RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve

RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (Full Version)

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

Message

Leandros -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (8/31/2016 7:50:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Anachro In my current PBEM, I lost Lexington, Enterprise, and Yorktown in Jan 1942. Admittedly, I also caused the Japanese player to lose Hiryu, Soryu, Shokaku, Ryujo, and Taiyo, but painful nonetheless. I've come to the conclusion that such losses for the Japanese player are, in the short-term, strategical minimal (if he doesn't lose the more than 2-3 carriers), as the Japanese player can simply speed up his production of Junyo, Hiyo, and the CVLs and maintain CV superiority throughout 1942. After Wasp, an American player does not get new CV until Essex in mid 1943. This is partially offset by the fact that American carriers can general carry more plaes and have room for additional fighter protection. However, come the introduction of the Essexes in number in mid-1943, along with the prevention of further carrier losses, the Japanese player will really begin to miss his lost carriers. Thus, its probably worth it if you can trade carrier for carrier in '42. Even if you lose your carriers and he loses none, you should still be back to parity by the end of 1943 if not sooner. Given you've only lost two, it should be sooner for you. My ambush of the KB happened in January 1942 with 3 CVs versus his 6 and the initial encounter saw me lose 1 carrier for 2 of his outright with the additional losses happening later. What I am trying to say is that, given the right opportunity, planning, and luck, you can still inflict good damage and use your carriers strategically versus the KB until the introduction of the Essex class. So don't give up! Not to forget the USN CVE's. In Feb '43 I have 8 of them. I find them quite handy. Fred

Anachro -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (8/31/2016 8:02:55 PM)
Yes, I didn't mentioned them because I haven't quite worked out the optimal use or various uses of CVEs. Convoy escort, invasion escort/cap defense, air transport, Carrier TF additional CAP? Your thoughts?

Leandros -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (8/31/2016 9:04:52 PM)
As the end approaches they grow to be as powerful as the regular Japanese ones - due to their diminishing carrier air units. Two CVE's almost equal one large USN carrier, too. Not so speedy but quite practical for the protection of the old battle wagons. Protection for recent forced landings before fighter support is properly established. Fred

rustysi -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (8/31/2016 10:59:09 PM)
Yes, what Leandros said. Keep in mind though what CVE jokingly stood for, Combustible, Vulnerable, Expendable. They are by no stretch of the imagination 'Fleet Carriers', or replacements thereof.

Rising-Sun -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/1/2016 8:10:23 AM)
Don't worry, you will have ton of reforcement, stay back and try defend Pearl. Sometime in early 1944, you should have good amount naval forces. Make sure you have good pilots too, so there will be a lot of rotation if you want to succeed. All you need to do is place those subs near major ports and stay out of shallow waters if possible. Don't worry about Truk or any islands down there, use your carriers around the Mariana Islands. If you can take Guam and Saipan, get the airfields build up, so you can put heavy bombers on it and start hitting Japan's Industrial targets. Surprise to see Soviets are active, did they do much? Once you taken out most of Steve's carriers, you wont have to worry too much of harassment. So keep of track of what have been sunk and figure out the balance of power on those carriers.

geofflambert -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/1/2016 11:38:57 AM)
Torps are terrible at this point? The US aerial torpedoes had none of the problems of the submarine torpedoes. What are you referring to?

geofflambert -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/1/2016 12:11:43 PM)
I suppose it is easy to get confused on this. The torpedoes used on US submarines had a 50% dud rate. This was not the case with US aerial torpedoes or the torpedoes used by destroyers. I'm not sure about the PT boat torps but doubt that they had the flaw either.

Anachro -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/1/2016 1:15:47 PM)
Geo, Thanks for the info as I thought the game treated all American torps the same. However, at the time my more overriding concern was the terrible Devastator and its small range, especially vis a vis the much more reliable Dauntless. Not to mention the striking power of a 1000 lb bomb versus japanese cvs. Thus, I wanted to devote as many Dauntlesses as I could to strike and so I put more TBDs on search.

