naval bombardment.

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

naval bombardment.

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 >> Tech Support >> naval bombardment.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

naval bombardment. - 11/1/2013 4:38:08 PM

MDDgames

Posts: 90
Joined: 7/6/2013
Status: offline

My understanding was that naval forces bombing a base must first defeat the shore guns before other targets can be hit.

This is not working. The following Unit went untouched, yet the airfield was flattened. There are other land units in the hex with DP guns as well. If the limitation is CDU units only, this kind of screws the Jap player huge because he only gets 2 or 3 mobile CDUs.

Also, the shore guns never fired back at him. He hit with CAs, CLs, and DDs.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by MDDgames -- 11/1/2013 4:44:52 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/1/2013 4:51:58 PM

MDDgames

Posts: 90
Joined: 7/6/2013
Status: offline

In the same vein, this unit was sitting in the Merak hex (straights off the left side of Java) and never fired at ships passing through the straight. This was several months back.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by MDDgames -- 11/1/2013 4:52:30 PM >

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 2

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/1/2013 5:30:38 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

I don't believe your understanding is correct.

If the shore bombardment force is set to bombard from outside the range of the coastal defense guns they can and will bombard with complete impunity never being fired on by the shore guns.

Its all dependent on the size of the guns which determines the range of the guns on both sides.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 3

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/1/2013 6:29:45 PM

dr.hal

Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline

Like Hans, I'm not sure your basic assumption is correct. I've never silenced a shore battery while conducting bombardment even if the range is close enough for the battery to engage. I don't recall reading about such a rule in either the manual or any of the follow-on upgrades. Hal

_____________________________

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 4

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/1/2013 6:45:52 PM

Crackaces

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

quote:

My understanding was that naval forces bombing a base must first defeat the shore guns before other targets can be hit.

Although I have certainly have been plastered by CD guns that I have failed to neutralize, it is quite possible for platforms set for the bombardment mission to engage other targets in the hex including port facilities, the airfields and LCU's in the hex. If Allied and IJ LCU's share the hex I believe the LCU's receive the brunt of the attack. I would suspect a die roll and subsequent modifiers for what targets are engaged ..

Putting platforms to support an amphib operation I see primary engagement of the CD's LCU's and more so than the other LCU's until the CD's are neutralized. Typically the invader hopes that land combat neutralizes the CD's because if this situation is allowed to continue the invasion force can be smacked by CD's the next turn(s) ..

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to dr.hal)

Post #: 5

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/1/2013 8:09:07 PM

Spidery

Posts: 1821
Joined: 10/6/2012
From: Hampshire, UK
Status: offline

quote:

In the same vein, this unit was sitting in the Merak hex (straights off the left side of Java) and never fired at ships passing through the straight. This was several months back.

There are wide and narrow straits, Merak is not listed as a narrow strait in section 20.3 of the manual.

In section 4.2.1.3 of the manual it says:

Vulnerability to attack by Coastal Guns: Task Forces moving
through straits are more likely to be attacked by coastal guns that
are located in the hexes either side of the strait hexside.

The "more likely" I think is important, there is no guarantee that CD guns will engage in a strait and, in particular, a wide strait.

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 6

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/1/2013 8:09:50 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames

In the same vein, this unit was sitting in the Merak hex (straights off the left side of Java) and never fired at ships passing through the straight. This was several months back.

You should consult Appendix C on straits, as well as Section 4.2.1.3.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 7

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/1/2013 8:49:17 PM

Captain Cruft

Posts: 3652
Joined: 3/17/2004
From: England
Status: offline

The Hong Kong Def Force doesn't have any actual CD guns either. Those devices are "Army Weapons", which only fire on ships when they are unloading troops.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 8

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/2/2013 12:11:10 PM

MDDgames

Posts: 90
Joined: 7/6/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

I don't believe your understanding is correct.

If the shore bombardment force is set to bombard from outside the range of the coastal defense guns they can and will bombard with complete impunity never being fired on by the shore guns.

Its all dependent on the size of the guns which determines the range of the guns on both sides.

