Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever?

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 >> Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever?

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 3:04:41 PM

topeverest

Posts: 3376
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Houston, TX - USA
Status: offline

I would appreciate some advice here what sequence actually occurred that caused such a one sided attack. American
DD force ordered to bombard Wake, and the Empire sent defenders. Nominally, the American force was inferior. By
My read, the empire force was docked for replenishment and attempts to get underway. but the empire crosses the T
and gets no damage on the American fleet. Looks like the American torpedo attack was massively successful early on.

Why didn't the empire get more damage on the allied fleet? I've never seen such one sided result.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Oct 07, 44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Wake Island at 136,98, Range 10,000 Yards

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
E13A1 Jake: 1 destroyed

Japanese Ships
CL Kashii, Shell hits 15, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Kiyoshimo, Shell hits 37, and is sunk
DD Shinonome, Shell hits 4, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
DD Usugumo, Shell hits 5, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Isonami, Shell hits 26, and is sunk
DD Shirayuki, Shell hits 12, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Uranami, Shell hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Asagiri, Shell hits 25, and is sunk
DD Akebono, Shell hits 22, and is sunk
DD Chugao #1, Shell hits 4, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk

Allied Ships
DD Franks, Shell hits 1
DD Heermann
DD Hoel
DD Kidd, Shell hits 1
DD Kimberly
DD Murray, Shell hits 1
DD Sigourney
DD Welles

