Matrix Games Forums

Hell is Approaching Deal of the Week Battle Academy Battle Academy 2 Out now!Legions of Steel ready for betaBattle Academy 2 gets trailers and Steam page!Deal of the Week Germany at WarSlitherine Group acquires Shenandoah StudioNew information and screenshots for Pike & ShotDeal of the Week Pride of NationsTo End All Wars Releasing on Steam!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

(Almost ) Historical MOD

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> (Almost ) Historical MOD Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
(Almost ) Historical MOD - 11/5/2011 9:15:19 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
It seems, quite lots of people download first Scenario, however, I work on them only one at a time, so all changes are implemented only in last uploaded (currently 31). New Scenario 31 is here, because it have profiled bombloads for Japanese planes, and IT WORKS ONLY WITH LATEST BETA

I can not delete old files in previous thread, so it would be better to make new one instead of adding them at the end of posts.

Link to previous versions:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2743160



This is not real MOD, more like pool of problems solutions.
The main goal is to force players to face real war decisions, that means, Japan should struggle with their economy, and both sides feel real constrains in their transport capacities.
The main purpose is to show, how to represent certain weapons/doctrines, considering game-engine limitations, and simple, quick implementation. Yes, it could be represented better, but it would require ten times as much work.

Most of the data (and I mean MOST, like 90%) is delivered directly from Technical Mission to Japan manuals dated 1942-1948. There are also some estimations, based on weapons production/introduction dates, to incorporate them into game, as currently they are absent completely from original game.


ALREADY DONE:
Japan Squads upgrades
early war US squads anti-tank value
sizes, and dates for Allied squad upgrades revised
lots of older Allied planes to use early
Sankaiden ammunition
China lend-lease
Japan tanks Soft Attacks
Japanese CVEs, and BBs have now capacity
transport ships capacity reduction
Japan CVEs
YAMATOs
late war SSTs
new pilots not arriving anymore in groups on map
support troops take more space
submarine Allied invasions with Commando troops
few guns, and aircraft weapons revised
D3A2 range
TOJO replacements
Ka-1 groups
DINAH KAI
aircraft, and engines arrival dates to incorporate research already on map
Japanese airborne torpedo upgrades
BETTY upgrades
SHINANO
revision of starting position
profiled bombloads for Japanese planes


TODO:
HIYO conversion
MOJI MARUs
LSD conversion into CVEs
larger aircraft guns
late-war Light Tanks upgrades
initial orders for airgroups, to ease first turn orders

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by inqistor -- 12/22/2012 7:45:10 AM >
Post #: 1
Scenario 31 - 11/5/2011 9:21:42 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
MODified Scenario 1. Numbered as 31.

Initial position highly revised.
Lots of additional planes for Allies (from pre-war reserves)
Japanese planes production dates include initial R&D factories (some arrive later)
REDUCED SHIP CAPACITIES
HISTORICAL PILOT NUMBERS
Larger support squads
Japanese squads upgrades
San-Shiki, sometimes even delayed
75mm guns have Hard Attack statistics streamlined (every type have different)
Two Infantry Guns upgrade their ammunition to HEAT around 1943/1944
Commando squad is initially smaller (and weaker), to fit onto submarines.
Ki-44 TOJO arrives in January, and have replacements value
2 additional historical pilots
YAMATOs arrive at historical dates, and are modified
Japanese CVEs are conversion, where they should be, also some of them gets additional airgroups later
Japanese tanks Soft Attacks revised
Second VAL model have recalculated range, and is better than First model.
Lots of planes have slightly bigger bombload for Kamikaze "duties".


China replacements are revised.
Ka-1 autogyro gets 9 units. 6 land-based, and 3 ship-based.
All Maru-Yu SSTs are now present, with modified armament, and entry-ports.
10cm/65 Type98 AA Gun IS now the BEST Japanese DP.
Few additional tweaks. Check RTF file for further info.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by inqistor -- 8/11/2012 7:55:12 AM >

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 2
Scenario 32 - 11/5/2011 9:22:11 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
MODified Scenario 2. Numbered as 32.

Fisrt shot at economy - Refineries produce 3 supply, and 8 fuel. Also manpower production is reduced.

TOJO gets engine change, because last patch did not implemented it also in this scenario.
Device 1486 (Japanese 88mm Type 99 AA Gun) is now not-empty. I have copied its statistics from stock Scenario 1.
Dutch Sumbarines have DP guns, so they can shot on surface.

REDUCED SHIP CAPACITIES FLAT (this time using "scientific" calculations. The absolute minimum for larger ships seems to be exactly 17.64%)
INITIAL POSITION REVISED, according to data from Niehorster site. NO JAPAN TROOPS IN THAILAND
ALLIED FIGHTER POOLS REVISED (there will be few hundred additional fighters in first months, all older models). Also over 100 fighters for China
HISTORICAL PILOT NUMBERS (as for Scenario 2)
Japanese planes arrival dates revised. Also some of their armament
Some changes to Japan planes bombload
Jpan airborne torpedo get upgrades
Larger support squads
Japanese squads upgrades
San-Shiki
75mm guns have Hard Attack statistics streamlined (every type have different)
Two Infantry Guns upgrade their ammunition to HEAT around 1943/1944
Commando squad is initially smaller (and weaker), to fit onto submarines.
Singapore is now undamaged, at the scenario beginning.
2 additional historical pilots
YAMATOs arrive at historical dates, and are modified
Japanese CVEs are conversion, where they should be, also some of them gets additional airgroups later
Japanese tanks Soft Attacks revised
Second VAL model have recalculated range, and is better than First model.
Two planes have slightly bigger bombload for Kamikaze "duties".
Ki-44 TOJO production modified. It begin small replacements in January 1942, and its engine is available at 4/42. Also it gets Service Rating of 2 (of similar reasons, that P-40 of AVG), and it is NOT in any upgrade path. Researching it does nothing for availability date of Ki-44 IIa model.
Second VAL model have recalculated range, and is better than First model.
Two planes have slightly bigger bombload for Kamikaze "duties".
Few longer Naval Guns have recalculated effect.


China replacements are revised.
Ka-1 autogyro gets 9 units. 6 land-based, and 3 ship-based.
All Maru-Yu SSTs are now present, with modified armament, and entry-ports.
10cm/65 Type98 AA Gun IS now the BEST Japanese DP.
Few additional tweaks. Check RTF file for further info.

And... new AI file, by AndyMac

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by inqistor -- 5/19/2012 8:20:40 AM >

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 3
Scenario 36 - 11/5/2011 9:22:26 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
MODified Scenario 6. Numbered as 36.

SHINANO - at last. Arrives as HULL, ready for conversion (over 400 days in both cases). Its airgroups are replenisment type.
All 7mm/.30cal MGs have penetration 2
All invasion fleets for New Guinea area are deleted
And HARBIN have more factories

TOJO gets engine change, because last patch did not implemented it also in this scenario.
Device 1486 (Japanese 88mm Type 99 AA Gun) is now not-empty. I have copied its statistics from stock Scenario 1.

REDUCED SHIP CAPACITIES (this time using "scientific" calculations. The absolute minimum for larger ships seems to be exactly 17.64%)
INITIAL POSITION REVISED, according to data from Niehorster site (Japan have more support troops in first wave, and this wave already have landed)
ALLIED FIGHTER POOLS REVISED (there will be few hundred additional fighters in first months, all older models)
HISTORICAL PILOT NUMBERS (and I mean it, there is shortage of Army pilots now)
Larger support squads
Japanese squads upgrades
San-Shiki, sometimes even delayed
75mm guns have Hard Attack statistics streamlined (every type have different)
Two Infantry Guns upgrade their ammunition to HEAT around 1943/1944
Commando squad is initially smaller (and weaker), to fit onto submarines.
Singapore is now undamaged, at the scenario beginning.
2 additional historical pilots
YAMATOs arrive at historical dates, and are modified
Japanese CVEs are conversion, where they should be, also some of them gets additional airgroups later
Japanese tanks Soft Attacks revised
Second VAL model have recalculated range, and is better than First model.
Two planes have slightly bigger bombload for Kamikaze "duties".
Ki-44 TOJO production modified. It begin small replacements in January 1942, and its engine is available at 6/42. Also it gets Service Rating of 2 (of similar reasons, that P-40 of AVG), and it is NOT in any upgrade path. Researching it does nothing for availability date of Ki-44 IIa model.
Second VAL model have recalculated range, and is better than First model.
Two planes have slightly bigger bombload for Kamikaze "duties".
Few longer Naval Guns have recalculated effect.


