RE: Blood in the skies

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: Blood in the skies

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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Blood in the skies

Page: << < prev 159 160 [161] 162 163 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/29/2011 4:10:02 PM

castor troy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

Philippine Sea? Maybe 150 Jap escort fighters facing 300?? Hellcats.......In a series of 4 seperate strikes. Maybe if the game split these huge air armadas into "chunks" the engine would give better results.

doesn't it already do this? We've got so much "uncoordination" (which it isn't I was told) I wonder if it could do any worse in terms of how strikes look like. Of course if there are 2500 available aircraft there is always the point when you get one or two huge strikes out a day. One might be enough to sink 80% of all escort carriers the Allied built during the war. I would like to see BoB bombing the Reich strikes, those actually make sense. In AE you see 800 fighters escorting 20 bombers, squadrons failing to fly as a whole squadron daily and so on. But that is a different story than the Cap issue in battles >300 aircraft. And yet it is still better than all ac in one strike per phase like WITP was. I think they've tried their best, it became better but it is still, well...

_____________________________

(in reply to Miller)

Post #: 4801

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/29/2011 4:21:18 PM

Miller

Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

Philippine Sea? Maybe 150 Jap escort fighters facing 300?? Hellcats.......In a series of 4 seperate strikes. Maybe if the game split these huge air armadas into "chunks" the engine would give better results.

doesn't it already do this? We've got so much "uncoordination" (which it isn't I was told) I wonder if it could do any worse in terms of how strikes look like. Of course if there are 2500 available aircraft there is always the point when you get one or two huge strikes out a day. One might be enough to sink 80% of all escort carriers the Allied built during the war. I would like to see BoB bombing the Reich strikes, those actually make sense. In AE you see 800 fighters escorting 20 bombers, squadrons failing to fly as a whole squadron daily and so on. But that is a different story than the Cap issue in battles >300 aircraft. And yet it is still better than all ac in one strike per phase like WITP was. I think they've tried their best, it became better but it is still, well...

I think that sums it up. Still way better than the WITP "Everyone dies" nonsense.

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 4802

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/29/2011 4:21:43 PM

JohnDillworth

Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline

Thats about right. There were a large number of badly co-ordinated strikes that got mauled. Similar to what happens when stragglers come in now, they get treated very rudley, on both sides. Hundred bomber formations seem to behave similar to real life in the European air war. Interceptors mix it up, the bombers get through and a small number get shot down. When the bomber stream come in unescorted, bad things happen

_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 4803

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/29/2011 4:33:07 PM

pat.casey

Posts: 393
Joined: 9/10/2007
Status: offline

Worst historical losses for a 4E strike of appreciable size was, what, 13% at Schweinfurt?

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 4804

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/29/2011 5:05:05 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

don't worry greyjoy, you got enough experience (more than many of those saying the world is beautiful and perfectly right) because of the fact you have driven your game well into 44 while the "experts" mostly dump around in 42 never seen a bigger air engagement than 100 ac on one side and 120 on the other side.

Now a 6 year old that roughly got a clue about numbers (and no clue about air battles) would smell the flaw when you see 50 ac shot down when 200 ac clash in the air but only 20 are shot down when 1000 meet each other, of the same types, same pilots, same conditions. But hey, seriously, there can't be something wrong... NO WAY CAN THERE BE SOMETHING WRONG THEN. Heck, people even argued months after the pre Cap flak BUG was squashed that there was no problem. Not even the official statement there was a bug made a difference. Same for strato sweeps, for 12 months, all was so perfectly well and then the official statement it would be an "exploit" to use them which implies there isn't all so perfectly well. Be aware, it seems you either are joining the vocal PBEM minority or the dark side, where you have to close your eyes and ears or shut down common sense.

C'mon now, Castor Troy-let's not be binary or polemic in this.

From a subjective POV, it does look like there are fewer aerial losses than would be expected based upon the number of combatants. I hear you about efforts to explain this away not passing the 'sniff' test and I agree with your previous examples of apologists / deniers of admitted bugs.

Having played a number of scenarios in the 1944 time frame (notably the AE Tournament II versus Captain Mandrake), I can tell you that large CV/CV + LBA clashes do occur with hundreds of aircraft on both sides involved in the scrum and they're extremely bloody, as I would have expected. I've not been disappointed in the modeling of my 1944 air battles from the scenarios.

