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: My first go at this game, very enjoyable!

 
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 >> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/6/2021 6:47:18 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline
The TF at Tulagi just invaded there, recall them and give them air cover. These are the ships that the Yorktown actually attacked.

The Claudes are not that good but are better than nothing as a defense. Those Kates can Naval Search and do ASW as well.

Maybe save your Betties for anti-ship duties. Don't forget to Naval Search. Search at night as well.

You know what happened in real life I presume and you have seen what the other side has. Now get it so your Kates can have an escort and attack his carriers at an eight hex range . . .

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Randy Stead)
Post #: 61
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/6/2021 7:02:52 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

I know that; I should've used emoticons to convey that it wasn't a serious post.

I wonder about policies with respect to splitting up close relations in combat units. In WWI the British deployed "pals" battalions, units of men drafted or volunteered from local areas. On one hand it facilitated very close bonds that boosted morale but at the same time made the effects of large casualties more demoralizing both at the front and at home as the casualty lists were published.


They broke them up later.

Four brothers were in the same Army unit but they were separated later. One died on Utah; one died on Omaha; a week before the Normandy invasion, one was believed to have died in Burma where he was a gunner on a shot down B-24; the other one was in the 506th PIR of the US 101st Airborne Division and he did parachute into Normandy. He received orders to go back to the states without having to have people look for him. His brother that was shot down in Burma, came home from a Japanese run POW camp.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Randy Stead)
Post #: 62
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/6/2021 7:36:11 PM   
BBfanboy


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

Extremely so, Joe. I learned more in one turn as the IJN than the Allies in two full scenario plays!

So, some observations from simply loading the game as IJN turn 1, with no actions plotted, just snooping:

TF5 is at Tulagi, mission: amphibious. It has no troops or cargo loaded. The base is too small for much. Looking around the map I am wondering what is the purpose of this empty TF? Am I supposed to send it to Truk or Rabaul and load it up with supplies for Port Moresby? Send it back to home port? There are virtually no troops on the map I can find except for a few engineers and base forces. Am I to load the engineers and use them to take empty Allied bases? Seems pointless, but then again I am a cherry rookie fumbling with the buttons of his first date.

TF4 is in the Solomon Islands chain, near Rakata Bay. It is labelled as MO Close Cover Force. I did nothing with it but the arrogant American decadent running dog capitalist imperialists [just ran out of epithets] had the effrontery to attack it and sank a few of the Emperor's much needed ships. Lesson to rookies: Look at TF labels; the scenario designer is giving you a clue as to what it should be used for. Next replay I shall send it west to cover the MO landing forces, probably what they were intended to do.

Although it would be a nice reinforcement for the fighter groups of the carriers, the splitting of the 27 plane Zero unit at Rabaul seems to weaken Rabaul. I am not a wise man yet, but I would think leaving them there would make my strikes on PM more effective. The Zeros at Lae I will not set to sweep, at least not until I get better at assigning bombers. When I watch the AI I see Bettys [?] from Rabaul hitting PM with escort from Lae and Rabaul. I can do better in this area.

Lastly, is it really good advice to send the 6 Kates from Shoho over to the main fleet? Yes, it gives that fleet more punch, but then what is the point of Shoho's TF with only fighters aboard? I tried to set her Claude's to naval search but could not. Are they any good in air to air? Or, never mind and I shall learn the harder, but more memorable way.

Prioritize! Hitting the enemy's carriers is first priority because it practically ensures the transports will make it to Port Moresby. Shoho should keep some punch and move close to the big CVs to share CAP while striking at enemy carriers or surface warships.
Rabaul must support the carriers. If Rabaul gets attacked it will be damaged but can recover from that - your carriers might not.
Don't be afraid to countermarch your transports to keep them out of range of US naval bombers until you have dealt with their carriers. Better to delay an invasion than have nothing to invade with. Yes, time is an issue, but the VPs you get for smashing the US carriers should give you victory (if you do not lose yours too!).
US subs will be pretty ineffective in torpedo attacks but they can boost your detection level so avoid their hexes if possible but don't waste a lot of effort trying to sink them. You need AA cover more than ASW cover.

_____________________________

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 Randy Stead)
Post #: 63
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/6/2021 7:43:56 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline
The US has S Boats there which have torpedoes that work, if I remember correctly about the subs.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 64
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/6/2021 7:46:56 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
Good point RJ. Even after considering that, their experience is low and the MK 10 torp is not so powerful, so the chances of a devastating sub attack are not huge. A judgement call for the player to make.

_____________________________

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 RangerJoe)
Post #: 65
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/6/2021 8:51:19 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline
Check the LCU's list and what target they are prepared to. That will tell those to use for Port Moresby invasion.

