RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable!

RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (Full Version)

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

Message

RangerJoe -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/5/2021 1:50:59 PM)
The S-Boats used the 21 inch Mark 10 torpedo which actually worked. It was smaller than the Mark 14 with a smaller payload as well.

alimentary -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/5/2021 1:55:51 PM)
quote: The S-Boats used the 21 inch Mark 10 torpedo which actually worked. It was smaller than the Mark 14 with a smaller payload as well. Thanks for the needed focus on the situation at hand. In the table in the manual: 1620 ("21 in") In the scenario editor: 1620 ("21in Mk X Torpedo"), ID 1583 (Scenario 1 - Campaign) In the scenario editor: 1620 ("21in Mk X Torpedo"), ID 1583 (Scenario 3 - Coral Sea)

Randy Stead -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/5/2021 8:53:32 PM)
Getting back to discussion of damaged ships... My dive bombers in my second run of Coral Sea, it was reported that there were six hits and heavy fire on Zuikaku. I expected to see her reported as sunk at the end of the scenario, yet somehow she remained afloat. Were these six hits and heavy fire reported in-game real, or subject to fog of war, which was set to on? I can't imagine how the real ship could have survived six x 1000 pound bombs and the subsequent fires. Without looking up, I wonder if she was one of those carriers built on a BB hull. Shokaku was reported in-game with 8 hits, heavy damage and heavy fire. She was reported sunk at the time of attack. Thinking back on my loss of Yorktown in the same hex as Townville, I suspect I had forget to turn on auto-disband for the escort TF. Or perhaps she did sink "within sight of land" so to speak; the icon in the hex, but the ship not actually in the anchorage. Which raises another question; can a damaged ship in the anchorage, but not "docked" sink from accumulated damage? And if so, is it irreparably lost? If it is in pier-side repair will it stop a flooded ship from sinking? I know the two battleships in the 12-8-41 turn are full 99s across the board but are not reported as sunk yet. But next turn they sink. And obviously ships can be sunk in port hexes from air attacks. Edit: reading through this I think I am not being clear enough. In order to save a sinking ship which you get to a port, of any size, does it have to go to pier-side to stop it from sinking in a smaller port? Will docking it a large enough port do the same? I know Yorktown could not have her major damage repaired at Townsville, I just keep wondering what exact steps must be taken once in the hex with the port to keep her afloat. Is simple disbanding of her TF enough to stop it from sinking? I realize repairing her enough to sail her to a shipyard is another matter, as is having her survive the journey.

Randy Stead -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/5/2021 9:05:43 PM)
Sorry to be such a pain, but I have an inquisitive mind. In the game, what caused the BBs at PH to be lost beyond repair, 99 in all four areas? Being in a sunken state in shallow water it is possible to raise a ship and put her back into service? In game terms, could you have a ship that had 99 flotation points but other damage not all at 99, be repaired and put back in service. I guess I am asking if in game terms it is ever possible to revive a ship with 99 flotation damage. 99 flotation damage at sea and the ship is lost in the game, but can a ship take 99 flotation in a port and be raised again?

