AE Surface 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

AE Surface Combat?

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

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

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

AE Surface Combat? - 5/23/2009 11:11:01 PM

pad152

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline

Way too many times in WTIP only one side fires in surface combat with no return fire, so what changes will we see in AE surface combat?

Post #: 1

RE: AE Surface Combat? - 5/24/2009 12:11:31 AM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152

Way too many times in WTIP only one side fires in surface combat with no return fire, so what changes will we see in AE surface combat?

The other side is supposed to shoot back?

_____________________________

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 2

RE: AE Surface Combat? - 5/25/2009 2:28:33 PM

John Lansford

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline

As long as the combat routine no longer does the "one ship gets 120 hits on a target and no one else fires" result I'll be satisfied. While I don't mind sinking Nagato with that many 6" shells from USS Phoenix, I think it's a bit out of the realm of possibility...

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 3

RE: AE Surface Combat? - 5/25/2009 2:56:58 PM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

I haven't seen that in AE. With that said, given the variability in WITP in general I suppose anything is possible, but I haven't seen that yet.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to John Lansford)

Post #: 4

RE: AE Surface Combat? - 5/25/2009 3:41:54 PM

pad152

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline

My point is, any ship that is in range and being fired at, should shot back, this is not always the case with WITP.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 5

RE: AE Surface Combat? - 5/25/2009 3:47:31 PM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

I would slightly amend that statement to say "as long as it can also see the enemy". There were some night battles I can think of that were quite confused, where ships took fire and still weren't sure where it was coming from, as least as far as being able to effectively direct fire back.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 6

RE: AE Surface Combat? - 5/25/2009 4:24:42 PM

pad152

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline

The ships did fire back, only at the wrong target, friendly fire is not simulated in WTIP, are you saying it's now simulated in AE?

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 7

RE: AE Surface Combat? - 5/25/2009 4:32:31 PM

Wirraway_Ace

Posts: 1400
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Austin / Brisbane
Status: offline

Not to steal Knavey's thunder, but it would go something like this: "It is November 42, and it seems like the entire IJN used one of my brand new Dakota class BBs for target practice in a night action and she barely even fired back! The BB had both SG and SC radar operational when she went into the night action. This never could have happened!"

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 8

RE: AE Surface Combat? - 5/27/2009 2:34:35 PM

W T Door

Posts: 23
Joined: 1/15/2009
Status: offline

In a similar vein, is the coast artillery any better than it was in stock? I've toured CA sites in various parts of the world (what? like the rest of you don't have any strange hobbies....) and one of the things that struck me was how the spotting stations and fire control rooms seemed to have everythihng pretty well dialed in, using things like silhouettes of the area under observation and photographs to aid the spotters. I was never sure if the dismal showing of CA was a play balance thing or just a design miscalculation. I don't expect them to be invincible, but you'd think they would score more hits, particularly the massed long range weapons around Manila (plus I find it a little unlikely that hits with 12" rifles would have so little effect).

I watched a show on Singapore last night and it got me to thinking about this (also the show made me wonder about Yamashita's rate of advance in stock, he seems to cover the distance that took at least six weeks in about 3 days, even with bicycles this seems a bit much).

(in reply to Wirraway_Ace)

Post #: 9

RE: AE Surface Combat? - 5/27/2009 2:54:04 PM

vettim89

Posts: 3615
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline

Well as far as night combat goes, once a ship is hit and on fire, it tended to draw all the other fire. Likewise in situations where radar fire control was being used, in general the biggest blip got the bulk of the fire. There were several engagements in the Solomons in 1943 where when the Japanese were under fire before they spotted the Allied ships they attempted to disengage. In the battle off Vila Standmore, I don't think the IJN fired a shot. In the Battle of Vella Gulf, not a single USN ship was hit.

It is widely accepted now that Admiral Scott was killed by a salvo from CA San Francisco in the First Naval Battle of Guadalcanal

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to W T Door)

Post #: 10

RE: AE Surface Combat? - 5/27/2009 3:04:00 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

I don't mind the WITP routines with one exception: I would like to see PTs die more than one at a time. Other than that, I'm good!

_____________________________

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 11

RE: AE Surface Combat? - 5/27/2009 3:17:43 PM

RevRick

Posts: 2617
Joined: 9/16/2000
From: Thomasville, GA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

Not to steal Knavey's thunder, but it would go something like this: "It is November 42, and it seems like the entire IJN used one of my brand new Dakota class BBs for target practice in a night action and she barely even fired back! The BB had both SG and SC radar operational when she went into the night action. This never could have happened!"

This is a primary example of the "Kaptain Klutz Rule" in operation, according to my reading! If the captain (Gatch) hadn't ordered the circuit breakers wired closed, the SG and SC may have returned to operational status during the shooting. But, then again, it could be that it was his plan to get his ship back to the states, or at least, Pearl, for some more liberty call!

_____________________________

"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.� ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer

(in reply to Wirraway_Ace)

Post #: 12

RE: AE Surface Combat? - 5/27/2009 3:24:18 PM

Nikademus

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

A ship thats fired on does not always have a target to fire back on.

_____________________________

(in reply to RevRick)

Post #: 13

RE: AE Surface Combat? - 5/27/2009 5:15:54 PM

aciddrinker

Posts: 135
Joined: 2/22/2008
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152

My point is, any ship that is in range and being fired at, should shot back, this is not always the case with WITP.

In battle near Savo, most allied crussier's was sunk before they oriented what happaens. Some of them not opened fire becouse commanders was thinking that they are under friendly fire ... This is just one example from many ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Savo_Island

< Message edited by aciddrinker -- 5/27/2009 5:16:56 PM >

_____________________________

Kill Board

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 14