Sorry Gridley380, just a typo.
No problem. :-)
However, in some details you should check your sources. The starting location for HMS Victorious for example - you want to put her at Aden instead of Cristobal, but in fact she entered the Pacific via the Panama canal. You also want to put CVE Shah and Tracker at Aden - that's not correct either. HMS Shah has been built at Seattle, picked-up her airgroup at San Francisco and then joined the British Fleet by crossing the Pacific, leaving San Francisco on 440115 (the game has a wrong date). HMS Tracker served in the Atlantic, got a refit at New York in order to be able to operate US carrier aircraft, and left New York on 45/01/01 for San Diego via the Panama canal (the game puts her at Cristobal at that date, so wrong place or time). But no worries, even if your data is not always on target, it points me to things I have not verified before which leads to the discovery of errors in the base scenario - so thanks again for sharing your data! I will continue to dig through the file.
Actually, I moved some of the RN ships for personal preference. This is, after all, notes for *my* mod. :-) I didn't expect anyone would be interested in anything short of a full-up scenario, so I didn't distinguish between things I did for historical accuracy and things I did for personal preference (I've also got a note in there about having the Americal Division appear as the 23rd Infantry Division, for example - not at all historical). Probably should have highlighted the "choice" ones before passing my notes to you, sorry.
A few notes on the notes:
My B-29 data is OBE - I've found better info since. I can dig that out if you're interested.
The changes to the Treasury class reflect that AGCs aren't as useful in-game as those ships are as long-range escorts. The pain of doing long-range convoys historically isn't worth the pain of having those ships fill a historical role that the game doesn't really use.
The Dutch engineers are somewhat speculative - they had engineer units in their OrBat, but I'm not sure how many personnel they had assigned.
The US Army land OrBats and TOEs both seem to need some serious work. Basically some day I'll sit down and comb through Stanton for the PTO as I've mostly done for the ETO. The US "division wedge" also seems to have too little support in-game. I've been mulling splitting most of the support out of HQc/y and creating some ENG units representing groups of Army Service Force personnel.
Allowing the conversion of Crater AK to Liberty xAK is another preference thing - be the time I get the Crater class I don't have a use for them except as more xAK's. Making them xAK's makes them easier to keep track of.
Dougout Doug's stats are a matter of debate, but I don't like him, so in my game he will have truly lousy stats. :-)
Buffing up Wake is something I need to play test more - I'd like to be able to get a semi-historical result for the initial Japanese assault at least, say, one time in three.
The VF Dets are something that I feel the US is really missing out on late-war; recon is VERY important in the game, as it was historically, and the fast carrier force had aircraft aboard for that purpose. The game should provide for that.
The Advanced Carrier Training Groups are another "miss" - they existed historically and can fulfill their basic purpose in the game.
The Barracuda's arguably had limited "on map" service and thus representing them is a boost for the Allies, but since the class data existed I decided to take advantage of it.
The xAPc's are useless in-game, and they're never going to get into a place where they might be sunk in a game I'm playing, so since there are lots of units missing I use the slots for those.
I haven't play-tested the Ground Support Equipment idea, but fixing aviation support is a major goal.
AA lethality is something I brought up in another thread, but nothing I've seen there has changed my mind.