(in reply to Randy Stead)
Post #: 66
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/6/2021 10:04:28 PM   
Randy Stead


Posts: 454
Joined: 12/23/2000
From: Ontario, Canada
Status: offline
Just finished Coral Sea as Japan.

Allied decisive victory. 1237 points to my 678.

I managed to get the assault ashore, but I let them rest one turn too long. My first assault was a 1-2, next was a 1-1 and I knocked the fortification down to 0. One more assault would have taken it. The scenario description is correct, time is the enemy to the IJN.

I was able to shield the landing force by moving my carriers south of PM. It was crazy; I had set my secondary targeting to airfields, so I lost a few planes by attacking PM and Darwin! I then made sure my only attack mode was naval after that. I had one weak attack at just outside American range. I had a whole wing of Kates wiped out due to poor escort. Lesson learned there. I made the mistake of moving closer, so that we hit each other the next day. Each side hit two carriers. On the way back to Noumea a sub sank Yorktown. I got my fleet back to Rabaul in decent shape, but not good enough for air ops. I sent a surface combat TF out from Rabaul and hit three Allied ships, sinking Australia and Hobart and damaged the DD with them. Some small satisfaction in getting off a successful surface combat. I should have done it earlier. Lesson learned.

A sub also sank the AO Tippecanoe. A blow to the Allies. I lost a ship or two to the coastal guns at PM. I need to do more shore bombardment. I realized that too late. By the time I got a decent TF there it was the last turn. Too late the hero, as the movie title says. I also muffed the Zeros from Lae. I had them set for two turns in a row to do a 100' attack on PM just for learning, but it didn't happen for some unknown, to me, reason.

I transferred those long range bombers from Truk to Rabaul, Bettys. They did an attack on the carriers but all I got was a black eye for it. I then set them to hitting PM.

Is there a way of specifically attacking the Allied land forces in PM? I had a few hits on them, minor results, was wondering if there is a way to specify the ground units, or the shore guns?

It was fun while it lasted, frustrating as hell not knowing what damage I had done to the carriers, but since they skedaddled I figured they were hurt.

My subs did very well, torpedoed but did not sink a couple of things, but did manage three hits on Yorktown. That was most satisfying.

I see why it was recommended to me by others to play this from both sides. I have learned that the IJN can be a lethal force if handled well. I did not handle them well, but I am a cadet. I realized the AI was afraid of getting too close to my land bombers. I made the mistake of closing in on them, and not having a properly coordinated strike when I did. Setting land targets as secondary could have cost me much worse against a good player, with my guys blowing their position with those futile land attacks whilst the carriers were still out there. I think the purpose of the carriers is to shield the transports. If the Allies wish to stop them, they must come to you.

(in reply to Randy Stead)
Post #: 67
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/6/2021 10:07:38 PM   
Randy Stead


Posts: 454
Joined: 12/23/2000
From: Ontario, Canada
Status: offline
Any advice for how to split the ratio between CAP and escort? I had one raid get jumped by 48 Wildcats.

(in reply to Randy Stead)
Post #: 68
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/6/2021 10:32:59 PM   
Randy Stead


Posts: 454
Joined: 12/23/2000
From: Ontario, Canada
Status: offline
Whilst eating dinner just now, I realized that I had forgotten to comment on the weather... I don't know what it is with me and weather in this game. Now that I am IJN the clouds are tethered to my ships. I must send crew up top with axes and cutting torches to cut the cables anchoring them to my ships. Made one strike, the first one I think it was, where my Kates got nailed. Crap weather. And again when I hit the American carriers. They came after me with the instruction to pack an umbrella for light rain, but also to bring their sunscreen lotion.

I don't want to sound like I am blaming the weather, but as a born and raised Toronto Maple Leafs fan [the refs hosed us!] I must have something to complain about.

(in reply to Randy Stead)
Post #: 69
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/7/2021 3:05:22 AM   
cblattmann


Posts: 77
Joined: 6/13/2019
Status: offline
Thank you BBfanboy. What you describe in your first paragraph is what I saw and wondered if that was a function of the type of TF and how or if that applied to other types of TFs. Especially after I read that bombardment TF are essentially surface combat TF that have the ability to bombard the shore. So I thought that there is an inherent ability to all the different TF types and choosing the right one would determine the functionality at my disposal.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 70
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/7/2021 3:13:29 AM   
rustysi


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

I did split the 27 Zeroes at Rabaul, sending 9 each to Zuikaku and Shokaku.


Not a bad 'get' for a 'cherry rookie'.

The last 9 may fit on the Shoho.

quote:

Although it would be a nice reinforcement for the fighter groups of the carriers, the splitting of the 27 plane Zero unit at Rabaul seems to weaken Rabaul. I am not a wise man yet, but I would think leaving them there would make my strikes on PM more effective.