Unlikly he set bombardment range to 18 (which is the only range where the DDs could fire and the DP guns couldnt) since he has no idea what units are in the hex. Plus I think it unlikely he would have caused as much damage as he did at max range with the small force he had. Also since his subs have been on station since the beginning of the game, not moving (which makes them useless when under an ASW air umbrella) he probably hasnt set a range, thus using the default settings.

< Message edited by MDDgames -- 11/2/2013 12:29:42 PM >

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 9

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/2/2013 12:12:40 PM

MDDgames

Posts: 90
Joined: 7/6/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

The Hong Kong Def Force doesn't have any actual CD guns either. Those devices are "Army Weapons", which only fire on ships when they are unloading troops.

Well, then this is wrong and should be changed, since the unit itself is a type "Coastal Defense Unit", wouldnt you think? (look at the unit icon for proof).

Edit, and seems to me, if the naval vessels are shooting, then land units (army or otherwise) can shoot back if they are in range. Im reasonably sure the 105mms at Guadalcanal probably fired back at Japanese bombardment groups when they started shooting. Im not a gun bunny, but if I was and I was there, I would be shooting back with anything I could down to and including my M-1.

As a friend once told me when they were quick firing M113 mounted 81mm mortars "if the rounds land somewhere in Europe, Im happy". At least theyre shooting.

< Message edited by MDDgames -- 11/2/2013 12:21:49 PM >

(in reply to Captain Cruft)

Post #: 10

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/2/2013 1:33:10 PM

Miller

Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

Small force?

bombardment of Ailinglaplap at 133,117

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-44-IIa Tojo: 351 damaged
Ki-44-IIa Tojo: 9 destroyed on ground
A6M2 Zero: 310 damaged
A6M2 Zero: 16 destroyed on ground
E13A1 Jake: 70 damaged
E13A1 Jake: 5 destroyed on ground

Allied Ships
CA Frobisher
CA Australia
CA Wichita
CA Vincennes
CA Quincy
CA San Francisco
CA Minneapolis
CA Astoria
CA Pensacola
CA Chester
CA Indianapolis
CL Trenton
CL Detroit
CL Richmond
CL Birmingham
CL Mauritius
CL Hobart
CL Perth
CL Achilles
CL Leander
DD Saufley
DD Radford
DMS Chandler
DMS Lamberton
DMS Trevor

Japanese ground losses:
162 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 33 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 8 (1 destroyed, 7 disabled)
Vehicles lost 10 (2 destroyed, 8 disabled)

Airbase hits 78
Airbase supply hits 25
Runway hits 172

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 11

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/2/2013 2:42:21 PM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames

Well, then this is wrong and should be changed, since the unit itself is a type "Coastal Defense Unit", wouldnt you think? (look at the unit icon for proof).

Unit designations do not always mean they are of that type. CD designation assigns special code to the unit that the dev's likely wanted to apply. I think you're a little 'young' to be taking the attitude that the game is in error. As already pointed out, there are numerous "operator error" items that could easily have accounted for the results.

The "gun bunnies" as you refer to them have weighed in on this before (army howitzers engaging naval forces) in detail which you would know if you had made the effort to search first. You may pleasure yourself with a search in the general forum for their thoughts. I can hardly wait for one of them to see your reference. No doubt they will be thrilled to assist you here with your difficulty.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 12

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/3/2013 8:42:51 AM

MDDgames

Posts: 90
Joined: 7/6/2013
Status: offline

I am wondering what point you were trying to make?

Did a quickie google search for artillery firing back at shore bombarding ships. Already knowing the answer (yes they DID shoot back), I didnt look too long before I found that according to records from DDs Frankford, Doyle, and Emmons at Normandy, they were indeed shot at by light artillery and often hit.

Im going to project that if the Germans did it at Normandy, it would not be too far fetched to believe that it was standard practice in the Pacific as well.

http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/destroyersatnormandy.htm

Note, it specifically said light artillery, not shore guns. Therefore, not only shore guns in the target hex should be shooting back, but every artillery piece in range, including mortars.

