RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (Full Version)

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



Message

HansBolter -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/24/2020 12:11:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: rader


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

The walls are closing on Chungking, the last major Chinese base.

He's got an incredible ~14K AV defending, but they've got to be low on supplies and we're bombing every day.






not sure how you would ever take this base against 14k enemy av. If you want to look at my AAR, I took Chungking and the rest of China and had massive probs to take the base with my 10k Army vs just something like 2-2,5k of Chinese in total over the course of the battle there. And yes, I was using 500 IJA medium bombers for a year in China and the Chinese were out of supply everywhere. No idea how you would take the base against this stack. I would just place 2500 av there and block the base forever, the enemy can't force you to retreat but you also won't be able to take the base IMO.



Hmm, is this true? I figured the first few assaults are purely to drop forts at extremely heavy cost. Once the forts are below 3, artillery and air will start to grind him down so he will no longer have such a devastatingly strong stack.


Yes.

Against the AI, I have had much more than 10K AV in CK that I have had to reduce. Bombing, ARTY, and Armor are your friends. Yes, the first few attacks are horrible as in Ironman CK has Level 9 forts. The key is to be sure your units have no (zero) disablements so that all of your casualties are disablements and not losses. The point units will go from 400AV to 3AV, literally. But, move them out to Neikiang to recover; in a couple of weeks they will be ready to return to the fray. Well maybe a few weeks time. [;)]

[8D][8D][8D]


Recovering all disablements is just not accomplishable in a contested hex, so Pax's advice is very sound.
Keeping a solid enough force in the hex to maintain the contention is also desirable.
If possible to accomplish this, use that force for daily bombardments to force supply usage through counter bombardment, keep morale suppressed, and fatigue, disruption and disablements from recovering.
Try to keep the target softened up for the return of the rested and recovered assault force.



rader -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/24/2020 6:08:10 PM)

In Burma news, recon has detected hundreds of AFVs moving in along the coast (this is just one example near Chittagong). How likely is it that the Allies will attempt a thrust into Central Burma in mid-1942?

I've got the equivalent of several divisions in the area with a few more ready to respond to threats wherever they emerge but I'm not sure how much to commit to this theater.

[image]local://upfiles/14041/71EAA2A32E574C129DB1396759F233DD.gif[/image]



rader -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/24/2020 6:11:20 PM)

In terms of Allied tactics, Encircled is a top notch player. One devious tactic he uses is to sweep bases or hexes 2 hexes away from my airfields with P-38s so that he can entice small groups of CAP to their death in a fight at highly uneven odds. I know I can set my cap to maximum 1-hex (or even 0 hexes which I assume means only over the airfield?) but sometimes I need to run LRCAP or need to stay flexible to respond to more than one hex.

Is there any good way to respond to this tactic, other than doing it back to him?



GetAssista -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/24/2020 6:41:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader
In Burma news, recon has detected hundreds of AFVs moving in along the coast (this is just one example near Chittagong). How likely is it that the Allies will attempt a thrust into Central Burma in mid-1942?

Maybe he's lulled by your inactivity in the region and is making a mistake? In mid 42 Japan is still perfectly capable of landing in Calcutta (or even Chittagong) to cut off those forward forces and eventually destroy them. Allied offensives do not have enough punch w/o 43 squads and a slew of aviation and tanks that come later



Lowpe -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/24/2020 7:44:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

In terms of Allied tactics, Encircled is a top notch player. One devious tactic he uses is to sweep bases or hexes 2 hexes away from my airfields with P-38s so that he can entice small groups of CAP to their death in a fight at highly uneven odds. I know I can set my cap to maximum 1-hex (or even 0 hexes which I assume means only over the airfield?) but sometimes I need to run LRCAP or need to stay flexible to respond to more than one hex.

Is there any good way to respond to this tactic, other than doing it back to him?


You have to restrict your cap to 0 hexes to prevent this. Sweepers are at a huge advantage against lrcap. Especially set your lrcap to 0 hexes so it doesn't stray from the target hex.

About the only time I set it to greater than 1 hex, is in rear area bomber only defense, and even then pretty rarely as it greatly reduces effectiveness. I will do it over sea areas where naval battles are expected to cover any damaged ships retreating...but you can't sweep sea hexes. Oh, night fighters usually get a 0 or 1 or 2 depending upon the area.





