naval bombardment - result

naval bombardment - result (Full Version)

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

Message

Maulet -> naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 9:05:53 AM)
hello, we are playing guadalcanal scenario (witp:AE) and I (jap) have bombarded this base (lunga), but my friend (allied) is not happy with the result and told me that is excessive. What is your opinion? thanks in advance. Night Naval bombardment of Lunga at 114,138 - Coastal Guns Fire Back! Allied aircraft no flights Allied aircraft losses F4F-4 Wildcat: 129 damaged F4F-4 Wildcat: 33 destroyed on ground PBY-5 Catalina: 63 damaged PBY-5 Catalina: 11 destroyed on ground Hudson III (LR): 42 damaged Hudson III (LR): 6 destroyed on ground SBD-3 Dauntless: 49 damaged SBD-3 Dauntless: 12 destroyed on ground 33 Coastal gun shots fired in defense. Japanese Ships BB Mutsu BB Hiei, Shell hits 1 CA Suzuya CA Haguro CA Myoko CA Maya CA Atago, Shell hits 1 CA Takao CA Chikuma CA Tone DD Yugiri DD Asagiri DD Ariake DD Yugure DD Makigumo Allied ground losses: 432 casualties reported Squads: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 58 disabled Engineers: 4 destroyed, 6 disabled Guns lost 12 (1 destroyed, 11 disabled) Vehicles lost 8 (4 destroyed, 4 disabled) Airbase hits 34 Airbase supply hits 18 Runway hits 123 BB Mutsu firing at 1st USMC/5th Regiment 9th USMC Defense Battalion firing at BB Hiei BB Hiei firing at 9th USMC Defense Battalion CA Suzuya firing at Lunga CA Haguro firing at 9th USMC Defense Battalion 9th USMC Defense Battalion firing at CA Haguro CA Myoko firing at Lunga CA Maya firing at Lunga CA Atago firing at 9th USMC Defense Battalion 9th USMC Defense Battalion firing at CA Atago CA Takao firing at Lunga CA Chikuma firing at Lunga CA Tone firing at 9th USMC Defense Battalion 9th USMC Defense Battalion firing at CA Tone DD Yugiri firing at Lunga DD Asagiri firing at Lunga DD Ariake firing at Lunga DD Yugure firing at Lunga DD Makigumo firing at Lunga

Yaab -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 9:10:05 AM)
60 aircraft destroyed... Overstack airfield at Lunga?

Maulet -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 9:19:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yaab 60 aircraft destroyed... Overstack airfield at Lunga? I don't know...perhaps... I am the japanese player [:)]

Leandros -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 9:21:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yaab 60 aircraft destroyed... Overstack airfield at Lunga? And almost 300 damaged...! Did the allies have anywhere near that many a/c in that area at the time...? If they had I'd say a naval bombardment effort of that magnitude could result in that much damage. OTH, if you rerun it couldn't the results be miniscule...? Is that not how the game works? Fred

Yaab -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 9:23:51 AM)
Damages just mean number of hits i.e one aircraft can be hit multiple times.

wdolson -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 9:34:41 AM)
You opponent needs to read up on what happened on the night of October 13-14, 1942. With two Kongos, one CL, and 9DDs, they destroyed more than half the aircraft at Henderson Field (48 total and damaged many of the rest), as well as torched most of the fuel supply, and killed six pilots. It looks like your opponent had more aircraft at Guadalcanal than the Allies did in the real war at that time, and you used a much larger force than the Japanese did. Bill

Yaab -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 9:55:20 AM)
Right, 8 CAs. Ouch!

KenchiSulla -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 11:00:44 AM)
The result does not seem that odd to me.. Your bombardment group was not contested (?) and fired a lot of shells into a fairly small area containing a lot of aircraft.... I can understand his unhappiness with the situation but the solution lies with defending his base better (or, for example, flying your aircraft to a secondary base behind the lines before the bombardment), not claiming a problem with the game engine...

