RE: Land Combat

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: Land Combat

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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Land Combat

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Land Combat - 3/23/2007 1:31:22 AM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

One thing that troubles me about this Mod is the land combat model. You guys are not far enough along yet but in the Western Desert the introduction of a new tank model tended to have major ramifications on the battlefield.

I used the Manchurian Scenario some time back to see/test how well the game modelled armored units and armored warfare and concluded that all the various stats etc for the different tanks must be pure fluff. In my test, repeated several times, the tinfoil Japanese tanks armed with squirt guns, did very very credibly against T-34/85s and other late war Russian models. Given the results, it seems that had the Germans had had a 37mm AT gun like the ones on Japanese armor, Fall Barbarossa would have succeeded easily.

BTW I manipulated all the variables possible in the editor (except armor and gun values) to be equal so that the test would only be affected by those differences.

I agree with you. My understanding of the ground battle algorithm is that in a first phase both sides will exchange fire and so disable squads, tanks and so on from the opposing side, and then the able squads of each side will be counted and with several adjustements (supplies, support, terrain, fatigue, morale, etc...) will have a global ASS value calculated.

I think that in the first phase, the rating of weapons and armor is taken into account, but that it is not in the second where a light tank = a heavy tank = an infantry squad = 1 ASS point. And what we see in ground battle animation is that the first phase will only affect some % of one side or another.

So basically if you have 12 000 infantry men (1000 squads) with no antitank guns or weapons facing 400 heavy tanks, the tanks will suffer no loss in the first phase and may disrupt 40-80 enemy squads, but in the assault phase the infantry will have more than 900 ASS points and the tanks only 400 and they will be routed. And a retreating unit will lose 16% of its OOB as destroyed (not disrupted), all supplies and so on...

So in WITP ground battles, quantity is better than quality...

Maybe you should just call it "AV"... "ASS points"...

Sorry...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to AmiralLaurent)

Post #: 151

RE: Land Combat - 3/23/2007 2:17:20 AM

niceguy2005

Posts: 12523
Joined: 7/4/2005
From: Super secret hidden base
Status: offline

quote:

a global ASS value calculated.

Oh no you did not just say that.

_____________________________

Artwork graciously provided by Dixie

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 152

RE: Rain? - 3/23/2007 4:54:33 AM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

quote:

no antitank guns or weapons facing 400 heavy tanks

Mines, traps, obstacules, weak armored spots in tanks etc.

(in reply to Halsey)

Post #: 153

RE: Rain? - 3/23/2007 12:41:39 PM

pauk

Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 01/08/42

Italian Navy addopted Japanese tactic - Tobruk is bombarded by night! As i've mentioned that to Speedy naval bombardments may become an issue once when target is well reconed and more capital ships are involved in the action...

Naval bombardment of Tobruk, at 50,128 - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

Allied aircraft losses
Blenheim IV: 1 destroyed

21 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.
Japanese Ships
DD Ascari
DD Alpino
DD Alfredo Oriani
DD Vincenzo Gioberti, Shell hits 1
DD Turbine
DD Euro
CL Muzzio Attendolo
CL Montecuccoli
BB Conte di Cavour, Shell hits 4

Allied ground losses:
248 casualties reported
Guns lost 10
Vehicles lost 2

Airbase hits 3
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 10

There is nothing that Fremen can do about it, i'm afraid. Air raids with 'reasonable' number of ac are working good - Italian and German bombers suffers losses due to flak even at 20K... but that can not be said for massive air raids on 6K - results are WiTPish
Day Air attack on Malta , at 35,120

Japanese aircraft
SM 79 x 28
CR-25 x 5
MC-200 x 18
Re-2001 x 16
BR 20 M x 33
Ju-88A-4 x 49
Bf-109F-4 R2 Recon x 5

Japanese aircraft losses
CR-25: 1 destroyed
BR 20 M: 10 damaged
Ju-88A-4: 10 damaged

Allied ground losses:
39 casualties reported
Vehicles lost 1

Airbase hits 4
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 106

Mostly at 6000 feet

As you may see...

