"Scraps of Paper - in a World on Fire" Scenario 127
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
- Admiral DadMan
- Posts: 3416
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
"Scraps of Paper - in a World on Fire" Scenario 127
"Scraps of Paper - in a World on Fire"
[v1.5 SCEN files NOW UPLOADED in the attachment below]
In this mod/scenario, the Washington Naval Conference/Five-Power Treaty of 1922 and the succeeding naval conferences are only partially successful in limiting capital ships, but do lead to some tamping down of the naval arms race.
Mostly rooted in reality, with some flight of my own particular fancy, this scenario takes the DaBabes WitP:AE - By Symon mod/scenario and adds to it new ships for both sides.
Some quick notes:
The biggest feature is that the Allied Player can now choose whether or not the U.S. completes some of the Cleveland class cruisers' hulls as Independence class CVL's or finish them as CL's. There is also the ability to complete a few Baltimore heavy cruisers as Monterey (ex.-Saipan) class CVL's or finish them as CA's.
Some of the ships that historically went to the breakers appear in this game:
. -Japan's Tosa & Kii classes;
. -America's Constitution (ex.-Lexington) battlecruisers, and the 1920 version of battleship South Dakota;
. -Britain's proposed "G3" and "F2" class battlecruisers named Lion and Nelson respectively.
Japan for its part, can convert some of her merchant hulls to MAC (Merchant Aircraft Carrier) CVE's starting in late 1942 if needed. America can convert some of her tankers into Long Island type CVE's as well. Granted, America gets a TON of Kaiser-built CVE's 1944 and onward.
Some "concept designs" are also included, such as
. -the Japanese "Pokekurū" or pocket battlecruiser of the Chichibu class;
. -America's answer to it in the Reliant class;
. -Rear Admiral Moffett's "flying-deck cruiser" or CLV/CAV (referred to as "CF" in this scenario) of the Ely and Chesapeake classes,
. -the original "quad turret" version of the North Carolina class battleships
. -and variant of the Brooklyn class with "quad turrets" as sub-class Phoenix cruisers.
Japan's CVL Ryujo evolves into a moderately (albeit scaled back) effective design. Six of her are built in place of other less viable conversions.
"Easter Eggs" are included:
. -HMS Ark Royal and a sister ship: HMS Bounty
. -After the Great Kanto Earthquake destroys the original Amagi hull, the third Amagi class battlecruiser, Takao, is not scrapped, but is re-named Amagi and completed as a sister carrier to Akagi.
. -Any ship that is in the Ship Reinforcement que that has a II, III, or IV at the end of its name (e.g. "ex.-Oriskany II" or "Crown Point III") can be renamed while still in the Ship Reinforcement que and BEFORE IT ARRIVES. If you forget, you will be stuck with some weirdly named ships.
ALL files including files for the new ships can be found here: Scen127
A full treatise/backstory is posted below. *************************************
v1.5 NOW UPLOADED in the attachment below:
[v1.5 SCEN files NOW UPLOADED in the attachment below]
In this mod/scenario, the Washington Naval Conference/Five-Power Treaty of 1922 and the succeeding naval conferences are only partially successful in limiting capital ships, but do lead to some tamping down of the naval arms race.
Mostly rooted in reality, with some flight of my own particular fancy, this scenario takes the DaBabes WitP:AE - By Symon mod/scenario and adds to it new ships for both sides.
Some quick notes:
The biggest feature is that the Allied Player can now choose whether or not the U.S. completes some of the Cleveland class cruisers' hulls as Independence class CVL's or finish them as CL's. There is also the ability to complete a few Baltimore heavy cruisers as Monterey (ex.-Saipan) class CVL's or finish them as CA's.
Some of the ships that historically went to the breakers appear in this game:
. -Japan's Tosa & Kii classes;
. -America's Constitution (ex.-Lexington) battlecruisers, and the 1920 version of battleship South Dakota;
. -Britain's proposed "G3" and "F2" class battlecruisers named Lion and Nelson respectively.
Japan for its part, can convert some of her merchant hulls to MAC (Merchant Aircraft Carrier) CVE's starting in late 1942 if needed. America can convert some of her tankers into Long Island type CVE's as well. Granted, America gets a TON of Kaiser-built CVE's 1944 and onward.