Leandros -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/1/2016 3:33:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: geofflambert I suppose it is easy to get confused on this. The torpedoes used on US submarines had a 50% dud rate. This was not the case with US aerial torpedoes or the torpedoes used by destroyers. I'm not sure about the PT boat torps but doubt that they had the flaw either. They may not have had the same specific problems related to the submarine service - that of running too deep or magnetic fuzes not working properly - but there were others related to the PT, destroyer and air service. Anyway, torpedoes are very complicated machines and more exposed to human technical errors than, say, a bomb. Regular maintenance is very important. For the PT's, an unfriendly environment, for the air-launched, an unfriendly environment as well as temperature complications. Strangely enough, all nations had problems with their torpedoes, except the Japanese. They simply took the problems more seriously. As an example, the US and Germans problems were almost identical but remedies were often obstructed by inter-branch rivalry. Morrison describes how a USN sub commander tried to tell the naval technical leadership in Cavite, the Philippines, what was wrong with the torpedoes but was not taken seriously. He had, together with his torpedo officer, found out through practical tests what was wrong. He was correct about it. His name was Dempsey. He advised the destroyer people to make the same tests he had but I believe there was little reaction. The German Navy court-martialled several technical officers after the Norwegian campaign because they had refused to take notice of earlier reports of the (lack of) practical torpedo results reported by their sub commanders. The British launched more than a dozen torpedoes (some on an own cruiser) in the hunt for Bismarck with one hit, and that only marginally. So, I think we can agree that torpedo attacks are not supposed to be easy, counting in the human factor, too. In that respect I find the game relatively realistic even if can be frustrating the constant Japanese successes with torpedoes. But, the Japanese were well trained, often attacked in large numbers (Repulse and Prince of Wales being a good example), but I have found in my present game (feb. '43)that they are much less efficient. Of course, the allied AA and fighter defense have improved, too. Fred

RogerJNeilson -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/1/2016 7:10:44 PM)
One of my games is in November 1944 and I am close to removing the last remnants in the Philippines, have taken most Sumatra, all the meaningful stuff in China and have not yet bothered with the island hopping central pacific stuff beyond Kusaie. He has had little oil for a good 9 months and I have yet to commit a CV force in action anywhere. CVs are only important if you want to play the island hopping route and you make them important. I haven't seen any of his carriers for over a year and have frequently downed fighters and bombers form various carriers flying off land bases - the deduction is he has no fuel or appetite for a carrier battle any more. There are more ways to win this than the historical approach. Japan does not have the capacity to defend everywhere well and once you punch a hole in the defensive wall their lack of resources and engineers means most areas are not well defended. BTW the red bases still on the map are mostly 'dead stones' in Go parlance. Roger [image]local://upfiles/41758/2CAF455A1733449F87A401388A5B9CB8.jpg[/image]

Rising-Sun -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/1/2016 8:15:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: geofflambert Torps are terrible at this point? The US aerial torpedoes had none of the problems of the submarine torpedoes. What are you referring to? To finish off the wounded, if you get lucky. Those dud rate have been fixed by mid 1942.

AW1Steve -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/1/2016 10:47:09 PM)
Thanks a lot! I'm not even playing you and I'm banned! [:D]

mussey -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/1/2016 11:45:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Anachro In my current PBEM, I lost Lexington, Enterprise, and Yorktown in Jan 1942. Admittedly, I also caused the Japanese player to lose Hiryu, Soryu, Shokaku, Ryujo, and Taiyo, but painful nonetheless. I've come to the conclusion that such losses for the Japanese player are, in the short-term, strategical minimal (if he doesn't lose the more than 2-3 carriers), as the Japanese player can simply speed up his production of Junyo, Hiyo, and the CVLs and maintain CV superiority throughout 1942. After Wasp, an American player does not get new CV until Essex in mid 1943. This is partially offset by the fact that American carriers can general carry more plaes and have room for additional fighter protection. However, come the introduction of the Essexes in number in mid-1943, along with the prevention of further carrier losses, the Japanese player will really begin to miss his lost carriers. Thus, its probably worth it if you can trade carrier for carrier in '42. Even if you lose your carriers and he loses none, you should still be back to parity by the end of 1943 if not sooner. Given you've only lost two, it should be sooner for you. My ambush of the KB happened in January 1942 with 3 CVs versus his 6 and the initial encounter saw me lose 1 carrier for 2 of his outright with the additional losses happening later. What I am trying to say is that, given the right opportunity, planning, and luck, you can still inflict good damage and use your carriers strategically versus the KB until the introduction of the Essex class. [image]http://i.imgur.com/GGkzlfJ.jpg[/image] So don't give up! Anachro, I luv your map. Excellent visual synopsis! A small suggestion. Others mention the importance of night patrols that raise detection levels sooner and higher.

