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: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result

 
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 >> RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/19/2009 7:43:19 PM   
EUBanana


Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

The RN got 50% hits at 600-1000 yds in simulated torpedo attacks by destroyers at night in peacetime.


I seem to remember some tests Jellicoe did before WW1 broke out that suggested torpedoes were effective at far greater ranges than that, if the target did not maneuver to avoid anyway.

_____________________________


(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 241
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/19/2009 7:50:40 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline 		The 40k range was irrelevant for combat purposes. I don't know of a single hit above 15k or so except maybe the Kortenauer (sp?) and the IJN transports at Java Sea.

(in reply to CEDeaton)
Post #: 242
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/19/2009 8:02:34 PM   
Dixie


Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana


quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

The RN got 50% hits at 600-1000 yds in simulated torpedo attacks by destroyers at night in peacetime.


I seem to remember some tests Jellicoe did before WW1 broke out that suggested torpedoes were effective at far greater ranges than that, if the target did not maneuver to avoid anyway.


That's a fantastic conclusion

_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to EUBanana)
Post #: 243
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/19/2009 8:08:11 PM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dixie


quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana


quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

The RN got 50% hits at 600-1000 yds in simulated torpedo attacks by destroyers at night in peacetime.


I seem to remember some tests Jellicoe did before WW1 broke out that suggested torpedoes were effective at far greater ranges than that, if the target did not maneuver to avoid anyway.


That's a fantastic conclusion


Were public funds used in this study

(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 244
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/19/2009 11:53:50 PM   
EUBanana


Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dixie
That's a fantastic conclusion


Pff, well, I can't remember the exact conclusions. At what range and how many hits. I remember there were numbers but those are lost in the mists of time. IIRC it was mentioned in 'Jutland' by Captain Donald McIntyre (top book btw).

Too many for Jellicoe's taste is the point! He was quite a scientific, technical sort of admiral, and the torpedo was always foremost in his mind. Hence he did what he did at Jutland, a dry technician weighing the odds, rather than a 'damn the torpedoes' type like Beatty might have been.

_____________________________


(in reply to Dixie)
Post #: 245
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/20/2009 12:31:52 AM   
Djordje

 

Posts: 537
Joined: 9/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CraigDeaton

Does it seem to anyone besides me that perhaps the torpedo part of surface combat was nerfed a bit too much?



I agree with you... I've had about dozen of surface combats so far, and I haven't seen a single Long Lance hit on a warship.
Those destroyers seems to be on steroids, it took me full KB (6 CVs) and 3 days of strikes to kill 3 allied destroyers... KB spent all torpedoes it had (I know those were not Long Lance but still torpedo can't hit DD in AE atm, at least for me)

(in reply to CEDeaton)
Post #: 246
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/20/2009 2:32:43 AM   
Dili

 

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

The 40k range was irrelevant for combat purposes. I don't know of a single hit above 15k or so except maybe the Kortenauer (sp?) and the IJN transports at Java Sea.


Yes and even if the enemy isn't aware and isn't zig-zagging there alaways small changes in speed and direction. 30km(navweaps max range) is around 30 min interception time at 37kt. In 30min many things can happen.

Btw anyone has information at what max distance IJN fired their torpedos. I suspect no more than 10km. ?

(in reply to Djordje)
Post #: 247
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/20/2009 5:26:03 PM   
EUBanana


Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline 		Just doled out another one sided surface combat asskicking to the Japs at night, thanks to radar in 1942.  The latest in a long line.

As an AFB, for once I have to agree with the JFBs.  Something Needs to be Done.


_____________________________


(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 248
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/20/2009 5:38:33 PM   
Nikademus


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



_____________________________


(in reply to EUBanana)
Post #: 249
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/20/2009 6:33:39 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline 		I had my first LongLance torpedo hit in about 6 weeks of gametime, from a fleet destroyer escorting a small TF south of Kendari.  HMS Mauritius took one and has about 35 flotation damage now, slowly limping south towards Darwin.  My sunk ship list only has a small handful of ships sunk from LL hits, mostly merchant ships caught by roving raider TF's.  The list of IJN ships sunk from USN or RN torpedoes, OTOH, is very long, including several cruisers and Kongo, brought down by a MTB's torpedo...

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 250
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/22/2009 10:15:09 PM   
CV Zuikaku

 

Posts: 442
Joined: 12/18/2008
From: Legrad, Croatia
Status: offline 		Here is my most successfull surface combat so far. As an IJN, I'm out of ships. All have ben slaugtered by super accurate allied small naval ship gunfire. Until some tuning this game is not playable for japanese player. And I wonder if it is for Allied players, since they'll slaugter IJN By March '42 or earlier...