China replacements are revised.
Ka-1 autogyro gets 9 units. 6 land-based, and 3 ship-based.
All Maru-Yu SSTs are now present, with modified armament, and entry-ports.
10cm/65 Type98 AA Gun IS now the BEST Japanese DP.
Few additional tweaks. Check RTF file for further info.

Few modifications to show, that it is 8th December. LCUs are disrupted, planes are already lost, and fuel for Hawaii attack is already used.
Also, Navy pilot pool is larger by 10 (to represent pilots MIA/WIA at Pearl Harbor), and 12mm Rockets have 10 effect (previously 0)

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by inqistor -- 9/8/2012 8:11:16 AM >

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 4
RE: (Almost ) Historical MOD - 11/5/2011 9:37:46 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
First I thought, that all ships in AE have 15 cruise speed, but it seems Akagi, and Kaga have it different, so I have changed Japanese Carriers according to this table. It should rarely provide any benefit, because there are no escorts, which travel that fast, so main bonus will be in saving some fuel, when that ONE extra hex will be needed. Anyway, it seems some changes could be implemened, as not all ships had the same cruising speed (for example Kamikaze class is listed at 14 kn).

Latest changes:
YAMATOs have earlier arrival dates, gets some additional armament, and armor. Most important, I think it was originaly Local Yokel idea - initial Yamato Guns are really bad (1/3rd of accuracy), later they get better, but San-Shiki is implemented in 9/42 upgrade. Also ship get worse maneuver rating initially, and first upgrade is possible only in largest Yard in Japan.
Japanese CVEs, and BBs have now capacities
Originally converted CVEs are now also converions (that gives possible additional CVE from Brazil Maru)
few smaller units have right icons (SNLF, instead of infantry)
Some CVEs gets additional airgroups later, according to UNYO TROM:

quote:

25 August 1944:
Depart Moji with light cruiser KASHII escorting HI-73 convoy with six escorts to Seletar.Ten Type 97 attack planes and six Type 93 bi-planes training aircraft from the 931st Squadron are embarked.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 5
RE: (Almost ) Historical MOD - 11/6/2011 9:50:25 PM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
I have accidentally discovered, that Kota Bharu Invasion TF can not load all units, after all those changes. Quick research shows, that there are only 3 transport ships mentioned in historical TF, while in-game there are 5, hmmm...

but there is also description, that Awajisan Maru, first Japanese ship sunk during WWII was gigantic at 9,784 tons, while in-game it have merely 2375, hmmm, hmmm....
However, another quick research shows, that:
quote:

Along with its sister ships Ayatosan Maru and Sakura Maru, it was carrying around 5,000 troops during the landings at Kota Bharu.


Awajisan Maru should have similar class to two other ships, but it belongs to Class 2066 Gozan Cargo, while two other are listed as Yusen A/S Cargo, so... quick change to Yusen Cargo and VOILA! All units fit.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by inqistor -- 11/6/2011 9:51:26 PM >

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 6
RE: (Almost ) Historical MOD - 11/12/2011 8:53:48 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
I forgot to mention, that latest changes include radar upgrade fix for LCUs, hich seems to be typo in original Scenarios.


I have discovered, that there is something wrong with Patani Invasion. It is unable to load all units, but checking original Scenario 1, it can not load there either, so this is not fault of my latest changes. However, since all the changes were made as experiment, and it seems Niehorster have detailed Invasion Forces composition, I have decided to assemble Singora Invasion, and recalculate all modification from there:

First, it seems that initial forces miss some support units. Namely Aviation Support, and some Construction Companies. I have modified Malaya part in this way:

8085 Kota Bahru Inv
+3925 8th Field AF Const Bn

8091 Singora Invasion
-075 25th Army (Only ONE Company is listed as being onboard)
+4001 11th Shipping Engr Rgt
+4674 12 Air District Rgt (that was hard to interprete. It is probably old WITP Aviation Rgt, in AE this is probably 12th JAAF Base Force)

8098 Singora Inv.III (there is serious problem here, because there are no transport listed for those units, all were supposed to be onboard combat ships, and setting TF to Fast Transport do not help much, because they have far too low capacity)
+4643 9th Base Force

There are also additional Base Force, and smaller units in Thai Malaya portion.

8087 Aparri Invasion
+034 11th Air Fleet
+4673 11th JAAF Base Force

And Batan Island invasion is actually divided into 3 parts, because both islands SW of Batan were also invaded.


Anyway, initial Singora Invasion have 11 Transport Ships, and must get 9 LCUs. That would mean, that TWO Infantry Regiments must fit into no more, than 2 ships, and rest of units must be able to be loaded in only ONE ship. That meant interesting conclusion, that it is LARGE transports, which are main bottleneck, not smaller ones. The whole issue reduced itself to Yusen S type, which should be able to load full Armored Regiment. After few experiment it seems, that absolute minimum for its Cargo Capacity must be 5255.
That have also solved Support Modifications. 12th Base Force was able to load with no more, than 9 load cost for Aviation Support, and reducing all larger tranports by similar ratio (around 17.5%), allowed for MAXIMUM possible Support load cost at 15, not 20.


I have also took care of fuel issue, where initial Invasion TFs load fuel onto their transports. I do not see option to turn it off in editor, so there are only two solutions:
1) Make Tanker TF, and load this fuel on them before
2) Pump all fuel from base to nearby other base

There seems to be actually only TWO Bases affected: SAMAH, and HIROSHIMA. Transfer of fuel from HIROSHIMA 228 to 245 seems to fix problem (unless someone wants to load tankers there in first turn).
SAMAH is not that simple, because there is only one other base on island, and supply path is too long for fuel to transfer in first day. The other base is also too small to store all 40500 fuel, so there is spoilage. Solution is to put maximum 19000 in 413, and rest somewhere in Vietnam.


And last issue, which was pissing me immensely from the beginning:
There are few SNLF Companies, which use standard infantry icon, there is also few Construction Companies, which use generic engineer icon, the same, which is used by AF Companies. Seriously, when I am seeking unit, I am interested in Aviation Support mainly, not few extra Engineers. So, magic line is:
=IF(AND(ISNUMBER(SEARCH("SNLF",B2)),AP2=70),76,IF(AND(ISNUMBER(SEARCH("Const Co",B2)),AP2=100),104,AP2))

The only problem now, is that Construction Companies have added "Construction Battalion" after their name. Something like 56th Const Co Construction Battalion.

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 7
scraping the bottom of the barrel - 2/11/2012 8:00:54 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
I wanted to check if Allies have actually as bad planes situation, when Japan stroke, as it seems in-game.
I began with fighters. The prime suspects were recently obsolete types, so P-26, P-35, P-36, and P-43. The main problem is map, which includes part of USA, and I am pretty sure, that if KB come "visiting" HOLLYWOOD, everything what could mount MG would fly in defence.

Here is what I have discovered:


p-26

quote:

By December 1941, U.S. fighter strength in the Philippines included 28 P-26s, 12 of them operational with the 6th Pursuit Squadron of the Philippine Army Air Corps.

There were 14 P-26 at Hawai, so those 13 in-game reserve, are probably part of garrison

quote:

Following Pearl Harbor, only nine P-26s remained airworthy in the Panama Canal Zone. In 1942-1943, the Fuerza Aérea de Guatemala acquired seven P-26s ostensibly by the U.S. government smuggling them in as "Boeing PT-26A" trainers to get around restrictions of sales to Latin American countries.


