RE: War Begins!

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: War Begins!

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: War Begins!

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: War Begins! - 2/6/2009 8:00:20 PM

jrcar

Posts: 3613
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Seymour, Australia
Status: offline

Yes it can be done at major bases, requires at least a level 6 port with naval support, preferably level 7 port.

At start the only one in CentPac or SWPAC is Truk.

Sorebaya is 7, Batavia 6 .

I having an AE also reloads torps on CV's trying to confirm.

A torp is a load cost of 2500, a Level 6 port can reload 700, a level 7 5500. So you need a 6 with a LOT of naval support.

The AE needs to have a capacity of the load size (in this case 2500) or greater, plus supplies, to reload.

I'm moving AE's into theatre. Truk is level 6 but I don't think there is enough naval support there yet. Truk can be built to 7.

Cheers

Rob

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elladan

Could you perhaps expand a bit on the possibilities of replenishing carrier's stock of air torpedoes? I see a mention it can only be done in Japan at the moment, what about other places to be conquered/built up soon?

< Message edited by jrcar -- 2/6/2009 11:46:39 PM >

(in reply to Elladan)

Post #: 301

Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 4:14:21 AM

jrcar

Posts: 3613
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Seymour, Australia
Status: offline

A good day for Cathartes :)

A US sub leaving Bataan hits a mine, and i badly damage another that has the gall to attack one of my TF.

DD Thanet (RN) though comes accross the Miri invasion force...
Day Time Surface Combat, near Miri at 64,85, Range 12,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
APD D-31
TB Kasasagi, Shell hits 5, heavy fires
AMc Wa 19, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
xAK Hokko Maru, Shell hits 2, heavy fires
xAK Zinzan Maru
xAK Kinkasan Maru, Shell hits 6, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Giyu Maru, Shell hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAKL Kembu Maru
xAKL Kiko Maru
xAKL Anbo Maru

Allied Ships
DD Thanet, Shell hits 3, on fire

Japanese ground losses:
756 casualties reported
Squads: 11 destroyed, 13 disabled
Non Combat: 14 destroyed, 38 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 11 (6 destroyed, 5 disabled)

DD Thanet later comes accoss a CA SCTF, puts a torp into the CA while she dies... a great outcome for the enemy!

My Zero's decide not to escort a large raid on Clark, and I pay a predictable price (The cause I think was weather, and an issue with not enough supply to fit drop tanks).

Invasion wise I take Kota Bharu, and a reinforced Wake Invasion takes the island, although some ships are badly beaten up.

My forces begin unloading at Ambon, it should fall next turn. These are forces usually assigned to Legapasi.

Next turn should see the invasion of Guam, and I should arrive at Alor Star.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to jrcar)

Post #: 302

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 4:17:14 AM

jrcar

Posts: 3613
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Seymour, Australia
Status: offline

Here is the status in Malaya, ships still unloading, a big chaneg from stock :)

Attachment (1)

(in reply to jrcar)

Post #: 303

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 4:20:39 AM

Chad Harrison

Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrcar

AMc Wa 19, Shell hits 1, and is sunk

Was there any previous damage to this little ship? Or did one 5" shell put her under?

If so, I love the new and much more realistic damage routines!

(in reply to jrcar)

Post #: 304

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 5:14:14 AM

jrcar

Posts: 3613
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Seymour, Australia
Status: offline

Yes, the damage model is much changed, one or two bomb hits usually sink a merchant, and a couple of shell hits. The two AK with heavy damage sank the next day.

There are a lot more ships now though, so loosing a few is sort of Ok.

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 305

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 8:26:33 AM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

What size (tonnage) were the ships and the bombs that hit them?

(in reply to jrcar)

Post #: 306

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 10:51:19 AM

jrcar

Posts: 3613
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Seymour, Australia
Status: offline

In turn 2 I increased HA-32 and HA-34 production, doubling both. The HA-32 is used in Sally and betty, amogst others, the Ha-34 in the Helen.

I was due to fly to Darwin tomorrow, however bushfires have cut me off from the airport, and two of my travelling companions have to stay to protect their properties, both are threatened by fire. I'm Ok being in a largish town, but it is very smokey outside.

Cheers

Rob

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 307

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 12:37:50 PM

Chad Harrison

Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrcar

Yes, the damage model is much changed, one or two bomb hits usually sink a merchant, and a couple of shell hits. The two AK with heavy damage sank the next day.

There are a lot more ships now though, so loosing a few is sort of Ok.

Very cool! Will be nice to have a much more realistic approach to ship damage.

Thanks for the reply.

