RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug

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: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug

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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug

Page: << < prev 107 108 [109] 110 111 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/14/2006 11:36:35 PM

Nikademus

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

The incident where a whole gaggle O Germans was held up by a single heavy tank........it was a regular KV-1 sittin on the road. On a side note , Combat Mission recreated the situation in a scenario. A whole company of German tanks vs. 1 KV, sitting at the other end of an open field.

DUCK SEASON!

_____________________________

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 3241

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/14/2006 11:37:31 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Erm, yes... I knew that... But we were talking about the -2...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 3242

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/14/2006 11:52:52 PM

Nikademus

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

Erm...yes, learn to read. Prze thought the tank in question was a KV-2

_____________________________

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 3243

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/15/2006 12:01:01 AM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Ah, hadn't seen the other post. I was commenting on the first post he made about how great the KV-2 was (it wasn't).

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 3244

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/15/2006 12:10:50 AM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

Plus, it was almost as ugly as a French tank.

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 3245

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/15/2006 12:17:48 AM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Heh... Nobody built ugly tanks like the Russians...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 3246

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/15/2006 4:40:12 AM

RUPD3658

Posts: 6922
Joined: 8/28/2002
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Status: offline

The Char-1B is hard to beat on the ugly scale.

The T-35 was the classic ugly Russian tank. I guess the thought was "It has no armour or speed so lets give it lots of guns in a bunch of turrets and maybe everyone will be too scared to shoot back"

On one of the boards a while back someone had a photo of a butt ugly US tank that was to be used in the invsion of Japan. Looked kind of like a Jadpather on steroids.

< Message edited by RUPD3658 -- 9/15/2006 4:43:09 AM >

_____________________________

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits"- Darwin Awards 2003

"No plan survives contact with the enemy." - Field Marshall Helmuth von Moltke

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 3247

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/15/2006 6:08:06 AM

The Duke

Posts: 94
Joined: 3/1/2005
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

The incident where a whole gaggle O Germans was held up by a single heavy tank........it was a regular KV-1 sittin on the road. On a side note , Combat Mission recreated the situation in a scenario. A whole company of German tanks vs. 1 KV, sitting at the other end of an open field.

DUCK SEASON!

I remember reading about that engagement.....early days of Barbarrossa, a KV-1 pretty much camped out on a road and held it for a couple of days, knocking the piss out of the Kraut Panzer IIs and IIIs. At some point its tracks were disabled, but the Russians had no intentions of bailing out....and they held out still. It wasn't until the Germans brought in some towed 88s they were able to disable and eventually knock it out.

Brave Soviets, and an omen of things to come - the Germans were not prepared to meet the KVs and T-34s, they simply had numbers and far better tactics and trained professionals.

You wonder what would have happened if Barbarrossa had kicked off in April or May, and if they would have had Panzer IVs, Tiger Is, or Panthers. Gotta think that Moscow at a minimum would have been cut off...and that alone might have triggered the collapse that was oh so close to happening in late '41.

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 3248

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/15/2006 6:12:12 AM

Nikademus

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

What about the Grant/Lee/M3?

_____________________________

(in reply to RUPD3658)

Post #: 3249

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/15/2006 6:34:00 AM

RUPD3658

Posts: 6922
Joined: 8/28/2002
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Status: offline

I think the Lee with it's sloped sides was even uglier than the Grant. Neither was pleasing to the eye. Both looked like a model that was assembled incorrectly. The asymetry is apauling.

_____________________________

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits"- Darwin Awards 2003

"No plan survives contact with the enemy." - Field Marshall Helmuth von Moltke

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 3250

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/15/2006 9:01:46 AM

Tetsuo

Posts: 28
Joined: 9/15/2006
From: Sweden
Status: offline

Hi, my first post have to be in this great AAR. :)

btw greatesttank ever built:(linkhotten)

(in reply to RUPD3658)

Post #: 3251

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/15/2006 9:46:11 AM

buzzz123

Posts: 78
Joined: 9/14/2006
From: ile Maurice
Status: offline

quote:

The asymetry is apauling.

nearly as bad as the spelling!!!

