RE: Torpedo bomber "Extended" vs. "Normal" range (and altitude?)... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

Mr.Frag -> RE: Torpedo bomber "Extended" vs. "Normal" range (and altitude?)... (8/5/2004 9:52:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Here is a standard run of PH ... note the numbers are pretty much *dead* on history.

If you screw around with the defaults, you will obviously change the results.

[image]local://upfiles/8185/Sq476025373.jpg[/image]


Where did you get that? Did you play as the Allies doing that? I 'regularly' get 40 destroyed and the average is closer to 50 (total - with the air-to-air losses being 'maybe' 2-3). I haven't screwed with the settings in the least, apart from historic first turn, the normal difficulty level, and the surprise option. The losses I'm getting you might expect 'without' the surprise, or some grand Allied redeployment option, but that's not the case.



That was me just kicking off a standard turn 1 (as japan)

You looking at the Combat Report or the Losses?



Mr.Frag -> RE: Torpedo bomber "Extended" vs. "Normal" range (and altitude?)... (8/5/2004 10:00:00 PM)

This is on Very Hard ... note the losses are higher, but not substantially higher.

[image]local://upfiles/8185/Ig123501569.jpg[/image]



Charles2222 -> RE: Torpedo bomber "Extended" vs. "Normal" range (and altitude?)... (8/5/2004 10:13:06 PM)

Mr Frag: The combat report. I've been going with the idea that one's own side would know their own losses, as the Japanese of course did, so I don't think of comparing it to this summary you're pulling up. If this summary is massively different, and the country you're playing knows the real losses int he summary report, does it make sense to keep the combat report as-is? I can see an inaccurate report showing dirctly after the turn, but it seems when you have both reports in at the end of a turn, they would agree. Anyway, that's how I've been thinking, though it still doesn't answer why the last 4 groups of bombers aren't attacking (which was another concern).



Mr.Frag -> RE: Torpedo bomber "Extended" vs. "Normal" range (and altitude?)... (8/5/2004 10:20:57 PM)

quote:

Mr Frag: The combat report. I've been going with the idea that one's own side would know their own losses, as the Japanese of course did, so I don't think of comparing it to this summary you're pulling up. If this summary is massively different, and the country you're playing knows the real losses int he summary report, does it make sense to keep the combat report as-is? I can see an inaccurate report showing dirctly after the turn, but it seems when you have both reports in at the end of a turn, they would agree. Anyway, that's how I've been thinking, though it still doesn't answer why the last 4 groups of bombers aren't attacking (which was another concern).


I wanted to have the enemy's portion of the losses suppressed, I didn't win. [;)]

Because only a single combat report is generated for both sides, it is *fogged* equally.



Mr.Frag -> RE: Torpedo bomber "Extended" vs. "Normal" range (and altitude?)... (8/5/2004 10:21:50 PM)

quote:

Anyway, that's how I've been thinking, though it still doesn't answer why the last 4 groups of bombers aren't attacking


Could you go into a bit more detail ... I don't quite understand what you mean here.



Charles2222 -> RE: Torpedo bomber "Extended" vs. "Normal" range (and altitude?)... (8/6/2004 1:18:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

Anyway, that's how I've been thinking, though it still doesn't answer why the last 4 groups of bombers aren't attacking


Could you go into a bit more detail ... I don't quite understand what you mean here.


On the earlier post you had mentioning FoW, I do alos think it's peculiar that you would have exaggerated losses 'for your own side' or at least at some point it wasn't corrected, say in the loss summary chart.

