Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Allied Transport Poverty

 
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 >> Allied Transport Poverty Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Allied Transport Poverty - 6/30/2002 2:20:23 AM   
segorn

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 6/30/2002
Status: offline 		Hi Folks,

I recently had to abandon a game, playing as the allies in May of 1943 because I was down to 12 transports.

Now, I partly had myself to blame in that I'd decided on a very aggressive forward defense early in the game and took huge AP losses running supply convoys into Buna and Lunga.

The problem now though is that its May of 1943, I control New Guinea south of Lae, and everything east of Bougainville with the exception of an isolated but heavily garrisoned Shortland.

There are somewhere over 100 APs and AKs sitting in Pearl Harbor.

I have 10 APs and 2 AKs in theatre.

The game obstinantly refuses to send me transport reinforcements. I fact, the sum total of transport resources for all of 1943 was 2 LSTs and 2 LCIs. Many other transports reached Pearl, but none made it out to me.

Is anyone else running into this? If so, is there a solution? Alternately, does Matrix need to change their ship release formula to release ships based on class needs e.g. I'm not running out of ships in general, but I sure am running out of APs?

A
Post #: 1
- 6/30/2002 2:45:03 AM   
U2


Posts: 3332
Joined: 7/17/2001
From: Västerås,Sweden
Status: offline 		Hi

This can happen with any type of ship and not just APs. Please also remember that the Pacific Fleet is not only used in your theater but the ENTIRE Pacific. Use your ships more carefully in the future because you never know when HQ at Pearl Harbour is gonna give you something. This varies from game to game. I once had 1CV and 1CVL as the IJN in August 1942! They did not release a darn CV to me since the start of the game. I think that this is something that makes the game more exciting because you never know......
Dan

_____________________________


(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 2
Ship Requests - 6/30/2002 2:56:20 AM   
FAdmiral


Posts: 378
Joined: 12/20/2002
From: Atlanta,GA, USA
Status: offline 		It would be nice to have in the game an ability for ship requests.
I know this really happened during the war where commanders
put in requests for ships they really needed.

JIM BERG, SR.

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 3
ship limit - 6/30/2002 3:01:05 AM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Hi, There is a commitment ceiling of 12k. Send ships of classess you have excess back to PH to get your level down (watch the probability go from low to moderate to high as you send ships back. If there are a lot of transports in PH some of them should be released as you lower the amout of ships in theatre.

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 4
- 6/30/2002 3:01:52 AM   
segorn

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 6/30/2002
Status: offline 		I agree, I'd like to have some capability to request specific ships and/or classes. Maybe some form of buy point system would work e.g. I'll trade you that 300 VP carrier you were going to send me for 20 15 VP Assault Transports...

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 5
Not an bad idea - 6/30/2002 4:01:20 AM   
Wasp

 

Posts: 62
Joined: 4/27/2002
Status: offline 		I think that would be an good idea. How about another? Major damage inflicted on enemy can increase ship release possibility, and you get to ask for ships you would like to get. (like an priority system: 1. CVs, 2. BBs, 3. APs, etc). How about an system that allows you to get more political power (Huge damage done to the enemy, capturing a base, sinking major enemy ships increasing political power little by little): thus increasing the chances for your request for a ship to be granted. This reward system would be great because you can get a different experience each time you play the game. How about another factor? The more you win, you get a chance to recieve extra squadrons of aircraft/ground troops early, or get bonus units, or even units/aircraft with extra capability? (Ex. Getting a tank division stocked with extra men and tanks) What do you think? This would give the game an bigger uncertainty factor allowing us to have more fun with the game:D .

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 6
- 6/30/2002 4:06:53 AM   
HARD_SARGE

 

Posts: 176
Joined: 5/27/2002
From: Cleveland, Ohio
Status: offline 		I got a kick out of the game I am playing, as soon as I got the CVE Long Island, I sent it back to PH, hopeing to getting something I could use, when the Long Island got back to PH, they sent it back to me the next day

guess they didn't want it either

HARD_Sarge

(I get it tomorrow, and it going back again)

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 7
- 6/30/2002 4:10:23 AM   
segorn

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 6/30/2002
Status: offline 		It sounds intersting, but I'd be concerned on balance of play grounds.

Right now, as far as I can tell, the game tends to have an anti-momentum bias in it.

If you get the snot knocked out of you by the Japanese and they sink your navy, you are *more* rather than less likely to get reinforcements.

