RE: Notes from a Small Island

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: Notes from a Small Island

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: Notes from a Small Island

Page: << < prev 15 16 [17] 18 19 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/16/2018 5:09:05 PM

cardas

Posts: 184
Joined: 4/8/2016
Status: offline

Unless I'm sorely mistaken Windows XP (along with that family of Windows OS systems such as Windows 2000) supported 4GB RAM. You'll have to go back to the likes of Windows 3.1 to get below a gigabyte in terms of RAM addressing.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 481

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/16/2018 5:45:47 PM

Canoerebel

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

Erik is employing massed land-based and naval air in his strikes against Shikuka. I think he has more than 1,000 aircraft involved. Maybe far more.

How often did that happen in the real war? How often did it happen in 1944?

The tactic is valid and it's part of the fun of the game. I'd do exactly the same. But if I'm facing a threat of that kind, I'm not breaking Death Star into smaller detachments to fit somebody's idea of historical accuracy.

Ditto my game with John III.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 482

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/16/2018 6:26:00 PM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

Afterall, 100ish attack aircraft escorted by 1000ish fighters is an odd tactic itself!

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 483

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/16/2018 6:44:19 PM

Canoerebel

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

Erik tells me that he had all strike aircraft set to Naval Attack. So he's frustrated that his aircraft aren't acting correctly too.

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 484

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/16/2018 9:31:17 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffroK

Afterall, 100ish attack aircraft escorted by 1000ish fighters is an odd tactic itself!

Too bad the game does not model AVGAS as part of the Oil/Fuel resource. Japan would not for long be able to operate 1000 fighters in support of a strike if it was burning fuel that fast!

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 485

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/17/2018 4:28:29 AM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

Yeah, its coming in WITPAE IV.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 486

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/17/2018 5:03:59 PM

ericv

Posts: 325
Joined: 1/21/2012
Status: offline

I tried a lot of reruns with a lot of different settings in a similar situation in 1941 using Ketoi Jima as an allied base with a lot of ships in harbor, lvl 9 AF, a lot of supply and fuel, a lvl 5 port and no landunits whatsoever. no Eng, no HQ. no AV Support .

Naval search from Etorofu with Mavis. Bettys flying naval attack.
Allied artificially enhanced Pilots to exp 60 and 70..
I tried 400 + lightning 38L against 670+ Jap CV Aircraft. All A6M8 and Judy's . I also tried 400+ different kinds of Allied aircraft against 670 A6M8 and Judys. Allied aircraft always on CAP. Japs switching between sweeping, CAP and LRCAP. Judy;s on Navalstrike.

I tried for the allied ships in Ketoi Jima
1. no Allied TF;s
2. all ship in TF's
3. half of the ships in harbor, other half in TF

I tried attacking with the A6M8 from 4 hexes, from 2 hexes. And artificially enhanced the range of the A6M8 to 11 hexes.

It seems to be impossible to get a lot of fighter on fighter action. Fighter losses are almost always very light even after 4 turns..... Jap's bombers get destroyed en masse. Sometimes Jap bombers get through and hit the shipping. sometimes they don't. No matter the altitude bands or plane settings.

surprising with no Air support or HQ at all for the allied fighters.

In the end I used just the 6 original Jap carriers with A6M8 and Judy, against 7 allied fighter squadrons (p39N, p40N, P51B,P38F) same result. Very light fighter losses. Jap bomber slaughter. moderate allied ship damage..

Just strange.

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 487

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/23/2018 7:46:41 PM

Canoerebel

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

Thanks for testing this and sharing your thoughts, ericv.

I'm discouraged about what's happened. The game may be nerfed due to my plan, though I had no idea this would happen. Erik may not have a way to get a fair crack at my base and shipping. Or, if he does figure out a way, he'll may be able to do so without there being the kind of extreme, prolonged air battle that I was counting on to attrition his pilot corps.

We've discussed this a bit. For now, I think he plans to keep tinkering to see if he can figure things out. I'm just sitting and regretting I turned this into a fiasco.

