Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Port damage

 
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] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Port damage Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Port damage - 7/13/2002 10:24:54 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		In preperation for my pending (now ongoing) assault against Luganaville i brushed up on the manual paying particular attention to the sections that covered damage to airfields, airfield support facilities, and most of all, port and port supply hits.

In the manual it specifically states that the larger the airfield/port, the more resistant it is too damage by virtue of said larger size but at the same time, once damaged the harder and longer it takes to repair it.

Given my target's close proximity to the primary and ulitmate Allied base in the game i was counting on this factor to help offset my target's formidable sized airfields and port facilities.

After much hard work (and a few daring bombardment missions.) i had seemed to achieve my objective, detailed reconesence revealing a heavily damaged airfield and port system, the latter in excess of 80% damage.

Very good news indeed given the AI's stubborn propensity to send even unescorted APD's and merchants into the battered harbor in vain attempts to continue a trickle of supply to the it's beleagered ground pounders.

Imagine my surprise when a mere 3 days later my reconoiter flights revealed that over 75% of both the airfield and port damage was already repaired!!!!

Now the airfield i can understand......fill in the craters, dust off the tarmac and you've got a place to take off again. No, the real shock came from the port status. Here i had one of the largest ports in the game, pounded into devastated ruins which not only cost me precious aircraft and aircraft supply to deliver, but serious damage to my bombardment unit which did not escape unscathed due to the attentions of Luganavilles battered but operational airfield (several bomb hits putting my already worn cruisers and one battleship closer and closer to the 'must send to Japan for refit list)

Perhaps the "problem" (if there is one.....looking for opinions after all) stems from the "Port" value's all encompasing spectrum. This single statistic covers everything from simple dropping off of supplies (whether by efficient dock facilities or by dingy on a remote location) to refueling ships to the more exotic and vulnerable repair and retooling of major warships.

Some aspects are easy to fix or improvise, others less so or not at all.....(hence all the fixation on a PH raid that targeted PH's fuel, and maintenance infrastructure.....and the actual damages suffered at other ports such as Darwin.

It seems to be that its almost not worth the effort of trying to bomb ports and just stick to airfields given they repair so **** quickly.

so i'm asking, do others think big ports repair too quickly? (and maybe airfields too (not "runways" though!)
Post #: 1
- 7/13/2002 12:14:41 PM   
strollen

 

Posts: 159
Joined: 5/18/2002
Status: offline 		Interesting question. But before I but my 2 cents in. How many engineering units do the Americans have? A single SeaBee unit is the equivalent of 130 engineering squads. Plus assuming that experience helps engineering units (it is a Gary Grisby game after all) the SeaBee units were very experienced.

While reasonable arguements can be made about the best soldiers, sailors, and airman in WWII. I do not think anybody would dispute that American engineer teams were remarkable efficient.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 2
- 7/13/2002 3:07:31 PM   
dgaad

 

Posts: 864
Joined: 7/25/2001
From: Hockeytown
Status: offline 		Its true ladies and Germs. If you reduce the SoPac command to holding only three bases, they will have an ungodly number of engineers per. As has been pointed out, many allied engineering units come with inherent tractors, which the Japanese do not. Several engineering units in one base with the inherent tractors, and you have the equivalent of 1000 or more engineering squads in dog-years. Unless you are prepared to follow up a massive air attack THE NEXT DAY, that base will be repaired.

Tactical suggestion. Don't take the allied bases sequentially. Let them disburse their resources, and then strike hard and fast at your main target.

_____________________________

Last time I checked, the forums were messed up. ;)

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 3
- 7/13/2002 3:08:54 PM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline 		The "SeaBees" deserve the top billing that they get.....there were some of the worlds best Engineering units of the time.

_____________________________




Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 4
huh? - 7/13/2002 6:30:12 PM   
Chiteng

 

Posts: 7666
Joined: 2/20/2001
From: Raleigh,nc,usa
Status: offline 		Err Dhaad what is the allied players isnt stupid enough to weaken himself?

