Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

I've just spent about 10 hours working on an Allied first turn - how have I been spending my time?

01 - Form convoys - mostly merchant ship convoys. Sending forward area merchant ships back to primary supply source ports - to be in position to move supply forward. Longer range xAK are heading to Capetown, where much of the supply on the "Brit Side" of the map will enter. Tankers are heading to Abadan. Many xAK and xAP in Australian/NZ are headed to America, though long range (13K+) xAK will head to Capetown. Forward ships will try to load up with fuel or supply in many areas to pull in farther back. More supply is needed in the PI and Malaya, so a few ships will start to bring supply to these areas. A lot of small convoy's will load up on the West Coast bring supply and fuel forward to the Islands between Pearl Harbor and Australia. Also the 41st ID will prepare to move to Noumea. To supply this move some additional xAP are head to the Tacoma/Seattle ports.

02 - Groom the Land Units. I want about 90% of my land units to go into "rest" mode. This will enable them to recover their morale in 1-2 months. One item high on my list for patch one is a global button to enable setting ALL LCU to rest mode. At least with my playing style, have this capability once at the start of the game, would save a lot of time. But for now, I have to turn them off by stack of from the LCU master list. Also nine cities in China and India are undergarrisoned, so I need to react to those. A few critical engineering projects need to be started and combat units repositioned for anticipated activities in China, Burma and India.

03 - Ships - Colorado and Warspite need to enter the ship yards at Seattle to remove damage. Damaged ships at Pearl also need to compete for shipyard space there. Removing minor floatation damage (pumping them out) takes precedence - and the space is limited - so priorities need to be set.

04 - Turning off the repair of various resource, light industry, etc. centers mostly in China to prevent evaporation of supply.

05 - Adjustment of LCU in the PI to prepare the defenses.

I'm probably 1-2 hours away from being done with the Allied first turn - so I would guess 12 hours total. I think as I get more used to it I can do it faster. A global ability to put LCU in rest mode might save 1 hour - so I'll be advocating for that!

quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Just thought I'd start a thread for some generalized player tips - this is for potential Allied players....

1. In the beginning - If you form a TRANSPORT TF on the US West Coast, DO NOT direct them to any ports other than Pearl, Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane or Auckland. Use AMPHIB TF to transport Base Forces and units with Naval Support to the lesser ports first. The AMPHIB TF is not nearly as efficient as the TRANSPORT TF in terms of amount carried but the unload time at smaller ports is significantly higher.

More to follow later....

Hey, who's gonna deliver important player tips for Jap Fanboys?
You don't want the Allied Fanboys have the upper hand, do you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Only 1 Tree hasnt been looking at a recent build the China tactic is no longer workable because most of the small Chinese Armies have a reduced TOE so they respawn with moderate strengh I think I missed one Chinese Corps but the rest wont gain strength if destroyed so na na naa na na

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Just thought I'd start a thread for some generalized player tips - this is for potential Allied players....

1. In the beginning - If you form a TRANSPORT TF on the US West Coast, DO NOT direct them to any ports other than Pearl, Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane or Auckland. Use AMPHIB TF to transport Base Forces and units with Naval Support to the lesser ports first. The AMPHIB TF is not nearly as efficient as the TRANSPORT TF in terms of amount carried but the unload time at smaller ports is significantly higher.

More to follow later....

Hey, who's gonna deliver important player tips for Jap Fanboys?
You don't want the Allied Fanboys have the upper hand, do you?

No need to. The situation is hopeless anyways.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Treespider's Japanese Player Tip #2

Don't advance your limited air search assets too far south, leaving a wide open gap into your supply lanes for an American carrier to drive into.

Wouldnt have been bad if air search worked. I had over lapping air cover from Japan right down to Fiji (based on aircraft ranges) but seemingly air search doesnt work (by Bradys testing, I was going to test that when he posted) beyond 10 to 12 hexes. And naval combat doesnt "spot" enemy ships for airplanes either (although subs do - go figure).

The Jap player only has 34 H6Ks they can deploy outside Japan (and 21 more there). Doesnt leave a lot of room for rear area searches which frankly I have a problem with. I feel this is a serious shortcoming in the game.

The Nell has a range of 17 hexes, the Betty a range of 21. It is 33 hexes from Saipan to Tokyo. I had a 36 plane Betty group at Tokyo on 30% search and a 27 (24 actual) Nell group at Saipan also at 30% search. Failed to sight enemy carrier force that is launching strikes at merchies in between them and failed to sight a surface force 12 hexes out that engaged in surface combat twice. You are entitled to your opinion that thats the way it should work. And you would be right. I am entitled to my opinion that that is flawed, and I would be right as well. My opinion is its flawed.

