RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before

RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series

Message

Great_Ajax -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 1:13:53 AM)
Wow. See that lone Rifle Division southwest of the target hex in in the level 2 entrenchment? He withstood two assaults by that full stack panzer corps that routed. In the 'old days' that attack would have been successful on the first go and then I would have redeployed those units to isolate that pocket. The two attacks held, I didn't have enough MPs to redeploy and the Soviets isolated me instead. In the old days as the Soviets, I could force a lone panzer or motorized division to retreat if it extended itself and I massed those kinds of forces against it. I wouldn't have ever been able to rout a full panzer corps. Nice move. Trey quote: ORIGINAL: JAMiAM In the meantime, to further fuel the flames of debate, I call this screenshot "Counterattack: Revenge of the Untermenschen!" German Panzer Korps bounced back into Rumania by hordes of Russians advancing to the rear...[:D] Sorry Trey...couldn't resist...[;)] [image]local://upfiles/10882/ABBC8642B5294D3D929E9AD78EF8B803.jpg[/image]

bwheatley -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 3:04:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson quote: I agree with the fact that Soviet air and support artillery units alone could be accounted for the majority of the losses the German force suffered. Therefore the "crack Panzerdivision vs. puny Rifle Division" argument is a moot point. Well if 20 German Me 109 vs 10 Hurricans and 20 Il-2 can give the Sov some sort of incredible air superiority and air attack strength in 1942.. what happens in later when sov are flying 50 or more of Il-2s? I have to laugh how many of you have twisted and morph'd this post into some other than what it was questioning. That's fine you want to goof on other people's legitimate concerns that's on you. I've still yet to see any proof in the context of the east front that this battle outcome could have occurred. So I guess since nobody can produce it, they just dance around and make fun of the thread starter like a bunch of immature children. If the results are because this was a hasty attack according to Joel, that's good to know. I think that reduces the effectiveness of the German Panzer forces as historically they did act as fire brigades w/good success and were making 'hasty' type attacks in most situations after Case Blau. If I need to be concerned about doing a hasty attacks with a well rested, elite Pz Div in WitE in 42 against a sov inf div in the open w/o entrenchment then I guess knowledge is power. [;)] If you think a rifle division shouldn't be able to kill german tanks how do you account for panzer divisions losing all but 8 tanks in less then a month after barbarossa? That's within 30 days at the peak of russian disorganization. This is almost a year in with a division that is one of my better non-guard divisions. Along with air support & elite arty support. I'm still not seeing an aberration but i shall agree to disagree. :) I promise when you are destroying my panzer divisions it will piss me off but i'll still enjoy the game.

Sabre21 -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 3:04:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bjmorgan quote: ORIGINAL: 2ndACR Bull crud......I was a 11b (infantry) before I went Cav. I know dang well an infantry (leg) can do a delaying action on a mechanized unit. In any kind of country. Any country is better than clear, but I know it can be done. We practiced it, without armor, brad, and even without our guided anti tank. Just AT4 and small arms. It can be done. Is it expected.......NO, not expected, but can be done. This all boils down to using 1941 expectations and results versus a 1942 Russian. You have to change and expect the enemy to get better as it goes. Maybe for a short period of time. But the game scale is a week. No leg infantry without AT can successfully delay for a week against a combined arms team, with substantial tanks, as the 101st Airlanding learned when they developed their then new AT doctrine in 1975. We went through them like crap through a goose when it was tested in the piney woods of the Florida panhandle. My tank company alone overran two full airborne battalions, and the controlers had to pause the war when I got to less than a mile from the 101st TOC. We started at daylight and it was not yet noon. They then had four hours to redeploy to make another go of it. Nevermind, we overran another BN by dark. Three days later, and two days before it was suppsed to end Sure it wasn't real, but it was a close as can be done without real bullets. The commander of the 101st even admitted that "they had more work to do" with their doctrine. No s***. Hey..I was there at that exercise. I was a grunt in the 82nd at the time..we were playing against the 101st. Solid Shield 75 I think it was.

