Happycat
-
Posts
318 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Happycat
-
-
Royal Navy, Indian Ocean - June 1942
The series of IJN raids into the Indian Ocean from January through April of 1942 sunk a number of British ships (CA's Hector, Cornwall, Dorsetshire - DD's Vampire and Tenedos - CV Hermes).
At the end of April, the Eastern Fleet consisted primarily of BB Warspite, CV's Formidable and Indomitable together with escorts. There was a second component of the fleet centered about the obsolescent Revenge class BB's. I did some checking, and of those, Ramillies was torpedoed during the Madagascar invasion in 1942, and most of the others served out of theatre.
The Eastern fleet would not have been in theatre as of June 1942, as it was busy off the coast of Africa. Accordingly, I think that the best thing would be to script the return of these ships to occur near the end of 1942. I think you could otherwise keep the production orders that are set in Operation Z.
So to summarize, I am suggesting that when the Midway campaign starts, there should be virtually no British fleet presence in the Indian Ocean.
It could go something like this:
June '42-DD and CA at Trincomalee. One SS at Calcutta.
July '42 - scripted (or by production queue) one more British SS arrives.
December '42 - Warspite, Indomitable and Formidable arrive in theatre (again by script or in the production queue, whichever you think is easier).
Other arrivals as per the Operation Z campaign production table.
It is worth noting that by 1944, there was a sizeable contingent of Royal Navy ships, including CV's,CVL's and BB's seconded to Halsey and Nimitz operations in the Pacific.
I don't think the game reflects that in any way, does it?
-
Scott, from what I can see in comparing to my own resources, Carverrt's advice with regard to the disposition of forces in Burma is right on the money, for Britain and Japan. I don't think I can add anything to it that would be of any significance in the context of this game.
I will look into what the British fleet dispositions should be for June '42. We need to take into account that the Japanese raid into the Indian Ocean took place, and adjust accordingly.
-
To make the islands more important one major change could be made by the programmers and that is to use the same system used in prior SC games in the naval conflict, when ships were at sea in the other SC series their supply went down every turn, why not do the same here, this would make the capture of outer islands important for resupply of the US navy warships. Willy
Hubert, et al---this is not a bad idea at all
-
One source to look out for is Purnell's History of the Second World War as I'm pretty sure there's a decent map of unit dispositions circa June 1942 in it.
A good book on the war in China is When Tigers Fight: Story of the Sino-Japanese War, 1937-45 by Dick Wilson. It will help with understanding the situation in China, and will help work out some of the deployments there (but only up to a point).
I cannot recommend too highly General Bill Slim's "Defeat Into Victory". It is probably my favourite WWII book, it tells the story of the Burma-India campaigns very well because not only will it tell you a lot about dispositions etc, it is also very educational as he considers the various strategies available. Reading it inspired me to make both the scenarios set in Burma.
Thanks, I'll have a look at General Slim's book, as we have it at our local library. Wislon and Purnell's books don't seem to be in the system, unfortunately.
-
SeaMonkey, sorry to hear about your father.
-
I have found a way to make it more exciting, and if I get support from a few key people I might just create a Major Midway MOD and see how that works. First though I would like to see who is up for the idea, and then I will see if it's worth going for? By the way I never lie especially when I'm talking about playing some type of scenario over and over again. Not that I think you're accusing me of it. By the way I really wasn't told anything by anybody about the problem on another thread topic. I just had a very bad choice of words I think that implied a different meaning. That's also not a lie.
I did not doubt you for a moment, but honestly assumed that you really have found a way to make the Midway scenario "come to life". If you're up for a PBEM of it, I would be more than willing.
If you are interested in modding a Midway scenario, I not only would be interested in seeing such a thing come to be, but would be interested in helping out with research and testing if you want the help.
-
I also would like to apologize for those of you who aren't psychic.
LOL
-
Just an update that the US Naval loops will include Canada for the first patch and I believe the off map industries have been addressed as well.
Given that the loop to Hawaii, for example, takes three turns to complete, which is about the same time it would take to move manually, are these loops just to reduce "handling" for the Allied player?
Assuming this is so, I wonder whether it would be useful to have a couple more loops, such as one near Japan that allows the IJN to transit to Truk (with an appropriate delay) and perhaps one for the Brits and Aussie's to travel between India and Australia without all of the handling that is required.
Of course, one problem I see with the Japan-Truk connection is that it gives US subs a pretty good idea where to hang around, but then one could say the same thing now for the existing US-Australia and US-Hawaii loops.