Day Air attack on Malta , at 35,120

Japanese aircraft
SM 79 T x 7
Ju-88A-4 x 48
Hs-126 B-2 x 5

Japanese aircraft losses
Ju-88A-4: 5 damaged

Allied ground losses:
30 casualties reported

Airbase hits 1
Runway hits 13

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x Ju-88A-4 bombing at 21000 feet
10 x Ju-88A-4 bombing at 21000 feet
6 x Ju-88A-4 bombing at 21000 feet
4 x SM 79 T bombing at 21000 feet
9 x Ju-88A-4 bombing at 21000 feet
3 x Ju-88A-4 bombing at 21000 feet
3 x Ju-88A-4 bombing at 21000 feet
3 x SM 79 T bombing at 21000 feet
3 x Ju-88A-4 bombing at 21000 feet
3 x Ju-88A-4 bombing at 21000 feet
4 x Ju-88A-4 bombing at 21000 feet
3 x Ju-88A-4 bombing at 21000 feet

Day Air attack on Malta , at 35,120

Japanese aircraft
CR-42 x 32
SM 84 x 6
IMAM Ro-37 x 1

Japanese aircraft losses
CR-42: 4 destroyed, 7 damaged
SM 84: 1 destroyed, 3 damaged

Airbase hits 1
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 12

CR-42 bombing at 2000 feet
SM 84 bombing at 6000 feet

Day Air attack on 9th Indian Brigade, at 47,129

Japanese aircraft
Bf-109F-4 Trop x 10
Ju-87 D (Ger) x 13

No Japanese losses

Allied ground losses:
26 casualties reported

Aircraft Attacking:
13 x Ju-87 D (Ger) bombing at 2000 feet

Day Air attack on TF, near Malta at 35,120

Japanese aircraft
Bf-109F-4 x 35

No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
PT MTB-66
PT MTB-63, Shell hits 4
PT MTB-64, Shell hits 4
PT MTB-62

Ok, Plan C (how original name) is not a secret anymore. Englander attacked my transports north of Benghazi which delivered supplies few days ago....

Day Air attack on TF at 45,126

Allied aircraft
Blenheim IV x 11
Hudson I x 6

Japanese Ships
PC Enrico Cosenzo
PC Nicola Fabrizi
AK Trapani
DE Pallade

at 8000 feet

Ariete push enemy towards Egypt once again. Only one armoured unit left (other one already retreats before this attack....note the extremely light losses!

Ground combat at 46,127

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 5594 troops, 54 guns, 194 vehicles, Assault Value = 167

Defending force 4562 troops, 98 guns, 181 vehicles, Assault Value = 142

Japanese max assault: 350 - adjusted assault: 154

Allied max defense: 92 - adjusted defense: 18

Japanese assault odds: 8 to 1

Japanese ground losses:
11 casualties reported

Allied ground losses:
22 casualties reported

Hehe... one of two retreating enemy units arrives at Msus and tried to capture it. But panzers are moving fast through the desert...

Ground combat at Msus

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 7337 troops, 129 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 217

Defending force 15458 troops, 194 guns, 567 vehicles, Assault Value = 522

Allied max assault: 194 - adjusted assault: 3

Japanese max defense: 549 - adjusted defense: 364

Allied assault odds: 0 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese ground losses:
361 casualties reported
Guns lost 8
Vehicles lost 3

Allied ground losses:
362 casualties reported
Guns lost 21

_____________________________

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 154

RE: Rain? - 3/23/2007 10:22:15 PM

Capt. Harlock

Posts: 5358
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

Italian Navy addopted Japanese tactic - Tobruk is bombarded by night! As i've mentioned that to Speedy naval bombardments may become an issue once when target is well reconed and more capital ships are involved in the action...

Naval bombardment of Tobruk, at 50,128 - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

Allied aircraft losses
Blenheim IV: 1 destroyed

21 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.
Japanese Ships
DD Ascari
DD Alpino
DD Alfredo Oriani
DD Vincenzo Gioberti, Shell hits 1
DD Turbine
DD Euro
CL Muzzio Attendolo
CL Montecuccoli
BB Conte di Cavour, Shell hits 4

Allied ground losses:
248 casualties reported
Guns lost 10
Vehicles lost 2

Airbase hits 3
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 10

Excellent move. But are you going to have enough fuel to put multiple Italian BB's to sea? (That was the historical problem.)