Any base I want held has every ENG I can get to it there.
ONLY running them out of supply with cause a collapse.
That is the only way. To do that, you MUST encounter and defeat
the enemy CV. Otherwise they will make hash out of your
BB taskforce(s) and shoot down your bombers to boot.

You MUST sink the enemy CV or damage them so that they cant
do flight ops. There really isnt any other way.

If the USA players is cagy, you will find it VERY hard to bring his
outnumbered CV's to battle. He does NOT have to commit them
EXCEPT to save Port Moresby.

He can easily loiter about waiting for an opportunity to ambush
an unwary taskforce.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 5
- 7/14/2002 12:27:43 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by dgaad
[B]Its true ladies and Germs. If you reduce the SoPac command to holding only three bases, they will have an ungodly number of engineers per. As has been pointed out, many allied engineering units come with inherent tractors, which the Japanese do not. Several engineering units in one base with the inherent tractors, and you have the equivalent of 1000 or more engineering squads in dog-years. Unless you are prepared to follow up a massive air attack THE NEXT DAY, that base will be repaired.

Tactical suggestion. Don't take the allied bases sequentially. Let them disburse their resources, and then strike hard and fast at your main target. [/B][/QUOTE]


I would have except i had so few targets to chose from ;)

It is only 10/42 after all and after sinking all carriers up to mid 1943 availability, most of the BB's (and sending the last operational one back for lengthy repairs at Pearl) and all of the heavy cruisers the sky was the limit. Having built up Lunga to a base that would make Rabaul and Truk both weep in terms of supply dumps there were but three options......Lungaville, Normura, and that wittle base in between them.

Your right in a way.......i shouldn't have "over"estimated the AI...turns out it sent 95% of it's ENTIRE allotment of American ground pounders to Luganaville which is what is making this fight so massive. Normua is all but undefended and the wittle base in the middle.....was completely undefended by ground pounders......dumb move considering it had put 5 squadrons of level bombers on it.

A recon discovered the lapse and a quick transport force landed but one weak combat engineer unit taking the base. :)

Maybe next time i'll go for Normura first....but i was cautious (this is my first UV campaign) and wanted to take advantage of being able to plaster Luganaville from airfields at Lunga.

Suppose i could have gone for Australia, esp after the AI nicely sent three of it's biggest brigades to die in the mountains of New Gineua...but the game winning hexes are east of there and besides, i never much stomached the idea of the Japanese invading the Australian continent. In game terms i suppose i should modify that if ever i'm able to play a human

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 6
- 7/14/2002 12:32:03 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		Excellent gentlemen....you have discovered the one aspect i had not considered (blame it on the heat and lack of air conditioning.)

I took a peak at Luganaville as the Allied to confirm my intel reports. There are currently Four engineer units based there

On first glance this seems a formidable amount, but i'm still skeptical.......consider, You have "four" small sized engineer units (none with more than 15-20 engineer squads, less if one factors in "disabled" squads due to lack of supply) to spread out among the tasks of

1) repairing airfields

2) repairing airfield infrastructure

3) repairing port facilities

4) repairing port infrastructure (i.e. fuel and supply system etc etc)

5) expanding airfields

6) expanding ports

7) expanding fortifications

8) providing an active combat bonus to the fighting


5/6 and 7 can be manipulated by the player but i know that the AI does not mess with these factors along with altitude for bombers so they are left at the default settings (on)


Can even four small engineer units on the same base effect all these repairs, at the same time in so short a time period as what i've seen?

I wonder if mayhaps we've found another uber-weapon ;) assuming the engineers are affecting the repair rate of the port and airfields at all (gotta check the manual on that)

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 7
- 7/14/2002 1:19:44 AM   
dgaad

 

Posts: 864
Joined: 7/25/2001
From: Hockeytown
Status: offline 		Nik : another tactic would be to focus on ground attacks first in order to destroy the engineering squads, while the navy looks to cut off supply and troop reinforcement. Reports are that this tactic has worked for other Japanese players.

