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: My CV attacked ....

 
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: My CV attacked .... Page: <<   < prev  43 44 [45] 46 47   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 2:09:22 AM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
my next game will be RHS but I have my obligations to finish this one
and I want to see how tough I am


_____________________________


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1321
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 4:45:25 AM   
BLurking


Posts: 199
Joined: 3/24/2005
From: Frisco, TX
Status: offline
Just so you're ready.

What just happened to you in the air, will happen to you on the ground.
Be mentally prepared for it.

The Allies have no Mac vs. Nimitz rivalry, and can focus on a single thrust through the Pacific.

You will not be able to stop that.

If you're lucky, he'll go historical and divide his forces. You can blunt that attack (he'll still win, but you can make it hurt).
But if he focuses on a single axis of attack, no base you hold will be able to withstand it.

Good luck - life sucks for the next 2 years. Get used to it...

(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1322
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 9:51:27 AM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
after i finished china i have more troops on the ground than historicaly
so i have no army/navy rivalry


< Message edited by Sneer -- 9/30/2006 10:24:56 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1323
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 1:16:34 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline
Damn! This was perfectly played and yet Japan didn't have a chance....

Keep the good work Sneer!

_____________________________


(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1324
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 2:07:01 PM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline
Hang on a minute, is this a JFB conspiracy or what? Two turns ago I lost 350 front line navy planes and everyone is saying what a wonderful Japanese victory it was…next turn the Japs loose 550 aircraft and everyone is suddenly saying that the A2A model is stuffed. 

_____________________________




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

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1325
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 2:42:53 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
You have to ask? Of course it's a JFB conspiracy!

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Raverdave)
Post #: 1326
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 3:19:30 PM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
you lost 350 planes to 270 cap in many uncoordinated attacks where you was beaten part by part
i lost 600 planes to less than 200 cap with almost perfect coordination
there is a diffrence


< Message edited by Sneer -- 9/30/2006 3:51:04 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 1327
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 3:27:30 PM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline
Mark my words...next time our CVs meet there will be a clear an defined victor.

_____________________________




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

(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1328
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 3:49:55 PM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
i will not oppose this statement
but next meeting will be not typical one
i have no chance in next typical
i see carriers as shield over surface groups now
with 500+ zekes i will have ability to move close to you unharmed if you strike you are dead

both carrier forces disengaged
i have done short revision of my naval wing reserves and i should have KB fully operational within 2 weeks
i have even few 80+ fighter groups that can reinforce my carrier wings
war is not over


_____________________________


(in reply to Raverdave)
Post #: 1329
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 4:47:53 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Raver,

Do you really not see a difference between fighters slaughtering about 1.33 planes for every fighter in masses of unco-ordinated strikes and fighters slaughtering 3 enemy planes for every fighter even when many of those planes were well-escorted?

Just curious since it seems pretty crazy to argue those two are fully equivalent.

(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1330
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 5:00:56 PM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline
Well I have had my butt kicked all around the map for the last 2 game years so it is rather nice to see jap planes fall from the sky like cherry blossoms.  So in answer to you Nemo, no I have no problem what so ever with the results.

_____________________________




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

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1331
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 5:32:12 PM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
That's true Nemo
I was not kind to Raverdave during last 2 game years so I think he prays for even more such outcomes
there is no chance to change A2A in this game so we need to get used to the thought that game is one sided from this point. probably it will be repeat from PZB fight as I still have excellent teritory position
western devils will never dare to reach Japan
I don't care and you can belive me that I'm not furious about result - Raverdave is really nice opponent
it is a game and I'm happy men in my private life


and next PBEM of course RHS


_____________________________


(in reply to Raverdave)
Post #: 1332
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 6:07:04 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Well Sneer I think you are taking it overly calmly... It is one thing to be succesful through good play etc, another to be succesful through game design issues.

Raver shooting down 500 of your planes, fine, IF as a result of pure skillful play. NOT fine if due to screwed up air to air model. I find it disappointing that he equivalates the two. Sure it is nice to get a victory after two years but if that victory isn't a result of skillful play but game design then it is worthless.

As to your next PBEM... If you fancy a game let me know. I like EOS as there are "goodies" for both sides. Don't mind whether I play as Japanese or Allies.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 9/30/2006 6:10:53 PM >

(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1333
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 7:20:19 PM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
i don't mind as well which side and eos is best of rhs scenarios
I will let you know
I have already thought about playing next PBEM against you Nemo
it is question about free time as I hate stopping good game but I will think about it

you need to accept or at least take calmly certain things in WITP otherwise you will loose fun and begin frustrated and this is wrong way.
I did it well as planned maybe not 100% but I was rather pleased
it would be better if allies attacked soerabaya than attack lba than carriers but you can't have everything 
enemy TFs were faster than mine forces.
in my opinion it was last reasonable option to go with carriers offensively
after heavy allied carrier losses - with max number of empire carrier force with high exp elite pilots against 60% of total allied cap. pity A2A works in this game this way.
bombs that hit allied carriers are probably last ones that I saw in this game. LBA will never force enemy cap - not in this game and allied TF will have more and more carriers.
I want to test my defence skill but from points situation japan should stop all planes construction at this moment as waste of resources.