Conversely, if you're doing very well (as I was in the game I got no reinforcements in), the game starves you of reinforcements.

The result of this is that the two sides stay relatively balanced throughout the game.

A system which rewarded you for doing well would, I think, fall victim to a momentum style of play e.g. once you get ahead of the other guy, you can just keep on him like a pit-bull b/c you'll get mroe and more troops and he'll get less and less. Sort of like games like Civilization where once your production exceeds the opposition its all over and will once get worse for them.

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 8
raise the level - 6/30/2002 6:37:39 AM   
brisd


Posts: 614
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: San Diego, CA
Status: offline 		For those of you who want every ship just raise the commitment level to 200% and live a great fantasy. If you were Admiral Nimitz in PH and the South Pacific theater was kicking butt would you send more ships? NOT. So it is a matter of realism and I think the designers got it right the first time.

_____________________________

"I propose to fight it out on this line if it takes all summer."-Note sent with Congressman Washburne from Spotsylvania, May 11, 1864, to General Halleck. - General Ulysses S. Grant

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 9
I don't want *every* ship - 6/30/2002 7:22:37 AM   
segorn

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 6/30/2002
Status: offline 		I'm not concerned b/c there's a fleet sitting in Pearl that I don't have access too. The concern is the nature of the reinforcements I'm getting.

I need transport assets e.g. AP, AK, LST, LI, etc.

I'd happily send back elements of my surface fleet and even a carrier.

Its certainly true that the entire US pacific fleet wasn't at the beck and call of Nimitz or MacArthur in this theatre.

Both Nimitz and MacArthur were, however, in communication with fleet HQ back in Pearl. Historically, when major issues arose, they could get on the horn back to Pearl and get them dealt with.

The theatre commanders could, and did, *talk* to their superiors and let them know what their needs were.

Example:

One of the early US invasions in the central pacific (was it Tarawa?) revealed that the a vast increase in the number of amphibious amtracs was needed to make landings over coral reefs.

Nimitz communicated that fact back to Pearl, and they communicated it back to the states. A few months later, large numbers of amtracs started rolling off the assembly lines stateside and heading out to Nimitz.

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 10
- 6/30/2002 9:27:32 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		Segorn, I agree with you about the need for the system to release ships of a type that we are starving for. I hope that sending back excess of other types will help ameliorate the situation (i haven't experienced it yet, but I haven't been in as dire need as you are either).

However, I wanted to point out that Adm. Chester Nimitz was in Pearl Harbor. He was CINCPAC (and thus the one with whom you now have a beef), and it was Ghormley (and then Halsey) who was COMSOPAC.

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 11
- 6/30/2002 12:37:53 PM   
HARD_SARGE

 

Posts: 176
Joined: 5/27/2002
From: Cleveland, Ohio
Status: offline 		Hi Brisd

If you were Admiral Nimitz in PH and the South Pacific theater was kicking butt would you send more ships? NOT

guess you have never heard of one of the first tenets of war

you reinforce success, not failure

I disagree with the way the game releases ships also, I would rather see a historical release, then one based on score or losses (do we get air units faster then normal if we lose more planes)

if the USS Matrix came to our war zone in Dec of 42, then that is when and what we should get

HARD_Sarge

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 12
a good point - 6/30/2002 1:00:38 PM   
brisd


Posts: 614
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: San Diego, CA
Status: offline 		Yes, reinforcement of success is a valid strategy for a commander. However, the point can be made if a strategic point is being threatened, more forces would be released to bolster that defense. The game system handles that pretty well in my opinion.

_____________________________

"I propose to fight it out on this line if it takes all summer."-Note sent with Congressman Washburne from Spotsylvania, May 11, 1864, to General Halleck. - General Ulysses S. Grant

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 13
- 6/30/2002 8:49:38 PM   
HARD_SARGE

 

Posts: 176
Joined: 5/27/2002
From: Cleveland, Ohio
Status: offline 		Hi Brisd
I still disagree, in my few games as the Allied commander, the damage I have done to the IJN, takes away any "strategic point is being threatened" idea, they got no CV's left, no BB's, most of there Transports and Air is resting on the bottom of the Seas

still think we should get what we should of gotten, and what we didn't, should stay out of our greedy little hands, play balance should be done with the AI , not reinforcements