As for pushing "limited air search assets too far south", I had a line of H6Ks from Lae, to Munda, to Tarawa with Nells at Saipan and Wake and Bettys at Tokyo. Sailing the Yorktown just out of Zero range off Japan inviting strikes to chew up bombers in Jan 42 may be a tactic you see no problem with, and frankly I dont either. But when these forces do all this crap, with all these search forces in the area, and I dont spot a thing, THAT I have a problem with.

I also have a problem with your surface combat force reacting to my ships when you dont have any ammo left on them. At least twice this happened. Again, I see a problem with this. Mow frankly I wouldnt have mentioned this at all, but since you brought it up, I thought I would set the record straight.

quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol
...but I must say that when the experienced beta tester suggests some flaws at this (final) level of AE development, when there is an official gold candidate announced and we all climb the walls in anticipation.. it's... somehow disturbing

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



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

Freedom is not Free.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Treespider's Japanese Player Tip #2

Don't advance your limited air search assets too far south, leaving a wide open gap into your supply lanes for an American carrier to drive into.

Wouldnt have been bad if air search worked. I had over lapping air cover from Japan right down to Fiji (based on aircraft ranges) but seemingly air search doesnt work (by Bradys testing, I was going to test that when he posted) beyond 10 to 12 hexes. And naval combat doesnt "spot" enemy ships for airplanes either (although subs do - go figure).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

As an Allied AI player in WITP I was always frustrated that anything floating of mine was always spotted by the Japanese searches whereas the Japanese were able to sneak ships through my searches for some nasty surprises. If the search engine is not broken, I will be happy to see that searches do sometimes fail to pick up everything moving within the aircraft's range.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Treespider's Japanese Player Tip #2

Don't advance your limited air search assets too far south, leaving a wide open gap into your supply lanes for an American carrier to drive into.

Wouldnt have been bad if air search worked. I had over lapping air cover from Japan right down to Fiji (based on aircraft ranges) but seemingly air search doesnt work (by Bradys testing, I was going to test that when he posted) beyond 10 to 12 hexes. And naval combat doesnt "spot" enemy ships for airplanes either (although subs do - go figure).

The Jap player only has 34 H6Ks they can deploy outside Japan (and 21 more there). Doesnt leave a lot of room for rear area searches which frankly I have a problem with. I feel this is a serious shortcoming in the game.

The Nell has a range of 17 hexes, the Betty a range of 21. It is 33 hexes from Saipan to Tokyo. I had a 36 plane Betty group at Tokyo on 30% search and a 27 (24 actual) Nell group at Saipan also at 30% search. Failed to sight enemy carrier force that is launching strikes at merchies in between them and failed to sight a surface force 12 hexes out that engaged in surface combat twice. You are entitled to your opinion that thats the way it should work. And you would be right. I am entitled to my opinion that that is flawed, and I would be right as well. My opinion is its flawed.

As for pushing "limited air search assets too far south", I had a line of H6Ks from Lae, to Munda, to Tarawa with Nells at Saipan and Wake and Bettys at Tokyo. Sailing the Yorktown just out of Zero range off Japan inviting strikes to chew up bombers in Jan 42 may be a tactic you see no problem with, and frankly I dont either. But when these forces do all this crap, with all these search forces in the area, and I dont spot a thing, THAT I have a problem with.

I also have a problem with your surface combat force reacting to my ships when you dont have any ammo left on them. At least twice this happened. Again, I see a problem with this. Mow frankly I wouldnt have mentioned this at all, but since you brought it up, I thought I would set the record straight.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger
And no sighting report at all by ships or planes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger
And no sighting report at all by ships or planes.

I think you may be suffering from being spoiled by the unrealistic searches that occurred in WitP, and your expectations are too high. Think about Midway and the difficulty hundreds of US strike planes at ranges far closer than 12 AE hexes had in finding a huge Japanese fleet whose heading and target was known to the allies as an example.

US patrol planes had spotted and loitered around the fleet for hours, yet just the short window of time between the last patrol plane sightings and the allied air attack almost prevented the US planes from even finding the Japanese fleet.

If it's that hard to find a previously spotted huge fleet with dozens and dozens of zeroes flying in the air above it, imagine how much harder it would be to find a much smaller fleet 2 or 3 times as far away with an unknown heading and destination that hadn't even been sighted at all yet.

While I agree a contact report should be generated in the hex that was attacked, I do not agree that a sighting report (that results in a fleet being detected and exposed to attack for the rest of the turn) would have to be generated just because an attack was made by the fleet, if that fleet had not been previously detected.