Obviously, in case of emergency, those 9 could be transfered back to States.
Overall, that means, that 13 P-26 from reserve should be at PH, additional 16 should be in Philippines, and reserve should be 9.


P-35


quote:

On 18 June 1940, United States declared an embargo against exporting weapons to any nation other than the United Kingdom. Optimistically, Republic continued to manufacture EP-106s which, by the 24 October 1940 order, 60 were taken over by the USAAC as the P-35A. The aircraft were re-armed to American standards with a pair of 0.50 in machine guns that fired through the propeller, but retained the Swedish specification of a 0.30 in machine gun mounted in each wing. Flight instruments were metric, and both their labeling and flight manuals written in Swedish. Of these, three aircraft were kept in United States as instructional airframes for mechanics. Six P-35As were delivered to Ecuador to form the first combat unit, the Escuadrilla de Caza.[24] The remainder were sent to the Far East Air Force in the Philippines beginning in February 1941. Eventually all pilots of the three pursuit squadrons on Luzon transitioned to the P-35A from the P-26. About 10 of these were lost in accidents.

That gives: 60-3-6-10=41 P-35 at Philippines (assuming no earlier deliveries), in-game there is only 22, but again, Niehorster shows 52

That is close to total production 136, of which 60 were send to Sweden (60+60+11=131)


P-36

quote:

Norway also ordered 36 Cyclone-powered Hawk 75A-8s. Most of this batch (a total of 30) were delivered as advanced trainers to "Little Norway" near Toronto, Ontario, Canada, a Norwegian training base established by the London based government-in-exile. Still later, they were resold to the U.S. and redesignated the P-36G model.

Although I can not find exact date of this resold (sources says either early 1942, or 1943). Nevertheless, there should be possibility of buying those 30 P-36 in early war.

Also, USAAF bought 213 P-36 overall, while in-game there is only 90.


quote:

In April 1941, the British government of India ordered 48 Cyclone-powered Mohawk IVz (Hawk 75A) for the RIAF, to be built by Hindustan Aircraft. The first such aircraft completed was test flown on 31 July 1942. However, only four additional aircraft were completed before the project was abandoned. The Indian-built series were used by RAF/RIAF units. Similarly, Chinese license production of the Hawk 75A-5 was moved to India, and these aircraft were also absorbed into RAF as Mohawk IVs. These aircraft were supplemented by 10 Hawk 75A-9s captured during the Anglo-Soviet invasion of Iran in August 1941,[5] while 74 ex-French Mohawk IVs were shipped to India from the United Kingdom.[4] The only RAF units to see combat in Mohawks were No. 5 Squadron RAF and No. 155 Squadron RAF, using the type mainly for Bomber escort and ground attack. The type was retired by the RAF/RIAF in 1944.

The South African Air Force received 72 Mohawks. Its first Mohawks were delivered to East Africa in mid-1941, where they were used by 3 Squadron SAAF to support operations in the East African Campaign, taking part in the Battle of Gondar which ended the campaign, and helping to patrol the border with Vichy French held Djibouti.[7] These Mohawks were then sent to South Africa, where, supplemented by fresh deliveries, they were used for training and for home defence.

That means there should be 10+74=84 Mohawks IV in India, when war begins (there is none currently).

And next 72+, as possible in emergency from East/South Africa training units.


P-43

Initial production for US is 147 (76 planes in-game)

HURRICANE

quote:

Order of battle, 7 December 1941
India Command (Wavell; at New Delhi)
Southern Army (Haig)

Colombo Fighter Squadron 42 Hurricane
Trincomalee Fighter Squadron 22 Hurricane

11 Squadron (at Trincomalee) 9 Blenheim


quote:

South Africa obtained a number of ex-RAF Hurricane Is before the war, which went into squadron service in Pretoria.



So, it seems game begins short of 25 P-26, 30 P-35, 123 P-36, 71 P-43, 84 Mohawks IV, and 64 Hurricanes (249 US, and 148 British fighters).
That is conservative estimation, not taking into account possible transfers from other calm areas.


TEXAN

Not technically fighter, but present in-game.
Thousands, upon thousands build, but it seems only few could be armed. Among them AT-6B seems to be closest to in-game representation (more, than 1 forward MG). 400 build.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 8
Dr. Leo Niehorster - 2/18/2012 8:01:45 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
New Scenario 36 is ready, take a look at post #4.
This update is mostly supported by data from Dr. Leo Niehorsters site.

I am not entirely trust those data, as I would use his research for German/Allied units, but I remain skeptic about Japanese part. But those are modifications:
- revised initial position. There are extra support troops in first wave. This Scenario have additional benefit that most of troops already landed, as there is simply not enough capacity in fleets to carry all those Base Forces. So it is possible in 8th December, but it will be NOT possible in 7th December start. Whole THAI coast have now Japanese units, and there is no Miri invasion TF yet. Also Kota Bharu forces (on both sides) have already fought that night, so they are weaker. Fuel for Hawaii attack is already used
- extra Allied fighters. Quite crude implementation, It should work only for PDU ON, as additional research is needed to find air units, which should be able to take extra planes. They should be mostly restricted to India, for British, and USA mainland, for US planes

- extra CATALINA in pools, as according to report for Kimmel - VP-21 had one Catalina under repair at Pearl Harbor. It also means, that number of CATALINAs at MIDWAY is right for 8th December, but it misses ONE plane for 7th December
- ship capacities are recalculated AGAIN, according to first wave load. I have cut every inch of space, but it seems Open Office only supports 4 digits in calculations. Magic Formula used is:
=IF(AND(S2+T2+U2>V2/2,C2<>58,C2<>45,C2<>35,C2<>36,C2<>43),IF(S2+T2+U2>V2,IF(AND(P2=2,OR(C2=82,C2=56),T2>2999,T2*0.8236<3000),3000,T2*0.8236),IF(AND(P2=2,OR(C2=82,C2=56),T2>2999,T2/2<3000),3000,T2/2)),T2)
that means, larger ships have cargo reduced by exactly 17.64%, smaller mostly by 50%.
- there were training facilities in Philippines, so there are some pilots in training initially
- Japanaese Army pilots are further reduced. I have made initial calculations when trainee pools could not be extracted, so I have added quite a lots of possible civilian pilots available for draw. Now there are only around 30 such pilots, and Japan starts war short of replacements for Army Air Forces

As an additional bonus:
2nd Naval District OOB clearly shows SUSIE planes still operational. 16 such planes in Saeki Naval Air Group (which I surprisingly guessed during my earlier implementation), and additional 36 in training unit.

< Message edited by inqistor -- 2/18/2012 8:02:54 AM >

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 9
scraping the bottom of Chinese barrel - 4/21/2012 8:13:15 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
I am reading document about China air war, and it have some interesting data on early fighter deliveries:
quote:

On 28 December the first 30 Vultee P-66 Vanguards arrived to Rangoon. This was aircraft ordered by the Swedish Government, which had been expropriated by the U.S. and allocated to China at Lauchlin Currie’s request.
On 20 March 1942, the first Republic P-43As arrived at Karachi. Once at Karachi, the fighters had to be transported to Malir airfield, taken out of their crates, assembled and test flown. This process was slow and it was April before the first P-43s were test flown and turned over to the Chinese pilots for ferrying to China. The 4th PG (22nd - 24th PS) received these P-43s and the pilots retrained in Kunming and in small groups the pilots flew in turn to India for the new fighters.
As of 29 April, 69 P-43s had been received at Karachi and eleven of these had been delivered to the Chinese and flown east.
During 1942-1943, the Chinese received 129 P-66s and 108 P-43A Lancers
.

I have counted 60 P-43A1, and 82 P-66 (which begins deliveries in July). There was some operational loses, but it seems China is short over 40 of both types. Unless there are some later deliveries in convoys, but I have checked all earlier.

