Artillery and ships (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> The War Room



Message

buchanan17 -> Artillery and ships (10/23/2006 4:12:54 PM)

This part of the game is crazy. For example in playing ANY overlord scenario from the highest to lowest scale, the allied ships get disabled WAY too easily. Three German guns can disable battleships just too easily. The ships are moving for goodness sake, and can take a fair bit of damage, yet the shore guns - in a fixed location and often not even in bunkers hardly get touched in these exchanges. YOu end up having to move the ships away from the coast towards the end of the turn - OK if it doesn't come suddenly early!






Brevet -> RE: Artillery and ships (10/24/2006 5:33:09 PM)

Planes will sink 'em quick too...



MarcA -> RE: Artillery and ships (10/24/2006 7:11:24 PM)

Depending on the ship, of course, you really need a 12"+ gun do do any thing except surface damage to a battleship.

To kill a battle ship you really need another battle ship or torpedo planes, even then many had belt armour against this, for example the BB Musashi needed 19 torpedoes to sink here. You either had to get a lucky strike on the prop shaft/steering gear or basically pound them apart.

I know naval units are an abstraction but it might be worth looking over this again as BB's and CA's do seem to be incapacitated very easily



golden delicious -> RE: Artillery and ships (10/24/2006 10:51:48 PM)

What you have to bear in mind is;

a) when a ship is 'destroyed' in TOAW combat, there is a good chance it is just sent to the 'on-hand' stockpile in the replacement engine. Depending on a few things, it should come back into the game in a while.
b) even if the ship is permanently 'lost' in TOAW terms, this just means it is out of action for the duration of the scenario. If your scenario (or- in the case of Overlord scenarios- the duration for which the naval units are present) is only a few days, this could mean just some minor damage or even that the ship has exhausted all its AA ammunition (ships retired away from Crete in 1941 for just this reason). Most scenarios don't cover more than a few months, so any significant damage is not going to be repaired during the course of the game, so as far as the players are concerned it might as well have been sunk.



MarcA -> RE: Artillery and ships (10/25/2006 12:07:07 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

What you have to bear in mind is;

a) when a ship is 'destroyed' in TOAW combat, there is a good chance it is just sent to the 'on-hand' stockpile in the replacement engine. Depending on a few things, it should come back into the game in a while.
b) even if the ship is permanently 'lost' in TOAW terms, this just means it is out of action for the duration of the scenario. If your scenario (or- in the case of Overlord scenarios- the duration for which the naval units are present) is only a few days, this could mean just some minor damage or even that the ship has exhausted all its AA ammunition (ships retired away from Crete in 1941 for just this reason). Most scenarios don't cover more than a few months, so any significant damage is not going to be repaired during the course of the game, so as far as the players are concerned it might as well have been sunk.


I understand your point but for battle ships this is generally invalid as only the largest dedicated shore batteries would have a chance at damaging them other than superficially.

For the smaller ships damage leading to repair and refitting is reasonably modelled by the abstraction in the game, but for the heavy stuff it is just too easy to damage them.

In the longer scenarios use of ammo would be a concern while in the campaign scenarios such things as maintanance and R&R would also be consideration. But these things can be modelled through the degredation of efficiency, supply and readiness of the naval units each turn it is not docked in a freindly port.






shunwick -> RE: Artillery and ships (10/25/2006 2:36:03 AM)

The main problem is that naval warfare is barely modelled by TOAW.  If you are finding that your ships are sunk too easily then the real culprit is the scenario designer. 

Best wishes,

Steve



SMK-at-work -> RE: Artillery and ships (10/25/2006 4:24:01 AM)

Shore batteries WERE insanely effective vs ships - they had all hte advantages - they had fixed positions which they knew, they had massive rangefinders, they had no other structure that could be damaged and cause them to become useless without actually getting hit (eg engines, bridge, hull) - unless you actually hit the gun then you weren't going to do anything.

Time after time, throughout the ages, ships have always been at a disadvantage vs shore batteries - Gallipoli is perhaps hte most famous - antiquated Turkish guns vs dozens of pre-dreadnoughts and even the 15" guns of hte Queen Elizabeth over several days culminating on 18 March 1915.  Only a handfull of Turkish guns were actually destroyed - had it gone on another day the Turks would have run out of ammo!!



MarcA -> RE: Artillery and ships (10/25/2006 10:16:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Shore batteries WERE insanely effective vs ships - they had all hte advantages - they had fixed positions which they knew, they had massive rangefinders, they had no other structure that could be damaged and cause them to become useless without actually getting hit (eg engines, bridge, hull) - unless you actually hit the gun then you weren't going to do anything.