bwheatley -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 3:17:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bjmorgan quote: ORIGINAL: 2ndACR Bull crud......I was a 11b (infantry) before I went Cav. I know dang well an infantry (leg) can do a delaying action on a mechanized unit. In any kind of country. Any country is better than clear, but I know it can be done. We practiced it, without armor, brad, and even without our guided anti tank. Just AT4 and small arms. It can be done. Is it expected.......NO, not expected, but can be done. This all boils down to using 1941 expectations and results versus a 1942 Russian. You have to change and expect the enemy to get better as it goes. Maybe for a short period of time. But the game scale is a week. No leg infantry without AT can successfully delay for a week against a combined arms team, with substantial tanks, as the 101st Airlanding learned when they developed their then new AT doctrine in 1975. We went through them like crap through a goose when it was tested in the piney woods of the Florida panhandle. My tank company alone overran two full airborne battalions, and the controlers had to pause the war when I got to less than a mile from the 101st TOC. We started at daylight and it was not yet noon. They then had four hours to redeploy to make another go of it. Nevermind, we overran another BN by dark. Three days later, and two days before it was suppsed to end Sure it wasn't real, but it was a close as can be done without real bullets. The commander of the 101st even admitted that "they had more work to do" with their doctrine. No s***. All then tanks destroyed were P II & P IV (close support varient)'s. Those are crap tanks. My division had a full compliment of AT guns. A full compliment of AT rifles for the squads. And it's using the 42A TOE which is the most powerful TOE that the russian infantry gets the whole war.

bwheatley -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 3:19:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MechFO quote: ORIGINAL: 2ndACR No problem. Won't work every time. I am just trying to point out that it CAN happen in real life. For all we know the hasty attack did not start until day 6-7 of the week. Sunday the Russian unit is spotted, the recon sits in a REMF inbox until Tuesday when it is finally sent to Army and down the chain of command. Movement starts on Wednesday night, hasty on Thursday, which for some reason has issues. Not enough fuel made it front, the combat trains took that left instead of right and is now in the div next to you rear area. On Friday, you are ready to go again only to find the enemy has pulled back 10 miles. Plausible and could happen. Maybe it did. I know danged well it could and does happen all the time even today. I remember moving road signs around in Germany and mixing units up like no tomorrow. I would love to have 1 day turns. But as a WITP guy, it would not be horrible, but prefer the longer turn time. Sure. For me that represents running out of MP's and explains why moving without disengagement penalties is possible in the players turn. I would be for 1/2 day day - night turns, with the option to export combats into Steel Panthers and then reimport loss/readiness stats. There can never be too much micro.[:'(] +1 for half day turns with imports to SP.

Sabre21 -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 3:41:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bwheatley quote: ORIGINAL: bjmorgan quote: ORIGINAL: 2ndACR Bull crud......I was a 11b (infantry) before I went Cav. I know dang well an infantry (leg) can do a delaying action on a mechanized unit. In any kind of country. Any country is better than clear, but I know it can be done. We practiced it, without armor, brad, and even without our guided anti tank. Just AT4 and small arms. It can be done. Is it expected.......NO, not expected, but can be done. This all boils down to using 1941 expectations and results versus a 1942 Russian. You have to change and expect the enemy to get better as it goes. Maybe for a short period of time. But the game scale is a week. No leg infantry without AT can successfully delay for a week against a combined arms team, with substantial tanks, as the 101st Airlanding learned when they developed their then new AT doctrine in 1975. We went through them like crap through a goose when it was tested in the piney woods of the Florida panhandle. My tank company alone overran two full airborne battalions, and the controlers had to pause the war when I got to less than a mile from the 101st TOC. We started at daylight and it was not yet noon. They then had four hours to redeploy to make another go of it. Nevermind, we overran another BN by dark. Three days later, and two days before it was suppsed to end Sure it wasn't real, but it was a close as can be done without real bullets. The commander of the 101st even admitted that "they had more work to do" with their doctrine. No s*. All then tanks destroyed were P II & P IV (close support varient)'s. Those are crap tanks. My division had a full compliment of AT guns. A full compliment of AT rifles for the squads. And it's using the 42A TOE** which is the most powerful TOE that the russian infantry gets the whole war. I hope you mean 41a TOE since the 41b doesn't begin until August 41 and then the 41c in Dec 41 followed by the 42a in March of 42.