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to pauk)

Post #: 155

RE: Land Combat - 3/23/2007 10:53:58 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

So in WITP ground battles, quantity is better than quality...

Up to a point yes. It also depends on the orders that the players employ. Disruption is a major key here. Given that the combat "is" abstracted to account for tactical maneuvers by INF/Armor etc (vs. a more Steel Panther's specific type action) getting the desired 2:1 modified combat odds is not a simple matter of comparing device stats, be they tank or squad.

Do the stats matter? yes.....but they are not a guarantee. I did some tests of my own on tanks in the game. Japanese "paper" tanks tend to suffer much more heavily if faced with an enemy tank that far outclasses it....but this can be overcome if the non-Jap player makes a wrong move...such as attacking and failing (0-1) resulting in a high disruption value. If the Japanese unit then counterattacks and gets a 2:1 it will force back the enemy unit causing a % of permanent losses. So it's a "victory" for the Japanese unit even if they lose 30 vehicles in the process vs. 2 on the enemy side (+ a % more vehicles due to the forced retreat....which could simulate everything from abandoned tanks to stuck in a ditch...fuel starved etc)

If the device stats are similar, numbers and strategy will become even more important.

_____________________________

(in reply to AmiralLaurent)

Post #: 156

RE: Land Combat - 3/24/2007 1:58:09 PM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

Hi all,

I've been thinking on this scenario over the past couple of days and have come up with a couple of suggestions/thoughts.

This is a play test so I wll totally open as to what I have here.

I feel the pace of this is way too fast.

Within 10 days Malta is dead and 60% of the available Allied force in NA is shattered and the Axis will be in Tobruk within 2 weeks.

All I have left from Tobruk to Alexandria are 2 x Division and 2 x Bde all of which are between 50-66% ready.

The problems I see are thus:

1. As we all know the stock WITP model is a fairly all or nothing model.

As such land and air battles are generally over very quickly and the loser loses badly. This is not the right model for WITM. As such I feel the air model needs to be tweaked to reflect the combat conditions. I feel Nik can be invaluable here guys. He knows a lot more on this than me but I think we need to lower the available number of aircraft for BOTH sides to prevent uber air battles and prevent the uber smashing of Malta (within 2 days

). With kloiwer numbers of planes operational then more realistic air battles will be seen and the easy smashing of any enemy base will not be possible. Nik - would changing the Durability levels help here?

2. The land model is also not right for NA IMO. This is going to be hard to change really hard/if not impossible. I feel the once more all or nothing model doesn't help here. As my ARM units have retreated they are TOTALLY wrecked and will NEVER recover (their full strength TOE is that of an ARM Bn). As such I will never end up with Shermans/Grants etc in these units ever again. Fremen is it possible to change the full TOAE of both Axis/Allied ARM units to make sure they will always have the chance to receover to full TOE? For example make them in the slots of IJA Tank Divisions and USA Arm Div rather than Tnk Bn slots?

So rather then them having a maximum capability of say 54 x Sherman they can have 108 x Sherman, 54 x Grant. Does that make sense?

Once retreated its a snowball effect where by Axis armour (in this case) can keep on attacking day after day and within 2 months they will be in Alexandria and with the sheer number of Axis units in NA there is nothing I can do about it. Of the top of my noggin he will have:

15th Pz
21st Pz
Ariete
Sarbratha
90th Light

Pauk - do you have Trento/Littorio div out there as well?

I think there will be another 2-4 It. units too.

With the land model at game start it is a matter of who gets the most there first will win. With the starting positions the Axis have a big advatage here since thy can deploy there untis forward via road quickly. The 2 nearest Allied formations - 44th Ind Div and Ind Bde are stuck in the dessert = they have no chance to get where they need to be before the Axis has the initiative.

So regarding the land model. We can't change the mechanics but maybe heavily reducing the starting available numbers of each unit - say maybe 20-30% of ready TOE/ That way they have lower chance of doing much and will need more supply to recover.

