Matrix Games Forums

Pandora: Eclipse of Nashira Announced! Deal of the Week: Command Ops goes half price!New Fronts are opening up for Commander: The Great WarCharacters of World War 1Sign of for the Pike and Shot Beta!More Games are Coming to Steam! Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great WarDeal of the Week Panzer Corps
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Aircraft Upgrades

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RE: Aircraft Upgrades Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 12/28/2004 8:53:20 PM   
Herrbear


Posts: 856
Joined: 7/26/2004
From: Glendora, CA
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: fbastos


Hah, what about them 62 Sqn and others going from Blenheim I to Hurricane II...

Them crazy brits...

F.


I show that scenario 15 converts them from Blenheim I to Hudsons.

(in reply to fbastos)
Post #: 91
RE: CVL problem... - 12/30/2004 5:44:55 AM   
RevRick


Posts: 2539
Joined: 9/16/2000
From: Dontblinkyoullmissit, GA
Status: offline
Hey, Pry..

In Sc. 14 I just noticed the the USS Langley (CVL) shows up on or about 15 Sep 42 - Complete with a deckload of F6Fs and TBMs. Thanks for the present, guys, but... what do I do when the F6F's run out.

Also - I am not terribly sure about all of the Wirraways on the board in Australia upgrading to Vengeances. Seems to me they should have been Boomerangs.

_____________________________

"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer

(in reply to Herrbear)
Post #: 92
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 12/30/2004 7:32:31 AM   
fbastos


Posts: 826
Joined: 8/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:




quote:

ORIGINAL: fbastos


Hah, what about them 62 Sqn and others going from Blenheim I to Hurricane II...

Them crazy brits...

F.


I show that scenario 15 converts them from Blenheim I to Hudsons.



Ah, pardon, it's the 60 Sqn that upgrades from Blenheim to Hurrican II.

But I posted that as a joke; I checked on the 60 Sqn history, and they indeed moved from Blenheim I to Hurricane II - probably after wipe out in Malaya.

F.

_____________________________

I'm running out of jokes...


(in reply to Herrbear)
Post #: 93
RE: CVL problem... - 12/30/2004 3:17:05 PM   
dr. smith

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: lost in space
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RevRick

Also - I am not terribly sure about all of the Wirraways on the board in Australia upgrading to Vengeances. Seems to me they should have been Boomerangs.


From looking at the RAAF museum site (http://www.raafmuseum.com.au/raaf2/html/squadrons.htm) earlier, I found lots of what seemed oddities. For your comment, several RAAF squadrons indeed went from Wirrways to Vengences. What is REALLY odd is after Vengences, they then went to Liberator heavy bombers (RAAF Sqdns 21, 24, 25 from imcomplete research).

I guess back then, what mattered was you knew HOW to fly, it didn't matter alot WHAT you flew. Morison states that the Navy pilots aboard the Hornet kept playing the Army flyboys in poker, hoping have them incur a HUGE debt and "sell" their spot in the Dolittle Raid to the squid, who would then fly to Tokyo.

None succumbed!

< Message edited by dr. smith -- 12/30/2004 8:18:50 AM >

(in reply to RevRick)
Post #: 94
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 12/31/2004 7:52:32 AM   
Jim D Burns


Posts: 3113
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline
After reading this:

"Despite Chiang's apparent unification of China by military force, his army incorporated many units more loyal to their former regional warlords than to his new central government. Nationalist Army units were not only uneven in loyalty but also in quality. On paper China had 3.8 million men under arms in 1941. They were organized into 246 "front-line" divisions, with another 70 divisions assigned to rear areas. Perhaps as many as forty Chinese divisions had been equipped with European-manufactured weapons and trained by foreign, particularly German and Soviet, advisers. The rest of the units were under strength and generally untrained. Overall, the Nationalist Army impressed most Western military observers as more reminiscent of a nineteenth- than a twentieth-century army."

along with the rest of the history, I've been giving some thought to how the Chinese might be bolstered given the current rules for ground combat. Assuming no major changes get done to the ground combat system, I think we might be able to help the Chinese out by creating some Warlord units for each of the bases in China.