oaltinyay -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/2/2016 6:18:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy I know how to take a screen shot and save it as a picture, but I have no idea what you mean by saving as a scenario file. You can upload a saved game turn for others to examine (but they need to have the same game version as you do and know the password for any PBEM save. is it possible turn a''snapshot of the game state on that moment/turn into a scenario ?''

oaltinyay -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/2/2016 6:20:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rustysi quote: 3. If Soviets are active that means you have the best AFs in the game to bomb Japan even now , just channel all your heavies there and let him grind his way into siberia. I haven't played as the Allies yet, but I don't think Allied forces can operate from Soviet territory, active or not. I'd check on this first. At any rate having the Soviets active has to complicate the Japanese position no matter what. I did bomb japan using them... Gamey It seems but then this is a simulation.

oaltinyay -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/2/2016 6:25:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: geofflambert I suppose it is easy to get confused on this. The torpedoes used on US submarines had a 50% dud rate. This was not the case with US aerial torpedoes or the torpedoes used by destroyers. I'm not sure about the PT boat torps but doubt that they had the flaw either. Didnt the DDs used a derivative of the same Torp with same mag. exploder and firing pin ? I believe so.

Sardaukar -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/2/2016 10:27:54 AM)
Well, in game Mk 14 dud rate is 80% until Jan 43, when it drops to 60% and then in Sept 43 to 10%. It is pretty historical, since Duds and running too deep problems were somewhat fixed after tests in late 42. Faulty magnetic exploder and deep running problems were not fully addressed until September 43. USN DDs used Mk 15 torpedoes derived from Mk 14, which were longer and bigger, but basically had same design flaws.

Leandros -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/2/2016 12:34:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sardaukar Well, in game Mk 14 dud rate is 80% until Jan 43, when it drops to 60% and then in Sept 43 to 10%. It is pretty historical, since Duds and running too deep problems were somewhat fixed after tests in late 42. Faulty magnetic exploder and deep running problems were not fully addressed until September 43. USN DDs used Mk 15 torpedoes derived from Mk 14, which were longer and bigger, but basically had same design flaws. I'm not sure if the game differentiates this but the S-class submarines, if I remember correctly, did not have torps with magnetic fuzes, just impact. Also I believe instructions were issued early to all subs not to use magnetic fuzes. Fred

KenchiSulla -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/2/2016 1:37:11 PM)
The S-Class use different torpedo's with a lower dud rate.. Below snapshot is from a DBB:C game... the mark 10 (torpedo the S type uses) has a dud rate of 15%.. The mark 15 has a dud rate of 60% Kenchis [image]local://upfiles/30342/256609130E594B68B3626CBCA81B1369.jpg[/image]

BBfanboy -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/2/2016 2:34:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: oaltinyay quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy I know how to take a screen shot and save it as a picture, but I have no idea what you mean by saving as a scenario file. You can upload a saved game turn for others to examine (but they need to have the same game version as you do and know the password for any PBEM save. is it possible turn a''snapshot of the game state on that moment/turn into a scenario ?'' To make a new scenario you would have to open the editor, load one of the existing scenarios, save it to an open slot (one that does not already have a scenario with that number) and then start modifying it. You can do things like change starting locations for ships and TFs, change arrival dates for reinforcements, change dud rates for torpedoes, etc. Open and look at some of the short scenarios like Coral Sea and Guadalcanal to see how they differ from the Grand Campaign Scenario 1. If you just want to try something different in your game against the AI, just open the last turn before the action you want to change, make your changes and save the game in a new slot before running the turn to see what happens.

geofflambert -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/2/2016 8:49:05 PM)
To Leandros, the Japanese did have a problem with the Long Lance, which was the oxygen fuel which made them so hazardous to carry the IJN discontinued their use.