_____________________________

Last time I checked, the forums were messed up. ;)

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 8
Re: huh? - 7/14/2002 1:20:22 AM   
dgaad

 

Posts: 864
Joined: 7/25/2001
From: Hockeytown
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chiteng
[B]Err Dhaad what is the allied players isnt stupid enough to weaken himself?

[/B][/QUOTE]

Nikky is playing against AI, Chi.

_____________________________

Last time I checked, the forums were messed up. ;)

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 9
- 7/14/2002 9:26:12 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by dgaad
[B]Nik : another tactic would be to focus on ground attacks first in order to destroy the engineering squads, while the navy looks to cut off supply and troop reinforcement. Reports are that this tactic has worked for other Japanese players. [/B][/QUOTE]


That might work.....but i had assumed, (perhaps wrongly) that the returns on the often marginal results of ground attacks would be too dispersed and in this case probably would be given that the AI had based SO much of it's remaining land based ground units there.......

To give an idea of the numbers involved (and its only late 42)

wer'e taking 50,000+ IJA and IJN troops against around 44,000 US and US Marine.

Thats alot of ground pounders for six harried Beatty squadrons to try to make a dent in

I figured air and port attacks would provide more benefits and thus was sadly educated in how quickly the port damage air (non runway) was being erased

The one good note.....supply points are apparantly harder to replace :) Thats what it will come down too, he who wins the supply battle....but having a destroyed port would help in this arena, now other than the port supply hits i'm finding little incentive to attack in that area

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 10
- 7/14/2002 10:58:48 AM   
strollen

 

Posts: 159
Joined: 5/18/2002
Status: offline 		However port supply hits are a pretty big deal. If I understand how it works each air or port supply hit destroy 10% of the bases supply.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 11
- 7/14/2002 11:15:07 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by strollen
[B]However port supply hits are a pretty big deal. If I understand how it works each air or port supply hit destroy 10% of the bases supply. [/B][/QUOTE]

oh definately, no argument there....but lets say the naval balance was er....less one sided then it is in my campaign.....say the enemy forms up a big resupply convoy escorted by mucho warships...

Thats where port damage is supposed to come in....make the effort to wreck the port and its supposed to put a serious crimp in the enemy's ability to quickly resupply it's beleagured troops fighting at the bases's outskirts :)

The way it is now....even at a big port...damage is repaired in as little as 48 hours. I find that hard to take even with four engineer units present on the island (and busy repairing airfields, building/reinforcing fortifications, giving the troops a combat bonus in the trenches and expanding the facilities all at the same time)

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 12
- 7/14/2002 11:35:38 AM   
strollen

 

Posts: 159
Joined: 5/18/2002
Status: offline 		The way it is now....even at a big port...damage is repaired in as little as 48 hours. I find that hard to take even with four engineer units present on the island (and busy repairing airfields, building/reinforcing fortifications, giving the troops a combat bonus in the trenches and expanding the facilities all at the same time)

Perhaps repair should be longer. I guess it depends on how badly the structures are damaged. Although, I'll admit that battleship bombardment should be able to destroy any port facility.

One correction though. The manual specifies that all repair work is done sequentially before any new work toward expansion or fortification is done.

So if you keep an airbase or port permanently damaged the troops will never gain a higher fortification level and the airbase/port will never get bigger. I've managed to keep Lae from ever expanding (7 months) despite the presence of a base engineering unit by always making sure that there is damage to repair first.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 13
- 7/14/2002 12:15:58 PM   
dgaad

 

Posts: 864
Joined: 7/25/2001
From: Hockeytown
Status: offline 		If you can get a sustained bombing campaign going that includes strong port attacks where you are getting the occasional 1,2 or if you are lucky even 3, port supply hits during a single raid, in a week or so you will have reduced the base to zero supplies. I posted a screenshot of Rabaul having been thusly reduced. With zero supply the engineers will degrade rapidly, and be unable to repair any damage anyway without supplies. Of course, you need to make sure they don't land a barge or transport during that time. Follow all this up with a mixed altitude airfield attack (including strafers at 100 feet) and you will get many airplanes destroyed.

