Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: No Strat Bombing in China

 
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 >> RE: No Strat Bombing in China Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/24/2021 9:00:12 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4344
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

I agree about not using units to get Intel when they are on suicide missions for the Allies but the Japanese did suicide missions - including transport planes full of troops destroying as many aircraft, equipment, and supplies as well as killing ground personnel.


No no mate. Get with the program. WE can't ban that because the IJ did it 3 times or something in the entire war. On the other hand the allies sending in sub launched recon swimmer teams to multiple beaches... no WE will ban that because it's allegedly "ahistorical".




Get real.

The job of UDT recon was to check obstacles and conditions of enemy-held beaches and to come back alive if possible to deliver a report, not to seek certain death in order to magically provide a complete list of the enemy garrison present.

The game does not even model these kind of operations and level of detail - so all the above is just hot air.




_____________________________


(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 31
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/24/2021 9:40:01 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4344
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Complete and seamless co-operation between troops, planes and ships of multiple different nations and absolutely no requirement to adhere to the political landscape of the Allied powers or the command and control arrangements and tensions.

Massive simplification of supply considerations for Allied units with limited interchangeable equipment.

Zero consequence for loss of units that play key roles in other off-map theatres.



1945-level supply and fuel production available from Dec 7th, 1941.

Allies can squander numerous assets without fear for political repercussions the heavy losses would cause in a democracy.

No USN submarine torpedo shortage.

No withdrawal of certain assets sent to the ETO IRL.

Many ship available way earlier than IRL (some ships even become available in the game the day their keel has been laid IRL).

_____________________________


(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 32
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/24/2021 11:22:27 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13069
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Complete and seamless co-operation between troops, planes and ships of multiple different nations and absolutely no requirement to adhere to the political landscape of the Allied powers or the command and control arrangements and tensions.

Massive simplification of supply considerations for Allied units with limited interchangeable equipment.

Zero consequence for loss of units that play key roles in other off-map theatres.



1945-level supply and fuel production available from Dec 7th, 1941.
Some of this has been changed in a mod but then again, the Allies can not increase the size of their production facilities. That can also be modded simply by giving them CD convoys for such things which they do get.

Allies can squander numerous assets without fear for political repercussions the heavy losses would cause in a democracy.
This could be modded as well simply by reducing the replacements which would make it harder to rebuild units.

No USN submarine torpedo shortage.
All of the supplies are simplified, would you want to have to ship all of the individual heavy BB shells as well? There is also a limit to how many rounds the guns can fire before they need to be relined, this is also not in the game. This can also be affected by the types of rounds and how much propellant is used as well.

No withdrawal of certain assets sent to the ETO IRL.
This can be modded as well. But the Japanese captured vessels which also does not come into play. I know that a lot of the USN 4 pipers left the theatre but that is not in the game.

Many ship available way earlier than IRL (some ships even become available in the game the day their keel has been laid IRL).
Again, mod this. The Yamato was available earlier than in the game as well, this could also be changed giving the Japanese a large boost to their shipbuilding efforts.


Except for the torpedoes and such supplies, everything else can be modified.

The Australian AMs were built and launched in Sydney yet they show up elsewhere, this should be changed as well so the are not "destroyed while building" if a base other than Sydney is captured.

If you can get a list of ships when they were actually available for service for the PTO and when they were withdrawn, then please do so. Even better if you can cite reliable sources then someone can modify a scenario for this.

< Message edited by RangerJoe -- 9/24/2021 11:29:11 PM >


_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 33
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/25/2021 6:12:43 AM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4344
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
quote:

No USN submarine torpedo shortage.
All of the supplies are simplified, would you want to have to ship all of the individual heavy BB shells as well? There is also a limit to how many rounds the guns can fire before they need to be relined, this is also not in the game. This can also be affected by the types of rounds and how much propellant is used as well.


The game does not model wear and tear on guns and their relining or replacing and it surely does not use different types of shells and quantities of propellant. Even if it did, the issue would impact both sides, so why do you bring it up in a discussion on allegedly one-sided advantages given to the Japanese players?

quote:

The Australian AMs were built and launched in Sydney yet they show up elsewhere, this should be changed as well so the are not "destroyed while building" if a base other than Sydney is captured.