These units would be large immobile units that represent the massive army China had for defense, but never actually used in an offensive manner due to warlords hording them for personal power. These units would need to be about 800-1000 squads or more with maybe a divisions worth of supporting heavy equipment as well (they were not very modern units, but they were VERY numerous). The key is to make them immobile CD type units that can not be moved.

This will make offensives and base captures much more difficult for Japan, but keep China's offensive capabilities very low.

I also think all of China's divisions that start attached to Southeast Asia HQ should start the game at 60 experience. These divisions were mostly trained and equipped by western nations, and actually preformed well until outflanked in burma.

Jim

< Message edited by Jim D Burns -- 12/31/2004 5:58:05 AM >


_____________________________



(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 95
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/1/2005 3:03:09 AM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14512
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
Jim,

This is a pretty decent idea. I hope it gets due consideration.

(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 96
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/1/2005 9:41:29 PM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1775
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
Hi,

according to M.J. Whitley's "Destroyers of World War Two", the Dutch destroyers of the Van Ghent (Evertsen, Kortenaer, Piet Hein) and Van Galen classes (Witte de With, Banckert, Van Nes) had a minelaying capacity of 24 mines each.

Would be nice to see this in the game!

K

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 97
Dutch Air OOB - 1/2/2005 8:03:38 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8137
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
I've noticed that the Dutch air OOB is screwed up in WITP - both composition and naming. It is apparently based on the table on Page 59 of "Bloody Shambles" - one of the few errors in that book. The table compresses out the III Groep and assigns IV Groep assets to III Groep. Other references in the book are correct and the table may be the result of a type-setting error. The correct allocation of the major Dutch air groups was:

I Groep - 2 Afdeling of Martin Bombers
II Groep - 1 or 2 Afdeling of Martin Bombers ***
III Groep - 3 Afdeling of Martin Bombers ***
IV Groep - 3 Afdeling of Fighters - 1 of Hawk 75, 1 of CW-21, 1 of B-339 (formed after mobilization)
V Groep - 3 Afdeling of B339 Fighters

*** Normally Dutch Bomber groups included two squadrons but the second squadron of II Groep was transferred to III Groep in order to form a 3-squadron group for deployment to Singapore. I THINK the total strength was 6 Squadrons on Martins but many histories do mention both 2e-VIG-II and 3e-VIG-III. I don't know if this is the same unit being referenced by both it's original and modified designation but Leo Niehorster's excellent site lists both 2e-VIG-II and 3e-VIG-III and gives a different commander for each.

Fighter Groups were intended to have three squadrons but both of them had only two when mobilization began (just before the war). They were expanded to three squadrons each using reserve Brewsters and rounding up all available pilots (including instructors from flight schools, which were closed).

An excellent list of units, their names, and deployments available from either of these references (the Dutch East Indies site is more detailed)

References:
http://www.geocities.com/dutcheastindies/Dutch_OOB.html
http://www.orbat.com/site/ww2/drleo/016_netherlands/41-12-08/army_air.html

My recommendations:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 98
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/3/2005 1:15:40 AM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

After reading this:

"Despite Chiang's apparent unification of China by military force, his army incorporated many units more loyal to their former regional warlords than to his new central government. Nationalist Army units were not only uneven in loyalty but also in quality. On paper China had 3.8 million men under arms in 1941. They were organized into 246 "front-line" divisions, with another 70 divisions assigned to rear areas. Perhaps as many as forty Chinese divisions had been equipped with European-manufactured weapons and trained by foreign, particularly German and Soviet, advisers. The rest of the units were under strength and generally untrained. Overall, the Nationalist Army impressed most Western military observers as more reminiscent of a nineteenth- than a twentieth-century army."

along with the rest of the history, I've been giving some thought to how the Chinese might be bolstered given the current rules for ground combat. Assuming no major changes get done to the ground combat system, I think we might be able to help the Chinese out by creating some Warlord units for each of the bases in China.