Night Time Surface Combat, near Tarakan at 67,91, Range 1,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CL Naka, Shell hits 7
DD Natsugumo, Shell hits 9, heavy fires
DD Minegumo, Shell hits 2
DD Asagumo, Shell hits 12, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Murasame, Shell hits 5, on fire, heavy damage
DD Harusame
DD Yudachi, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
DD Samidare

Allied Ships
DD Van Nes, Shell hits 1
DD Evertsen, Shell hits 11, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk



Reduced sighting due to 53% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Clear Conditions and 53% moonlight: 11,000 yards
Range closes to 1,000 yards...
DD Evertsen engages CL Naka at 1,000 yards
CL Naka engages DD Van Nes at 1,000 yards
DD Evertsen engages DD Murasame at 1,000 yards
DD Evertsen engages DD Asagumo at 1,000 yards
DD Minegumo engages DD Evertsen at 1,000 yards
DD Natsugumo engages DD Evertsen at 1,000 yards
Range increases to 2,000 yards
DD Evertsen engages CL Naka at 2,000 yards
DD Van Nes engages DD Asagumo at 2,000 yards
DD Yudachi sunk by DD Van Nes at 2,000 yards
DD Evertsen engages DD Harusame at 2,000 yards
DD Murasame engages DD Evertsen at 2,000 yards
Range increases to 4,000 yards
DD Asagumo sunk by DD Evertsen at 4,000 yards
DD Van Nes engages DD Murasame at 4,000 yards
DD Natsugumo engages DD Evertsen at 4,000 yards
CL Naka engages DD Evertsen at 4,000 yards
DD Van Nes engages DD Natsugumo at 4,000 yards
DD Harusame engages DD Van Nes at 4,000 yards
DD Evertsen engages DD Minegumo at 4,000 yards
DD Natsugumo engages DD Van Nes at 4,000 yards
Range increases to 6,000 yards
CL Naka engages DD Evertsen at 6,000 yards
DD Samidare engages DD Evertsen at 6,000 yards
DD Evertsen sunk by DD Murasame at 6,000 yards
de Vries, W.M. orders Allied TF to disengage
Range increases to 9,000 yards
DD Van Nes engages DD Minegumo at 9,000 yards
DD Murasame engages DD Van Nes at 9,000 yards
Task forces break off...

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 251
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/22/2009 10:41:17 PM   
EUBanana


Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline 		Yeah, in my Guadalcanal scenario the Japs have lost or drawn every single surface engagement so far.  Mostly more or less evenly matched in forces I think. 

_____________________________


(in reply to CV Zuikaku)
Post #: 252
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/22/2009 11:13:41 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		In above engagement 37 shell hits vs 12 shell hits. But since it is night combat it more possible than some really awkard/impossible day results. How the engagement stated at 1000yds w/ visibility of 11kyd was it in bad weather?

(in reply to EUBanana)
Post #: 253
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/22/2009 11:57:24 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline 		I jumped a supply TF at Canton with a force of two CL's, a CA and 6 DD's.  I was surprised to find it escorted by CA Nachi and two DD's, plus a TB, for only 2 largish transports.  In a daytime engagement my CL/DD force closed in from 21,000 yards, not getting hit even once, down to 4000 yds, sank Nachi and the escorting DD's and left the two largish transports burning fiercely.

My damage?  A minor shell hit on one of the DD's and a torpedo hit on my CA that didn't sink it. 

I have to say that I believe the surface warfare combat routines are far, FAR too liberal when it comes to hitting small ships, accuracy of rapid firing weapons, and not enough weight given to nighttime experience and overall crew experience.

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 254
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/22/2009 11:59:13 PM   
Barb


Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline 		I have conducted some tests. You can see results in AAR section (especially posts number 4, 5 and 6) : http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2215485
Use Mission speed for your TFs and you will not see Ridiculous Surface Combat Results again...


_____________________________


(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 255
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 12:11:08 AM   
Kull


Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Barb

I have conducted some tests. You can see results in AAR section (especially posts number 4, 5 and 6) : http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2215485
Use Mission speed for your TFs and you will not see Ridiculous Surface Combat Results again...


I think your results are interesting, but I've never once sent SCTFs into harm's way on "Cruise" speed, and have never seen the AI do it either.

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 256
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 12:45:35 AM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline 		Why should you reduce your ships' speed going into combat?  That wouldn't make any sense at all; every surface battle always had ships steaming at full speed to make themselves harder to hit.  The problem is the combat routines are taking this to an extreme.

(in reply to Kull)
Post #: 257
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 12:54:09 AM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Why should you reduce your ships' speed going into combat?  That wouldn't make any sense at all; every surface battle always had ships steaming at full speed to make themselves harder to hit.  The problem is the combat routines are taking this to an extreme.