HARD_Sarge

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 14
- 6/30/2002 9:03:50 PM   
U2


Posts: 3332
Joined: 7/17/2001
From: Västerås,Sweden
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by HARD_SARGE
[B] when the Long Island got back to PH, they sent it back to me the next day guess they didn't want it either
[/B][/QUOTE]

I feel you pain:D Very funny post. Perhaps you could use it to ferry planes from Brisbane to Nomuea? Some A/C groups do not have enough range to make it. That's what I'm doing with it anyway.
Dan

_____________________________


(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 15
- 6/30/2002 9:40:12 PM   
HARD_SARGE

 

Posts: 176
Joined: 5/27/2002
From: Cleveland, Ohio
Status: offline 		Hi U2
I have seen that idea posted before, but don't really understand it, you can fly to most bases in the Solomons (may take a few days) and in NG, I got 3 major bases (PM,Gili,Goodenough) and they got all the planes they really need, should have Lae in a few days (4300 JP troops, 4900 Aussies, with 12000 marching in the next couple of days (had 4000 more 2 miles away, stopped them in place for the other unit to close in, and it put them back where they started)

so, plan on pulling the lights out of Gili, a Fighter Squadron or 2 from PM, and that base is ready to go, wouldn't mind a squadron or 2 of SBD's, but there is nothing to attack in NG

oh well, long story short (yea right) I see no real need for the long island, see it as hurting me more then helping, if it gets hit, it is going down and lots of cheap points for the AI to gain, with out being worthwhile for me

and I have just parked 3 CV's in Munda for the last 10 days, to act as bait for the IJN air, LOL lots of bad weather, only one attack so far, and it was aimed at the base, they lost 4 Bettys, 15 Nells, 10 A6M2 and 1 A6m3, but that is a risk, that I believe I can take and will pay off in the long run, while the Long Island is not

oh well, guess I see things different then others :)

HARD_Sarge

oh it is Nov 10th 1942 in my game, historical aug 42 to dec 43 campaign

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 16
- 6/30/2002 9:47:49 PM   
U2


Posts: 3332
Joined: 7/17/2001
From: Västerås,Sweden
Status: offline 		Hi Hard Sarge

Its true that most A/C types can make it to Nomuea. In my case I had a CV battle and their airgroups made it to Australia but without the range to make it back. Therfore I moved them to Brisbane and then shipped them over for the defence of those Islands. This does not happen often and mostly she's just in port doing nothing. But right now I'm happy to have her. Tomorrow she will not do anything again. So for transfer of carrier groups from Australia she is OK:)
Dan

_____________________________


(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 17
- 7/1/2002 12:33:34 AM   
HARD_SARGE

 

Posts: 176
Joined: 5/27/2002
From: Cleveland, Ohio
Status: offline 		Hi U2
yes, I can see that one, never had it happen to me, so didn't think along those lines, then again, I would most like of just put them on the front line in NG (and wait for some of the other CVE's to come in, if they last that long)

oh, I not saying the Long Island does not have it's uses, just I for one have not been useing it

HARD_Sarge

ahhhh, battle for Lea, 4900 Aussie vs 4300 JP, been tadeing attacks back and forth, the next group of Aussies marched in, and blamo, out of the blue, another JP reg shows up (don't think he could of flown in a whole Reg in one day ?, maybe it marched)

so now the battle is more like 8000 Aussies to 6000 JP, but got 2 more Aussie Reg's moveing in, think 2 and 4 days out, very good battle so far (like it better then the one attack sweep)

most marching I have done in any of my games yet

nice war so far, Buin fell on the 10th, the attack on Lea started on the 10th, Buka fell on the 15th (sank 19 AG in Shortland Harbor last night, it is a major deathtrap now)

maybe for 1.2 they can work some more on how the AI thinks on defence, it does not use the chain well as JP, and if you can bypass Shortland, you can bleed the AI dry

also, at least in my game, it was Nov 14th 1942 that the first JP planes show up in NG (9 Oscars, flying at least)

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 18
Re: I don't want *every* ship - 7/1/2002 8:55:14 PM   
Beckles

 

Posts: 128
Joined: 4/9/2002
From: Kansas City, MO, USA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by segorn
[B]I'd happily send back elements of my surface fleet and even a carrier. [/B][/QUOTE]

Start sending some ships back then. To make sure they don't just turn them right around (like the CVE Long Island example), send back your ships with the most system damage (so, they only have 10 and you'd usually keep them ... if you have them to spare, send them back) so they'll have to spend some time getting repaired.