(in reply to ericv)

Post #: 488

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/23/2018 7:53:29 PM

Canoerebel

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

We're near the end of June, doing a turn every day or two or three. While Erik is working various angles to get his air forces to properly attack Shikuka, I'm doing the same ol' things:

1. Strategic bombing of his bases - the results have been modest with fairly light losses; nearly 2,000 points scored thus far, but we're very early in the game.
2. My moderately damaged carriers made Seattle, where the three of them need about 50-60 days in the yards. Two other fleet carriers needed only a week or two in port will arrive shortly.
3. The two heavily damaged carriers are nearing the West Coast. They're going to Alameda, as long as they don't spring more leaks. They've had good damage control, so I'm optimistic. But they'll need maybe 180 days in port.
4. The balance of the carriers have reformed and are on the move. They're strong but not strong enough to take on KB, though I hope Erik doesn't know that. I may have to taunt and tease him from time to time, though, so that he can't focus solely on Shikuka and Sikhalin Island.

Mostly, though, I wonder if this game is doomed to whither.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 489

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/23/2018 7:54:20 PM

Lecivius

Posts: 4845
Joined: 8/5/2007
From: Denver
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I'm just sitting and regretting I turned this into a fiasco.

Not your fault, boss. You just pulled a Greyjoy'ism

_____________________________

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 490

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/23/2018 8:17:32 PM

jwolf

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline

quote:

The two heavily damaged carriers are nearing the West Coast. They're going to Alameda, as long as they don't spring more leaks.

Wouldn't it be faster to repair one of them in Alameda and the other in SF?

(in reply to Lecivius)

Post #: 491

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/23/2018 9:23:56 PM

witpqs

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

Is this related to a particular way of using LRCAP?

_____________________________

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

(in reply to jwolf)

Post #: 492

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/23/2018 9:33:30 PM

Canoerebel

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

I think it's related to LRCAP, but you'll probably have to read Erik's AAR to get more information. I know for sure something wonky is going on but I'm not sure what or why.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 493

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/23/2018 9:56:55 PM

witpqs

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

I'm only reading one side of this, my LRCAP question was from recalling some comment or other that was made when this first came up. I forget who made the comment.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 494

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/23/2018 10:05:27 PM

Canoerebel

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

When this all started, I thought Erik's use of big LRCAP over Shikuka, combined with massive sweeps of the base, wasn't working right. The massive number of fighters only engage in brief, disinterested fighting rather than the carnage I'd expected. This has since happened many other times. Erik (and others, I think) wonder if the wonkiness is created by the vast number of targets in the hex. I have hundreds of ships disbanded in port, plus combat TFs there, plus well over 1,000 aircraft.

Erik is concerned (rightfully so, as far as I can tell) that his strike aircraft aren't flying in the expected numbers. He's only getting dribs and drabs in a target rich environment.

I'm concerned because a surprising percentage of his strike aircraft do get through to launch. In a recent massive raid of 1,000+ fighters, he managed to get about 90 strike aircraft to attack. Of those 90, something like 60 made it through and attacked. I had well over 750 fighters at the base. They barely engaged the enemy fighters and enemy strike aircraft. My losses were minimal while he did lose a fair number of the aircraft involved.

But nothing like you'd expect to see in this kind of environment. I'd expected carnage, with both sides losing lots of planes and Erik losing lots of pilots, since we're fighting over my base. Instead, his fighter corps hasn't been scratched, yet.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 495

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/23/2018 11:06:07 PM

witpqs

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

OK, it must have been that discussion. I'm trying to salt away how to avoid that issue in late game, but it seems like a technique is not really discovered yet.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 496

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/24/2018 7:46:18 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Thanks for testing this and sharing your thoughts, ericv.

I'm discouraged about what's happened. The game may be nerfed due to my plan, though I had no idea this would happen. Erik may not have a way to get a fair crack at my base and shipping. Or, if he does figure out a way, he'll may be able to do so without there being the kind of extreme, prolonged air battle that I was counting on to attrition his pilot corps.

We've discussed this a bit. For now, I think he plans to keep tinkering to see if he can figure things out. I'm just sitting and regretting I turned this into a fiasco.

I don't intend this to be harsh but...

I don't see this as a flaw in the game. You invaded and captured a critical potential airbase (up to level 9) that your airframe superiority allows you to retain aerial control over. Just because Japan can't compete with that (effectively) doesn't mean something has gone wrong with the game.

While yes, the minimal fighter-on-fight combat is a bit weird, I'm not convinced that it's not simply an artifact of LRCAP not being very effective (just writ large in this case).

Shikuka is a long way for IJ planes to fly and try to do anything (except for the long-legged bombers who would be short on escorts) against several hundred Allied CAP. His only chance would be if he still had Toyohara and was able to keep it open and supplied with planes.