Anyway, onto the issue now at hand. I've done this many times....count the number of groups bombing. I suppose they go in order from the Akagi onwards, especially if they were plotted that way (I'm still not sure if that makes a difference as to which group bombs 1st). There are 6 Val groups in TF1 and 6 Kates, right? Assuming there's no strafing Zeroes you will see these things in this order:

1. 1 Val group bombs ships. Flak before and after the attack.
2. 1 Kate group bombs ships (or torpedoes of course). Flak before and after the attack.
3. 1 Val group bombs ships. Flak before and after the attack.
4. 1 Kate group bombs ships. Flak before and after the attack.
5. 1 Val group bombs ships. Flak before and after the attack.
6. 1 Kate group bombs ships. Flak before and after the attack.
7. 1 Val group bombs ships. Flak before and after the attack.
8. 1 Kate group bombs ships. Flak before and after the attack.
9. 1 Val group bombs nothing. 1 set of flak, presumably before the attack only. No attack so no flak attack afterwards.
10. 1 Kate group bombs nothing. 1 set of flak, presumably before the attack only. No attack so no flak attack afterwards.
11. 1 Val group bombs nothing. 1 set of flak, presumably before the attack only. No attack so no flak attack afterwards.
12. 1 Kate group bombs nothing. 1 set of flak, presumably before the attack only. No attack so no flak attack afterwards.

That's only 8 out of 12 attacks. The only thing I figured was maybe airfield attacks, since we know the Kates of the last two carriers are both airfield targeted, don't show up with attacking, or dropping bombs on the bombsight graphic if you will, if they have that sort of mission, but my Clark airfield raids don't do that.

The only reason I ever noticed this was because I'm counting how many torpedo attacks there are that are made by Kates, and everytime it stops at four attacks not six attacks.



Mr.Frag -> RE: Torpedo bomber "Extended" vs. "Normal" range (and altitude?)... (8/6/2004 2:48:50 AM)

quote:

9. 1 Val group bombs nothing. 1 set of flak, presumably before the attack only. No attack so no flak attack afterwards.
10. 1 Kate group bombs nothing. 1 set of flak, presumably before the attack only. No attack so no flak attack afterwards.
11. 1 Val group bombs nothing. 1 set of flak, presumably before the attack only. No attack so no flak attack afterwards.
12. 1 Kate group bombs nothing. 1 set of flak, presumably before the attack only. No attack so no flak attack afterwards.


Actually, they are dropping on the airfield. You'll just see a big boom, no text



MadDawg -> RE: Torpedo bomber "Extended" vs. "Normal" range (and altitude?)... (8/6/2004 3:26:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Because only a single combat report is generated for both sides, it is *fogged* equally.


Mr Frag. is there any chance of this changing going on the wish list? It would be much more useful to know your actual losses for both air and ground battles. I realise this opens up the possability for cheating a little, but why not just make it a toggle if so as I think it would make the game far more player friendly as the results are at time very foggy and its hard to get a grasp of your own losses, particually for land combat.

Actually with ground combat I currently tend to throw a whole bunch of stuff in an area and hope they win as I have no real conept for what losses I take in a battle due to FOW on my own stuff. [:)]

Dawg



Mr.Frag -> RE: Torpedo bomber "Extended" vs. "Normal" range (and altitude?)... (8/6/2004 4:56:37 AM)

quote:

Mr Frag. is there any chance of this changing going on the wish list? It would be much more useful to know your actual losses for both air and ground battles. I realise this opens up the possability for cheating a little, but why not just make it a toggle if so as I think it would make the game far more player friendly as the results are at time very foggy and its hard to get a grasp of your own losses, particually for land combat.


Don't know how they could do it except to double the combat reports, one with true results for each side. Getting the report to actually display stuff was a bug filled nightmare.

Kid can stick it on the wish list.



MadDawg -> RE: Torpedo bomber "Extended" vs. "Normal" range (and altitude?)... (8/6/2004 5:34:55 AM)

Yeah, Im guessing it would require too much re-coding, but it would be nice [;)]

My main concern is to find out how many losses I did truely take last turn for air and ground units. For instance if I am bombarded by a surface task group, just what damaged does it do? Currently I dont know, hehe, I just guess it must be bad :-) What Id like to see is some sort of value in my units info screen (like the togglable TOE) that gives their losses for the last turn which in turn would help me learn just how damaging certain combat situations are (bombardments, shock attacks, attacks against fortifications, defense, etc).

Does that make sense? [:)]

Dawg



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.65625