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: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

 
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: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) Page: <<   < prev  141 142 [143] 144 145   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/14/2019 7:09:10 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Ok, I found what I was looking for. It was FLAK that got the transports during the period 24-28 Aug 43. That probably wasn't over Chungking. That was when the Chindits attacked Warazup in the NE corner of Burma. I'll bet he was trying to fly in supply.

My next question is, why isn't the flak I have in Chungking shooting at anything? Range? Let me check to see what's there.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4261
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/14/2019 7:21:23 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		In addition to all the AAMGs, I have 32x 75mm T88 AA Guns. They have a 25k ceiling. If his transports are dropping supply from that height, the supply would be landing all over the countryside.



_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4262
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/14/2019 8:01:04 PM   
Xargun

 

Posts: 3690
Joined: 2/14/2004
From: Near Columbus, Ohio
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

In addition to all the AAMGs, I have 32x 75mm T88 AA Guns. They have a 25k ceiling. If his transports are dropping supply from that height, the supply would be landing all over the countryside.




Not sure AA shoots at transports dropping supplies or men. Only when I've ever hit them was with CAP or LRCAP over the destination base.

Xargun

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4263
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/14/2019 8:11:36 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Well, this is what I saw on 8/24/43:

AIR TRANSPORT PHASE
:: Dakota III damaged by flak
:: Dakota III damaged by flak
:: Dakota III damaged by flak
:: Dakota III damaged by flak
** Dakota III destroyed by flak
:: Dakota III damaged by flak
:: Dakota III damaged by flak
:: Dakota III damaged by flak
** Dakota III destroyed by flak
** Dakota III destroyed by flak
:: Dakota III damaged by flak
** Dakota III destroyed by flak
** Dakota III destroyed by flak
:: Dakota III damaged by flak
:: C-46A Commando damaged by flak
:: C-46A Commando damaged by flak
:: C-46A Commando damaged by flak
** C-46A Commando destroyed by flak
** C-46A Commando destroyed by flak
** C-46A Commando destroyed by flak
** C-87 Liberator destroyed by flak
:: C-87 Liberator damaged by flak
:: C-87 Liberator damaged by flak
:: C-46A Commando damaged by flak
:: C-46A Commando damaged by flak
:: C-46A Commando damaged by flak
:: C-46A Commando damaged by flak
:: C-46A Commando damaged by flak
:: C-46A Commando damaged by flak
:: C-46A Commando damaged by flak
:: C-46A Commando damaged by flak

No confirmation what they were carrying or where it was, unfortunately.

81 Oscars sweeping Chungking tomorrow. If nothing, then I'll try the LRCAP with tanks the way Michael suggested.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Xargun)
Post #: 4264
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/14/2019 9:49:15 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2732
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli
If nothing, then I'll try the LRCAP with tanks the way Michael suggested.

Teach us the dao of flying tanks please!!

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4265
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/14/2019 10:39:33 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		lol, that's DROP tanks.

Got the turn. A couple errands and I'm running it.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 4266
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/14/2019 10:56:12 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline 		What makes you sure it's Chungking that is getting the air supply and not an Allied unit out in the wilderness?

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4267
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/14/2019 11:05:02 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline 		It's been done. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_A-40







Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Zorch -- 1/14/2019 11:06:12 PM >

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 4268
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/15/2019 12:45:40 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

What makes you sure it's Chungking that is getting the air supply and not an Allied unit out in the wilderness?


The Chinese AV keeps rising even with the bombing. Supply is coming from somewhere. 100 transports are at Ledo. Now you have me thinking again. I'm going to go over the last week's turns to see what the raw manpower looks like.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 4269
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/15/2019 1:28:18 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline 		It could also be units that are coming back … IIRC at least some of the devices arrive in ready state, not sure about all.


_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4270
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/15/2019 11:30:38 AM   
mind_messing

 

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

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

It could also be units that are coming back … IIRC at least some of the devices arrive in ready state, not sure about all.