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 19
- 7/1/2002 9:19:38 PM   
FAdmiral


Posts: 378
Joined: 12/20/2002
From: Atlanta,GA, USA
Status: offline 		Unfortunately, my skuttle and return to Pearl commands are
always grayed out so I can't send anything back. Even if they
have hvy. damage. Whats up with that???

JIM BERG, SR.

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 20
- 7/1/2002 9:24:32 PM   
juliet7bravo

 

Posts: 894
Joined: 5/30/2001
Status: offline 		The ship has to be in Noumea, and it has to be out of a TF, and "anchored" in the port. Only time the "Pearl" command works. Scuttle only works if the damage is severe enough I think.

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 21
- 7/1/2002 9:53:16 PM   
Didz


Posts: 728
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: UK
Status: offline 		This does seem to be a problem.

I'm playing #17 Allies and it is now Feb in the final year.

I have only lost 2 AP's and 1 AK in the entire campaign but even so I am having trouble keeping my forward bases supplied.

However, I have CV's and DD's stacked up doing nothing and would gladly trade them for more AP's.

As it is I have troops sitting in Noumea and Brisbane that could be taking out more enemy bases if only I had transports to spare to get them there.

_____________________________

Didz
Fortis balore et armis

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 22
- 7/1/2002 10:23:05 PM   
cyberwop

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 5/11/2001
From: Valparaiso, Indiana
Status: offline 		I agree with brisd, the system is fine just the way it is. If you don't like it turn up the ship commitment.

Remember the south pacific in 42 and early 43 was a secondary theatre. The U.S. west coast was concidered threated let alone Hawii. [midway, alaska, ect]

Also Nimitz was c-in-c of central pacific so he is pearl harbor. So your saying he reported back to himself?

This isn't Panzer General. [great game] The whole prestege system would stink in this game, unrealistic. Read your history sometimes the best commander gets less support in times of desperation because his boss may think a good commander may get by with less. And a front threatened with total collapes may get rushed reiforcements to stave off defeat..

The thing to remember this game puts you in a role of a theatre commander whole support may depend on strategic decisions beyond his scope.

If you don't like it fine. Play a RTS game and you can plunk down a little CV or BB factory and collect coconut crystal ore and buy all the capital ships you want. Me I love this game, I lonve the role of theatre commander with subordinates who screw up and a higher HQ that doesn't fully understand the plight of the troops in the field.

In thinking of dressing my son up as my adjudent :} I don't think the wife would understand.

_____________________________

Live like a King and Die like a man.

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 23
- 7/1/2002 10:55:34 PM   
Didz


Posts: 728
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: UK
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by cyberwop
[B]If you don't like it fine. Play a RTS game and you can plunk down a little CV or BB factory and collect coconut crystal ore and buy all the capital ships you want. Me I love this game, I lonve the role of theatre commander with subordinates who screw up and a higher HQ that doesn't fully understand the plight of the troops in the field.
[/B][/QUOTE]

Hmm! I think you may be over reacting slightly here CW.

I don't beleive anyone on this thread has requested a facility to be able to select the ships they receive as reinforcements let alone build them to order.

I beleive the point being made is a valid one and worth noting and that whilst brand loyalty is commendable it can go a little too far when it begins to stiffle valid suggestions for improvement.

The ship reinforcement schedule as defined in the game is presumably based upon the actual priority and availability that occured durng the campaign.

However, that priority and availability was influenced and determined by actual events and by the needs and requests of the various commanders at that time.

Now! inevitably in a wargame events may not actually pan out exactly the same way as they did historically and consequently the requests that we the commanders might wish to make to our superiors will vary from those of our historical counter-parts.

The suggestion being made is that UV should accept that this is likely to happen and allow the player a limited degree of influence over the reinforcement schedule. I don't consider such a suggestion a-historic or unreasonalbe in fact it makes far more sense than having a fixed reinforcement schedule that continues to pump your forces with unnecessary reinforcements whilst ignoring your real requirements.