The Australian Bathurst class AMs have not been build exclusively in Sydney - quote from Wikipedia: "The lead shipyard was Cockatoo Docks & Engineering Company in Sydney, which laid down the first ship, HMAS Bathurst, in February 1940, and produced a further seven vessels.The other seven shipyards involved were Walkers Limited in Maryborough, Queensland (7 ships), Evans Deakin & Company in Brisbane (11 ships), Mort's Dock & Engineering Company in Sydney (14 ships), Poole & Steel in Sydney (7 ships), State Dockyard at Newcastle, New South Wales (1 ship), HMA Naval Dockyard at Williamstown, Victoria (8 ships), and BHP at Whyalla, South Australia (4 ships)."

quote:


If you can get a list of ships when they were actually available for service for the PTO and when they were withdrawn, then please do so. Even better if you can cite reliable sources then someone can modify a scenario for this.


I haven't made a list, I compared and modified the dates if necessary directly in the editor; Sources were mainly DANFS and if necessary other ship histories that came up in Google searches. The sources do not always gives exact dates and or locations in the AE sense i.e. where and when a vessel is entering the map, so guesstimates must be made working backwards / forward from available dates and locations. To give you just the most extreme example I have found - the Balao class submarine USS Ling enters the game on December 15, 1943 - in fact she was commissioned only on June 8th 1945 and never made a war patrol! Yes, there are mods which try to address some of the issues if possible, my own happens to be among them.

< Message edited by LargeSlowTarget -- 9/25/2021 6:14:28 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 34
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/25/2021 7:30:12 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3218
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

I agree about not using units to get Intel when they are on suicide missions for the Allies but the Japanese did suicide missions - including transport planes full of troops destroying as many aircraft, equipment, and supplies as well as killing ground personnel.


No no mate. Get with the program. WE can't ban that because the IJ did it 3 times or something in the entire war. On the other hand the allies sending in sub launched recon swimmer teams to multiple beaches... no WE will ban that because it's allegedly "ahistorical".




Get real.

The job of UDT recon was to check obstacles and conditions of enemy-held beaches and to come back alive if possible to deliver a report, not to seek certain death in order to magically provide a complete list of the enemy garrison present.

The game does not even model these kind of operations and level of detail - so all the above is just hot air.




You didn't actually read the document I linked, did you?

_____________________________

"You may find that having is not so nearly pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
- Cdr Spock


Ian R

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 35
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/25/2021 8:17:48 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3218
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline
Edit - my detailed responses are the red ones underneath Ranger Joe's.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget


1945-level supply and fuel production available from Dec 7th, 1941.
Some of this has been changed in a mod but then again, the Allies can not increase the size of their production facilities. That can also be modded simply by giving them CD convoys for such things which they do get.

US war production/spending/orders peaked in July 1943, not 1945.In any event the constraint on logistics is moving it forward, rather than producing it, so averaging out arrivals of stuff (including before and after July 1943) does not produce a non historical advantage.

Allies can squander numerous assets without fear for political repercussions the heavy losses would cause in a democracy.
This could be modded as well simply by reducing the replacements which would make it harder to rebuild units.

Except that it costs them lots of victory points, and both Centpac (Palaus) and SWPAC (liberating the entire PI, Borneo 1945, even Biak in 44) did indeed engage in unnecessary operations that squandered assets, so this claim is not accepted as "historical". In fact, politics required Washington to overlook the squandering of assets in at least one stated instance.

No USN submarine torpedo shortage.
All of the supplies are simplified, would you want to have to ship all of the individual heavy BB shells as well? There is also a limit to how many rounds the guns can fire before they need to be relined, this is also not in the game. This can also be affected by the types of rounds and how much propellant is used as well.


What Ranger Joe says, but if you want to try and model that (did the designers allow for it in the dud rate anyway?), could we also include modelling the effect of putting barely processed Borneo crude in IJN ship bunkers? How far do you want to go?


No withdrawal of certain assets sent to the ETO IRL.
This can be modded as well. But the Japanese captured vessels which also does not come into play. I know that a lot of the USN 4 pipers left the theatre but that is not in the game.

