8 Dec Scenario

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
moses
Posts: 2252
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 3:39 am

8 Dec Scenario

Post by moses »

This looks really great. No house rules will be required whatsoever. Players will have to adjust to the slower start but it is far more historical. As an added bonus if KB decides to hang around PH for 3 or 4 turns the Wake invasion could be in for some hurt. This is the true historical scenario.
User avatar
DrewMatrix
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 2:49 pm

RE: 8 Dec Scenario

Post by DrewMatrix »

I have the download, but am at work and haven't installed it.

That 8 December scenario was the thing I am most looking forward to. Can't wait to get home
Image
Beezle - Rapidly running out of altitude, airspeed and ideas.
User avatar
mdpeyrot
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri May 03, 2002 7:20 am
Location: Plattsmouth, Nebraska
Contact:

RE: 8 Dec Scenario

Post by mdpeyrot »

I love this scenario. Thanks Pry!!

Only one minor quibble. I assume it wasn't possible to include the losses for December 7th in the score and sunk ships/planes losses data. Too bad.
moses
Posts: 2252
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 3:39 am

RE: 8 Dec Scenario

Post by moses »

One other quibble. I think the South Sea detachment should be at sea shouldn't they? Historically they hit guam on 9 Dec. Doesn't really matter I guess they just take it a day or two late.
User avatar
pry
Posts: 938
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 7:19 am
Location: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas

RE: 8 Dec Scenario

Post by pry »

Thanks guys Hope you enjoy it,
Only one minor quibble. I assume it wasn't possible to include the losses for December 7th in the score and sunk ships/planes losses data. Too bad.

The losses were added to the Japanese score via additional points (about 500 IIRC) for the value of Tokyo but in my rush to get the scenario in for inclusion I forgot to add the latest updates files and 2 small issues were not addressed (I had 2 sets of files for this while I was working on it and sent in the wrong ones) one being the points to the Japanese, and I had been toying with removing the ML Ogalala from the OOB as she was never used again in this duty after her repair so in the files you all got she has no damage. It is not possible to have the loses listed at game start because that record is kept by the game and not a data base.
One other quibble. I think the South Sea detachment should be at sea shouldn't they? Historically they hit guam on 9 Dec. Doesn't really matter I guess they just take it a day or two late.

I went back and forth over the South Seas detachment on if they should be loaded or not I finally decided the cost of a day or two in a 1,600 turn game makes no real difference.

Over all from testing it, I think is has a better feel to it and slows down the pace a bit.
User avatar
Grotius
Posts: 5842
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 5:34 pm
Location: The Imperial Palace.

RE: 8 Dec Scenario

Post by Grotius »

This sounds great. How is the start "slower," exactly?
Image
User avatar
pry
Posts: 938
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 7:19 am
Location: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas

RE: 8 Dec Scenario

Post by pry »

I took out all the non historical landings from scenario 15, for instance the only landing made in the Philippines is at Bataan Island, now the computer or japanese player has to take a few days to load up his invasion forces for further landings in the PI. Since i am not using Dec 7th, the game uses normal load rates and it slows down the Japanese attacks.

I reduced the Malaya attack to as close to the historical number of forces as possible, so instead of two full divisions, there is one division at Singora and a single regiment at KB, again the Japanese has to take time to load up more forces or march them overland it all takes time and slows things down. Both places have consistantly held out longer than they do in scenario 15 during AI to AI testing.
User avatar
Mark VII
Posts: 1850
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 6:41 am
Location: Brentwood,TN

RE: 8 Dec Scenario

Post by Mark VII »

Good to hear, was wondering about all of those (historical start) landings on Luzon on Dec 7.
Image
Svar
Posts: 379
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2000 8:00 am
Location: China Lake, Ca

RE: 8 Dec Scenario

Post by Svar »

I have taken Scenario #16 and modified it to address some of my pet concerns and as I have incorporated Micheal Johnson's South Pacific base changes I was wondering if anyone was interested in having more of his changes incorporated then provided it to Spooky's site for download? Here is a copy of the readme for the changes so far.

