RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A)

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: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A)

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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A)

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/20/2012 11:08:59 PM

desicat

Posts: 542
Joined: 5/25/2008
Status: offline

Maybe Nemo will chime in and provide a few tips.

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 301

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/20/2012 11:18:43 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

I mean, are they supposed to give an advantage in ability to get through defenses, accuracy, or damage inflicted? And if none of these, what's the point of using them?

I think historically it was to give an exp level '1' pilot a chance of doing some damage not to give a exp '70' pilot superhuman powers ..If you have exp level 70 pilots it is probably better to just do the regular attack thing ..

I saw some some small group raids with Helens .. I understand Nemo set loose 100's all at once at vulnerable targets .. the CR says for example:

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Niigata at 115,55

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid detected at 79 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 19 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-IIIa Oscar x 20

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-43-IIIa Oscar: 11 destroyed
Ki-43-IIIa Oscar: 2 destroyed by flak

Allied Ships
DD Cassin Young
DD Wedderburn, Kamikaze hits 1, on fire
DD Wickes
DD Young
DD Yarnall

Aircraft Attacking:
20 x Ki-43-IIIa Oscar flying as kamikaze
Kamikaze: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb

Just a thought ...

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 302

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/20/2012 11:19:44 PM

Nemo121

Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline

No, not after I was left hung out to dry by the forum when Krupp posted.

Posting any advice about kamis in this thread would obviously relate to this game and I've said I wouldn't do that ---- plus why make myself a target when I KNOW most people here won't actually pipe up if I'm attacked for answering their questions. If I thought they'd stand up I'd be more willing to post but making myself a helpless target in order to help people who don't lift a finger in response --- No thanks.

I've been PM'ed re: advice on kamis today and have responded by directing those who contacted me via PM to my previous AARs. There's more than enough information there for people to draw the correct conclusions.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 1/20/2012 11:26:46 PM >

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to desicat)

Post #: 303

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/20/2012 11:35:25 PM

desicat

Posts: 542
Joined: 5/25/2008
Status: offline

Nemo, I can understand your standing on principle and can't argue with that - ever.

I thought that tips on the effective use of Kamikazes would be a tactical lesson that everyone could learn from and watch play out. When put in those terms I didn't really think it would be considered by anyone to your giving strategic advice.

(in reply to Nemo121)

Post #: 304

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/20/2012 11:42:05 PM

Nemo121

Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline

desicat,

To paraphrase Shakespeare; To those who wish to make an issue even a puff of breeze is proof of a hurricane. No, once bitten, twice shy.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to desicat)

Post #: 305

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/20/2012 11:46:10 PM

krupp_88mm

Posts: 406
Joined: 10/13/2008
Status: offline

(in reply to desicat)

Post #: 306

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 1:19:31 AM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: krupp_88mm

??????

??????

I am not sure of your point except that I need a pro-version of photobucket to understand your point of view ...

(in reply to krupp_88mm)

Post #: 307

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 2:13:23 AM

krupp_88mm

Posts: 406
Joined: 10/13/2008
Status: offline

quote:

pro version.....

< Message edited by krupp_88mm -- 1/21/2012 2:14:09 AM >

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 308

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 3:32:05 AM

jeffk3510

Posts: 4132
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline

Ive always got your back Nemo. Especially from fakes like Krupp

_____________________________

Life is tough. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be.

Currently chasing three kids around the Midwest.

(in reply to krupp_88mm)

Post #: 309

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 5:39:59 AM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

No, not after I was left hung out to dry by the forum when Krupp posted.

Posting any advice about kamis in this thread would obviously relate to this game and I've said I wouldn't do that ---- plus why make myself a target when I KNOW most people here won't actually pipe up if I'm attacked for answering their questions. If I thought they'd stand up I'd be more willing to post but making myself a helpless target in order to help people who don't lift a finger in response --- No thanks.

I've been PM'ed re: advice on kamis today and have responded by directing those who contacted me via PM to my previous AARs. There's more than enough information there for people to draw the correct conclusions.

Hi Nemo,

Sorry if you feel I didn't stick up for you. I just don't want to get involved in personal issues unrelated to WITP, and don't want to "stir to pot". And I thought the "flame" post you are refering to really couldn't be taken seriously anyway. But I definitely understand your position if you don't want to give advice to either side.