Ambassador -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/5/2021 9:24:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Randy Stead Getting back to discussion of damaged ships... My dive bombers in my second run of Coral Sea, it was reported that there were six hits and heavy fire on Zuikaku. I expected to see her reported as sunk at the end of the scenario, yet somehow she remained afloat. Were these six hits and heavy fire reported in-game real, or subject to fog of war, which was set to on? I can't imagine how the real ship could have survived six x 1000 pound bombs and the subsequent fires. Without looking up, I wonder if she was one of those carriers built on a BB hull. Shokaku was reported in-game with 8 hits, heavy damage and heavy fire. She was reported sunk at the time of attack. Thinking back on my loss of Yorktown in the same hex as Townville, I suspect I had forget to turn on auto-disband for the escort TF. Or perhaps she did sink "within sight of land" so to speak; the icon in the hex, but the ship not actually in the anchorage. Which raises another question; can a damaged ship in the anchorage, but not "docked" sink from accumulated damage? And if so, is it irreparably lost? If it is in pier-side repair will it stop a flooded ship from sinking? I know the two battleships in the 12-8-41 turn are full 99s across the board but are not reported as sunk yet. But next turn they sink. And obviously ships can be sunk in port hexes from air attacks. Edit: reading through this I think I am not being clear enough. In order to save a sinking ship which you get to a port, of any size, does it have to go to pier-side to stop it from sinking in a smaller port? Will docking it a large enough port do the same? I know Yorktown could not have her major damage repaired at Townsville, I just keep wondering what exact steps must be taken once in the hex with the port to keep her afloat. Is simple disbanding of her TF enough to stop it from sinking? I realize repairing her enough to sail her to a shipyard is another matter, as is having her survive the journey. Regarding hits : the combat report is subject to some FOW, but as far as I know, I’ve never seen the number of bomb, shell or torpedo hits being wrong. However, only watching the combat animation will tell you if any or all of those hits were penetrating, or even critical hits, or if magazines exploded (or even which bombs hit - especially important if you have different types of bombers attacking). Heavy fires without heavy damage doesn’t mean the ship will sink. Regarding Yorktown, the disbanding occurs late in the turn resolution. Hexes are big, and a TF in a base hex doesn’t mean the ships are in the base - they might be several dozen miles from it. We usually refer to ships disbanded in port as « anchored », docked ships are those ships belonging to a docked TF. A TF which is not docked is not in the « anchorage », but simply in the vicinity. A ship disbanded in port is usually safe from sinking, unless it continues to receive damage. That damage might be fire damage, as I said earlier : fire damage causes additional flood damage, and once it reaches 100... A ship still in a TF, even docked, is more at risk, as it could still be steaming if an enemy arrives. And the ship is in the TF, not in the port.

Ambassador -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/5/2021 9:28:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Randy Stead Sorry to be such a pain, but I have an inquisitive mind. In the game, what caused the BBs at PH to be lost beyond repair, 99 in all four areas? Being in a sunken state in shallow water it is possible to raise a ship and put her back into service? In game terms, could you have a ship that had 99 flotation points but other damage not all at 99, be repaired and put back in service. I guess I am asking if in game terms it is ever possible to revive a ship with 99 flotation damage. 99 flotation damage at sea and the ship is lost in the game, but can a ship take 99 flotation in a port and be raised again? No way in game to raise a sunken ship. During a PH strike, the battle wagons will endure damage, and include fire damage - that’s usually the source of the sinking in later turns. A ship in port with 99 flood damage is not sunken, it’s still afloat. It’ll require several months of repairs, but it didn’t sink.

RangerJoe -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/5/2021 9:47:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ambassador quote: ORIGINAL: Randy Stead Sorry to be such a pain, but I have an inquisitive mind. In the game, what caused the BBs at PH to be lost beyond repair, 99 in all four areas? Being in a sunken state in shallow water it is possible to raise a ship and put her back into service? In game terms, could you have a ship that had 99 flotation points but other damage not all at 99, be repaired and put back in service. I guess I am asking if in game terms it is ever possible to revive a ship with 99 flotation damage. 99 flotation damage at sea and the ship is lost in the game, but can a ship take 99 flotation in a port and be raised again? No way in game to raise a sunken ship. During a PH strike, the battle wagons will endure damage, and include fire damage - that’s usually the source of the sinking in later turns. A ship in port with 99 flood damage is not sunken, it’s still afloat. It’ll require several months of repairs, but it didn’t sink. Just make sure that the beer drinkers urinate overboard and not into into the ship.[X(] There was a submarine lost due to an overflowing toilet.