Maulet -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 11:58:27 AM)
thank to all very much. Last question: the problem was the overstock of airplanes? or not enough coastal batteries defense?

Yaab -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 12:19:07 PM)
Did you set the bombardment range for the ships? Maybe the range was 0 and the ships bombarded with all their guns, including AA guns.

KenchiSulla -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 12:20:53 PM)
When battleships are involved, coastal defenses (unless of large caliber) will have no or almost no effect.. If you have to keep your aircraft at the base, the best solution is to have surface ships of your own to counter the bombardment... PT boats are a personal favorite against battleships, especially in low light conditions....

Maulet -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 12:30:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yaab Did you set the bombardment range for the ships? Maybe the range was 0 and the ships bombarded with all their guns, including AA guns. my range was 6 hexes and I put "escort bombard: yes"

Maulet -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 12:30:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenchiSulla When battleships are involved, coastal defenses (unless of large caliber) will have no or almost no effect.. If you have to keep your aircraft at the base, the best solution is to have surface ships of your own to counter the bombardment... PT boats are a personal favorite against battleships, especially in low light conditions.... thanks!

SuluSea -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 2:18:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wdolson You opponent needs to read up on what happened on the night of October 13-14, 1942. With two Kongos, one CL, and 9DDs, they destroyed more than half the aircraft at Henderson Field (48 total and damaged many of the rest), as well as torched most of the fuel supply, and killed six pilots. It looks like your opponent had more aircraft at Guadalcanal than the Allies did in the real war at that time, and you used a much larger force than the Japanese did. Bill Yeah, you know when the men that endured it refer to it as "the bombardment" considering numerous times they were shelled, it had to be terrifying.

Lokasenna -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 3:37:56 PM)
Looks like overstacking. The number of planes reported destroyed is always underreported in my experience, and 62 are shown destroyed here. So you got maybe around 80? With lots more damaged. Looks like he had perhaps 200+ planes there, and some of them with multiple engines? You should both read up on the mechanics of overstacking, however there has been a slight update since the information in the manual, which is that it is number of engines not the number of planes that matters for the "Aircraft Stack Level" line on the airfield information screen. Those Hudsons, for example, count twice as much towards the stacking limit as the Wildcats do. The Catalinas, being amphibious, should not count towards the aircraft stacking level even if they are being supported by shore-based aviation support instead of a seaplane tender. quote: ORIGINAL: Yaab Damages just mean number of hits i.e one aircraft can be hit multiple times. Small quibble, but it is a "Fog of War"-ed number that is related to the number of hits on an aircraft that don't result in a destroyed plane (e.g., 1 hit that results in a destroyed plane will show "1 destroyed" and nothing for damaged).

RogerJNeilson -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 7:11:20 PM)
Simple answer, don't park planes in a concentration on an airfield where the enemy can bombard, if you do it won't be pleasant. Roger

crsutton -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 7:24:36 PM)
It is the way it works. Been that way ever since the game came out. PT boats, mines and surface forces are the counter. It is either that or evac the base when you smell a bombardment. It is to easy to do but it works both ways and will not change at this stage.

rustysi -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/22/2016 10:20:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Maulet quote: ORIGINAL: Yaab Did you set the bombardment range for the ships? Maybe the range was 0 and the ships bombarded with all their guns, including AA guns. my range was 6 hexes and I put "escort bombard: yes" The range you are referring to is probably the reaction range. Look just above it in a bombardment TF to see the bombardment range. I think the default is '0', and if that's what was set you hit him with everything, including the kitchen sink.[:D]