(in reply to Nemo121)

Post #: 310

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 5:40:52 AM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

I've got to know what the heck is this my little pony stuff?

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 311

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 5:41:59 AM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

No turn tonight, Greyjoy and I are both really drunk and going to bed...

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 312

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 7:41:29 AM

Itdepends

Posts: 937
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline

Boy you could read that the wrong way - sleeping with the enemy and all that.

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 313

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 11:47:55 AM

Grfin Zeppelin

Posts: 1515
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Itdepends

Boy you could read that the wrong way - sleeping with the enemy and all that.

That came up to my mind also instantly.

_____________________________

(in reply to Itdepends)

Post #: 314

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 12:16:53 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

@ Rader,

I would expect improved efficacy of your kamikaze attackers were they escorted. None of the small-ish raids that you showed had escorted attackers. I would expect that Helen IIa kamikazes encountering appreciable CAP would get shredded and have their attack dulled, just as a 'regular' unescorted flight of Helens would be kneecapped. I'd expected somewhat better results from your Oscar IIa attack, as they are speedier and presumably more able to avoid CAP, but the sample size here is hard to make heads or tails out of.

Kamikazes are going to be a numbers game. You're going to lose a bunch of 'em. Thousands, like IRL. Every so often-say 10-20% of the time-one will hit and cause some pain. Although I don't have the personal PBEM Kamikaze experience behind me (yet), I would venture that large commitments (say 1000 in a turn) of trained and escorted kamikazes that are capable of breaking through a fatigued Allied CAP are likely to engender more success for you.

In your example, I count a total of 70 Kamikaze losses (mixed frames) to all losses. How many of these broke through CAP? You certainly can't fault the kamikaze mission for bombers getting chewed up by CAP, can you?

Still, with all the issues associated with these attacks, you've scored 3 hits. That's 4.3%.

I would venture this percentage can be improved to the better by incrementally improving your kamikaze approaches or methods. Good luck! We're rooting on you to fend off the Allied dogs!

_____________________________

(in reply to Grfin Zeppelin)

Post #: 315

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 2:52:42 PM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

@ Rader,

I would expect improved efficacy of your kamikaze attackers were they escorted. None of the small-ish raids that you showed had escorted attackers. I would expect that Helen IIa kamikazes encountering appreciable CAP would get shredded and have their attack dulled, just as a 'regular' unescorted flight of Helens would be kneecapped. I'd expected somewhat better results from your Oscar IIa attack, as they are speedier and presumably more able to avoid CAP, but the sample size here is hard to make heads or tails out of.

Kamikazes are going to be a numbers game. You're going to lose a bunch of 'em. Thousands, like IRL. Every so often-say 10-20% of the time-one will hit and cause some pain. Although I don't have the personal PBEM Kamikaze experience behind me (yet), I would venture that large commitments (say 1000 in a turn) of trained and escorted kamikazes that are capable of breaking through a fatigued Allied CAP are likely to engender more success for you.

In your example, I count a total of 70 Kamikaze losses (mixed frames) to all losses. How many of these broke through CAP? You certainly can't fault the kamikaze mission for bombers getting chewed up by CAP, can you?

Still, with all the issues associated with these attacks, you've scored 3 hits. That's 4.3%.

I would venture this percentage can be improved to the better by incrementally improving your kamikaze approaches or methods. Good luck! We're rooting on you to fend off the Allied dogs!

Maybe, but the problem is that if I escort them, I lose valuable fighter pilots too. Escorts just can't compete in any sense against CAP. This is the main reason my air losses are so high in this game. Give eqaul skill and aircraft, escorts vs. CAP suffer hugely disproportionate losses - at least 2:1 and I would guess more like 3:1. As someone once said, they are nothing more than ablative armor.

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 316

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 4:50:35 PM

FatR

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

I mean, are they supposed to give an advantage in ability to get through defenses, accuracy, or damage inflicted? And if none of these, what's the point of using them?

My testing suggests that kamikaze give a greater accuracy (by this I mean =/= 0) to untrained pilots fresh from reserve, but actually do significantly reduced damage compared to just putting the same bomb weight into the target by normal means, so that you need at least 2, and better 3 Val hits to put a DE or an old DD anywhere near critical condition. I cannot vouch 100% that this wasn't changed somehow by beta tweaks since then.

