Virginia[ex. Merrimack] incident), USS Hartford (after the other ship of 1812-14 fame).

[Admiral DadMan]

Originally posted by Yamamoto
I made a scenario when I added four more Shokaku class carriers and four more Yorktown carriers... I named the Yorktown ones after four more revolutionary war battles.

Yamamoto

Here's another thought for you:

Suppose that in 1923 the US did not cancel the four remaining Lexington Class battle cruisers, and instead converted them to CV's as well, so that they would not have to bear the cost of scrapping. The first 4 Lexingtons would have come up to about 130,000 tons. The Washington Naval Treaty allowed for 135,000 tons of carriers. The remaining were: Constellation, Ranger, Constitution, and United States.

Suppose that because the Treaty expires in 1936, the US decides to continue to build on the last two hulls slowly, so that they are completed after the Treaty's expiration.

This pushes the three Yorktowns back and they don't get commissioned until 1942 (May, July, September). Ranger(CV-4) of course never gets built as a ground-up CV. Wasp too never gets built, as she was a stopgap.

What do you think?

[tanjman]

Originally posted by Yamamoto
If it were possible to change the rates of replacements for airplanes, what would you change them to? Scenario 19 has different replacement rates for the planes than scenario 17 does.

Yamamoto,

If I were able to set the aircraft replacement rate I would use around 5 per month per 24 plane squadron and adjust it from there according to squadron size. I feel any higher would unbalance playability.

Guys, thanks for the suggestions and the links.

As far as scenario 19 goes I've had strange things happen when I edited it and saved it back to slot 19 to save the Japanese aircraft repacement rates. i.e. I had remnant air units start being listed as reinforcements but never arriving. So I restored the orginal and stopped messing with scenario slots 1 - 20.