I did all of these things in more in my game against the AI, and took Rabaul and Kavieng during a two week period in September, 1943.

_____________________________

Last time I checked, the forums were messed up. ;)

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 14
- 7/14/2002 1:33:52 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		true.

The problem of course, is that given the rapid level of repair experienced, it litterally would have to "be" a sustained attack....day after day after day in order to keep the Port repair factor down.

I have two problems with that

1) certain instrinsic "port" functions encompass structures and such that certainly cannot be repaired in a mere # of days (the factors that pertain to organized supply distribution....ship repair and refueling etc) Did Pearl Harbor.....Darwin......and other ports recover so quickly?

2) since keeping the port status down requires daily attention i cant devote bombers to other equally important factors such as ground attack and/or airfield attack.


heh, it reminds me of fiction book i read (no relation to historical wars on Earth) in which a problem was described in similar fashion.....i.e. concentrate on one aspect but as soon as you do, another "fold" in the paper machette pops up requiring attention....go refold that section carefully and the one you just previously attended too now pops up. :)

Comes down to the time scale i think. Mogami in particular pointed out several game aspects where a player's time "sense" is skewed because so many of us have been weened off PacWar's "weekly" turns.

Here i think we have the opposite situation where despite the turns being only a "mere" 24 hours in scope.......we see major facilities repairing as if those weekly turns are still going by.

Thats the impression at least. Not saying my viewpoint is 100%.....the killjoy is the obvious easy fix factors that are included in the port designation......but still......it just leaves you in the end with a sense of "why bother" One should almost just stick to airfield assault to keep those bombers down (which is a chore all in of itself!)

Either that or just wait for the supply to run out. (hopefully)

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 15
Bombing sux - 7/14/2002 2:19:24 PM   
Chiteng

 

Posts: 7666
Joined: 2/20/2001
From: Raleigh,nc,usa
Status: offline 		Actually nothing in the game beats the Bombardment group
at hurting the port. Just tossing that out. Even a group of
1914 cruisers does a better job than planes.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 16
Re: Bombing sux - 7/15/2002 12:51:35 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chiteng
[B]Actually nothing in the game beats the Bombardment group
at hurting the port. Just tossing that out. Even a group of
1914 cruisers does a better job than planes. [/B][/QUOTE]


Very true. In fact "thats" what did do the majority of my port damage and given the heavy "risk" involved in sending my only major surface TF group into the range of aircraft (Luganaville's 'and' that little island between it and Normura which the AI reinforced with 6 LBA level bomber squadrons), i had thought initially "Mission Acomplished" as my bombardment force dealt a massive blow to the port (and airfield support structure) putting it at that debilitating 80+% damage.

That was where i got the shock of my life when 48 hours later, it had been reduced to 10% (along with the airfield support structure....confirmed too by peaking at the AI's side since i wanted to eliminate an Intel snafu as the explanation)

This too "during" the continuing bombardment from the air.

Hence the bombardment TF had to go back to do it all again only this time my luck ran out as planes from both Luganaville and that pesky airbase south of it caught my ships in daylight and scored another great Level Bomber success and scored 4 hits!!!!, two on my only operational battleship (exaserbated by the overinflated bomb ratings......all of the 500ILB bombs penetrated the decks causing massive damage)

Hence my frustration.....the "why bother" aspect. Ports and airfield support structure just repair faster than a Borg cubeship. ;) The risk to my ships outweighs the potential gains as the results dont last. My only "success" has been in destroying the morale of Luganaville's airgroups through constant airfield bombardment, keeping their #'s at a low level.

It doesn't make sense to me, even with those four engineer units present. Its too quick, given the size of the targets. This isn't a case of a dirt airfield and Guadalcanal style dump the cargo over the side to float to shore....but a major base, that took time to develop into a major hub.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 17
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Port damage Page: [1]
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

1.016