It's only Chinese squad-type devices that come back IIRC, so Chinese Rifle, Cavalry and maybe (?) MMG squads. Could possibly account for your rise in AV - keep track of the number of units present. Given that they resurrect every 30 days it's possible you're seeing troops that you already destroyed in the siege reappear - which is great for you: more VP's.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 4271
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/15/2019 6:16:37 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Yep, you guys are right. Units are coming back. They're getting back about 0-2 units a day. You're right, it is great for VPs, but I'm done with Chungking. I want it to be over. I'm just a couple days away from the big experiment: the 11k AV attack. I'm really curious to see what effect that has on the Chinese vs. 2x 5-6k AV attacks during the same timeframe.

The sweeps did nothing, as expected. I'm about ready to send the turn back. There will be ~40 or so Oscars on LRCAP from 4 hexes out with drop tanks next turn. (The other sentai of Oscars will resume strafing Chungking, and doing nice execution too.) If that doesn't work, then screw it. Either he's not sending in supply (which I seriously doubt) or he's using stealth transports. I'll just move on from the attempt to kill transports.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 4272
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/15/2019 7:11:35 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		10 Dec 43

Sub War

Vava'u is an Allied hub, and I've had some good hunting there. Guess I struck a nerve recently because the place has several ASW TFs there now. One found and hit the I-2 once causing moderate damage: 43-38(15)-10(6)-0. She's headed home.

5 Fleet

Just the usual Sally raid on Umnak. The Japanese troops there continue to prepare for the deliberate assault in about a week's time.

4 Fleet

The US carriers are at it again. A raid of 36 Dauntlesses escorted by 60 Hellcats it the airbase at Nauru Island causing light damage. I have a sub that'll reach them the day after tomorrow. I'm keeping an eye on them, just in case.

I have the 3 Unryus available at Saipan and the Shokaku and Kaga at Babeldaob (along with a smattering of baby flattops there too). In addition, Akagi and Soryu will complete their repairs in 4 and 5 days respectively (at Kobe). They'll then head out to join up with Shokaku and Kaga. It looks like there are only 2 US CVs in the TF. I'd love to gang up on them with 7 Japanese CVs. We'll see. If they're still goofing around tomorrow, I'll probably send Shokaku and Kaga to Saipan and make a merry fleet to go a hunting.

SE Fleet

Same ole thing. 59x 2E sorties against Rabaul and 17x 4E sorties against Hollandia. No damage.

SRA

Nothing to report.

Burma

I saw that the level 4 airfield at Kalemyo is being upgraded, so I sent the Helens there today. A total of 58 Helens flew (in 3 waves) causing little damage and losing a Helen to flak vs. a single Hurricane to the escorting Oscars.

A couple Hurricanes were shot down over Akyab and a couple Warhawks were lost over Ledo. Slim pickings today.

China

With no Oscars bombing, the aerial bombardment was lackluster. Only 2 squads were killed (1 infantry) and another 121 were disabled.

The artillery bombardment was a little better killing 31 steps (27 infantry) and disabling another 29.

The Chinese infantry squad kill count is up to 182 for the month. Half of the replacements squads already!

The sweep of Chungking did nothing at all. I'm trying LRCAP with drop tanks from 4 hexes away tomorrow to see if anything happens. If not, I give up!

Other Stuff

Status of damaged carriers:

Akagi: 3-1(1)-0-0, repaired in 4 days
Soryu: 14-0-0-0, repaired in 5 days
Zuikaku: 3-50(50)-20(19)-0, repaired in 147 days
Chuyo: 20-3(3)-0-0, repaired in 12 days.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4273
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/15/2019 8:33:41 PM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Hi, Is he flying recon over those bases where his bombing is have no effect? (in other words what is his detection level?)

_____________________________






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

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4274
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/16/2019 1:58:13 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline 		I don't know which particular Oscar model is being used but intercepting enemy transport operations from an airfield 4 hexes distant is too far away for some of the Oscar models.