Besides, US doctrine was to attack convoys, not warships, while IJN doctrine was quite the opposite.
-
First, I would just like to say great game guys, but it would be nice I think if sometime in the future the SC team works to create a Midway major campaign. It's just a thought of one road this game could go down in the future. If this actually does go through which I unfortunately doubt it will it will give both Japan and the Allies the chance to fight the war once the beginning part was all over. Sort of like my favorite Fall Blau campaign in SC2. I do know that there is a minor Midway campaign, and I've played it a lot. Like I've said above I'm VERY happy with this game, and I think this would be nice if this could happen to it. Great job once again on creating another great game Hubert, and company.
I'm curious what your opinion is of the Midway scenario. I have not found a satisfactory way to replicate the historical importance of recon (all those PBY's and SBD's fanning out to search for the Kido Butai!). Probing with subs and DD's yields the results, but lacks the drama, at least for me. I'm guessing that if you have, as you said, played Midway a lot, then perhaps you have found a way to make it more exciting?
-
What if you have units get created for the buffer islands that SeaMonkey is talking about. All you would have to do then is set those units to an AI setting of 0 in the editor, and there you have it. I do agree though that Japan, wasted time by it's island hoping campaign it's just it would also allow the play balance to even out a little bit too.
I am in fact experimenting with a mod where I added a dozen corps to the Japanese force pool, at a cost of 60 mpp each. They are seriously crippled, stats-wise, and can not be reinforced. So essentially they are divisions, and not very robust ones either.
Still, I am hoping that they will bring the islands into play in a meaningful way, without screwing up the game balance.
I also added two more SNLF's at start up, although both sitting in Japan. My early experience with the game leads me to think that the Japanese do not have enough amphibious capability early enough.
The "China first" strategy is a common one in war games covering the Pacific theatre, but over the decades that I have been playing war games (too many decades
) my experience has been that Japan loses because of the American juggernaut, not by neglecting China.Of course, the joy in any game is found in trying different approaches and seeing what works best. SC-PT is already demonstrating to me that it will stay on the hard drive for a very, very long time.
-
For the most part Ludi I think this has already been addressed.
Maybe it would be nice, for those of us who aren't psychic, to elaborate on this?
Although I have a thorough grounding in the history of the era, and can reasonably predict what actions might, say for example, tick off Mao Tse Tung, I do think that the question as posed deserves a slightly more responsive answer.
In a recent game, I was surprised to see Mao get all hot and bothered over "Japanese successes", and enter the war the following turn. Since none of my successes were in China (the only thing I had done was move an HQ), I was a bit baffled over such a bellicose posture on the part of the Reds, so early in the game (January '41).
Does "already addressed" mean it has been answered elsewhere? It's being fixed in the patch? Clearly, it sounds like you know something that some of the rest of us don't, so be a nice scottsmm and share with us
-
In a subsequent email, Hubert has clarified this further for me and us: the distance between HQ and subordinate unit is five CLEAR terrain hexes, modified downwards by any applicable terrain penalties. To quote from the email message:
So if it is clear terrain then it would be a range of 5 tiles, if the
shortest path to a potential unit for attachment includes 1 mountain
tile then you have to include the movement cost of that mountain tile
and as a result it reduces the range in that direction by 2 as mountains
cost 2 AP etc.
Therefore, and as Stitch pointed out previously, ZOC is a terrain penalty and would have an effect upon HQ attachment distances.
-
Well, it turns out that everything here is wad. Hubert emailed me and advised that because my unit is in a mountain hex, it is actually outside of the HQ's range. The manual says "within range of five tiles" but the actual mechanics are that the range between HQ and subordinate formation is measured by action points (movement cost, I suppose?). So although my unit is within five tiles, it is actually 7 or 8 ap's away from the HQ.
-
I captured Brisbane a few turns ago, but the number in the port square remained red. This turn an allied transport landed in the port square and unload a unit while I was still in occupation of the city! I am unable to move any ships into the port square myself, or work out how to capture it.
I'm wondering if this has something to do with the city being part of the US in game terms.
Any thoughts?
Thanks, Makris
Bump. I'd like to know the answer to this one too.
-
These do indeed seem like ideas worthy of consideration. Certainly wouldn't be any harm in trying them in a beta patch, would there?
In addition, consideration might be given to adding another SNLF or two---while this would be slightly ahistorical, I think it would allow a bit quicker expansion throughout Micronesia.
The CRT seems quite bloody; I have seen SNLF's lose 50% of their strength in landings on islands that would be unlikely to have any garrison.