Some "concept designs" are also included, such as
. -the Japanese "Pokekurū" or pocket battlecruiser of the Chichibu class;
. -America's answer to it in the Reliant class;
. -Rear Admiral Moffett's "flying-deck cruiser" or CLV/CAV (referred to as "CF" in this scenario) of the Ely and Chesapeake classes,
. -the original "quad turret" version of the North Carolina class battleships
. -and variant of the Brooklyn class with "quad turrets" as sub-class Phoenix cruisers.
Japan's CVL Ryujo evolves into a moderately (albeit scaled back) effective design. Six of her are built in place of other less viable conversions.
"Easter Eggs" are included:
. -HMS Ark Royal and a sister ship: HMS Bounty
. -After the Great Kanto Earthquake destroys the original Amagi hull, the third Amagi class battlecruiser, Takao, is not scrapped, but is re-named Amagi and completed as a sister carrier to Akagi.
. -Any ship that is in the Ship Reinforcement que that has a II, III, or IV at the end of its name (e.g. "ex.-Oriskany II" or "Crown Point III") can be renamed while still in the Ship Reinforcement que and BEFORE IT ARRIVES. If you forget, you will be stuck with some weirdly named ships.
ALL files including files for the new ships can be found here: Scen127
A full treatise/backstory is posted below. *************************************
v1.5 NOW UPLOADED in the attachment below:
- Attachments
-
- SCEN127.zip
- (929.34 KiB) Downloaded 198 times
RE: Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper" -in a World on Fire
Bravo Dad. Looking forward to it....GP
Intel Ultra 7 16 cores, 32 gb ram, Nvidia GeForce RTX 2050
AKA General Patton
DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
WIS Manual Team Lead & Beta Support Team
"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
AKA General Patton
DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
WIS Manual Team Lead & Beta Support Team
"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
- Admiral DadMan
- Posts: 3416
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
RE: Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper" -in a World on Fire
Thank you. Still working out some things that I find as I re-look at certain areas, like US ship endurance which is way out of whack to both extremes.
No way can Brooklyn and Wichita classes make 14,500nm of endurance. Then I found this:
War Service Fuel Consumption of U.S. Naval Surface Vessels
- CV-5 USS Yorktown (based on a proposed 24,700 ton design study for Yorktown) is available in Norfolk
- CV-7 USS Wasp (based on the historical 19,800 ton Yorktown design) is theoretically available,
- CV-1(a) USS Langley (re-built/modified Lexington CVB class) is due in 30 days, and
- CV-8 USS Hornet (19,800 ton Wasp class) is due in March/April.
Really on the fence with how to go. I like Ranger's back story, but logic says that Wasp would be the better choice to bring to the Pacific, and both carriers were in or near Norfolk (EC) in 7 Dec 41. The reason for keeping both of them in the Atlantic was that Yorktown was a better capable choice to send to the Pacific.
Yes, this is a lot of mental minutiae over one ship, but history is the flavor of this game, and because it's not less filling, I like it to taste good. [:D]
No way can Brooklyn and Wichita classes make 14,500nm of endurance. Then I found this:
War Service Fuel Consumption of U.S. Naval Surface Vessels
Probably one of the last things I am working out is how to deal with CV-4 USS Ranger (1934). I have the ability in place/programmed to bring her into the game from Norfolk (East Coast) on turn 1, but justifying it when1. WAR SERVICE FUEL CONSUMPTION OF U.S. NAVAL SURFACE VESSELS (FTP 218) is issued for the use and guidance of the Naval Service and is effective upon receipt. The distribution is in accordance with the hallowances prescribed in the Registered Publication Allowance Tables.
2. FTP 218 supersedes (a) FTP 136, and (b) "Fuel Oil Consumption Tables and Endurance Charts" which were issued tosubsequent to September 1943 to certain surface vessels. Holders are directed to destroy the above mentioned superseded material. No report of destruction is required.
3. FTP 218 is a confidential, non-registered publication which shall behandled, stowed and transported as prescribed by Article 76, U.S. Navy Regulations (1920) and the Registered Publication Manual.
4. This document contains information affecting the natinoal [sic] defense of the United States within tyhe [sic] meaning of the Espionage Act, 50 U.S.C., 31 and 32, as amended. Its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.