SgtKachalin -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 4:11:26 AM)
A hobby of mine is GPW era awards and badges of the USSR. With the fall of that empire the RKKA archives has (sporadically) been open for research, including the citations for millions of medals awarded. A synopsis of the citation of one of the awards reads: "Awarded on 6 November 1942 to Private Ivan Zamoraev, Gun Layer, 295th Artillery Regt., 138th Rifle Div., 64th Army, Stalingrad Front. He showed extraordinary valor in the 2-day battle near Yagdonyi, southwest of Stalingrad, on August 31 - September 1, 1942, when his battery was attacked by 80 enemy tanks. With his gun commander and another crewman Zamoraev disabled 2 German tanks. When the German motorized infantry and armor broke through on September 8, Zamoraev scored a hit on an enemy tank with his second shot. The precise fire of his and other guns of the battery forced the panzers to retreat behind a hill. Three days later, 3 German tanks supported by submachine-gunners broke through the Soviet infantry line and flanked the battery. Zamoraev turned his gun to face them and with three shots disabled one of the tanks prompting the others to turn back. During the next 2 hours Zamoraev defended his battery from the German infantry assaults, until Soviet reinforcements reached his position. " Glantz refers to these battles in his "To the Gates of Stalingrad". The 138th indeed retreated under the attacks from 4th Panzer Army, but as shown cost the Germans while doing so. Many gamers are handicapped by relying on sources from the 60s and 70s, told almost exclusively from the German side. Hence the idea that is was "impossible" for the Red Army rifle divisions to put up a fight against the Panzers. More recent scholarship has put this idea to rest; the Germans were indeed formidable, but by no means invulnerable.

bwheatley -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 4:57:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sabre21 quote: ORIGINAL: bwheatley quote: ORIGINAL: bjmorgan quote: ORIGINAL: 2ndACR Bull crud......I was a 11b (infantry) before I went Cav. I know dang well an infantry (leg) can do a delaying action on a mechanized unit. In any kind of country. Any country is better than clear, but I know it can be done. We practiced it, without armor, brad, and even without our guided anti tank. Just AT4 and small arms. It can be done. Is it expected.......NO, not expected, but can be done. This all boils down to using 1941 expectations and results versus a 1942 Russian. You have to change and expect the enemy to get better as it goes. Maybe for a short period of time. But the game scale is a week. No leg infantry without AT can successfully delay for a week against a combined arms team, with substantial tanks, as the 101st Airlanding learned when they developed their then new AT doctrine in 1975. We went through them like crap through a goose when it was tested in the piney woods of the Florida panhandle. My tank company alone overran two full airborne battalions, and the controlers had to pause the war when I got to less than a mile from the 101st TOC. We started at daylight and it was not yet noon. They then had four hours to redeploy to make another go of it. Nevermind, we overran another BN by dark. Three days later, and two days before it was suppsed to end Sure it wasn't real, but it was a close as can be done without real bullets. The commander of the 101st even admitted that "they had more work to do" with their doctrine. No s*. All then tanks destroyed were P II & P IV (close support varient)'s. Those are crap tanks. My division had a full compliment of AT guns. A full compliment of AT rifles for the squads. And it's using the 42A TOE** which is the most powerful TOE that the russian infantry gets the whole war. I hope you mean 41a TOE since the 41b doesn't begin until August 41 and then the 41c in Dec 41 followed by the 42a in March of 42. No i meant 42A :) Our game where the combat ara mentions was around turn 48 i think or 49. A few turns since my guys converted from 41C to 42A. The increase in AT power was welcome. Though i'm again finding it hard to fill out a rifle division. I'll be glad when 42B rolls around to drop the infantry size by 3k. Even with 7 million men i have few divisions that are above 80% on their infantry size.

wosung -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 9:02:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson quote: I agree with the fact that Soviet air and support artillery units alone could be accounted for the majority of the losses the German force suffered. Therefore the "crack Panzerdivision vs. puny Rifle Division" argument is a moot point. If I need to be concerned about doing a hasty attacks with a well rested, elite Pz Div in WitE in 42 against a sov inf div in the open w/o entrenchment then I guess knowledge is power. [;)] quote: ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson To the Gates of Stalingrad: Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942: David Glantz The 6th Panzer Division 1937-1945: Helmut Ritgen "Destruction of the Barvenkovo Salient Both sides spent the 20th of May reorganizing their forces in and around the Barvenkovo salient. During the 20th, the 14th Panzer Division captured Protopopovka, which narrowed the neck of the pocket to only twelve miles. On the 22nd, German forces began their attempt to seal the neck of the pocket. In the south the 14th and 16th Panzer Divisions attacked northwards from Protopopovka and Zagorodnoe toward Chepel and the 14th Panzer Division reached Bayrak, to the south of Balakleia. In the north, the redeployed elements of the 3rd and 23rd Panzer Divisions attacked southwards from Balakleia and Andreevka smashing through the 337th and 47th Rifle Divisions, forcing crossings of the Northern Donets River at Chervonyi Donets and Krasnaia Gusarovka." All you do is throwing in ONE lousy citation, without making clear from which book, which page it comes. The citation itself only speaks of German PDs forcing Russian RDs to retreat. There is NO data about Russian casualities in your citation at all. But you, Sir, do have the guts to state for all and every time in game casuality rate never ever could happen. And whoever thinks otherwise, has to prove it in detail. And you are talking about superhumans and [only your] knowledge is power. Frankly, I find your behavior very arrogant.