Randy Stead -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/5/2021 11:00:11 PM)
Thanks for the replies, Ambassador; they are helpful. I think the part about the disbanding not happening until later in the turn may have played a part. It is really irking me that I cannot remember if I had set Yorktown's TF to auto disband. And as you stated, being in the hex is not the same thing as being in the port. A hex covers a large area of sea and land in the real world. Anyway, this run through of the scenario has been a tremendous learning experience for me. I thank all those who have suggested using Coral Sea as your first gaming experience. Not to question your advice, which is quite useful, but to abstract the game's concept of damage modeling... I come at this issue from many years of playing U-boat games, the most played being Silent Hunter 3. That game's original damage model was quite FUBAR, but the modding community improved it to be more realistic. There are two vessels in that game which sink, the surface ships and the submarines. The original damage model was based on hit points; once a target vessel received "X" number of hit points it sank, often with graphic explosions and booms. It did not matter where on the ship you hit it with torpedoes or deck gun, X hit points and off she went. The complaint was that you could pound the superstructure with the deck gun and once you hit the magic number, the ship sinks. This was all very unrealistic. Then the modders released a damage model related to loss of buoyancy and now we had a winner. You had to "poke holes" in the ships [and subs] to get them to let in water and once sufficient buoyancy was lost down she went. In light of this, I am having a hard time envisioning how fire, in-game and in real life, makes a ship lose buoyancy and sink. You could lose buoyancy without one fire and a ship will sink. I just can't understand how fire sinks a ship. Think of all those ships that were nuked at Bikini Atoll and stayed afloat, though badly charred. Unless, of course, the fires set off ordnance and fuel and the resultant explosions open the hull to flooding. And of course a large enough fire means the crew cannot do damage control. Perhaps I am on the right track here in understanding how this game models ship loss? I loaded up the Coral Sea scenario from the Japanese side a few minutes ago and had a look around. Those boys on the carriers sure are a competent lot. It seems the non-carrier TFs have their assignments and will proceed to do their jobs without the player touching their orders; the player's main job seems to be to take care of the Allied ships trying to prevent the landings. I must say it looks rather complicated. In real life the Japanese had a flaw of trying to come up with clever ploys to deceive the enemy and overcomplicated things. AF, the operation in 1942 seems such a plan. In expert players' opinions, is this operation the sort of thing the AI has setup in this scenario the type of thing a human player would do, set up and choreograph this number of different operations, all coming to a head as was planned in MO? Or is this scenario an example of how overcomplicated Japanese plans led to defeat?

RangerJoe -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/5/2021 11:18:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Randy Stead Not to question your advice, which is quite useful, but to abstract the game's concept of damage modeling... I come at this issue from many years of playing U-boat games, the most played being Silent Hunter 3. That game's original damage model was quite FUBAR, but the modding community improved it to be more realistic. There are two vessels in that game which sink, the surface ships and the submarines. The original damage model was based on hit points; once a target vessel received "X" number of hit points it sank, often with graphic explosions and booms. It did not matter where on the ship you hit it with torpedoes or deck gun, X hit points and off she went. The complaint was that you could pound the superstructure with the deck gun and once you hit the magic number, the ship sinks. This was all very unrealistic. Then the modders released a damage model related to loss of buoyancy and now we had a winner. You had to "poke holes" in the ships [and subs] to get them to let in water and once sufficient buoyancy was lost down she went. In light of this, I am having a hard time envisioning how fire, in-game and in real life, makes a ship lose buoyancy and sink. You could lose buoyancy without one fire and a ship will sink. I just can't understand how fire sinks a ship. Think of all those ships that were nuked at Bikini Atoll and stayed afloat, though badly charred. Unless, of course, the fires set off ordnance and fuel and the resultant explosions open the hull to flooding. And of course a large enough fire means the crew cannot do damage control. Perhaps I am on the right track here in understanding how this game models ship loss? IJN damage control would only be specific people, the entire crew was not trained to do the job. Yes, fire could destroy a ship. The US Navy had the crews chip away a lot of build up paint that could burn, they also got a lot of furniture off the ship. Sometimes ships with planes on the gong into battle with jettison the planes plus the gasoline for them because of the danger. The ammo for the guns and other flammable items were an inherent danger, hence the paint locker where most if not all of such flammable items were normally stored. The ships at Bikini probably had been stripped of munitions, fuel, and a lot of the flammable items. Plus, while the heat was intense, it was of a short duration.