Allied Ships Reported to be Approaching!
Japanese TF begins to get underway
Improved night sighting under 71% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Overcast Conditions and 71% moonlight: 8,000 yards
Range closes to 24,000 yards...
Range closes to 18,000 yards...
Range closes to 12,000 yards...
CONTACT: Allies radar detects Japanese task force at 12,000 yards
CONTACT: Japanese radar detects Allied task force at 12,000 yards
Range closes to 10,000 yards...
CONTACT: Allies radar detects Japanese task force at 10,000 yards
Kojima, Hideo crosses the 'T'
DD Chugao #1 engages DD Sigourney at 10,000 yards
DD Sigourney engages DD Uranami at 10,000 yards
DD Heermann engages DD Shirayuki at 10,000 yards
DD Kimberly engages DD Usugumo at 10,000 yards
DD Shinonome engages DD Sigourney at 10,000 yards
DD Kiyoshimo engages DD Kimberly at 10,000 yards
Range closes to 8,000 yards
DD Shirayuki engages DD Welles at 8,000 yards
Massive explosion on DD Shinonome
DD Shinonome engages DD Sigourney at 8,000 yards
DD Akebono engages DD Welles at 8,000 yards
DD Kimberly engages DD Shirayuki at 8,000 yards
DD Uranami engages DD Kidd at 8,000 yards
DD Shirayuki engages DD Heermann at 8,000 yards
DD Shinonome sunk by DD Heermann at 8,000 yards
DD Kidd engages DD Usugumo at 8,000 yards
Range closes to 7,000 yards
DD Chugao #1 engages DD Welles at 7,000 yards
DD Kidd engages DD Chugao #1 at 7,000 yards
DD Uranami sunk by DD Murray at 7,000 yards
DD Asagiri engages DD Sigourney at 7,000 yards
DD Usugumo sunk by DD Hoel at 7,000 yards
DD Heermann engages DD Isonami at 7,000 yards
Range closes to 5,000 yards
CL Kashii engages DD Heermann at 5,000 yards
DD Isonami engages DD Sigourney at 5,000 yards
DD Murray engages DD Isonami at 5,000 yards
DD Kimberly engages DD Isonami at 5,000 yards
DD Shirayuki sunk by DD Heermann at 5,000 yards
DD Isonami engages DD Hoel at 5,000 yards
DD Welles engages DD Kiyoshimo at 5,000 yards
DD Isonami engages DD Franks at 5,000 yards
Range closes to 2,000 yards
DD Welles engages DD Isonami at 2,000 yards
DD Isonami sunk by DD Sigourney at 2,000 yards
DD Akebono engages DD Welles at 2,000 yards
DD Akebono engages DD Kimberly at 2,000 yards
DD Kiyoshimo engages DD Welles at 2,000 yards
Range increases to 3,000 yards
CL Kashii engages DD Welles at 3,000 yards
DD Chugao #1 sunk by DD Kimberly at 3,000 yards
DD Asagiri engages DD Murray at 3,000 yards
DD Asagiri engages DD Murray at 3,000 yards
DD Franks engages DD Kiyoshimo at 3,000 yards
DD Hoel engages DD Asagiri at 3,000 yards
DD Asagiri engages DD Heermann at 3,000 yards
Kojima, Hideo orders Japanese TF to disengage
Range closes to 2,000 yards
DD Asagiri engages DD Welles at 2,000 yards
DD Akebono engages DD Sigourney at 2,000 yards
DD Kidd engages DD Asagiri at 2,000 yards
DD Heermann engages DD Kiyoshimo at 2,000 yards
DD Asagiri engages DD Hoel at 2,000 yards
DD Heermann engages DD Asagiri at 2,000 yards
DD Asagiri engages DD Franks at 2,000 yards
Range increases to 4,000 yards
CL Kashii engages DD Murray at 4,000 yards
DD Sigourney engages DD Akebono at 4,000 yards
DD Asagiri engages DD Murray at 4,000 yards
DD Kimberly engages DD Asagiri at 4,000 yards
DD Kidd engages DD Asagiri at 4,000 yards
DD Heermann engages DD Asagiri at 4,000 yards
Range increases to 5,000 yards
DD Sigourney engages DD Kiyoshimo at 5,000 yards
DD Murray engages DD Kiyoshimo at 5,000 yards
DD Kidd engages DD Kiyoshimo at 5,000 yards
DD Kidd engages DD Akebono at 5,000 yards
DD Heermann engages DD Akebono at 5,000 yards
DD Akebono engages DD Franks at 5,000 yards
Range increases to 6,000 yards
CL Kashii sunk by DD Franks at 6,000 yards
DD Sigourney engages DD Kiyoshimo at 6,000 yards
DD Kiyoshimo engages DD Murray at 6,000 yards
DD Kimberly engages DD Kiyoshimo at 6,000 yards
DD Kiyoshimo engages DD Hoel at 6,000 yards
DD Heermann engages DD Kiyoshimo at 6,000 yards
DD Franks engages DD Kiyoshimo at 6,000 yards
Range increases to 8,000 yards
DD Welles engages DD Akebono at 8,000 yards
DD Sigourney engages DD Asagiri at 8,000 yards
DD Kiyoshimo engages DD Heermann at 8,000 yards
DD Kimberly engages DD Asagiri at 8,000 yards
DD Welles engages DD Akebono at 8,000 yards
DD Murray engages DD Kiyoshimo at 8,000 yards
DD Kimberly engages DD Kiyoshimo at 8,000 yards
Range increases to 9,000 yards
DD Akebono sunk by DD Sigourney at 9,000 yards
DD Kiyoshimo engages DD Kidd at 9,000 yards
DD Heermann engages DD Kiyoshimo at 9,000 yards
Range increases to 10,000 yards
Range closes to 6,000 yards
DD Kiyoshimo engages DD Welles at 6,000 yards
DD Kiyoshimo engages DD Heermann at 6,000 yards
DD Franks engages DD Kiyoshimo at 6,000 yards
Range increases to 8,000 yards
DD Heermann engages DD Kiyoshimo at 8,000 yards
Range increases to 9,000 yards
DD Welles engages DD Kiyoshimo at 9,000 yards
DD Kiyoshimo engages DD Murray at 9,000 yards
Range increases to 11,000 yards
DD Franks engages DD Kiyoshimo at 11,000 yards
Range closes to 8,000 yards
DD Welles engages DD Kiyoshimo at 8,000 yards
DD Sigourney engages DD Kiyoshimo at 8,000 yards
DD Kiyoshimo sunk by DD Franks at 8,000 yards
Combat ends with last Japanese ship sunk...

< Message edited by topeverest -- 6/17/2014 4:06:27 PM >

_____________________________

Andy M

Post #: 1

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 3:32:39 PM

mind_messing

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

Allied Ships Reported to be Approaching!
Japanese TF begins to get underway

Right there. The Japanese ships were tied up and sitting ducks when the Allies showed up.