I've played deep into 1943 and, in May 1943 in my Scenario 1 PBEM had a major carrier clash: 600 IJNAF aircraft versus ~450 USNAF. The combat(s) were modelled well and extremely bloody to both sides.

So, yes, if I extrapolated the template of my expected aerial losses to GreyJoy's game, I'd expect greater losses than this one combat demonstrated. Does this mean the game is borked? Hardly.

For me to admit that the game is borked, I'd have to see that other-most-of these large combats resulted in losses / intercepts that were well below expected. Then I'd want to see if this was a systematic problem (other PBEMs in 1944 witnessing the same thing or just a few exceptionally vocal people?). I'd want to compare game versions (which I believe is an underrated cause of some buggy behavior) and whether the game had been upgraded to a beta patch or if it was operating on an official patch too.

To summarize: while this one combat does seem off, so what? If this isn't a systematic problem-almost universally experienced-what do you expect to come of it? There's not enough PBEMs going deep into 1944 to troubleshoot these mega-aerial fights for the Devs to get a handle on how much of a problem it is. My experiences in 1944 (scenarios) do not suggest a problem, so maybe it's an individual thing.

Recognizing an aberrant event is not a solution, but merely the first stage in exploration of one.

_____________________________

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 4805

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/29/2011 5:32:41 PM

Dan Nichols

Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline

Would it be possible to move this discussion to another thread and not hijack GreyJoys AAR?

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 4806

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/29/2011 5:54:20 PM

crsutton

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

Philippine Sea? Maybe 150 Jap escort fighters facing 300?? Hellcats.......In a series of 4 seperate strikes. Maybe if the game split these huge air armadas into "chunks" the engine would give better results.

Viperpol and I have a game going and he has suffered his share of turkey shoots as the Japanese player-as have I on a smaller scale as the Allies. Our last turn my CAP took out 350 of his attacking planes. The problem for him was that the attack went in uncoordinated. However, given strong enough CAP, I have on plenty of occasions shredded his coordinated attacks as well.

However, there have been some strange attacks where both of us have sent in attacks facing large CAP (some big-some small) where the CAP has not done anything. In this last battle I had a dozen cats attack his carriers and 200 zeros on CAP only tweaked them before one cat torpedoed a carriers. However, there may be other factors such as altitude, weather, radar working or not. I will say that so far CAP is effective about 80% of the time and that seems to me to be about the way it should be. One thing I like about the game is the fact that things just don't always work as planned.

Now, let me say that we have yet to reach the point of super massive air battle in our game so I can't comment on that experience.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Miller)

Post #: 4807

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/29/2011 7:04:11 PM

soticrandy

Posts: 38
Joined: 7/19/2011
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dan Nichols

Would it be possible to move this discussion to another thread and not hijack GreyJoys AAR?

(in reply to Dan Nichols)

Post #: 4808

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/29/2011 7:08:30 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: soticrandy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dan Nichols

Would it be possible to move this discussion to another thread and not hijack GreyJoys AAR?

Well I think this is a carry over in context of GreyJoy's discussion in the Tech forum and so posters are mixing the two threads in context ...not as much as an internet etiquette violation as say a complete hijack ...

I assume this will get back on track with GreyJoy goes back to operations ...

(in reply to soticrandy)

Post #: 4809

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/30/2011 10:53:06 AM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

22, 23 July 1944

A quiet turn. My AF at Hakkodate, despite having 250 engineers, is still very much damaged...pretty strange!

...

Nothing happened this turn....

Tomorrow our 2Es will bomb again Ominato, while our 4Es will rest again...lots of damaged big boys there.

Our Fleet is re-grouping at Bihoro, under 860 strong CAP (really can't do anything more than that for my defence...)
I have 15,000 AVs ready for the invasion of Japan. The 5th USMC Div is the last division i'm waiting before committing.... the scheldue remains the same. 1 more month and we'll be ready.
Supply isn't an issue and i'm swimming with fuel and transports... i just fear my CAP inefficiency

Anyway...have to decide how to use my CVs in the invasion.... we're gonna have for sure thousands of enemy planes from Tokyo area attacking our ships...and we know i cannot hope to close all those lvl 9 AFs....so we have to live with that threat.... but the KB will for sure operate in close conjunction with the LBA...so i cannot really hope to chase the KB without exposing my CVs to the terrible effect of a massive torpedo bombing attack by his LBA+KB combo.... should i disembark all my CV Hellcats and use them from Hakkodate? Would it be worth?....

