Surface combat TFs not fighting

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Surface combat TFs not fighting

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 >> The War Room >> Surface combat TFs not fighting

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Surface combat TFs not fighting - 2/27/2011 7:33:41 AM

yubari

Posts: 365
Joined: 3/24/2006
Status: offline

Allow me to set the scene first. The allies, very ably led by Yakface take an island in the Aleutians early in 1943. The Japanese send a huge counter invasion force backed by pretty much the entire Japanese navy aside from a few light cruisers. With the enemy carriers known to be out of position, this battle marks the perfect opportunity to fight the Decisive Battle! With the Japanese invasion force one day from the island there is no sign so far of enemy forces, aside from a few PT boats. "They shall be no threat" says an over-confident Yamamoto. We have 12 battleships in our navy, plus a large number of heavy and light cruisers, why even in destroyers alone we outnumber them more than three to one. In game terms I send two surface combat fleets both of around three cruisers and four destroyers, an ASW fleet of four escorts and a bombardment fleet of two battleships, two cruisers and four destroyers to the island to escort my invasion ships. Then this happens.

Night Time Surface Combat, near Kiska Island at 157,51, Range 7,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CL Kashii, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD Asakaze
DD Harukaze
E Kiji
AK Awazisan Maru, Shell hits 13
AK Azumasan Maru
xAK Hawaii Maru
AK Manila Maru, Shell hits 2, Torpedo hits 4, and is sunk
xAK Azuma Maru, Shell hits 1, heavy fires
xAK Katuragi Maru
xAK Goyo Maru, Shell hits 4, heavy fires
AK Hokkai Maru, Shell hits 2
AK Asakasan Maru, Shell hits 1
AK Yamazuki Maru, Shell hits 2
AK Nissyu Maru, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
xAP Teiko Maru, Shell hits 6
xAP Hie Maru
xAP Hikawa Maru, Shell hits 24, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
xAP Hakone Maru, Shell hits 5
xAP Hakozaki Maru, Shell hits 5
xAP Hakusan Maru
xAP Teika Maru, Shell hits 12, heavy fires
xAP Teison Maru, Shell hits 3
xAP Teibi Maru, Shell hits 20, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
xAP Teiritsu Maru, Shell hits 5, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk

Allied Ships
PT-80, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PT-81
PT-82
PT-83
PT-84
PT-128
PT-142
PT-143
PT-144
PT-145, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PT-146, Shell hits 2, on fire
PT-147, Shell hits 1

Japanese ground losses:
6700 casualties reported
Squads: 162 destroyed, 171 disabled
Non Combat: 138 destroyed, 81 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 37 (36 destroyed, 1 disabled)

Maximum visibility in Overcast Conditions and 53% moonlight: 7,000 yards
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
Range closes to 7,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 7,000 yards
Japanese ships attempt to get underway

The PT boats dance around the defending ships like they are not there. Then a second enemy task force attacks.

Night Time Surface Combat, near Kiska Island at 157,51, Range 5,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Naganami
E Hishu
E Kiku
AK Sasako Maru, Shell hits 8
AK Kinka Maru, Shell hits 1
AMC Asaka Maru
AMC Awata Maru, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
AK Arimasan Maru, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
AK Tatuwa Maru, Shell hits 3
AK Yamabiko Maru, Shell hits 2
AK Nitti Maru, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
xAP Kongo Maru, Shell hits 9, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
xAP Kobe Maru, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
xAP Dairen Maru, Shell hits 2
xAP Tsingtao Maru, Shell hits 2, Torpedo hits 4, and is sunk
xAP Taizan Maru, Shell hits 4
xAP Ussuri Maru, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
xAP Ural Maru, Shell hits 2, on fire
xAP Baikal Maru, Shell hits 2, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk

Allied Ships
PT-26
PT-34
PT-66
PT-67
PT-68
PT-73, Shell hits 1
PT-74
PT-75
PT-76
PT-77
PT-78
PT-79

Japanese ground losses:
4514 casualties reported
Squads: 75 destroyed, 60 disabled
Non Combat: 190 destroyed, 80 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Vehicles lost 104 (85 destroyed, 19 disabled)

Maximum visibility in Overcast Conditions and 53% moonlight: 5,000 yards
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
Range closes to 7,000 yards...
Range closes to 6,000 yards...
Range closes to 5,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 5,000 yards
Japanese ships attempt to get underway

The slaughter is even worse this time.

During this time, none of the four combat task forces I have in the hex even try to attack, despite there apparently being maximum visibility. Now one could certainly argue that I should have had more ships embedded in the invasion task force itself but it has been my experience that those ships fight like Audley Harrison against David Haye, they might as well not be there. Hence the reason for the two powerful surface combat task forces. There is even maximum visibility as indicated in the combat report.
My question is, how can I get the surface combat task forces to try to stop the PT boats? Should I set the invasion task forces to follow the surface combat task force? Did I forget to say three hail Marys? Does the numbering of the task forces, ie having the surface combat as the lowest number TF have an effect? Should have strangled a chicken and lain its entrails on the ground to invoke good luck first? Any suggestions gratefully received.