Scenario #16 Mod Notes

There were some minor USAAF FG changes from the Scenario #15 to Scenario #16 but nothing on the scale that I made here to reflect the correct composition at the end of the war so my changes refer to Scenario #15 instead of Scenario #16.

I have modified the USAAF FGs to reflect the composition historically serving at the end of the war. Historically by 1945 there were 8 P-51 FGs plus 4 independent FSs, 7 P-47 FGs plus 1 independent FS, 7 P-38 FGs plus 1 independent FS, and 4 P-40 FGs plus 1 independent FS for a total of 26 FGs plus 7 independent FSs. The projected Scenario #15 1945 composition is 1 P-51 FG plus 2 independent FSs, 8 P-47 FGs plus 1 independent FS, 8 P-38 FGs plus 2 independent FSs, and 12 P-40 FGs plus 6 independent FSs for a total of 29 FGs plus 11 independent FSs.

The 15th FG is represented in Scenario #15 by its 3 component FSs. The 4 FGs that were disbanded before 1945 were the AVG which became the 23rd FG, the 24th FG (destroyed at Manila) which was carried on the USAAF rolls but never rebuilt, the 54th FG in early 1944 and the 407th FG also disbanded in early 1944. In fact many FGs were disbanded in 1944 but most of them were training FGs stationed in the States. I have combined the 3 15th FG squadrons into a single FG. I have eliminated the 3 15th FG squadrons plus 1 other which leaves the 7 independent FSs that were still present in 1945.

The following units were deleted; the 54th FG, the 407th FG, the 34th FS, the 45th, 46th, and 47th FSs. The last 3 FSs make up the 15th FG. The 24th FG was switched to the 15th FG and moved to PH. The 15th FG should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Dec 44. The 24th FG was replaced with the 23rd FG in Manila which should be upgrade to P-51Ds in Dec 44. The 23rd FG is the replacement for AVG but since air units can't be removed from the game you get two for one except AVG can't be upgraded past P-40Ns so this is a good compromise. The 35th FG was switched to P-39Ds and moved to Clark, it will end the game as a P-38J FG. The P-51D replacement for the historical 35th FG will be the 81st FG which will enter the game when it did originally but equipped with P-47Ds that should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Mar 45. Three FSs were modified; the 3rd FS was changed to the 2nd FS and will enter the game 12/15/44 with P-51Ds. The 21st FS which was changed to the 4th FS will enter the game 12/15/44 with P-51Ds. Finally the 78th FS was changed to the 6th FS. The 18th (P-39Ds) and 49th (P-40Es) FGs will end the game as P-38J FGs. The 21st FG should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Jan 45. The 80th FG was changed to P-47Cs and 33rd FG was changed to P-47Ds. The 311th FG will upgrade to P-51Bs and the 348th FG should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Mar 45. Finally the 51st FG should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Dec 44.

These changes will give the final composition of the USAAF fighter units as follows; These are P-51D units the 15th, 21st, 23rd, 51st, 81st, 311th, 348th, and 506th FGs plus 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th FSs. These are P-47D units the 33rd, 58th, 80th, 413th, 414th, 507th, and 508th FGs plus the 5th FS. These are the P-38J units the 8th, 18th, 35th, 49th, 318th, 347th, and 475th FGs plus the 6th FS. These are the P-40N units the AVG, 14th, 20th, 55th, and 343rd FGs plus the 18th FS.

For the record, the 23rd, 51st, and 311th FGs plus the 1st and 2nd FSs ended the war in China. The 35th (81st in the mod) and the 348th FGs plus the 3rd and 4th FSs ended the war with Southwest Pacific Command. Finally, the 15th, 21st, and 506th FGs ended the war with the 20th AF on Iwo Jima.