Think of playing a CG. Your first and last idea should be the safety of your CV's. Especially as Japan.

quote:

Lastly, is it really good advice to send the 6 Kates from Shoho over to the main fleet? Yes, it gives that fleet more punch, but then what is the point of Shoho's TF with only fighters aboard?


Eh, just keep in mind that CV's have limited torp ops available. Keeping Shoho separate is one of Japans' plan complications IMHO. I prefer to attach it to the main fleet. Concentration of force.

quote:

I tried to set her Claude's to naval search but could not. Are they any good in air to air?


No, but you have to use what you get. They're not much of an aircraft at this point, but set them to CAP=100%, range=0, and they'll stay over your TF and fly interference. That is once they're included in your main TF.


_____________________________

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 Randy Stead)
Post #: 71
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/7/2021 3:20:19 AM   
rustysi


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

I don't want to sound like I am blaming the weather


A lot of people don't like the weather model in the game. I say it is what it is, both sides have to deal with it.

_____________________________

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 rustysi)
Post #: 72
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/7/2021 3:39:38 AM   
BBfanboy


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: cblattmann

Thank you BBfanboy. What you describe in your first paragraph is what I saw and wondered if that was a function of the type of TF and how or if that applied to other types of TFs. Especially after I read that bombardment TF are essentially surface combat TF that have the ability to bombard the shore. So I thought that there is an inherent ability to all the different TF types and choosing the right one would determine the functionality at my disposal.

Bombardment is a mission, so is surface combat. Different ships can be capable of multiple mission types. AMs are designed for minesweeping but can be assigned to the ASW mission. APDs can do amphibious, troop transport, supply transport, surface combat and ASW missions and maybe minesweeping as well. There is a chart in the appendix area of the manual that shows the missions each ship type can participate in.

There is a quirk you need to know about Air Combat TFs - you can only have such a TF if you have a CV/CVL/CVE type (not sure about CS seaplane tenders) in the TF. But if you bring your ACTF to port and transfer the carrier to the port for repairs, the TF becomes Surface Combat. When the carrier completes repairs, you cannot transfer it back into your SCTF because a carrier cannot be part of one. Fortunately, Escort TFs (for damaged ships) can have most any type of ship so you just change your SCTF to an Escort TF, transfer the carrier in, and then change it to an ACTF again!

_____________________________

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 cblattmann)
Post #: 73
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/7/2021 9:09:13 AM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: cblattmann

Thank you BBfanboy. What you describe in your first paragraph is what I saw and wondered if that was a function of the type of TF and how or if that applied to other types of TFs. Especially after I read that bombardment TF are essentially surface combat TF that have the ability to bombard the shore. So I thought that there is an inherent ability to all the different TF types and choosing the right one would determine the functionality at my disposal.

Bombardment is a mission, so is surface combat. Different ships can be capable of multiple mission types. AMs are designed for minesweeping but can be assigned to the ASW mission. APDs can do amphibious, troop transport, supply transport, surface combat and ASW missions and maybe minesweeping as well. There is a chart in the appendix area of the manual that shows the missions each ship type can participate in.

There is a quirk you need to know about Air Combat TFs - you can only have such a TF if you have a CV/CVL/CVE type (not sure about CS seaplane tenders) in the TF. But if you bring your ACTF to port and transfer the carrier to the port for repairs, the TF becomes Surface Combat. When the carrier completes repairs, you cannot transfer it back into your SCTF because a carrier cannot be part of one. Fortunately, Escort TFs (for damaged ships) can have most any type of ship so you just change your SCTF to an Escort TF, transfer the carrier in, and then change it to an ACTF again!

And if someone wonders why you would do that rather than create a new TF, the answer is : leader and political points.

Assigning a leader of your choosing costs some PP (sometimes a lot, depending on the leader), and in a carrier task force assigning an adequate leader matters the most, as the Air skill of the TF leader acts like an Air HQ (thereby improving the air group’s number of planes flying, and coordination). If you can keep a task force with a very good leader assigned, you’ll avoid having to spend PPs several times.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 74
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/7/2021 9:22:49 AM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

Whilst eating dinner just now, I realized that I had forgotten to comment on the weather... I don't know what it is with me and weather in this game. Now that I am IJN the clouds are tethered to my ships. I must send crew up top with axes and cutting torches to cut the cables anchoring them to my ships. Made one strike, the first one I think it was, where my Kates got nailed. Crap weather. And again when I hit the American carriers. They came after me with the instruction to pack an umbrella for light rain, but also to bring their sunscreen lotion.

I don't want to sound like I am blaming the weather, but as a born and raised Toronto Maple Leafs fan [the refs hosed us!] I must have something to complain about.

Blame the weather, you’re welcome.