Also, this page mentions P-66 in early West Coast Defence:
quote:

In early 1941, Chiang Kai-Shek's Nationalist Chinese forces were being hard-pressed by Japanese air attacks, and were in desperate need of more combat aircraft. So dire was their need that they were willing to accept just about anything that had wings. On May 19, 1941, the British government agreed to release its Vanguards for supply to Chiang Kai-Shek's Nationalist Chinese forces. The 144 Vanguards were given the USAAC designation P-66 and were assigned the serial numbers 42-6832 thru 42-6975.

Following the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, there was complete panic on the west coast of the USA. The Japanese fleet was expected to show up off Santa Barbara at any moment. In anticipation of a Japanese attack, some forty to fifty P-66s originally intended for China were hastily impressed into USAAC service and issued to the 14th Pursuit Group for use in the emergency defense of southern California. The pilots of the 14th Pursuit Group actually liked their P-66s, and they described the P-66 as being a very good aerobatic aircraft. Test pilot Gil Clark thought that it was the best aircraft he had ever flown, being much better than the Curtiss P-36. However, the cockpit layout was rather poor, and the aircraft was not sufficiently robust for a fighter. In addition the P-66 had an disconcerting tendency to ground-loop, some 15 examples being lost to this sort of accident.

Eventually, the US west coast was regarded as being sufficiently secure that the Vanguards were eventually released from USAAC service and allowed to be transferred to China. The first shipment of P-66s left for China in February of 1942, the last aircraft being delivered by August. They went first to Karachi (at that time in India) where they were assembled, tested, and ferried to China.

There are 3 14PG squadrons in-game, and none of it uses P-66 (there is actually no such plane in US inventroy):
4046 P-38E
4047 P-36A
4048 P-40B

So, few dozen additional P-66 seems to be present, when war began.

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 10
RE: scraping the bottom of Chinese barrel - 5/11/2012 5:02:50 PM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
Since there are few crazy scientists, who actually calculated average time of repair for R&D factories, I have made, what I have been planning for some time - recalculated arrival dates of planes, which begin game with research factories.
Code is simple: left date is Scenario 1 date, right date is modified arrival date. I have compared 2-3 sources in each case, and some of planes actually arrive earlier. Arrows shows which date is later. Scenario 2 use different approach, and is listed in brackets (along with additional comments). In some cases expected research is pretty close to 100, so I pushed date by 1 month anyway:

615 A6M5d-S Zero 6/44 -> 7/44
630 B6N1 Jill 5/43 <- 3/43 (this is the date in Scenario 2, but it seems actually more historical. Production began in February)
635 B7A2 Grace 12/44 <- 6/44 (production of A1 model began in May, Scenario 2 shows 8/44)
639 C6N1 Myrt 8/44 <- 7/44 (production ordered in February, began probably in June, it entered service in September)
640 C6N1-S Myrt 5/45 <- 7/44 (this is just modified version of C6N1, no reason to delay it. It was used in 1944)
649 D4Y1 Judy 4/43 (1/43 in Scenario 2. Later models have rear MG exchanged for 13mm)
665 E16A1 Paul 4/44 <- 1/44 (production began in January)
674 G4M2 Betty 1/44 <- 8/43
694 J2M2 Jack 9/43 -> 10/43 (5/43 in Scenario 2. Frontline deliveries began in December 1943, but first production took place in December 1942 - similar long development, as TOJO)
695 J2M3 Jack 4/44 <- 12/43 (production began together with J2M2 model, and first batch was delivered to frontline at February 1944)
715 N1K1-J George 9/43 -> 1/44 (7/43 in Scenario 2. Production began somewhere in 1943, but it entered service in early 1944)
721 P1Y1 Frances 11/43 -> 12/43 (8/43 in Scenario 2. Hard to tell when exactly in 1943 production began, but 44 examples were produced during 1943, and 453 until October 1944)
724 P1Y2 Frances 11/44 <- 7/44 (production began in June)
725 P1Y2-S Frances 11/44 <- 10/43 (Initial named Hakk? ("Corona") in October 1943, renamed Kyokk? in March 1944. But it was P1Y1 conversion, and later converted into P1Y2. Armed with 30mm, in rear position, not 20mm)
809 Ki-61-Ia Tony 2/43 <- 12/42 (11/42 in Scenario 2, although first equipped unit was probably put on frontline in April 1943, it was delivered into testing unit around August/September 1942, so no reason to keep first unit with NATEs, if it arrive 60 days earlier)
815 Ki-67-Ia Peggy 4/44 -> 10/44 (1/44 in Scenario 2. Production began in August)
818 Ki-67-Ia(T) Peggy 9/44 -> 10/44 (5/44 in Scenario 2. Began production in August, but first torpedo was installed on model no 106)
825 Ki-84a Frank 4/44 -> 7/44 (1/44 in Scenario 2. Have biggest research factory, and will accelerate by at least 3 months)
826 Ki-84b Frank 3/45 -> 5/45

Some mid-war bombers arrive earlier, night-fighters arrives much earlier, but biggest kick went to GEORGE, and FRANK. Like 3-4 months LATER.

< Message edited by inqistor -- 8/4/2012 8:35:59 AM >

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 11
RE: scraping the bottom of Chinese barrel - 5/19/2012 8:27:21 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
Scenario 32 is ready.

New changes:
Japanese airborne torpedoes get upgrades as war progresses. That also have another consequence - that early models carry weaker torpedoes (this of NELL is really poor, and does not upgrade, same as early MAVIS). Neither MABEL, nor KATE N1 upgrade, so that should answer the question - what produce.

Jean, Nell, Mavis K4 KAI-1 model damage/penetration 331
Mabel, Kate N1 KAI-2 model damage/penetration 452
Kate N2, Mavis K5, and BETTY M1 KAI-2 upgraded to KAI-3 (KATE in January, BETTY in March, damage/penetration 529)
All later BETTY, Frances, and PEGGY KAI7 model damage/penetration 926
JILL, Emily KAI-3 Improved (only better accuracy, and less DUD)
GRACE KAI-4 model damage/penetration 679

It is hard to tell what weaker torpedoes impact is. During tests I had situations, where no BB was sunk in PH (and none of them was in danger of sinking), and other situations, where 4 BBs were sunk in first attack. Similar to stock.
What seems common - Force Z seems to be able to keep ONE heavy ship, under Scenario original setting, most of the time (although damaged). NELLs carry really weak torpedo.



BETTY models streamlined, some arrive earlier, and some have armor. Also, I have added fake torpedo to later models, to simulate their bigger bombload. Torpedo have 0 accuracy, and effect (but it will use torpedo from AIR HQ), but is exchanged for standard bombs during non-torpedo attacks.
Initial position shows 6th December - that means NO JAPAN TROOPS in Thailand. Also I have added damage to infrastructure, where there are THAI forces, to simulate, that Thailand must first be conquered.
Planes arrival dates incorporate initial research factories (it is more complicated in Scenario 2, as some planes arrive early anyway). Also some fixing in planes. Some of them gets 12.7mm MG in later models, and some have MAX LOAD set to their KAMIKAZE load (that should also increase their supply usage).

Since I see in initial el cid RHS tests, that there seems to be no difference, between 15kg, and 250kg bombs, during attacks on squads, some initial experiments with bombload. The main goal is to give reason, to keep some models still in production, because now LILY is just poor version of SALLY (costs the same, but carry smaller bombs), and PEGGY is poor version of BETTY (same number of bombs, shorter range)
VAL exchange 250kg bomb, for 4x60kg bombs for ground attack.
LILY exchange 100kg bombs, for 2x50kg bombs for ground attack. Also, I have not found single reference, which shows, that DB model carried LESS bombs, and ALL references show, that II model had DOUBLE bombload (still, 800kg is less, than 1000kg of SALLY).
PEGGY carry 1x500kg bomb against ships, exchanged for 8x100kg for ground attack
GEORGE is ground-attack version. It carry 4x250kg bombs (it seems to be actually most common 2 version produced)

Also, I see in AARs, that there are some supply problem for Japan in mid-war, and I have yet see shortage of fuel for naval operations, so first bite into economy:
Refineries produce 3 supply, and 8 fuel from 10 oil (yes, 11 for 10, that would show pretty clear, that it is oil which should be transported)
Also, I have cut manpower production from 5 to 4, although seeing how much it players accumulate, even cutting it to ONE, will probably result in surplus.