Due to the respawning of US CVs and CAs I have modified the OOB to reflect actual arrival dates of a ship without the honorary name for a lost sister. There are also some errors in the OOB with respect to the arrival dates of the CVs and CVLs.

Ship Name Arrival Date
CVs
Essex 5/23/43
Bunker Hill 7/17/43
Intrepid 8/2/43
Franklin 10/1/43
Hancock 1/3/44
Ticonderoga 3/1/44
Bennington 3/28/44
Randolph 6/1/44
Shangri-La 9/15/44
Bon Homme Richard 9/15/44
Antietam 1/1/45
Boxer 1/20/45
Lake Champlain 2/7/45
REPLACEMENT 4/7/45
REPLACEMENT 6/12/45
REPLACEMENT 8/15/45
REPLACEMENT 10/7/45

CVLs
Independence 7/14/43
Belleau Wood 7/19/43
Princeton 8/1/43
Cowpens 9/12/43
Monterey 10/15/43
Cabot 11/25/43
Langley 1/1/44
Bataan 4/1/44
San Jacinto 4/1/44

CAs
St Paul 1/13/45
Bremerton 3/15/45
Columbus 5/23/45
Los Angeles 6/1/45
REPLACEMENT 11/13/45
REPLACEMENT 12/7/45
REPLACEMENT 12/7/45
REPLACEMENT 1/20/46

Any respawned ship should be held in a west coast port until a replacement date occurs. The St Paul was already in the OOB but the arrival date was 3/15/45. The last 3 Baltimore class CAs were added to the OOB for ships that actually served in the war with the name of a lost sister.

There were also some minor changes with the CVL CAGs because there were 24 fighters and 9 torpedo bombers on all these ships so the CAGs were changed and the capacity of the CVLs was increased to 33 A/C. The capacity of all the CVs except Wasp was increased to 92 A/C with the 1944 and later upgrades because in 1945 when you refuel your CVs they load 36 F6Fs, 36 F4Us, 18 SB2Cs, and 15 TBMs. That is 105 A/C and 115% of 90 is 103.5 so you exceed the capacity of the carrier and no A/C fly. It is just too big a pain to try to keep your CAG under 103 A/C so it was easier to just increase the capacity by 2 A/C.

The South Pacific base modifications from Michael Johnson's Scenario #26 were adopted as well as modifying the Admiralty Islands to a port SPS of 6 and an airfield SPS of 5.
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: 8 Dec Scenario

Post by Ron Saueracker »

ORIGINAL: Svar

I have taken Scenario #16 and modified it to address some of my pet concerns and as I have incorporated Micheal Johnson's South Pacific base changes I was wondering if anyone was interested in having more of his changes incorporated then provided it to Spooky's site for download? Here is a copy of the readme for the changes so far.

Scenario #16 Mod Notes

There were some minor USAAF FG changes from the Scenario #15 to Scenario #16 but nothing on the scale that I made here to reflect the correct composition at the end of the war so my changes refer to Scenario #15 instead of Scenario #16.

I have modified the USAAF FGs to reflect the composition historically serving at the end of the war. Historically by 1945 there were 8 P-51 FGs plus 4 independent FSs, 7 P-47 FGs plus 1 independent FS, 7 P-38 FGs plus 1 independent FS, and 4 P-40 FGs plus 1 independent FS for a total of 26 FGs plus 7 independent FSs. The projected Scenario #15 1945 composition is 1 P-51 FG plus 2 independent FSs, 8 P-47 FGs plus 1 independent FS, 8 P-38 FGs plus 2 independent FSs, and 12 P-40 FGs plus 6 independent FSs for a total of 29 FGs plus 11 independent FSs.

