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: Disaster!

 
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: Disaster! Page: <<   < prev  229 230 [231] 232 233   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Disaster! - 3/3/2016 1:50:27 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		The defenders of Nagoya. Two depot divisions make it today. Here is the plan, break down all division but 1. That lucky division will get nailed by the 7 BB, 8CA, plus 60 other smaller ships.

The next day they will fragment, and another division will rebuild and take it on the chin.

I hope this protects all the fragments and rgts and brigades.

Also, today 4 more tank regiments have arrived. Every day without an attack and my command prep gets better.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6901
RE: Disaster! - 3/3/2016 1:53:19 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		A good day in the air. A very rare positive victory point day.

I had a good attack against some Fletchers with a squadron of Myojo...they all miss in the morning, and their A6M5c escorts take it on chin but get all the bombers thru.

Then the Myojos decide to fly in the afternoon too. The Mustangs have a field day on them. Sigh.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 3/3/2016 1:59:36 AM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6902
RE: Disaster! - 3/5/2016 5:26:03 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		August 4th, 1944

Nagoya bombarded and then aerially bombed and then artillery bombarded. 7000AV on the Allies, up to 3800 for the Empire.

MTBs continue to earn their points...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6903
RE: Disaster! - 3/5/2016 5:31:07 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Two decent battles for Japan in the jungle. Won't last as supplies are being dwindled...

Allies moving on closing down the pocket before moving into China proper I think.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6904
RE: Disaster! - 3/9/2016 4:17:16 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Tiemanj is tied up and mentioned slower turns for a while...

I have 3800 AV in Nagoya, with almost every spare Tank regiment there. They seem to really be able to avoid the naval bombardments and do pretty well against aerial bombing too.

I am now starting my daily routine of having one large division take the brunt of the naval bombardments every three days and building up other splintered division for the other days and cycling them thru.

I need to add up the amount of infantry I now have on Reserves, I believe it is around 800. I have one crack division with 80+ experience I will leave broken down and in reserve mode.

I am moving more CD gun units here, and will move them in and out of Nagoya in the hopes of inflicting some wear and tear and the Allied bombardment ships.

I am expecting a full out bombing of Nagoya followed by a shock attack this turn. Cross your fingers.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 3/9/2016 4:18:10 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6905
RE: Disaster! - 3/9/2016 4:59:31 PM   
Crackaces


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

I am moving more CD gun units here, and will move them in and out of Nagoya in the hopes of inflicting some wear and tear and the Allied bombardment ships


I might propose that If the Allies are ignoring bombardment distances and just coming in close the CD guns might take their toll
But .. if those CD guns start firing and in particular I think they will fire during bombardment artillery attacks and consume big amounts of supply
others might comment ...

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6906
RE: Disaster! - 3/9/2016 7:25:26 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline 		Supply consumption is based upon LC ... so depends upon the size of the CD guns ... not too many of them are mobile, and those that are don't have that big of guns nor that many.

Good news for your ID is that CD's are bombardment magnets, so they will bear the brunt of the bombardment....

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 6907
RE: Disaster! - 3/11/2016 2:46:21 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Aug 5th, 1944

Allies keep making good progress in Vietnam pushing from the north, south, and west.

No heavy aerial bombing on Nagoya (but normal naval bombardment by 75 ships), Allies pick other targets and hit the runways north of Osaka and Keijo! Will the vehicle factory at Keijo be next, that will cripple Japanese morale as those 5 type 3 tanks a day are really making a difference and to see them all go by the wayside for the rest of the game will be a bitter pill.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 3/11/2016 2:54:03 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6908
RE: Disaster! - 3/11/2016 2:53:07 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Notice the blue waterside hexes that prevent Allied movement and expansion. They are pretty tactical.

Matsuyama is free of the Allied attacker. For now.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6909
RE: Disaster! - 3/11/2016 6:11:34 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Supply consumption is based upon LC ... so depends upon the size of the CD guns ... not too many of them are mobile, and those that are don't have that big of guns nor that many.

Good news for your ID is that CD's are bombardment magnets, so they will bear the brunt of the bombardment....


Not for guns in a LCU.

Every device in a LCU consumes 1 supply point per month. That amount changes if combat is involved and the number of shots the unit takes. Each shot adds 10% to supply consumption and the maximum is 10 shots, which amounts to doubling the supply consumption.

For LCUs, there is no internal tracking of device ammo levels or supply consumption. The tracking is only at the LCU level.

Naval guns on ships have a different supply consumption algorithm to naval guns in a LCU.

Alfred

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 6910
RE: Disaster! - 3/11/2016 8:50:14 PM   
Drakanel

 

Posts: 253
Joined: 4/6/2015
Status: offline 		I really hope you manage to keep Nagoya for as long as possible. Banzai!

Now the real problem would be if he were to land somewhere else...

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 6911
RE: Disaster! - 3/12/2016 12:28:08 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Supply consumption is based upon LC ... so depends upon the size of the CD guns ... not too many of them are mobile, and those that are don't have that big of guns nor that many.