All those search aircraft you mentioned would have already been in the air on their search routes. At best they could probably direct one or two planes to head to the contact hex, but that's only if they were in a good position (outward leg of pattern) with enough fuel left to get there.

And without an indication of where the attacking fleet actually was, they would need dozens of search planes to cover all of the possible ocean the fleet could be sitting on. Which leads to the final hurdle. How can you possibly simulate this in AE?

I think the only real solution is to leave it up to normal search attempts to find the fleet. But I do agree surface fleets should generate sighting reports just like subs do for spotted fleets in their own hex.

Jim

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

Based on tests that were done long long ago by I believe Apollo, the search engine has always been geared to only work out to 10 to 12 or so hexes regardless of the range of the search aircraft. In WitP this translates to 600 to 720 miles. Now admittedly I havent thoroughly tested this aspect of AE but it appears that this same 10 to 12 hex limitation is still in place, which means a 460-550 mile range (8-9 hexes in WitP) which means there are huge holes that cant be covered in the eastern pacific (by both sides). And putting picket ships out there wont do anything other than be a target. I had a merchie convoy engage the Yorktown group in a night surface engagement and that too failed to "sight" the carrier so the only effect that pickets will do is let you know they got sunk by airplanes and the general direction the strike came from. Putting AVs or CSs out there wont do a lot of good either as their range isnt any better than the SBDs or Vals that would spot them meaning you would be tossing them away also. I suppose the Jap player could put a wall of Glen boats out there, but what of the allies? One of my tricks in WitP is to drive the Hiyo and Junyo around behind Pearl when I know there are no enemy carriers in the area to disrupt things but in WitP, seemingly carriers that launch are spotted (for a turn anyways) so the other player knows where they are at least, in AE they are not.

AE also has a setting to narrow the search arc which I have read increases the chance to sight something in this arc (no explanation on how much of an increase) again something I was intending to test but since the "code freeze" (meaning no more changes - which to me is GOLD) I didnt see a need since if found to actually be a problem, it wouldnt be changed before release anyways so seemed pointless to me to pursuit it.

Dont get me wrong, there are a lot of really good things about AE. I think as a 1 player game people will find it superior in almost every facet to WitP. However. In my opinion it has problems in a 2 player mode. These problems will likely be corrected in patches but personally I dont play 1 player games. WitP will not be replaced by AE on my computer. At least not yet. Others will disagree. Thats their right. This is just my insight to it. That is MY right.

Some things havent had a chance to be tested simply because of how long it takes to play the game like production for example. Sure it has been tested in an AI v AI mode but long term effects in a player v player mode havent, and really CANT be done, so problems might arise from this as well. Those that have been around a while will remember a lot of game killing problems when WitP first came out. Patches that forced restarts of games that were needed to fix serious issues. Dont be surprised if they also pop up here. And frankly I think everyone expects that and wont be seriously outraged by it if it occurs.

Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

As an Allied AI player in WITP I was always frustrated that anything floating of mine was always spotted by the Japanese searches whereas the Japanese were able to sneak ships through my searches for some nasty surprises. If the search engine is not broken, I will be happy to see that searches do sometimes fail to pick up everything moving within the aircraft's range.

Based on tests that were done long long ago by I believe Apollo, the search engine has always been geared to only work out to 10 to 12 or so hexes regardless of the range of the search aircraft. In WitP this translates to 600 to 720 miles. Now admittedly I havent thoroughly tested this aspect of AE but it appears that this same 10 to 12 hex limitation is still in place, which means a 460-550 mile range (8-9 hexes in WitP) which means there are huge holes that cant be covered in the eastern pacific (by both sides). And putting picket ships out there wont do anything other than be a target. I had a merchie convoy engage the Yorktown group in a night surface engagement and that too failed to "sight" the carrier so the only effect that pickets will do is let you know they got sunk by airplanes and the general direction the strike came from. Putting AVs or CSs out there wont do a lot of good either as their range isnt any better than the SBDs or Vals that would spot them meaning you would be tossing them away also. I suppose the Jap player could put a wall of Glen boats out there, but what of the allies? One of my tricks in WitP is to drive the Hiyo and Junyo around behind Pearl when I know there are no enemy carriers in the area to disrupt things but in WitP, seemingly carriers that launch are spotted (for a turn anyways) so the other player knows where they are at least, in AE they are not.

AE also has a setting to narrow the search arc which I have read increases the chance to sight something in this arc (no explanation on how much of an increase) again something I was intending to test but since the "code freeze" (meaning no more changes - which to me is GOLD) I didnt see a need since if found to actually be a problem, it wouldnt be changed before release anyways so seemed pointless to me to pursuit it.