To increase the accuracy of your gunfire. High speeds create vibration, increase ship motion, and complicate firing solutions...

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 258
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 2:16:54 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		In my game its Dec 42 and the IJN is a shadow of its strength. They have no fleet carriers or CVL's. That includes the 2 they used accelerated production to bring out. They love parking them at Oosthaven and my cruisers sail out from Java and sink them. I can't wait for the patch to give the AI a better chance.

As far as the speed of the TF's I never change it unless the ships are damaged and heading to a port for repair. I have seen what I expect when I catch their amphib groups or they catch mine, but the combat between warships especially BB's is really off.

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 259
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 2:20:00 AM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
So apparently there is some difference now between Mission Speed and Cruise Speed in Surface Combat TFs now?


_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 260
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 2:31:24 AM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline 		No warship goes into combat at "cruise speed"; that's too slow and would make them a sitting duck, especially for torpedoes.   Fast, wildly maneuvering ships might cause their gunfire to be less accurate, but it also makes it less likely of them being hit as well.  Every incident I've read of where a ship loses speed in a surface gunfight inevitably ends up getting hit a lot more after losing that speed.  If the routine is screwing up the hit results because of the AI using cruise speed, that is a bug that definitely needs to be fixed.

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 261
RE: Battle Decision - 8/23/2009 4:58:54 AM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		I have not seen enough surface fights to really judge but had an interesting fight when a Japanese raider TF ran into an Allied TF of four DDs.

The IJN had two CA, one CL and two DDs vs the four Allied DDs. It was a daylight fight, overcast, 30,000 yd visb.,
The Japanese started off right and crossed the T but missed all shots and things went very wrong after that. The four American DDs dealt out a royal "pimp slapping" over numerous rounds-perhaps 15 or so. Range varied between 20,000 yds and 8,000 yds but most rounds took place in the 13,000 to 17,000 range. Oddest thing was that the CAs rarely fired and had only one 8 inch hit on an American DD for the whole battle. Basically the Japanese spent the whole battle missing with every shot. They fired a lot of torpedoes at very long range but no hits. In the end one American DD was mildly damaged 30 sys, 30 float, and 14 engine with the Japanese force shot up pretty bad. One Japanese DD was sunk and the two CAs suffered heavy superstructure damage.

Thing is I would think that a daylight engagement at these ranges would have been perfect for the IJN CAs main guns. It was the right range for 8 inchers and conditions were good. Yet the guns fired only a few times and hit nothing. The IJN crossed the T so you would expect all of their ships to fire I wish I had a save as I would have replayed that battle a few times. I have to get in the habit of saving more.

I know they are working on it so won't bitch.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 262
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 8:34:46 AM   
Bluebook

 

Posts: 143
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline 		Doesnt seem broken to me... these two engagements are from my AAR.
Its a PBEM by the way, not a game vs the AI.


quote:



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kota Bharu at 51,75, Range 30,000 Yards

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
BB Kongo
BB Haruna, Shell hits 1
CA Takao, Shell hits 1
CA Atago
CL Jintsu
DD Asashio, Shell hits 1
DD Oshio
DD Michishio, Shell hits 2
DD Arashio
DD Akatsuki
DD Hibiki

Allied Ships
BB Prince of Wales, Shell hits 15, on fire
BC Repulse, Shell hits 32, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
DD Vampire, Shell hits 1
DD Tenedos
DD Electra
DD Express