I have some new Open Office version, and it seems it uses semicolon, instead of comma, go figure!
This time I have cut flat cargo loads to 82.36%. All ships, except tenders, who have capacity of more, than 50% of tonnage, have bulk capacity cut (except some Japanese ships, which need at least 3000 for conversion, they are capped at 3000)
Magical line:
=IF(AND(S2+T2+U2>V2/2;C2<>58;C2<>45;C2<>35;C2<>36;C2<>43);IF(AND(P2=2;OR(C2=82;C2=56);T2>2999;T2*0.8236<3000);3000;T2*0.8236);T2)

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 12
RE: scraping the bottom of Chinese barrel - 7/14/2012 9:41:41 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
I am reading several reports, about situation in Pearl Harbor on eve of attack. There is interesting part about airfield capacities, and planned construction: I am actually trying to get aircraft loses closer to history, so far I have put quite a lots of planes under repair, I have also unloaded most patrol planes from Battleships, now I am trying to lower airfield size. None of this actions seems to have much influence (although they have SOME).

quote:

REPORT OF ARMY-NAVY BOARD 31 OCTOBER 1941

Air Fields Available:
Oahu

Army: Hickam Field, Wheeler Field, Bellows Field.
Navy: Ford Island, Ewa, Kaneohe.
Air Fields Proposed: Kahuku, John Rodgers, (Commercial), Barbers Point,
Keehi Lagoon (commercial—under construction).

In game-terms it definitely mean, that Oahu was NOT maxed-out, because there was construction under way. It was also commercial enterprise, so it could mean, construction should be easy, and cheap (below SPS)

quote:

[6] d. The bombardment command of the Hawaiian Air Force consists of 182
heavy bombers. To relieve congestion, all of the training for heavy
bombardment is conducted over water or land areas removed from the
Island of Oahu. This number of heavy bombers over-taxes the capacity of
Hickam Field, their home station, to such an extent that provisions must
be made for the training of approximately one-half of this force from
outlying fields
on other islands of the Hawaiian Archipelago.

So, Hickam could operate Heavy Bombers, but there was hardly enough space, to operate them all in the same time. So, more like minimum size needed for operations.

quote:

[7] h. A careful survey has been made of the entire Island of Oahu for
sites on which landing fields can be constructed. On this island, with
the exception of the Kipapa Gulch area, all level ground that might be
available for air fields is either so occupied, projects are underway
for preparation of air fields, or the turbulence in the air created by
the close proximity of mountain ranges precludes such development. The
site commonly referred to as the Kipapa Gulch area will accommodate two
5,000-foot runways free from obstructions.
The greatest handicap to the
use of this area is that it is about two-thirds of the distance between
Pearl Harbor and Wheeler Field which would further increase the
congestion of the air over this part of the island, It would also remove
from cultivation a highly productive tract of land. The Kipapa Gulch
area is the only site remaining where an air field could be constructed.

And another mention, about possible construction of TWO airstrips (there are also possible more, but for this, building demolition would be needed).

To sum up - there was airfield under construction, at OAHU, and it was still below SPS. There should be also space for at least 1, or possibly 2 more upgrades. With maximum construction of 9, that would give 7, with SPS 8, or 6 with SPS 7 for Pearl Harbor air base.


To show some comparison. I have fired-up old WITP, just put all ground planes down, and this is Pearl Harbor attack result - pretty historical, so why I am unable to get even HALF of those loses in WITPAE?




Attachment (1)

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 13
RE: scraping the bottom of Chinese barrel - 7/28/2012 8:37:16 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
I have checked several AARs, to estimate possible cuts for manpower, and Aviation Support production. Obviously, Allied players do not post such summaries, so all would go from Japan side.

The problem with too easy support of large aircarft numbers could be easily solved, by cutting Aviation Support production (if this is also possible for Japan), but numbers are NOT encouraging. It seems, that during whole war, Japan needs LESS than 10k such support, which translates itself into less than 250 production per month (current is 600). That means, to force shortage, Aviation Support production should be cut to around 200 (THREE times less than now). It seems, that 600 is initially just slightly above initial Allies needs (if you do not turn on Russia, and US static units). Of course Allied production can be pumped up by adding some support for convoys.


MANPOWER shows interesting trends. The lowest amount of surplus-per-day-per-center, I have calculated is 2.64. That means, that cutting manpower production by 2 would not change anything on Japanese side. Also, up to 1943, the smallest surplus seems to be 3.04 - that means that cutting production by THREE will not cause shortages, until 1944. Of course players tend to NOT repair manpower centers, and after initial conquest, overall number falls, as Allies reconquer territory, but it seems cutting production by THREE potentially WILL cause shortage in late war.
Of course reason for whole change is to cause historical Allies manpower shortage at the end of 1944.

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 14
RE: scraping the bottom of Chinese barrel - 7/30/2012 6:36:31 PM   
Gridley380


Posts: 245
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline
A few thoughts from the Allied side:

I consider myself fairly knowledgeable on the subject, and I've never run across anything that indicated the Allies, especially the US, had a shortage of what the game calls Aviation Support.

I do believe the game models AvSup as too 'light' (it should cost more to transport, and require cargo load for sure). From the partial numbers I've been able to put together I also don't think AvSup should be self-supporting (i.e. you should need separate Support or Motorized Support squads to support your AvSup).

As en example, consider a USAAF fighter group. Let's go with a 4-squadron one. Total aircraft: 100. Total manpower: 1,292 (including HQ Squadron and authorized combat augmentation - basically the extra pilots and WitP: AE player includes in his groups as a matter of course). That's almost exactly 13:1 men:planes, which is very close to the 15-man AvSup squad:1 plane. But it fails to include an entire echelon. The USAAF would also have in support an Airdrome Squadron and, for a pursuit group, about half an Air Service Group. That's another ~820 men, bringing us to ~21:1. So AvSup squads either need to be 40% bigger (and have a cargo cost - the Fighter Squadron itself had 34 vehicles), or they should be cut in size but have their self-support feature turned off.

Also, I'd be very careful to limit the Allied squad availability. While intense combat rapidly depleted Allied units, especially the rifle companies of the US Army, those units were always brought back up to strength. The USMC didn't switch from its all-volunteer status until well into the war, and that was heavily due to a belief among certain politicians that the Marines were draining the 'best' of the manpower pool.

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 15
RE: scraping the bottom of Chinese barrel - 7/30/2012 8:54:17 PM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gridley380

I consider myself fairly knowledgeable on the subject, and I've never run across anything that indicated the Allies, especially the US, had a shortage of what the game calls Aviation Support.

Remember, that all SUPPORT types are used globally, by all members (So, for example both USA, Russia, and China). I was thinking more about the line of evacuation (especially in case of Japan). So like NOT allowing to destroy your Base Force, because you would NOT rebuild it in 3 days. If your base is likely to fall, you should evacuate your specialists.

quote:

I do believe the game models AvSup as too 'light' (it should cost more to transport, and require cargo load for sure). From the partial numbers I've been able to put together I also don't think AvSup should be self-supporting (i.e. you should need separate Support or Motorized Support squads to support your AvSup).

Yeah, there is also strange thing with what actual SUPPORT is needed to. For example, it seems that DISABLED squads DO NOT need support for "repair". It could fix the problem with China forces going into offensive after just ONE month. They just recover too quickly!

quote:

As en example, consider a USAAF fighter group. Let's go with a 4-squadron one. Total aircraft: 100. Total manpower: 1,292 (including HQ Squadron and authorized combat augmentation - basically the extra pilots and WitP: AE player includes in his groups as a matter of course). That's almost exactly 13:1 men:planes, which is very close to the 15-man AvSup squad:1 plane. But it fails to include an entire echelon. The USAAF would also have in support an Airdrome Squadron and, for a pursuit group, about half an Air Service Group. That's another ~820 men, bringing us to ~21:1. So AvSup squads either need to be 40% bigger (and have a cargo cost - the Fighter Squadron itself had 34 vehicles), or they should be cut in size but have their self-support feature turned off.

