Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Minewarfare Questions

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Minewarfare Questions Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/23/2006 2:35:26 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

The facts indicate that Japanese CAP, even over the home islands, was pretty ineffective in preventing/deterring aerial mining by Allied a/c and inflicted at most only about 1% losses (if ALL losses were credited to Japanese defenses).


Official data also says that losses of aircraft - including the B-29 - were always greater to AAA than to fighters. So by that standard, the CAP caused losses must be less than 1/2 of 1%. Yet other data indicates that operational losses were in a similar range - only rarely did enemy action cause losses in the 2-4% range - and that was almost always due to AAA.
But operational losses were a major fraction of 1% regardless of enemy caused losses. CAP cannot have caused more than 1/4 of 1% losses in the mine campaign. I dout it caused any.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 31
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/23/2006 12:06:15 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

In reply to Castor Troy

The article wouldn't let me cut and paste so here are some stats from its summary:

In the so-called Outer Zone (Marianas, Carolines, Philippines, DEI, China):

3231 mining a/c sorties laying 9254 mines in 108 minefields
40 a/c lost to all causes
estimate of 405 ships sunk or damaged/776,260 tons

In the Inner Zone (Japan)

1529 B-29 mining sorties laying 12,135 mines in 26 minefields
15 a/c lost to all causes
estimated 670 ships/1,251,256 tons
apparently the Japanese resorted to sweeping some mines with suicide small craft upon occasion

The facts indicate that Japanese CAP, even over the home islands, was pretty ineffective in preventing/deterring aerial mining by Allied a/c and inflicted at most only about 1% losses (if ALL losses were credited to Japanese defenses).



Sorry, but I donīt understand why letīs say 150 fighters on CAP over Truk wouldnīt intercept 200 bombers coming in in daylight to mine Trukīs port! And I wonder if those minelaying bombers also came in with 200+ bombers in one raid on one target in reality. I think they did that in smaller numbers and thatīs why it was hard to get them. But in WITP they arenīt even intercepted.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 32
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/23/2006 3:30:04 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		The bombers didn't operate in daytime and sortied individually or in small groups. My guess is that Matrix hard-coded that they would not be intercepted because the mission was historically and statistically a very safe mission.

BTW, even late war, an effective Japanese CAP of 150 planes is pretty much without historical foundation

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 33
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/23/2006 4:06:43 PM   
BlackVoid


Posts: 639
Joined: 10/17/2003
Status: offline 		I think castor says that in-game, the allies can lay mines at day and not get intercepted.

Arguing that very few AC was lost is silly. We play the game to alter history not to redo it again. With the same argument you could also argue that if ship X was not lost to enemy action, it should be invulnerable in the game.

_____________________________


For Liberty! website

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 34
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/23/2006 4:36:45 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

We play the game to alter history not to redo it again


You already have your altered history with 150 "effective" Japanese fighters in a CAP.

Since the a/c conducting the mining could essentially take off and land in the daylight hours (even though the mission was at night) my guess is that matrix made it a day mission to avoid imposing ahistorical operational losses.

(in reply to BlackVoid)
Post #: 35
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/23/2006 5:17:15 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

The bombers didn't operate in daytime and sortied individually or in small groups. My guess is that Matrix hard-coded that they would not be intercepted because the mission was historically and statistically a very safe mission.

BTW, even late war, an effective Japanese CAP of 150 planes is pretty much without historical foundation


This makes it even more obvious that in game aerial mining is broken, as in game 200+ bombers (not in small numbers) can do aerial mining from 6000 feet at the best defended base (or whatever base they want with whatever cap) without being intercepted. I even think they arenīt shot at by flak.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 36
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/23/2006 5:40:47 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		In the game there are too many heavy bombers. Thus the high sortie number; more than I could find any record of anyways. But the mining a/c didn't fly in large formations: 12 hours is a long time for them to come in in ones and twos at low altitude and from many directions with minimal possibility of detection and even less of interception.

I personally haven't gotten to a point in a game where mining becomes a possibility.
My guess is that settings for the bombers conducting it are essentially irrelevant. The lack of flak firing at the bombers would tend to confirm that. I might suggest you try flying CAP with some nightfighters and see if that brings on some kind of combat (I think I've heard that Japanese nightfighters aren't very good so you might have to wait a bunch of turns to see results).

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 37
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/23/2006 6:03:41 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline 		As Iīve seen it in the game large, no, huge formations of bombers come in at DAYLIGHT and arenīt touched by CAP (donīt know about flak). If it would be like it was in real life I wouldnīt have a problem. Of course small numbers or single planes at low level would be hard to intercept. But formations of 200 bombers at the same time over the same target? Anybody seriously thinking those wouldnīt be attacked with all theyīve got?

Bringing in night fighters doesnīt help, the 200+ mining formations come in at daylight.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 38
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/23/2006 9:06:38 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		Just wondering...is there a combat animation for aerial mining?

Actually I have another question as well. How effective are these mines? In my limited experience in WitP and in UV the IJN MSWs do a pretty good job of cleaning up minefields.
IRL several waterways and harbors were essentially closed using mines and although the IJN eventually found a way to sweep almost every type of mine the Allies used the Allies apparently laid the mines in fields with a mixed bag of triggering devices which complicated sweeping to such an extent that the IJN MSWs were unable to clear many of the fields to an acceptable level of safety for regular traffic.

< Message edited by spence -- 1/23/2006 9:19:28 PM >

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 39
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/23/2006 9:35:17 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

Just wondering...is there a combat animation for aerial mining?