That is a scenario designer activity; what do you mean by "certain assets" anyway? The allied withdrawal lists are long and hundreds of things withdraw. If something was overlooked, that can be edited in.

Many ship available way earlier than IRL (some ships even become available in the game the day their keel has been laid IRL).
Again, mod this. The Yamato was available earlier than in the game as well, this could also be changed giving the Japanese a large boost to their shipbuilding efforts.


On the other hand, the game goes to 1946 (or later), yet USN ship arrivals in theatre fall short of what was actually available in the last year of the war. I did a lot of research on this for my mod. There are considerable numbers of CA, CL, and Sumner/Gearing DDs MIA. If you are referring to arrivals of xAK liberties, or the like, are there others that turn up later than historical entry to the PTO? Does the IJ player have to give back militarised merchant hulls to the (invisible) civil administration after the initial military expansion, to haul food to the HI? Should there be a rule that unless the IJ players haul resources to the HI that are expended on a "food pool", manpower points will be damaged/eliminated? Like I said, it's a Pandora's box and maybe you should leave the lid shut.



Except for the torpedoes and such supplies, everything else can be modified.

The Australian AMs were built and launched in Sydney yet they show up elsewhere, this should be changed as well so the are not "destroyed while building" if a base other than Sydney is captured.

Already done in my mod, please feel free to copy the info - which came from more traditional sources than wiki.


If you can get a list of ships when they were actually available for service for the PTO and when they were withdrawn, then please do so. Even better if you can cite reliable sources then someone can modify a scenario for this.



< Message edited by Ian R -- 9/25/2021 8:24:41 AM >


_____________________________

"You may find that having is not so nearly pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
- Cdr Spock


Ian R

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 36
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/25/2021 10:42:00 AM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13069
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

quote:

No USN submarine torpedo shortage.
All of the supplies are simplified, would you want to have to ship all of the individual heavy BB shells as well? There is also a limit to how many rounds the guns can fire before they need to be relined, this is also not in the game. This can also be affected by the types of rounds and how much propellant is used as well.


The game does not model wear and tear on guns and their relining or replacing and it surely does not use different types of shells and quantities of propellant. Even if it did, the issue would impact both sides, so why do you bring it up in a discussion on allegedly one-sided advantages given to the Japanese players?

quote:

The Australian AMs were built and launched in Sydney yet they show up elsewhere, this should be changed as well so the are not "destroyed while building" if a base other than Sydney is captured.

The Australian Bathurst class AMs have not been build exclusively in Sydney - quote from Wikipedia: "The lead shipyard was Cockatoo Docks & Engineering Company in Sydney, which laid down the first ship, HMAS Bathurst, in February 1940, and produced a further seven vessels.The other seven shipyards involved were Walkers Limited in Maryborough, Queensland (7 ships), Evans Deakin & Company in Brisbane (11 ships), Mort's Dock & Engineering Company in Sydney (14 ships), Poole & Steel in Sydney (7 ships), State Dockyard at Newcastle, New South Wales (1 ship), HMA Naval Dockyard at Williamstown, Victoria (8 ships), and BHP at Whyalla, South Australia (4 ships)."

quote:


If you can get a list of ships when they were actually available for service for the PTO and when they were withdrawn, then please do so. Even better if you can cite reliable sources then someone can modify a scenario for this.


I haven't made a list, I compared and modified the dates if necessary directly in the editor; Sources were mainly DANFS and if necessary other ship histories that came up in Google searches. The sources do not always gives exact dates and or locations in the AE sense i.e. where and when a vessel is entering the map, so guesstimates must be made working backwards / forward from available dates and locations. To give you just the most extreme example I have found - the Balao class submarine USS Ling enters the game on December 15, 1943 - in fact she was commissioned only on June 8th 1945 and never made a war patrol! Yes, there are mods which try to address some of the issues if possible, my own happens to be among them.