3. Supply - I don't know here but I feel Pauk has the chance of moving major amounts of supply to NA from Italy and that in time supply/fuel will NOT be a problem for him in NA. Only Pauk can confirm or deny this? If it is such then I feel industry should be lowered in Italy.

4. Allied upgrades. As fremen has mentioned I feel a change of nationality from British to Aussie etc will help since it will give the Allied player the same chance of upgrading his units as the Axis can. At present all I have are 3 x Spit and 3 x P40 squadrons. The rest are Hurri = dead meet to any decent Italian/Geman fighter.

Just some thoughts guys but at present The Axis will be in Alexandria within 3-4 months and there ain't much I can do about it

< Message edited by Speedy -- 3/24/2007 2:03:13 PM >

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 157

RE: Land Combat - 3/24/2007 4:19:16 PM

Ron Saueracker

Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

I guess one can see why the official War in the Med project based on the WITP engine was shelved permanently. Kudos for trying guys. Looked great.

_____________________________

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Speedysteve)

Post #: 158

RE: Land Combat - 3/24/2007 7:45:03 PM

kokubokan25

Posts: 1252
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Iliaca, Spain
Status: offline

Thanks for your support Ron.

Is the WITP engine free of heavy problems? I can remember many words like "screwed" refered to WITP land combat.
WITM had problems (keep in mind is a mod), but is playable, if you can forget some issues...

Agree with most of your toughts Speedy.
Sneer pointed me days ago about the Allied (and axis) TOE problem. Was a very heavy error by my side.
Mifune and me are now working on this issue and will be ready (i hope), next week. The land units are totally re-writen, changing HQs, TOEs and start positions. With those changes the land units can recover to full TOE.
The A2A model is now standarized to RHS system. However, i'm not sure are the correct. Italian aircraft continue show EXCESIVE level and combative spirit. The Hurrie continue with bad level so all the british fighters will be converted to Commonwealth to allow upgrade to Spits.

The Malta problem: Sorry that but i think this issue is impossible to change. If the axis side want DESTROY Malta, Malta will be destroyed. The axis had so many planes at range and the number of sqn/groups are historical.

_____________________________

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)

Post #: 159

RE: Land Combat - 3/24/2007 8:51:02 PM

Cap Mandrake

Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fremen

Thanks for your support Ron.

Fremen;

You are one forgiving guy.

I think it is a great effort. It my require some deviation for historical positions/strengths for play balance. Perhaps some fortifications for the Allies or improved readiness at the start? Better CO's, etc etc

Perhaps the aircraft attributes could be tweaked a bit but the TO&E's left the same?

Perhaps expand the scale to 1 km and company/Bn level units?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to kokubokan25)

Post #: 160

RE: Land Combat - 3/24/2007 9:18:21 PM

qgaliana

Posts: 311
Joined: 4/27/2005
Status: offline

I need to check a book but IIRC - Malta almost collapsed in 1942 due to starvation. The ability to pummel it and close it down is historical. The British were literally killing themselves running convoys and extra a/c into the island.

Not sure why the Hurri is such easy prey - too slow for the WITP model? Maybe the Italian ftr guns are overrated in the mod?

DAK irl rolled the Brits all the way to Alamein as well. Given the weird way that WITP pushes supplies forward by land you may find the axis tanks running out of gas in the same place. I think if the British player is aggressive with his navy like his historical counterpart, there won't be that much supply in NA for the axis troops.

I think the biggest trick will be getting the supply levels right. By 42 the Italian navy had shot it's load and could barely get the capital ships out of port for lack of fuel. There probably shouldn't be too much supply floating about either, even in Italy.

Anyways, I think the mod shows promise, and it should be a good theatre for it. A 1941 scenario might also be interesting - that's when the navies really went at each other.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 161

RE: Land Combat - 3/24/2007 9:42:37 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Hi all,

I've been thinking on this scenario over the past couple of days and have come up with a couple of suggestions/thoughts.

This is a play test so I wll totally open as to what I have here.

I feel the pace of this is way too fast.

Within 10 days Malta is dead and 60% of the available Allied force in NA is shattered and the Axis will be in Tobruk within 2 weeks.

All I have left from Tobruk to Alexandria are 2 x Division and 2 x Bde all of which are between 50-66% ready.