BBfanboy -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/5/2021 11:43:30 PM)
System damage is the key to understanding how the flooding and fire can be fatal. Firstly, IRL fire could gut a ship and often cause warping of the hull springing open seams. There are also opening in the hull that are sealed with materials that can be damaged by fire - like the glands around the screw shaft, or the condenser intake that brings in seawater to make steam. Secondly, minor flooding from a hull penetration can spread to adjoining compartments via the openings for hatches, electrical, steam and hydraulic/pneumatic lines. Again, the openings have grommets to seal the compartments but fire can often damage those. So you have some fires and perhaps some flooding but it doesn't seem too bad - how does it spread? System damage affects electrical power and pumps, both needed to deal with damage. If your ship had very high system damage, the damage control crews are using buckets and flashlights. Usually the fire or the flooding will spread if there is not enough capacity to keep it in check. So what is capacity besides System points? The crew, especially the damage control parties. Each ship has a damage control value that represents the dedicated teams. The crew as a whole may be another level of damage control - the Allied Damage Control advantage is that they trained all their sailors to do damage control while the IJN did not. During combat you may see messages about "Severe Casualties to Damage Control Parties" or even worse "Damage Control Parties Trapped Below Decks". That represents loss of DC capacity. There is another message "Severe Personnel Casualties" which seems to mean crew loss and is implemented by lowering crew experience. And there is another wrinkle - during combat the crew is not available to help with damage control, just the DC parties. So you will often see that a damaged ship with controllable fires gets attacked in a series of combats (usually a few scattered air attacks) and the fire gets away from them and becomes "heavy fires". If it includes "heavy damage", the ship is in trouble, and you need a great captain and good crew experience and no enemy attacks to beat it back. So then you get clear of the fray and want to get your heavily damaged ship to port. Heavy fires and high flooding are sensitive to high speed runs so fleeing at top speed is not an option. You set the TF at cruise speed and if possible provide a companion ship of the same size to help fight fires. Also consider other escorts to protect against subs and bombers looking for cripples. Then you have to decide where to go, and that is a big judgement call. Big ports have better firefighting and repair potential than smaller ones, but they are usually more scarce. You have to guess whether your crew can hold the line on fires and flooding for the distance you want to travel. If no, sometimes it is better to head to the nearest port of whatever size and disband so your crew can devote full effort to putting down the fires and pumping out the minor flood damage. If that worked and you got the fires put out, you could then decide whether to stay in the small port to repair some of the system damage so you can pump water enroute to permanent repairs. Much will depend on the threat environment and how long you can leave the ship in the small port - i.e. do you need it back on the line ASAP or can you play it safe and let it repair slowly for a long time. You can also bring in Naval Support squads, a Naval HQ, an AR or an ARD to help with repairs. And if your ship is a DD, SS, or small patrol vessel, the tenders AD, AS and AG respectively can also help with repairs. Again, do you want to risk those assets to help repair the damaged ship? Your call - based on threats and whether you can afford to lose the assets or not. What about major Engineering damage? AFAIK, Eng. damage only affects the speed of the ship. Large ports 7 and up can repair Eng. damage and ARs can repair Eng. damage 5 or less. Shipyards large enough to accommodate the ship can repair Engineering and Flood damage. And your ship may have some damaged devices (gun turrets or mounts/radar/etc.). The ability to repair those depends on the load cost of the device vs. the size of the port or available shipyard repair. You will not know the projected repair time for these until the ship has passed one turn in damage repairs - apparently to model assessment of the damage.

RangerJoe -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 12:02:16 AM)
Alfred put out a nice ship repair guide - somewhere!