(in reply to topeverest)

Post #: 2

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 3:38:47 PM

crsutton

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

Your guess is as good as mine. If you just sent your TF in why was it docked, or was it? That I think is why you got crushed. As far as I have seen whenever you see that "TF is attempting to get underway" message then nothing but bad news is going to follow. That plus you took massive damage on one ship during the first round which if the ship did not separate would have slowed the TF down. But that is speculation on my behalf as I do not know (does anyone) how the combat model exactly works. Yes, a docked TF plus a combination of unfavorable digital events. It is what I love about the game. Bad luck happens and no matter what you can never expect victory. The game would be dull if it were any other way. I "do" feel your pain though.

Oct 7 44, both sides have radar but Allied radar is much better, Allies now have working torpedoes, Allied crew experience is excellent after 1/44, fletchers have armor (not that it mattered here) and better more powerful guns with I think a faster rate of fire. This outcome could have very well been similar in a real life encounter in 10/44.

I will say that in five years of constant playing, I have never seen either side pull off a more successful torpedo attack.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to topeverest)

Post #: 3

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 4:00:31 PM

EHansen

Posts: 360
Joined: 12/6/2013
Status: offline

Isn't CL Kashii a slow training cruiser? If so, it would have slowed the whole TF down.

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 4

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 4:18:06 PM

btd64

Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

I concur with the above. They could not get out of there own way and got hammered for it. GP

_____________________________

Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to EHansen)

Post #: 5

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 4:21:13 PM

dcpollay

Posts: 532
Joined: 11/22/2012
From: Upstate New York USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

Allied Ships Reported to be Approaching!
Japanese TF begins to get underway

Right there. The Japanese ships were tied up and sitting ducks when the Allies showed up.

The odd part of that is that the Japanese crossed the T. That seems to indicate some kind of advantage, not being "sitting ducks."

_____________________________

"It's all according to how your boogaloo situation stands, you understand."

Formerly known as Colonel Mustard, before I got Slitherine Syndrome.

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 6

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 4:27:08 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Colonel Mustard

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

Allied Ships Reported to be Approaching!
Japanese TF begins to get underway

Right there. The Japanese ships were tied up and sitting ducks when the Allies showed up.

The odd part of that is that the Japanese crossed the T. That seems to indicate some kind of advantage, not being "sitting ducks."

I have found "crossing the T" to be more of a disadvantage in this game than an advantage.

Nine times out of ten when I cross the tee only my lead ship fires while getting fired on in return by the entire enemy force.

Crossing the T seems to be bass ackwards in this game.

Another disadvantage........crossing the T presents broadsides to torpedo attacks.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to dcpollay)

Post #: 7

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 4:30:19 PM

Dili

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

The Fletchers guns are overpowered.

_____________________________

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 8

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 4:39:07 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

Allied Ships Reported to be Approaching!
Japanese TF begins to get underway

Right there. The Japanese ships were tied up and sitting ducks when the Allies showed up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: EHansen

Isn't CL Kashii a slow training cruiser? If so, it would have slowed the whole TF down.

And another +1

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 9

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 4:43:50 PM

offenseman

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

1. Ships at anchor
2. Kashii slowing down all the DDs to 18 kts
3. Fletchers are stronger than most IJN CLs.
4. Night engagement with good USN radar

Essentially you have 8 Light Cruisers against a training cruiser and 9 DDs, all of whom started at a dead stop and were limited to 18 kts. Perhaps the IJN commander on the scene also had some high aggression which did not allow them to try to run away as quickly, and of course when it tried to run, it could go no faster than 18 kt.

I find that to be a fair result. IMHO

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 10

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 4:47:44 PM

Gaspote

Posts: 303
Joined: 6/30/2013
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Colonel Mustard

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

Allied Ships Reported to be Approaching!
Japanese TF begins to get underway

Right there. The Japanese ships were tied up and sitting ducks when the Allies showed up.

The odd part of that is that the Japanese crossed the T. That seems to indicate some kind of advantage, not being "sitting ducks."

I have found "crossing the T" to be more of a disadvantage in this game than an advantage.

Nine times out of ten when I cross the tee only my lead ship fires while getting fired on in return by the entire enemy force.

Crossing the T seems to be bass ackwards in this game.

Another disadvantage........crossing the T presents broadsides to torpedo attacks.

You not supposed to get an advantage when crossing the T. It's the worst case in naval battle except if you are Admiral Nelson and get the wind.