The problems I see are thus:

1. As we all know the stock WITP model is a fairly all or nothing model.

As such land and air battles are generally over very quickly and the loser loses badly. This is not the right model for WITM. As such I feel the air model needs to be tweaked to reflect the combat conditions. I feel Nik can be invaluable here guys. He knows a lot more on this than me but I think we need to lower the available number of aircraft for BOTH sides to prevent uber air battles and prevent the uber smashing of Malta (within 2 days). With kloiwer numbers of planes operational then more realistic air battles will be seen and the easy smashing of any enemy base will not be possible. Nik - would changing the Durability levels help here?

When i finish with my conversion of the Guadalcanal scenario to the upcoming Nikmod 9.1, I plan to start working with this mod to see how it would work with the NM model. I can see from the AAR and from some quick playing of the mod how the pace can be accelerated. (i.e. many of the issues are the same as in WitP....for example, the slew of 6000 foot low altitude air attacks)

I have an idea on air serviceability.......something I've thought about using for Pacific NM but haven't had the time to test.

_____________________________

(in reply to Speedysteve)

Post #: 162

RE: Land Combat - 3/24/2007 10:57:57 PM

sprior

Posts: 8596
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Portsmouth, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

quote:

ORIGINAL: fremen

Thanks for your support Ron.

Fremen;

You are one forgiving guy.

I think it is a great effort. It my require some deviation for historical positions/strengths for play balance. Perhaps some fortifications for the Allies or improved readiness at the start? Better CO's, etc etc

Perhaps the aircraft attributes could be tweaked a bit but the TO&E's left the same?

Perhaps expand the scale to 1 km and company/Bn level units?

Is that a Combined Arms teaser?

_____________________________

"Grown ups are what's left when skool is finished."
"History started badly and hav been geting steadily worse."
- Nigel Molesworth.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 163

RE: Land Combat - 3/25/2007 5:30:25 AM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

Hey Fremen,

I've taken advantage of an all-day Sci-Fi Channel "bad movie" marathon (Can't wait for Attack of the Gargoyles) and have mostly finished a NM conversion of your mod, including some fixes to OOB boo boos and the creation of GE and ITA land devices (So no more IJA infantry squads etc). I won't post it if you don't want me to since it's based off your mod but assuming it works, would you mind if i gave it anyone who wanted to help playtest it?

_____________________________

(in reply to kokubokan25)

Post #: 164

RE: Land Combat - 3/25/2007 11:10:00 AM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

Nice one mate.

Fremen - wouldn't worry about the fatalistic views of Ron. I feel this mod is a cracking effort and still has life in it.

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 165

RE: Land Combat - 3/25/2007 11:54:55 AM

kokubokan25

Posts: 1252
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Iliaca, Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

Hey Fremen,

I've taken advantage of an all-day Sci-Fi Channel "bad movie" marathon (Can't wait for Attack of the Gargoyles) and have mostly finished a NM conversion of your mod, including some fixes to OOB boo boos and the creation of GE and ITA land devices (So no more IJA infantry squads etc). I won't post it if you don't want me to since it's based off your mod but assuming it works, would you mind if i gave it anyone who wanted to help playtest it?

As i said before when released the mod, everybody is free to modify and upgrade it. Actually mifune had (almost ready) the 1.2 upgrade and this patch contain the new and correct DEVICES, land, aerial and naval.

_____________________________

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 166

RE: Land Combat - 3/25/2007 12:42:41 PM

pauk

Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline

Hi to all...i will add my comments latter - still tired of yesterdays trip to Austria and Croatia - Macedonia soccer match....

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 01/09/42

Day Air attack on Malta , at 35,120

Japanese aircraft
SM 79 x 25
CR-25 x 1
Bf-109F-4 R2 Recon x 1

Japanese aircraft losses
SM 79 : 1 damaged

Runway hits 5
at 23000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Malta , at 35,120

Japanese aircraft
SM 79 T x 12
Ju-88A-4 x 45
Hs-126 B-2 x 4

Japanese aircraft losses
SM 79 T: 1 damaged
Ju-88A-4: 2 damaged

Allied ground losses:
60 casualties reported
Guns lost 3

Airbase hits 3
Runway hits 19

at 21000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Malta , at 35,120

Japanese aircraft
SM 84 x 5
IMAM Ro-37 x 1

Japanese aircraft losses
SM 84: 5 damaged

Runway hits 5

6000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Malta , at 35,120

Japanese aircraft
SM 84 x 33

Japanese aircraft losses
SM 84: 1 damaged

Allied ground losses:
20 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Runway hits 1

at 25900 feet

He cant stop us and he knows that....