These units would be large immobile units that represent the massive army China had for defense, but never actually used in an offensive manner due to warlords hording them for personal power. These units would need to be about 800-1000 squads or more with maybe a divisions worth of supporting heavy equipment as well (they were not very modern units, but they were VERY numerous). The key is to make them immobile CD type units that can not be moved.

This will make offensives and base captures much more difficult for Japan, but keep China's offensive capabilities very low.

I also think all of China's divisions that start attached to Southeast Asia HQ should start the game at 60 experience. These divisions were mostly trained and equipped by western nations, and actually preformed well until outflanked in burma.

Jim


JIM. This is a terrific idea, and should be relatively easy to implement as it just calls
for adding in some additional non-mobile units. Solves the problem of the Japanese
going wild in China early while still permitting them to make some progress as the
war goes on. And does it without giving the Chinese anything that they could use to
make a-historic advances either. Simple and elegant---it beats the ideas I had been
going to propose out with no regrets on my part. Hope someone will take it to heart
on the design staff.

(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 99
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/6/2005 2:13:50 AM   
BPRE

 

Posts: 609
Joined: 10/16/2000
From: Stockholm,Sweden
Status: offline
DMS Long is included twice in the database for all scenarios. One ship (position 4326) is appearing 421106 and sunk 450106) the other one appearing 430215 (position 4317) but also sunk 450106).

/BPRE

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 100
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/6/2005 2:59:32 AM   
BPRE

 

Posts: 609
Joined: 10/16/2000
From: Stockholm,Sweden
Status: offline
In the 6/43 ugrade of AV Curtiss (pos 1487 in the Ship classes) the RS facing M2 Brownings are still there. I think they should have been removed together with LS facing ones.
/BPRE

(in reply to BPRE)
Post #: 101
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/6/2005 4:43:46 AM   
fbastos


Posts: 826
Joined: 8/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:


These units would be large immobile units that represent the massive army China had for defense, but never actually used in an offensive manner due to warlords hording them for personal power. These units would need to be about 800-1000 squads or more with maybe a divisions worth of supporting heavy equipment as well (they were not very modern units, but they were VERY numerous). The key is to make them immobile CD type units that can not be moved.


Yay! Good idea!!

F.

_____________________________

I'm running out of jokes...


(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 102
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/6/2005 8:01:08 AM   
SpitfireIX


Posts: 264
Joined: 1/9/2003
From: Fort Wayne IN USA
Status: offline
Scenario 15

HMAS Shropshire should not be available until October 1943, and she should have already received her 6/43 upgrade. Also, the London Class 6/43 upgrade has one of the aft 8" turrets removed. This did not happen historically. According to the Royal Australian Navy's web site, Shropshire still had 8x8" guns when she was in Australian service. Also, if you look in Jane's Fighting Ships of WWII (I assume someone has a copy handy), the pictures of HMS London dated 1946 clearly show that she still has four turrets.

http://www.navy.gov.au/spc/history/ships/shropshire.htm

_____________________________

"I know Japanese. He is very bad. And tricky. But we Americans too smart. We catch him and give him hell."

--Benny Sablan, crewman, USS Enterprise 12/7/41

(in reply to pry)
Post #: 103
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/6/2005 9:09:29 AM   
testarossa


Posts: 951
Joined: 9/24/2004
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline
B-25Js appear in the game Jan 1943. In Rl the first flight was made on December 14th 1943.

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/bombers/b3-12.htm

F6F3 was available in Jan 1943. Why did you make it available Jul 1943? Because the first combat use was in Aug 1943?