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 11

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 4:59:51 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gaspote

You not supposed to get an advantage when crossing the T. It's the worst case in naval battle except if you are Admiral Nelson and get the wind.

I beg to differ. That was the goal of any naval force to achieve during the time period. You bring your full firepower to bear on the enemy who can only respond with fire from the bow. Crossing the T should be a major tactical advantage in combat. As to your Nelson comment, getting the weather gage was always a tactical advantage during the period, but every Captain tried to rake (cross the T) of an enemy ship's bow or stern if given the opportunity to do so.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 6/17/2014 6:03:43 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to Gaspote)

Post #: 12

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 5:01:53 PM

Paladin1dcs

Posts: 195
Joined: 7/7/2011
From: Charleston, WV
Status: offline

As others have said, don't think of this as 8 Allied DDs versus a IJN CL/DD task force. Fletchers are really more like small CLs than the DDs you're used too seeing. Just be glad that the Allied force didn't have some true CLs like the Brooklyns or Clevelands.

(in reply to Gaspote)

Post #: 13

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 5:20:56 PM

koniu

Posts: 2763
Joined: 2/28/2011
From: Konin, Poland, European Union
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gaspote

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Colonel Mustard

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

Allied Ships Reported to be Approaching!
Japanese TF begins to get underway

Right there. The Japanese ships were tied up and sitting ducks when the Allies showed up.

The odd part of that is that the Japanese crossed the T. That seems to indicate some kind of advantage, not being "sitting ducks."

I have found "crossing the T" to be more of a disadvantage in this game than an advantage.

Nine times out of ten when I cross the tee only my lead ship fires while getting fired on in return by the entire enemy force.

Crossing the T seems to be bass ackwards in this game.

Another disadvantage........crossing the T presents broadsides to torpedo attacks.

You not supposed to get an advantage when crossing the T. It's the worst case in naval battle except if you are Admiral Nelson and get the wind.

It all depend on formation. In "classical" battle crossing the T should be only good thing.
You are able to fire all Your guns in broadside volley while enemy is forced to use only forward guns and very often ship in front are blocking others ships in formation to even use forward guns or fire torpedoes

Disadvantage of crossing the T in WW2 standards is that You are very expose to TT attack. All Your ships are big targets. Especially when moving in slow 18kn formation

So crossing the T should give some bonus to gun fire ratio and reduce chance of torpedo hit to side that cross T. Other side should have disadvantage in gun fire ratio and numbers of TT fired, but TTs should have better chance of hitting.

I could be wrong in all what i write so correct me

As for battle result.
Fletcher are the same on sea war what P-47 is in air war. You can expect only worst when You meet them

< Message edited by koniu -- 6/17/2014 6:23:23 PM >

_____________________________

"Only the Dead Have Seen the End of War"

(in reply to Gaspote)

Post #: 14

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 5:31:15 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

Other than submarines, PT boats and Motor Torpedo boats I don't know of too many warships that had bow facing torpedo launchers? How can a force that has their T crossed even bring their torpedoes to bear?

As to the combat. I think the fact the Japanese crossed the T is simply the combat engine stating the orientation of the Japanese force. I agree with all the other comments. Ships were not underway (and full broadside exposed) which negates crossing the T as the Japanese force was not moving and the CL would have killed the speed of the Japanese DD's anyway. The Fletchers were at a huge tactical advantage and it shows in the results.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 6/17/2014 6:31:32 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to koniu)

Post #: 15

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 6:37:24 PM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Colonel Mustard

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

Allied Ships Reported to be Approaching!
Japanese TF begins to get underway

Right there. The Japanese ships were tied up and sitting ducks when the Allies showed up.

The odd part of that is that the Japanese crossed the T. That seems to indicate some kind of advantage, not being "sitting ducks."

I have found "crossing the T" to be more of a disadvantage in this game than an advantage.

Nine times out of ten when I cross the tee only my lead ship fires while getting fired on in return by the entire enemy force.

Crossing the T seems to be bass ackwards in this game.

Another disadvantage........crossing the T presents broadsides to torpedo attacks.

I am glad I am not the only one that thinks the crossing the T is not working right.

_____________________________

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 16

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 6:48:26 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Colonel Mustard

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

Allied Ships Reported to be Approaching!
Japanese TF begins to get underway

Right there. The Japanese ships were tied up and sitting ducks when the Allies showed up.