Day Air attack on 132th Ariete Tank Division, at 47,127

Allied aircraft
Blenheim IV x 3
Wellington III x 3

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
8 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

at 8000 feet
------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 9th Indian Brigade, at 47,129

Japanese aircraft
Bf-109F-4 Trop x 10
Ju-87 D (Ger) x 13

No Japanese losses

Allied ground losses:
26 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Aircraft Attacking:
13 x Ju-87 D (Ger) bombing at 2000 feet
--------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Malta at 35,120

Japanese aircraft
Bf-109F-4 x 31

No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
PT MTB-62
PT MTB-61
PT MTB-63
PT MTB-64
PT MTB-66, Shell hits 4

Ariete sings perfectly - enemy didn't suffer other casaulties than men/vechiles lost in retreat!

Ground combat at 47,127

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 5582 troops, 54 guns, 195 vehicles, Assault Value = 165

Defending force 7135 troops, 144 guns, 298 vehicles, Assault Value = 278

Japanese max assault: 292 - adjusted assault: 204

Allied max defense: 192 - adjusted defense: 34

Japanese assault odds: 6 to 1

Japanese ground losses:
312 casualties reported
Vehicles lost 5

Defeated Allied Units Retreating!

Another costly victory by our panzers!

Ground combat at Msus

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 14907 troops, 182 guns, 559 vehicles, Assault Value = 499

Defending force 6741 troops, 101 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 183

Japanese max assault: 950 - adjusted assault: 126

Allied max defense: 109 - adjusted defense: 18

Japanese assault odds: 7 to 1

Japanese ground losses:
469 casualties reported
Guns lost 8
Vehicles lost 6

Allied ground losses:
124 casualties reported
Guns lost 3

Defeated Allied Units Retreating!

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to kokubokan25)

Post #: 167

RE: Land Combat - 3/25/2007 12:49:42 PM

pauk

Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline

Speedy, these are the units i currently have in North Africa and reinforcements:

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to pauk)

Post #: 168

RE: Land Combat - 3/25/2007 1:02:50 PM

pauk

Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline

ok, here are the status of my assault units in North Africa.... some of them are in the good shape but Italian inf units are in trouble...

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to pauk)

Post #: 169

RE: Land Combat - 3/25/2007 4:21:04 PM

AmiralLaurent

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline

IMOO both sides should at start have low supplies and be under TOE, with Axis units being in a worst shape than Allied.

Benghazi, Darce and Msus should be in Allied hands, but more or less wrecked.

There should be an Axis base, or dot, in Halfaya/Sullum/Bardia between Tobruk and Sidi Barrani that should held for some weeks and effectifely disrupt Allied supply moves.

Most Axis units should be prepared for El Aleigha, where there should be forts ready... while Allied units should be prepared for various targets, but with a far lower preparation state.

My last advice for Fremen and co would be to work on the mod step by step. I think the first mod should cover the period from 1st January 1942 to 8 November 1942. Once it will be OK and playable, you/we may add a second part covering the period to 8 September 1943. I think that the switchover of Italy is impossible to simulate in WITP, so the scenario should stop when it happens.

(in reply to pauk)

Post #: 170

RE: Land Combat - 3/25/2007 10:06:00 PM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

Hi all,

Just a further update for you all.

Pauk and I are staging a Naval battle 120 miles south of Crete. Pauk is sending Doria and Vittorio Veneto, 2 x CA, 1 x CL + 7 x DD.

I am sending an equivalent force under Palliser - Queen Elizabeth class x 2, 3 x CL + 7 x DD.

My force may not make it until 2 days time.

Here's my entire Infrantry/Armour arsenal. In total I have:

2 x British ARM Div (at 50% at game start)
3 x Bde (at 50-75% at game start)
3 x Div (50-85% at game start).

