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: Artillery Testing

 
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: Artillery Testing Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/11/2010 7:24:02 PM   
Kwik E Mart


Posts: 2447
Joined: 7/22/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

why even have the bombard option? you either include independent artillery units in an attack or not. end of discussion...


And Bombard is an excellent recon for exact (FOW excepted) AV counts on the defenders.




LOL! true...

_____________________________

Kirk Lazarus: I know who I am. I'm the dude playin' the dude, disguised as another dude!
Ron Swanson: Clear alcohols are for rich women on diets.

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 121
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/11/2010 9:09:32 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline 		Artillery Test # 3

Same setup as baseline tests #1 & #2

On the turn 2 execution the Japanese 1st Heavy Artillery with 8x24cm T45 Howitzers (Effect 340, Anti Soft 83, Anti Armor 130) and the 3rd Heavy Ind Artillery with 6x28cm Howitzers (Effect 494, Anti Soft 76, Anti Armor 157) started conducting daily bombardments of Hong Kong.

What is interesting as you will see from the data - with only two units and 14 guns bombarding, the defenders supply consumption was as much if not more than in BigJ's test wherein he had all the attacking artillery units bombarding.

Defender Disruption - No discernable Disruption was inflicted as Disruption remained at 0 throughout the test.

Defender Fatigue - Slight increase of fatigue from an Average of 3 with Enemy present to 3.167-3.83 after bombardments

Defender Casualties - negligible

Experience Increases -

Baseline test # 1
Starting Exp = 40,40,40,35,60,40 Avg=42.5
Ending Exp = 43,40,40,35,60,40 Avg = 43

Baseline test #2 (Enemy Units present, No combat)
Starting Exp = 40,40,40,35,60,40 Avg=42.5
Ending Exp = 40,40,40,35,60,40 Avg = 42.5

Art. Test #3 (two enemy units bombard)
Starting Exp = 40,40,40,35,60,40 Avg=42.5
Ending Exp = 47,40,44,38,60,41 Avg = 45

Defender Supply consumption -





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by treespider -- 3/11/2010 9:11:21 PM >

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Kwik E Mart)
Post #: 122
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/11/2010 9:48:17 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline 		So from your results I gather that over 9 tunrs you used approximately 180 more supplies (or 20 more supplies per turn), caused nil fatigue or disruption, but the enemy reaps the benefits of 5 XP with the 2 heavy units bombarding.

One interesting note is that the longer the bombardment continues, the more steep the supply drop becomes. Eventually you would run the base out of supplies, and the results do seem to compound. So in that sense, artillery is having an effect, and that effect seems to be compounded over time.

This is a true siege situation where the enemy has no way to move in supplies. In a situation where an enemy unit has a supply line, the only effect you will truly have is to increase your opponent's XP, thus making it harder for you to win. One could draw the conclusion that in a non-siege situation it is actually counter-productive to bombard enemy fortifications.

Granted, this is not at the saturation level, so we need to see the results with a larger number of tubes and higher throw weight to make any judgements.

With all that said, let me suggest this: Perhaps units should not gain experience from bombardment.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 123
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/11/2010 11:51:18 PM   
Kwik E Mart


Posts: 2447
Joined: 7/22/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

So from your results I gather that over 9 tunrs you used approximately 180 more supplies (or 20 more supplies per turn), caused nil fatigue or disruption, but the enemy reaps the benefits of 5 XP with the 2 heavy units bombarding.

One interesting note is that the longer the bombardment continues, the more steep the supply drop becomes. Eventually you would run the base out of supplies, and the results do seem to compound. So in that sense, artillery is having an effect, and that effect seems to be compounded over time.

This is a true siege situation where the enemy has no way to move in supplies. In a situation where an enemy unit has a supply line, the only effect you will truly have is to increase your opponent's XP, thus making it harder for you to win. One could draw the conclusion that in a non-siege situation it is actually counter-productive to bombard enemy fortifications.

Granted, this is not at the saturation level, so we need to see the results with a larger number of tubes and higher throw weight to make any judgements.

With all that said, let me suggest this: Perhaps units should not gain experience from bombardment.


why not? i for one, would get a lot better at digging foxholes after a week's bombardment...


_____________________________

Kirk Lazarus: I know who I am. I'm the dude playin' the dude, disguised as another dude!
Ron Swanson: Clear alcohols are for rich women on diets.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 124
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/12/2010 1:09:14 AM   
Jim D Burns


Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7
but the enemy reaps the benefits of 5 XP with the 2 heavy units bombarding.


This is not necessarily true. I know in WitP bombardment experience gains were capped at around 45 or 50 max. After that a unit could not gain any experience from being bombarded. I assume it stayed the same in AE, but I guess it may have been changed. Someone would need to track this in their game to verify if this is still the case for sure.

Jim


_____________________________


(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 125
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/12/2010 1:34:08 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7
but the enemy reaps the benefits of 5 XP with the 2 heavy units bombarding.


This is not necessarily true. I know in WitP bombardment experience gains were capped at around 45 or 50 max. After that a unit could not gain any experience from being bombarded. I assume it stayed the same in AE, but I guess it may have been changed. Someone would need to track this in their game to verify if this is still the case for sure.