As in RL, weather plays a big part in the effectiveness of an air attack, and checking the forecast for rain or thunderstorm every day is among the first things to do in a day. If forecast is bad, better ground the bombers for their R&R day then, rather than having to let them rest when it’s sunny over the target.

Many players think the Advanced Weather Effect On leads to worse overall weather than Off, but I believe the split over using either option is close to 50/50, and I don’t remember seeing a Dev (or Alfred) comment on it. But you can still get bad weather in the option Off (but with no warning in the forecast).

(in reply to Randy Stead)
Post #: 75
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/7/2021 9:37:59 AM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

Just finished Coral Sea as Japan.

Allied decisive victory. 1237 points to my 678.

I managed to get the assault ashore, but I let them rest one turn too long. My first assault was a 1-2, next was a 1-1 and I knocked the fortification down to 0. One more assault would have taken it. The scenario description is correct, time is the enemy to the IJN.

In a campaign, you probably would have taken PM, just a few days later. But the scenario timetable takes into account the proximity of RL of Operation MI.



quote:

I was able to shield the landing force by moving my carriers south of PM. It was crazy; I had set my secondary targeting to airfields, so I lost a few planes by attacking PM and Darwin! I then made sure my only attack mode was naval after that. I had one weak attack at just outside American range. I had a whole wing of Kates wiped out due to poor escort. Lesson learned there. I made the mistake of moving closer, so that we hit each other the next day. Each side hit two carriers. On the way back to Noumea a sub sank Yorktown. I got my fleet back to Rabaul in decent shape, but not good enough for air ops. I sent a surface combat TF out from Rabaul and hit three Allied ships, sinking Australia and Hobart and damaged the DD with them. Some small satisfaction in getting off a successful surface combat. I should have done it earlier. Lesson learned.

Attacking a base to support troops is tempting, but when an enemy CV TF is known to be around (or even only suspected to be around), it’s dangerous. Pilots accumulate fatigue, planes accumulate plane fatigue or take damage, stores are depleted... and if you use torpedoes against nearby shipping, that’s your best anti-CV weapon becoming unavailable.

quote:

A sub also sank the AO Tippecanoe. A blow to the Allies. I lost a ship or two to the coastal guns at PM. I need to do more shore bombardment. I realized that too late. By the time I got a decent TF there it was the last turn. Too late the hero, as the movie title says. I also muffed the Zeros from Lae. I had them set for two turns in a row to do a 100' attack on PM just for learning, but it didn't happen for some unknown, to me, reason.

I transferred those long range bombers from Truk to Rabaul, Bettys. They did an attack on the carriers but all I got was a black eye for it. I then set them to hitting PM.

Is there a way of specifically attacking the Allied land forces in PM? I had a few hits on them, minor results, was wondering if there is a way to specify the ground units, or the shore guns?

Ground attack mission will attack the units, but there’s no way to choose which unit in the hex is attacked. Also, any ground attack mission in the jungle, woods, rough, etc, is, I won’t say wasted, but not quite as effective as attacking an LCU on strat movement on a road in a clear hex.


quote:

It was fun while it lasted, frustrating as hell not knowing what damage I had done to the carriers, but since they skedaddled I figured they were hurt.

My subs did very well, torpedoed but did not sink a couple of things, but did manage three hits on Yorktown. That was most satisfying.

I see why it was recommended to me by others to play this from both sides. I have learned that the IJN can be a lethal force if handled well. I did not handle them well, but I am a cadet. I realized the AI was afraid of getting too close to my land bombers. I made the mistake of closing in on them, and not having a properly coordinated strike when I did. Setting land targets as secondary could have cost me much worse against a good player, with my guys blowing their position with those futile land attacks whilst the carriers were still out there. I think the purpose of the carriers is to shield the transports. If the Allies wish to stop them, they must come to you.

As you say, the IJN has a notable advantage in quality in the first year, but it must be used with caution, ‘cause the replacement ships are few.


As for CAP, the ratio will depend on many factors, including how many squadrons you have in the TF, the quality and numbers of the opposition you’re likely to face, the overall situation, etc.

For my part, in an ideal situation with several CV being regrouped, I’ll try to specialize my fighter squadrons. Some will be assigned as Escort 0% CAP, at an altitude maximizing coordination with the bombers, while others will be put to Escort 50% CAP 0 range, to provide CAP for the TF without leaving the hex, but with different altitudes for a layered CAP.

(in reply to Randy Stead)
Post #: 76
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/7/2021 10:41:46 AM   
Alfred

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador


... Many players think the Advanced Weather Effect On leads to worse overall weather than Off, but I believe the split over using either option is close to 50/50, and I don’t remember seeing a Dev (or Alfred) comment on it. But you can still get bad weather in the option Off (but with no warning in the forecast).