< Message edited by testarossa -- 1/6/2005 12:54:10 AM >


_____________________________

Dr. Miller: I should've called the marines!
Dalton: They're few, they're proud... And they ain't here!!!


(in reply to SpitfireIX)
Post #: 104
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/6/2005 4:59:00 PM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1775
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
Hi,

in the 1944 Campaign Scenario there is the 18th UK Division at Calcutta. This Division was disbanded after captured in Singapore on 02/15/42 and never reformed .

And there is the AVG at Kunming. As far as I know the AVG was disbanded 07/04/42?

K

(in reply to testarossa)
Post #: 105
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/6/2005 6:47:27 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14512
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

And there is the AVG at Kunming. As far as I know the AVG was disbanded 07/04/42?

K

I thought AVG was just taken over by the USAAF and renamed?

< Message edited by witpqs -- 1/6/2005 8:57:18 AM >

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 106
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/6/2005 7:02:06 PM   
Lemurs!


Posts: 788
Joined: 6/1/2004
Status: offline
B25J's are representing not only the J model but some earlier models, when you have limited slots some things get simplified.

Mike

_____________________________



(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 107
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/6/2005 9:45:49 PM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1775
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

And there is the AVG at Kunming. As far as I know the AVG was disbanded 07/04/42?

K

I thought AVG was just taken over by the USAAF and renamed?


Hi,

not as far as I know. However, sources about this topic are somewhat confusing because immediately after the disbanding of the AVG a China Air Task Force (CATF) under the command of Chennault was organized. But the CATF included a Fighter Groups (23rd) with 3 Sqn. (74th, 75th, 76th), another Fighter Sqn. (16th) and the 11th Bombardment Sqn. A much larger formation than the AVG. Only 5 pilots of the AVG joined this new force which was activated the same day AVG was disbanded (as the name indicates, AVG was an all volunteer formation).

K

< Message edited by Kereguelen -- 1/6/2005 7:46:26 PM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 108
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/9/2005 7:55:09 PM   
SemperAugustus

 

Posts: 257
Joined: 1/9/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

quote:

One Indian division fought with UK army in Burma.


Just to clarify for folks (as I think English may be your second language). What you're saying is that an Indian Div fought -against- the UK army in Burma. "With" implies beside, as allies, and there were certainly many India Divs that fought beside the conventional UK Divs.

That's quite true (altho I didn't know the numbers, but yes, quite a bit).

I've got the information on my home PC tho (the name of the unit and their leader). Basically, he was a Indian nationalist (self-rule), that went to Japan for help. The number of partisans that fought for him was disappointing to the Japanese (they were hoping the closer he got to the border, that more Indians would revolt), but it was no small number.

I think he was active for Japan in late 42 thru 43. He then saw that Japan wasn't going to win (and was therefore no use to him), so he went back to India, and offered his "services" for the British. The Brits obviously weren't real happy with him, and I don't think they actually lent him any support.



The guy's name was Subhash Chandra Bose. He recruited troops from the POWs taken at Singapore. While he wasn't successful with recruiting massive amounts of troops (I think he got together a couple of divisions), the British considered him dangerous enough to spend a lot effort countering pro-Japanese propaganda in Assam.
The other guy is Aung San (the one that switched sides) a burmese leader who switched sides when things went bad.
With regards to the partisans, its a bit of a two edged sword: while there were anti-Japanese partisans there were also forces fighting on the Japanese side against either the partisans (e.g. in China (Reformed Government of China and some of the warlords) and the Phillipines the Laurel regime) or against the Europeans (in Indonesia (Sukarno) and Thailand (Phibun-what's his name)). There were also forces that switched sides during the war, the Burmese nationalists under Aung San and the Inner Mongolian forces under De Wang both switched to the winning side when the Japanese started losing.
After the war the above "collaborationist" forces claimed to be forced by the Japanese and were secretly fighting the regime from within. I doubt it very much.
In any case the two cancel each other out pretty much.