If he really wanted to close it, he had a chance to do so when your navy was gone - he could have escorted surface forces in with KB and made a run at a bombardment to damage enough CAP or inhibit the airfield to a substantial degree. He has no chance of doing this if your carriers are in the vicinity, and if he just didn't have the assets in place to do it when your carriers retired to the east... that's still not a flaw in the game's air combat routines.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 497

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/24/2018 7:52:14 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Erik is concerned (rightfully so, as far as I can tell) that his strike aircraft aren't flying in the expected numbers. He's only getting dribs and drabs in a target rich environment.

This cuts both ways. More strike planes flying for him means more planes and pilots lost, and more VPs for you.

It's also entirely possible that, given that so many of his planes are dedicated to LRCAP (apparently; I'm reading both sides but I don't think he's even posted an exact breakdown of how many units were doing what), his strike craft are refusing to fly into the teeth of an overwhelming CAP without enough dedicated escorts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I'm concerned because a surprising percentage of his strike aircraft do get through to launch. In a recent massive raid of 1,000+ fighters, he managed to get about 90 strike aircraft to attack. Of those 90, something like 60 made it through and attacked. I had well over 750 fighters at the base. They barely engaged the enemy fighters and enemy strike aircraft. My losses were minimal while he did lose a fair number of the aircraft involved.

This is largely my experience with being struck by bombers. It took a very long time before my pilots were able to shoot them down before an appreciable number were able to drop ordnance. I attributed this to an increasing disparity in pilot skills as the most likely factor, but it's possible that increased access to better radar sets did it. I used comparable numbers of fighters, whether based on CVs/CVEs or at an airfield.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

But nothing like you'd expect to see in this kind of environment. I'd expected carnage, with both sides losing lots of planes and Erik losing lots of pilots, since we're fighting over my base. Instead, his fighter corps hasn't been scratched, yet.

Given the specific circumstances in this game, I'm not at all surprised at what's happening in the combats.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 498

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/24/2018 9:22:47 PM

witpqs

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

It seems I was understanding right in the first place - LRCAP is being used (true?). If it doesn't work in this case (as just described by Lokasenna), so what? That's not a bug.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 499

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/24/2018 9:27:49 PM

MakeeLearn

Posts: 4278
Joined: 9/11/2016
Status: offline

Where applicable...

" Long Range CAP over Air Combat TF�s is only 20% as effective as over other units since it�s harder to coordinate with an Air Combat TF that is constantly changing course and is using radio silence. "

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 500

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/24/2018 10:50:41 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

Where applicable...

" Long Range CAP over Air Combat TF�s is only 20% as effective as over other units since it�s harder to coordinate with an Air Combat TF that is constantly changing course and is using radio silence. "

Yeah, I don't think that's applying here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

It seems I was understanding right in the first place - LRCAP is being used (true?). If it doesn't work in this case (as just described by Lokasenna), so what? That's not a bug.

Right, the point I was trying to make (and I posted examples of air strikes from MM against my 700+ plane CAP in obvert's AAR making this point) was that bombers do get through anyway (admittedly not all that many). That part of it, at least, is definitely not a bug. The only part that's weird is seemingly the cooperating sweeps having short combats and potentially leading to a short combat for the CAP vs strike escorts. LRCAP combat being short or nonexistent is nothing new - it happens all the time, despite planes being "there" in the combat animation.

Here are the examples I posted on obvert's side. The CAP outnumbers the raid by 8:1 in the first example (and the escorts by almost 20:1), by more than 15:1 in the second example (and by 75:1 on just the escorts), and by about 6:1 total in the third example. And still a handful of planes attempted attacks against a layered CAP (from 2K up to 36K with plenty of planes scattered all over) that had more than 30 minutes of warning, on range 0 with 80+% set to CAP. This is just from one day - I probably have dozens more examples I could find.

No LRCAP was harmed in the making of this quote.

quote:

Raid detected at 120 NM, estimated altitude 30,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 40 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B6N2a Jill x 52
J2M3 Jack x 23
Ki-84r Frank x 14

Allied aircraft
FM-2 Wildcat x 173
F4U-1D Corsair x 296
F6F-3 Hellcat x 99
F6F-5 Hellcat x 162

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N2a Jill: 28 destroyed
J2M3 Jack: 5 destroyed
Ki-84r Frank: 3 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F6F-5 Hellcat: 1 destroyed

--------------------------------------

Raid detected at 116 NM, estimated altitude 18,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 34 minutes

Japanese aircraft
D4Y4 Judy x 44
N1K5-J George x 9

Allied aircraft
FM-2 Wildcat x 173
F4U-1D Corsair x 292
F6F-3 Hellcat x 99
F6F-5 Hellcat x 157