Without opening the game, I know that there was at least one ship that shows up in Derby on the North Coast, I did not know that the ship was built there but there is not much to that base. So actually making a list of the ships with the source, then adding in any comments would be useful to someone making a mod to correct any such errors would be useful, may make it easier for some people to do so, and would thus encourage more work on the other vessels if many such corrections were known. Something like a "team effort" to get this accomplished. I do believe that Babes did try to correct some things as well.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 37
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/25/2021 11:22:36 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 4440
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline
Regarding start bombing in China. You can choose the middle way. Bomb Manpower(terror bombing) and Heavy Industry( real-life Chinese arsenals - Chungking had several). If you wipe out all HI in China, Chiinese supply production is reduced by 1/3. The Chinese can still continue fighting having untouched LI.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 38
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/25/2021 11:29:07 AM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13069
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
Bombing manpower can destroy/damage industry.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 39
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/25/2021 4:09:30 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4344
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R
You didn't actually read the document I linked, did you?


Of course I did read it, and thanks for posting it. It's the sad story about a sub-launched UDT team sent to Yap to recon reef and beach conditions for a possible amphib invasion. Unfortunately it lost three men MIA presumed captured by the Japanese and main part of the story is about the differing accounts concerning their mysterious fate. Interesting tidbit about two of the UDT men being originally from the "Maritime Unit" of the OSS "...trained to conduct other intelligence missions besides beach reconnaissance....". You surely know that besides beach recon and sabotage of shipping and port installations, the MU's "other intelligence missions" consisted of clandestine ferrying missions to infiltrate men, arms, ammo, radios and supplies to resistance groups and to exfiltrate downed Allied airmen. But these kind of operations aren't modeled in AE - maybe except the abstraction of the occasional downed pilot "having been found" and I have found nothing about resistance groups on Yap, an island under Japanese control since 1914. And if the article talked about suicide missions to magically obtain a list of enemy units present by dumping a sub-load of sacrificial cannon-fodder on the target base, I must have missed it.

Regarding your comments about Pandora's box and how far I want to go: I didn't ask for tracking individual BB shells and barrel wear, a "food pool" or what else has come up here. Go back to my initial post where I simply proposed house rules to increase realism concerning existing game mechanics which can be exploited. It was you who charged-in with a list of ahistorical advantages given to the Japanese side which are not being modelled by the game mechanics. To counter your biased list, mind_messing and I provided examples of ahistorical advantages given to the Allied side. Well, you may continue to contest that both sides get their share of ahistorical advantages, but as you observed yourself, it's a game and it is not 100% historical for both sides. If you have no problem with exploiting game mechanics, it's your choice and that's fine with me. My choice is not to exploit them and I impose HRs on myself, including ships not going full-speed off-map, no scattered paradrops and no suicide submarine invasions. Finally, I congratulate you on your ability to use more traditional sources than wiki and I will punish myself for having copied/pasted a good-enough summary from wiki out of convenience and laziness instead of assembling and retyping information from more traditional sources myself - no dessert for me this supper.

_____________________________


(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 40
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/25/2021 4:56:20 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13069
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
I have no problem quoting from Wiki if I already have an informed idea that it is accurate. It also depends upon the topic as well.

Both sides have advantages and disadvantages. There are no personal egos to stoke in the game other than the players egos. There is no bias against the US trying to reestablish colonial empires. Leave it as a game, let people play the way that they want to as long as they are happy with it.

My comments about the ammo actually comes several things that I have read. One of them was a Japanese admiral was chastised for using too much ship main gun ammo during a bombardment since that does use a lot of metal. One of the US old battleships actually reduced the amount of powder for the shells during the naval bombardments with no lessening in effectiveness which helped prolong the barrel life as the barrels were close to needing relining. Guess what? There was little to no wear after that! Also, my own personal knowledge that the militaries do keep track of barrel wear and tear on the gun tubes which does effect range and accuracy.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 41
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/25/2021 5:13:32 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3218
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R
You didn't actually read the document I linked, did you?

it lost three men MIA presumed captured by the Japanese


And probably beheaded and cremated. After they were tied to a tree and used for bayonet practice. Let's not gloss over the facts here.

quote:

but as you observed yourself, it's a game and it is not 100% historical for both sides


Correct, and that was my point - IJ players demanding house rules on the basis of "historical realism" is an oxymoron.

_____________________________

"You may find that having is not so nearly pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
- Cdr Spock


Ian R

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 42
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/25/2021 5:20:25 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3218
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline
quote:

Finally, I congratulate you on your ability to use more traditional sources than wiki and I will punish myself for having copied/pasted a good-enough summary from wiki out of convenience and laziness instead of assembling and retyping information from more traditional sources myself - no dessert for me this supper.