- CV-5 USS Yorktown (based on a proposed 24,700 ton design study for Yorktown) is available in Norfolk
- CV-7 USS Wasp (based on the historical 19,800 ton Yorktown design) is theoretically available,
- CV-1(a) USS Langley (re-built/modified Lexington CVB class) is due in 30 days, and
- CV-8 USS Hornet (19,800 ton Wasp class) is due in March/April.
Really on the fence with how to go. I like Ranger's back story, but logic says that Wasp would be the better choice to bring to the Pacific, and both carriers were in or near Norfolk (EC) in 7 Dec 41. The reason for keeping both of them in the Atlantic was that Yorktown was a better capable choice to send to the Pacific.
Yes, this is a lot of mental minutiae over one ship, but history is the flavor of this game, and because it's not less filling, I like it to taste good. [:D]
- Admiral DadMan
- Posts: 3416
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Available for Public BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.10
Well, here it is.
In the first post I have attached the SCEN files and backstory (which is EIGHT PAGES) for this scenario.
There is also 68MB of Ship Art that is too big for the forum, so I will have to figure out a way to give folks access to it.
About the only thing that I still have to finish is USN airgroup composition. I have been toying with a VSR (Scout/Recon) "FXX-XP" squadron replacing/augumenting the VS SBD/SB2C squadrons. I haven't quite mentally puzzled it out.
In the meantime, enjoy the inner workings of the last 20 years of my brain.
Scot.
**EDIT: The attachment below is also a copy of the backstory by itself, for convenience.
***DOCUMENT EDITED AND RE-UPLOADED on 22JUL18.
In the first post I have attached the SCEN files and backstory (which is EIGHT PAGES) for this scenario.
There is also 68MB of Ship Art that is too big for the forum, so I will have to figure out a way to give folks access to it.
About the only thing that I still have to finish is USN airgroup composition. I have been toying with a VSR (Scout/Recon) "FXX-XP" squadron replacing/augumenting the VS SBD/SB2C squadrons. I haven't quite mentally puzzled it out.
In the meantime, enjoy the inner workings of the last 20 years of my brain.
Scot.
**EDIT: The attachment below is also a copy of the backstory by itself, for convenience.
***DOCUMENT EDITED AND RE-UPLOADED on 22JUL18.
- Attachments
-
- Scraps of .. on Fire.zip
- (41.82 KiB) Downloaded 108 times
RE: Available for Public BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.10
Admiral: Nice back story and mod. This looks like it would be a fun one to play.
I have seen two hicups so far. Concord class has 16 and 14 in guns. There is a USN CV without a name, I think it comes in on Apr 18 1946.
I have seen two hicups so far. Concord class has 16 and 14 in guns. There is a USN CV without a name, I think it comes in on Apr 18 1946.
- Admiral DadMan
- Posts: 3416
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
RE: Available for Public BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.10
Thank you.
And thank you for picking off the goofs. "The Carrier Which Shall Not be Named" lol.
And thank you for picking off the goofs. "The Carrier Which Shall Not be Named" lol.
ORIGINAL: DOCUP
Admiral: Nice back story and mod. This looks like it would be a fun one to play.
I have seen two hicups so far. Concord class has 16 and 14 in guns. There is a USN CV without a name, I think it comes in on Apr 18 1946.
- Admiral DadMan
- Posts: 3416
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Available BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.12
Latest update now available. Still working on a way to host the ship art.
The probably final item that I am puzzling out is whether or not I want to re-configure US carrier air groups from VF/VS/VB/VT to VF/VSR/VB/VT, where VSR squadrons are 8 plane sections of -P models for scouting. So instead of:
27/18/18/15
it's
27/8/27/15.
It kinda throws the balance of power in mobile scouting.
To that end, I'm also debating if I should allow players to immediately be able to change the size of carrier air groups. Personally, I'd immediately bump my VF up to 45 at least, but that jumps the gun on doctrine by at least 2 years. On the other hand, it's not like players can't already to that by moving air groups around.
The probably final item that I am puzzling out is whether or not I want to re-configure US carrier air groups from VF/VS/VB/VT to VF/VSR/VB/VT, where VSR squadrons are 8 plane sections of -P models for scouting. So instead of:
27/18/18/15
it's
27/8/27/15.
It kinda throws the balance of power in mobile scouting.
To that end, I'm also debating if I should allow players to immediately be able to change the size of carrier air groups. Personally, I'd immediately bump my VF up to 45 at least, but that jumps the gun on doctrine by at least 2 years. On the other hand, it's not like players can't already to that by moving air groups around.