ComradeP -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 10:19:52 AM)
quote: Having glanced over your AAR with NN, James took far bigger swathes of the map vs me, and far sooner, than you did against NN. Possibly, but I can't do the impossible, such as breaking through a line along a major river with mobile units with 30-40 MP's where even the weakest Rifle divisions are capable of stopping hasty attacks, the losses I inflict are low to minimal no matter how good the attack was, units conveniently always rout next to the HQ and are combat capable again on the Soviet part of the turn, and those same units attack my spearhead next turn because all they need is a 1:1 because they're the Soviets. notenome's Sir Robin gave him a substantial amount of forces to use for the river defence, which is in some ways a good Soviet strategy and in some ways isn't (I still refuse to withdraw to the Dnepr early on as the Soviets myself). The system gave me much more of a headache early on than notenome's defence, there's no other way to say it. - JAMiAM: I'll set up a game. In my opinion, random weather just makes 1941 more difficult for the Axis, and I prefer historical weather for both sides, but if you want to play random weather, that's fine too. I'll start with locked HQ's. If you don't want locked HQ's you can fix that in a few seconds in the CR screen, and there's no automated support unit movement on turn 1.

PMCN -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 11:00:18 AM)
Why not pour some high octane av fuel on this...in my game I forced the surrender of the 16th Panzer division in turn 2...I used around 8 divisions to do mind you...but still in the second week of the campaign there were German POWs from a Pz division. The horror of this is sure to cause heart attacks. I don't understand why the AI left the unit isolated, but it probably though "Oh, I can air supply a cut off panzer division easily." Could not possibly happen in the real world...much like it surely can't be possible to loose 4 fleet carriers off some dinky island midway across the pacific to an utterly uncoordinated (and botched) attempt at launching an air strike from 3 dispersed CVBGs...nah if that happened clearly the game is borked and the AI is cheating. About the request for a log file...that is, well, utterly impossible is perhaps too strong but highly unlikely. There are thousands of shots in a fight even a small one, I don't think it is possible to log this for later review. What I would like to see is some sort of listing of what happened in each "phase/range band/whatever you want to call it. This would be available if you click on a button in the show battles mode. So you could see: Long Range Fire Phase 20 122mm Hwz fired 1200 rounds and produced 15 men, 3 guns and 2 tanks in losses. etc. I would much prefer if the data was presented in a more graphical format...bar graphs or something. But still with a division having upwards of 15 devices keeping this to a format where it was useful would probably be more challenging then the programing changes to implement the format. I must admit that I can't understand why people don't play at higher resolution. lvl 3 gives you the results of the air attack, then the ground action. Lvl 4 is what I usually use and that seems to be the best compromise between detail and time. It is admittedly well I suppose watching me watching the battle would be amusing. The comments I make from time to time are using language I learned in barracks, and I've been known to get excited, saddened, furious, over joyed, etc watching these fights. Seeing your guys getting cut down as they march through MG 34 fire...making comments like "ENOUGH WITH THE DAMNED 6.5 mm 1893 FIRE!" during an attempt to push back a Rumanian Infantry division. The groans when the dreaded "GrW 81 or GrW 50" message shows up. The change in demenor when the first "Rifle squad is destroyed by flame thrower" message shows up. This means the punishment is over and my boys get to do the bayonet and SMG thing. The reason those damned security divisions can be right annoying is they have a battalion of 105 mm Hwz, plus they have a fair few mortars...worse they seem to be prioritized to get captured equipment so guess what...your own 120 mm mortars cut your men down. I view them as a chance to get a victory on my win-loss ratio but it will cost you around 1000 men and several guns to get it.