(in reply to jrcar)

Post #: 308

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 12:59:33 PM

veji1

Posts: 1019
Joined: 7/9/2005
Status: offline

this will mean longer and better planning for amphibious operations and a lot more escorting duties for warships : A lone jap CL or AMC wondering in the american shipping lanes will be able to massively hurt poorly escorted convoys.. This will mean in turn that many of the CVEs and DEs the USN used for escort duties will actually have to do this... Very positive...

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 309

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 1:38:15 PM

kokubokan25

Posts: 1252
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Iliaca, Spain
Status: offline

Sinking a ship with only two shells it's a realistic aproach to ship damage? Well, i will see future surface combats to cheers.

_____________________________

(in reply to veji1)

Post #: 310

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 2:25:56 PM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fremen
Sinking a ship with only two shells it's a realistic aproach to ship damage? Well, i will see future surface combats to cheers.

If it's a tiny ship like a AMc (coastal mine sweeper), yes, that could be realistic.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to kokubokan25)

Post #: 311

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 2:46:09 PM

W T Door

Posts: 23
Joined: 1/15/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fremen

Sinking a ship with only two shells it's a realistic aproach to ship damage? Well, i will see future surface combats to cheers.

Actually, it is. Merchant vessels are typically built with lighter structure (fewer frames and so forth) to reduce hull tonnage and boost profitable weight and volume. They also lack the extensive watertight compartmentation and damage control organisation of naval vessels (they have these but to a far lesser degree and size, they are, after all designed to haul goods, not fight). It's entirely possible to sink a small or lightly constructed vessel with a near miss by opening the seams between plates or strakes and cause unrecoverable flooding.

(in reply to kokubokan25)

Post #: 312

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 2:52:53 PM

kokubokan25

Posts: 1252
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Iliaca, Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: W T Door

quote:

ORIGINAL: fremen

Sinking a ship with only two shells it's a realistic aproach to ship damage? Well, i will see future surface combats to cheers.

Actually, it is. Merchant vessels are typically built with lighter structure (fewer frames and so forth) to reduce hull tonnage and boost profitable weight and volume. They also lack the extensive watertight compartmentation and damage control organisation of naval vessels (they have these but to a far lesser degree and size, they are, after all designed to haul goods, not fight). It's entirely possible to sink a small or lightly constructed vessel with a near miss by opening the seams between plates or strakes and cause unrecoverable flooding.

Yes, i agree in some specific cases (small ships, small xAKs), but not in general. Reading jrcar comment seems as sinking ships with only small number of shells will be the norm in AE. I'm in panic thinking about...

< Message edited by fremen -- 2/7/2009 2:54:15 PM >

(in reply to W T Door)

Post #: 313

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 2:54:02 PM

castor troy

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

the question will nevertheless be if the naval engagement routine will keep attacking a PT boat with 8inch+ guns after it was already hit by 58 shells...

_____________________________

(in reply to kokubokan25)

Post #: 314

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 3:21:55 PM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fremen
Yes, i agree in some specific cases (small ships, small xAKs), but not in general. Reading jrcar comment seems as sinking ships with only small number of shells will be the norm in AE. I'm in panic thinking about...

No, it's not the norm. Battleships are as durable as ever - but on the lower end merchant ships, barges, PT boats and tiny coastal ships are more vulnerable than they used to be.

< Message edited by Erik Rutins -- 2/7/2009 3:22:55 PM >

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to kokubokan25)

Post #: 315

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 4:24:26 PM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

The shear volume of commercial ships makes them possible of survival if the cargo is not explosive.

Here is an example known of Australians and New Zelandeers for sad reasons : http://www.aifpow.com/part_1__missing_in_action,_believed_pow/chapter_4__transportation_of_pow/a._by_sea

quote:

...On that same day, the Royal Navy submarine "Turbulent" (formerly named the "Trieste") commanded by Lt. Commander "Tubby" Linton, VC, was on patrol off Novarino. About 3 o'clock that afternoon, it sighted the convoy and despite its strong protective cover, "Tubby" Linton attacked, with a salvo of three torpedoes narrowly missing the "Sestriere" but hitting the "Nino Bixio" in Number 1 hold forward, in the engine room amidship and glancing off the rudder, but doing enough damage to render it useless. No. 1 hold was crammed with Allied POW, in the main Australian, New Zealand and South African and the torpedo burst through the skin of the ship and exploded inside. Less than half of the 300 men in this hold survived. The 2/28th Infantry Battalion of the AIF lost 29 men alone from the 39 Australians killed. 118 New Zealanders died.