RE: Available BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.12
Does this have your China changes? Have you thought about dropbox?
- Admiral DadMan
- Posts: 3416
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
RE: Available BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.12
I made no changes to China from the DaBabes scenario. The changes are 90% naval, with a few new aircraft to accomodate the "flying-deck cruisers".
I'm considering giving a look into dropbox.
I'm considering giving a look into dropbox.
ORIGINAL: DOCUP
Does this have your China changes? Have you thought about dropbox?
- Admiral DadMan
- Posts: 3416
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
- Admiral DadMan
- Posts: 3416
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Available BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.2
Updated today: See Post #1.
I have made a decision on the US Carrier Air group issue that is more or less historical, so that if the Allied player wants to make a US CV into a fighter carrier, multiple VF must be used before Jan 45. This required some heavy duty mentating due to the differing capacities of the pre-war CV's and the Lexington/Ranger re-builds.
Outside of any boo-boos, I think it's nearly gold.
Comments welcome.
I have made a decision on the US Carrier Air group issue that is more or less historical, so that if the Allied player wants to make a US CV into a fighter carrier, multiple VF must be used before Jan 45. This required some heavy duty mentating due to the differing capacities of the pre-war CV's and the Lexington/Ranger re-builds.
Outside of any boo-boos, I think it's nearly gold.
Comments welcome.
- ny59giants
- Posts: 9902
- Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm
RE: Available BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.2
CV Ranger - I would keep her in Atlantic until Jan '43. Reasoning being she was needed for Torch. See comes into Pacific to be the flagship for all the CVEs coming out since she is too slow to keep up with the Yorktown's.
[center]
[/center]
[/center]- Admiral DadMan
- Posts: 3416
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
RE: Available BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.2
Indeed. The lack of top end speed does not translate well in to AE game terms as regards to how it affected flight operations. Her real deficit is a nearly complete lack of protection.
What I've decided is that with the the USN having a half dozen CF's (aka CLV's) in theater, that I want to keep some balance as regards to them vis-a-vis the IJN Ryujo CVL's, as well as the USS Langley (ex.-United States) CVB rebuild. And I like Ranger's unique history.
She shouldn't be employed on the front line unless you're desperate. She can be pulled off-line for a re-build in October '42, which could also be in parallel with Torch employment.
So I've opted for this:
CVL Ranger on 7 Dec in Norfolk
CVB Langley at Bremerton in Jan42
CV Yorktown in March42
CV Wasp in June42
CV Hornet in July 42
What I've decided is that with the the USN having a half dozen CF's (aka CLV's) in theater, that I want to keep some balance as regards to them vis-a-vis the IJN Ryujo CVL's, as well as the USS Langley (ex.-United States) CVB rebuild. And I like Ranger's unique history.
She shouldn't be employed on the front line unless you're desperate. She can be pulled off-line for a re-build in October '42, which could also be in parallel with Torch employment.
So I've opted for this:
CVL Ranger on 7 Dec in Norfolk
CVB Langley at Bremerton in Jan42
CV Yorktown in March42
CV Wasp in June42
CV Hornet in July 42
ORIGINAL: ny59giants_MatrixForum
CV Ranger - I would keep her in Atlantic until Jan '43. Reasoning being she was needed for Torch. See comes into Pacific to be the flagship for all the CVEs coming out since she is too slow to keep up with the Yorktown's.
ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan
Probably one of the last things I am working out is how to deal with CV-4 USS Ranger (1934). I have the ability in place/programmed to bring her into the game from Norfolk (East Coast) on turn 1, but justifying it when
- CV-5 USS Yorktown (based on a 24,700 ton design study for Yorktown) is available in Norfolk
- CV-7 USS Wasp (based on the historical 19,800 ton Yorktown design) is theoretically available,
- CV-1(a) USS Langley (re-built/modified Lexington CVB class) is due in 30 days, and
- CV-8 USS Hornet (19,800 ton Wasp class) is due in July 42.
Really on the fence with how to go. I like Ranger's back story, but logic says that Wasp would be the better choice to bring to the Pacific, and both carriers were in or near Norfolk (EC) in 7 Dec 41. The reason for keeping both of them in the Atlantic was that Yorktown was a better capable choice to send to the Pacific.
Yes, this is a lot of mental minutiae over one ship, but history is the flavor of this game, and because it's not less filling, I like it to taste good.
