Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios

Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> The Operational Art of War IV

Message

mamnich24 -> Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (12/13/2017 2:40:43 AM)
Dear Guys, Does one get the naval improvements if one upgrades an old scenario like Guadacanal 42? Do the ships etc. act like in old scenario or like they would in a newly designed scenario? Thanks, Mike

Oberst_Klink -> RE: Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (12/13/2017 10:34:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mamnich Dear Guys, Does one get the naval improvements if one upgrades an old scenario like Guadacanal 42? Do the ships etc. act like in old scenario or like they would in a newly designed scenario? Thanks, Mike Mike you get the improvements, as in all the other improvements. Alas, I'd test it and if required, adjust the Naval Scalar perhaps. Klink, Oberst

gbaby -> RE: Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (12/13/2017 10:55:51 AM)
I have found that loading any scenario (those included with TOAW IV and other user scenarios) via the game editor and checking the Naval Attrition Divider and setting to 100 (default is 10) as a general rule of thumb works very well. May not meet the scenario designer's intent, but it tones things down, like coastal guns wiping out ships in one attack. Seems to work well, ships still take damage and are eventually sunk, but usually won't get wiped out in one attack. Usually. I've played several older scenarios and it "feels" right with the new naval rules. If I find it set higher than 100, I leave it alone. I'm sure this is too simplistic a rule and everything does not fit it, but seems okay so far.

larryfulkerson -> RE: Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (12/13/2017 4:55:21 PM)
Hey there gbaby dude: I'm wondering what effect changing the scale of the game would have as well as changing the naval divider thing. Instead of half-day turns maybe use hourly turns....would that help what you're trying to achieve? I too like it when the ships aren't sunk in one attack but if the turns are half-day then perhaps it's not so unrealistic that the ship gets sunk. What say you? Anybody?

gbaby -> RE: Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (12/13/2017 5:54:23 PM)
Good point, but I'm okay with the backing off on attrition. I mean, it impacts both sides and extends the use of naval forces. Also, the results don't seem that odd, some get sunk, some get damaged, and given a chance to pull back. Mostly its the coastal defenses taking out any naval force that gets close. Way too powerful by default on some of the older scenarios. I'm sure if a scenario was designed with emphasis on naval, the turn length would be set to something more realistic for naval engagements. Time will tell as we get more experience with the new naval rules.

thomasharvey -> RE: Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (12/13/2017 8:45:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gbaby Good point, but I'm okay with the backing off on attrition. I mean, it impacts both sides and extends the use of naval forces. Also, the results don't seem that odd, some get sunk, some get damaged, and given a chance to pull back. Mostly its the coastal defenses taking out any naval force that gets close. Way too powerful by default on some of the older scenarios. I'm sure if a scenario was designed with emphasis on naval, the turn length would be set to something more realistic for naval engagements. Time will tell as we get more experience with the new naval rules. At the battle of Midway three Japanese carriers were destroyed in just five minutes by the American dive bombers. My small naval scenarios are 6 hour per turns so ships can be and are destroyed quickly. The shore batteries are over powered in the standard equipment list. I reduced it by 50% in all my scenarios since they use custom equipment lists and use a naval attrition divider of 15. A shore battery is designed to sink small forces that appear in front of them, not large formations. The way to handle a shore battery is to send a STACK of large naval vessels into its range, there is an instant engagement with the shore battery destroyed and only minor damage to the stack of ships. Then the invasion of ground troops can proceed. To increase the naval attrition divider to 100 eliminates any meaningful naval action. If that is desired then that is the way to do it. Otherwise there would be no naval activity.

mamnich24 -> RE: Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (12/14/2017 2:21:54 AM)
Dear Thomasharvey, You mention your naval scenarios. Are these in Toaw4, or where can they be downloaded? Thanks, Mike

thomasharvey -> RE: Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (12/14/2017 2:45:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mamnich Dear Thomasharvey, You mention your naval scenarios. Are these in Toaw4, or where can they be downloaded? Thanks, Mike The PBEM versions are in TOAWIV and issued as new scenarios in the WW2 Asia section. Full PO versions of all 5 are in the Mods and Scenarios of this site. They are Coral Sea 1942, Battle of Eastern Solomons, Battle of Snata Cruz Islands, Operation MI, and Battle of Leyte Gulf. All are carrier battles in the Pacific in WW2. They were designed with using the naval rules in TOAWIV.

thomasharvey -> RE: Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (12/14/2017 2:56:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thomasharvey quote: ORIGINAL: mamnich Dear Thomasharvey, You mention your naval scenarios. Are these in Toaw4, or where can they be downloaded? Thanks, Mike The PBEM versions are in TOAWIV and issued as new scenarios in the WW2 Asia section. Full PO versions of all 5 are in the Mods and Scenarios of this site. They are Coral Sea 1942, Battle of Eastern Solomons, Battle of Snata Cruz Islands, Operation MI, and Battle of Leyte Gulf. All are carrier battles in the Pacific in WW2. They were designed with using the naval rules in TOAWIV. For all aspects of the Pacific war including shore batteries you can find that in Pacific at War (PBEM) also in TOAWIV WW2 Asia section. That covers WW2 in the Pacific from December of 1941 to August of 1945 on the regimental level. It has all ships and aircraft of the conflict. It has most of the Japanese shore batteries but I did not put in all allied shore batteries like the ones on the West Coast of the US as they are generally a bridge too far for Japan. The PO version does not exist at the present time.