Just my two yens' worth.

< Message edited by SemperAugustus -- 1/9/2005 5:57:51 PM >

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 109
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/14/2005 1:11:56 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 13791
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
At present 81st West African Divion and 82nd West African Division arrive in August 1944.

11th East African a little earlier but not much

These datea are a year late and reflect the dates the formations were transferred to 14th Army Command.

Prior to that all three Divison s had been operating for over a year having arrived in in theatre in August 43

So by my calculations thats a year to late.

Both Divisions were involved in the Arakan fights in early 44 late 43 and were garrison troops in Ceylon.

Can this be fixed please Indian Army is already understrength without units arriving a year late.

Also why does the 36th British Division not arrive in the main scenario and yet it is in the 43 scenario so its obviously been examined.

Thats 4 Commonwealth Divions either missing or arriving so late as to be worthless.

< Message edited by Andy Mac -- 1/13/2005 11:20:55 PM >

(in reply to SemperAugustus)
Post #: 110
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/14/2005 1:34:28 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 13791
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
Dont know if this helps demonstrate my point

SECOND WORLD WAR





Thirty thousand Nigerians fought in World War 2. They saw action at Juba, Goluin, Marda Pass, Babile Gap, Bisidimo, Colito, Omo and Lechemti during the Abyssinian campaign in East Africa from 1940-41. The 12th African division in that theater consisted of the 1st South African Brigade Group, 22nd, 25th, 26th and 28th East African, 23rd Nigerian and 24th Gold Coast Brigades. The brunt of actual fighting beginning in Somaliland (Mogadishu) through to Ethiopia was borne by the 23rd Nigerian Brigade. Nigerian soldiers were right there with Orde Wingate when Emperor Haile Selassie was returned to power in Addis Ababa. The Nigerian and Gold Coast troops who fought in East Africa later joined the 82nd (West Africa) Division in Burma.



In Burma, from 1943-45, as part of the 81st and 82nd West African Divisions, the Nigeria regiment of the West African Frontier Force also fought in North Arakan, Kaladan, Mayu Valley, Myohaung, Arakan Beaches, Kangaw, Dalet and Tamandu and was a component of Chindit operations in 1944. The high point of the Nigerian regiment in Burma was the fall of Myohaung on January 24-25, 1945. Before independence, January 25 used to be celebrated annually in Nigeria as an official military day.



The 81st (West Africa) Division



The 81st (West Africa) Division was created in March 1943 in Nigeria under Major General C. G. Woolner, CB, MC. It consisted of the 3rd, 5th and 6th (West Africa) Brigades. The 3rd Brigade under Brigadier H. U

Richards comprised the 6th, 7th and 12th Nigerian Battalions. The 5th (West Africa) Brigade was entirely Ghanaian (Gold Coast). The 6th Brigade combined battalions from Nigeria, Gambia and Sierra Leone under Brigadier J. W. A. Hayes DSO.



Between August 14th and November 8th, 1943, various Brigades of the 81st Division arrived in Burma and concentrated at Chiringa, which thus became the West African Base and Rear Headquarters. Barely after arrival, with no animals or vehicles in support, the Division was “volunteered” by General Giffard, C-in-C Eastern Command, to advance independently of the main Arakan formation along the Kaladan River on the left, threatening the Japanese flank and their west-east lines of communication at Kanzauk Pass. General Slim regarded this area of operations as “the dangerous spot in Arakan”. The axis of advance meant the Africans would have to totally rely on air re-supply – the first time an entire unit of that size would be deployed under such circumstances. The 81st created a jeep track through 75 miles of jungle from Chiringa to Satpaung (nicknamed ‘West Africa Way’) and constructed airstrips along the Kaladan River. From a springpoint at Daletme, they thrust southwards against Japanese resistance toward Paletwa. As they neared Kyauktaw they began to threaten the Japanese right rear.