_____________________________


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1334
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 7:51:09 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5358
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sneer

you lost 350 planes to 270 cap in many uncoordinated attacks where you was beaten part by part
i lost 600 planes to less than 200 cap with almost perfect coordination
there is a diffrence



There sure is. Something else is that these results happened with the same planes (A6M5 vs. F6F primarily) and even the same squadrons. Why exactly should the Allied fighters be so much better on CAP than on strike escort? It might be time to report this to the Matrix administrators. . .

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1335
RE: My CV attacked .... - 9/30/2006 8:14:38 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sneer

you lost 350 planes to 270 cap in many uncoordinated attacks where you was beaten part by part
i lost 600 planes to less than 200 cap with almost perfect coordination
there is a diffrence



There sure is. Something else is that these results happened with the same planes (A6M5 vs. F6F primarily) and even the same squadrons. Why exactly should the Allied fighters be so much better on CAP than on strike escort? It might be time to report this to the Matrix administrators. . .


I think it just doesn´t help to report anything related to air to air combat....

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 1336
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/1/2006 6:00:09 AM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sneer

you lost 350 planes to 270 cap in many uncoordinated attacks where you was beaten part by part
i lost 600 planes to less than 200 cap with almost perfect coordination
there is a diffrence



There sure is. Something else is that these results happened with the same planes (A6M5 vs. F6F primarily) and even the same squadrons. Why exactly should the Allied fighters be so much better on CAP than on strike escort? It might be time to report this to the Matrix administrators. . .


Welllllll.....on the strike escort the US planes didn't have the advantage of radar to co ordinate their defense of the torp and dive bombers where as in the pure defense of the CVs they had controllers that were able to vector them to be in the best position? I'm not saying that is the reason, I'm just throwing some pennys down the wishing well. Thoughts anyone?
( And lets not forget the Great Marianas turkey shoot where the IJN lost 373 aircraft to 23 US).


_____________________________




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

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 1337
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/1/2006 10:13:04 AM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline
greetings Raverdave,

I'm aware that A2A model isn't perfect - but this goes for both sides. Japan have advantage early in the war and Allies in latter war period. I do agree with Sneer and his thoughts 100 % - i would only add that you are one of my favourite players on the boards. I do not know many persons who would continue game after heavy beating you took from the Sneer and that's makes you even more popular in my eyes. Still remember yours and Luskans AAR - a really classic one!

But, you must understand JFBs dissapointment with unability to hurt Allied CVs even after they lost 8 CVs...

As for the radar you may be on target - there is a thread in scenario design about radar - i think Andy Mac done some good tests (although there is other opinion as well) and it is likely that allied radar boost air defence (not only in numbers!).

The other reason for the slaughter (yours planes and Sneers little latter) is that sweep is more efficient than escort (fighters on escort sufffers serious penalty). Is that OK that is another question....



_____________________________


(in reply to Raverdave)
Post #: 1338
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/1/2006 10:35:23 AM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline
Ah pauk, I always enjoy your reading your thoughts.  I guess I was just a little miffed at having lost two CV encounters so far and with this third one seeing my strike force go in piece-meal and get chopped.  On top of that when the tables are turned the crowd bays for blood claiming that the A2A model is broke and hence it's not fair.  But i'm over it now,  just a note here, neither Sneer or myself have any problems with each other but rather there are times when the game mechanics piss us off, but we continue regardless.

Oh and a small ray of sunshine:-

Sub attack at 27,68

Japanese Ships
CV Akagi, Torpedo hits 1
DD Matsukaze
DD Asakaze
DD Shinonome
DD Fubuki
DD Nowaki
DD Tokitsukaze
DD Amatsukaze
DD Niizuki

Allied Ships
SS Silversides

_____________________________




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

(in reply to pauk)
Post #: 1339
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/1/2006 6:40:53 PM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
sub is sunk and akagi keeps 20+ knots with 20+ sys and 10+ flt
so it will remain in frontline bases
if this hit would happen before battle ...


< Message edited by Sneer -- 10/1/2006 6:42:31 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Raverdave)
Post #: 1340
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/2/2006 10:37:54 AM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline
Well at least it was hit...........about time my subs started paying their way.  Pity she was sunk, but the captain will at least get a
posthumous Navy Cross.