Lowpe -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/24/2020 7:46:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rader
How likely is it that the Allies will attempt a thrust into Central Burma in mid-1942?



Usually pretty likely, as the Allies want to hit back and Burma area is the easiest and perceived low risk.



RangerJoe -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/24/2020 8:27:13 PM)

Monsoons are great for defense as it restricts the supply flow to bases. You can have nice bombing targets. If there is Allied LRCAP, bring out the brooms and randomly sweep potential target hexes. If they are moving along the coastal road, some naval bombardments might be in order. But the naval bombardments will only encourage the retreat unless he is willing to push on with fatigued, disrupted units that may be low on supply.



rader -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/25/2020 4:30:46 AM)

Looking at long-term R&D. Are those upward pointing guns any good? What are the relative merits of the A7M3-J vs. the Shinden? I know the M3 can't go on CVs, just looking at them as land-based fighters.

-Same service rating (3)

Shinden pros:
-Faster (466 mph vs 403 mph)
-CL 30 mm guns (better accuracy)

A7M3-J pros:
-Same 30 mm guns but wing mounted, and in addition has 2x UP mounted guns. Are these any good?
-Slightly better rate of climb and durability
-Better endurance/range



RangerJoe -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/25/2020 1:03:19 PM)

UP guns, the fighter gets under the bomber and fires into the belly of the bomber. How effective do you think that would be?



Lowpe -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/25/2020 1:49:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

Looking at long-term R&D. Are those upward pointing guns any good? What are the relative merits of the A7M3-J vs. the Shinden? I know the M3 can't go on CVs, just looking at them as land-based fighters.

-Same service rating (3)

Shinden pros:
-Faster (466 mph vs 403 mph)
-CL 30 mm guns (better accuracy)

A7M3-J pros:
-Same 30 mm guns but wing mounted, and in addition has 2x UP mounted guns. Are these any good?
-Slightly better rate of climb and durability
-Better endurance/range


Shinden, you need to counter Jugs sweeps and have something left for the bombers. You still need to be able to sweep Allied bases and bleeding CAP and quite frankly the George is very adequate till the end. The army KI83 is another great endgame sweeper, albeit two engines.

UP guns are good, especially on NF and rear area anti bomber squadrons.



rader -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/25/2020 9:18:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

UP guns, the fighter gets under the bomber and fires into the belly of the bomber. How effective do you think that would be?


Well, it depends on what guns the bombers have underneath. As I recall, the Lancasters and other night bombers didn't originally have underside guns, hence the effectiveness of schräge musik. But against a B-29? Not necessarily more effective than a side pass aiming at engines.



RangerJoe -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/25/2020 11:20:40 PM)

More effective if you match speeds and then fire a sustained burst into the belly. But the game might not model this, nor the cannon fire going into the bomb bay . . .



rader -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/26/2020 6:43:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

More effective if you match speeds and then fire a sustained burst into the belly. But the game might not model this, nor the cannon fire going into the bomb bay . . .


Ah, that does sound deadly... but I doubt that's modeled. Did Allied bombers add armor plate to their bomb bays to mitigate against this?



RangerJoe -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/26/2020 11:29:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rader


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

More effective if you match speeds and then fire a sustained burst into the belly. But the game might not model this, nor the cannon fire going into the bomb bay . . .


Ah, that does sound deadly... but I doubt that's modeled. Did Allied bombers add armor plate to their bomb bays to mitigate against this?


Not that I know of. I think that they armored parts of the crew compartment, fuel cells, engines, but not the bomb bay. The Sturmovic actually had something like an armoured bathtub for the crew, the aircraft was built around that.



BBfanboy -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/26/2020 3:05:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rader


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

More effective if you match speeds and then fire a sustained burst into the belly. But the game might not model this, nor the cannon fire going into the bomb bay . . .


Ah, that does sound deadly... but I doubt that's modeled. Did Allied bombers add armor plate to their bomb bays to mitigate against this?

I would think that at engagement range at night, getting the bombs to explode would be fatal to the engaging fighter as well.

The fighters had to locate the bomber by the occasional flame from the engine exhaust. I suspect they tried to shoot off the control surfaces on the tail rather than hit the bomb bay. Without rudder or elevators the bomber would tumble around like a powered leaf.