Perhaps as a result of prior positive experience with Nigerians under Orde Wingate in Ethiopia, the 3rd (Nigerian) Brigade of the 81st Division was transferred to the Special Forces Unit (Chindits) back on November 8th 1943 and was thus detached from its parent force. East African and Indian detachments replaced the Nigerian Brigade. Thus, in January 1944, during “Operation Thursday”, most Nigerian troops in the 81st were actually deployed with the legendary Chindits under Major General Orde Wingate – a long-range group of Special Forces trained to fight and survive deep behind enemy lines, supplied only by air. The 6th, 7th and 12th Nigerian regiments in the Thunder (3rd West African) Brigade were designated as Fortress or airfield Protection troops.



In the meantime, the remaining 4th Battalion, Nigeria Regiment, of the main 81st Division, seized Kyauktaw and Apaukwa. The Division was, however, later thrown back in confusion (after the Battle of Pagoda Hill on March 1st and 2nd) to an area near Taung Bazaar. This was caused by a determined Japanese counter-attack led by one Colonel (later Major General) Koba and lack of resolute command by 81st Div Commander Major General Woolner. In April 1944, the 81st Division was redeployed from the Kaladan valley across the Kaladan ranges into the Kalapanzin valley to fill a gap created by the deployment of the 7th Indian Division to the Imphal front. In August, there were wholesale changes in its command structure. In addition, its reconnaissance battalion, the 81st (West Africa) Reconnaissance Battalion of the West Africa Armoured Corps, which had been removed (along with the 3rd Nigerian Brigade) from its Order of Battle back in late 1943, was returned to the parent Division.



With the Monsoon rains over, the 81st Division, now under Major General Loftus-Tottenham, regained the offensive and advanced once again down the Kaladan Valley. By October 18, they had cleared Singpa and Mowdok. After a series of pitched battles in very difficult terrain, they crossed the Kaladan River on December 4th,, outflanking Kyauktaw and Thayettabin. The Divisional Reconnaissance Regiment (DRR) advanced towards Apaukwa and Kanzauk in support of the main Arakan offensive by the 25 Indian Division. Meanwhile, the 82nd West Africa Division advanced down the Kalapanzin Valley. On January 7, 1945, at Kanzauk, the DRR linked up with the 4th Brigade of the 82nd Division, which had crossed the range from Hzitwe. The 81st Divisional Reconnaissance Regiment thus came under the command of the 82nd West African Division for the final push to take the strategic Japanese Communication Center at Myohaung, the ancient capital of Arakan. This forced the Japanese to order a general retreat from the area, barely extricating themselves from isolation between Minbya and Kangaw. Elements of both West African divisions, under Maj. Gen. H.G. Stockwell (D.S.O.) joined elements of the Indian and British Divisions with supporting armour for the final assault on Mandalay and Rangoon, in order to drive the Japanese out of Burma.

At the end of March 1945, however, the 81st (West Africa) Division was withdrawn from Burma (to ease the strain on maintenance) and thus left for India. They had suffered 74 killed, 343 wounded and 21 missing in the Arakan campaign. Later on, in August 1944, the 3rd (West Africa/Nigerian) Brigade of the Chindits, under Brigadier A. H. Gillmore was also withdrawn from Burma. Brigadier P. M. Hughes later replaced Gillmore. They were re-united with the main 81st Division on March 20th, 1945 in India. As plans were being made for the Division to take part in the reconquest of Malaya (Operation Zipper), the Japanese surrendered. In May 1946, therefore, the 81st (West Africa) Division returned to Nigeria.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 111
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/14/2005 8:38:53 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 3899
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: vermont
Status: offline
SECRETARY CLASS CUTTERS

I just got the game and have only patched to v1.3 so far but it appears from my initial scan of the ship data base that this entire class of Coast Guard Cutters was omitted from the OOB.

