Night surface engagement. No matador_spa

Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (Full Version)

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

Message

traskott -> Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/11/2014 2:09:37 PM)
Hi. I need some advice about a battle I have lost. Mod: Ultimate Battleships ( heavy BBs build, lot of battlewagons for two sides). Date: 21th December. Place: Kuching. Allied empty base, mined. Combat report: ight Time Surface Combat, near Kuching at 58,88, Range 5,000 Yards Japanese Ships CA Tone CA Chikuma, Shell hits 2, on fire CL Agano DD Shirakumo, Shell hits 2, on fire DD Murakumo DD Asagiri, Shell hits 1 DD Sagiri DD Yugiri Allied Ships DD Graham DD Alden, Shell hits 4, and is sunk DD Barker DD Bulmer DD Edsall DD John D. Edwards, Shell hits 1 DD Fox DD Paul Jones DD Parrott DD Peary, Shell hits 2 DD Whipple, Shell hits 1 DD Stewart BB Emperor of India, Shell hits 4 ( Iron Duke Class ) BB Ramillies, Shell hits 1 BB Resolution, Shell hits 10, Torpedo hits 6, and is sunk Reduced sighting due to 14% moonlight Maximum visibility in Partly Cloudy Conditions and 14% moonlight: 8,000 yards Range closes to 15,000 yards... Range closes to 9,000 yards... Range closes to 5,000 yards... CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 5,000 yards Japanese open fire on surprised Allied ships at 5,000 yards Second combat on the same hex: Night Time Surface Combat, near Kuching at 58,88, Range 9,000 Yards Japanese Ships BC Kirishima BC Hiei, Shell hits 3 CA Chokai CA Ashitaka CA Kumano, Shell hits 1 CLAA Kiso, Shell hits 1 CL Sendai DD Maikaze DD Nowaki DD Arashi, Shell hits 1 DD Hagikaze, Shell hits 1, on fire DD Asashio DD Oshio, Shell hits 1 DD Michishio DD Arashio DD Akatsuki DD Hibiki DD Shinonome, Shell hits 1, on fire Allied Ships DD Graham DD Barker, Shell hits 4, heavy fires DD Bulmer, Shell hits 1 DD Edsall, Shell hits 5, on fire DD John D. Edwards, Shell hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage DD Fox, Shell hits 15, and is sunk DD Paul Jones, Shell hits 3, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk DD Parrott, Shell hits 5, and is sunk DD Peary, Shell hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage DD Whipple, Shell hits 1 DD Stewart, Shell hits 2, on fire BB Emperor of India, Shell hits 67, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk BB Ramillies, Shell hits 36, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk Reduced sighting due to 14% moonlight Maximum visibility in Partly Cloudy Conditions and 14% moonlight: 10,000 yards Range closes to 15,000 yards... Range closes to 9,000 yards... CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 9,000 yards Japanese open fire on surprised Allied ships at 9,000 yards ----------------------------- I assume engaging IJN at night is risky bussiness, ok, but with the british BBs I was (almost) sure of taking some big ship with me ( my strategical objective was damaging them enough to erode the Japanese Main Batteline ). So, was my TF wrong? simply bad luck? How can I do an efficient surface TF knowing Japan has a LOT of BBs and BCs.. Thank you

dr.hal -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/11/2014 2:30:39 PM)
Torpedoes are the killers for those older BBs. They simply don't have the damage control capability.... They go down like rocks if underwater integrity is compromised. Which is a reflection of reality.

traskott -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/11/2014 2:34:10 PM)
Yes, but with sooo many escort DDs, I expected had enough time to keep a good fight.

Barb -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/11/2014 2:38:05 PM)
- Battleships - 21kts top speed killed them, slowing down whole TF (very easy targets) - 15 ships in a SCTF at night will probably cause half of them not to engage - too many ships to handle at night for any commander

traskott -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/11/2014 2:39:23 PM)
Yes, it's a big TF, but...ey!!! the japanese too !!![:-]

dr.hal -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/11/2014 3:12:04 PM)
Ok, I take it that this was early in the war, was this December '41? If so, the Japanese outclassed all other forces in their night fighting capability (even the British). Second, what was the level of light? How much moon was there? If the engagement opened at about 5K it is evident that there was little light, again this works in the favor of the Japanese as they had excellent lookouts (this is pre-radar time) and it gives them prime torpedo weather, low light, long range fast torpedoes, and normally the enemy is surprised (the tactic was to launch a torpedo barrage and then close the enemy with and finish off with guns). I'm surprised that your BBs lasted two rounds. Look at the battle of Savo Sound for this tactic in action. Oh, I just read it was 14% light.... very low... this fits the picture. And the Allied side was surprised..... again fits the picture.