_____________________________

The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 317

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 5:00:17 PM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

I mean, are they supposed to give an advantage in ability to get through defenses, accuracy, or damage inflicted? And if none of these, what's the point of using them?

My testing suggests that kamikaze give a greater accuracy (by this I mean =/= 0) to untrained pilots fresh from reserve, but actually do significantly reduced damage compared to just putting the same bomb weight into the target by normal means, so that you need at least 2, and better 3 Val hits to put a DE or an old DD anywhere near critical condition. I cannot vouch 100% that this wasn't changed somehow by beta tweaks since then.

Darn, so they really don't seem very useful. I mean, it only takes a month or so to train a pilot up to around 60 NavB skill (maybe 1.5 months), where they have a decent chance of hitting. Maybe the reason they seem useless is that training pilots to be "average" (~60 skill) dosen't take very long.

Read Nemo's AAR in detail and I think part of the difference is not that he's getting/expecting better hit rates, but that he is using planes with very large bombloads as kamikazes. I imagine a strat bomber kamikaze could do quite a number on a ship, while a biplane would just be swept off the deck.,,

EDIT: I guess the training groups could be used as kamikazes because their old biplanes aren't much good for normal naval attacks, but it also seems to me like a better use for these groups is just to increase the training rate of conventional pilots.

< Message edited by rader -- 1/21/2012 5:03:12 PM >

(in reply to FatR)

Post #: 318

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 5:04:35 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

I mean, are they supposed to give an advantage in ability to get through defenses, accuracy, or damage inflicted? And if none of these, what's the point of using them?

My testing suggests that kamikaze give a greater accuracy (by this I mean =/= 0) to untrained pilots fresh from reserve, but actually do significantly reduced damage compared to just putting the same bomb weight into the target by normal means, so that you need at least 2, and better 3 Val hits to put a DE or an old DD anywhere near critical condition. I cannot vouch 100% that this wasn't changed somehow by beta tweaks since then.

The biggest change I perceive is in how CAP works. The changes Rader suggested after the LB's were wreaking havoc in central Japan also mean that CAP is more effective overall and reduced numbers penatrating to make a hit.

It was my understanding that at Oki the IJ used 2:1 and 3:1 escorts on their Kami's meaning a lot more pentrated the CAP. The raids shown here were small and given the new CAP algorithums not very many made it through . but those that did and hit someething did damage ...

(in reply to FatR)

Post #: 319

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 5:57:55 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader
I mean, it only takes a month or so to train a pilot up to around 60 NavB skill (maybe 1.5 months), where they have a decent chance of hitting. Maybe the reason they seem useless is that training pilots to be "average" (~60 skill) dosen't take very long.

Hmmm...

rader, did you train your kamikazes on NavB or LowNav? My understanding is that Kamikazes attack using LowNav / Kamikaze training / skills, not NavB. You may not have been as trained as you suspect...

_____________________________

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 320

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 6:16:19 PM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

I trained LowN...

Hmm, signature not working...

< Message edited by rader -- 1/21/2012 6:17:31 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 321

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 6:25:59 PM

JohnDillworth

Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline

quote:

But how would they break though the 6 or so Iowa class BBs guarding his invasions and shore bombarding me every turn?

Well he only gets 4 Iowa's I don't have the game open but I don't know if all of those are on line yet. Count up his modern fast BB's. Can't speak to his deployments but those BB's have multiple responsibility. I think your night fighting is better than his radar. As long as he has no PT's about I think it is a 50/50 shot. Of course your guys might not come back so it's only worth it if you hit something juicy, then it's a knife fight. What else are you going to do do with them? my 2 cents

< Message edited by JohnDillworth -- 1/21/2012 6:27:04 PM >

_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 322

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 6:37:07 PM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

quote:

But how would they break though the 6 or so Iowa class BBs guarding his invasions and shore bombarding me every turn?

Well he only gets 4 Iowa's I don't have the game open but I don't know if all of those are on line yet. Count up his modern fast BB's. Can't speak to his deployments but those BB's have multiple responsibility. I think your night fighting is better than his radar. As long as he has no PT's about I think it is a 50/50 shot. Of course your guys might not come back so it's only worth it if you hit something juicy, then it's a knife fight. What else are you going to do do with them? my 2 cents

But if I try to interfere, I will get sunk by his a/c anyway before I get there. Sure I will use them if he tries to invade somewhere outside his air umbrela of course. You're right. They aren't much use after the surrender documents have been signed...