The odd part of that is that the Japanese crossed the T. That seems to indicate some kind of advantage, not being "sitting ducks."

I have found "crossing the T" to be more of a disadvantage in this game than an advantage.

Nine times out of ten when I cross the tee only my lead ship fires while getting fired on in return by the entire enemy force.

Crossing the T seems to be bass ackwards in this game.

Another disadvantage........crossing the T presents broadsides to torpedo attacks.

I am glad I am not the only one that thinks the crossing the T is not working right.

I think it's OK. It's not a supreme advantage, but it does seem to limit things - such as only Front facing weapons firing, at least at the beginning of the engagement. In short engagements where the T has been crossed, I've checked the ships that "got crossed" afterwards - the LS/RS/R/C guns have less ammo expenditure, meaning they fired less. This is anecdotal, but crossing the T can't be any worse than simply meeting each others' battle lines.

It also says to me that the TF commander has an edge on his opponent in the Naval skill department, which brings general advantages throughout the fight.

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 17

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 6:53:14 PM

topeverest

Posts: 3376
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Houston, TX - USA
Status: offline

Thanks for the help guys. Not knowing the combat secret sauce, I also assume the kiss of death was the TF deciding to refuel and being caught cold. I need to be sure to keep refuel disabled in the future.

What strikes me so odd is that there were almost no hits on allied ships. I would have expected several more even in a shellacking.

_____________________________

Andy M

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 18

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 7:18:31 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

Don't use training cruisers in surface groups in 44!

You can use them to help escort cargo ships and tankers...

(in reply to topeverest)

Post #: 19

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 7:44:39 PM

crsutton

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

Yes, I overlooked the slow cruiser which slowed the TFs maximum speed to 18 knots. That in itself was a serious gaffe. Almost halved the speed of the TF. Oh well. It is not like we all have not done something just as painful.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 20

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 7:50:38 PM

Gaspote

Posts: 303
Joined: 6/30/2013
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gaspote

You not supposed to get an advantage when crossing the T. It's the worst case in naval battle except if you are Admiral Nelson and get the wind.

I beg to differ. That was the goal of any naval force to achieve during the time period. You bring your full firepower to bear on the enemy who can only respond with fire from the bow. Crossing the T should be a major tactical advantage in combat. As to your Nelson comment, getting the weather gage was always a tactical advantage during the period, but every Captain tried to rake (cross the T) of an enemy ship's bow or stern if given the opportunity to do so.

Yep I agree, i understood the opposite. In french we use something like "blocking the T" so for me crossing the T is like you try to go trough but I was wrong.

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 21

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/17/2014 8:34:18 PM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

Crossing the T worked out well at Tsushima, but it was key in the days before turrets. With turrets fore and aft the line only need turn 30 some degrees in line abreast to bring their broadsides to bear. Plus they could wiggle left and right while continueing to close, thus avoiding enemy torpedoes. The crossing formation would also be a nice target to be torpedoed. I don't know enough about the level of radar fire control at that date, but it could be another factor.

(in reply to Gaspote)

Post #: 22

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/18/2014 1:59:40 AM

Dili

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

I don't agree geoff, crossing the T is significant advantage, the force have more guns and fire first. I agree that the crossing the T doesn't appear to work well.
But the player bungled here choosing like many said a slow cruiser.

Anyway the issue with Fletchers - in a short range night combat like this it is non issue - is that Japanese gun being a long gun /50 it should have a significant range advantage over a /38 gun. In the game data it barely exist.

One thing that Japanese players need to keep in mind is that a Fletcher retains 8 guns main guns while most Japanese destroyers go from 6 main guns to 4 guns with 25mm AA uprgrades. So a Fletcher broadside is double of a Yugumo.

The only Japanese destroyer that keeps up are the Akizukis but those should be saved for AA coverage not surface combat.