_____________________________




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

(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1341
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/4/2006 8:53:16 PM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
in last few days I punished subs for their concentration
3 next are sunk and 2 next damaged

and ss grayling 2 days later

< Message edited by Sneer -- 10/6/2006 10:48:43 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Raverdave)
Post #: 1342
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/7/2006 12:12:00 AM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
i have few minutes free and will post some data about stats and industries  for all interested in mid war japanese economy
this AAR suffers from my lack of time in last days as well as pace of PBEM
i think critical period will end within next 6 weeks and we will move fast again


_____________________________


(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1343
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/7/2006 12:12:52 AM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
points situation on 11/10/43




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1344
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/7/2006 12:13:48 AM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
my highest exp pilots - note helen pilot with 1 kill




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1345
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/7/2006 12:14:27 AM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
air war losses in totals




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1346
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/7/2006 12:15:07 AM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
industrial info part 1




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Sneer -- 10/7/2006 12:17:55 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1347
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/7/2006 12:16:37 AM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
industrial data part 2




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1348
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/7/2006 12:18:17 AM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
i know some data should be confidential but ...
soon i will be flooded with allied toys so with current A2A engine it doesn't matter
if anybody finds these data useful it was worth posting
as always additional data on request


_____________________________


(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1349
RE: My CV attacked .... - 10/7/2006 2:46:50 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
It seems to me a simple matter of logistics...

You can produce 900 (roughly) fighters per month. You can adequately crew 30 of these from your pilot training pool. End result: You will suffer massive losses in any aerial battle due to inexperience of your pilots. If you try to fight the enemy on his terms you lose. Therefore, you must change tack in order to be succesful. If you can tie the enemy fighters up shooting down your fighters for long enough then even with the Allied ueberCAP you should be able to get some bombers through.


I've been observing the air model and since there is a limit to the number of engagements which are possible it is, theoretically, possible to force the Allied ueberCAP to waste its total number of engagements on the fighter component of a Japanese strike. I've looked into it and with the following assumptions it is possible to penetrate Allied CAP and/or simply exhaust their ability to sustain an offensive beyond land based air ( but only until 1944)....

1. Assume that Japanese fighter type and pilot quality do not matter ( except in the relatively small manner that better japanese fighters and pilots will cause the Allied CAP to have to make slightly more passes in killing them and will be able to inflict a very slightly higher loss level than exp 30 pilots... both of which help to reduce allied CAP passes during an A2A engagement).

2. Assume a limited ( although very large) number of passes are available to the ueberCAP.

3. Accept that any fighter passes made against fighters count against the total number of passes available to the ueberCAP. Thus the more ueberCAP passes you can force the Allies to make against your fighters the fewer passes they can make against your bombers.


The end result is that the actual PERFORMANCE of your escorts is, almost, irrelevant. All that matters is sending a large enough escort to "absorb" most of the ueberCAP passes ( the better they fight back the fewer escorts are needed. At this stage though they can't fight back well so you must use their airframes and bodies to absorb the passes instead of relying on them to shoot down the ueberCAP). With very few passes remaining after the escorts are destroyed most of the bombers should get through and be able to attack the fleet.


One thing this forces the Japanese player to accept is that they should husband their airpower for 1 large strike rather than sending in 3 or 4 medium-sized strikes.

Given your production I wouldn't be at all afraid of committing 900 fighters as cover for 400 or 500 bombers. Even vs a 500 fighter stock CAP most of those bombers should get through... I've tested this against Corsair CAP and when things go right I'm able to get bombers through even when my escorts are 30 Exp A6M2 pilots flying leftovers from 1941. It is damned costly - you can easily lose 600 or 700 planes in a day BUT if 300 Bettys get through to attack their carriers the result will be decisive and well worth the loss. It won't be decisive on that day but will be on later days as medium-sized follow-up strikes pick off the cripples.

One other thing that is essential is that the fighter units fly from a well-supplied ( more than 20,000 ton) base such that after they are almost entirely slaughtered in the first day they can be immediately brought back up to strength for further attacks on Day 3 ( they'll be repairing on Day 2 and not capable of flying effective strikes).

lastly, Oscar IIs. They fly up above enemy CAP, fly to long range and carry a good payload. They are excellent kamikazes and are useful in the approach phase of an invasion fleet where they don't cause much damage to CVs and BBs etc but do tend to destroy AAA weapons making your real strikes all the more effective. In my AI vs AI game I'm still building Oscar IIs even in 1945 for ONLY this reason. Every time the Allies come near one of my bases 10 Daitais hurl themselves at the Allied fleet every 2 days. By the time they are in range for a decisive engagement several DDs are limping back home and the CLs, CAs, BBs and CVs have lost a few AAA weapons and slowed down a bit, becoming more vulnerable to the large kami strikes which follow.


To give a numerical example. Let us suppose a Japanese defensive sector has 500 fighters and 500 bombers available and that an Allied ueberCAP has the capacity to shoot down 600 planes in one attack.

If the Japanese send in 2 attacks of 500 planes each all of their planes are shot down. If, OTOH, they send in a single 1,000 plane strike they will lose 500 fighters and 100 bombers to CAP but 400 other bombers get through.

In 1943 onward I really think the game boils down to a numbers game in which you must seek to simply exhaust the number of ueberCAP passes on the fighter component and then let your bomber component go to work. Since you have unlimited 20 and 30 Exp pilots and can produce a lot of obsolescent airframes this works out well.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 10/7/2006 2:58:17 AM >

(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1350
Page:   <<   < prev  43 44 [45] 46 47   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: My CV attacked .... Page: <<   < prev  43 44 [45] 46 47   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

1.375