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 4810

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/30/2011 2:26:48 PM

jeffs

Posts: 644
Joined: 2/19/2004
From: Tokyo
Status: offline

Actually...I think it was very valuable spending one attack on an airfield....I think GreyJoy needs to keep 80-90% of the 4E attacks on airplane factories but the threat (and actually destruction) of airfields away from factories might force Rader to not be as concentrated on defending the factories..Or if he does..Have a few turns where he loses 300 planes....

_____________________________

To quote from Evans/Peattie`s {Kaigun}
"Mistakes in operations and tactics can be corrected, but
political and strategic mistakes live forever". The authors were refering to Japan but the same could be said of the US misadventure in Iraq

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4811

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/30/2011 3:03:44 PM

USSAmerica

Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Graham, NC, USA
Status: offline

GJ, make sure all of those 250 engineers at Hakkodate are set to Combat mode, or they won't do any repairs.

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to jeffs)

Post #: 4812

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/30/2011 3:44:46 PM

jeffk3510

Posts: 4132
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline

Greyjoy, are you planning on keeping a floating reserve? Say an extra 5k to throw into the mix if any opportunity presents itself, of a disaster..

_____________________________

Life is tough. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be.

Currently chasing three kids around the Midwest.

(in reply to USSAmerica)

Post #: 4813

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/30/2011 6:33:18 PM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: USS America

GJ, make sure all of those 250 engineers at Hakkodate are set to Combat mode, or they won't do any repairs.

Yup...they are....let's see if next turn brings some improvements...

(in reply to USSAmerica)

Post #: 4814

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/30/2011 6:35:13 PM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

Greyjoy, are you planning on keeping a floating reserve? Say an extra 5k to throw into the mix if any opportunity presents itself, of a disaster..

Yes, the proximity of the landing site gives me the chance of using multiple invasions. I won't committ my whole forces all togheder. I'll split the landings into 3 different waves so that every invasion will have all the proper ship support needed.

(in reply to jeffk3510)

Post #: 4815

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/30/2011 7:48:54 PM

JohnDillworth

Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline

quote:

Yes, the proximity of the landing site gives me the chance of using multiple invasions. I won't committ my whole forces all togheder. I'll split the landings into 3 different waves so that every invasion will have all the proper ship support needed.

Please take this in the spirit in which it is intended. Why should we believe a word you say about invasion locations?

_____________________________

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4816

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/30/2011 9:31:11 PM

Cribtop

Posts: 3890
Joined: 8/10/2008
From: Lone Star Nation
Status: offline

GJ, consider the fact that multi-wave invasions will mean more time with ships exposed to air attack from KB and LBA. I'm sure you're planning for this, but feel like stating the obvious today.

_____________________________

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 4817

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/31/2011 9:58:44 AM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

24, 25 july 1944

Another slow turn...both sides are getting ready for the next step...

We sent 250 2Es to bomb Ominato in order to keep that damned AF suppressed. Some flak losses but a part from that no opposition found.
150 P-47s swept Tokyo and found a stiff opposition. We went in very uncoordinated and we only achieved a 2,5-1 kill ratio...not that good...

Tomorrow we'll keep on bombing Ominato while our fighters and our 4Es will rest again...

crib...i know...but the idea is to have an overcommittment of ships so that our soldiers will be all unloaded in a turn...so the exposure time should be lower... that's the general idea btw

John....:-) well, this time it's pretty impossible to do a feint...so the landing site is pretty much obvious...Hachinoche is my first choice!

My CVs are being requipped with the new Hellcats-5....hopefully these guys will perform bettern than their cousins...even tough i can't wait to have the brand new Corsair that comes online in november!

(in reply to Cribtop)

Post #: 4818

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/31/2011 12:02:59 PM

cwDeici

Posts: 70
Joined: 12/6/2011
Status: offline

Roughly how many a/c do you field at this point in time? Any rough idea of Rader's numbers?

Happy New Year!

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4819

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/31/2011 12:15:06 PM

Grfin Zeppelin

Posts: 1515
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

Well if you are going to invade Honshu then bombing AC factories might turn out to be a grave strategical error. Armament and especialy vehicle production should have been the target. ACs dont win a ground war and Japan gets how many divisions in the first half of 44 at the home islands ? twenty ? Thirty maybe with the emergency reinforcments.Perhaps even more in scen 2 O.o

Anyway, I wish you good luck and maybe I am wrong.