Actually, Aviation Support "weights" 8, and despite what manual claims, SUPPORT "weights" 10, not 15. But I have recalculated earlier, that maximum "weight" of Aviation Support can be 9, for initial Japanese invasions to fit their ships (this could be different, if it would be changed into no-infantry type, but I doubt it is possible in editor)

quote:

Also, I'd be very careful to limit the Allied squad availability. While intense combat rapidly depleted Allied units, especially the rifle companies of the US Army, those units were always brought back up to strength. The USMC didn't switch from its all-volunteer status until well into the war, and that was heavily due to a belief among certain politicians that the Marines were draining the 'best' of the manpower pool.

Squads would produce normally, MANPOWER shortage should only limit speed at which units are fleshed out. And again, they are global, so you can turn-off Chinese units, to fill out USA, but I think main change would be turning-off SUPPORT squads (for example in HQs), to get troops into infantry squads (which is EXACTLY what happened in Europe!)

(in reply to Gridley380)
Post #: 16
RE: scraping the bottom of Chinese barrel - 7/30/2012 9:05:22 PM   
Gridley380


Posts: 245
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: inqistor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gridley380

As en example, consider a USAAF fighter group. Let's go with a 4-squadron one. Total aircraft: 100. Total manpower: 1,292 (including HQ Squadron and authorized combat augmentation - basically the extra pilots and WitP: AE player includes in his groups as a matter of course). That's almost exactly 13:1 men:planes, which is very close to the 15-man AvSup squad:1 plane. But it fails to include an entire echelon. The USAAF would also have in support an Airdrome Squadron and, for a pursuit group, about half an Air Service Group. That's another ~820 men, bringing us to ~21:1. So AvSup squads either need to be 40% bigger (and have a cargo cost - the Fighter Squadron itself had 34 vehicles), or they should be cut in size but have their self-support feature turned off.

Actually, Aviation Support "weights" 8, and despite what manual claims, SUPPORT "weights" 10, not 15. But I have recalculated earlier, that maximum "weight" of Aviation Support can be 9, for initial Japanese invasions to fit their ships (this could be different, if it would be changed into no-infantry type, but I doubt it is possible in editor)



Ugh, there goes my idea for improving that aspect of the game. Maybe the starting 'assault' units could start at under TOE strength in Support squads?

I'm far from an expert in the editor, but could you perhaps create a new "Heavy Aviation Support" squad type that had the Aviation Support feature but had a cargo cost? It would be a lot of work to redo all your TOEs to swap out the old AvSup device, of course.

You make an excellent point on the international nature of the generic squads - as China and the USSR certainly DID have problems finding people with technical training of all sorts. I was only really thinking of the 'Western' Allies. Oh well, post in haste, repent eternally.

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 17
RE: scraping the bottom of Chinese barrel - 8/3/2012 9:33:35 PM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
I am reading document about preparations of defenses in Malaya/Burma. Some interesting parts:

Supply stockpiles at China-Burma border:
quote:

Co-operation as regards air consisted mainly
in the preparation of aerodrome sites and the
dispatch to China of stocks of aviation petrol'
and, finally, bombs, all for British squadronswhich
it was hoped to send up later. (See-
Para. 26 above.) The aerodrome sites werein
three groups: the first in'the area north
and west of Kunming
, the object of which was
largely to protect the Burma Road; the second,
an area north of Hong Kong, from which it washoped
to assist in the defence of that placer
and the third, an area further east, from which
it was hoped that one day it might be possibleto
deliver air attacks on Japan. It was only
in the first group that these preparations could'
be called complete when war 'broke out
. Transport
was one of the main difficulties,

And more supplies:
quote:

72. The whole organisation for the supply
to the aerodromes and to the guerilla squads
was based on Bftrma. It was known first as
Chi Base and later as Tulip. Lieutenant^Colonel
McFeat was in charge; his own headquarters
were at Rangoon, the training of guerilla squads
was carried out at Maymyo, and stores of all
sorts were sent up to Lashio and to Bhamo.

A mechanical transport organisation for forwarding

How do you rate such fortifications?
quote:

38. The A.R.P. organisation in Hong Kong
was good, and some 12,000 A.R.P. workers of
one sort or another had been enrolled before
war broke out. In addition, tunnels were made
into the granite hills behind the town of Victoria;
these provided admirable shelters which
should have been proof against any type of
bomb.
The limitation here was the number of
pneumatic drills that could be obtained to
enable the necessary blasting to be carried out.
It was a slow process but by the time war broke
out there was shelter accommodation in the
tunnels, concrete splinter-proof shelters and
strengthened houses for about 300,000.

Provision was made for the movement of the
balance to hutments outside the town.



quote:

ORIGINAL: Gridley380


quote:

ORIGINAL: inqistor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gridley380

As en example, consider a USAAF fighter group. Let's go with a 4-squadron one. Total aircraft: 100. Total manpower: 1,292 (including HQ Squadron and authorized combat augmentation - basically the extra pilots and WitP: AE player includes in his groups as a matter of course). That's almost exactly 13:1 men:planes, which is very close to the 15-man AvSup squad:1 plane. But it fails to include an entire echelon. The USAAF would also have in support an Airdrome Squadron and, for a pursuit group, about half an Air Service Group. That's another ~820 men, bringing us to ~21:1. So AvSup squads either need to be 40% bigger (and have a cargo cost - the Fighter Squadron itself had 34 vehicles), or they should be cut in size but have their self-support feature turned off.

Actually, Aviation Support "weights" 8, and despite what manual claims, SUPPORT "weights" 10, not 15. But I have recalculated earlier, that maximum "weight" of Aviation Support can be 9, for initial Japanese invasions to fit their ships (this could be different, if it would be changed into no-infantry type, but I doubt it is possible in editor)



Ugh, there goes my idea for improving that aspect of the game. Maybe the starting 'assault' units could start at under TOE strength in Support squads?

I was thinking about it, there is some problem in that there must be parent TOE present for game to know to which size it should allow filling.

quote:

I'm far from an expert in the editor, but could you perhaps create a new "Heavy Aviation Support" squad type that had the Aviation Support feature but had a cargo cost?

I do not see any special features for those devices, so they have to be hard-coded, and must be in the exact spots they are now. However they ARE devices after all. Some of them are special type (like industry), but it seems all kinds of SUPPORT are just squads. I have made a simple experiment, and it seems it is possible to change AVIATION SUPPORT type into VEHICLEs. That brings some interesting changes:
(1) You can not transport it by air (but if you get as example B-17, how much men, WITHOUT heavy equipment would you need to load, and refuel it? How many, to push it from airstrip, when it crash?)
(2) There are problems with unloading it without port
(3) This is my favorite part - it costs Japan VEHICLE POINTS to produce, not ARMAMENT POINTS. Whats more, squads are produced at cost of only ONE ARMAMENT POINT, no matter the size, but VEHICLES take full amount of weight. That suddenly changes cost for Japan from "I could not care less" (1 armament point), to "there is not enough production to fill it" (Japan begins game with 72 daily production, and this should be barely enough, if AVIATION SUPPORT weights around 9 points, anything more, and Japan needs to seriously upgrade this part of industry. That of course do not include any TANKS, which are needed to flesh armored units)

There is also problem with sizes, as squads are loaded into passenger part initially, and only when it is short, into cargo (at 3 times of size), but VEHICLES also load at 3 times of size, so there would be no change for Japanese side. The bigger problem begins with Allies, because they cross-load at SIX times the size, so VEHICLE-AVIATION-SUPPORT need to be TWICE bigger, to take the same amount in cargo space.
What is quite interesting - xAKLs load at EIGHT time of size. That means, that currently one AVIATION SUPPORT squad takes 8*8=64 points. For VEHICLE type, it would need to be 64/3=21.(3), to take same amount of space, which is exactly what you calculated earier

(in reply to Gridley380)
Post #: 18
RE: scraping the bottom of Chinese barrel - 8/4/2012 8:35:02 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
New version of Scenario 31 is ready.