BletchleyGeek -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 11:25:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely Could not possibly happen in the real world...much like it surely can't be possible to loose 4 fleet carriers off some dinky island midway across the pacific to an utterly uncoordinated (and botched) attempt at launching an air strike from 3 dispersed CVBGs...nah if that happened clearly the game is borked and the AI is cheating. I remember reading this about Normandy battles: quote: If the Americans had been as bad as everyone thought they were, the Germans as good as everyone thought they were and the British as bad as themselves thought they were the outcome of the campaign would have been very different.

Shellshock -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 12:16:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely Could not possibly happen in the real world...much like it surely can't be possible to loose 4 fleet carriers off some dinky island midway across the pacific to an utterly uncoordinated (and botched) attempt at launching an air strike from 3 dispersed CVBGs...nah if that happened clearly the game is borked and the AI is cheating. Or cite a less famous example, that a force of 4 battleships, 8 cruisers, and 11 destroyers in a daylight surface engagement eventually retreated in the face of 6 puny escort carriers, 3 destroyers and 4 escort destroyers as happened in the battle off Samar. World War II was totally borked. Since these players can't rant on their generals for their supposed failures as Hitler did, I suppose they have to rant on the system.

TulliusDetritus -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 12:27:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shellshock quote: ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely Could not possibly happen in the real world...much like it surely can't be possible to loose 4 fleet carriers off some dinky island midway across the pacific to an utterly uncoordinated (and botched) attempt at launching an air strike from 3 dispersed CVBGs...nah if that happened clearly the game is borked and the AI is cheating. Or cite a less famous example, that a force of 4 battleships, 8 cruisers, and 11 destroyers in a daylight surface engagement eventually retreated in the face of 6 puny escort carriers, 3 destroyers and 4 escort destroyers as happened in the battle off Samar. World War II was totally borked. Since these players can't rant on their generals for their supposed failures as Hitler did, I suppose they have to rant on the system. Well, the CVEs and their escort DEs did not really force them to retreat. The presence of all the 5h Fleet CVs and CVLs (with more than 1.000 planes) made them retreat. Quite different. But I get the spirit [8D]

PMCN -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 12:59:59 PM)
I'm fairly sure there were more than a few Japanese Admirals that would have loved to "gone back to a saved game" more than a few times... I find it odd how when Leyte Gulf comes up the first battle...where the US battleline of aging Battleships obliterated the Japanese is never mentioned. The second force then sailed right by the burning wreckage of the Fuso on their way to that meeting with the jeep carriers. It is purely speculative on my part...but I kinda think that experience had something to do with their retreat from the destroyer screen. I, again guessing, figure its highly likely they retreated from the DDs more because they were afraid of what they thought was behind them (and which they knew had just vaporized half the attack force) then from the efforts of the ships they were facing. I could be wrong...it is just the thought that I can't help but having over the situation. I agree completely...ranting at the system...or the generals is a typical reaction of tin plated dictators everywhere...and isn't that a good description for us Grognards? (err that is a joke or an attempt at humor...which is impossible to convey over the internet...)

Shellshock -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 1:18:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely I find it odd how when Leyte Gulf comes up the first battle...where the US battleline of aging Battleships obliterated the Japanese is never mentioned. The second force then sailed right by the burning wreckage of the Fuso on their way to that meeting with the jeep carriers. It is purely speculative on my part...but I kinda think that experience had something to do with their retreat from the destroyer screen. I, again guessing, figure its highly likely they retreated from the DDs more because they were afraid of what they thought was behind them (and which they knew had just vaporized half the attack force) then from the efforts of the ships they were facing. I could be wrong...it is just the thought that I can't help but having over the situation. The Japanese fleet at Leyte Gulf acted in an odd manner. Sometimes reckless, sometimes timid. Two cruisers were lost to submarines before the battle was even joined because lttle effort was made to bother with an proper ASW screen. To be fair to Admiral Kurita who commanded the force at Samar, he thought he had run directly into Halsey's 5th Fleet. That those escort carriers and destroyers in front of him were fleet carriers, battleships and cruisers. However, his orders were to smash his way through to the landing beaches on Leyte and there was no point in retreating and saving his ships for later, as events proved. By 1945 they were all eventually sunk or laid up for lack of fuel. Plus catching 5th Fleet's carriers in daylight in a surface action should have been seen as a golden opportunity. (even if only in error.)