Time after time, throughout the ages, ships have always been at a disadvantage vs shore batteries - Gallipoli is perhaps hte most famous - antiquated Turkish guns vs dozens of pre-dreadnoughts and even the 15" guns of hte Queen Elizabeth over several days culminating on 18 March 1915. Only a handfull of Turkish guns were actually destroyed - had it gone on another day the Turks would have run out of ammo!!



Maybe so, but the point here is that BB's in particular are too easily damaged in this game, which they are. You are discussing the damage to the shore guns during a bombardment, which is different topic.

And if we go to the particular operation the OP was discussing, the D-Day landings, the type of guns the Germans had available to them in reality, did very little damage, if any, to the heavy ships bombardment and suirface combat fleet. Note, I said bombardment fleet and not amphibeous landing fleet, which primarily consisted of light craft.

BB's are put out of action too easily in TOAW. Somebody else, in a different thread suggested multiplying the defensive values of BB's by 5, which sounds like a start, but would require an equipment editor. As another suggestion here, wanting to be positive rather than negative on this subject, you could model ammo loss through the proportion of supplies used during combat. Is there anyway to alter supplies used during combat through an editor?



SMK-at-work -> RE: Artillery and ships (10/25/2006 12:18:24 PM)

If the shore guns are good enough they wil massacre ships as the Norwegian guns at Oslo did to the Blucher in 1940 - 2 x 47 year old 28cm guns and 2 x 40 year old guided torpedoes sank the 10,000 ton cruiser, and 15cm guns knocked out the Anton 28cm turret of the Lutzow.

The Germans bombarded the fort from outside its range for the next day and a half, causing zero casualties. In total the fort lost 1 man for a cruiser sunk and a pocket battleship badly damaged - that man was on a scoput boat that had gone out to warn hte approaching ships and was fired upon with live rounds after firing warning shots - there was not a single caualty in the fortress.

So the concept of land fortifications crippling or even sinking heavy ships is far from unreasonable.

Most of the Atlantic wall was, of course, not attacked at all, and in Normandy there was considerable egffort made to silence hte heavy batteries before or during the landing proper - which were successful AFAIK - although some of them were found to be empty.

Land fortifications may well be a waste of resource in toto, but they had the edge over pretty much any shipping that came within range.




golden delicious -> RE: Artillery and ships (10/25/2006 1:00:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mantill

I understand your point but for battle ships this is generally invalid as only the largest dedicated shore batteries would have a chance at damaging them other than superficially.


Mm. Weird stuff happens sometimes, though. I imagine being peppered with enough 6 inch shells would certainly go a long way to cramping a battleship's style.



golden delicious -> RE: Artillery and ships (10/25/2006 1:04:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

So the concept of land fortifications crippling or even sinking heavy ships is far from unreasonable.


Yeah- on the whole, ships get by through not moving into range of coastal batteries until they've been silenced.

quote:

Land fortifications may well be a waste of resource in toto, but they had the edge over pretty much any shipping that came within range.


There's an inherent disadvantage to being on a floating platform as opposed to a prepared position on dry land.



JAMiAM -> RE: Artillery and ships (10/25/2006 7:31:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mantill
Is there anyway to alter supplies used during combat through an editor?


No. This is hard-coded.



Tom Hunter -> RE: Artillery and ships (10/26/2006 5:45:28 AM)

SMK

The problem is that the German shore batteries regularly sink the Allied gunfire support fleet if it is not pulled back at the end of the turn. This was simply beyond the capabilities of the Germans, but it happens regularly in the game.

The solution is to pull all your ships back before the turn ends, but this is a real pain at best, and if the turn ends before you expect it to it can be quite painful.

This discussion has nothing to do with the theoretical effectiveness of shore batteries in general. I was messing around with a North Africa scenario the other day and lost Barham to an Italian 75mm battery. Obivously something is wrong.



Ian R -> RE: Artillery and ships (1/20/2007 9:53:16 AM)

Has any attention been paid to this problem in recent patches, maybe by making ships floating tanks instead of floating artillery?




Catch21 -> RE: Artillery and ships (1/20/2007 4:14:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: buchanan17

This part of the game is crazy. For example in playing ANY overlord scenario from the highest to lowest scale, the allied ships get disabled WAY too easily.


Remember the naval war in TOAW is somewhat (well highly really) abstracted. Take 2WIN. The Allied answer to this issue is to ensure that their ships (a huge fire support asset particularly in direct fire mode) are ALWAYS out of range of any shore battery until they've been rolled up by combat troops. If you don't the Germans in their turn will (or should) direct fire their batteries against any Allied ships in range towards the end of their turn (given their 0 MP rating).