(in reply to Tetsuo)

Post #: 3252

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/15/2006 11:54:23 PM

Monter_Trismegistos

Posts: 1359
Joined: 2/1/2005
From: Gdansk
Status: offline

Soviet tanks at least are prettier than Shermans...

_____________________________

Nec Temere Nec Timide
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą

(in reply to buzzz123)

Post #: 3253

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/15/2006 11:55:24 PM

RUPD3658

Posts: 6922
Joined: 8/28/2002
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: buzzz123

�
quote:

The asymetry is apauling.

nearly as bad as the spelling!!!

Spellcheckers are for sissies.

_____________________________

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits"- Darwin Awards 2003

"No plan survives contact with the enemy." - Field Marshall Helmuth von Moltke

(in reply to buzzz123)

Post #: 3254

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/17/2006 11:14:23 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Nice to see new members and their first posts, welcome Buzz and Tetsuo!

I've had a WitP free weekend and tried out my new MTB (unfortunately not a Main Battle Tank, but a Mountain Bike

It seems like we may have a solution to the problem that forced us to take a weeks break. Tomorrow me and Andy will
backtrack one turn and resume the war. If everything goes according to plan, we should have this Campaign back on track in no time!

Btw a big thanx to Matrix for their support

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to RUPD3658)

Post #: 3255

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/18/2006 9:10:40 AM

rudbeck47

Posts: 19
Joined: 5/6/2004
Status: offline

Hi PzB,

First of all - thanks for this lovely AAR - I love reading it.

May I ask what the solution to the problem is (or will be)? Patch from Matrixgames - or a change in your house-rules?

Kindest regards

Rudbeck47

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 3256

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/18/2006 9:12:51 AM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

Soviet tanks at least are prettier than Shermans...

No.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Monter_Trismegistos)

Post #: 3257

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/18/2006 9:44:36 AM

buzzz123

Posts: 78
Joined: 9/14/2006
From: ile Maurice
Status: offline

quote:

If everything goes according to plan, we should have this Campaign back on track in no time!

quote:

Great news!!

I have followed a lot of AARs, but only ONE that actually finished (Nagumo v Spruance i think).

Oh, and cheers to Matrix for the ongoing support. Well done guys.

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 3258

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/18/2006 8:38:18 PM

The Duke

Posts: 94
Joined: 3/1/2005
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline

PzB, let us know how this was fixed - my PBEM is in 4/44 and I may be having the same issues in the near future...look forward to seeing your campaign move forward.

(in reply to buzzz123)

Post #: 3259

RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug - 9/18/2006 9:31:15 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Thx Rudbeck! You know, I have to concentrate BIG time when talking to business customers from Denmark

As far as I understood it Matrix cleaned up the pilot roster, removed 'deceased' pilots. Think this is an
interim solution. A full fix will be presented in a future patch. In this game some 50k aircraft have been destroyed.
When your kill counters reach this number, you may want to keep a close eye on your squadrons

I also suggest that you ask the same questions to Matrix in the support forum, perhaps they got more info!

I have just replayed the 30th of August 2006 turn: no new results, when I get Andy's next turn we'll know
how things work regarding the dissappearing pilot isse

Here is a screenie: The Western Part of the Empire has now been brought up to strength and there are no longer
any large areas of lightly defended territory for Andy to grab. This came mostly at the expense of moving LCUs from
southern parts of the Empire that have been bypassed by the enemy, e.g. Timor.

Reinforcements have also been moved from China and supplemented with new arrivals.

Western Wing of the Empire

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to The Duke)

Post #: 3260

On the road again! - 9/20/2006 5:49:52 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Everything seems fine, we will continue as before!

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 08/31/44

Ground Combat

Ground combat at Banjarmasin

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 54855 troops, 496 guns, 540 vehicles, Assault Value = 1413

Defending force 6267 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 55

Allied max assault: 1696 - adjusted assault: 1703

Japanese max defense: 36 - adjusted defense: 5

Allied assault odds: 340 to 1

Japanese ground losses:
7964 casualties reported
Guns lost 43
Vehicles lost 5

Allied ground losses:
71 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
Vehicles lost 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 09/01/44

Air Combat

We sink a destroyer today. Otherwise I'm trying to train my pilots before the enemys
onslaught. Some 500 new type interceptors will be ready soon. In all there are 3300 fighters
and fighters bombers on the map as well as 2400 bombers. Large air reinforcements will arrive
over the next few weeks, including 96 George's in 12 days.

