KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (Full Version)

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



Message

Ian R -> KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/4/2020 11:28:20 AM)

As some of you, who have played my mod, know, these two make an appearance early in the scenario.

This is the way the exe handles the result - luck plays a role - or perhaps stupidity.

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Cocos Islands at 33,93, Range 7,000 Yards

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
Arado AR-196: 1 destroyed

Japanese Ships
AMC Kormoran, Shell hits 34, and is sunk

Allied Ships
CL Sydney, Shell hits 1

Improved night sighting under 96% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Partly Cloudy Conditions and 96% moonlight: 11,000 yards
Range closes to 17,000 yards...
Range closes to 11,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 11,000 yards
Range closes to 7,000 yards...
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 7,000 yards
CL Sydney engages AMC Kormoran at 7,000 yards
Range closes to 5,000 yards
CL Sydney engages AMC Kormoran at 5,000 yards
Range closes to 2,000 yards
CL Sydney engages AMC Kormoran at 2,000 yards
CL Sydney engages AMC Kormoran at 2,000 yards
Krauss, F orders Japanese TF to disengage
AMC Kormoran engages CL Sydney at 2,000 yards
AMC Kormoran sunk by CL Sydney at 2,000 yards
Combat ends with last Japanese ship sunk...



Ian R -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/4/2020 11:29:33 AM)

Not even a paint scratch.

[image]https://i.imgur.com/MFFltlP.png[/image]



Ambassador -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/4/2020 11:51:14 AM)

It looks like the fight was slightly one-sided...



RangerJoe -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/4/2020 11:53:44 AM)

I would definitely lower that Australian captains skills. He was caught by surprise at relatively short range and during the day. I would also lower the crew experience as well since they just had officers changed.



GetAssista -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/4/2020 12:40:21 PM)

For an example on how AMC can savage CLs look how AndyMac Ironman is set. Japanese AMCs can pack a wallop against Dutch
Also, where the heck would Sydney get 75+ xp in 41?



Ian R -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/4/2020 12:48:11 PM)

Quite why Joe Burnett went as close to Kormoran as he did, will remain a mystery. I gave him a naval rating of 49.

However, the crew had been at war for two years, including several surface engagements in the Mediterranean. Basically, a professional navy crew at that point.



Ian R -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/4/2020 12:52:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

For an example on how AMC can savage CLs look how AndyMac Ironman is set. Japanese AMCs can pack a wallop against Dutch
Also, where the heck would Sydney get 75+ xp in 41?


The scenario is based on tier 3 ironman. The class 4054 KGM AMC is as he had it set up. 8 x 5.9" SK C/28, smaller guns, 53cm torpedoes.

See above comment regarding the previous two years, the war didn't start in December 1941.



fcooke -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/4/2020 7:16:01 PM)

I never could figure out how the Syd was bush wacked after a couple of years in the the Med, but she was.



RangerJoe -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/4/2020 7:28:18 PM)

A new Captain. That is why his naval and aggression should be low. The float planes were not flying either and he let the ship get too close. It took the Sydney FOUR minutes to return fire. The secondary gun crews were near but not at their stations due to being to close to the steam catapult. Fly the aircraft first, then man all of the guns before you let the ship get close and make sure that the ship is the one that it claims to be.



GetAssista -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/4/2020 9:10:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R
See above comment regarding the previous two years, the war didn't start in December 1941.

Yeah it did not, yet your Sydney is the most experienced CL+ ship in Allied Navy if stock xp values are taken. And by far the most experienced in night combat.
While in Med it was through one serious battle (Cape Spada), one destroyer skirmish, couple anti-convoy battles and several bombardments. Judge for yourself if it is enough to elevate it to a most experienced Allied ship of the period.

Granted, it's more of the nitpicking on my part [:)] Even 50-60 xp CLs will usually trash standard AMCs. It is hard to recreate the factors that played a part in reality, like surprise and camouflage. The game has "cross the T" event but I've never seen auxiliary ships do that. A lucky torpedo hit can happen too. But most of the time it would be the usual trashing. Unless you increase AMC xp into 90s like Andy did.



jdsrae -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/4/2020 11:35:43 PM)

I think I read this scale in relation to pilots, but it seems equally applicable to ships and land units too.
<50 = trainees
50-59 = rookies
60-69 = trained
70-79 = experienced
80-89 = veteran
90+ = elite
The relative difference between crews would be important too.
What is the Kormoran crew rated at?



Encircled -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/5/2020 12:39:59 PM)

There is a good podcast series on the Australian Navy

Has an episode on the Komoran-Sydney action

https://open.spotify.com/episode/76tmZ68SLd8Klsc9R9I5FE



Ian R -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/5/2020 1:16:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

I think I read this scale in relation to pilots, but it seems equally applicable to ships and land units too.
<50 = trainees
50-59 = rookies
60-69 = trained
70-79 = experienced
80-89 = veteran
90+ = elite
The relative difference between crews would be important too.
What is the Kormoran crew rated at?


