RE: Small Scen VS AI

RE: Small Scen VS AI (Full Version)

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

Message

RangerJoe -> RE: Small Scen VS AI (2/25/2019 8:16:56 PM)
quote: I misspoke about the new Ubuntu, I only changed the drive and installed. I tend to replace broken parts and keep machines until they fail completely. Then dual boot with a separate partition for your programs and data. That way, if an OS gets messed up and you have to reinstall, only the OS partition is affected.

Technopiper -> RE: Small Scen VS AI (3/2/2019 1:49:15 PM)
I finally took Sittang Bridge! What I did differently is that I merged 12 battalions into their parent regiments (4 in all). Is that a big factor or am I imagining things? What do you think? quote: AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Feb 18, 42 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ground combat at Sittang Bridge (56,54) Japanese Deliberate attack Attacking force 23475 troops, 163 guns, 16 vehicles, Assault Value = 620 Defending force 12639 troops, 134 guns, 115 vehicles, Assault Value = 157 Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 0 Japanese adjusted assault: 281 Allied adjusted defense: 107 Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 0) Japanese forces CAPTURE Sittang Bridge !!! Combat modifiers Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), preparation(-), experience(-) Attacker: Japanese ground losses: 440 casualties reported Squads: 1 destroyed, 34 disabled Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled Engineers: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled Allied ground losses: 3498 casualties reported Squads: 179 destroyed, 0 disabled Non Combat: 165 destroyed, 9 disabled Engineers: 56 destroyed, 0 disabled Guns lost 85 (85 destroyed, 0 disabled) Vehicles lost 85 (84 destroyed, 1 disabled) Units retreated 9 Units destroyed 2 Defeated Allied Units Retreating! Assaulting units: 143rd Infantry Regiment 20th Ind. Engineer Regiment 55th Cavalry Regiment 112th Infantry Regiment 55th Engineer Regiment 214th Infantry Regiment 4th Ind. Engineer Regiment 215th Infantry Regiment 33rd Engineer Regiment 55th Mountain Gun Regiment 33rd Mountain Gun Regiment Defending units: 2nd Burma Brigade 16th Indian Brigade 13th Indian Brigade 1st Burma Brigade 48th Gurkha Brigade 46th Indian Brigade 6th Burma Rifles Battalion 27th Indian Mountain Gun Regiment 11th Burma Rifles Battalion 1st Burma Div 17th Indian Div

Bif1961 -> RE: Small Scen VS AI (3/2/2019 2:41:03 PM)
Merging components into the larger parent unit gives them more support to conduct operations, especially attacks, also you might want to look at the Commander's skills of the combined unit as he might be better then your separate smaller unit commanders were.

Technopiper -> RE: Small Scen VS AI (3/2/2019 3:17:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bif1961 Merging components into the larger parent unit gives them more support to conduct operations, especially attacks, also you might want to look at the Commander's skills of the combined unit as he might be better then your separate smaller unit commanders were. What about air force squadrons? Would it be a good idea to merge fighter squadrons?

Bif1961 -> RE: Small Scen VS AI (3/3/2019 1:27:54 AM)
Depends what you need them for if you only have 1 squadron but need it to do multiple things like night CAP, Day CAP and escort with the same squadron then split it. If it is a search squadron it might be a benefit to split it up to cover from more bases. So it all depends on your needs at the time. However, I am sure they fight better combined in their original squadron with everything else being equal.

RangerJoe -> RE: Small Scen VS AI (3/3/2019 6:31:39 AM)
When you split up air units, the B and C sections may not have that good of a leader.

Technopiper -> RE: Small Scen VS AI (3/3/2019 4:47:19 PM)
Thanks for the answers guys. Learning bit by bit as I play.[&o]

tarkalak -> RE: Small Scen VS AI (3/5/2019 11:34:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Technopiper quote: ORIGINAL: Bif1961 Merging components into the larger parent unit gives them more support to conduct operations, especially attacks, also you might want to look at the Commander's skills of the combined unit as he might be better then your separate smaller unit commanders were. What about air force squadrons? Would it be a good idea to merge fighter squadrons? In general: Yes. You can always split them later. In this scenario: ... it is complicated. You have three Sentais of fighters each made of 42 planes combined. I will call them 1st, 2nd and 3rd Sentai, because I don't remember the actual names. 1st Sentai is divided in three core group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ia .II group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ia .III group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ia 2st Sentai is divided in three core group - 14 Oscar Ib; can't upgrade .II group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ib .III group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ib 3st Sentai is divided in three core group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ic .II group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ia .III group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ia For replacements you have some numbers in the pool but your production is: Nates - many, I don't remember it , but there were enough. Oscar Ia - 12 per month Oscar Ib - 12 per month Oscar Ic - 5 per month All of them have no armor and die fast. 3rd Sentai has a weird dilemma: 1. If you combine it right away and upgrade them to Oscar Ic you will never have enough Oscars to fill it. 2. If you upgrade the core group alone you cannot combine it with the others later. 3. You can also combine one group with the core and upgrade. You will have 3rd Sentai as 24 plane group with Oscar Ic and a detachment of 14 Nate/Oscar Ia planes. The other two Sentais don't have the same dilemma, but you don't have enough planes to keep them full. Ideally you want the Oscars to Sweep/CAP, while the Nates train pilots and immolate themselves as Escorts when you need them to. The allies on the other hand have little to no replacements for their planes, but theirs are tougher to kill. Edit: typos.

Bif1961 -> RE: Small Scen VS AI (3/5/2019 3:17:05 PM)
Always more things to consider when you make one decision it cascades into other issues.

RangerJoe -> RE: Small Scen VS AI (3/5/2019 5:08:16 PM)
A suggestion, use thee Nates for LRCAP on the enemy airfields at a low percentage level. This will increase his ops losses. If you say there are little to no replacements and Nates aren't good offensively, then that is a good option. Nates can also be good for CAP as the are maneuverable and the escorts are at a disadvantage. Even if the Nates don't shoot down too many bombers, they can damage them which increases the chance for an ops loss as well as spoil their aim. It is probably very hard to concentrate when a bullet whizzes by your ear . . .

Technopiper -> RE: Small Scen VS AI (3/6/2019 12:20:50 AM)
tarkalak, that's a very detailed explanation. You highlighted everything I've been scratching my head over. Thanks! And yeah, Nates and Oscars tend to drop like flies. I'll take RangerJoe's advice and use them as LRCAP.

Technopiper -> RE: Small Scen VS AI (3/6/2019 12:23:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe A suggestion, use thee Nates for LRCAP on the enemy airfields at a low percentage level. This will increase his ops losses. If you say there are little to no replacements and Nates aren't good offensively, then that is a good option. Nates can also be good for CAP as the are maneuverable and the escorts are at a disadvantage. Even if the Nates don't shoot down too many bombers, they can damage them which increases the chance for an ops loss as well as spoil their aim. It is probably very hard to concentrate when a bullet whizzes by your ear . . . That's a good suggestion. I've noticed that fighters fought at an disadvantage when escorting bombers. Guess that make sense since they need to fight and babysit at the same time.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.640625