There is a lot of incorrect info on Wiki.

Always check the sources ... and read them yourself.

No pudding for you.

_____________________________

"You may find that having is not so nearly pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
- Cdr Spock


Ian R

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 43
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/26/2021 2:17:27 AM   
Wirraway_Ace


Posts: 1305
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Austin / Brisbane
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

I would add that some houserules are there to increase realism and to avoid exploits of game mechanics. The "no full speed off-map movement" HR comes to mind - if off-map movement would actually use fuel and accumulate sys and engine damage, nobody would be running his ships full-speed off-map. Or the limitations on night-bombings, huge tank-only stacks, submarine invasions, scattered paradrops...


Interesting. Did not know this was possible and first I've heard of this one before. The other one I just recently heard about was only Tankers being allowed to carry oil. No AKs other than the ones with liquid capacity.


Only tankers or ships with liquid storage can carry oil. AKs and AP of any type can carry fuel, this should include AMCs and other vessels with a cargo capacity including PBs.


Yes I was confused by that:

Transport fuel/oil only in TK, AO and in dedicated fuel/oil capacity of some xAKs

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5078303

This house rule has been around a while. The use of "oil" in the description of the rule is to distinguish between bulk fuel and oil carrying capacity versus 55 gallon drums in cargo holds. AKs and xAKs, indeed any ship carrying supplies, may very well be carrying 55 gallon drums of AV gas, diesel or petrol, as aircraft, tanks and trucks burn supplies (the reason refineries make supply points). You could not, however, run an economy from 55 gallon drums shipped in cargo holds...

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 44
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/26/2021 4:57:12 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 4167
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

I would add that some houserules are there to increase realism and to avoid exploits of game mechanics. The "no full speed off-map movement" HR comes to mind - if off-map movement would actually use fuel and accumulate sys and engine damage, nobody would be running his ships full-speed off-map. Or the limitations on night-bombings, huge tank-only stacks, submarine invasions, scattered paradrops...


Interesting. Did not know this was possible and first I've heard of this one before. The other one I just recently heard about was only Tankers being allowed to carry oil. No AKs other than the ones with liquid capacity.


Only tankers or ships with liquid storage can carry oil. AKs and AP of any type can carry fuel, this should include AMCs and other vessels with a cargo capacity including PBs.


Yes I was confused by that:

Transport fuel/oil only in TK, AO and in dedicated fuel/oil capacity of some xAKs

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5078303

This house rule has been around a while. The use of "oil" in the description of the rule is to distinguish between bulk fuel and oil carrying capacity versus 55 gallon drums in cargo holds. AKs and xAKs, indeed any ship carrying supplies, may very well be carrying 55 gallon drums of AV gas, diesel or petrol, as aircraft, tanks and trucks burn supplies (the reason refineries make supply points). You could not, however, run an economy from 55 gallon drums shipped in cargo holds...



Thanks for clearing that up!

_____________________________


(in reply to Wirraway_Ace)
Post #: 45
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/26/2021 5:44:39 PM   
Wirraway_Ace


Posts: 1305
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Austin / Brisbane
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Regarding start bombing in China. You can choose the middle way. Bomb Manpower(terror bombing) and Heavy Industry( real-life Chinese arsenals - Chungking had several). If you wipe out all HI in China, Chiinese supply production is reduced by 1/3. The Chinese can still continue fighting having untouched LI.

This is a nice approach, Yaab. My primary concern for bombing LI in China, is how it could possibly be targeted. My understanding is it was almost all cottage industry. On the subject of HI, do you have any pics or links to information on Chinese arsenals in Chungking of the era?

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 46
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/26/2021 6:25:35 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13069
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
Hit English for a translation:

http://www.chinesefirearms.com/110108/articles/cart_g.htm#1

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Wirraway_Ace)
Post #: 47
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/26/2021 6:40:10 PM   
Wirraway_Ace


Posts: 1305
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Austin / Brisbane
Status: offline
Thanks, RangerJoe!