JAMiAM -> RE: Artillery and ships (1/20/2007 7:57:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: General Staff
If you don't the Germans in their turn will (or should) direct fire their batteries against any Allied ships in range towards the end of their turn (given their 0 MP rating).


In TOAW III, waiting until the end of the turn isn't necessary, since you can fire 0 MP artillery from the very first tactical round, without burning out the turn.



Dabbs -> RE: Artillery and ships (1/20/2007 8:33:34 PM)

First thing is that if you know land-based artillery is good at taking out naval vessels, don't leave your naval vessels in their range.  It is a matter of prepping the field - in which with Two Weeks in Normandy, the Allies have several fleets, total domination of the skies with several bombers, and plenty of ground units... meanwhile the Axis has no fleet...no airforce, only a few artillery units with the range of actually reaching the navy, and very likely only a few turns of even having that capability before it is overrun or pushed out of range.  A battleship sitting close to shore (2.5 km) firing away at everything with impunity is going to be a priority target.





Catch21 -> RE: Artillery and ships (1/21/2007 3:47:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM
In TOAW III, waiting until the end of the turn isn't necessary, since you can fire 0 MP artillery from the very first tactical round, without burning out the turn.

Thanks. I should know better. Still trying to get a handle on this. Is there anywhere the mechanics of this are explained in detail? I couldn't find anything in the manual. Any pointers appreciated.



JAMiAM -> RE: Artillery and ships (1/21/2007 5:11:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: General Staff


quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM
In TOAW III, waiting until the end of the turn isn't necessary, since you can fire 0 MP artillery from the very first tactical round, without burning out the turn.

Thanks. I should know better. Still trying to get a handle on this. Is there anywhere the mechanics of this are explained in detail? I couldn't find anything in the manual. Any pointers appreciated.


In detail? No. However, you can look at the Whatsnew doc, and for item 33, on the v3.0.0.12 release notes, see that "Low MP unit combat is improved. Zero MP units may now fire without using the entire turn."

There is a general all-around improvement in the way low MP units attack. In CoW, a unit with only 4 of 4 MP's wouldn't start the attack until the 3rd tactical round. Now, they begin on the first. Likewise with the other low MP situations. Many of the low MP scenarios that were IMO dreadfully boring to play because of the way earlier versions of TOAW handled the units in combat are now much more playable.



Ian R -> RE: Artillery and ships (1/21/2007 5:18:52 AM)

So does this mean that if you do what historically was done at Omaha beach, ie move two destroyers as close in as possible to sail up and down the beach firing (including directly) on the German pill boxes and strongpoints, it works? or do they fall victim to German artillery as soon as it can fire?



Catch21 -> RE: Artillery and ships (1/21/2007 1:20:59 PM)

If your ships are in range and are firing on a coastal arty unit, it will perhaps understandably have an unfortunate tendency to fire back (consider it counter-battery fire). However if it is 'dug out' (i.e. in mobile status) I don't believe it can fire back defensively and certainly not offensively (only if in F, TR, LR, D or E status). One could argue that this represents the terrific pounding that Omaha fortifications received prior to the assault, perhaps contributing to the fact these ships were able to fire so close to shore as they did without getting hit.

If your naval units end the turn within range of coastal arty, expect the Germans to make them priority 'best bang for the Reichmark' (in fact really only) targets. Advice to Allies- calculate ranges of all German batteries prior to scenario start (I'm sure the Allies did on the day) and ensure your naval units are NEVER at risk.

JAMiAM: Thanks for response. "Low MP unit combat is improved. Zero MP units may now fire without using the entire turn." is what I recall reading. I think I'll test and revert with results.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Artillery and ships (1/21/2007 6:40:37 PM)

Counterbattery fire could use some improvement so that ranges are employed. So that Battleship firing from 7 hexes away would not receive counterbattery fire from the shore battery with a range of 2.



Catch21 -> Counter-Battery Fire (1/21/2007 8:40:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Counterbattery fire could use some improvement so that ranges are employed. So that Battleship firing from 7 hexes away would not receive counterbattery fire from the shore battery with a range of 2.

My understanding always was that counter-battery fire does not extend out of equipment range, so I tested to prove using the Longues sur Mer CA Battery (63,27) with 4x150mm Fixed Gun (Range of 10 and AS Capability of 99 each (i.e. pretty effective AS)) and 1x122mm Gun (Range of 7 and AS Capability of 9) against Allied Naval Units firing at it beyond the 10 hex range in 2WIN.