Reduced sighting due to 67% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Overcast Conditions and 67% moonlight: 8,000 yards
CONTACT: Allies radar detects Japanese task force at 30,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BC Repulse at 30,000 yards
BC Repulse engages BB Kongo at 30,000 yards
BB Haruna engages DD Express at 30,000 yards
BB Haruna engages DD Electra at 30,000 yards
Range closes to 24,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BC Repulse at 24,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BC Repulse at 24,000 yards
BC Repulse engages CA Atago at 24,000 yards
BB Haruna engages DD Electra at 24,000 yards
BB Haruna engages DD Vampire at 24,000 yards
Range closes to 22,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BB Prince of Wales at 22,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BC Repulse at 22,000 yards
BC Repulse engages CA Takao at 22,000 yards
Range closes to 20,000 yards
BC Repulse engages BB Haruna at 20,000 yards
BC Repulse engages BB Haruna at 20,000 yards
DD Hibiki engages DD Express at 20,000 yards
DD Hibiki engages DD Electra at 20,000 yards
DD Hibiki engages DD Vampire at 20,000 yards
DD Oshio engages DD Electra at 20,000 yards
BC Repulse engages DD Asashio at 20,000 yards
Range closes to 17,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages BB Haruna at 17,000 yards
BC Repulse engages BB Kongo at 17,000 yards
DD Oshio engages DD Express at 17,000 yards
DD Electra engages DD Oshio at 17,000 yards
CL Jintsu engages BC Repulse at 17,000 yards
DD Hibiki engages DD Express at 17,000 yards
DD Arashio engages DD Electra at 17,000 yards
DD Michishio engages DD Express at 17,000 yards
DD Express engages DD Asashio at 17,000 yards
Range closes to 15,000 yards
BC Repulse engages BB Haruna at 15,000 yards
BB Kongo engages BC Repulse at 15,000 yards
CA Atago engages DD Express at 15,000 yards
CA Takao engages DD Electra at 15,000 yards
BC Repulse engages CL Jintsu at 15,000 yards
DD Hibiki engages DD Vampire at 15,000 yards
DD Arashio engages DD Express at 15,000 yards
DD Vampire engages DD Oshio at 15,000 yards
DD Electra engages DD Asashio at 15,000 yards
Range closes to 13,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BB Prince of Wales at 13,000 yards
BC Repulse engages BB Kongo at 13,000 yards
CA Atago engages BC Repulse at 13,000 yards
BC Repulse engages CA Takao at 13,000 yards
CL Jintsu engages BC Repulse at 13,000 yards
DD Arashio engages DD Vampire at 13,000 yards
DD Arashio engages DD Tenedos at 13,000 yards
DD Vampire engages DD Asashio at 13,000 yards
Range closes to 10,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BB Prince of Wales at 10,000 yards
BB Kongo engages BC Repulse at 10,000 yards
CA Atago engages BC Repulse at 10,000 yards
CA Takao engages BC Repulse at 10,000 yards
DD Tenedos engages DD Oshio at 10,000 yards
DD Hibiki engages DD Express at 10,000 yards
DD Arashio engages DD Electra at 10,000 yards
DD Asashio engages DD Electra at 10,000 yards
Range closes to 7,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BC Repulse at 7,000 yards
BB Kongo engages BC Repulse at 7,000 yards
CA Atago engages DD Express at 7,000 yards
BC Repulse engages CA Takao at 7,000 yards
DD Akatsuki engages DD Tenedos at 7,000 yards
DD Hibiki engages DD Vampire at 7,000 yards
DD Akatsuki engages DD Express at 7,000 yards
DD Tenedos engages DD Michishio at 7,000 yards
DD Asashio engages DD Electra at 7,000 yards
Range increases to 11,000 yards
BC Repulse engages BB Haruna at 11,000 yards
BB Kongo engages BC Repulse at 11,000 yards
CA Atago engages BC Repulse at 11,000 yards
CA Takao engages BC Repulse at 11,000 yards
BC Repulse engages CL Jintsu at 11,000 yards
DD Vampire engages DD Akatsuki at 11,000 yards
DD Akatsuki engages DD Vampire at 11,000 yards
DD Vampire engages DD Michishio at 11,000 yards
DD Oshio engages DD Tenedos at 11,000 yards
Range increases to 13,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages BB Haruna at 13,000 yards
BC Repulse engages BB Kongo at 13,000 yards
BC Repulse engages CA Atago at 13,000 yards
CA Takao engages BC Repulse at 13,000 yards
DD Tenedos engages DD Oshio at 13,000 yards
DD Vampire engages DD Hibiki at 13,000 yards
DD Express engages DD Akatsuki at 13,000 yards
DD Arashio engages DD Express at 13,000 yards
DD Oshio engages DD Electra at 13,000 yards
Range closes to 12,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BB Prince of Wales at 12,000 yards
BC Repulse engages BB Haruna at 12,000 yards
DD Express engages DD Akatsuki at 12,000 yards
BC Repulse engages CA Takao at 12,000 yards
CL Jintsu engages BC Repulse at 12,000 yards
DD Vampire engages DD Asashio at 12,000 yards
DD Michishio engages DD Vampire at 12,000 yards
DD Express engages DD Asashio at 12,000 yards
Range closes to 9,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BB Prince of Wales at 9,000 yards
BC Repulse engages BB Haruna at 9,000 yards
DD Arashio engages DD Express at 9,000 yards
DD Arashio engages DD Electra at 9,000 yards
CL Jintsu engages DD Tenedos at 9,000 yards
DD Hibiki engages DD Vampire at 9,000 yards
DD Oshio engages DD Tenedos at 9,000 yards
Range increases to 10,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BB Prince of Wales at 10,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BC Repulse at 10,000 yards
DD Arashio engages DD Express at 10,000 yards
DD Akatsuki engages DD Electra at 10,000 yards
DD Michishio engages DD Tenedos at 10,000 yards
DD Oshio engages DD Vampire at 10,000 yards
DD Vampire engages DD Michishio at 10,000 yards
Range closes to 9,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages BB Haruna at 9,000 yards
DD Arashio engages DD Express at 9,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages CA Atago at 9,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages CA Takao at 9,000 yards
CL Jintsu engages DD Vampire at 9,000 yards
DD Hibiki engages DD Tenedos at 9,000 yards
DD Michishio engages DD Vampire at 9,000 yards
DD Oshio engages DD Vampire at 9,000 yards
DD Express engages DD Asashio at 9,000 yards
Range increases to 11,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BB Prince of Wales at 11,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages BB Kongo at 11,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages CA Atago at 11,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages CL Jintsu at 11,000 yards
DD Oshio engages DD Express at 11,000 yards
DD Asashio engages DD Express at 11,000 yards
Range increases to 14,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BB Prince of Wales at 14,000 yards
BB Kongo engages BB Prince of Wales at 14,000 yards
CA Atago engages BB Prince of Wales at 14,000 yards
CA Takao engages DD Tenedos at 14,000 yards
DD Vampire engages DD Arashio at 14,000 yards
DD Express engages DD Arashio at 14,000 yards
DD Michishio engages DD Electra at 14,000 yards
DD Tenedos engages DD Oshio at 14,000 yards
DD Electra engages DD Asashio at 14,000 yards
Range increases to 19,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BB Prince of Wales at 19,000 yards
DD Express engages DD Oshio at 19,000 yards
CA Atago engages BB Prince of Wales at 19,000 yards
DD Akatsuki engages DD Tenedos at 19,000 yards
DD Arashio engages DD Tenedos at 19,000 yards
DD Michishio engages DD Vampire at 19,000 yards
Range increases to 23,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages BB Haruna at 23,000 yards
BB Kongo engages DD Express at 23,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages CA Atago at 23,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages CL Jintsu at 23,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages DD Asashio at 23,000 yards
Range increases to 27,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages BB Haruna at 27,000 yards
BB Kongo engages DD Express at 27,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages CL Jintsu at 27,000 yards
BB Prince of Wales engages DD Oshio at 27,000 yards
Task forces break off...