- Admiral DadMan
- Posts: 3416
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
RE: Available BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.2
Working on correcting a weapons loadout issue. Apparently, TBD Devastators (and TBF Avengers) can carry a torpedo AND a 1000lb SAP bomb for naval attacks. I think I have a solution for it however...
RE: Available BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.2
Dad, don't you mean a torpedo OR a 1000lb bomb?....GP
Intel Ultra 7 16 cores, 32 gb ram, Nvidia GeForce RTX 2050
AKA General Patton
DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
WIS Manual Team Lead & Beta Support Team
"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
AKA General Patton
DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
WIS Manual Team Lead & Beta Support Team
"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
- Admiral DadMan
- Posts: 3416
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
RE: Available BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.2
Nope BOTH.
I was fooling around testing something else when I noticed that Devastators were dropping both weapons on the same attack , even though I took care to properly segment the weapons in to proper slots and filter them.
What I was intending was for VT's to be able to carry 1000lb bombs as an alternate loadout (i.e. when no torps were available) instead of defaulting to the single 500lb bomb (or 2 in the case of the Avenger) as specified for Extended range loadouts.
Either cannot program effectively or, as I'm beginning to suspect, the filter are not working properly (at least not #4.
I was fooling around testing something else when I noticed that Devastators were dropping both weapons on the same attack , even though I took care to properly segment the weapons in to proper slots and filter them.
9 x TBD-1 Devastator launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.5in Mk13 AerTorp, 1 x 1000 lb GP Bomb
What I was intending was for VT's to be able to carry 1000lb bombs as an alternate loadout (i.e. when no torps were available) instead of defaulting to the single 500lb bomb (or 2 in the case of the Avenger) as specified for Extended range loadouts.
Either cannot program effectively or, as I'm beginning to suspect, the filter are not working properly (at least not #4.
ORIGINAL: btd64
Dad, don't you mean a torpedo OR a 1000lb bomb?....GP
RE: Available BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.2
I've seen the avenger up close. It doesn't have the hard points for both at the same time. Unless the bomb or the torpedo hangs on the outside of the bomb bay doors. It can carry up to 2000lbs, or torpedo in the internal bomb bay or 4 500 or 12 100lb bombs in the bomb bay. This info is from some older notes I have and I believe it to be true. It could also mount 5" rockets....GP
Intel Ultra 7 16 cores, 32 gb ram, Nvidia GeForce RTX 2050
AKA General Patton
DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
WIS Manual Team Lead & Beta Support Team
"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
AKA General Patton
DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
WIS Manual Team Lead & Beta Support Team
"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
- Admiral DadMan
- Posts: 3416
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
RE: Available BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.2
Exactly.
I don't WANT them to carry both at the same time. What I intend is if the group is set to Naval Attack, and there are NO torpedoes available for the planes to carry a 1000lb bomb. What is happening is that when there ARE torpedoes available, the planes are carrying BOTH.
I have to think that I have something not defined correctly.
I don't WANT them to carry both at the same time. What I intend is if the group is set to Naval Attack, and there are NO torpedoes available for the planes to carry a 1000lb bomb. What is happening is that when there ARE torpedoes available, the planes are carrying BOTH.
I have to think that I have something not defined correctly.
ORIGINAL: btd64
I've seen the avenger up close. It doesn't have the hard points for both at the same time. Unless the bomb or the torpedo hangs on the outside of the bomb bay doors. It can carry up to 2000lbs, or torpedo in the internal bomb bay or 4 500 or 12 100lb bombs in the bomb bay. This info is from some older notes I have and I believe it to be true. It could also mount 5" rockets....GP
RE: Available BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.2
Ok. I must have misunderstood what you said. Sorry about that....GP
Intel Ultra 7 16 cores, 32 gb ram, Nvidia GeForce RTX 2050
AKA General Patton
DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
WIS Manual Team Lead & Beta Support Team
"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
AKA General Patton
DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
WIS Manual Team Lead & Beta Support Team
"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
- Admiral DadMan
- Posts: 3416
- Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
RE: Available BETA: "Scraps of Paper" v0.2
No problem. Can't seem to puzzle out where it's going wrong, or if I am.
I've got Airfield, Port, Ground, ASW, and City working just fine.
I've got Airfield, Port, Ground, ASW, and City working just fine.