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 48
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/26/2021 7:03:44 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 4440
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Regarding start bombing in China. You can choose the middle way. Bomb Manpower(terror bombing) and Heavy Industry( real-life Chinese arsenals - Chungking had several). If you wipe out all HI in China, Chiinese supply production is reduced by 1/3. The Chinese can still continue fighting having untouched LI.

This is a nice approach, Yaab. My primary concern for bombing LI in China, is how it could possibly be targeted. My understanding is it was almost all cottage industry. On the subject of HI, do you have any pics or links to information on Chinese arsenals in Chungking of the era?



WirrawayAce, try this link. Unfotunately, I can only view this one page (page 131) from the book.

https://books.google.pl/books?id=7Yequ29RhDMC&pg=PA131&lpg=PA131&dq=#v=onepage&q&f=false


< Message edited by Yaab -- 9/27/2021 5:55:46 AM >

(in reply to Wirraway_Ace)
Post #: 49
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/26/2021 7:23:02 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13069
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
You might try this but you have to sign up. I did not sign up.

Workers at War: Labor in China's Arsenals, 1937-1953

https://read-download-books.com/v6/preview/?pid=6&offer_id=417&ref_id=7f71a436257858e2e13H1cf1ZboSpTEM_6445a45f_c28f910b&sub1=4301&keyword=workers%20at%20war%20labor%20in%20china%20s%20arsenals%201937%201953&sub8=workers%20at%20war%20labor%20in%20china%20s%20arsenals%201937%201953&m=workers%20at%20war%20labor%20in%20china%20s%20arsenals%201937%201953

It might just be a description of the book.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 50
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/27/2021 11:15:53 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 4954
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Without opening the game, I know that there was at least one ship that shows up in Derby on the North Coast, I did not know that the ship was built there but there is not much to that base. So actually making a list of the ships with the source, then adding in any comments would be useful to someone making a mod to correct any such errors would be useful, may make it easier for some people to do so, and would thus encourage more work on the other vessels if many such corrections were known. Something like a "team effort" to get this accomplished. I do believe that Babes did try to correct some things as well.


FWIW I am working on updating my personal game scenario and I have a fair few ship arrival corrections already. I am aware that LargeSlowTarget has also done a lot of work and I will be incorporating some of those updates into my own scenario as well. I would be very happy to take a look at whatever other such updates anyone has, and at the end of my updates to the scenario I can create a list of ships and corrected arrival dates.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 51
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/27/2021 12:25:09 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13069
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
I do know that the Alden left the Pacific and worked in the Atlantic area. i think that most of the 4 pipers did unless they were sunk. One was sunk, refloated by the Japanese and repaired somewhat.

Ernest Evans, MOH, started the war on the Alden.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 52
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/27/2021 2:50:29 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3218
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Without opening the game, I know that there was at least one ship that shows up in Derby on the North Coast, I did not know that the ship was built there but there is not much to that base. So actually making a list of the ships with the source, then adding in any comments would be useful to someone making a mod to correct any such errors would be useful, may make it easier for some people to do so, and would thus encourage more work on the other vessels if many such corrections were known. Something like a "team effort" to get this accomplished. I do believe that Babes did try to correct some things as well.


FWIW I am working on updating my personal game scenario and I have a fair few ship arrival corrections already. I am aware that LargeSlowTarget has also done a lot of work and I will be incorporating some of those updates into my own scenario as well. I would be very happy to take a look at whatever other such updates anyone has, and at the end of my updates to the scenario I can create a list of ships and corrected arrival dates.


I Have the corrected Bathurst arrivals in my scenario; please copy and save yourself some time. There are also a lot of later war changes/additions included.

_____________________________

"You may find that having is not so nearly pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
- Cdr Spock


Ian R

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 53
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/27/2021 3:12:02 PM   
Wirraway_Ace


Posts: 1305
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Austin / Brisbane
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Regarding start bombing in China. You can choose the middle way. Bomb Manpower(terror bombing) and Heavy Industry( real-life Chinese arsenals - Chungking had several). If you wipe out all HI in China, Chiinese supply production is reduced by 1/3. The Chinese can still continue fighting having untouched LI.

This is a nice approach, Yaab. My primary concern for bombing LI in China, is how it could possibly be targeted. My understanding is it was almost all cottage industry. On the subject of HI, do you have any pics or links to information on Chinese arsenals in Chungking of the era?