quote:



AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Dec 10, 41

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Singkawang at 56,88, Range 5,000 Yards

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
CA Mogami, Shell hits 2, on fire
CA Mikuma
CA Suzuya
CA Kumano
DD Maikaze, Shell hits 3, on fire
DD Nowaki, Shell hits 1
DD Arashi
DD Hagikaze

Allied Ships
CL Java
CL De Ruyter, Shell hits 7, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
CL Tromp, Shell hits 6, on fire, heavy damage
DD Banckert
DD Van Nes, Shell hits 3, on fire
DD Witte de With
DD Evertsen
DD Kortenaer, Shell hits 2, on fire
DD Piet Hein
DD Van Ghent



Reduced sighting due to 57% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Clear Conditions and 57% moonlight: 12,000 yards
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 5,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 5,000 yards
CL Tromp engages CA Mogami at 5,000 yards
CA Mogami engages CL De Ruyter at 5,000 yards
CA Mikuma engages CL Tromp at 5,000 yards
CA Mogami engages CL De Ruyter at 5,000 yards
CA Mogami engages DD Piet Hein at 5,000 yards
DD Nowaki engages DD Kortenaer at 5,000 yards
DD Maikaze engages DD Piet Hein at 5,000 yards
DD Maikaze engages DD Van Nes at 5,000 yards
DD Banckert engages DD Maikaze at 5,000 yards
Range closes to 2,000 yards
CA Kumano engages CL Tromp at 2,000 yards
CA Kumano engages CL De Ruyter at 2,000 yards
CL De Ruyter engages CA Mikuma at 2,000 yards
CL De Ruyter engages CA Mogami at 2,000 yards
DD Hagikaze engages DD Kortenaer at 2,000 yards
DD Kortenaer engages DD Maikaze at 2,000 yards
DD Nowaki engages DD Witte de With at 2,000 yards
DD Van Nes engages DD Nowaki at 2,000 yards
DD Maikaze engages DD Banckert at 2,000 yards
Range increases to 5,000 yards
CA Kumano engages CL Tromp at 5,000 yards
CL Tromp engages CA Suzuya at 5,000 yards
CL De Ruyter sunk by CA Mikuma at 5,000 yards
DD Van Ghent engages DD Maikaze at 5,000 yards
DD Piet Hein engages DD Nowaki at 5,000 yards
DD Evertsen engages DD Maikaze at 5,000 yards
DD Evertsen engages DD Maikaze at 5,000 yards
DD Maikaze engages DD Van Nes at 5,000 yards
DD Banckert engages DD Maikaze at 5,000 yards
Range increases to 8,000 yards
CL Tromp engages CA Kumano at 8,000 yards
CL Tromp engages CA Suzuya at 8,000 yards
DD Nowaki engages DD Van Ghent at 8,000 yards
CL Tromp engages CA Mogami at 8,000 yards
DD Kortenaer engages DD Hagikaze at 8,000 yards
DD Arashi engages DD Piet Hein at 8,000 yards
DD Nowaki engages DD Witte de With at 8,000 yards
DD Van Nes engages DD Maikaze at 8,000 yards
Task forces break off...