Can't be many AE topics I haven't visited.

Try these threads.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4050459&mpage=1&key=weather�

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4822249&mpage=1&key=rain�

Then there is post #1604 in this thread: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2859420&mpage=54&key=rain�

Alfred

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 77
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/7/2021 4:10:54 PM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador


... Many players think the Advanced Weather Effect On leads to worse overall weather than Off, but I believe the split over using either option is close to 50/50, and I don’t remember seeing a Dev (or Alfred) comment on it. But you can still get bad weather in the option Off (but with no warning in the forecast).


Can't be many AE topics I haven't visited.

Try these threads.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4050459&mpage=1&key=weather�

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4822249&mpage=1&key=rain�

Then there is post #1604 in this thread: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2859420&mpage=54&key=rain�

Alfred

You’re everywhere, but are not be allowed to speak about everything.

I meant about the claim that AWE On leads to worse weather overall. I’ve seen claims that thunderstorms and rain occurred too often and that weather globally worsened to reach a nigh-permanent bad weather (but that’s not really my experience). Or about the probabilities of each weather for a given forecast.

And pardon my inexperience, as I don’t remember every playing with AWE Off, but does michaem’s post #1604 mean that a « partial cloud » forecast will then only lead to « partial cloud » or « heavy cloud » ? I would understand then why people would « complain » about worse weather...

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 78
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/7/2021 5:39:15 PM   
Randy Stead


Posts: 454
Joined: 12/23/2000
From: Ontario, Canada
Status: offline
My three attacks had: heavy thunderstorms, heavy rain, severe weather. The two American attacks had light rain, clear.

I agree there are a few things I have to tighten up. I have been completely ignoring weather forecasts and weather in any particular hex of interest. I have not set any searches to night.

How does one go about keeping an enemy TF at just outside of their range to hit you? I am sure there is a subtle tactical feel to it, I just have not yet discovered it. Other than vaguely holding back.

Another thing I noticed was a couple of Allied surface units sitting in the same hex for several turns. At first I did not believe it, then I sent some subs and a surface combat TF into the hex. I had them outnumbered 7 to 2, achieved surprise, night engagement. They still managed to slip away after a few hits on them.

In one attack on the CVs my Zeros were getting dived on by Wildcats. I've read a lot about setting escorting fighters to the same altitude as the bombers to enhance coordination. That led to me getting dived on. What would be my odds if I sent the Zeros in at 20K, the dive bombers at 15K and the torpedo bombers at 10K?

This is not a gripe, just an observational question. Since what we are doing as overall commanders is sending groups here and there, why must we be immersed in tactical minutiae such as setting the altitudes and ranges of various planes? I would think a carrier air wing commander would be best suited to doing that. We have such little control over certain aspects of operations but detailed control over others. We don't seem to have such micromanagement of LCUs, or surface combats. Not a complaint, just commenting. I know this is how the game was designed so I will live with it.

One last question. What is the best means of attacking shore guns; can they be targeted in particular? I know shore bombardment can hit them, suppress them. If aircraft attack the port in the hex, can the shore guns be damaged in that type of attack? I sent a bomber group to attack the port at Port Moresby and it knocked out fuel and reduced port capacity. I was hoping they might knock down the shore guns.

Comment about rerouting the invasion force. I did that in the preceding game. That was why I lost by one day. My first attack was a 1-2, the seconde was a 1-1 which reduced the fort to 0. I was sure the next one would do it. In my second go, the same happened and the third time was the charm. Related to this; in a campaign style game, would anything be gained by going after the retreating Aussie units hightailing toward Buna? In the scenario I was simply content to hold the hex. I was pondering the benefits and consequences of attacking that retreating unit immediately. In real life it might be the thing to do, but in game terms? The unit just landed was set to PM, would it get mauled going straight after Buna?

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 79
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/7/2021 9:22:10 PM   
Randy Stead


Posts: 454
Joined: 12/23/2000
From: Ontario, Canada
Status: offline
Just finished another round as Japanese in Coral Sea. Much better naval results, but somehow I messed up the PM invasion. I did lose one ship on the way in to a U.S. sub. Not sure what was aboard, perhaps it was the margin. First attack went in at 1-5, then 1-3, 1-2, 1-1 but ran out of time.

I need to do more reading on shore bombardments; specifically what the range settings do.

I lost one transport to a sub on the way in, one on the way back and four to those nasty Oz coastal gunners.

I had Shokaku take one bomb hit, but she repaired it down to only 3 or 4 major damage points. I was able to get one hit in first, a small raid that did some damaged to Yorktown. I guess I am figuring out the range hold off thing. The next day I got a few more licks in and clobbered Lexington, more on Yorktown. I got greedy and moved a bit closer and got some damage on Shokaku. My fliers worked over some surface units.