BBfanboy -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 12:06:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe Alfred put out a nice ship repair guide - somewhere! https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2990845&mpage=1&key=

Psaeko -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 12:55:48 AM)
quote: A ship disbanded in port is usually safe from sinking, unless it continues to receive damage. If only that were the case in real life. Somewhere off the coast of hashira-jima lie the remains of the worlds most expensive warning against playing with fire [:D] And that one wasn't even damaged in the first place when it was anchored.

cblattmann -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 3:00:04 PM)
It is great to read others getting into the game. I am playing "Coral Sea' as my first scenario. I love the battle reports from first sightings, smoke hinderance and so forth. The details ae amazing and very engrossing. What surprised me was the the carriers TF engaged enemy TFs on their own and I was wondering why? What are the commands of naval attack and so forth for if the carrier group does it on their own. I went to the manual and I think I got a bit of an answer. Not sure if I drew the right conclusions. When you create a new TF you specify what kind of TF it will be. So when I create a "air combat" TF it will handle the air combat automatically. But if I want to attack land based ground targets with that "air combat" TF then I have to issue an order to the airplanes to do the attack? So what a "sub patrol" TF will always attack ships (so to attack a certain TF I would have to issue orders to move into the same hex) but I would have to issue orders to the sub TF if I want to deploy mines in a certain hex, right? Is that it?

Randy Stead -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 3:17:42 PM)
BBfanboy, all that you have said satisfies my question about how fire can sink a ship. I had never considered all those tiny openings in a vessel, such as prop shaft glands, which in totality of leakage, combined with popped hull plates and such can allow in sufficient water to sink a vessel, especially when considering that system and personnel losses can thwart pumping and damage control. It all makes more perfect sense. I also realized I made a rookie mistake... I ordered my damaged carriers and other units to head to Australia at full speed. I had not considered speed as a factor in damage control; my only focus was on getting them out of Dodge as quickly as possible. As well, I did not add a large ship to the escort of the lone destroyer automatically assigned to escort. Should I have put the Lexington in with Yorktown, or will a cruiser or two suffice? I had the Lexington speed off on her own as she was much faster than the more heavily damaged Yorktown. Looking back on it, I am wondering if I could have saved Yorktown if I had not ordered full speed all the way to Oz.

RangerJoe -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 3:27:06 PM)
I think that it is better to use the DDs and other small ships as escorts in the escort TF.

Randy Stead -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 3:30:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe I think that it is better to use the DDs and other small ships as escorts in the escort TF. That would seem to make more sense to me, but BBfanboy suggests, if possible, to put a ship of similar size in the escort convoy to assist with damage control on the way to sanctuary. Does this help much in the game?

Alfred -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 3:32:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cblattmann It is great to read others getting into the game. I am playing "Coral Sea' as my first scenario. I love the battle reports from first sightings, smoke hinderance and so forth. The details ae amazing and very engrossing. What surprised me was the the carriers TF engaged enemy TFs on their own and I was wondering why? What are the commands of naval attack and so forth for if the carrier group does it on their own. I went to the manual and I think I got a bit of an answer. Not sure if I drew the right conclusions. When you create a new TF you specify what kind of TF it will be. So when I create a "air combat" TF it will handle the air combat automatically. But if I want to attack land based ground targets with that "air combat" TF then I have to issue an order to the airplanes to do the attack? So what a "sub patrol" TF will always attack ships (so to attack a certain TF I would have to issue orders to move into the same hex) but I would have to issue orders to the sub TF if I want to deploy mines in a certain hex, right? Is that it? Not quite. Nothing is "automatic" in the sense of independent active operations occurring without initial player input, unless you set task forces to computer control which you should never, under any circumstances do. You must always set the parameters of what you want your assets to do (be they land, air or sea). The game will continue carrying out those parameters until you change them. Hence if an air unit is set to perform naval attacks, it won't do anything else until your change the orders. Land targets can be selected by the player (or left up to the computer). If the player chooses Base A as the target for an air unit, the air unit will not attack any other bases other than Base A, and then only the specified type of attack against Base A. If you want the unit to attack Base B, or perform a different type of attack against Base A, it won't happen until you change the unit's orders. A naval task force can never be selected as a target by a human player. You should carefully read the manual regarding task forces which are given an area to patrol and those not given an area to patrol. Again the former will continue carrying out those orders until you either change them or one of the conditions to automatically terminate the patrol arise. When you get more experienced with the game engine, you will find there are several "safety triggers which cause assets to automatically cease carrying out their orders. When this occurs, the assets do nothing (air/land) or return to the home port (naval). Alfred