Barton Maughan (A3 p764) has slightly different figures: "Of the 504 originally in No.I hold, only 70 remained".

The survivors were kept on the ship for four days to carry up as many dead as practical and to identify them if possible. During this period a few Italian army biscuits were their only food, but, as a survivor put it, "everyone was too dazed by the shock to worry about food". Of the 201 Australians on board at Benghazi, 37 were killed or drowned. After a short stay at Corinth, the uninjured were shipped to Bari in Italy, where they entered Campo 75, then being used as a main transit camp for British prisoners from North Africa.

The "Saetta" took the stricken "Nino Bixio" in tow and beached her in the harbour at Navarino...

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 316

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 4:51:15 PM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

No doubt, but as far as I recall there were actually some bugs we found in original WITP that made them even more durable than they should be. I haven't seen an AK or AP go down to a single small shell hit - the larger the ship, the more it takes, but an equivalent size military ship will be more durable. Combination of construction as well as crew experience with damage control.

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 317

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 5:11:38 PM

traskott

Posts: 1546
Joined: 6/23/2008
From: Valladolid, Spain
Status: offline

Well...with a bit of real surface combat in the AAR we'll see how combat model really works

.

Any chance ?

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 318

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 5:35:32 PM

vettim89

Posts: 3615
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

No doubt, but as far as I recall there were actually some bugs we found in original WITP that made them even more durable than they should be. I haven't seen an AK or AP go down to a single small shell hit - the larger the ship, the more it takes, but an equivalent size military ship will be more durable. Combination of construction as well as crew experience with damage control.

Regards,

- Erik

One of my big gripes about WITP was that merchant shipping was too durable. I have hit AK's with three or four 500 lb bombs and not have them sink. A DD would have a hard time absorbing that kind of punishment with trained DC teams and warship watertight intergrity. We have also seen a medium to large size AK take multiple torpedo hits. Not only should two or more TT sink most MS but it should do it on the spot. I acknowledge the concerns about making them too fragile but it needed improving. Keep in mind that a single 225 lb warhead took out the Atlantic Conveyor in the Falklands conflict. She displaced 14,500 tons which is bigger than any AK in the Japanese inventory. Making MS historically vulnerable will add a level of sanity to both sides offensive operations - Japan in 1941-42 and the Aliies in 1943-45.

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 319

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 5:39:25 PM

Cathartes

Posts: 2155
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline

My view of the DD Thanet, which after this heroic action, moved on and ate a torpedo off Serasan suffering heavy damage.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to traskott)

Post #: 320

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/7/2009 5:43:23 PM

Cathartes

Posts: 2155
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline

Wake falls, I lose all my Wildcats at the base, but they manage to down a couple of raiding Nells before the tragic loss of the island.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Cathartes)

Post #: 321

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/8/2009 12:03:19 AM

Zeta16

Posts: 1199
Joined: 11/20/2002
From: Columbus. Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

No doubt, but as far as I recall there were actually some bugs we found in original WITP that made them even more durable than they should be. I haven't seen an AK or AP go down to a single small shell hit - the larger the ship, the more it takes, but an equivalent size military ship will be more durable. Combination of construction as well as crew experience with damage control.

Regards,

- Erik

One of my big gripes about WITP was that merchant shipping was too durable. I have hit AK's with three or four 500 lb bombs and not have them sink. A DD would have a hard time absorbing that kind of punishment with trained DC teams and warship watertight intergrity. We have also seen a medium to large size AK take multiple torpedo hits. Not only should two or more TT sink most MS but it should do it on the spot. I acknowledge the concerns about making them too fragile but it needed improving. Keep in mind that a single 225 lb warhead took out the Atlantic Conveyor in the Falklands conflict. She displaced 14,500 tons which is bigger than any AK in the Japanese inventory. Making MS historically vulnerable will add a level of sanity to both sides offensive operations - Japan in 1941-42 and the Aliies in 1943-45.

I am reading a book about US subs during the war and it was rare if a merchant went down with one torp it was usually more than two that took it down. So it wasn't like they they took a little damage and went down. Also it seemed deck guns on subs were useless when merchants shot back as most of the time the sub would go back under, but deck guns were good aganist real small ships and sampains.

_____________________________

"Ours was the first revolution in the history of mankind that truly reversed the course of government, and with three little words: 'We the people.' 'We the people' tell the government what to do, it doesn't tell us." -Ronald Reagan

(in reply to vettim89)

Post #: 322

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/8/2009 3:16:23 AM

Crimguy

Posts: 1409
Joined: 8/15/2003
From: Cave Creek, AZ
Status: offline

Zeta - which book , if I may ask? I was looking into Clay Blair's book. . .