GetAssista -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/26/2020 3:09:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader
quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe
More effective if you match speeds and then fire a sustained burst into the belly. But the game might not model this, nor the cannon fire going into the bomb bay . . .

Ah, that does sound deadly... but I doubt that's modeled. Did Allied bombers add armor plate to their bomb bays to mitigate against this?

I don't know for sure but there is little reason to model those particular guns differently compared to all other guns, that is not through effect and accuracy numbers. Those numbers are visible and should give full info on how deadly the airframe armament is.

Anyway, hardly anyone researches A7M3-J because you need other much more crucial planes to arrive earlier



rader -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/26/2020 9:49:36 PM)

Question about pilot experience. I never usually worry about experience when I train pilots. Common wisdom is that skill in their task (air-to-air, ground attack, naval attack, naval search) is what matters for the primary mission and experience merely affects chance of ops losses and fatigue reduction etc.

Thus, I figure skill is much more important. But anecdotally, my higher experience pilots do seem to do better at their primary mission too, so I wonder if experience is factored into success in the primary mission. Does anyone know?

Also, side question: what the heck would experience in air transport do? I mean, it seems obvious that it should increase success at transporting things by air, but since planes transport stuff using the load factor of the aircraft and ops losses etc is accounted for by experience, it doesn't seem like transport skill should do anything...



RangerJoe -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/26/2020 9:55:46 PM)

Skills are what counts for most individual actions, including training.

Experience, in general, counts in non-combat areas.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2260137

Note that pilots can also lose experience.



rader -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/26/2020 10:02:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Skills are what counts for most individual actions, including training.

Experience, in general, counts in non-combat areas.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2260137

Note that pilots can also lose experience.


If that's true than it does indeed seem a lot less important to train for experience and the air transport skill should indeed do nothing at all (since the activity is fundamentally non-combat and mostly relies on not accidentally crashing).



RangerJoe -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/26/2020 10:32:16 PM)

True, but they should be trained anyway. If nothing else, highly skilled for troop movement.



Lowpe -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/26/2020 10:38:17 PM)

Experienced pilots are of critical importance.

Try dogfighting with 55 exp versus 80 exp and you will find out. Night naval bombers really need 80 exp to hit with their torpedoes along with a high naval skill.




rader -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/27/2020 7:44:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Experienced pilots are of critical importance.

Try dogfighting with 55 exp versus 80 exp and you will find out. Night naval bombers really need 80 exp to hit with their torpedoes along with a high naval skill.




That is my suspicion too (exp makes a difference directly in combat), which goes against common wisdom.



GetAssista -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/27/2020 9:15:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader
That is my suspicion too (exp makes a difference directly in combat), which goes against common wisdom.

Common wisdom is that xp acts as a critical multiplier in everything you do. Pilots, ships, LCUs - everyone benefits a lot form high xp



Alfred -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/27/2020 11:31:02 AM)

In very general terms the following applies.  Bear in mind, not all the applicable factors are mentioned.


1.  Pilot skill ratings are used exclusively in combat situations.

2.  Non combat situations factor pilot experience level.

3.  Combat situations which are not directly addressed by the aptly named skill, use as one of the relevant factors, the experience level.  Experience feeds into and modifies pilot Morale, Fatigue, Disruption levels in combat.

4.  In a fighter on fighter confrontation, the jockeying for position is influenced by the relevant skill rating; A2A to engage, DEF to evade.

5.  In a fighter on fighter confrontation, after the jockeying for position is determined, an energy state check is made.  This check is partly influenced by the respective pilot experience level.  It determines the actual combat speed at which combat occurs.

6.  The combat speed may result in adjusted MRV ratings of the airframes for that specific combat.


In classical WITP only experience mattered.  This is not the case in AE which has "sub contracted" many of the old classical WITP experience checks to the relevant skill ratings.

Alfred



Lowpe -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/27/2020 1:11:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

In very general terms the following applies.  Bear in mind, not all the applicable factors are mentioned.


1.  Pilot skill ratings are used exclusively in combat situations.

2.  Non combat situations factor pilot experience level.

3.  Combat situations which are not directly addressed by the aptly named skill, use as one of the relevant factors, the experience level.  Experience feeds into and modifies pilot Morale, Fatigue, Disruption levels in combat.