76mm -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 1:27:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely What I would like to see is some sort of listing of what happened in each "phase/range band/whatever you want to call it. This would be available if you click on a button in the show battles mode. So you could see: Long Range Fire Phase 20 122mm Hwz fired 1200 rounds and produced 15 men, 3 guns and 2 tanks in losses. etc. Yeah, this would probably be better than a huge, un-user-friendly log file.

PMCN -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 1:35:46 PM)
Yup, WW2 was totally borked. Should have loaded from an earlier save many times in it...and the AI cheated all over the place. Imagine if it could read your orders even as you gave them for example. Truth is stranger than fiction and certainly things happened in real life no gamer would accept in a game...myself included. I still remember there was a Squad Leader scenario that introduced the US Airborne in Anvil of Victory that gave you this artillery piece that could only fire HE...and you were squared off against Tiger I's. Firing HE at a Tiger I is an exercise in pointlessness, I don't think you can roll low enough to take out the tank, but when you read the aftermath description the gun is credited with destroying and driving off 2 or 3 Tiger I tanks if not more. It played a major part in the victory in reality.

TulliusDetritus -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 1:49:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely I'm fairly sure there were more than a few Japanese Admirals that would have loved to "gone back to a saved game" more than a few times... I find it odd how when Leyte Gulf comes up the first battle...where the US battleline of aging Battleships obliterated the Japanese is never mentioned. The second force then sailed right by the burning wreckage of the Fuso on their way to that meeting with the jeep carriers. It is purely speculative on my part...but I kinda think that experience had something to do with their retreat from the destroyer screen. I, again guessing, figure its highly likely they retreated from the DDs more because they were afraid of what they thought was behind them (and which they knew had just vaporized half the attack force) then from the efforts of the ships they were facing. I could be wrong...it is just the thought that I can't help but having over the situation. I agree completely...ranting at the system...or the generals is a typical reaction of tin plated dictators everywhere...and isn't that a good description for us Grognards? (err that is a joke or an attempt at humor...which is impossible to convey over the internet...) The funny thing about this Battle of Leyte is that the attack on Sprague's CVEs and DEs in Samar in fact SAVED Ozawa's CVs (the bait in the Japanese plan) from total annihilation. And the latter (Ozawa) were supposed to save the BBs and CAs which attacked in Samar from a certain destruction. And Sprague's force survived because the big sisters (CVs and CVLs) were around. So we have a weird I save you => you save me => I save him => he saves me

Zovs -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 3:40:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely I still remember there was a Squad Leader scenario that introduced the US Airborne in Anvil of Victory that gave you this artillery piece that could only fire HE...and you were squared off against Tiger I's. Firing HE at a Tiger I is an exercise in pointlessness, I don't think you can roll low enough to take out the tank, but when you read the aftermath description the gun is credited with destroying and driving off 2 or 3 Tiger I tanks if not more. It played a major part in the victory in reality. They fixed that in ASL, now HE can (if your very, very lucky) get a kill on a Tiger, but you'd have to have something like greater then 105 mm though. Also, HEAT and APCR are much more efficient in ASL. Lastly, ASL added in Improbable Hits, basically if you got tank you can't kill (like say a 37mm door knocker against a T-34) if you roll snake eyes (Critical Hit) you still can't kill the T-34, but if you roll snake eyes again and if you roll a 1 on 6 sided dice you get the Improbable Kill. I have done it at least three times in my 25 years of playing ASL. The most notable is when we were playing a Budapest scenario and I had a JapPz with a German 9-2 armor leader (buttoned up) and moved on to the board and expended all my MP to get on top of a hill, I pivoted and then fired at a T-34/85 with a 9-2 Armor Leader in it at 26 hexes (we were playing a threesome, I was the Germans and the SS, and my two buddies were playing the Russians and the Soviet Guards (that is how we split up the forces) I had no chance of hitting the damn thing, but guess what I rolled snake eyes twice and a 1 for a burning wreck. The Soviet commander retreated to a couch lit up a smoke and went to sleep, my other buddy was so pissed at him, since it was only the first turn and if failed his PMC (personal morale check).... EDIT: Now that is some Utter Madness!

DBeves -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 4:18:35 PM)
quote: To be fair to Admiral Kurita who commanded the force at Samar, he thought he had run directly into Halsey's 5th Fleet. Well thats precisely the point isnt it ... most of war comes down to mistakes and luck and other things a game with a few dice rolls is never going to simulate. All a game can do is allow for some random chance in a vain effort to simulate it. I have to admit when I read the rant in the O post I expected the screen shot to reveal some horrific result that totally destroyed my will to play the game. Personally I would rather play a game where this could happen than a game that simply produced a rock and scissors result that was absolutely predictable very time you went into a fight.