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to AmiralLaurent)

Post #: 171

RE: Land Combat - 3/25/2007 10:11:33 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Another thing: Fremen should change the "IJA", "IJN", etc. in the squad titles. They're just text blocks, and they take away from the immersion...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Speedysteve)

Post #: 172

RE: Land Combat - 3/26/2007 1:10:23 AM

Andy Mac

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline

Those allied forces feel 'light' for early 42

5th Indian Div (Cyprs Garrison)
50th Northumbrian Div (Syria)
2nd NZ Div (Delta)
9th Aus Div (Delta)
70th Div (Tobruk Garrison)
10th Armoured Div (Palestine)
Polish Carpathian Bde (Tobruk)
22nd Guards Bde (Delta)

Andy

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 173

RE: Land Combat - 3/26/2007 7:20:41 AM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

I've sent a beta to you Speedy. Let me know if you don't receive it.

_____________________________

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 174

RE: Land Combat - 3/26/2007 9:17:13 AM

kokubokan25

Posts: 1252
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Iliaca, Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Another thing: Fremen should change the "IJA", "IJN", etc. in the squad titles. They're just text blocks, and they take away from the immersion...

The Device file is now correct (thanks to mifune), no more IJA squads and armament.
I hope the 1.2 patch will be this week.

_____________________________

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 175

RE: Blitzkrieg...well...damn! - 3/26/2007 9:52:42 PM

Feinder

Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline

Very cool scenario guys. Thanks for the play-test.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

(in reply to pauk)

Post #: 176

RE: Blitzkrieg...well...damn! - 3/26/2007 9:56:31 PM

Feinder

Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline

Oh, and without seeing the entire OB, how many Divs do you have available? Might it be a good idea to divide up the units into their respective Bde/Rgt/Btn (or whavever would be appropriate maneuver elements)?

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

(in reply to Feinder)

Post #: 177

RE: Land Combat - 3/26/2007 10:43:32 PM

Capt. Harlock

Posts: 5358
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

I need to check a book but IIRC - Malta almost collapsed in 1942 due to starvation. The ability to pummel it and close it down is historical. The British were literally killing themselves running convoys and extra a/c into the island.

Pummel it, yes, but close it down? That, I wonder about. True, the Brits suffered serious losses with their convoys, but the Italians lost many ships as well trying to re-supply the Axis forces in North Africa. Malta actually comprises more than one island, and IIRC there was more than one airfield. Perhaps that's what is needed to make the Axis job tougher.

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to qgaliana)

Post #: 178

RE: Land Combat - 3/26/2007 11:47:41 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

quote:

I need to check a book but IIRC - Malta almost collapsed in 1942 due to starvation. The ability to pummel it and close it down is historical. The British were literally killing themselves running convoys and extra a/c into the island.

Pummel it, yes, but close it down? That, I wonder about. True, the Brits suffered serious losses with their convoys, but the Italians lost many ships as well trying to re-supply the Axis forces in North Africa. Malta actually comprises more than one island, and IIRC there was more than one airfield. Perhaps that's what is needed to make the Axis job tougher.

From what i've read, Malta was open to invasion more than once, and the invasion probably would have succeeded.

What the game means by "closing down an airfield" probably means putting enough holes in it so that planes couldn't take off on offensive missions. Looking at some of the pics, this likely would have happened more than once during the air seige, although i am not sure it ever happened to ALL the airfields at once. Maybe i need to find those books again and re-read them...

There WERE more than (one air fields), but that is true about almost any hex in WITP as well (i.e. Rabaul, Pt. Moresby, Oahu).

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)

Post #: 179

RE: Land Combat - 3/27/2007 12:04:33 AM

anarchyintheuk

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline

There were at least three airfields on Malta (Luqa, Halfar and one or two dirt strips). Don't think the Axis ever shut down one airfield, much less all of them.

Now, shooting all the airfield's aircraft down is another matter.

Edited for no apparent reason.

< Message edited by anarchyintheuk -- 3/27/2007 12:05:13 AM >

(in reply to rtrapasso)

Post #: 180

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Land Combat