Lokasenna -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/11/2014 3:41:54 PM)
Allied ships surprised under 14% moonlight. You're lucky you didn't lose more DDs! Really need radar before you can engage the IJN at night without moonlight. Maximum spotting of 8,000 means that all parties were well within torpedo range, and at 21 knots those BBs just aren't going to survive that.

traskott -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/11/2014 3:50:18 PM)
I have to check the game but im almost sure the BB had radar...well, in fact what i really want to know is: i have more BBs, BCs, and CAs near. Faster and modern, with radars. If I try it again, will I get the same outcome?. Considering the answer of dr.hal, no matter what tupe of ship you deploy, u are going to lose. But leaving DEI without fight when u have 3BCs, 2BBs and a good bunch of CA/CLs...well. PS: sorry about spelling, no native english plus smartphone is a bad combo.

Lecivius -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/11/2014 6:44:46 PM)
Prime Lance weather. Plus, even early war radar was suspect at best, and openly ignored by many. I agree, if this was early in the war I think you got of lightly.

dr.hal -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/11/2014 10:11:07 PM)
Traskott, It's not hopeless but putting those BBs out there is not the way to go. Don't deploy them until a near full moon to give them a fighting chance and remember early radar was pretty poor, I think you're right the early British BBs have it, but it won't help much. The second generation systems are much better as they used shorter frequency thus more resolution capability. Pick off some of his side shows, don't go after the main body, you will loose.

traskott -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/11/2014 10:37:31 PM)
Thanks... Looks like I will have to take the Cunningham approach and move all the fleet to Mombasa. [:D]

rms1pa -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/12/2014 1:23:01 AM)
quote: hanks... Looks like I will have to take the Cunningham approach and move all the fleet to Mombasa. truth, the R class were considered scarecrows at this time. the trained crews were considered more valuable than the ships. i try to save the R's and QE's for bombardment only, en mass. quite refreshing. rms/pa

LoBaron -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/12/2014 5:52:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: traskott [...]take the Cunningham approach and move all the fleet to Mombasa. [:D] Isn�t the correct terminology 'Cunningham departure' instead of approach? [:D]

traskott -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/12/2014 7:32:14 AM)
I think the right word is "retreat" [;)]

Barb -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/12/2014 7:33:27 AM)
NEVER! "Change in direction of advance" maybe [:D]

LoBaron -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/12/2014 2:57:45 PM)
You probably mean advance on reciprocal heading?

traskott -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/12/2014 3:46:48 PM)
I mean: run, poor little limeys, run!!! [:D]

Bill Durrant -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/12/2014 11:46:49 PM)
Okay, I'll defend Cunningham! If you read his diaries he is aware that what he takes over is undertrained personnel manning obsolete equipment. As WitPAE shows any conflict with the enemy at this stage of the war will end in only one result. He withdraws to Addu Atoll knowing that at least he has saved some form of deterrent to Japan controlling the Indian Ocean. It is this fleet that forms the basis of an invasion of Madagascar in May '42 (before Midway) to prevent the possibility of a German and/or Japanese submarine base.

Dili -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/13/2014 2:40:40 AM)
You have probably a worse crew quality for night combat and since the allied ships were surprised then probably don't have radar.

Jellicoe -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/13/2014 7:15:45 PM)
Of course by Cunningham I assume we are meaning Somerville?

Bill Durrant -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/13/2014 8:00:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jellicoe Of course by Cunningham I assume we are meaning Somerville? Yes you are absolutely right - Somerville

pontiouspilot -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/13/2014 8:06:48 PM)
You were a little unlucky also! I am never afraid to use my old BBs and I can only think of once I was badly lanced. You may have had too many ships in TF for prime effectiveness. These DDs were all old US 4 pipers if I'm not mistaken. Did they have radar without later upgrades? They are generally badly outmatched. Quere if there are issues with combining US ships with Brits?? I don't think I have ever heard there are command inefficiencies.

traskott -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/13/2014 8:38:53 PM)
Thats one of my "fears" : too many ships, and perhaps, not uniform speed. The only plus side is the surviving DDs got 60 night xp...

crsutton -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/15/2014 3:48:35 AM)
You could just as easy have some better luck and pound a Japanese surface force. Lots of factors involved and one thing I know is you can never guarantee an outcome in AE. Basically as the Allies I would recommend using smaller TFs (I find 8 ships to be about right) and don't use your old BBs in a night fight. Never use any BB at any time in a fight where the moonlight is less than 70% You send a six to eight ship TF with CAs, CLs and DDs up against BBs at night and you will find that many times the BBs don't even fire a shot. Especially if he is using a big TF. I would avoid using the old four stackers if you can. A good but cautious leader is not a bad idea. He will attempt to disengage if the battle is not going well.

John Lansford -> RE: Night surface engagement. No matador_spa (8/23/2014 1:33:24 AM)
You're better off leaving the "R" class BB's at home early in the war. The RN cruisers and destroyers together can fight even at night on even terms with the IJN, but the BB's are just too big and slow.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.046875