This time I revised mostly initial position. First document is collection of reports about preparations in Pearl Harbor. As a result 5 patrol units, which arrived recently to base, have lower experience. ONE of such units is MORE experienced. There is also some extra planes at base (taken from pools mostly). Airfield is much smaller.
Another document, about planes in Pearl Harbor, also mentions, that some of Battleships have their planes on ground. They are put there.
Yet another document, about bombload of Japanese attack waves. I incorporated it indirectly, because there is no way to exchange torpedo for only ONE 250 kg bomb. KATEs use 2x250kg + 2*60kg bombs in airfield attacks, and VALs use 4*60kg. Different deliveries, but number, and type of bombs used in attack is identical to historical.

All those changes have resulted in increase of destroyed Allied planes in base by 30%-40%. Still far below expectations (it need to be about TRIPLEd), but there is also more damaged planes, which could be written-off later.


Another document, about Commonwealth preparations to war. Few bases have better forts, few air units better experience, and there are also planes put from pool to ground. There is extra supply at Burma-China border.

Overall, inital position is highly revised. There is another 28 bombers for USAAF, and extra 16 P-40 in PI. I have also recalculated reserves, to include missed 7 days in December, so another 30 fighters should show up. Some ships at Pearl Harbor are under repair initially.
Initial orders for Japanese air groups are also modified, so Force Z would live, if players play historical turn.


There is also interesting article about OSCAR armament. Implementation of this is quite hard, so I just made small modification, and Ic model arrives in May, which should result in historical behavior (more Ic models at the beginning, then dropping, and again rising).

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 19
RE: scraping the bottom of Chinese barrel - 8/9/2012 2:20:49 PM   
Gridley380


Posts: 245
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: inqistor


quote:

I'm far from an expert in the editor, but could you perhaps create a new "Heavy Aviation Support" squad type that had the Aviation Support feature but had a cargo cost?

I do not see any special features for those devices, so they have to be hard-coded, and must be in the exact spots they are now. However they ARE devices after all. Some of them are special type (like industry), but it seems all kinds of SUPPORT are just squads. I have made a simple experiment, and it seems it is possible to change AVIATION SUPPORT type into VEHICLEs. That brings some interesting changes:
(1) You can not transport it by air (but if you get as example B-17, how much men, WITHOUT heavy equipment would you need to load, and refuel it? How many, to push it from airstrip, when it crash?)
(2) There are problems with unloading it without port
(3) This is my favorite part - it costs Japan VEHICLE POINTS to produce, not ARMAMENT POINTS. Whats more, squads are produced at cost of only ONE ARMAMENT POINT, no matter the size, but VEHICLES take full amount of weight. That suddenly changes cost for Japan from "I could not care less" (1 armament point), to "there is not enough production to fill it" (Japan begins game with 72 daily production, and this should be barely enough, if AVIATION SUPPORT weights around 9 points, anything more, and Japan needs to seriously upgrade this part of industry. That of course do not include any TANKS, which are needed to flesh armored units)

There is also problem with sizes, as squads are loaded into passenger part initially, and only when it is short, into cargo (at 3 times of size), but VEHICLES also load at 3 times of size, so there would be no change for Japanese side. The bigger problem begins with Allies, because they cross-load at SIX times the size, so VEHICLE-AVIATION-SUPPORT need to be TWICE bigger, to take the same amount in cargo space.
What is quite interesting - xAKLs load at EIGHT time of size. That means, that currently one AVIATION SUPPORT squad takes 8*8=64 points. For VEHICLE type, it would need to be 64/3=21.(3), to take same amount of space, which is exactly what you calculated earier


Interesting! That sounds like it might work - unless it would mess up the Japanese too much?

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 20
Curious case of I-6 - 8/11/2012 8:09:42 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
Well, at least it was nice theory...

It seems AVIATION SUPPORT have some specific code for unloading. I have tried it with VEHICLE, AFV, and INFANTRY WEAPONS setting. In small, friendly ports (lvl 1, and 2 in Malaya), they abolutely refuse to unload. Docked or not. Different devices, of the same type, but even larger unload without problems (Motorized Support, or tanks). It does not even unload from AKs. What is weird, they seems to have no problem with assaulting beach in enemy bases. They unload normally in that cases


I have discovered, that I forgot to change BETTY transport factory, so there is new Scenario 31 file. Also, after changes to capacities, both Chichi Jima, and Amami Oshima were in orange, so I have added some supply there.

Lastly, I have discovered, that I-6 have plane capacity, but no GLEN. Different pages say different things about this submarine, but tracing TROM shows, that in 1940 aircraft installation was removed, and in 1942 it seems submarine was changed into some form of transport (around 40 tons of goods, and 40 passengers). Probably losing some torpedo tubes in process (it mentions only 2 torpedoes after one of supply runs). So I-6 is also changed. Also, it seems game gives both J1, and J2 SS types too much fuel.

(in reply to Gridley380)
Post #: 21
RE: Curious case of I-6 - 8/25/2012 8:43:56 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
It seems replacement rate for Japanese planes seems to NOT working at all, if production is turned on. Strange, it works fine in smaller Scenarios. And it surely is not fault of lack of engines


It is a well known fact, that nobody EVER have seen Japanese bomber shot down any Allied fighter in AE (which is weird, because I remember in WITP I had several aces in Recon Groups). I am not sure, I even seen damaged enemy fighter, in any encounter. The main suspect would be 7mm MG, as this is the main defensive armament of most Japanese planes.

I made some experiments with this:
First, I have increased effect (from 2 to 3). This dos not seems to change anything.
Then, I also increased penetration (from 1 to 2). This also did not seem to do anything.
Then, in desperation I changed range, effect, and penetration to 5! And... it also does not produced any hits.

Considering, that most damage Allies done is by 4Es, and they are armed with .50 cal, I just exchanged Japanese 7mm, for Allied .50, and... it still does not changed anything.
Well, maybe time, or strike sizes were too small. After all in one of my games, after month there are only 3 Allied bombers with kills, and two of them are Hudsons (which means, that plane toughness is not a factor).

In the meantime, I also realised, that somehow NATEs/CLAUDEs on sweep seems to NOT do any damage. They seems to have some influence on CAP, but that should accumulate with defensive AA fire. Anyway, this seems strange, because OSCAR Ia definitely works fine on sweep, and it have identical armament.
The only problem I could think of, was penetration, which is equal 1 for 7mm, and this is exactly number for armor for most Allied planes. Since plane armor, actually do not represent literal armor for airframe, penetration shold NOT be factor, for most hits.

I increased it by ONE, and effect was surprisingly immediate. More than 30% of sweeps end with destroyed Allied plane (and 95% of it seems to cause exactly ONE destroyed plane, no damages). Suddenly TOP PILOTS list have half of it filled with NATEs, and other half with ZEROs (with some additions of OSCARs, and CLAUDEs).


And... in several hundred air battles, I have found just ONE example, which could indicate, that with this modification it can be possible to defensively shot down Allied fighter one day:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 22
RE: Curious case of I-6 - 8/27/2012 8:50:21 PM   
Gridley380


Posts: 245
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline
I wouldn't push too hard to allow IJ bombers to shoot down US fighters - it was extraordinarily rare in real life as well as in the game.

The Babes mods seem to have fixed the US bomber ace problem - at least I almost never see my 4Es get kills.

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 23
RE: Curious case of I-6 - 9/1/2012 8:17:17 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
Some time ago I have written about modelling SHINANO by first producing empty hull, and then allowing player to convert it either into CV, or BB. The obvious problem is to set date for HULL production, as once it gets into conversion, it can not be accelerated (it also do not use NAVAL Points anymore). Thinking of it - it is actually possible to calculate that date:
Shinano reconstruction began around June 1942, and took until October 1944. That could mean 2 years, and 4 months, BUT...
descriptions also say, that construction was originally scheduled for early 1945, and it was accelerated after Battle of the Philippine Sea. Acceleration in-game-terms doubles construction speed, so if there was 3 MONTHS of acceleration, actual date of ship arrival should be 3 months from October 1944, so January 1945. That means 2 years, and 7 months.