4.  In a fighter on fighter confrontation, the jockeying for position is influenced by the relevant skill rating; A2A to engage, DEF to evade.

5.  In a fighter on fighter confrontation, after the jockeying for position is determined, an energy state check is made.  This check is partly influenced by the respective pilot experience level.  It determines the actual combat speed at which combat occurs.

6.  The combat speed may result in adjusted MRV ratings of the airframes for that specific combat.


In classical WITP only experience mattered.  This is not the case in AE which has "sub contracted" many of the old classical WITP experience checks to the relevant skill ratings.

Alfred


I always read everything Alfred posts at least twice. [:D]

I always meant, but never got around to it, to train defense first for some Japanese fighter squadrons on anti-sweep duties.

I used low level layered cap, and the lowest layer was always my highest maneuver frames like say an Oscar. Their job is not really to shoot down the Allied sweepers, but to dance with them and avoid being shot down -- an attempt to pull the engagement out of the stratoshpere.

Of course, the war being what the war is for Japan, the worst pilots ended up flying Oscars, with the 70 air 70 def pilots, when I could get them, all going into Franks, Georges, Jacks or CVs.

But the attraction of training pilots in defense would lessen the pilot training a fair bit, not half but a fair bit. Defense is always a tough skill to train.

By the end of the war, Japan usually struggles to get an Ace past 20 kills before going down himself, while the American pilots rack up staggering amount of kills and sorties. I think the game does a really good job here...





BBfanboy -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/27/2020 5:45:55 PM)

I disagree on the difficulty of training pilots in Defensive Skill. I have mine train in Strafe or LowG/LowN, flying at 100 or 1000 feet respectively. I also use 1000 feet for Air Skill training. The Defensive Skill rises quickly with low level training.



RangerJoe -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/27/2020 5:56:51 PM)

You could also train pilots in Low Nav to increase the defensive skill. That way they are also ready to die for their Emperor . . .



inqistor -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/27/2020 8:12:13 PM)

Maybe Transport skill influences missions like para-drops, and dropping supplies? Just wild guess.

I am making some small experiment right now, and left one of my air units on General Training. It seems to train Defense skill quite fast, but all pilots delivered there were completely green, so it might be just coincidence.



Alpha77 -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/27/2020 9:02:16 PM)

I handled non combat training and building quite low priority. Eg. transport, recon and search. One must give priority with limited resources, this means skills that give your air a chance to maintain air superiority at least over own bigger bases. I found recon + search average skills and exp will do. Not so for air and anti naval combat. I have now some better transport units with the new Helen transport, I found with ca. 65 transport skill and 60 exp they do a much better job in moving men and light guns then the lower skill transport pilots (but they also fly worse planes), more stuff gets to the destination with almost no op losses.

For air combat sure exp is also important, just the same as air and def skills. I found 63 exp pilots in Franks might be worse then 70 exp pilots in Tojo 2c´s. I also have made some tests in the Marianas scen, where ZeroM5s with high exp pilots did ok vs. Hellcat sweeps. Not great cause they lack firepower and speed in the end, but they often are able to escape. This was not true for some Frank As with only ca. 60 exp. The Frank only got better when they got some better pilots. So pilot skill/exp is very important sometimes more than the plane itseld they fly. If it is not totally BS like the early Oscar mind you..

Edit, the Zeros also had more planes in the air then Frank or George btw. The airfield for Franks and Georges is size 5 the one with the Zeros size 4, still the Zeros seemed to join the battle faster for some reason (means more numbers to meet the enemy). I wonder if SR3 planes have a malus of some kind also in how fast they get in the air, perhaps longer service time is modelled also in air combat...



Alpha77 -> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) (4/27/2020 9:19:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

More effective if you match speeds and then fire a sustained burst into the belly. But the game might not model this, nor the cannon fire going into the bomb bay . . .


It models it - at least the firing from underneath, I made some tests with the Marianas scen where some old IJN nightfighters are included they ONLY have a schräge Musik and NO forward firing gun. But these are totally useless I have to say vs. 4Es one can only hope the model which gets a radar and at least also forward firing guns is better, even if a bit slower...



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.015625