RangerJoe -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 3:36:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cblattmann It is great to read others getting into the game. I am playing "Coral Sea' as my first scenario. I love the battle reports from first sightings, smoke hinderance and so forth. The details ae amazing and very engrossing. What surprised me was the the carriers TF engaged enemy TFs on their own and I was wondering why? What are the commands of naval attack and so forth for if the carrier group does it on their own. I went to the manual and I think I got a bit of an answer. Not sure if I drew the right conclusions. Click on the TF, then click on the individual air craft carriers. Set the missions for each air unit. Fighters for CAP (Combat Air Patrol) and Escort mission. Set the bombers for the mission that you want with any secondary mission. The VS bomber units were the Scout Bombers that you may have read about. They would normally use 50% for scouting with the rest waiting to bomb a target. The VB was used at 100% for bombing. The Torpedo Bombers early would best be left for ASW even if not highly trained. Their range is too short and the torpedoes ineffective. But they can still be used for Naval Attack. Be sure not to set your bombers to attack past the range of your fighters. Set the reaction range and threat level for the TF to what you want. When you create a new TF you specify what kind of TF it will be. So when I create a "air combat" TF it will handle the air combat automatically. But if I want to attack land based ground targets with that "air combat" TF then I have to issue an order to the airplanes to do the attack? So what a "sub patrol" TF will always attack ships (so to attack a certain TF I would have to issue orders to move into the same hex) but I would have to issue orders to the sub TF if I want to deploy mines in a certain hex, right? See above for the air units. For subs, it is best to set them to patrol a specific hex or hexes. If you want to lay a minefield, there has to be mines available and the ability to load them in a large enough port or a port with support. That is not always the case. Then tell them to go to that specific hex and you have to make sure they they will "Lay Mines" as that is a selection that you must make. Is that it? I hope that helps.

RangerJoe -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 3:39:18 PM)
Alfred, I did not see your post before I posted mine. I don't think that our answers conflict. Joe

RangerJoe -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 3:42:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Randy Stead quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe I think that it is better to use the DDs and other small ships as escorts in the escort TF. That would seem to make more sense to me, but BBfanboy suggests, if possible, to put a ship of similar size in the escort convoy to assist with damage control on the way to sanctuary. Does this help much in the game? It appears to help with the smaller ships plus the smaller ships also help against submarines. The more ships, the merrier. [;)] The USS Hammann was helping with the Yorktown when they were both torpedoed. For some reason, I try not to have both of them in the same TF in the game. I also try to keep both of them away from the I-168 for some reason. [8\|]

RangerJoe -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 3:45:21 PM)
By the way, if you would rather make than buy the first item in that list of suggestions that I gave you, I can give you some simple but good recipes. [8D] I did talk to someone about my suggestions and *she* thought that they were a good idea.[;)]

