What do you make of this

What do you make of this (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition

Message

Chris21wen -> What do you make of this (12/30/2011 10:05:23 AM)
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Woleai at 101,103 Weather in hex: Partial cloud Raid spotted at 20 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet. Estimated time to target is 7 minutes Japanese aircraft G4M2 Betty x 31 H8K2-L Emily x 16 Allied aircraft F4U-1D Corsair x 4 F4U-1A Corsair x 7 F4U-1D Corsair x 10 Japanese aircraft losses G4M2 Betty: 20 destroyed H8K2-L Emily: 6 destroyed No Allied losses Allied Ships PT-231, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-227, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-255, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-225, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-187, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-233, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-228, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-229, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-230, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-226, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk Aircraft Attacking: 25 x G4M2 Betty flying as kamikaze Kamikaze: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb, 4 x 60 kg GP Bomb 10 x H8K2-L Emily flying as kamikaze CAP engaged: VF-17 with F4U-1D Corsair (7 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling) (6 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.) 7 plane(s) intercepting now. 3 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact. Group patrol altitude is 18000 , scrambling fighters between 7000 and 18000. Time for all group planes to reach interception is 57 minutes VMF-441 with F4U-1A Corsair (7 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling) (3 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.) 7 plane(s) intercepting now. Group patrol altitude is 20000 Raid is overhead No.17 Sqn RNZAF with F4U-1D Corsair (4 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling) (4 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.) 4 plane(s) intercepting now. Group patrol altitude is 15000 Raid is overhead

castor troy -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 10:12:24 AM)
a) a waste of aircraft and b) those bombers would not be able to hit a fast moving PT

LoBaron -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 10:13:09 AM)
Emily Kamis??? Crashing into PT boats?!?! Oo WTF! Serious stuff man, serious stuff. The rest of the story is somewhere in the realm of 7 minutes time to target.

LoBaron -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 10:16:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy those bombers would not be able to hit a fast moving PT In case they were static the Emilys could try to hit the PT´s by landing on the water and driving on top of em. [:D][:D][:D]

Chris21wen -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 10:18:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LoBaron quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy those bombers would not be able to hit a fast moving PT In case they were static the Emilys could try to hit the PT´s by landing on the water and driving on top of em. [:D][:D][:D] [:D]

Erkki -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 10:29:31 AM)
Or just land on the water and shoot them with the on-board machine guns and cannons... Lol.

Gunner98 -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 10:57:16 AM)
Raming Speed!! Bowling for PT boats [:D]

Miller -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 1:17:16 PM)
Hey, at least they attacked ships. I will never forget one turn in the original WITP whereby I had 200 Kamis crash into a Chinese base.

pauk -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 1:29:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy a) a waste of aircraft and In fact that is old and well known bug. But AE gods didnt touch this for a years. But at the other hand they have no problem with taking (your) money [:D] hey mate, you re getting idea why im saying "what im saying"? they included even a swagger stick for the commonwealth army but they didnt bother to fix such bugs, including inital attack on PH where mostly attack doesnt result with even a single one BB sunk. There are many examples like this one, not to mention "4E combat model".. [:'(][:D][:'(]

Miller -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 2:10:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pauk quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy a) a waste of aircraft and In fact that is old and well known bug. But AE gods didnt touch this for a years. But at the other hand they have no problem with taking (your) money [:D] hey mate, you re getting idea why im saying "what im saying"? they included even a swagger stick for the commonwealth army but they didnt bother to fix such bugs, including inital attack on PH where mostly attack doesnt result with even a single one BB sunk. There are many examples like this one, not to mention "4E combat model".. [:'(][:D][:'(] Well going off most of the AARs I have read, two or more BBs are usually lost in the PH attacks[&:] Or are you referring to the original WITP?