Day Air attack on Kweiyang , at 41,35

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zeke x 36
N1K1-J George x 117
J2M Jack x 48
G4M2 Betty x 50
Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 36
Ki-61 KAIc Tony x 124
Ki-84-Ia Frank x 72

No Japanese losses

Allied ground losses:
14 casualties reported

Airbase hits 12
Airbase supply hits 4
Runway hits 117
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Kweiyang , at 41,35

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zeke x 485
J2M Jack x 101
D4Y Judy x 57
B6N Jill x 36
B7A Grace x 27
G4M1 Betty x 27
G4M2 Betty x 45
Ki-43-Ib Oscar x 36
Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 36
Ki-84-Ia Frank x 144

No Japanese losses

Airbase hits 41
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 539
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Lautem , at 33,78

Allied aircraft
SB2C Helldiver x 30
Boomerang II x 12

Allied aircraft losses
SB2C Helldiver: 2 destroyed, 9 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
14 casualties reported

Port supply hits 4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 30,71

Japanese aircraft
P1Y Frances x 22
Ki-30 Ann x 3

Allied aircraft
Spitfire VIII x 4

Japanese aircraft losses
P1Y Frances: 5 destroyed, 12 damaged
Ki-30 Ann: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
Spitfire VIII: 1 damaged

Allied Ships
DE Bebas
DE Cabana
DE Weaver, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage *sinks*
AK William Glackens
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground Combat

Ground combat at Banjarmasin
Last remnants are wiped out. Support troops only.
A barge convoy brought out elements of a base units and a brigade while we airlifted
an aviation regiment out.

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 54834 troops, 493 guns, 540 vehicles, Assault Value = 1410

Defending force 1060 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1

Allied max assault: 1726 - adjusted assault: 1421

Japanese max defense: 0 - adjusted defense: 1

Allied assault odds: 1421 to 1

Japanese ground losses:
2922 casualties reported
Guns lost 2

Allied ground losses:
5 casualties reported

Ground combat at Noemfoor

Noemfoor is still causing the enemy casualties!

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 28461 troops, 284 guns, 71 vehicles, Assault Value = 547

Defending force 13556 troops, 2 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 234

Allied max assault: 1042 - adjusted assault: 447

Japanese max defense: 146 - adjusted defense: 34

Allied assault odds: 13 to 1

Japanese ground losses:
493 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Allied ground losses:
615 casualties reported
Guns lost 13
Vehicles lost 2
------------------------------------------------------------------

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 3261

RE: On the road again! - 9/20/2006 8:19:05 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

I'm thinking about how I should equipp the KB:

Katsuragi 64
Shokaku 72
Zuikaku 72
Taiho 72
cvl 30
cvl 30
cvl 30

Total ac: 400 (at max capacity)

The KB is now the equal of a single powerful enemy carrier TF.
Should I make it fighter heavy and include kamikaze Zekes among the bomber squadrons?

I will try not to loose this force as it's still strong enough to be reckoned with.

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 3262

RE: On the road again! - 9/20/2006 8:27:25 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

Against the Allied Carrier TFs, it's dead meat. I'd try to find a place to send it where the Allied carriers aren't. Kill some shipping and piss him off. Maybe he'll send some carriers to chase you. If he splits up his carriers and sends some after you, you might be able to ambush some with some LBA.

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 3263

RE: On the road again! - 9/20/2006 8:30:02 PM

AmiralLaurent

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline

Glad to see you continuing this game !

At this stage of the war, I will mainly put fighters on KB and use 100% CAP (Andy is at 90% IIRC), and then use KB as an air umbrella above you main asset now: your surface fleet. And I will use both combined to strike where the US deathstar isn't.

Also it's time you put them in 'target' mode. Like US CV in 1942, keep only one CV per TF, so US raids will be divided in size by 6 and your CAP has a chance to reach the bombers.

< Message edited by AmiralLaurent -- 9/20/2006 8:31:41 PM >

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 3264

RE: On the road again! - 9/20/2006 8:47:24 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Thx for the advice!