gbaby -> RE: Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (12/14/2017 1:54:45 PM)
quote: To increase the naval attrition divider to 100 eliminates any meaningful naval action. If that is desired then that is the way to do it. Otherwise there would be no naval activity. Thanks for the info, appreciated. However, setting 100 doesn't really eliminate, since playing as such the naval battles are still significantly causing a lot of damage. Sometimes in one round! Like 4 destroyers take on a task force of larger ships (as Elmer tried), they were all sunk immediately. I've had naval exchanges that were quite damaging with destroyed ships at the 100 setting, so it doesn't make it "safe". You just don't see entire stacks of ships disappearing at once. Of course, I would much rather have a scenario like yours with the results you have designed for and keep your setting as is. This is always the best. There is never a "general" rule to cover all the older scenarios, there are just too many variables, in OOB, equipment, and other settings, but so far... Oh, about the Japanese carrier comment. Yea, naval air power is very dangerous to ships. My concern though was with ship to ship getting out of hand, destroying each other in first encounter. I like the comments on the shore batteries. Your method to decrease their strength is best, and thanks for the tips on handling them.

Zovs -> RE: Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (6/27/2019 6:30:26 PM)
So I have a question, in my War in Europe scenario, I added Naval for the Germans, Italians, Soviets, French, CW and US. I used the default values for AAA Lethality (100) and for the Naval Attrition Divider (10). In my one PBEM test we noticed that the ships evaporated (mostly the German's DD, CL and CA. But when I tested my turn as the Germans I fired the entire Kreigsmarine and the 9 stack of British ships. I did do some damage but I lost the entire German fleet (6 CL's, 6 CA's and 2 BB). I am using for the naval units the new TOAW 5.1 DB values and the nqp file with it. When I looked at PAW it shows a AAA Lethality of 50 and NAD of 15, and when I looked at both Battle of Eastern Solomons and Battle of Santa Cruz Islands (same scale 25 miles as mine) they have AAA Leth: 100 and NAD = 10. So I am trying to decipher this and adjust. Thomas or Bob any thoughts or insights? I did not think the entire German Navy would be evaporated in one battle. The CW naval units were damaged but none sunk. I could use some insight/help on this aspect. Thanks in advance. Don

thomasharvey -> RE: Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (6/27/2019 7:43:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zovs So I have a question, in my War in Europe scenario, I added Naval for the Germans, Italians, Soviets, French, CW and US. I used the default values for AAA Lethality (100) and for the Naval Attrition Divider (10). In my one PBEM test we noticed that the ships evaporated (mostly the German's DD, CL and CA. But when I tested my turn as the Germans I fired the entire Kreigsmarine and the 9 stack of British ships. I did do some damage but I lost the entire German fleet (6 CL's, 6 CA's and 2 BB). I am using for the naval units the new TOAW 5.1 DB values and the nqp file with it. When I looked at PAW it shows a AAA Lethality of 50 and NAD of 15, and when I looked at both Battle of Eastern Solomons and Battle of Santa Cruz Islands (same scale 25 miles as mine) they have AAA Leth: 100 and NAD = 10. So I am trying to decipher this and adjust. Thomas or Bob any thoughts or insights? I did not think the entire German Navy would be evaporated in one battle. The CW naval units were damaged but none sunk. I could use some insight/help on this aspect. Thanks in advance. Don I make adjustments for each scenario. There is no one setting that works for all. Testing is always needed. Surface action between ships occurs when one ship or group of ships sails into range of another ship or group of ships. The defending ships appear to have an advantage. They fire first, the losses are taken out and then the surviving ships fire back. There does not appear to be simultaneous fire. However, the range of ships is very important as you can fire before the other force is in range, etc. In a large scenario you must consider air to ground combat as well as air to ship combat. I have solved that by increasing the AAA fire of each ship using the equipment editor and then reduce the AAA of the scenario for each side. You must balance all the factors in a large scenario to get the results desired.

Zovs -> RE: Naval Improvements in old updated scenarios (6/27/2019 8:21:36 PM)
Thanks Thomas that gives me a good direction to go. My first adjustment was to raise the NAD up to 15 and run a test with my scenario playing both sides. That helped a bit but it still seems a little off. I�ll run a few more test and look at more of yours at this scale. Thinking of increasing the BB range by one hex. The AA maybe ok. I lost a lot of Luftwaffe when attacking. Thanks for the tips.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.5