Erkki -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 2:13:29 PM)
Miller check out my AAR's 2 first pages. [;)][:D]

Puhis -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 2:23:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Miller quote: ORIGINAL: pauk quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy a) a waste of aircraft and In fact that is old and well known bug. But AE gods didnt touch this for a years. But at the other hand they have no problem with taking (your) money [:D] hey mate, you re getting idea why im saying "what im saying"? they included even a swagger stick for the commonwealth army but they didnt bother to fix such bugs, including inital attack on PH where mostly attack doesnt result with even a single one BB sunk. There are many examples like this one, not to mention "4E combat model".. [:'(][:D][:'(] Well going off most of the AARs I have read, two or more BBs are usually lost in the PH attacks[&:] Or are you referring to the original WITP? Well I've started 5 PBEM games as Japan, and my best PH score is 2 BBs sunk (once), usually it have been 0 or 1 BB sunk.

castor troy -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 3:11:06 PM)
And if you want to you can sink 6. Easily put, the IJN has the possibility to hang around a week and have hundreds of Kate sorties to sink each and every ship in PH's harbour. How long does it actually take until KB runs out of sorties? It takes forever if the IJ commander isn't crazy enough to use Vals all the time together with the Kates. Knock out the airfield, then kill the BBs at will. After 400 Kate sorties, how many BBs are left then? It's the IJN that gets BB killing bombs, not the Allied. And seriously, if you go for the airfield on day one, then there is just nothing the IJN has to worry about, there is nothing on Hawaii that could hit a moving ship, the chance to see that is as high as having two carriers collide during movement.

Erkki -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 3:14:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy And if you want to you can sink 6. Easily put, the IJN has the possibility to hang around a week and have hundreds of Kate sorties to sink each and every ship in PH's harbour. How long does it actually take until KB runs out of sorties? It takes forever if the IJ commander isn't crazy enough to use Vals all the time together with the Kates. Knock out the airfield, then kill the BBs at will. After 400 Kate sorties, how many BBs are left then? It's the IJN that gets BB killing bombs, not the Allied. And seriously, if you go for the airfield on day one, then there is just nothing the IJN has to worry about, there is nothing on Hawaii that could hit a moving ship, the chance to see that is as high as having two carriers collide during movement. After 3 days and 308 B5N sorties exactly 0 BBs and 0 other ships down with 6 torpedo hits on BBs(torp hits from all days). As I said above, see the first page of my AAR.... [:'(]

Shark7 -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 3:38:57 PM)
Looks like something michealm needs to look into...kami's should not be attacking PTs. Looks like an easy thing to exploit on the allied side.

HansBolter -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 3:54:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Puhis quote: ORIGINAL: Miller quote: ORIGINAL: pauk quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy a) a waste of aircraft and In fact that is old and well known bug. But AE gods didnt touch this for a years. But at the other hand they have no problem with taking (your) money [:D] hey mate, you re getting idea why im saying "what im saying"? they included even a swagger stick for the commonwealth army but they didnt bother to fix such bugs, including inital attack on PH where mostly attack doesnt result with even a single one BB sunk. There are many examples like this one, not to mention "4E combat model".. [:'(][:D][:'(] Well going off most of the AARs I have read, two or more BBs are usually lost in the PH attacks[&:] Or are you referring to the original WITP? Well I've started 5 PBEM games as Japan, and my best PH score is 2 BBs sunk (once), usually it have been 0 or 1 BB sunk. I recently started a new Ironman Japan v3 scenario. I ran the first turn 10 times before I got a decent enough start for the Japanese to be worth playing on. However, 7 out of 10 results delivered 2 BBs sunk ( I just don't consider that a good enough start to play on). I result delivered 1 BB sunk. 1 result delivered 0 BBs sunk. I finally got a 7 BBs sunk result on the 10th iteration and decided to play that one out.

Don Bowen -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 4:22:39 PM)
Just for the record... AE does NOT pre-script battle results. If you want specific (historical?) results, use a scenario that starts after that battle ends. For ALL combat there is a high use of random. This means that any outcome is possible. Trying to apply historical results to any specific game battle is a complete waste of time.