Total Allied losses, 12 ships:

CV Lexington
CV Yorktown
CA Australia
CA Minneapolis
CA Portland
CA Chester
CA New Orleans
DD Perkins
DD Worden
DD Aylwin
AO Tippecanoe

After one of the low odds attacks I gave my land units an extra day of rest. Perhaps it cost me the victory. I need to learn more about ground combat.

Also, any advice on how to deal with shore guns when unloading TFs? I am thinkng it may have to do with my shore bombardment settings. I left them at default but during the animations it shows my CLs firing from 15,00 or more away. Is that useless? I also still do not know if I set my bombers to port attack if that will help to suppress shore guns.

I also forgot to mention that Shoho got hit, with some mid level system and floation damage. I sent a cruiser and two DDs back with her. By game's end she was still floating and seemed not in danger of sinking.

< Message edited by Randy Stead -- 1/7/2021 9:29:24 PM >

(in reply to Randy Stead)
Post #: 80
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/7/2021 10:50:51 PM   
rustysi


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

If aircraft attack the port in the hex, can the shore guns be damaged in that type of attack?


Yes.

quote:

Also, any advice on how to deal with shore guns when unloading TFs?


Having a separate shore bombardment TF will help, but having adequate support ships embedded within the TF's is needed. By support ships I mean CA's and BB's. Japanese CA's can be particularly useful. I'm talking about the 13/14k tons guys. I've had them shrug of hits of up to 9.2"CD guns.

They will do some bombardment prior to troops landing, and return fire when shore guns fire at your transports. This 'suppressing' fire should mean lots of misses for the shore weapons. Of course the more of these 'supporting' ships the better.

Keep in mind that all attacks may raise the fatigue level and lower morale of the shore guns, thus reducing their effectiveness.

Generally speaking I don't use early Japanese CL's for shore bombardment, unless I know there're no shore guns at the local.


_____________________________

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 Randy Stead)
Post #: 81
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/7/2021 11:50:08 PM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

Just finished another round as Japanese in Coral Sea. Much better naval results, but somehow I messed up the PM invasion. I did lose one ship on the way in to a U.S. sub. Not sure what was aboard, perhaps it was the margin. First attack went in at 1-5, then 1-3, 1-2, 1-1 but ran out of time.

I need to do more reading on shore bombardments; specifically what the range settings do.

I lost one transport to a sub on the way in, one on the way back and four to those nasty Oz coastal gunners.

I had Shokaku take one bomb hit, but she repaired it down to only 3 or 4 major damage points. I was able to get one hit in first, a small raid that did some damaged to Yorktown. I guess I am figuring out the range hold off thing. The next day I got a few more licks in and clobbered Lexington, more on Yorktown. I got greedy and moved a bit closer and got some damage on Shokaku. My fliers worked over some surface units.

Total Allied losses, 12 ships:

CV Lexington
CV Yorktown
CA Australia
CA Minneapolis
CA Portland
CA Chester
CA New Orleans
DD Perkins
DD Worden
DD Aylwin
AO Tippecanoe

After one of the low odds attacks I gave my land units an extra day of rest. Perhaps it cost me the victory. I need to learn more about ground combat.

Also, any advice on how to deal with shore guns when unloading TFs? I am thinkng it may have to do with my shore bombardment settings. I left them at default but during the animations it shows my CLs firing from 15,00 or more away. Is that useless? I also still do not know if I set my bombers to port attack if that will help to suppress shore guns.

I also forgot to mention that Shoho got hit, with some mid level system and floation damage. I sent a cruiser and two DDs back with her. By game's end she was still floating and seemed not in danger of sinking.

Even if you failed to capture PM, I’d still count this as a big victory. Imagine Midway without Yorktown, and possibly with Zuikaku (and Shokaku, depending on the damage).

I haven’t played Coral Sea in a long time, so I don’t remember the specifics, but the memories I got are that the conquest of PM is really hard to achieve in the timeline. You will see in other scenarios, like Guadalcanal, that ground combat requires patience. Doing back-to-back attacks is not often the right thing to do, especially against entrenched enemies, unless you have overwhelming advantage and the enemy is on the brink of defeat.

The reason is that each attack accumulates disruption, fatigue, disabled devices, and you’re often better off holding for a day (or a couple of days) before the next attack - especially if you have isolated the base and can bomb it every day to keep the forts from being built again.

(in reply to Randy Stead)
Post #: 82
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/8/2021 12:03:58 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
The shore bombardment routine in the game engine is not well described in the manual. Here's the gist of some things Alfred let us know:

1. If the bombardment TF contains BBs, CAs or CLs (with gun range over 15K), AND IF the TF is set to "No escort bombardment", the bombardment will start at 30K yards and move in to 15K yards (ammo permitting). I remain unclear whether setting a stand-off distance of, say, 22K would prevent the TF from approaching closer, but I am fairly sure that if you set 10K stand-off the TF will still not approach closer than 15K.