Good news for your ID is that CD's are bombardment magnets, so they will bear the brunt of the bombardment....


Not for guns in a LCU.

Every device in a LCU consumes 1 supply point per month. That amount changes if combat is involved and the number of shots the unit takes. Each shot adds 10% to supply consumption and the maximum is 10 shots, which amounts to doubling the supply consumption.

For LCUs, there is no internal tracking of device ammo levels or supply consumption. The tracking is only at the LCU level.

Naval guns on ships have a different supply consumption algorithm to naval guns in a LCU.

Alfred


Alfred, I don't think you mentioned this supply expenditure in your Supply Opus. Very good to know.

I assume supply points spent by engineers building forts is above the general lcu supply costs and is not subject to doubling if attacked enough times.

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 6912
RE: Disaster! - 3/12/2016 12:29:00 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Drakanel

I really hope you manage to keep Nagoya for as long as possible. Banzai!

Now the real problem would be if he were to land somewhere else...



You and me both. He will land somewhere else....at least he should.

(in reply to Drakanel)
Post #: 6913
RE: Disaster! - 3/14/2016 12:35:48 AM   
Crackaces


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

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Supply consumption is based upon LC ... so depends upon the size of the CD guns ... not too many of them are mobile, and those that are don't have that big of guns nor that many.

Good news for your ID is that CD's are bombardment magnets, so they will bear the brunt of the bombardment....


Not for guns in a LCU.

Every device in a LCU consumes 1 supply point per month. That amount changes if combat is involved and the number of shots the unit takes. Each shot adds 10% to supply consumption and the maximum is 10 shots, which amounts to doubling the supply consumption.

For LCUs, there is no internal tracking of device ammo levels or supply consumption. The tracking is only at the LCU level.

Naval guns on ships have a different supply consumption algorithm to naval guns in a LCU.

Alfred


This is a damn interesting problem .. so the smaller guns that take more shots use up more supply ? So bombarding at a range the encourages the smaller guns at thir maximum range seems in my line of thinking to burn up the enemies supplies at the lowest risk?
That also suggests to me that constant flows of bombardment that day after day get the maximum shots and constant disruption is better than a big bombardment with rest in between ..

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 6914
RE: Disaster! - 3/14/2016 8:36:29 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Supply consumption is based upon LC ... so depends upon the size of the CD guns ... not too many of them are mobile, and those that are don't have that big of guns nor that many.

Good news for your ID is that CD's are bombardment magnets, so they will bear the brunt of the bombardment....


Not for guns in a LCU.

Every device in a LCU consumes 1 supply point per month. That amount changes if combat is involved and the number of shots the unit takes. Each shot adds 10% to supply consumption and the maximum is 10 shots, which amounts to doubling the supply consumption.

For LCUs, there is no internal tracking of device ammo levels or supply consumption. The tracking is only at the LCU level.

Naval guns on ships have a different supply consumption algorithm to naval guns in a LCU.

Alfred


Alfred, I don't think you mentioned this supply expenditure in your Supply Opus. Very good to know.

I assume supply points spent by engineers building forts is above the general lcu supply costs and is not subject to doubling if attacked enough times.


I have covered it in much more detail in other posts. See this early 2015 thread which has probably escaped your attention.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3778277&mpage=1&key=supply�

As always one needs to read all my posts in a thread and click on any supplied linked threads.

The basic position is quite simple.

1. Supply consumption for ground units involved in combat is tracked at the LCU level.

2. Supply consumption from combat is not tracked internally for each individual device within the LCU.

3. The amount of additional supply brought about by combat applies to the entire LCU and not to individual devices within the LCU. This LCU tracking level is determined on the basis of shots involving the LCU, not on the basis of participation of individual devices.

4. An LCU with a nominal supply consumption of 1500 will go to 1650 after a single attack by the enemy with no return fire. I have detailed this in post #6840 in this this AAR.

5. Engineer expenditure on non combat tasks is added to the nominal supply estimate.

Alfred

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6915
RE: Disaster! - 3/14/2016 8:49:47 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Supply consumption is based upon LC ... so depends upon the size of the CD guns ... not too many of them are mobile, and those that are don't have that big of guns nor that many.

Good news for your ID is that CD's are bombardment magnets, so they will bear the brunt of the bombardment....


Not for guns in a LCU.

Every device in a LCU consumes 1 supply point per month. That amount changes if combat is involved and the number of shots the unit takes. Each shot adds 10% to supply consumption and the maximum is 10 shots, which amounts to doubling the supply consumption.

For LCUs, there is no internal tracking of device ammo levels or supply consumption. The tracking is only at the LCU level.

Naval guns on ships have a different supply consumption algorithm to naval guns in a LCU.

Alfred


This is a damn interesting problem .. so the smaller guns that take more shots use up more supply ? So bombarding at a range the encourages the smaller guns at thir maximum range seems in my line of thinking to burn up the enemies supplies at the lowest risk?
That also suggests to me that constant flows of bombardment that day after day get the maximum shots and constant disruption is better than a big bombardment with rest in between ..