There are two distinct elements involved in intercepting transport aircraft.  The first element involves range of the interceptors. and distance to target  At a distance of 4 hexes and if the latest beta is used, the interceptors need a minimum range of 14 hexes.  If this element is met an interception message is displayed.  This message does not mean air combat ensued.  For air combat to ensue requires the second element, a die roll to be passed.  The greater is the distance to target, the less likely combat ensues.  The longer legged is the interceptor the more likely the die roll is passed.

Alfred

(in reply to mogami)
Post #: 4275
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/16/2019 2:11:22 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline 		Mike's obsessive quest for transport interdiction.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 4276
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/16/2019 3:57:10 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Alfred - what is the formula for transport interdiction?

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 4277
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/16/2019 4:38:25 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Mike's obsessive quest for transport interdiction.









Attachment (1)

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 4278
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/16/2019 7:14:15 PM   
witpqs


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

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Mike's obsessive quest for transport interdiction.




Interdict the transport sub!

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 4279
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/16/2019 7:24:09 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2732
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch
Mike's obsessive quest for transport interdiction.



Interdict the transport sub!

That's more like US sub surfaces, and you are there all alone in your dingy PB

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 4280
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/16/2019 9:47:13 PM   
dasboot1960


Posts: 389
Joined: 8/2/2009
From: St Augustine, Florida
Status: offline 		I think it likely that he is not air landing transport in, otherwise, I think ops losses would show up due to the runway damage. I think I recall reading that paradropping supply goes off at 1/2 capacity, but I certainly can't find it now.

_____________________________

Down like a CLOWN!

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 4281
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/16/2019 10:09:34 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline 		Mike - the transports damaged by flak messages will be noticeable in the replay. It doesn't tell you in the message where it's occurring, but during the replay it will be centered on the hex it's occurring in.

(in reply to dasboot1960)
Post #: 4282
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/17/2019 3:41:33 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		There is a wealth of information on intercepting transports in the old Obvert vs Jocke AARs, with I believe Alfred chiming in and also perhaps in one of my AARs.

I would search for posts by Alfred about it...surely you will find some. I found this tidbit very quickly, interesting, but doesn't answer Michael's question (but I only did one search and selected one post):

IIRC I thought the manual says that if you are flying transport supply missions from base A to base B, then you can only protect the transport planes by flying LRCAP from base A (or base C, D etc) over base B. Fighters at base B itself will not provide protection for the incoming transport planes.

Alfred


Long and short of it is that you need to be close, with lots of fighters, and I am unsure if you need to match altitudes. Anything beyond 3 hexes if very is rough. My bad memory seems to think a rough guide is divide the range by 3 to have any chance of intercepting. Other factors come into play too....

The Oscar IIIa if available, has great range and is perhaps the best Japanese fighter relatively early for the task.

----
Transports and bombers can drop supplies at a base even with the runways destroyed, they just air drop, and suffer a penalty in capacity...pretty sure that this is clear in the manual somewhere.

---

The 8/24 transport and flak report in the ops report would show up in the replay, the map will center over the location, perhaps get a red line showing direction of the transports, and the text shows up in the bottom left. You can pause and cycle thru the messages...perhaps you still have that save around and can watch the replay again?

I have had this happen notably where I was air transporting supplies to my own base and lost the base but forgot to stand down the transports and or a paratroop landing.

---

You are at the point where Allied Flak, if present, can absolutely negate your bombers.



< Message edited by Lowpe -- 1/17/2019 3:50:38 PM >

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 4283
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/17/2019 4:45:57 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2732
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Transports and bombers can drop supplies at a base even with the runways destroyed, they just air drop, and suffer a penalty in capacity...pretty sure that this is clear in the manual somewhere.