I'm of course not going to send the KB toe to toe with the enemy death star.
More thinking of having a fast striking force that can 'dance' around an enemy invasion area and threaten Andy's supply train
and provide cover for my surface fleet. Perhaps an 80/20 ratio of fighters/bombers?

The 4 fleet carriers are all 30+ knot ships and can cover a lot of distance in no time.
Not sure I will divide them into single ship TFs; 2 and 2 perhaps....

Andy knows that he will loose 250 Hellcats if he wants to crack a CAP of 300 Zekes

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to AmiralLaurent)

Post #: 3265

RE: On the road again! - 9/21/2006 2:59:17 AM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

How much air power does Andy have at Pearl??
If you have some Glen equipped subs left find out. It may be nice to send KB back for a late raid just to remind him that you have some punch left.

If not, I would use it to raid his supply lines and force him to divert resources to protect his LONG supply chain.

_____________________________

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 3266

RE: On the road again! - 9/21/2006 8:13:47 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

The idea is goo NY59, but a bit too bold...considered it a year ago when the KB was
strong and mighty. Even then the risk was much bigger than any potential gain.

Think I will have to keep the carriers in the backyard, upgrade their AAA and have
a fleet in being. Perhas another cvl raid against enemy supply lines!

Unfortunately the CV Taiho can't be upgraded, has been fixed in later versions of the
game.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 09/02/44

Air Combat

Put some Jack's at Truk. Harvest was limited as the pilots were fatigued
and outnumbered.

Day Air attack on Truk , at 63,78

Japanese aircraft
J2M Jack x 27

Allied aircraft
F-5C Lightning x 4
PB4Y Liberator x 12
B-24J Liberator x 38

Japanese aircraft losses
J2M Jack: 4 destroyed, 15 damaged
G4M2 Betty: 2 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
PB4Y Liberator: 1 destroyed, 3 damaged
B-24J Liberator: 1 destroyed, 6 damaged
B-17E Fortress: 1 destroyed

Japanese ground losses:
36 casualties reported
Guns lost 2

Airbase hits 8
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 103
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 3267

RE: On the road again! - 9/21/2006 8:41:07 PM

AmiralLaurent

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline

I don't think a raid on PH is a good idea. Allied AA in 1944 will kill most of the bombers attacking port and ships will only be damaged and not sunk. That is if they managed to get trough the CAP....

Better to try to raid Allied convoy lines but going between PH and West Coast may be a one-way trip.... I will do that only if the US deathstar is involved around Borneo. The best scenario is this case being the full KB (well, the remains of KB) facing an isolated CV just having arrived in WC and sailing to PH.

But it is still too risky IMOO.

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 3268

RE: On the road again! - 9/21/2006 8:57:17 PM

AdmNelson

Posts: 554
Joined: 5/14/2001
From: New Mexico
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

I don't think a raid on PH is a good idea. Allied AA in 1944 will kill most of the bombers attacking port and ships will only be damaged and not sunk. That is if they managed to get trough the CAP....

Better to try to raid Allied convoy lines but going between PH and West Coast may be a one-way trip.... I will do that only if the US deathstar is involved around Borneo. The best scenario is this case being the full KB (well, the remains of KB) facing an isolated CV just having arrived in WC and sailing to PH.

But it is still too risky IMOO.

I think a raid on Pearl would be bad. I am myself in a game now in 11/44 the Allied player I have not only have a lot carriers repairing at Pearl, but more important is the 500- 800 a/c that could be also there. For any IJN carriers it would probably be a one way trip.

_____________________________

Very Proud Marine Dad

(in reply to AmiralLaurent)

Post #: 3269

RE: On the road again! - 9/21/2006 9:55:52 PM

Ron Saueracker

Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

I'd use the CVs as long range clubs vs landings not in close proximity to Us CVs or land bases. Only problem with this is the stupid design feature which almost always forces your CVs to react when you don't want them to, despite having react set to zero or when against long odds or even if crippled! Can't trust the game not to impale your ships, despite orders and every possible precaution.

_____________________________

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to AdmNelson)

Post #: 3270

Page: << < prev 107 108 [109] 110 111 next > >>

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: 1000 days of war...and a serious bug