The 15th FG is represented in Scenario #15 by its 3 component FSs. The 4 FGs that were disbanded before 1945 were the AVG which became the 23rd FG, the 24th FG (destroyed at Manila) which was carried on the USAAF rolls but never rebuilt, the 54th FG in early 1944 and the 407th FG also disbanded in early 1944. In fact many FGs were disbanded in 1944 but most of them were training FGs stationed in the States. I have combined the 3 15th FG squadrons into a single FG. I have eliminated the 3 15th FG squadrons plus 1 other which leaves the 7 independent FSs that were still present in 1945.

The following units were deleted; the 54th FG, the 407th FG, the 34th FS, the 45th, 46th, and 47th FSs. The last 3 FSs make up the 15th FG. The 24th FG was switched to the 15th FG and moved to PH. The 15th FG should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Dec 44. The 24th FG was replaced with the 23rd FG in Manila which should be upgrade to P-51Ds in Dec 44. The 23rd FG is the replacement for AVG but since air units can't be removed from the game you get two for one except AVG can't be upgraded past P-40Ns so this is a good compromise. The 35th FG was switched to P-39Ds and moved to Clark, it will end the game as a P-38J FG. The P-51D replacement for the historical 35th FG will be the 81st FG which will enter the game when it did originally but equipped with P-47Ds that should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Mar 45. Three FSs were modified; the 3rd FS was changed to the 2nd FS and will enter the game 12/15/44 with P-51Ds. The 21st FS which was changed to the 4th FS will enter the game 12/15/44 with P-51Ds. Finally the 78th FS was changed to the 6th FS. The 18th (P-39Ds) and 49th (P-40Es) FGs will end the game as P-38J FGs. The 21st FG should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Jan 45. The 80th FG was changed to P-47Cs and 33rd FG was changed to P-47Ds. The 311th FG will upgrade to P-51Bs and the 348th FG should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Mar 45. Finally the 51st FG should be upgraded to P-51Ds in Dec 44.

These changes will give the final composition of the USAAF fighter units as follows; These are P-51D units the 15th, 21st, 23rd, 51st, 81st, 311th, 348th, and 506th FGs plus 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th FSs. These are P-47D units the 33rd, 58th, 80th, 413th, 414th, 507th, and 508th FGs plus the 5th FS. These are the P-38J units the 8th, 18th, 35th, 49th, 318th, 347th, and 475th FGs plus the 6th FS. These are the P-40N units the AVG, 14th, 20th, 55th, and 343rd FGs plus the 18th FS.

For the record, the 23rd, 51st, and 311th FGs plus the 1st and 2nd FSs ended the war in China. The 35th (81st in the mod) and the 348th FGs plus the 3rd and 4th FSs ended the war with Southwest Pacific Command. Finally, the 15th, 21st, and 506th FGs ended the war with the 20th AF on Iwo Jima.

Due to the respawning of US CVs and CAs I have modified the OOB to reflect actual arrival dates of a ship without the honorary name for a lost sister. There are also some errors in the OOB with respect to the arrival dates of the CVs and CVLs.

Ship Name Arrival Date
CVs
Essex 5/23/43
Bunker Hill 7/17/43
Intrepid 8/2/43
Franklin 10/1/43
Hancock 1/3/44
Ticonderoga 3/1/44
Bennington 3/28/44
Randolph 6/1/44
Shangri-La 9/15/44
Bon Homme Richard 9/15/44
Antietam 1/1/45
Boxer 1/20/45
Lake Champlain 2/7/45
REPLACEMENT 4/7/45
REPLACEMENT 6/12/45
REPLACEMENT 8/15/45
REPLACEMENT 10/7/45

CVLs
Independence 7/14/43
Belleau Wood 7/19/43
Princeton 8/1/43
Cowpens 9/12/43
Monterey 10/15/43
Cabot 11/25/43
Langley 1/1/44
Bataan 4/1/44
San Jacinto 4/1/44

CAs
St Paul 1/13/45
Bremerton 3/15/45
Columbus 5/23/45
Los Angeles 6/1/45
REPLACEMENT 11/13/45
REPLACEMENT 12/7/45
REPLACEMENT 12/7/45
REPLACEMENT 1/20/46

Any respawned ship should be held in a west coast port until a replacement date occurs. The St Paul was already in the OOB but the arrival date was 3/15/45. The last 3 Baltimore class CAs were added to the OOB for ships that actually served in the war with the name of a lost sister.