wdolson -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/23/2016 2:48:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wdolson You opponent needs to read up on what happened on the night of October 13-14, 1942. With two Kongos, one CL, and 9DDs, they destroyed more than half the aircraft at Henderson Field (48 total and damaged many of the rest), as well as torched most of the fuel supply, and killed six pilots. It looks like your opponent had more aircraft at Guadalcanal than the Allies did in the real war at that time, and you used a much larger force than the Japanese did. Bill quote: ORIGINAL: SuluSea Yeah, you know when the men that endured it refer to it as "the bombardment" considering numerous times they were shelled, it had to be terrifying. I believe it was the first time BBs had ever been used for shore bombardment and the Japanese essentially gave the US ideas. The effect was so traumatic the USN risked their dwindling surface ships including two fast battleships to stop them. In two surface actions on two different nights the USN managed to sink both Japanese BBs, but the cost was high. I think the Japanese also got lucky on their first bombardment and happened to hit the airfield with most of their rounds. Few bombardment missions during the war were quite as successful. Bill

Yaab -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/23/2016 5:22:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rustysi quote: ORIGINAL: Maulet quote: ORIGINAL: Yaab Did you set the bombardment range for the ships? Maybe the range was 0 and the ships bombarded with all their guns, including AA guns. my range was 6 hexes and I put "escort bombard: yes" The range you are referring to is probably the reaction range. Look just above it in a bombardment TF to see the bombardment range. I think the default is '0', and if that's what was set you hit him with everything, including the kitchen sink.[:D] Ah, the glorious night of IJN 25mm AA guns! So they can hit Allied aircraft after all!

geofflambert -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/23/2016 6:55:11 AM)
Your opponent never needs to have that many PBYs in one place anywhere. What were they all supposed to do? Get repaired I guess. Except he couldn't possibly have enough engineer support at Lunga to handle all those planes. PBYs are way too valuable to waste like that. You never have enough of them. Put a dozen at a base like Tulagi with no airstrip and this doesn't happen. Just my two cents: For the Allied player in the first year or so, a good operational airstrip with adequate support should not have PBYs searching. It should have B-17s in that role and later on B-24s. If you think they would be better utilized bombing something in the vast Pacific you are mistaken (up to a point). There is so much territory that must be searched adequately before you start allocating 4E bombers to bombing.

geofflambert -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/23/2016 7:14:03 AM)
This brings up another subject of some import. Search arcs and search range and whether to search at all. If you expose search planes to enemy bases with CAP you will lose a lot of them. Doing recon of an enemy harbor that has CAP is a risk that must be calculated as well. If you have a BB/cruiser TF that passes near to an enemy base with CAP and you have your FPs out searching at range and in a 360� arc you will have some ships coming home with no search planes. Take care in those situations. Special note to the IJN player, those subs you have with FPs should not be deployed near an enemy base. It's a long, sad trip home to replace your FP while you still have plenty of fuel and torpedoes. If you don't bother to go home to replace that FP it means that you didn't know what the hay you're supposed to use those subs for in the first place.

HansBolter -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/23/2016 1:12:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3 Simple answer, don't park planes in a concentration on an airfield where the enemy can bombard, if you do it won't be pleasant. Roger Not a lot of choices in a limited scenario. One simply has to go for it and hope for the best. Once can of course use PT and SCTFs to disrupt, but I suspect both of those are available in limited quantity in this scenario as well. An active carrier group capable of "dissuading" the big boys from visiting is the best recipe for success for the Allies.

Yaab -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/23/2016 2:46:17 PM)
Why not create a defensive ring of USN subs in hexes adjacent to the base and put patrol planes on 360% nav search, 1 hex range? I bet nothing could slip through that unmolested.

geofflambert -> RE: naval bombardment - result (5/23/2016 4:12:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yaab Why not create a defensive ring of USN subs in hexes adjacent to the base and put patrol planes on 360% nav search, 1 hex range? I bet nothing could slip through that unmolested. You need more than 1 hex range of reaction time for those subs. Others can speak to this but piling more than one sub in a hex does not seem to be effective. Place them all the way up the "slot" and search at least one hex beyond your furthest sub. Use a search arc if you wish. Also, that bombardment force will come in at night so you need to search all the way up to Rabaul to catch them in daylight.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.71875