_____________________________

Didz
Fortis balore et armis

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 24
my impression too - 7/1/2002 11:07:56 PM   
brisd


Posts: 614
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: San Diego, CA
Status: offline 		cyberwop - good analogy, got a laugh out of me this morning! :D

_____________________________

"I propose to fight it out on this line if it takes all summer."-Note sent with Congressman Washburne from Spotsylvania, May 11, 1864, to General Halleck. - General Ulysses S. Grant

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 25
- 7/2/2002 3:40:03 AM   
mjk428

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline 		A more robust replacement system would add to the realism IMO. Any competent theater commander would be on the horn asking for what he needed. Almost always he would get less. Sometimes he'd even get something useless. The requests would still have some overall effect though.

It's been pointed out that the assets may be needed elsewhere. OK then, give us some indication as to how things are going in other theaters. Then we will understand why we're not getting needed assets.

Too many things in this game are hidden and random for my tastes. Maybe if I was given more details as to why X,Y & Z occured I'd feel differently. It's all very convenient to say it's "FOW" or "It's Operational" or "The Weather" or "The Tokyo Express". Some people find the randomness exhilerating but if I'm looking for that kind of a thrill I'll go to a casino. UV is a good game but I feel there are things going on "under the hood" that need to be tweaked.

Now of course the loyalists will tell me to play something else. OK, I will.

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 26
- 7/2/2002 5:16:24 AM   
Didz


Posts: 728
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: UK
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by mjk428
[B]
It's been pointed out that the assets may be needed elsewhere. OK then, give us some indication as to how things are going in other theaters. Then we will understand why we're not getting needed assets. [/B][/QUOTE]

This came to mind when I was penning my last thread. I seem to recall playing a game in the past that had just this sort of mechanism but can't remember what it was.

Like UV in this game the player was commanding one theatre of operations and the rest of the war was going on outside the game so to speak.

As a result the reinforcement schedule was constantly being influenced by events reported elsewhere so that you could find your expected reinforcements suddenly redirected to another front or could suddenly have a bonus as fresh troops were released following a success elsewhere. You could even be presented with demands to release some of your existing forces to assist elsewhere.

This added a tremendous amount of uncertainty to the game but as you quite rightly mention it was not an issue simply because the game explained what it was doing and why.

_____________________________

Didz
Fortis balore et armis

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 27
The current system is a bit weak - 7/2/2002 5:33:46 AM   
segorn

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 6/30/2002
Status: offline 		The current system is a bit weak, and not just because the forty transports I needed were stuck at Pearl while they kept sending me useless surface reinforcements.

There's another issue with teh current model though that bear consideration: its vulnerable to exploits.

Example:

The allies have about twenty minesweepers total in the game. Maybe 6 DMS and about 15 more MSW that enter the game at various stages.

As a japanese player, I am aware of this material bottleneck, and equally aware that the allies will take huge casualties if I mine a lot and they can't sweep them.

So, I spend min 1942 hunting minesweepers. I don't get them all, but I reduce the allies to two DMS and a half dozen MSW. The, in a fit of luck, I sink those sweepers during the allied player's invasion of Lunga.

Now, we're in a sitaution where the allied player has no minesweepign capability at all.

You can bet that, were this the actual world, the theatre commander would be screaming for minesweepers and .. he'd get them. Even if by some miracle the folks back at Pearl decided not to send him some, he could put minesweeping planes on some of his older DDs and do the job.

As it stand now though, the game is vulnerable to bottlenecking and doesn't model the real world's plasticity in response to a narrow assault. When certain critical ship classes run low, the real world makes more of them.

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 28
sorry - 7/2/2002 8:55:10 AM   
cyberwop

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 5/11/2001
From: Valparaiso, Indiana
Status: offline 		I'm sorry about this morning. I was comming off my 1st midnight shift of the week and was a bit tweaked.

All I meant was I would hate to see a system where if I sank 2 enemy CV's I would get 600 points to spend at the Pearal Harbor gift shop.

I've got a few problems with this game which I will post in another thread.

_____________________________

Live like a King and Die like a man.

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 29
Re: sorry - 7/2/2002 1:31:16 PM   
Didz


Posts: 728
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: UK
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by cyberwop
[B]
All I meant was I would hate to see a system where if I sank 2 enemy CV's I would get 600 points to spend at the Pearal Harbor gift shop.
[/B][/QUOTE]

I think we are all with you on that CW. I'm even a little dubious about the instant PT and Barge feature.

_____________________________

Didz
Fortis balore et armis

(in reply to segorn)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Allied Transport Poverty Page: [1] 2   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

0.844