Anyone know how t link a photo for a signature?

EDITL: Uh oh, too big... will have to shrink it...

< Message edited by rader -- 1/21/2012 6:41:33 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 323

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 6:47:26 PM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

testing...

_____________________________

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 324

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 6:51:16 PM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

testing... EDIT: I shrank it a lot, but it's still coming out huge

EIDT: Not great resolution, but it'll do for now.

< Message edited by rader -- 1/21/2012 7:06:07 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 325

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 7:38:43 PM

bigred

Posts: 3599
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline

Hi Radar. what with the Space colony photo

, you and your classmates going to the moon?

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 326

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 7:47:06 PM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred

Hi Radar.� what with the Space colony photo, you and your classmates going to the moon?

Hopefully we all are... Mars is better but Earth dosen't look so impressive from there

(in reply to bigred)

Post #: 327

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 10:47:37 PM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

quote:

But how would they break though the 6 or so Iowa class BBs guarding his invasions and shore bombarding me every turn?

Well he only gets 4 Iowa's I don't have the game open but I don't know if all of those are on line yet. Count up his modern fast BB's. Can't speak to his deployments but those BB's have multiple responsibility. I think your night fighting is better than his radar. As long as he has no PT's about I think it is a 50/50 shot. Of course your guys might not come back so it's only worth it if you hit something juicy, then it's a knife fight. What else are you going to do do with them? my 2 cents

I basically mean any US BB with 16" guns... iowa class, SoDak, Wash, Mass, etc.

Go Massachusetts

Only BB I've been on.

EDIT: Unless you count Mikasa, but that's a cruiser sized pre-dreadnought...

< Message edited by rader -- 1/21/2012 10:48:58 PM >

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 328

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 11:09:27 PM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

Quiet turns these days. I think we're both licking our wounds after that last major series of air battles.

I'm not sure what GJ is up to... he has his invasion fleet in Hakkodate under 3,200 fighters. His bombers are all there too.

All is quiet as out ~6000 AV each in Hachinohe and Akita (the two clear hexes in northern Honshu) make faces at each other. He keeps bombarding. I wonder if he's going to send more troops, continue attacking, or what?

He's bombarding them with all his BBs and CAs every turn, inflicting mild attrition. I get the sense that something isn't quite historical about being able to bombard every second day but I can't put my finger on it. Maybe it is reasonable given the proximity of his port. Did the allies historically use their BBs to bombard each day or two, or did they only do it sparingly? And if they didn't do it every possible opportunity, why not? Chance of wearing out the gun barrels? I'm just curious, not complaining, but I am wondering what the historical drawback to using a ship to shell a coast day after day was (if any?). You only really hear about shore bombardment accompanying invasions.

He has 71 land units (250,000 troops) in Hakkodate along with his fleet. I am watching these guys closely. If he wants to invade somewhere down the coast, we'll at least have some warning when he loads up the troops.

I've given up trying to contest the air in northern Honshu. I just can't compete with 3200 fighters near his base. If I send in strikes, they come in dribs and drabs and get chewed up before they can do anything. I've got to save my naval air force and remaining navy in case he wants to come down the coast. If he keeps sending troops up north, it is going to be up to the army to stop them. But any landing south of those 4 bases in the north (or a move towards the Bonins/Ryukus/other) will be fiercely contested with KB, LBA, and remaining surface forces.

I have a feeling that I'll be able to hold out for about another year until around September 1945 when the ETO forces arrive. After that there won't be much that can stop the Allied jugernaut. And with the ahistorically fast pace of operations possible in AE, it might not last long past that point. I'm hoping to hold out at least until xmas 1945... in fact, that's my goal for both games (see Taming the Bear).

< Message edited by rader -- 1/21/2012 11:11:37 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 329

RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A) - 1/21/2012 11:39:44 PM

JohnDillworth

Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline

quote:

Unless you count Mikasa, but that's a cruiser sized pre-dreadnought

Been on the Mass also. I've had the pleasure of seeing the New Jersey at sea, well at river. Operation Sail, sometime in the early 80's I think she went up the Hudson. I was surprised how low to the water she looked. Very business like. Most of the other ships were newer. A BB is a BB and nothing looks like a big gun ship.
Do you still have the Musahsi, Nagato & Mutsu? Those have equal guns

_____________________________

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 330

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A)