Shark7 -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 4:38:40 PM)
Not necessarily a scripted outcome, I'd rather have a less predictable outcome. Right now, the average result is pretty historical, though exact ships lost may not match history. A little more randomness wouldn't be a bad thing. As it stands, if you start the Dec 7 grand campaign, you can pretty well count on 0-2 BBs sunk (unless there are criticals). While in truth only Arizona was a total loss. Oklahoma was lost while being towed back to the mainland after having been righted and raised. The 0-2 loss is pretty accurate.

castor troy -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 4:45:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Erkki quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy And if you want to you can sink 6. Easily put, the IJN has the possibility to hang around a week and have hundreds of Kate sorties to sink each and every ship in PH's harbour. How long does it actually take until KB runs out of sorties? It takes forever if the IJ commander isn't crazy enough to use Vals all the time together with the Kates. Knock out the airfield, then kill the BBs at will. After 400 Kate sorties, how many BBs are left then? It's the IJN that gets BB killing bombs, not the Allied. And seriously, if you go for the airfield on day one, then there is just nothing the IJN has to worry about, there is nothing on Hawaii that could hit a moving ship, the chance to see that is as high as having two carriers collide during movement. After 3 days and 308 B5N sorties exactly 0 BBs and 0 other ships down with 6 torpedo hits on BBs(torp hits from all days). As I said above, see the first page of my AAR.... [:'(] must have been more than bad luck, I would bet this won't happen in 9 out of 10 times. My game vs. mortar showed 14 torp hits the first round only and I don't consider this a lot. In my game against 1eyedjacks he scored something like two dozen torp hits the first day alone. And then there are the unlimited number of 800kg bombs. I just can't believe I wouldn't be able to sink a couple of BB if I stick around long enough if there isn't something really exceptionell happening. Morning Air attack on Pearl Harbor , at 180,107 Weather in hex: Clear sky Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 1,100 feet. Estimated time to target is 26 minutes Japanese aircraft A6M2 Zero x 68 B5N2 Kate x 144 D3A1 Val x 126 Allied aircraft no flights Japanese aircraft losses A6M2 Zero: 11 damaged A6M2 Zero: 7 destroyed by flak B5N2 Kate: 5 damaged B5N2 Kate: 1 destroyed by flak D3A1 Val: 19 damaged D3A1 Val: 2 destroyed by flak Allied aircraft losses B-18A Bolo: 53 damaged B-18A Bolo: 4 destroyed on ground B-17D Fortress: 53 damaged B-17D Fortress: 3 destroyed on ground PBY-5 Catalina: 162 damaged PBY-5 Catalina: 6 destroyed on ground A-20A Havoc: 14 damaged A-20A Havoc: 4 destroyed on ground P-40B Warhawk: 85 damaged P-40B Warhawk: 4 destroyed on ground C-33: 2 damaged SBD-1 Dauntless: 28 damaged SBD-1 Dauntless: 4 destroyed on ground B-17E Fortress: 13 damaged F4F-3 Wildcat: 10 damaged F4F-3 Wildcat: 3 destroyed on ground O-47A: 9 damaged O-47A: 2 destroyed on ground P-36A Mohawk: 16 damaged P-36A Mohawk: 1 destroyed on ground R3D-2: 1 damaged Allied Ships BB West Virginia, Bomb hits 10, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage BB Arizona, Bomb hits 7, Torpedo hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage BB Oklahoma, Bomb hits 7, on fire CM Oglala BB Pennsylvania, Bomb hits 9, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage BB Maryland, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 2 BB Tennessee, Bomb hits 4, Torpedo hits 1, on fire AV Tangier DM Pruitt DM Montgomery AV Wright BB Nevada, Bomb hits 8, heavy fires DD Tucker, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires BB California, Bomb hits 4, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage PT-28, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk CA New Orleans, Bomb hits 1 CL Phoenix, Bomb hits 1, on fire CA San Francisco, Torpedo hits 1 xAK Florence D., Bomb hits 1, on fire edit: I do count 9 torp hits the first round in your game though. Unfortunately your cr doesn't show the weather nor what the bombers are attack or from with alt they bomb but you don't seem to be even getting a 10% hit rate from your Kates if they actually attack the ships in port and not something else. Your Kates must be quite unique with such a hit rate.