Japanese aircraft losses
D4Y4 Judy: 24 destroyed
N1K5-J George: 5 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
FM-2 Wildcat: 5 destroyed

Allied Ships
CVL Independence

Aircraft Attacking:
1 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 10000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb

--------------------------------------

Japanese aircraft
N1K2-J George x 10
Ki-43-IIIa Oscar x 27
Ki-48-IIc Lily x 48
Ki-84a Frank x 14

Allied aircraft
FM-2 Wildcat x 157
F4U-1D Corsair x 287
F6F-3 Hellcat x 97
F6F-5 Hellcat x 153

Japanese aircraft losses
N1K2-J George: 3 destroyed
Ki-43-IIIa Oscar: 6 destroyed
Ki-48-IIc Lily: 30 destroyed
Ki-48-IIc Lily: 1 destroyed by flak
Ki-84a Frank: 2 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
FM-2 Wildcat: 4 destroyed

Allied Ships
BB Queen Elizabeth

Aircraft Attacking:
1 x Ki-48-IIc Lily releasing from 10000'

(in reply to MakeeLearn)

Post #: 501

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/25/2018 4:58:47 AM

palioboy2

Posts: 190
Joined: 12/16/2009
From: Canada
Status: offline

Do you have a different vision for strategic bombing in this game? Possibly something more pointed at a single industry. Trying to take out one of the cogs like HI or his aircraft production instead of general bombing?

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 502

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/25/2018 11:05:52 AM

HansBolter

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: palioboy2

Do you have a different vision for strategic bombing in this game? Possibly something more pointed at a single industry. Trying to take out one of the cogs like HI or his aircraft production instead of general bombing?

Second this sentiment and it goes for both of your current AAR games.

Especially in the game against J3, I would have concentrated on destroying the aircraft and engine factories, primarily in the sweet target of Harbin, but in other locales as well.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to palioboy2)

Post #: 503

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/25/2018 12:10:24 PM

Canoerebel

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

Concentrating on a specific industries or a small spread of industries has the downside of making the targeting too predictable.

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 504

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/25/2018 12:55:19 PM

jwolf

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Concentrating on a specific industries or a small spread of industries has the downside of making the targeting too predictable.

Well, you get what you pay for. I guess the question is what is more important: scoring points, or destroying certain key industry? They are correlated, of course, but which is the primary objective?

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 505

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/25/2018 1:04:14 PM

MakeeLearn

Posts: 4278
Joined: 9/11/2016
Status: offline

Warning Leaflets

Telling the targets in advance can be a psychological weapon, even in the game.
It can give the added bonus of providing something to "Sweep" up.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to jwolf)

Post #: 506

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/25/2018 1:16:42 PM

Canoerebel

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

The highest priority is preserving the bomber force as best as possible. Telegraphing targeting doesn't help. Spreading the targets does. It's still early in the war with a long way to go. THus far I've mostly targeted Resources, Heavy Industry, Light Industry and a few aircraft factories. But the first three are so common that Erik can't pick a pattern. I've hit daytime, nighttime, close, far off, targets reconned, targets not reconned, etc.

(in reply to MakeeLearn)

Post #: 507

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/30/2018 4:33:11 AM

palioboy2

Posts: 190
Joined: 12/16/2009
From: Canada
Status: offline

I agree with the point of remaining unpredictable and harboring your forces at this point. But would it not be possible to strategically target HI (for example) while still maintaining operational flexibility?

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 508

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/30/2018 5:23:47 AM

Lovejoy

Posts: 240
Joined: 12/16/2015
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

Warning Leaflets

Telling the targets in advance can be a psychological weapon, even in the game.
It can give the added bonus of providing something to "Sweep" up.

Does anyone know what the card says?

(in reply to MakeeLearn)

Post #: 509

RE: Notes from a Small Island - 1/30/2018 6:45:11 AM

Barb

Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lovejoy

quote:

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

Warning Leaflets

Telling the targets in advance can be a psychological weapon, even in the game.
It can give the added bonus of providing something to "Sweep" up.

Does anyone know what the card says?

http://navonanumis.blogspot.sk/2015/02/b-29-superfortress-bombing-raid-warning.html

_____________________________

(in reply to Lovejoy)

Post #: 510

Page: << < prev 15 16 [17] 18 19 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Notes from a Small Island

Page: << < prev 15 16 [17] 18 19 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

1.109

Slitherine

RE: Notes from a Small Island