< Message edited by Dili -- 6/18/2014 3:09:03 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to geofflambert)

Post #: 23

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/18/2014 2:35:29 AM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

Dili I don't know what you mean. Fletchers have 5 main guns, not 8, yes? As far as ballistics, that is what it was known to be, not what the theory says it will likely be. Many other things go into it. Anyway, are you talking about Babes where all the naval guns were calibrated to the same standard a long time ago? A lot of that data was fed into stock a while back, too.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 24

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/18/2014 3:19:50 AM

Dili

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

You are right for some idotic reason i put in my head that the Fletcher had 4 double turrets, might had picturing some British ship instead. No i am not talking about Babes. From the glimpses i got about Babes it seems to go in right direction. In navweps /38 has some 16km range and /50 gun 18,3km strangely in game this goes for 18km vs 20km which makes them both too good. I now think the divergence between them is not so big to warrant my critic.

_____________________________

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 25

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/18/2014 3:33:12 AM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

I realize I also forgot that fire control is not a separate item in this game, so the gun stats have to take that into account as well.

< Message edited by witpqs -- 6/18/2014 4:33:23 AM >

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 26

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/18/2014 6:59:46 AM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

This is October 1944
This would be much more of a actual issue if the fight went the other way.

By 1944 USN torpedoes actually work and against flimsy targets like this a single torpedo can be deadly. Add to that that the US by this point in the game usually has high experience, advanced radar and upgraded ships.

I picture this fight happening in the night in a almost full moon. The Japanese detect the Allies at 12,000 yards and light their boilers and begin to raise steam. The range falls to 10,000 yards as the USN hits the IJN with searchlights and smothers them in rapid fire salvos. The IJN is illuminated against the coast line. Not all of their ships are going to reach sailing power at the same time. In fact if they were at anchor the ships would have to raise electric power and probably have the crew falling out of their bunks to an general alarm.
They would get underway 1 by 1 and the USN would be at full power, battle stations and have all the advantages.

I see nothing wrong here.

_____________________________

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 27

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/18/2014 8:47:52 AM

JuanG

Posts: 906
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

You are right for some idotic reason i put in my head that the Fletcher had 4 double turrets, might had picturing some British ship instead. No i am not talking about Babes. From the glimpses i got about Babes it seems to go in right direction. In navweps /38 has some 16km range and /50 gun 18,3km strangely in game this goes for 18km vs 20km which makes them both too good. I now think the divergence between them is not so big to warrant my critic.

Game ranges are in kyards, not km. Game data does give 5in/38 18kyard range when it is actually 17,3 kyard which should probably be round to 17 kyard instead.

Ballistically the relatively narrow gap in performance despite the difference in barrel length and muzzle velocity (2600fps vs 3000fps in favour of the 5in/50) can be attributed to the heavier shell in the US gun (better energy retention) and the blunter shape of the Japanese shell (more energy loss), which means even though initial muzzle energy is ~23% greater on the Japanese shell, its range is only ~15% longer.

< Message edited by JuanG -- 6/18/2014 9:48:27 AM >

_____________________________

Coral Sea HDM
AltWNT Scenarios

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 28

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/18/2014 10:08:20 AM

Dili

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

quote:

Game ranges are in kyards, not km. Game data does give 5in/38 18kyard range when it is actually 17,3 kyard which should probably be round to 17 kyard instead.

Ballistically the relatively narrow gap in performance despite the difference in barrel length and muzzle velocity (2600fps vs 3000fps in favour of the 5in/50) can be attributed to the heavier shell in the US gun (better energy retention) and the blunter shape of the Japanese shell (more energy loss), which means even though initial muzzle energy is ~23% greater on the Japanese shell, its range is only ~15% longer.

Okay kyds explains it. Thanks.

_____________________________

(in reply to JuanG)

Post #: 29

RE: Most one sided Fletcher Fight ever? - 6/18/2014 1:15:48 PM

Paladin1dcs

Posts: 195
Joined: 7/7/2011
From: Charleston, WV
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

You are right for some idotic reason i put in my head that the Fletcher had 4 double turrets, might had picturing some British ship instead. No i am not talking about Babes. From the glimpses i got about Babes it seems to go in right direction. In navweps /38 has some 16km range and /50 gun 18,3km strangely in game this goes for 18km vs 20km which makes them both too good. I now think the divergence between them is not so big to warrant my critic.

I think you're thinking of the pre-war Porter and Sumers class DDs. They had four twin 5" mounts and are, frankly, some of the best DDs available to the Allies until the Fletchers come along. Great in the AAA role and tough to beat in the surface role as well. The only thing that they don't have, which I wish they did, is armor like the Fletchers.

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 30