LoBaron -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 5:09:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Don Bowen Just for the record... AE does NOT pre-script battle results. If you want specific (historical?) results, use a scenario that starts after that battle ends. For ALL combat there is a high use of random. This means that any outcome is possible. Trying to apply historical results to any specific game battle is a complete waste of time. This. Actually, in another thread I noticed many players want both, history recreated and fair results. Could be a contradiction, what do I know...

HansBolter -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 5:57:07 PM)
My post was simply intended to document that that the average results seem to be very close to the historical results. I simply don't consider a close to historical result (2 BBs lost) good enough to serve for a start of an AI game. The AI really, really needs the maximum victory points it can get right out of the starting gate. When you play the AI, you don't play to win, you play to coddle the AI and help it along to keep it a viable opponent for as long as possible. That means providing it with the best possible first turn results. and as a clarification I consider the Repulse a BB for reporting purposes as to how many BBs were sunk on turn 1.

Gridley380 -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 9:33:41 PM)
On the 'odd Pearl Harbor' tally, I'll note that in my... 2nd? vs AI game trial, I lost the USS Pennsylvania to a single torpedo on 12/7. Pretty impressive since she was in dry dock IRL... ;-)

jcjordan -> RE: What do you make of this (12/30/2011 11:29:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chris H Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Woleai at 101,103 Weather in hex: Partial cloud Raid spotted at 20 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet. Estimated time to target is 7 minutes Japanese aircraft G4M2 Betty x 31 H8K2-L Emily x 16 Allied aircraft F4U-1D Corsair x 4 F4U-1A Corsair x 7 F4U-1D Corsair x 10 Japanese aircraft losses G4M2 Betty: 20 destroyed H8K2-L Emily: 6 destroyed No Allied losses Allied Ships PT-231, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-227, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-255, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-225, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-187, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-233, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-228, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-229, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-230, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk PT-226, Kamikaze hits 1, and is sunk Aircraft Attacking: 25 x G4M2 Betty flying as kamikaze Kamikaze: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb, 4 x 60 kg GP Bomb 10 x H8K2-L Emily flying as kamikaze CAP engaged: VF-17 with F4U-1D Corsair (7 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling) (6 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.) 7 plane(s) intercepting now. 3 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact. Group patrol altitude is 18000 , scrambling fighters between 7000 and 18000. Time for all group planes to reach interception is 57 minutes VMF-441 with F4U-1A Corsair (7 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling) (3 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.) 7 plane(s) intercepting now. Group patrol altitude is 20000 Raid is overhead No.17 Sqn RNZAF with F4U-1D Corsair (4 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling) (4 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.) 4 plane(s) intercepting now. Group patrol altitude is 15000 Raid is overhead Back to the OP, I assume it's vs AI? As far as Allied planes VF-17 is one of the historical groups w/ historical pilots & is rather high in xp so losses caused would be high due to unescorted bombers vs fighters. As to the kami on the PTs, in my game when I look at the AI side of things the AI seems to set kamis to 100ft alt so the low nav skill gets increased over time. IIRC 100ft is the alt setting you'd need to attack PT, barges & other small craft so that might be why the attack took place even though the combat report says 10k ft. Maybe one of the groups did come in at that alt while the other came in at 100ft & both did kami runs. It may not be as strange as you think based on how the combat model works however ahistorical it may be.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.765625