-
Most likely because the unit was not fully supplied as of the start of the turn. Although I think I've had some odd occurances of not fully supplied units having all their action points, and being able to elite upgrade.
I tend to think you're right; supply has certainly seemed to have an influence on reinforcement, so why not on other actions as well? Some of my SNLF's are in relatively low supply, approximately 45% effectiveness, and quite unable to reinforce at all. It's going to take me a LOOOONG time to create my island buffer zone.
-
Happycat,
Without any question you should do that, because later on in your campagin you'll pay a huge price if you don't upgrade them. That goes for both Allies, and Japan. Carrier's are the backbone of any victory in this game (land, air, and of course sea).
Thanks. This matches my instincts in this regard. Although most Pacific based wargames I have played over the years tend to reward quick expansion by the Japanese player, I felt that keeping my technical edge over the USA for as long as possible might just be more important. In this game, the Allied player has little to work with anyway, so all of those nifty little bases like Rabaul will still be there, ripe for the picking, a few turns from now
-
I just had a thought! There is one thing that would stop you from attaching it: if it has already used up its action points, as HQ attachments can only be amended before you use a unit.
Could that be the answer here?
Nope. I do my HQ attachments first, as Scottsmm refers to in his post. The unit tells me it has 3/4 action points available (why there is one missing, I have no idea). Anyway, I emailed Hubert with the saved game, so I am sure he will look into it. Incidentally, I have also tried auto-assist and that makes no difference unfortunately.
-
Thank you both (Bill101 and Scottsmm) for your replies. I am a very experienced and methodical war gamer, so I have already ensured that the armor unit is close to the HQ and that the HQ is within quota (in fact, only has two other units attached). So there is something else at work here, and I am wondering still if effectiveness, supply or action points has some bearing.
Maybe I will send the save game to Hubert to look at. Thanks again.
-
I am curious as to what other players consider to be optimal play as Japan in the early months. Is it worth the time, after Pearl Harbor, to reinforce CV's (including adding the elites) and to upgrade them? It is of course very time consuming, since only one action can be performed per turn. With a CV that is in need of repair, upgrade and plus has elites available, this can take up to five turns (six if both air and CV can be upgraded).
TIA
-
Can someone expand upon how HQ attachments work? I like using manual mode, and am currrently playing a PBEM as Japan. I have moved a couple of units from Manchuoko to China (none that affect the garrisoning rule vis a vis USSR). One unit, the 1st Tank Army, will not attach to an HQ. It's readiness is about 45, and action points are 3. Do either of those numbers have any bearing on this issue?
I find this occurs from time to time with other units too. An example is SNLF units seem to be capable of being attached to HQ's---sometimes; and sometimes not. Very difficult to find the common denominator to this problem.
TIA.
-
My favorite "biggest let down" ending of a wargame was Chris Crawford's "Battle of the Bulge" when you're told "In war nobody wins" with a cheesy animation. If I wanted to feel guilty about playing a game I'll look at the clock, or my wife's expression when I've been on for too long...
-
Hey just glad to see you got it working
For future reference with anyone having the same problem, Vista seems to be a bit particular when programs are installed in the Program Files directory (in some cases) so as a quick workaround if you install into another directory such as 'Games' it seems to resolve the issue. For example:
C:\Games\Battlefront\Strategic Command WWII Pacific Theater
Hubert
Yet another reason that I am happy to have stuck with XP. One wonders about the beta testing of MS products.
Just curious, was the game designed with a bias towards running under XP? It certainly runs well with that OS, regardless
-
Dude, try invading Seattle sometime, it rains 90% of the time between late Fall & Spring.
You been to Seattle? It really does rain 90% of the time betwen late fall and spring. It's why they invented Starbucks
Bringing the Outer Islands into Play
in Strategic Command - PACIFIC THEATER
Posted
As much as I am enjoying watching the children having fun flaming each other, could we get back on topic?
A few people raised some rather serious and interesting points here, in particular about supply of fleets at sea not dwindling. While some abstractions are necessary in a game, this is, perhaps, one that could be revisited.
Someone else raised a point about being able to upgrade ships at minor ports like Ulithi or Makin. Is there any way in the game editor to create a port, but "cripple" it for ugrades? Realistically, ships for all sides should have to go back home for this kind of work.
OK, one more comment about the flaming going on here: Perhaps the moderator (is there one?
) could set up a thread called "sandbox" and everyone who has something they need to work out could go there and indulge themselves. Then the rest of us would not have to wade through all of this nonsense, looking for the few kernels of wisdom that are hiding within.