There were also some minor changes with the CVL CAGs because there were 24 fighters and 9 torpedo bombers on all these ships so the CAGs were changed and the capacity of the CVLs was increased to 33 A/C. The capacity of all the CVs except Wasp was increased to 92 A/C with the 1944 and later upgrades because in 1945 when you refuel your CVs they load 36 F6Fs, 36 F4Us, 18 SB2Cs, and 15 TBMs. That is 105 A/C and 115% of 90 is 103.5 so you exceed the capacity of the carrier and no A/C fly. It is just too big a pain to try to keep your CAG under 103 A/C so it was easier to just increase the capacity by 2 A/C.

The South Pacific base modifications from Michael Johnson's Scenario #26 were adopted as well as modifying the Admiralty Islands to a port SPS of 6 and an airfield SPS of 5.

Hey, Svar. If you are basically ignoring the respawning rule, where are CV 10. 12, 16, 18?
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
RevRick
Posts: 2615
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Thomasville, GA

RE: 8 Dec Scenario

Post by RevRick »

Was thinking the same thing, Ron.

CV10 (Yorktown), CV12 (Hornet), CV16 (Lexington), CV18 (Wasp) should be present in this scenario under there original names - Bon Homme Richard, Kearsarge, Cabot, and Oriskany and IIRC, the original Bon Homme Richard and Kearsarge were due much earlier in the game than indicated here.
"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Svar
Posts: 379
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2000 8:00 am
Location: China Lake, Ca

RE: 8 Dec Scenario

Post by Svar »

I use the same names that the game designers use. Instead of giving each hull their original name they gave them the name of the next Essex to be launched with an original name. I didn't change the name of any Essex already in the game I just assigned them with an actual arrival date into the theater. The respawned carriers will still enter the game just when an actual Essex CV did. There were 13 Essex class CVs in theater at the end of the war, there are still but the names are different. Only the Essex has the same name as the original CV all the others have the name of the next Essex class CV to enter that wasn't renamed for a lost sister.
User avatar
Caltone
Posts: 651
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Raleigh, NC USA

RE: 8 Dec Scenario

Post by Caltone »

ORIGINAL: pry

Thanks guys Hope you enjoy it,
Only one minor quibble. I assume it wasn't possible to include the losses for December 7th in the score and sunk ships/planes losses data. Too bad.

The losses were added to the Japanese score via additional points (about 500 IIRC) for the value of Tokyo but in my rush to get the scenario in for inclusion I forgot to add the latest updates files and 2 small issues were not addressed (I had 2 sets of files for this while I was working on it and sent in the wrong ones) one being the points to the Japanese, and I had been toying with removing the ML Ogalala from the OOB as she was never used again in this duty after her repair so in the files you all got she has no damage. It is not possible to have the loses listed at game start because that record is kept by the game and not a data base.
One other quibble. I think the South Sea detachment should be at sea shouldn't they? Historically they hit guam on 9 Dec. Doesn't really matter I guess they just take it a day or two late.

I went back and forth over the South Seas detachment on if they should be loaded or not I finally decided the cost of a day or two in a 1,600 turn game makes no real difference.

Over all from testing it, I think is has a better feel to it and slows down the pace a bit.

Pry did you mean the latest updates that didn't make it in included the points for the Dec 7th losses? Doesn't appear to be any additional points for Japan in the scenario as far as I can tell.

Still, very enjoyable scenario and agreed on the slower pace at the beginning. It feels about "right" [;)]
"Order AP Hill to prepare for battle" -- Stonewall Jackson
Post Reply

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