< Message edited by Gr�fin Zeppelin -- 12/31/2011 12:17:14 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to cwDeici)

Post #: 4820

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/31/2011 6:18:31 PM

princep01

Posts: 943
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

Happy New Year....Greyjoy and readers.

Back from the big hunt just in time for Greyjoy and Rader to start duking it out in earnest. Hope your Christmas was bright and well, try to stay clothed for New Years...at least in public.

I say continue to bomb those a/c factories silly. It pays dividends in the future qulaity and quantity od advanced ac. However, air superiority (at least locally) is essential to a successful landing. The suggestion made above to smack a few airfield with 4E raids is also a good idea it would seem. Always nice to take away future production, but when the troops hit the beach, it is those planes currently available and flying that present a clear and present danger.

(in reply to Grfin Zeppelin)

Post #: 4821

RE: Blood in the skies - 1/1/2012 12:06:21 PM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

Hi graff and Bolton!!! Happy new year to all of you guys!!!!

Japan got the masses to push me out....and to succesfully repulsean invasion....i know....but i wanna try it nonetheless! I have only two choices now:invade or keep on bombing till 1946....the latter being a very boring alternative.
Then i know you all wanna see this invasion unfold....be honest!!!! :-)

We're starting to use michealm's beta from next turn....let's see how japanese CAP will work!

(in reply to princep01)

Post #: 4822

RE: Blood in the skies - 1/1/2012 2:51:39 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

have only two choices now:invade or keep on bombing till 1946....the latter being a very boring alternative.

Actaully this bombing campaign has produced no less than 4 side threads in the Tech Support/War room forums .. hardly boring and most controversial!

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4823

RE: Blood in the skies - 1/1/2012 8:27:05 PM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

Another sleepy turn in the bag....bad weather prevented any air operation in northern japan. The only action was the usual naval bombardment of hachinoche by the BC reknown TF.

Now i have 3 british CVs with my Death Star at PH....not bad. The real question remains how shall i use my CVs for tjhe upcoming invasion?

Checked all the LCU leaders today and made some changes....the best leaders are now everywhere in charge. The chain of command is perfect with 2 theatre HQs fully prepped, 2 army HQs and 5 corp HQs, along with 2 amphib HQs...really think i cannot do more to provide the best possible landing.
I'm also organizing the surface fleet that will cover the landing site...2 modern BB TFS, composed of 2 BBs and 2CAs each, with 2 more CLs TFs, along with several fletcher DD divisions and waves of PT TFs...
The only thing i cannot cover is the air stuff....there i know i'm facing the terrible risk of being annihilated by his betties....let's
Hope the micheal's new exe will provide some help

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 4824

RE: Blood in the skies - 1/1/2012 9:25:08 PM

princep01

Posts: 943
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

And, this time, Ser Greyjoy, please do not forget the blowtorches, sharpened bamboo shoots, the battery cables hooked to the metal lawn chairs and the other "tools of persuasion" that come in handy when you need a Japanese civilian to TALK. What fun is an invasion without a bit of pilaging, plundering and torturing? No ****-footing about with these chaps. Remember the meriless misery they inflicted upon you for 2+ years. I'll even come along to help administer the "persuasion. Got a dark little room for me on one of your nifty transports?

Oh boy, oh boy what a happy New Year this will be:).

BTW, where are the New Year party pics? Canoerebel was asking about them. He seemingly has an insatiable desire to bear witness to your debauchery.

princepBolton

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4825

RE: Blood in the skies - 1/1/2012 9:34:13 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

"Debauchery" is a great word! My wife used it in a conversation last night. I used it in a conversation this morning. And now princep lobs it into this AAR. That's good talkin'!

Keeping with princep's suggestions, GJ, you should also bring the "Comfy Chair" and the "Soft Pillows."

"Noone expects the Spanish Inquisition!"

(in reply to princep01)

Post #: 4826

RE: Blood in the skies - 1/1/2012 9:42:24 PM

princep01

Posts: 943
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

Oh, oh, the bloody censor is always at work...forgot that. Let's try it this way....."No puzzy-footing about with these chaps". There, Ethel, censor that!

princepBolton

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 4827

RE: Blood in the skies - 1/1/2012 10:08:13 PM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

I'll post some pics tomorrow.........don't worry ;-)

(in reply to princep01)

Post #: 4828

RE: Blood in the skies - 1/1/2012 11:34:19 PM

USSAmerica

Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Graham, NC, USA
Status: offline

Now, I'm worried.