Smirfy -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 4:26:32 PM)
From the bible of British artillery on the web http://nigelef.tripod.com/index.htm "An often asked question is about the effect of indirect artillery fire on tanks. One example helps, in 1944 the German IX Corps in Italy reported that artillery fire was the largest single cause of its tanks losses, it seems that this was usually from medium and heavy guns controlled by air OPs. The second largest source was German destruction of damaged or broken-down tanks to prevent their capture (mechanical reliability was not a feature of German tanks)"

BletchleyGeek -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 5:31:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dlazov66 The most notable is when we were playing a Budapest scenario and I had a JapPz with a German 9-2 armor leader (buttoned up) and moved on to the board and expended all my MP to get on top of a hill, I pivoted and then fired at a T-34/85 with a 9-2 Armor Leader in it at 26 hexes (we were playing a threesome, I was the Germans and the SS, and my two buddies were playing the Russians and the Soviet Guards (that is how we split up the forces) I had no chance of hitting the damn thing, but guess what I rolled snake eyes twice and a 1 for a burning wreck. The Soviet commander retreated to a couch lit up a smoke and went to sleep, my other buddy was so pissed at him, since it was only the first turn and if failed his PMC (personal morale check).... EDIT: Now that is some Utter Madness! [:D] Nice story. You ASLers have the best anecdotes, hands down. I was told about a Prokhorovka scenario game that turned sour - they almost got to actually fight themselves - just because of a "very lucky" 82mm Mortar platoon...

Zovs -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 6:03:12 PM)
Usually it's wise to have a good buddy you can call names and still be friends when your done. My good buddy I play weekly face to face with is an old Navy sea dog and I am an old Army dog some of the names we lovingly call each other and the way we talk at the game table would make your hair and toes curl and you would not think were best buddies. I can't use the language here but he is a pathetic attempt: Don "Wind Check, NE" Joe "Dumb A$$ you wasted a 5" Don "F#ck You bright eyes" Don "Okay I got to rally that broke dick 8-0 over here, damn 9, stupid b@$trd is such a chick sh1t" Joe "Ha, your just a dumb A$$, Hell I would tell you to kiss off too" Don "Kiss this M0th3rF#ck3r" Don "Okay I am done with my rally, are you done yet b@$trd?" Joe "Yeah, look my 2 broke dm squads just ralled, their going cut your throat in CC now" Don "Prep Fire, okay I got 16 +2 here, sh1t those dumb a$$es can't hit sh1t" Joe "Maybe you need another beer?" Don "Trying to trick me? Okay I got a 8 up one over there on those b@$trds in the woods, oh sorry I rolled a 3 so thats a 2MC" Joe "Great, that squad rolled a 11 which ELR you suck!" Okay, you get the idea that was the cleaned up version. Right now were in the middle of a Ilu Campaign Game, it's the Japanese and Marines in the Guadalcanal when the Japanese attacked across the Ilu river in that famous attack. It has 3 night scenarios and 2 day ones. On the first night attack I as the Japanese had 18 squads and I screwed up my setup not understanding who this scenario would work, in the end I did get across the river, but I had lost 16.5 squads leaving me with 1.5 squads left. Out of 6 leaders I had 2 left, both striped (in ASL Japanese leaders don't break they flip over to their wounded side or stripped sided). We just finished the second night scenario and I got across the river again and got 2 strategic locations but I lost 75% of my force doing it. He had three modules of artillery, lucky for me one red carded right away and was gone, the other got one fire mission off before red carding and the last one was a puny 70mm one that killed a crap load of my squads and leaders.