_____________________________

________________________
www.azcrimes.com
<sig removed because I'm a bandwidth hog>

(in reply to Zeta16)

Post #: 323

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/8/2009 5:55:07 AM

TMFoss

Posts: 26
Joined: 10/17/2008
Status: offline

Clay Blair actually wrote three books on submarine warfare during WWII. Silent Victory was about the Pacific War and written a few decades ago. It was out of print last time I checked, but things do change again. He also wrote a two volume set called Hitler's U-Boat War covering the German U-boat campaign. Knowing Blair's penchant for data, you probably could mine some very good information from these books.

(in reply to Crimguy)

Post #: 324

11-12 Dec 41 - 2/8/2009 10:18:08 AM

jrcar

Posts: 3613
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Seymour, Australia
Status: offline

11-12 Dec 41

The invasion of Ambon continues, the CD guns extract revenge and I loose 2 ships (PB and an xAK), but the base falls on the first attack. Naval strike aircraft immediately fly in.

B-17 hammer the invasion TF in the northern Phillipines, hitting 5-6 ships over the 2 days. Thankfully the bad weather helps to protect my shipping as someone forgot to LRCAP them...

Aparri and Loang fall and the sweep down Luzon begins.

A BB tf gets some target practice (see image below).

the US sub S-38 has a good time sinking ships near Pescadores, getting two carrying resources. A ASW tf is formed to go after here.

The Dutch sub KXV also hits a shi, but is hit in return, near Miri. More forces arrive at Miri and it should fall next turn. Loosing two ships to the Brit DD has really thrown things out here.

Hong Kong is subejected to attack from the air and ground, the main attack should go in tomorrow.
Guam is invaded as well.

In China forces are moving to secure the rear areas, with a series of attacks to occur. A strategey in China is begining to form.

Finally in Malaya forces are advacing with some small air battle ocuring between Nates and Buffaloe (about even outcome). Kota Bharu is almost repaired, with an AirHQ on the way offensive operations should begin soon.

A BB TF is sent into Kuantan to soften it up.

With Ambon mine the rate of advance will pick up soon, things are almost in position.

Cheers

Rob

Attachment (1)

(in reply to jrcar)

Post #: 325

RE: 11-12 Dec 41 - 2/8/2009 2:49:03 PM

Monter_Trismegistos

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

Hi, you are transferring resources so early? From where to where?

_____________________________

Nec Temere Nec Timide
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą

(in reply to jrcar)

Post #: 326

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/8/2009 3:05:38 PM

IndyShark

Posts: 303
Joined: 7/7/2002
From: Indianapolis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrcar

Yes, the damage model is much changed, one or two bomb hits usually sink a merchant, and a couple of shell hits. The two AK with heavy damage sank the next day.

There are a lot more ships now though, so loosing a few is sort of Ok.

How does the bomb model handle strafers like the B-25J and skip bombing? I assume they would be deadly against anything smaller than a cruiser.

< Message edited by IndyShark -- 2/8/2009 5:49:48 PM >

(in reply to jrcar)

Post #: 327

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/8/2009 6:22:46 PM

Cathartes

Posts: 2155
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline

Overall, Dec. 11-12 was one Allied Happy Day(s) in the endless march of Japanese Happy Days. Not all was perfectly rosy, so we'll start with the one particularly unhappy moment:

Attachment (1)

(in reply to IndyShark)

Post #: 328

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/8/2009 6:24:02 PM

Cathartes

Posts: 2155
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline

Actually, you don't even mind getting plastered by such magnificent looking battleships--was worth the loss just for the show...

(in reply to Cathartes)

Post #: 329

RE: Day 3 and 4 - 2/8/2009 6:38:24 PM

Cathartes

Posts: 2155
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline

One thing I really appreciate in AE is the new patrol zones that you can set up with your subs. You simply delineate the patrol zones with up to 3 waypoints, and your sub will cruise between the points on patrol. It's having the best of both worlds--manual control and autopilot. In this situation I set up S-38 to cruise back and forth along this hex row and she found two different unescorted targets to abuse from the surface.

Sub attack near Pescadores at 83,63

Japanese Ships
xAK Konzan Maru, Shell hits 1, Torpedo hits 4, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
SS S-38

SS S-38 attacking xAK Konzan Maru on the surface

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Pescadores at 83,63

Japanese Ships
xAK Koyu Maru, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
SS S-38, hits 1

SS S-38 attacking xAK Koyu Maru on the surface