Jim




It should be noted that in Art test #3 the unit that went from 40 to 47 experience was the 1st Middlesex battalion...it also starts the game with 100 Prep for HK. In the first baseline test it gained 3 exp just by sitting there moving from 40 to 43...whereas in test #2 with enemy units present it gained 0 exp.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 126
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/12/2010 4:29:25 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

So from your results I gather that over 9 tunrs you used approximately 180 more supplies (or 20 more supplies per turn), caused nil fatigue or disruption, but the enemy reaps the benefits of 5 XP with the 2 heavy units bombarding.

One interesting note is that the longer the bombardment continues, the more steep the supply drop becomes. Eventually you would run the base out of supplies, and the results do seem to compound. So in that sense, artillery is having an effect, and that effect seems to be compounded over time.

This is a true siege situation where the enemy has no way to move in supplies. In a situation where an enemy unit has a supply line, the only effect you will truly have is to increase your opponent's XP, thus making it harder for you to win. One could draw the conclusion that in a non-siege situation it is actually counter-productive to bombard enemy fortifications.

Granted, this is not at the saturation level, so we need to see the results with a larger number of tubes and higher throw weight to make any judgements.

With all that said, let me suggest this: Perhaps units should not gain experience from bombardment.


why not? i for one, would get a lot better at digging foxholes after a week's bombardment...



Unfortunately while one gets very good at digging foxholes, the fact that they are having to dig so many foxholes would lend one to believe that the whole 'happiness' thing would be lacking. Besides...practice digging foxholes doesn't make them any better at shooting the bad guys.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Kwik E Mart)
Post #: 127
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/12/2010 4:39:54 AM   
Kull


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

ORIGINAL: Shark7

With all that said, let me suggest this: Perhaps units should not gain experience from bombardment.


IRL, troops learn a LOT the first time somebody tries to kill them. No amount of training can prepare you for that, and to suggest - even in game terms - that nobody is learning anything, well, that's just wrong. I could see several possible tweaks to artillery bombardments, but this is not one of them.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 128
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/12/2010 5:53:04 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

With all that said, let me suggest this: Perhaps units should not gain experience from bombardment.


IRL, troops learn a LOT the first time somebody tries to kill them. No amount of training can prepare you for that, and to suggest - even in game terms - that nobody is learning anything, well, that's just wrong. I could see several possible tweaks to artillery bombardments, but this is not one of them.


Actually there should be two different experience categories, offensive and defensive. You may learn a lot about not getting killed every time you go through an attack, but you don't really learn anything about taking ground while on the defense. So there should be two skill sets for LCUs, attack skills and defensive skills.

Obviously not something that will be added, so the best we can do is keep the current caps in place.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Kull)
Post #: 129
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/13/2010 8:48:27 AM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		yes the skills of digging faster foxholes are not the only skill needed to be a better fighter. So the units should have a cap in increasing skills from bombardment.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 130
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/13/2010 1:46:45 PM   
mike scholl 1

 

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili
yes the skills of digging faster foxholes are not the only skill needed to be a better fighter. So the units should have a cap in increasing skills from bombardment.



I'd say the most important "skill" gained in actually coming under enemy fire for the first time is a sudden realization that your platoon leader DID know what he was talking about...

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 131
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/13/2010 2:07:27 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili
yes the skills of digging faster foxholes are not the only skill needed to be a better fighter. So the units should have a cap in increasing skills from bombardment.



I'd say the most important "skill" gained in actually coming under enemy fire for the first time is a sudden realization that your platoon leader DID know what he was talking about...



You mean the 90-day wonder just out ROTC?


_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to mike scholl 1)
Post #: 132
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/13/2010 3:32:52 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili
yes the skills of digging faster foxholes are not the only skill needed to be a better fighter. So the units should have a cap in increasing skills from bombardment.



I'd say the most important "skill" gained in actually coming under enemy fire for the first time is a sudden realization that your platoon leader DID know what he was talking about...



Or to your horror, that the Lt. that is two weeks out of officer school really doesn't.

All jokes aside, the senior sergeant really does know his stuff.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to mike scholl 1)
Post #: 133
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/13/2010 6:25:43 PM   
mike scholl 1

 

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Or to your horror, that the Lt. that is two weeks out of officer school really doesn't.

All jokes aside, the senior sergeant really does know his stuff.




To be fair, I did say "leader", not "commander".

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 134
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/13/2010 8:46:53 PM   
Whisper

 

Posts: 121
Joined: 1/20/2008
From: LA
Status: offline 		Yes, people learn lots of things mostly how to keep dry and avoid the dreaded trench foot.

To keep fingers and toes working just right, I use FungiCure by Alma-Amco the finger and toe fungi specialists. And I use hi-wick ski socks under my dockers.

Those of you who serve, and those that did, know just what i'm talking about, and it works for arty too if you think about it.

< Message edited by Whisper -- 3/13/2010 8:56:21 PM >

(in reply to mike scholl 1)
Post #: 135
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/14/2010 5:28:47 AM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		But doesn't teach infiltration tactics, attack coordination within unit, with own heavy artillery and air support etc.

(in reply to Whisper)
Post #: 136
RE: Artillery Testing - 3/20/2010 8:49:40 AM   
Venividivici10044


Posts: 137
Joined: 8/29/2009
Status: offline 		bump...

_____________________________

I play and post for fun...nothing stated ever carries with it the thought to irritate. If something does...privately PM and I will review.

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 137
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Artillery Testing Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
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

1.906