The USCGC TANEY was at Pearl Harbor on Dec 7 1941 and engaging Japanese a/c within 4 minutes of the attack commencing. She served for a considerable time in the Pacific, transferred to the Atlantic in 43 and then was converted to an Amphib Command Ship in late 44 and returned to the Pacific.
The other ships, USCGCs BIBB, CAMPBELL, DUANE, INGHAM and SPENCER served in the Atlantic as escort ships in 1942-44 then were likewise converted to Amphib Command Ships and sent to the Pacific in late 44 and 45.
These were all fairly substantial ships (larger than most prewar DDs) Although they were slower (20 kts) and did not carry torpedos they packed substantial firepower (up to 4 x 5" plus assorted LAAA). As a class they sank at least 5 UBoats in the Atlantic. Can't seem to find it right now but TANEY may have gotten an I-boat fairly early on.
I guess I kinda have a personal interest in these ships in that I served on three of them (BIBB, CAMPBELL and DUANE) for a total of nearly 4 years.

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 112
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/14/2005 11:20:36 AM   
Oliver Heindorf


Posts: 1906
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Hamburg/Deutschland
Status: offline
I have in my 1.4 game the LB-30 Liberator Aircraft where all of its guns are pointing forward. This should be fixed as well, as I doubt it that this is correct.

< Message edited by Oliver Heindorf -- 3/19/2005 8:47:31 PM >

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 113
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/14/2005 12:50:58 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 13791
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
Correction to my earlier post 11th East African and 81st West African was operational in India from August 43 as garrison toops on Cylon and as fland Guards for the 2nd Arakan offensive respectively but 82nd West African arrived in April 44.

So all dates are still wrong.... but 6 months to a year

Its not a huge issue unless like Wobb v PZB or in one of my own PBEM's India is invaded where you need formations to arrive at the correct times to support an advance.

p.s. there is still no upgrade for late war CW inf squads.

This seems unreasonable are we really saying that under equipped Malay and Burmese levies had the same equipment level as the East and West African formations that had fought successful campaigns against the Italians and had two or three years to flesh out their ORBAT and gain equipment.

Andy.
Andy

(in reply to Oliver Heindorf)
Post #: 114
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/14/2005 6:40:12 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 13791
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
I just wonder if perhaps some minor fortress units should be installed in Indian Cities.

Perhaps a Bn of Light Squads with some Ard Cars and a few old Guns to represent

1. Garrison and Police Units
2. Nepalese Army Units deployed as Garrison troops in India
3. State levies and troops lent to the British as Garrsion Troops.
4. NW Frontier Garrison forces.

so

40 Light Squads
4 Cavalry Squads
4 Mortars
2 MG's
4 Armoured Cars
20 Support
No Engineers

To Hyderabad/ Lucknow/ Bangalore etc

Allocate one fixed position Bn to each city with Indian Militia/ Light troops and make them immovable unless forced to retreat.

Combat value minimal but at least it clearly includes Indian Garrison distinct from the field army.

Obviously in cities like Chandpur where a fortress exists we ignore this secondary internal security force.

Give them low morale and low experience to reflect the fact that they are rear area policement in effect

Andy

< Message edited by Andy Mac -- 1/14/2005 4:42:47 PM >

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 115
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/14/2005 7:20:14 PM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1775
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
Hi,

it seems that some units of the Commonwealth forces in India don't start at their historical locations in Scen. 15. and that the OOB was a little bit different:

13th Indian Brigade was east of Taung Gyi at the border to Thailand and 16th Indian Brigade was at Mandalay (both start at Rangoon in the game).

1st Burma Brigade is located at Moulmein in the game (it was located at Taung Gyi; 2nd Burma Brigade is correctly located at Moulmein).