Now, I think its time to fix this hole in the game. Michael, what say you?

< Message edited by MDDgames -- 11/3/2013 8:50:38 AM >

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 13

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/3/2013 8:48:20 AM

MDDgames

Posts: 90
Joined: 7/6/2013
Status: offline

double post

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 14

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/3/2013 11:08:32 AM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames
I am wondering what point you were trying to make?
...what say you?

WAD

< Message edited by PaxMondo -- 11/3/2013 11:10:10 AM >

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 15

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/3/2013 12:30:18 PM

KenchiSulla

Posts: 2948
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline

If you do not take range into account - 12cm and 8cm guns are really wimpy compared to the 8 inch/20cm guns of heavy cruisers.... They are ok for disrupting transports but do not expect anything against warships...

_____________________________

AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.�
� Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 16

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/3/2013 6:47:38 PM

MDDgames

Posts: 90
Joined: 7/6/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

If you do not take range into account - 12cm and 8cm guns are really wimpy compared to the 8 inch/20cm guns of heavy cruisers.... They are ok for disrupting transports but do not expect anything against warships...

The point is, they DIDNT SHOOT AT ALL. I dont care HOW "wimpy" they are.

(in reply to KenchiSulla)

Post #: 17

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/3/2013 6:48:17 PM

MDDgames

Posts: 90
Joined: 7/6/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames
I am wondering what point you were trying to make?
...what say you?

WAD

Didnt ask you. Dont care what your opinion is. I asked Michael. Because his is the only opinion that matters.

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 18

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/3/2013 7:02:27 PM

Don Bowen

Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames
I am wondering what point you were trying to make?
...what say you?

WAD

Didnt ask you. Dont care what your opinion is. I asked Michael. Because his is the only opinion that matters.

I predict you will have a brief and unhappy AE experience.

< Message edited by Don Bowen -- 11/3/2013 7:37:02 PM >

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 19

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/4/2013 12:51:51 AM

Miller

Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames
I am wondering what point you were trying to make?
...what say you?

WAD

Didnt ask you. Dont care what your opinion is. I asked Michael. Because his is the only opinion that matters.

So who is this Michael? I hope he comments on this.......

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 20

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/4/2013 1:37:58 AM

erstad

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline

quote:

Unlikly he set bombardment range to 18 (which is the only range where the DDs could fire and the DP guns couldnt) since he has no idea what units are in the hex.

Note there is a one click option to set the range to the minimum range of the bombarding guns. Many folks might routinely click that. Has nothing to do with knowing what units are present.

Doesn't prove your opponent *did* set the range. But absent other data one can't assume he *didn't* set the range.

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 21

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/4/2013 11:41:29 AM

Miller

Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

Range was set to zero. The only ships those guns could have damaged anyway were the DDs/DMS....

(in reply to erstad)

Post #: 22

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/4/2013 1:40:40 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

If range is set to zero, it just uses the default range, as it was before there was a range setting available, right?

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to Miller)

Post #: 23

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/5/2013 12:15:07 AM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

If range is set to zero, it just uses the default range, as it was before there was a range setting available, right?

That's my understanding.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 24

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/5/2013 11:25:09 AM

MDDgames

Posts: 90
Joined: 7/6/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

Range was set to zero. The only ships those guns could have damaged anyway were the DDs/DMS....

Right. But he didnt.

And again, the guns didnt fire AT ALL, as did none of the other guns in the hex. It is broken.

And truth be told, that isnt true either. Ive had the Yamato catch fire and burn down from 40mm hits from PT boats.

< Message edited by MDDgames -- 11/5/2013 12:27:56 PM >

(in reply to Miller)

Post #: 25

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/5/2013 11:53:01 AM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
I predict you will have a brief and unhappy AE experience.

+1

Even if the guns would have fired back it wouldn�t have changed anything one bit. A couple of peashooters against 20 Cruisers...

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 11/5/2013 1:10:00 PM >

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 26

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/5/2013 11:59:25 AM

Miller

Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

Range was set to zero. The only ships those guns could have damaged anyway were the DDs/DMS....