First I set the toawlog switch so I will get a log of events. Then as Allied Player I moved anything that floated with range=13 to 23,16- just outside the 10 hex range of the German emplacement. Then just let rip with everything the assembled fleet has on Minimize Loss setting (i.e. only fire for one round max) round after round- for 9 rounds.

Attached is the resulting TOAWlog.txt file. It would appear that if a unit can't 'reach' the unit firing on it, it won't conduct counter-battery fire (in 9 rounds not a chirp from the German Battery in the toawlog), though in the detailed combat report it will state something like "German Army Coastal Arty, Longues sur Mer defends.".

I've got the scenario set up pre-Round 1 as an SAL file if anyone wants to double check but I'd suggest this plus a bunch of other empirical quick tests and observations over time is pretty conclusive.



Ian R -> RE: Counter-Battery Fire (1/22/2007 1:34:52 AM)


quote:

My understanding always was that counter-battery fire does not extend out of equipment range, so I tested to prove using the Longues sur Mer CA Battery (63,27) with 4x150mm Fixed Gun (Range of 10 and AS Capability of 99 each (i.e. pretty effective AS))


What effect would those 4 x [5.9" approx] have on, eg the Texas or the Warspite? If they blow them away in one round then there is still a problem.



Catch21 -> RE: Counter-Battery Fire (1/22/2007 2:19:47 AM)

One could run a test in hotseat mode to see. I'd suggest both units would have trouble if they remained in range during the German player's turn. Don't forget also that they're groups comprising 1BB and escorts. The BB might be OK while the escorts take hits.



golden delicious -> RE: Counter-Battery Fire (1/22/2007 1:41:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

What effect would those 4 x [5.9" approx] have on, eg the Texas or the Warspite? If they blow them away in one round then there is still a problem.


Well, because of the way AP fire and ships are handled, there is going to be a chance of a battleship being 'destroyed' by a 6" gun battery. However bear in mind that "destruction" in TOAW terms can mean a number of things. First, the ship might just go to replacements, in which case in such a short scenario it might be back in action in a matter of hours. Second, the ship might be out of action for the length of the scenario but, again, this can just mean it's laid up in drydock for a couple of weeks, or whatever. It doesn't have to mean the magazine exploded and the ship is now in little peices on the bottom of the Channel.



Ian R -> RE: Counter-Battery Fire (1/22/2007 3:21:39 PM)

I just can't imagine the captain of either of those BBs having much of a career if he withdrew after copping a 6" shell hit or 2 or 6 that maybe did some damage and maybe put some of the secondary battery out of action. Weren't the main turrets, magazines and fire control stations (well maybe not the latter) armoured so that even 12" would bounce at sufficient range?

If it happened to say 1 out of 6 BBs (I'm trying to remember which of the "R" battleships  was half towed into position with only part of its armament operating) you could wear that as a good salvo into the superstructure wreaking havoc on fire control, etc, but it sounds like its going to happen to each and every one of them.



golden delicious -> RE: Counter-Battery Fire (1/22/2007 5:01:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

I just can't imagine the captain of either of those BBs having much of a career if he withdrew after copping a 6" shell hit or 2 or 6 that maybe did some damage and maybe put some of the secondary battery out of action. Weren't the main turrets, magazines and fire control stations (well maybe not the latter) armoured so that even 12" would bounce at sufficient range?


So were the turrets of the British Battlecruisers at Jutland. Strange things can happen in war. Of course a battleship's absence for just part of one six hour turn (i.e. if it goes to replacements) could mean something as basic as it being suppressed or hit by smoke shells.

quote:

but it sounds like its going to happen to each and every one of them.


I dunno. You'd have to test it.

quote:

"Optimism can not overcome the laws of physics" - LtCdr Tu'vok


He's obviously never watched Star Trek



Ian R -> RE: Counter-Battery Fire (1/22/2007 5:23:39 PM)



quote:

"Optimism can not overcome the laws of physics" - LtCdr Tu'vok

He's obviously never watched Star Trek


Alas there is no TV in the 23rd Century. [:'(]



Ian R -> RE: Counter-Battery Fire (1/22/2007 6:09:36 PM)

Totally coincidentally I've got the history channel on and they were just interviewing a seaman from the Nelson who was describing how the BB was sitting off the beach firing on targets 20 miles inland, directed by a spotter plane.

It was on about Dday +3 though, so you would imagine the Coast guns are gone by then.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.875