oaltinyay -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/2/2016 8:51:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy quote: ORIGINAL: oaltinyay quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy I know how to take a screen shot and save it as a picture, but I have no idea what you mean by saving as a scenario file. You can upload a saved game turn for others to examine (but they need to have the same game version as you do and know the password for any PBEM save. is it possible turn a''snapshot of the game state on that moment/turn into a scenario ?'' To make a new scenario you would have to open the editor, load one of the existing scenarios, save it to an open slot (one that does not already have a scenario with that number) and then start modifying it. You can do things like change starting locations for ships and TFs, change arrival dates for reinforcements, change dud rates for torpedoes, etc. Open and look at some of the short scenarios like Coral Sea and Guadalcanal to see how they differ from the Grand Campaign Scenario 1. If you just want to try something different in your game against the AI, just open the last turn before the action you want to change, make your changes and save the game in a new slot before running the turn to see what happens. So I gather it's not possible to make a scenario from a save game state...

rustysi -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/2/2016 11:14:44 PM)
quote: the oxygen fuel which made them so hazardous to carry the IJN discontinued their use. Really, I didn't know this. Since when?

geofflambert -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/3/2016 3:31:17 AM)
Good that you asked. I had thought they'd discontinued their use by sometime in early '43 but there is a story of the loss of Chokai in which LLs figure. I believe they did decide to stop using them but now I'm not sure when. In any case, almost anything will burn in the presence of pure oxygen, including for instance, aluminum. The German use of hydrazine and concentrated wasserstoff (hydrogen peroxide) was worse still.

Rising-Sun -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/3/2016 9:14:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: geofflambert Good that you asked. I had thought they'd discontinued their use by sometime in early '43 but there is a story of the loss of Chokai in which LLs figure. I believe they did decide to stop using them but now I'm not sure when. In any case, almost anything will burn in the presence of pure oxygen, including for instance, aluminum. The German use of hydrazine and concentrated wasserstoff (hydrogen peroxide) was worse still. Yeah I remember reading something on that heavy cruiser IJN Chokai, that was having problems and too dangerous. Infact if that tubes get hit by enemy fires, even small 50cal MGs could set it off.

Buckrock -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/3/2016 3:37:10 PM)
The Type 93 torpedo was still being carried by IJN warships in 1945. Same as in the AE database.

BBfanboy -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/3/2016 3:43:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Buckrock The Type 93 torpedo was still being carried by IJN warships in 1945. Same as in the AE database. Maybe they just offloaded the usual reloads so they would not have to carry spare oxygen tanks.

Leandros -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/3/2016 4:33:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: geofflambert To Leandros, the Japanese did have a problem with the Long Lance, which was the oxygen fuel which made them so hazardous to carry the IJN discontinued their use. That may be but I have never registered that they actually stopped using it. I know they had great problems during its development and they were aware of its weak points but found that the advantages outweighed the drawbacks. Fred

Alpha77 -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/3/2016 7:49:16 PM)
Leandros, some small corrections, a) no British ship was hit by a torpedo from own planes and b) the torp hit on B. was not marginal but citical (without it she probably would have reached Luftwaffe protection range) Btw: While we are at certain missconception I watched a docu on PH (did not want to since it is quite boring, but this was something with conspiracy theme so a bit less boring). However they said in there that PS was the first strike by CVs - but was it not Tarent (Tarento) ? Also they said, that some RDF station on the US coast had received some IJN radio signal from the KB sailing towards PH, but is this no way too far away ? I "love" the docus which have nice(dramatic) music and seemingly knowledgeable speakers but get basic things wrong. Just like the east front docus with the battle of moscow and the combat footage has Tiger and Panthers. THis is pretty lazy [:@]

Leandros -> RE: Beaten, Battered, But Unbowed/ No Steve (9/3/2016 9:22:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alpha77 Leandros, some small corrections, a) no British ship was hit by a torpedo from own planes and... That was exactly my point. They didn't hit.....but were intending to. Was it HMS Suffolk..? quote: b) the torp hit on B. was not marginal but critical (without it she probably would have reached Luftwaffe protection range) It was a marginal hit. I don't believe the Swordfish pilot aimed for the rudder area. Do you....[;)].....of several launched, too, if I remember correctly. Or was it only one that came to shot? No disrespect for the Swordfish guys, they did some incredible jobs. My posting was just to underline that all nations had problems with air-launched torpedoes. Except the Japanese - seemingly. That said, I have never seen an overview of British duds or missed launches. Could be interesting. Fred P.S.: At that time I believe "RDF" signals were LF - low frequency - nothing like modern VOR/VHF signals, so technically it could have been possible. LF signals follows the earth's curvature or reflects from the atmosphere. Actually, I don't believe RDF is used anymore. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.671875