(in reply to EUBanana)
Post #: 263
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 10:31:50 AM   
Barb


Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline 		I thought in WITP when TF were at cruise speed for surface combat they would switch for max speed in combat. It seems it no longer applies for AE.
Certain Task Forces in anticipating night surface combat LOWERED their speed to not give away their positions due to flourescent wake.
As for preparing for combat - what you need is to have your boilers lit and turbines ready - to switch them on.


_____________________________


(in reply to Bluebook)
Post #: 264
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 11:41:47 AM   
EUBanana


Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Barb
Use Mission speed for your TFs and you will not see Ridiculous Surface Combat Results again...


I don't think I've ever not used Mission Speed... certainly never cruise speed anyway.

_____________________________


(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 265
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 12:25:19 PM   
CV Zuikaku

 

Posts: 442
Joined: 12/18/2008
From: Legrad, Croatia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Barb

I have conducted some tests. You can see results in AAR section (especially posts number 4, 5 and 6) : http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2215485
Use Mission speed for your TFs and you will not see Ridiculous Surface Combat Results again...



Yes, I've seen your test results. And it seems that speed is very important- but if the TF enters the battle on cruise speed, I'm sure they'll increase speed if needed. Cruise/mission and full shouldn't have any impact on combat. Only on tear and wear, fuel consumption and number of hexes that TF's travell during one day. Or am I wrong?! Anyway, they were at full speed during the encounter I posted above...

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 266
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 1:11:30 PM   
Barb


Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline 		It worked that way in WITP. Dont know if it works the same in AE - I am waiting for confirmation.

_____________________________


(in reply to CV Zuikaku)
Post #: 267
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 2:24:52 PM   
JuanG


Posts: 906
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline
quote:


Reduced sighting due to 67% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Overcast Conditions and 67% moonlight: 8,000 yards
CONTACT: Allies radar detects Japanese task force at 30,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BC Repulse at 30,000 yards
BC Repulse engages BB Kongo at 30,000 yards
BB Haruna engages DD Express at 30,000 yards
BB Haruna engages DD Electra at 30,000 yards
Range closes to 24,000 yards


Anyone else see something wrong here?

I remember noticing this is one of the pre-release AARs and commenting on it, but it seems it still happens.

I could understand the Japanese returning fire after the first few rounds even if its beyond the normal visibility, as by then they will see flashes and there will probably be illuminations rounds in the air, ect, but right off? Those Kongos must have some serious anti-radar gear...

Is there a reasonable explanation for this or is this a bug?

_____________________________


Coral Sea HDM
AltWNT Scenarios

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 268
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 3:19:12 PM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JuanG

quote:


Reduced sighting due to 67% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Overcast Conditions and 67% moonlight: 8,000 yards
CONTACT: Allies radar detects Japanese task force at 30,000 yards
BB Haruna engages BC Repulse at 30,000 yards
BC Repulse engages BB Kongo at 30,000 yards
BB Haruna engages DD Express at 30,000 yards
BB Haruna engages DD Electra at 30,000 yards
Range closes to 24,000 yards


Anyone else see something wrong here?

I remember noticing this is one of the pre-release AARs and commenting on it, but it seems it still happens.

I could understand the Japanese returning fire after the first few rounds even if its beyond the normal visibility, as by then they will see flashes and there will probably be illuminations rounds in the air, ect, but right off? Those Kongos must have some serious anti-radar gear...

Is there a reasonable explanation for this or is this a bug?



Gotta say it's still screwed up. The longest range a BB EVER scored a hit was about 26,000 yards, so the Allies opening fire at 30,000 is really dumb (expecially with a radar spot and such limited visability...all that happened is they wasted their "suprise"). Secondly, even if the Japs were firing at "muzzle flashes", why would the DD's be firing at all? To have a hope of hitting anything with their 4.7's, they would have to close to about 15,000. "Reasonable" it ain't..., so "bug" sounds appropriate.

(in reply to JuanG)
Post #: 269
RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result - 8/23/2009 4:17:22 PM   
Tazo


Posts: 85
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Toulouse, France
Status: offline
I can now say the following after a very long testing period on Guadalcanal (now 5 campaigns). Five points 1-5 on the main topics here, after two general claims.

Claim 1. To balance the beginning of the thread I would like to point out that as the IJN side I felt to have a kind of surface engagement superiority, mainly thanks to torps and BBs. (And very good zeros/betties/Kates too but this is another thread.)