Right. But he didnt.

And again, the guns didnt fire AT ALL, as did none of the other guns in the hex. It is broken.

And truth be told, that isnt true either. Ive had the Yamato catch fire and burn down from 40mm hits from PT boats.

Well it seems the vast consensus on here thinks that it's not a bug. So, as I have said to you previously, its either time to accept it and play on or call it quits so I can start looking for another opponent. PM me your answer.

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 27

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/5/2013 2:40:02 PM

MDDgames

Posts: 90
Joined: 7/6/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

Range was set to zero. The only ships those guns could have damaged anyway were the DDs/DMS....

Right. But he didnt.

And again, the guns didnt fire AT ALL, as did none of the other guns in the hex. It is broken.

And truth be told, that isnt true either. Ive had the Yamato catch fire and burn down from 40mm hits from PT boats.

Well it seems the vast consensus on here thinks that it's not a bug. So, as I have said to you previously, its either time to accept it and play on or call it quits so I can start looking for another opponent. PM me your answer.

lol, no. Michael is the one and only opinion here that matters. And he hasnt responded.

And frankly, it IS a bug. No one here is disputing that. They offer excuses on why they may not have fired, while their excuses would be true under the circumstances they site, the fact is the circumstances dont apply. The 4" Mk 9 guns on your DMSs have a max range of 16, and the 120mm DP has a range of 17. The simple fact is my guns out range you, even if you HAD fired at max range (which you didnt), and my guns didnt shoot.

It IS a bug. Simple as that. But again, Michael is the one and only authority on that, and he hasnt responded as yet. And I find it laughable that I seem to be the only person here that is willing to acknowledge that fact, that being that his is the ONLY opinion that matters.

And those that dont offer a possible explanation think that attacking the poster is the answer to the problem. Such petty people.

< Message edited by MDDgames -- 11/5/2013 3:41:13 PM >

(in reply to Miller)

Post #: 28

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/5/2013 3:00:37 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

You clearly don't know who Don Bowen is.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 29

RE: naval bombardment. - 11/5/2013 3:14:19 PM

Miller

Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

quote:

ORIGINAL: MDDgames

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

Range was set to zero. The only ships those guns could have damaged anyway were the DDs/DMS....

Right. But he didnt.

And again, the guns didnt fire AT ALL, as did none of the other guns in the hex. It is broken.

And truth be told, that isnt true either. Ive had the Yamato catch fire and burn down from 40mm hits from PT boats.

Well it seems the vast consensus on here thinks that it's not a bug. So, as I have said to you previously, its either time to accept it and play on or call it quits so I can start looking for another opponent. PM me your answer.

lol, no. Michael is the one and only opinion here that matters. And he hasnt responded.

And frankly, it IS a bug. No one here is disputing that. They offer excuses on why they may not have fired, while their excuses would be true under the circumstances they site, the fact is the circumstances dont apply. The 4" Mk 9 guns on your DMSs have a max range of 16, and the 120mm DP has a range of 17. The simple fact is my guns out range you, even if you HAD fired at max range (which you didnt), and my guns didnt shoot.

It IS a bug. Simple as that. But again, Michael is the one and only authority on that, and he hasnt responded as yet. And I find it laughable that I seem to be the only person here that is willing to acknowledge that fact, that being that his is the ONLY opinion that matters.

And those that dont offer a possible explanation think that attacking the poster is the answer to the problem. Such petty people.

Ok. Lets assume, for arguments sake, it is a bug. What would you have expected the outcome to be if they had fired? In an email to me you stated that if your guns had fired I would have inflicted no damage at all to the airfield. Seriously? 160-ish 8" and 6" guns vs 2 x 5" and a handful of 3". Come on.

The net result is you have lost, I estimate, 50 fighters on the ground and the field is closed for a turn or two. You have no strike planes based there so its not as if the result stopped you launching a counter strike the next day either. I have offered to suspend any further bombardments for the time being. Do you really want to give up on this game after the amount of time we had dedicated to it over this issue? Seriously?

(in reply to MDDgames)

Post #: 30