WirrawayAce, try this link. Unfotunately, I can only view this one page (page 131) from the book.

https://books.google.pl/books?id=7Yequ29RhDMC&pg=PA131&lpg=PA131&dq=#v=onepage&q&f=false


Thanks, none the less. It looks like a good reference.

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 54
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/27/2021 3:16:44 PM   
Wirraway_Ace


Posts: 1305
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Austin / Brisbane
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Hit English for a translation:

http://www.chinesefirearms.com/110108/articles/cart_g.htm#1

Thanks, RangerJoe. Good stuff. Using these names and descriptions to search for period pictures of the arsenals.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 55
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 9/27/2021 11:59:24 PM   
Tanaka


Posts: 4167
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Without opening the game, I know that there was at least one ship that shows up in Derby on the North Coast, I did not know that the ship was built there but there is not much to that base. So actually making a list of the ships with the source, then adding in any comments would be useful to someone making a mod to correct any such errors would be useful, may make it easier for some people to do so, and would thus encourage more work on the other vessels if many such corrections were known. Something like a "team effort" to get this accomplished. I do believe that Babes did try to correct some things as well.


FWIW I am working on updating my personal game scenario and I have a fair few ship arrival corrections already. I am aware that LargeSlowTarget has also done a lot of work and I will be incorporating some of those updates into my own scenario as well. I would be very happy to take a look at whatever other such updates anyone has, and at the end of my updates to the scenario I can create a list of ships and corrected arrival dates.


Hey AndyMac can you get in on this for your scenarios as well?

_____________________________


(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 56
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 10/1/2021 8:13:20 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3911
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

I would add that some houserules are there to increase realism and to avoid exploits of game mechanics. The "no full speed off-map movement" HR comes to mind - if off-map movement would actually use fuel and accumulate sys and engine damage, nobody would be running his ships full-speed off-map. Or the limitations on night-bombings, huge tank-only stacks, submarine invasions, scattered paradrops...


Interesting. Did not know this was possible and first I've heard of this one before. The other one I just recently heard about was only Tankers being allowed to carry oil. No AKs other than the ones with liquid capacity.


Only tankers or ships with liquid storage can carry oil. AKs and AP of any type can carry fuel, this should include AMCs and other vessels with a cargo capacity including PBs.


Yes I was confused by that:

Transport fuel/oil only in TK, AO and in dedicated fuel/oil capacity of some xAKs

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5078303

This house rule has been around a while. The use of "oil" in the description of the rule is to distinguish between bulk fuel and oil carrying capacity versus 55 gallon drums in cargo holds. AKs and xAKs, indeed any ship carrying supplies, may very well be carrying 55 gallon drums of AV gas, diesel or petrol, as aircraft, tanks and trucks burn supplies (the reason refineries make supply points). You could not, however, run an economy from 55 gallon drums shipped in cargo holds...



Thanks for clearing that up!


Was wondering about production of those 55-gallon barrels. I had no idea that so many were produced. It's hard to visualize what 2.5m barrels/month would look like.

https://books.google.com/books?id=qgThuPSL04sC&pg=PA131&lpg=PA131&dq=55+gallon+drum+production+during+world+war+2&source=bl&ots=loBFKKhFME&sig=ACfU3U1AlQBu4IcjeOQ2RrzAjf6Oho3HhA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiursu6garzAhVKm2oFHSKIBKk4ChDoAXoECAsQAw#v=onepage&q=55%20gallon%20drum%20production%20during%20world%20war%202&f=false

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 57
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 10/1/2021 9:17:07 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13069
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
Just look up a picture of a US supply, ammo, and fuel dump.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 58
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 11/11/2021 8:40:03 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 4440
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline
Jesus, 2.5m barrels per MONTH? This is obscene. The Japs never had a chance.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 59
RE: No Strat Bombing in China - 11/11/2021 6:59:03 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3911
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline
To be fair, the source says that the 2.5m/month height of the 55-gallon barrel production was achieved in 1944. The article didn't have a monthly production graph covering the war, which would have been interesting. 2.5m/month comes out to approximately a barrel/second.

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: No Strat Bombing in China Page: <<   < prev  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

0.324