I am testing this right now and you won't believe what happened! [click here]

Fully developed base, several transport groups transporting supply to an island base in range. Level of runway damage on the island is set in the editor. No enemies on the map. All that jazz.
Contrary to common sense, transports do not fly at all towards the base with the severely damaged runway. I'm currently trying to determine the amount of damage that stops transports.
This pretty much amounts to a bug. Because as you have said nothing prevents supply paradrop in this case. Yet zero supply is transported

Edit: I do not remember what is the formula for airfield closing due to damage, but transports do not fly e.g. with 50% damage on 5 level airfield. And do fly with 50% damage on the 6 level
Edit2: Formula for airfield closing is damage>20+(Airfield Size *5) for strike missions (Manual 9.4.1). So apparently receiving airfield is treated the same way as starting airfield for transports. Both should be open for transports to fly. No paradrops of supply heh.

< Message edited by GetAssista -- 1/17/2019 5:38:54 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 4284
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/17/2019 5:37:28 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

I don't know which particular Oscar model is being used but intercepting enemy transport operations from an airfield 4 hexes distant is too far away for some of the Oscar models.

There are two distinct elements involved in intercepting transport aircraft.  The first element involves range of the interceptors. and distance to target  At a distance of 4 hexes and if the latest beta is used, the interceptors need a minimum range of 14 hexes.  If this element is met an interception message is displayed.  This message does not mean air combat ensued.  For air combat to ensue requires the second element, a die roll to be passed.  The greater is the distance to target, the less likely combat ensues.  The longer legged is the interceptor the more likely the die roll is passed.

Alfred


I'm using the Oscar IIIa exclusively here, with a 14 hex extended range with drop tanks. I ran the turn and nothing happened. I had then set to use drop tanks but set their max range to 4 hexes. Apparently that was the reason nothing happened (assuming transports flew there). I reset the max range to 14 hexes this time. One more go.

I appreciate the explanation of how this works. Never knew that was how it worked (obviously).

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 4285
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/17/2019 5:38:15 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Mike's obsessive quest for transport interdiction.





lol, it really is turning into this...

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 4286
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/17/2019 8:05:18 PM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Hi, Setting a low range with drop tanks allows the planes to loiter.

_____________________________






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

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4287
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/17/2019 8:46:49 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

I don't know which particular Oscar model is being used but intercepting enemy transport operations from an airfield 4 hexes distant is too far away for some of the Oscar models.

There are two distinct elements involved in intercepting transport aircraft.  The first element involves range of the interceptors. and distance to target  At a distance of 4 hexes and if the latest beta is used, the interceptors need a minimum range of 14 hexes.  If this element is met an interception message is displayed.  This message does not mean air combat ensued.  For air combat to ensue requires the second element, a die roll to be passed.  The greater is the distance to target, the less likely combat ensues.  The longer legged is the interceptor the more likely the die roll is passed.

Alfred


I'm using the Oscar IIIa exclusively here, with a 14 hex extended range with drop tanks. I ran the turn and nothing happened. I had then set to use drop tanks but set their max range to 4 hexes. Apparently that was the reason nothing happened (assuming transports flew there). I reset the max range to 14 hexes this time. One more go.

I appreciate the explanation of how this works. Never knew that was how it worked (obviously).


That barely gets you over the first element. Always better to exceed the first element.

It is not, however, comfortably meeting the second element. IOW you face good odds of failing the die roll which determines whether combat is initiated. Even if combat is initiated (IOW you passed the die roll) you then enter the combat algorithms where the interceptor model is not a particularly fearsome killer.

You really should be aiming to base your interceptors (Oscars) closer to Chungking. A distance of 2 hexes from Chungking would go a long way to neutralising the less favourable aspects of the algorithm.

Alfred

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4288
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/17/2019 8:48:25 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mogami

Hi, Setting a low range with drop tanks allows the planes to loiter.


Not really relevant in this instance. "Loitering" time is already factored into the interception algorithm.

Alfred

(in reply to mogami)
Post #: 4289
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/17/2019 8:58:08 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
quote:

I thought I had heard somewhere that it's airdropped if there was no airfield.


But that would reduce his range to normal, as airdropped supplies are done at that range, which in this case would be too short.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4290
Page:   <<   < prev  141 142 [143] 144 145   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) Page: <<   < prev  141 142 [143] 144 145   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

2.250