BBfanboy -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 3:52:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cblattmann It is great to read others getting into the game. I am playing "Coral Sea' as my first scenario. I love the battle reports from first sightings, smoke hinderance and so forth. The details ae amazing and very engrossing. What surprised me was the the carriers TF engaged enemy TFs on their own and I was wondering why? What are the commands of naval attack and so forth for if the carrier group does it on their own. I went to the manual and I think I got a bit of an answer. Not sure if I drew the right conclusions. When you create a new TF you specify what kind of TF it will be. So when I create a "air combat" TF it will handle the air combat automatically. But if I want to attack land based ground targets with that "air combat" TF then I have to issue an order to the airplanes to do the attack? So what a "sub patrol" TF will always attack ships (so to attack a certain TF I would have to issue orders to move into the same hex) but I would have to issue orders to the sub TF if I want to deploy mines in a certain hex, right? Is that it? Air Combat TFs have a special react (not the one you can set in the TF screen, an AI driven one) that causes carriers to attack one another or flee the threat. The react may or may not include movement by a few hexes. That is just movement of the ships - you need to give the air units on the carriers orders for the type of mission they must fly. When enemy ships are expected you normally set bombers to Naval Attack with a % to Naval Search/ASW and fighters to Escort with a % assigned to CAP. With these settings your aircraft will attack enemy ships based on detection level and ship types. Be warned: if both enemy transports and carriers are present, you attacks by be split and less effective. You want your carriers to be undetected while have good detection on the enemy. If your air units are assigned to attack a land target in both morning and afternoon (say a setting for Naval Attack/Airfield Attack) they will not be available for an attack on enemy shipping. In the Coral Sea scenario, the RL USN did not know how bloody carrier combat would be in aircraft losses and carrier vulnerability. Had they known, they would have had more fighters to protect their carriers even if that meant fewer bombers. They also would have implemented measures to purge aircraft refueling lines when enemy aircraft were approaching. That would have saved Lexington. So in that scenario you fighting the handicaps of too few fighters and carriers that burn up easily, but you have the advantage of foreknowledge of the general movements of the enemy. Submarines set to Patrol will carry a full torpedo load to go and locate/attack enemy ships of any type. If they can get past the escorts they will attack the most valuable enemy ship, but die rolls and captains' skills determine if they get into position or not. If you set the sub to a Mining mission, they will load mostly mines but retain a few torpedoes. They will avoid attacking ships until they lay their mines and then will attack shipping if the opportunity presents itself. If something causes the sub to abort the mining mission, it will return to home port and, unless you change the order to "Do Not Lay Mines", it will lay its mines at the home port. I find it best to leave the minelaying sub with the "Do Not Lay Mines" order and send it to a waypoint or patrol point next to the target hex. Once it is there I give the order to lay mines and set the target hex. The sub is less likely to abort and RTB early with that set of orders but you need to monitor mission progress.

BBfanboy -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 3:56:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe Alfred, I did not see your post before I posted mine. I don't think that our answers conflict. Joe Ditto to both of you!

Randy Stead -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 4:09:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe quote: ORIGINAL: Randy Stead quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe I think that it is better to use the DDs and other small ships as escorts in the escort TF. That would seem to make more sense to me, but BBfanboy suggests, if possible, to put a ship of similar size in the escort convoy to assist with damage control on the way to sanctuary. Does this help much in the game? It appears to help with the smaller ships plus the smaller ships also help against submarines. The more ships, the merrier. [;)] The USS Hammann was helping with the Yorktown when they were both torpedoed. For some reason, I try not to have both of them in the same TF in the game. I also try to keep both of them away from the I-168 for some reason. [8\|] For similar reasons, do you split up the Sullivan brothers, or leave them all on the same ship? I hear you. When I play a game, any game about war, I find I have special attachments to certain units. If I play Russia Besieged, for example, I always think of Guy Sajer when I see the Gross Deutschland unit on the board. I think of Doolittle when I see Hornet, etc.