Claim 2. The dice can hardly balance very unbalanced encounters, but DO decide in balanced engagements. It's fair. The player has to recover from defeats and provoke unbalanced engagements in the right direction by combined arms coordination and some good inspiration. To that aim, maintaining good logistics and sufficient active TF prevails on tactical outcomes. The losses however leads to adaptations in the way to defend one's logistic /front line and to attack the enemy ones. This alchimy between tactical scale and operational scale, and also opponent moral/psychology, is great and almost unique. This certainly explains all our concerns about realistic tactical resolutions in AE.

1 - The "firing back" process.

I fully agree with the above impression of Thales concerning the "you fired at me so I fire back" process. This seems not realistic in case of multiple ships firing at a single one since when the latter acquiers a target she has to keep it a little bit, and not more than one target per type of range/caliber. However quite often I also observed series of salvos exchanged between two opposite ships or say, between pairs, the other ships being not considered at first or exhanging salvos simultaneously without interacting with the previous ones. So this moderates the "firing back" strange process, a ship that mainly fires on a fixed one but changing only from time to time is OK.

I also agree the "one to one shots with immediate fire back" does cause a small size TF shoot as many shells as the bigger one they are facing. Here again a moderation comes from the fact that at times I've seen series of shots with no fire back, at the end or in the middle of some battles - maybe everybody closed up the same target, or the target had a range problem to reply or low ammo or damaged gun.

2 - Night engagements.

The night battles with very close ranges are quite annoying because far too frequent. In bad weather, entering an hex and always finding the enemy TF there at 1000' is not satisfying, and can lead to overkilling games after months. I even have seen a US BB crossing the T to a Jap BB at 1000' ! A nonsense because then, two minutes later the converging Jap BB is now crossing the T to the other one !

Night fights may be short and intense at close initial range or, far less often, very long and lazy because of careful long range exchanges of useless fire, certainly provocated on purpose by the US side. The point to be fixed here is clearly the frightening encounters between 2 TF's in bad weather at 1000' or 3000' in non coastal hexes, very improbable but seen many times, and at least the disengagement should be tempted immediately by the side that don't know about the exact opposition - maybe both sides.

On the opposite day surface engagements are very nicely modeled, I always managed to find good explaination of the outcomes and have seen reasonable disengagements on right time, a lot of draws and many marginal victories, deadly IJN torpedoes compensating well the slightly better hitting factors of some US/Auxies ships. Wiped out convoys are a well understood exception. The range are very often reasonnable, between 9000' and 23000', almost no shots beyond 24000', sometimes hazardous closings below 8000' - few days with such a visibility too.

Sometimes, but less than 5-10% I've seen agressive IJN TF raiding convoys in coastal hexes catching a slow TF trying to retire because of early radar detection. During night the empirical probability of escaping is 100%. However a 90-95% chance of success to escape a >30kn TF at 10-12kn during day just due to early detection seems exagerated, especially with more than 20 planes in naval search in a very small aera nearby. The 100% by night is quite exagerated too, as already observed in the thread.

---> Conclusion : probability of night/low visibility engagement seems too high, too many very short initial ranges, disengagement in low visibility not enough used, radar previous detection too automatic and escape of slow TF too easy during day.

3 - Day battles.

As an aggressive jap player in Guadalcanal I've seen a lot of IJN victories by night but more often with the larger number of ships, and each time helped by a number of welcomed torpedoe hits at short or medium ranges that widely compensate the good US ships hitting factors. I also experienced draws when outnumbered, and no disasters or outstanding victories - except surprised and wipped out convoys. As a US player I was more concentrated on sinking ships by using intensively SBD squadrons - not enough Kates on the other side, but more hunting surface TFs.

Concerning "similar size" TF in surface combat, the Guadalcanal scenario, especially in september, the IJN has so many ships that he can try many kinds of engagement doing the counter invasion. Having done that with TF of similar size compared to AI-US ones, my experience is that surface combat are fair and really full of realistic uncertainty, and in view of point 2 above here I mainly talk about day engagement. As the IJN I clearly won more than one half of the combats, but only marginaly, and I was able to sink almost everything by day (or night afterwards) raids provided the US CV were already neutralized or occupied fighting mine. Some details later in an AAR post about replays of "Yamato versus South Dakota" near Rabaul.

First fact, frequency of engagements strongly depend on the agressiveness of leaders, even with 3BB+5CA a careful leader will retire by invoking a "retirement due to surface threat", and if engaged with a weak opposing TF then keep distances as far as possible, a real mess if you put the wrong man in charge of a SCTF - tried on purpose.