2. IF you set the TF to a standoff range of 1 and "Escorts Bombard" you permit the DDs to fire. If you have BBs, CAs, CLs in the TF they may start firing at 30K and will move in as close as 6K yards, although occasionally the big ships will go in as close as 4K if shore gunfire is weak. The DDs will often go in as close as 2K and sometimes 1K if shore fire is weak. I think if you set a stand-off range of 10K instead of 1K, the entire TF will limit itself to 10K closest approach.

3. It is usually best not to mix gun calibers too much. I usually keep CAs, CLs and BBs in different TFs with their DD escorts. That's not an absolute rule if you are short on bombardment ships and DDs, a mixed bag is better than none. Keep the TF around 8-10 ships or you may find that some of them never get a chance to fire.

4. Embedding BBs or CAs with an Amphib TF seems to be more effective at knocking out fortress or CD unit guns than a separate bombardment TF. Bear in mind that non-CD units also have artillery and MGs that will fire on your troops once they hit the beach and bombardment by Air and Sea in the days before the landings will suppress them. It is best to keep up continuous bombardment day after day because any break will allow the enemy to recover from much of the low morale, fatigue and disruption.

5. The AI does not favour daytime naval bombardments. The model is for the bombardment TF to move within sprinting distance to the target and end the turn there, then next turn go flank speed to target during the night naval movement phase, bombard, and retreat at flank speed to avoid air attacks. You need to be really careful that nothing delays the bombardment TF during this cycle or it may not get out of range of enemy retaliation. Things that can delay the TF are the need to refuel DDs at sea so they can make the sprint, combat with enemy TFs, sub attacks, etc. Obviously, your big ships should all have similar top speeds since the TF will be limited by the slowest ship.

6. As with so many things in this game, detection level is key to good results. If you can recon your target for a few days before bombardment, day and night, you set up a good MDL (median DL). Then before the bombardment, set your float planes to recon the target, range 0. One will usually do spotting duties for the TF. If the DL is too low, the TF might not even carry out the bombardment and will sit at the beginning hex for the sprint.

7. Ensure the TF routing is set to "Absolute" threat tolerance and "Direct" route. Do NOT use waypoints with a bombardment TF - they seem to interfere with the sprint in-out routine.

_____________________________

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 Randy Stead)
Post #: 83
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/8/2021 12:47:59 AM   
Randy Stead


Posts: 454
Joined: 12/23/2000
From: Ontario, Canada
Status: offline
Shoho was the more seriously damaged of the carriers. Shokaku had very small number of damage points, 3 or 4 major ones that would require a proper repair job. In my opinion, with the damaged done to my carriers in this scenario, they'd have had at least Zuikaku in addition to the other four, and likely would've had Shokaku repaired in time. Would the USN have gone after Kido Butai at Midway knowing it would've had 5 or 6 carriers, with only their 2 [because I sunk Yorktown and Lexington at Coral Sea]?

Thanks for the advice on shore bombardment, BBfanboy. In this scenario you only have CLs, unless you detach some CAs from the carrier group. They only reason I had to make such hasty attacks was the ticking clock of the scenario. Another day or two and I would've had PM, but that's the way the scenario was designed. In looking back, I should have sent my carriers over to PM and hit it a time or two. I still had enough planes and ordnance to do it. Even with the damage to Shokaku.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 84
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/8/2021 12:51:10 AM   
Randy Stead


Posts: 454
Joined: 12/23/2000
From: Ontario, Canada
Status: offline
Sorry, I'm still left wondering about those shore guns in the Coral Sea scenario. Has anybody figured out a way to pull their teeth with what is available in the scenario? I lose at least four ships from the landing force to those shore guns every time I play this scenario. In this game I lost a transport, with its cargo of supplies and/or troops, plus the number of men who drown during the unloading process. I guess the Japanese are not as good at swimming when laden with gear as the USMC?

And I have still not had any luck getting the Zeros from Lae to do a strafe attack on Port Moresby. I set the mission to ground attack, target PM and set the altitude to 100' and still nothing happens. I am wondering what I am doing wrong. I've only been attempting this for the purpose of getting to see what it does in a scenario before I try it in a campaign.

< Message edited by Randy Stead -- 1/8/2021 12:53:26 AM >

(in reply to Randy Stead)
Post #: 85
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/8/2021 1:10:00 AM   
rustysi


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

And I have still not had any luck getting the Zeros from Lae to do a strafe attack on Port Moresby.


Lae is a level one airfield. In short, no offensive missions may be carried out from a level one airfield.