I went with a rough calculation that fully trained gets you near 70, and being in a engagements was worth an extra 10 points. Veteran is probably arguable, if the whole crew had stayed together, but given some rotations/promotions I put it at 75/75 (and it picked up a point from the Kormoran).

Edit: Kormoran also starts at 75/75.



spence -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/5/2020 1:36:37 PM)

quote:

I think I read this scale in relation to pilots, but it seems equally applicable to ships and land units too.
<50 = trainees
50-59 = rookies
60-69 = trained
70-79 = experienced
80-89 = veteran
90+ = elite
The relative difference between crews would be important too.
What is the Kormoran crew rated at?


Other than the Uboat arm I don't think the German Navy particularly distinguished itself during WW2. Even though the HMAS Sydney was taken by surprise and taken under accurate fire immediately the KMS Kormoran was also sunk by what few hits HMAS Sydney managed to score.

In a computer game which does not include a very sophisticated surface combat model the I would be very surprised if the historical result of the combat is anywhere near the peak of a curve of possible outcomes if the Kormoran's captain/crew is anything higher than "trained".



RangerJoe -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/5/2020 2:05:18 PM)

The Kormoran crew was experienced, had a few months and "combat actions" so to speak already. It also had surprise which would be hard to emulate during the day at that range plus the Sydney was communicating with it.



BBfanboy -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/5/2020 3:19:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

I think I read this scale in relation to pilots, but it seems equally applicable to ships and land units too.
<50 = trainees
50-59 = rookies
60-69 = trained
70-79 = experienced
80-89 = veteran
90+ = elite
The relative difference between crews would be important too.
What is the Kormoran crew rated at?


Other than the Uboat arm I don't think the German Navy particularly distinguished itself during WW2. Even though the HMAS Sydney was taken by surprise and taken under accurate fire immediately the KMS Kormoran was also sunk by what few hits HMAS Sydney managed to score.

In a computer game which does not include a very sophisticated surface combat model the I would be very surprised if the historical result of the combat is anywhere near the peak of a curve of possible outcomes if the Kormoran's captain/crew is anything higher than "trained".

As a converted merchant ship, Kormoran's damage control capability would not have been very good. Little things like lots of connections for water hoses to fight fires below decks, counterflooding valves and significant watertight compartmentation come to mind. And who knows if the crew had the gear to fight below-decks fires featuring zero visibility in toxic smoke ...

However, the crew were well trained in launching boats ... [:)]



Alfred -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/5/2020 4:01:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

quote:

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

I think I read this scale in relation to pilots, but it seems equally applicable to ships and land units too.
<50 = trainees
50-59 = rookies
60-69 = trained
70-79 = experienced
80-89 = veteran
90+ = elite
The relative difference between crews would be important too.
What is the Kormoran crew rated at?


I went with a rough calculation that fully trained gets you near 70, and being in a engagements was worth an extra 10 points. Veteran is probably arguable, if the whole crew had stayed together, but given some rotations/promotions I put it at 75/75 (and it picked up a point from the Kormoran).

Edit: Kormoran also starts at 75/75.


Not wise to extrapolate those figures as being transferable to ship crew experience. Different algorithms handle the data differently.

A 50-59 experience level pilot is considered to be fully trained. To get to that exp level they will possess some skills at a much higher level. That degree of "detail" is not present for ship crews. Crew performance is also shaped by certain hard coded changes, which do not appear for pilots.

The Sydney should not have a starting 1941/42 experience level above 65. At that level it is already the recipient of a generous assessment which gives it a benefit from the algorithms.

Alfred



Ian R -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (10/6/2020 6:47:10 AM)

Thanks Alfred. Interesting, but not surprising, that modeling of experience was not homogeneous.



LargeSlowTarget -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (1/12/2021 8:23:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
As a converted merchant ship, Kormoran's damage control capability would not have been very good. Little things like lots of connections for water hoses to fight fires below decks, counterflooding valves and significant watertight compartmentation come to mind. And who knows if the crew had the gear to fight below-decks fires featuring zero visibility in toxic smoke ...
However, the crew were well trained in launching boats ... [:)]


Just found this via http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4939027

The hits in the engine room of Kormoran destroyed much of the firefighting equipment, esp. the foam sprinkler system. The "well trained in launching boats" remark is a bit unfair. Two officers and 14 men died trying to fight the oil fire in the engine room. And I bet that with an uncontrollable fire raging and threatening to spread to the ammo storage and mine storage areas - Kormoran had 360 mines on board - you would prefer to take to the boats as well, wouldn't you? In fact, the mines exploded half an hour after the crew had abandoned ship, blowing Kormoran apart.







Sardaukar -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (1/12/2021 8:50:58 AM)

This is good too (apart from dramatic music):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h61lu_dMYzM



Sardaukar -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (1/12/2021 9:07:21 AM)

This bit better:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHpXRwZhhhc



Ambassador -> RE: KMS Komoran v HMAS Sydney (1/12/2021 10:12:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

This bit better:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHpXRwZhhhc

Interesting.

I found this too : https://youtu.be/3qQS-RuFYGM, about the expedition to the shipwrecks in 2015.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.75