And this number is actually maximum, which should be allowed for HULL construction, because any additional day would allow player to potentially accelerate ship beyond what current model allows (assuming it will be accelerated whole time). Not quite historical, because you have to accelerate on the beginning of production, not the end.

Overall, my calculations shows 20 JULY 1943, as HULL PRODUCTION DATE (plus few days, because I do not know, when conversion actually began)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gridley380

I wouldn't push too hard to allow IJ bombers to shoot down US fighters - it was extraordinarily rare in real life as well as in the game.

The Babes mods seem to have fixed the US bomber ace problem - at least I almost never see my 4Es get kills.

It is possible that either large number of bombers is needed, or "formation bonus" will trigger on some date, because in stock I also do not see many kills in early war.
Anyway, the maneuver area is pretty small. 7mm MG have PENETRATION 1, and EFFECT 2, while 0.50 cal have PENETRATION 2, and EFFECT 3. So, to keep 7mm worse, only ONE of those points can be increased by ONE.
I could eventually increase them both, and lower some other statistics (like range, or accuracy), but extensive battle tests by NEMO, in his modified DOWNFALL Scenario, concluded, that neither accuracy, nor range have much influence on bombers defensive fire.

(in reply to Gridley380)
Post #: 24
RE: Curious case of I-6 - 9/8/2012 8:19:38 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
New Scenario 36 is ready

Mostly tidying up. I have changed upgrade paths for some units, so extra planes will fit also with PDU OFF. The most important change, is that NELL units now upgrade only into G4M1-12 model, not initial G4M1, so Japan is forced to use NELLs (and their weak torpedo) for several months longer.
Also, I have finally implemented Shinano as HULL for conversion. Much cheaper (arrives in mid-1943), but conversions takes more than 400 days. It arrives with FOUR air groups (additional small recon), and all her groups are REPLENISHMENT groups (the only such on Japanese side). It also can carry 120 planes - in 1944, Japan would have already some Carriers sunk, so lets give them some deck to put bought back airgroups. Shinano have NO extra aircraft/torpedo ordnance.
And of course, ALL 7mm, and .30 cal MGs have now penetration 2 (even ground based).
HARBIN have extra TOJO (not quite historical, but I needed place to produce first model), and engine factories. RisingSun have accidently discovered, that HARBIN had quite large production of both planes, and engines. Even doing some research.
All New Guinea/Rabaul area invasions are deleted. I could not find a single reference of landings in December (in fact, most took place in April). Also there are already Japanese troops in Bangkok. They should arrive there day later, but I do not see a way to set them into strategic mode at the beginning of the Scenario. There was also TWO extra doubled Japanese units, and since OOB is short of two Construction Battalions in the first wave to Malaya, I have exchanged them.

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 25
Where are crews? - 11/17/2012 9:13:31 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
I wanted to change squads upgrade dates, according to dates of TOE tables from BAYONETSTRENGTH website, but I have also discovered, that it seems there is somehing missing in squad sizes:

Taking as example Japanese squads - they were actually NOT that big, but their firepower also includes "Knee" Mortars, from GD squad, and their crews. By comparison - same calculation should be used for other side.

That is not big problem for Commonwealth forces, as they only have 2 in mortar, with crew of 3 in platoon, and I am not even sure it was issued with ammo other than smoke, but something is seriously missing from US squads. Their firepower rises, but it does not go with increase of their size. This extra firepower is delivered from extra weapons at company level, and it was issued with their own crews (well, at least in most cases). Just take a look at Marine Regiment strength:
Series D have 24 extra men for support weapons, Series E increased it to 35, and Series F to 64!

Here is my shot at it. Numbers are quite conservative, as I left some men out (as they are represented as Support Squads), and no men from HQ are included. First change is for squad size (weight), and second for availability dates. Overall first upgrade is generally earlier, but second is much later:

952 AIF Inf Section 42 11->12 4201 4212
953 AIF Inf Section 43 11->12 4212 4405
954 AIF Inf Section 44 11->12 4405 -

992 Canadian moved to 4308

1000 Brit Inf Section 44 10->11 4411 -
1002 Brit Inf Section 43 10->11 4302 4411

1101 USA Rifle Squad 13->15 4112 4204
1102 USA Rifle Squad 42 13->15 4204 4308
1103 USA Rifle Squad 43 13->15 4308 4411
1104 USA Rifle Squad 44 13->15 4411 -

I am not sure what 44 upgrade represents. I am guessing it is July 1944 issue of extra automatic weapons, but it was ad-hoc emergency upgrade in Normandy, because of Germans firepower advantage, and I am not sure it was even implemented in other theatres. Anyway, since there was some shifting in front priorities from September, I delayed this change for few months.

1106 Parachute 10->15

1113 USMC Rifle Squad 13->14 4112 4305
1114 USMC Rifle Squad 43 13->15 4305 4404
1115 USMC Rifle Squad 44 13->19 4404 -

1116 Raider 10->14

As you can see, with time Marine units, despite their firepower increase, are not that desirable from stacking limits point of view.

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 26
RE: Where are crews? - 11/17/2012 10:18:29 AM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 1300
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
inqistor,

Bayonet Strength is a smashing website for TO&E. I sometimes use SPWW2, for adapting playable
and still historicity accurate OOB and TO&e.As far as I know, they use(d) the TO&E form SPWAW
for WiTE, perhaps even for WitP.

Klink, Oberst





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam
(Marcus Porcius Cato Censorius)

Visit the Gefechtsstand!

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 27
RE: Where are crews? - 11/17/2012 12:14:50 PM   
RisingSun


Posts: 722
Joined: 11/5/2009
From: Clifton Park, NY
Status: offline
Nice, look like you been busy working on this. I know most of us wanted the realistic as possible mod there can be. You should get a medal for this heh.

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 28
RE: Where are crews? - 11/18/2012 10:25:08 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
I checked Bradley, and he writes, that they got reduction for Infantry Replacements, in November 1944. From 80000 to 67000 (but I am not sure this includes Italy front). I do not want to research deeper, but considering early war planning:
Pacific was supposed to get 1/3rd of Europe strength. That means 40000 Infantry per month for Pacific (in-game this is represented by 80 squads). Assuming, that those 13000 was moved to Pacific, not reduced in US, that would give us extra 26 squads per month, for "USA Infantry Squad 44", assuming again, that those numbers do not include Marines replacements.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

Bayonet Strength is a smashing website for TO&E. I sometimes use SPWW2, for adapting playable
and still historicity accurate OOB and TO&e.As far as I know, they use(d) the TO&E form SPWAW
for WiTE, perhaps even for WitP.


Both games are made by the same guy, so TOE exchange would be no surprising
I was playing Mega Campaign few weeks ago, and was wondering if they somehow implemented reduction of light weapon crews with time. Nations generally began war with 2-3 assistants for every LMG, and light mortar, and it was reduced to just ONE man, as war progressed. Maybe cutting for ROF, or ammo?

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 29
RE: Where are crews? - 11/18/2012 12:06:51 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 826
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poznan, Poland
Status: offline
I just stumbled upon your mod today, inqistor. Sounds great, but I have some questions:

1) I downloaded the zip file from post 2, unpacked it and dropped its contents into SCEN folder of the game. I can now choose the scenario 31 from the list of scenarios. I ran the first turn, saved it and loaded into the Tracker. I can see the reduced cargo capacities for ships, PH airfield is smaller but I cannot see any additional 10 Allied bomber in Phillipines, no new 18 Bolos in pools and I have no new 300 extra training fighters in airgroups/pools on map or arriving. Am I doing something wrong with the scenario installation?

< Message edited by Yaab -- 11/18/2012 1:33:30 PM >

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> (Almost ) Historical MOD Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.125