_____________________________

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 Randy Stead)
Post #: 86
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/8/2021 1:11:55 AM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline
You can also have the bombardment TF set to "Remain On Station" and then change them back to bombardment again for the next turn. I do this sometimes because they do not always use almost all of their ammo when they otherwise would. They will try to keep a couple of loads for enemy ships. The reason for the "No Escorts Bombard" is to save their ammo for anti-aircraft fire. Evven DDs on a bombardment mission with no obvious damage to the enemy units or facilities is useful.

Keep at least one unit on the ground bombarding the enemy, if not all of them. This will keep the enemies fatigue and disruption up so they will not have a chance for a beer.

You can also use Fast Transports for your Japanese cruisers and destroyers and carry units and/or supplies. You could even use these to take bases like Buna if they are relatively undefended. Then they become Surface Combat Task Forces with a full load of ammo.

Try to keep your air strikes going in at the same altitude otherwise they may not coordinate. Think of Torpedo 8 at Midway attacking with such a great fighter escort!

If you set your dive bombers to attack at 15k feet, they will probably level bomb.

The enemy CAP, especially if they have radar, will usually be able to climb above your attacking forces then dive. This is because the escorts are staying with the bombers as well as the warning of the raid with the RADAR seeing the raid coming in. With enough warning, the enemy CAP can also be augmented by additional fighters that take off from the carriers.

Try using the Claudes at 5k or 6k feet, both as anti-torpedo plane CAP as well as anti-search plane CAP. In the grand campaign, I do this in the DEI against the Commonwealth biplane torpedo planes with good results.

I have seen 18 and 25 pounders shooting at the invasion force, the 40mm Bofors is especially good at that!

Try two or three DDs on a surface mission with aggression set to "LOW." Especially on those dark and/or stormy nights, this way they can get close and launch torpedoes, then leave. If the enemy has non-surface combat ships there, those could be hurting. Think if you did this and torpedoed an enemy carrier so it could not launch aircraft the next day when each side launches airstrikes against each other. Lead with DDs like this, then have your heavier ships come in next.

You could also break up your Betty unit into smaller sizes and have one section at night set to bomb PM as well as Naval Search.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 87
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/8/2021 1:13:11 AM   
Kull


Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

Sorry, I'm still left wondering about those shore guns in the Coral Sea scenario. Has anybody figured out a way to pull their teeth with what is available in the scenario? I lose at least four ships from the landing force to those shore guns every time I play this scenario. In this game I lost a transport, with its cargo of supplies and/or troops, plus the number of men who drown during the unloading process. I guess the Japanese are not as good at swimming when laden with gear as the USMC?


Think of it this way - it's a scenario where the clock is running. In the Grand Campaign, it's a much different clock. If you really want to take an objective, overwhelm the heck out of it. Multiple bombardment TFs, lots of BBs and CAs accompanying the invasion force, MANY troop transports (configured to unload the majority or all of your assault force during the first pulse), extensive air bombardment prep, whatever it takes.

But that's not what you have here. The Japanese ran their ops on a shoestring, and this is a small taste of what happens when you do that.

< Message edited by Kull -- 1/8/2021 1:14:24 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Randy Stead)
Post #: 88
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/8/2021 1:17:06 AM   
rustysi


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

If you set your dive bombers to attack at 15k feet, they will probably level bomb.


Dive bombers will dive bomb at altitude 10-15k.

_____________________________

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 Kull)
Post #: 89
RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! - 1/8/2021 3:55:44 AM   
BBfanboy


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

Sorry, I'm still left wondering about those shore guns in the Coral Sea scenario. Has anybody figured out a way to pull their teeth with what is available in the scenario? I lose at least four ships from the landing force to those shore guns every time I play this scenario. In this game I lost a transport, with its cargo of supplies and/or troops, plus the number of men who drown during the unloading process. I guess the Japanese are not as good at swimming when laden with gear as the USMC?

And I have still not had any luck getting the Zeros from Lae to do a strafe attack on Port Moresby. I set the mission to ground attack, target PM and set the altitude to 100' and still nothing happens. I am wondering what I am doing wrong. I've only been attempting this for the purpose of getting to see what it does in a scenario before I try it in a campaign.

With drop tanks, Zeros can sweep or LRCAP up to 14 hexes. Strafing is ineffective against troops with forts and you will lose a lot of aircraft to light AA. Your Zero pilots are probably not well trained in strafing anyway. IRL the Japanese landed their troops down the coast between Milne Bay and PM. Aircraft from PM took out most of their supply ships so they could never make much progress up the coast. You can drop troops at a coastal hex (at least you could when the game came out) but the losses are something like 50%. It seems your only real choice is to put those CAs in the Amphib TF to suppress the CD unit.

_____________________________

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 Randy Stead)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   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

0.781