JAMiAM -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 7:55:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ComradeP JAMiAM: I'll set up a game. In my opinion, random weather just makes 1941 more difficult for the Axis... Good...then you'll have no excuses, and I will...[;)] quote: ORIGINAL: ComradeP ...and I prefer historical weather for both sides, but if you want to play random weather, that's fine too... I prefer random weather for a couple of reasons. First off, I sort of like not knowing what to expect. The original commanders couldn't predict the weather, nor plan weeks in advance for an exact weather change on a particular date, and neither should we. Secondly, going hand in hand with that, I feel that the non-random weather lends itself to a whole "paint-by-numbers" mentality on the part of players. Or, perhaps that should be "war-by-numbers"...[:D] Locking oneself into a mode of thinking that something must be done a certain way, is a sure fire way of allowing oneself to be constantly, and unpleasantly, surprised when his opponent refuses to stay within the lines, so to speak. I tend to do a bit of metagaming when I'm playing against live opponents, so keeping it real, fresh and unpredictable makes the game much more exciting, in my opinion. quote: ORIGINAL: ComradeP I'll start with locked HQ's. If you don't want locked HQ's you can fix that in a few seconds in the CR screen, and there's no automated support unit movement on turn 1. Sounds good. Let me know in a PM when you've actually set up the game. Please set a password for it, and set it up on the Slitherine server, when you have a chance. I didn't see any open challenges that looked like you. Do you use a different name on the server? I have the same username both places. Finally, I would be interested in doing an AAR with you, if you have the time. We can make them so that each of us stays out of the others thread, if you'd like, or institute a couple of turn delay. Your choice, in any event. Look forward to the challenge. Regards, James

chris0827 -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 8:45:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely I find it odd how when Leyte Gulf comes up the first battle...where the US battleline of aging Battleships obliterated the Japanese is never mentioned. The second force then sailed right by the burning wreckage of the Fuso on their way to that meeting with the jeep carriers. It is purely speculative on my part...but I kinda think that experience had something to do with their retreat from the destroyer screen. I, again guessing, figure its highly likely they retreated from the DDs more because they were afraid of what they thought was behind them (and which they knew had just vaporized half the attack force) then from the efforts of the ships they were facing. Kurita's force took a different route. They didn't sail past the burning Fuso.

Lanconic -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 10:14:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shellshock quote: ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely I find it odd how when Leyte Gulf comes up the first battle...where the US battleline of aging Battleships obliterated the Japanese is never mentioned. The second force then sailed right by the burning wreckage of the Fuso on their way to that meeting with the jeep carriers. It is purely speculative on my part...but I kinda think that experience had something to do with their retreat from the destroyer screen. I, again guessing, figure its highly likely they retreated from the DDs more because they were afraid of what they thought was behind them (and which they knew had just vaporized half the attack force) then from the efforts of the ships they were facing. I could be wrong...it is just the thought that I can't help but having over the situation. The Japanese fleet at Leyte Gulf acted in an odd manner. Sometimes reckless, sometimes timid. Two cruisers were lost to submarines before the battle was even joined because lttle effort was made to bother with an proper ASW screen. To be fair to Admiral Kurita who commanded the force at Samar, he thought he had run directly into Halsey's 5th Fleet. That those escort carriers and destroyers in front of him were fleet carriers, battleships and cruisers. However, his orders were to smash his way through to the landing beaches on Leyte and there was no point in retreating and saving his ships for later, as events proved. By 1945 they were all eventually sunk or laid up for lack of fuel. Plus catching 5th Fleet's carriers in daylight in a surface action should have been seen as a golden opportunity. (even if only in error.) A commander should be judged by the information he has at the time. Not 60+ years hindsight. Kurita did not know what he was facing He had heard NOTHING from the other task forces All his planes had been lost to various mishaps His force was NOT pristine when they arrived All he knew was that he was getting beat up by an unknown force and some of his ships were starting to sink. You think its easy to command a battle line? He knew that he was losing more than he was sinking. He did know that. He had already lost the Mushashi. That had to have affected his thinking

ComradeP -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/28/2011 10:17:20 PM)
I know WitP(:AE)'s also a popular game that many of us play, but it also has its own forum...where this subject has probably been brought up about a million times, at the least.

Mynok -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/29/2011 12:41:06 AM)
[:D] I'm afraid you'll have to deal with us WitpAE folk, Comrade. There are a lot of us over here.

ComradeP -> RE: Utter madness... if you didn't believe something was wrong before (1/29/2011 12:46:20 AM)
The more people here, the merrier, it's just that this thread isn't about Leyte Gulf, as interesting as the statements here might be. I have no idea what this thread is about at this point, but still. Yes, WitP:AE'ers, there are threads out there that in no way involve the Japanese, the Allies and peculiar naval engagements where one group of debaters says the result was entirely predictable, and another group says the result was completely out of whack considering the circumstances (judging by the WitP:AE forums, the middle ground is rarely stood on).

Page: << < prev 4 5 6 [7] 8 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.859375