Post #: 1

RE: Surface combat TFs not fighting - 2/27/2011 8:00:02 AM

Puhis

Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: yubari

Should I set the invasion task forces to follow the surface combat task force?
Does the numbering of the task forces, ie having the surface combat as the lowest number TF have an effect?

I'd say yes to both...

(in reply to yubari)

Post #: 2

RE: Surface combat TFs not fighting - 2/27/2011 10:23:01 AM

inqistor

Posts: 1813
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline

Every ship over 15 in Task Force will seriously hamper behaviour of ships present. So large transport forces fight really poor.
Probably the best solution will be to send SCTF first, before transports enter hex.
Also, MAYBE, speed difference is important? So BBs generally slower TFs speed, and can not reach fast PTs?

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 3

RE: Surface combat TFs not fighting - 2/27/2011 3:37:08 PM

khyberbill

Posts: 1941
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline

I wish my PT boats had that effect! They mostly act as anchors and sink right away.

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to yubari)

Post #: 4

RE: Surface combat TFs not fighting - 2/27/2011 6:55:09 PM

Don Bowen

Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

quote:

ORIGINAL: yubari

Should I set the invasion task forces to follow the surface combat task force?
Does the numbering of the task forces, ie having the surface combat as the lowest number TF have an effect?

I'd say yes to both...

Yes and No.

You should always lead with the fighting force. It may seem a little backward, but transports following combat TF is the way to go.

No. TF numbering does not affect order of combat. There is a function that will select the TF to fight (sorry, interruption by granddaughter, what was I saying?). Oh yes. When there are more than one TF in the same hex as the enemy, the one that will engage in combat is determined by a routine that scans the available TFs and assigns a ranking based on strength, ammo level, commander aggression, day-or-night, fuel levels, TF mission, and the ever-popular random. The random is always the issue. We don't say that the best TF will always fight. (Oh Oh, Eden Amelia again!). There's always a chance that other TFs might stumble into each other. Trying for real life here. A good chance the best TF will fight, a fair chance another combat TF will be picked, and always a chance that the wrong one will get into the scrap. That's the way it has always been - UV, WITP, AE. The player puts the right units into the combat zone and things don't always go right.

(in reply to Puhis)

Post #: 5

RE: Surface combat TFs not fighting - 2/27/2011 8:36:17 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

I would have to say that it is the most lopsided PT action that I have seen, so perhaps you were just unforturnate in your rolls. However, I suspect that the large size of all of your TFs are a problem as well. Do you have and 4-5 DD/CL Tfs on patrol? I find that these are the best for taking on small surface ships such as PT or E type boats.

We do have a HR limiting PTs to a max of six in a squadron and only one squadron attacking or defending an object. This is really left over from WTIP but it seems to keep PTs in perspective.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 6

RE: Surface combat TFs not fighting - 2/27/2011 10:31:29 PM

bradfordkay

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

"We do have a HR limiting PTs to a max of six in a squadron and only one squadron attacking or defending an object."

This is more difficult to achieve in AE. Chez and I agreed to an HR in CHS limiting PT TFs to six boats and two PT TFs at any one base. Under the original WITP (and CHS) the most PTs created when you hit the create PTs button was twelve, so this was very easy to achieve. Now when you create PTs it will put more than that into the TF/location if there are more in the pool.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 7

RE: Surface combat TFs not fighting - 3/5/2011 8:19:16 AM

yubari

Posts: 365
Joined: 3/24/2006
Status: offline

Thanks for the answers everyone, particularly Don Bowen. I noticed that I had set the transport TFs to move at full speed whereas the surface combat TFs were set to move at mission speed, could this be another reason?

(in reply to bradfordkay)

Post #: 8

RE: Surface combat TFs not fighting - 3/5/2011 5:16:53 PM

offenseman

Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline

Unless every ship in that Transport Group had a max speed higher than the cruise speed of you SCTFs then it might have allowed the Transports to pull ahead. It is possible to set up a Transport group with a 15-18 knot max speed, but looking at the ships involved, I believe the max speed would have been 14 at best. That means the SCTFs should have had no trouble keeping up.

Bad break though....

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to yubari)

Post #: 9

RE: Surface combat TFs not fighting - 3/5/2011 7:00:01 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

"We do have a HR limiting PTs to a max of six in a squadron and only one squadron attacking or defending an object."

This is more difficult to achieve in AE. Chez and I agreed to an HR in CHS limiting PT TFs to six boats and two PT TFs at any one base. Under the original WITP (and CHS) the most PTs created when you hit the create PTs button was twelve, so this was very easy to achieve. Now when you create PTs it will put more than that into the TF/location if there are more in the pool.�

Well, we have no limit to the number of PTs in a base so I just disband the surplus and use them to replace losses or return the surplus to the pool if I am worried about port attacks. I has not been difficult.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to bradfordkay)

Post #: 10