BAF (Burma Auxilary Force) and Burma Rifles Brigades did not exist historically. These forces were mostly spread about the whole of Burma at Battalion level to guard bridges, airdomes and other locations of strategic importance. Guess it was a necessary compromise to brigade them. However the two Burma Brigades were mainly formed from regular Burma Rifles battalions. The Burma Rifles Brigades should have some kind of light squads instead of CW squads because these troops were mainly territorials with not much firepower (Indian Light squads would be some kind of compromise). 1st Burma Brigade should have 36 British and 108 CW squads (2nd King's Own Yorkshire Light Infantry, 1st, 6th, and 7th Burma Rifles) and 2nd Burma Brigade 144 CW squads (2nd, 4th, 5th, and 8th Burma Rifles). However both formations were quite variable in their makeup and changed a lot in Dec 41.

Rangoon Force (or rather Rangoon Brigade, maybe the CD guns should be added to the RN Base Force there even if the CD battery belonged to the brigade) had only one British battalion (1st Gloucesters) and one Burmese battalion (3rd Burma Rifles).

Only the 1st to 8th battalions of the Burma Rifles were regular troops (CW squads) and these are all included in my OOB proposal.

Btw, the Mountain Artillery Regiments that are in the game were not British, they belonged to the Indian Army.

K

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 116
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/14/2005 10:00:46 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 13791
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
OK I am starting to harp on now I apologise to the forum but the more I look at this the more it bugs me.

Now my latest gripe why does 7th Indian Division arrive in Jan 44 when it was operational from July 42 and in action in Arakan as a division in 43.

So by my calcs thats

36th British Division missing from scen 15
11th East African 1 year late
81st West African 1 year late
82nd West African 6 months late
7th Indian 12 - 18 months late
19th Indian Divison was formed in October 1941 and was responsible for the defence of Madras in 1942 with upto 5 Brigades under command at various points so an arrival date in 1944 just seems plain wrong in fact it was the main reserve for GHQ Southern Army throughout 42 - 44.

Am I missing something or is there a reason all the formations seem to appear when they were transferred to 14th Army ignoring Arakan and defensive operations in India.

1 Division missing and 5 divisions up to a year late why are we emasculating the Indian Army ?

If there is a valid game reason for balance someone please tell me and I will just shut up but this seems competely stupid as is.

Andy

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 117
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/14/2005 10:06:31 PM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1775
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
Hi,

some earlier post (guess by Andy Mac but cannot find it now) stated that the 19th Indian Division should be available earlier. Can confirm this, 19th Indian Division was at Madras on 04-21-41 under the command of Maj.Gen. Scoones (according to Joslen and Kirby).

And why does the 70th British Division have a delay of 9999 in Scen. 15? Should arrive at Karachi in March 42. Somewhat conflicting sources, but I think it was lacking the 16th Brigade at this time (only 23rd and 45th Brigades, 16th Brigade rejoined Division 2-8-43).

36th British Division (originally 36th Indian Division until 9-1-44) cannot be found in the OOB?

The IV. Indian Corps was in existence in April 42 at latest but does appear as a reinforcement 8-15-42? XV. Indian Corps also existed at this time but appears 1-1-43?

K

Edit: Andy posted again during I wrote this.

< Message edited by Kereguelen -- 1/14/2005 8:07:45 PM >

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 118
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/14/2005 10:10:31 PM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1775
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
Seems that 19th Indian Division had 62nd, 64th, and 98th Indian Brigades under its command (April 42) but no divisional assets (engineers & artillery).

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 119
RE: 1.40 OOB Issues - 1/14/2005 10:15:28 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 13791
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
It had 115th Regt RA and 134th Field REgt RA from May 42 and the 19th KGV lancers under command as well but the 4 companies of Madras Sappers and Miners Group as Divisonal Engineers did not arrive until later in the year

It did have supply ambulance and medical staff as well but no AT/ Intel secition or bizarelly Post Office section until later in 42

Andy

< Message edited by Andy Mac -- 1/14/2005 8:16:03 PM >

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RE: Aircraft Upgrades Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   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

0.117