RangerJoe -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 4:22:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Randy Stead quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe quote: ORIGINAL: Randy Stead quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe I think that it is better to use the DDs and other small ships as escorts in the escort TF. That would seem to make more sense to me, but BBfanboy suggests, if possible, to put a ship of similar size in the escort convoy to assist with damage control on the way to sanctuary. Does this help much in the game? It appears to help with the smaller ships plus the smaller ships also help against submarines. The more ships, the merrier. [;)] The USS Hammann was helping with the Yorktown when they were both torpedoed. For some reason, I try not to have both of them in the same TF in the game. I also try to keep both of them away from the I-168 for some reason. [8\|] For similar reasons, do you split up the Sullivan brothers, or leave them all on the same ship? I hear you. When I play a game, any game about war, I find I have special attachments to certain units. If I play Russia Besieged, for example, I always think of Guy Sajer when I see the Gross Deutschland unit on the board. I think of Doolittle when I see Hornet, etc. Unfortunately, you can't assign individual crew members. One of the Sullivan brothers did survive the sinking and was on a life raft but was not rescued in time.

Randy Stead -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 4:55:23 PM)
I know that; I should've used emoticons to convey that it wasn't a serious post. I wonder about policies with respect to splitting up close relations in combat units. In WWI the British deployed "pals" battalions, units of men drafted or volunteered from local areas. On one hand it facilitated very close bonds that boosted morale but at the same time made the effects of large casualties more demoralizing both at the front and at home as the casualty lists were published.

Randy Stead -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 6:02:48 PM)
In my eagerness to get going as IJN in Coral Sea scenario, I completely FUBARed my first turn. I completely forgot to set my subs to do anything. As well, I saw no use for the two TFs near Tulagi, so I set them no orders. What should I do with them? I did split the 27 Zeroes at Rabaul, sending 9 each to Zuikaku and Shokaku. I also sent the Kates on Shoho to one of the big carriers. None of my bombers from Rabaul did anything; I thought they would go and bomb PM, but they did not. Hmm, more to learn. The Americans plastered ships from those two idle TFs near Tulagi and sank several ships for the loss of a scant few planes. The useless Wirraways even had the nerve to pull off an unescorted attack on Lae, but ineffectively. I had set the Zeroes there to sweep, thinking they would fly over PM and intercept any P-40s that might try to reinforce. Back to the drawing board.

RangerJoe -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 6:12:21 PM)
I guess that you should call that turn very educational! [;)]

Randy Stead -> RE: My first go at this game, very enjoyable! (1/6/2021 6:28:00 PM)
Extremely so, Joe. I learned more in one turn as the IJN than the Allies in two full scenario plays! So, some observations from simply loading the game as IJN turn 1, with no actions plotted, just snooping: TF5 is at Tulagi, mission: amphibious. It has no troops or cargo loaded. The base is too small for much. Looking around the map I am wondering what is the purpose of this empty TF? Am I supposed to send it to Truk or Rabaul and load it up with supplies for Port Moresby? Send it back to home port? There are virtually no troops on the map I can find except for a few engineers and base forces. Am I to load the engineers and use them to take empty Allied bases? Seems pointless, but then again I am a cherry rookie fumbling with the buttons of his first date. TF4 is in the Solomon Islands chain, near Rakata Bay. It is labelled as MO Close Cover Force. I did nothing with it but the arrogant American decadent running dog capitalist imperialists [just ran out of epithets] had the effrontery to attack it and sank a few of the Emperor's much needed ships. Lesson to rookies: Look at TF labels; the scenario designer is giving you a clue as to what it should be used for. Next replay I shall send it west to cover the MO landing forces, probably what they were intended to do. Although it would be a nice reinforcement for the fighter groups of the carriers, the splitting of the 27 plane Zero unit at Rabaul seems to weaken Rabaul. I am not a wise man yet, but I would think leaving them there would make my strikes on PM more effective. The Zeros at Lae I will not set to sweep, at least not until I get better at assigning bombers. When I watch the AI I see Bettys [?] from Rabaul hitting PM with escort from Lae and Rabaul. I can do better in this area. Lastly, is it really good advice to send the 6 Kates from Shoho over to the main fleet? Yes, it gives that fleet more punch, but then what is the point of Shoho's TF with only fighters aboard? I tried to set her Claude's to naval search but could not. Are they any good in air to air? Or, never mind and I shall learn the harder, but more memorable way.

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

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.078125