Dont get me wrong, there are a lot of really good things about AE. I think as a 1 player game people will find it superior in almost every facet to WitP. However. In my opinion it has problems in a 2 player mode. These problems will likely be corrected in patches but personally I dont play 1 player games. WitP will not be replaced by AE on my computer. At least not yet. Others will disagree. Thats their right. This is just my insight to it. That is MY right.

Some things havent had a chance to be tested simply because of how long it takes to play the game like production for example. Sure it has been tested in an AI v AI mode but long term effects in a player v player mode havent, and really CANT be done, so problems might arise from this as well. Those that have been around a while will remember a lot of game killing problems when WitP first came out. Patches that forced restarts of games that were needed to fix serious issues. Dont be surprised if they also pop up here. And frankly I think everyone expects that and wont be seriously outraged by it if it occurs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

This may be a case of geometry getting you. I don't know for sure because I have no inside information to the search code.

This is what I mean though. Lets say you have a base that you feel needs 360 degree coverage around to gurad against both surface and submerged threats. Each plane flying a search can cover roughly a 120 nm arc (or piece of the full radius). The reason for this is that the Mk 1 Optical sensor can see about 30 nm in good weather conditions. If the visibility is not ideal, than our aerial observers will be able to cover an even narrower arc but lets assume good to ideal conditions for this example. Our HK4M or PBY flies the outbound leg with eyes looking left and right (or port and starboard if you prefer). They are able to search a 60 nm wide swath doing this. The plane turns at maximum range and runs 60 nm across the top of the arc. Then on the inbound leg they search another 60 nm swath that just touches the one they just searched while running out. The problem comes in when you start looking farther out it takes a lot more planes. Some examples:

To search out to 360 nm (9 AE hexes) your circle is 2261 nm around meaning you need 19 a/c to accomplish full coverage
To search out to 480 nm (12 AE hexes) your circle is 3016 nm around meaning you need 25 a/c to accomplish full coverage
To search out to 600 nm (15 AE hexes) your circle is 3770 nm around meaning you need 31 a/c to accomplish full coverage

Keep in mind that 600 nm means at least ten hours in the air which is going to wear on both man and machine. Even the 12 hex range search would require a full 27 plane group that stays at near 100% availability all the tme and where fatigue doesn't build up. So more than likely you are gonna need at least 36 planes to keep this search up and even then you are gonna grind your planes and pilots to dust. I don't think 600 nm searches were done in full 360 search patterns very often by either side because of the cost in men and materials. BTW, you go much further than 600 nm and you will run out of daylight figuring your average patrol plane cruises at 120 knots and with twelve hours of daylight to work with on average (less in northern/southern latitudes during the winter), max range would be about 690 nm with no time to loiter over a contact or prosecute a sub.

Just my 0.02 worth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

The more I think about my "spiral" search theory (i.e. concentric circles with increased range) I think it is correct assumption...


Here is how I think it works:

#1
Every pilot in every squadron assigned for air search ("Naval Search" or "ASW") that passes all pre-flight checks (enough pilots, enough aircraft, leader check, percentage of aircraft assigned to mission, weather etc.) individually flies the "spiral" (i.e. concentric circles with increased range) up to the range user selected (halved in case of ASW).

#2
The "spiral" (i.e. concentric circles with increased range) covers every single HEX (in range) and then checks are made in every such HEX for discovery and countermeasures (enemy CAP, AA etc.).

Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

...

Tim this is excellent analysis but, unfortunately, the search in WitP (and most probably in WitP-AE) is big approximation...

Here are my threads from many years ago (2005 - oh my is it really that long time ago) when I extensively tested this:

....

quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

I remember back in the day in WITP it was deemed that Japanese conquest of India was essentially impossible.  The first time someone did it on an AAR there was much cheering and shouting.  Nowadays, a conquest of India is the hallmark of a good Japanese player and isn't even that unusual, it happens in several AARs.

So, regarding AE, I don't really see what the fuss is about regarding Japan not being able to do this sort of thing anymore.  When WITP came out it was assumed, without complaint, that such things as complete conquests of India were not on the cards.  Time proved otherwise.

That said, I'm certain that it will be so in AE as well - there will be AARs of Indian conquests at some point, I'm sure of it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Just thought I'd start a thread for some generalized player tips - this is for potential Allied players....

1. In the beginning - Use AMPHIB TF to transport Base Forces and units with Naval Support to the lesser ports first.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

Just thought I'd start a thread for some generalized player tips - this is for potential Allied players....

1. In the beginning - Use AMPHIB TF to transport Base Forces and units with Naval Support to the lesser ports first.

Just wondering Tree, In December of '41 roughly how many units of these base forces w/naval support are available to be ferried around the Pacific from the United States?