Actually I have another question as well. How effective are these mines? In my limited experience in WitP and in UV the IJN MSWs do a pretty good job of cleaning up minefields.
IRL several waterways and harbors were essentially closed using mines and although the IJN eventually found a way to sweep almost every type of mine the Allies used the Allies apparently laid the mines in fields with a mixed bag of triggering devices which complicated sweeping to such an extent that the IJN MSWs were unable to clear many of the fields to an acceptable level of safety for regular traffic.



yes, you get a combat report about how many bombers and at what alt they mined.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 40
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/23/2006 9:46:38 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		So do you lose a lot of ships to the mines or do your sweepers just clear them away?

You are, after all, given notice where the fields are; something your RL counterparts only learned when one or more ships went BOOM.

If you're not losing a lot of ships to the mining then you have no reason to complain.

< Message edited by spence -- 1/23/2006 10:09:34 PM >

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 41
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/23/2006 11:46:11 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

So do you lose a lot of ships to the mines or do your sweepers just clear them away?

You are, after all, given notice where the fields are; something your RL counterparts only learned when one or more ships went BOOM.

If you're not losing a lot of ships to the mining then you have no reason to complain.


no, you donīt lose many but all the time you have a damaged one (not just AKs, most times CA, BB, DD). I have a houserule on that in my games.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 42
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/24/2006 4:47:20 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

no, you donīt lose many but all the time you have a damaged one


Historical figures put Japanese shipping losses to the aerial mining program at around 1.8 million tons. That's one reason why the Japanese government was publishing recipes to the general population on how to prepare grass for dinner by the end of the war.

Talk about whining

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 43
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/24/2006 1:12:03 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

no, you donīt lose many but all the time you have a damaged one


Historical figures put Japanese shipping losses to the aerial mining program at around 1.8 million tons. That's one reason why the Japanese government was publishing recipes to the general population on how to prepare grass for dinner by the end of the war.

Talk about whining


Oh man, anybody listening on this forum? Just tell me how you lose a ship in a level 9 port after it has hit a mine? Tell me what you say if 75 % of all your CV, BB, CA and CL are out of action because they hit a mine laid at your main bases. No matter how many sweepers you send out every day. Every day at bright daylight there are coming in 200 - 400 4E bombers laying mines and youīre not able to do something.

The problem here perhaps is, that most people are playing in 42 and aerial mining isnīt even working, but if you play a game in 43 and your opponent isnīt bombing but only mining, then you need either a house rule or a change that formations of 200 - 400 bombers at BRIGHT DAYLIGHT can be intercepted by your fighters.

If you have ships attacked in a base hex, there are also fighters engaging. No matter if this hex is 60 miles.

But why should I say more, people are obviously blind. They tell me historical facts and the facts arenīt what happens in the game but they still say: hey thatīs realistical or historical. Of course Japan lost thousands of ships due mines and I donīt have problems with mines, but if someone is exploiting it, then itīs just weird.

Anyway, I donīt play the AI and my opponents never had problems with houserules.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 44
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/24/2006 2:12:13 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

They tell me historical facts


I used to have a neighbor in Tacoma Washington who served on the USSBS as a captain (navy). The USSBS was dominated by the USAAF - and yet IT concluded that air minelaying was one of just three reasons Japan would have surely surrendered by November 1, 1945 WITHOUT an invasion and WITHOUT atom bombs. The USAAF in fact stopped minelaying for doctrinal reasons - not because it was not effective - and it should have laid a lot more than it did. I regard objecting to air minelaying and then appealing to history as a bit ironic: history shows air minelaying was effective to a degree the imatiated mines of this game simply do not allow. I would prefer better game mechanics in lots of ways - INCLUDING MORE POWERFUL mine warfare rules. Not less. Mines are very efficient and it is only ignorance of them that prevents us from using them more. [I am an AAW guy who also got some unusual ground combat experience - but I managed once to go to a mine warfare school - and I have to tell you - the real problem with mines is mainly that they are not laid. It is hard to deal with mines - and there are fewer ways harder to stop them being laid then by unpredictable airplanes. You don't even know where they are going - IF you try to intercept you are very likely to find they turned around BEFORE the intercept point - since the mission location was not at a place you could predict.]

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 45
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/24/2006 2:14:40 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

In my limited experience in WitP and in UV the IJN MSWs do a pretty good job of cleaning up minefields.


Far too efficient. Matrix officially admitted (in UV days) that it felt mines should only be a harassment factor - and refused to contemplate what it knew were factual mine warfare capabilities.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 46
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/24/2006 11:09:15 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		Inasmuch as historically Kavieng, Rangoon, Haiphong, the Yangzte River and several other ports and anchorages were closed to the IJN by aerial mining the best thing to do might be to get out of Truk. Mining even closed down the port of Palembang (didn't know the port was actually up a river a fair ways) for a month (supposedly by RAAF PBYs - wonder where they came from?).

I guess though that the game mechanics are working to push the Allied Player anyway and maybe even the Japanese Player into foregoing traditional bombing in favor of aerial mining and I'll confess that that would have been completely impossible in the USAAF/USN, IJN/IJAF of the 1940s (and today). I'm not in favor of allowing CAP interception though - given the state of Japanese fighter direction throughout the war they get far more effective interception than they deserve. But I guess I'll go for a House Rule with my opp - assuming that I survive til 1943 - something like bomber squadron/groups may only conduct aerial mining if they have experience of 80+. I jsut wish one could create some kind of special training program for this more or less special mission. That might handicap the Japanese a bit but then again I've never read or heard about any kind of effective mining program run by the IJN/IJAF.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 47
RE: Minewarfare Questions - 1/25/2006 2:54:44 AM   
kbad

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 6/8/2005
Status: offline 		I have noticed that when I send a MSW to conduct mine warfare in a friendly port, they seem to also clear the friendly mines. Anybody elso notice this.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 48
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Minewarfare Questions Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.734