Second fact, tactically both sides have well modeled strong and weak points that can reach there climax if the right circumstances have been met : see 4 and 5.

Third, I've seen no disaster nor "one way victory" in day surface combat between warships, always heavy or light exchanges, generally in favor of the side with more ships. Desengagements were logical, at least more than during night fights. By the way one issue to retire on time is to consider differential of number of hits but this is not a good indicator of damages and critical hits are always likely to revert the immediate fate, especially unexpected tropedoes. The point is that the damage curve is not linear with hits but has jumps at random times, and this risk may overhelm the actual estimate of "ratio of hits" especially at short range - and medium range to a smaller extend. So the right formulae to evaluate a situation in the nice Herwin suggestion has to take immediate possible jumps into account (are we risking torps if we close up range to exploit our superior rate of fire ?).

---> Conclusion (3+4+5) : good LR torp job but not systematic at medium range, colorful cruisers battles rather impredictable, DD are a dangerous nuisance but not decisive, jap DD efficiently neutralize US-DD if in superior number, BB are very solid, able to give a lot in duel and impressive in day surface combat, US ships have better hitting factors but lesser sinking factor (torps do actually sink more often).

4 - Torpedoes.

The jap LR torpedoes saved me more than one time by hitting some over-firing US CA "à la Boise". I sunk many CA/Cl/DD by jap torp at 5000 to 12000 but wasted the torps fired at more than 13000. Speed seems crucial here since when launching to slow big transports the number of hits is extreme. In the same time US DD often charged the big ships and scored well when they are too close, but almost never critically, and several times they simply exploded while crossing the critical 9000-15000 range where everybody (BB/CA/CL/DD) has good hitting probabilities, they rarely - but it happens - got sunk by torps, and finally their own torps scored some hits but quite often never exploded. In low visibility the jap cruisers are really at their ease thanks to deadly torps. For instance I've seen US cruisers becoming too confident after many hits on jap cruisers, then closing range less than 9000 and suddenly sunk by torpedoes launched by their almost crippled victims, a badly inspired closing up! On two occasions I stopped watching a CA battle in clear advantage of the US-AI but the report announced a draw or marginal jap victory thanks to a feew successful torps just after my stop!

5 - BB and CA.

As already reported in this thread BB can not operate accurately at close range, especially in low visibility, but they can really take a lot of hits thanks to the "belt armor" or "tower armor". It is nice to see their high durability in action, and if they have no BB in front of them they are really hard to hurt, and deliver efficient fire on cruisers and stand to be reliable flag ships in their SCTF. They can also damage entire squadrons of bombers and thus can close enemy air TF on some important occasions. Also a couple of times "my" Yamato charged 2 or 3 DD to cach the escorted AKs and immediately sunk 2 of them at medium range during the closing, then decimated herslelf the convoy using all her shells. The most impressive day battles are when both sides have BB aligned, and then you smell the breath of burning steel and feel the smoke of big guns in action for results heavily depending on critical hits or outrageous number of hits, typically the cruisers playing a separated battle together and the BB breaking off after taking too much... usually to become at the mercy of bombers having uncontested air superiority. But sinking a BB using diving bombers really takes days and CV squadrons are too precious to be engaged and damaged all the time.

So everything has a strong point and a weak point, the complementarity of air/ships makes any missuse of them or any underevaluation of some risk very determinant. For me the "day" model is great and even BB have their place. So here is my answer to players that found that the "DD > BB" - I had this feeling for a while when playing the US side, but no more after playing all the jap BB in many tasks. "Please give me 4 more BB in exchange of 20 additional DD for you" - whatever my side. Yes, a night battle of 20DD versus 4BB can be a disaster for BBs, but I won't use the BB together, they will be combined to other ships and certainly be able to cripple more ships than the 20DD for sure. Also, DD are far easier targets for bomber pilots, mine have suffered a lot trying to sink one or two BB but sunk freely dozens of spotted DDs.

In cruiser fights, after a lot of tests, prediction are even harder to make due to high rates of fire and multiple torp launches, the efficientcy of which depending on the closing. However in an upcoming AAR post on Savo battle I shall observe that given 4 TFs there is some ordering in the average outcomes, some TF being more likely to beat such other due to some not well identified factors, but not a nation-biais since US(1)=IJN>US(2)>US(3). So this is neither such or such biais nor pure randomness, and by testing one can find the right explicative variables to feel the right relative strengh between 2 particular TFs, but this is impossible before the next encounter/circumstances in the actual game!


_____________________________

There is only two kinds of operational plans, good ones and bad ones.
The good ones almost always fail under unexpected circumstances that often make the bad ones succeed.
-- Napoléon.

With AE immortality is no more a curse.
-- A lucky man.

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 270
Page:   <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Ridiculous Surface Combat Result Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
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

1.485