No.

See the preceding post of mine.

Individual devices within the LCU do not track their supply consumption as such. It is the unit itself which tracks supply irrespective of which devices within it directly participated in combat or how "often" they did. The number of times the devices participate gets credited to the unit's "shots".

Personally I don't think the term "shots" is the best term but it is what the devs employed. Better would be something along the lines of "participation rounds" involving the LCU.

It isn't that smaller guns firing more often use up more supply. Each participation round involving the smaller guns ups by 10% the estimated supply consumption of the entire LCU by 10%. A participation round which sees no involvement by the smaller guns still sees the LCU increase its estimated supply consumption by 10%.

So whilst not technically correct regarding the mechanics of the smaller guns, the conclusion of regular bombardments rather than a single nuclear bombardment would generally be correct. I say generally because the nuclear bombardment might result in greater damage to devices in term of readiness, disruptions, fatigue etc which all have their own supply consumption needs to make right.

Alfred

(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 6916
RE: Disaster! - 3/14/2016 11:19:38 AM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline 		Ok the concept of "participation rounds" (vs. "shots") really clarified the point for me. Thanks Alfred!

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 6917
RE: Disaster! - 3/14/2016 4:22:02 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

I have covered it in much more detail in other posts. See this early 2015 thread which has probably escaped your attention.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3778277&mpage=1&key=supply�

As always one needs to read all my posts in a thread and click on any supplied linked threads.

The basic position is quite simple.

1. Supply consumption for ground units involved in combat is tracked at the LCU level.

2. Supply consumption from combat is not tracked internally for each individual device within the LCU.

3. The amount of additional supply brought about by combat applies to the entire LCU and not to individual devices within the LCU. This LCU tracking level is determined on the basis of shots involving the LCU, not on the basis of participation of individual devices.

4. An LCU with a nominal supply consumption of 1500 will go to 1650 after a single attack by the enemy with no return fire. I have detailed this in post #6840 in this this AAR.

5. Engineer expenditure on non combat tasks is added to the nominal supply estimate.

Alfred


Thanks so much for the link; I did indeed missed seeing it for whatever reason.

I also enjoyed reading the Strafing linked article too.


(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 6918
RE: Disaster! - 3/15/2016 3:39:57 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Aug7 1944

Shanghai gets rough treatment...Yank Carriers heading for Yellow Sea and my remaining battleships?

Allies sweep a base in Korea, I had been using it for LRCAP over the vehicle factory at Keijo and some LRCAP fighters bleed over...never a good result.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6919
RE: Disaster! - 3/15/2016 3:40:49 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Losses in the air today.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6920
RE: Disaster! - 3/15/2016 3:47:09 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Nagoya rotation of big units, and breaking down in splinters to recover, seems to be working well.

I wish I could figure out a way for the Artillery to recover a bit.

Armor is in great shape, 0 disruption.

600 AV roughly in reserve mode no pursuit mode.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 3/15/2016 3:48:16 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6921
RE: Disaster! - 3/17/2016 3:51:31 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		August 8,1944






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6922
RE: Disaster! - 3/17/2016 3:53:43 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		B29s hit lots of ships, but nothing sinks.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6923
RE: Disaster! - 3/17/2016 3:55:42 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		The defense crumbles.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6924
RE: Disaster! - 3/17/2016 3:58:44 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Air losses. 4Es raid Yokohama, site of the greatest AA concentration and barely a scratch on the Allied bombers.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6925
RE: Disaster! - 3/17/2016 4:08:08 PM   
witpqs


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Air losses. 4Es raid Yokohama, site of the greatest AA concentration and barely a scratch on the Allied bombers.






What altitude did they use?

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6926
RE: Disaster! - 3/17/2016 4:24:15 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		One can only hope they need to repair for a while.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 6927
RE: Disaster! - 3/17/2016 5:08:08 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline 		That is a concern. I take it the Yokohama base force has had it's TOE upgrade?

If so, that's 90 odd 12.7cm DP guns firing that didn't manage to destroy a plane outright, let alone what other AA units were in the hex. Considering the 12.7cm DP is one of the (if not the best) Japanese flak device, that has me worried. At 7000ft even the 8cm flak pop-guns should have been having a go...

Granted, nearly 10% of the raid suffered damage, but not a single outright loss to flak?

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6928
RE: Disaster! - 3/17/2016 8:39:07 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

That is a concern. I take it the Yokohama base force has had it's TOE upgrade?

If so, that's 90 odd 12.7cm DP guns firing that didn't manage to destroy a plane outright, let alone what other AA units were in the hex. Considering the 12.7cm DP is one of the (if not the best) Japanese flak device, that has me worried. At 7000ft even the 8cm flak pop-guns should have been having a go...

Granted, nearly 10% of the raid suffered damage, but not a single outright loss to flak?



Not very pleasant eh?

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 6929
RE: Disaster! - 3/17/2016 8:53:31 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

That is a concern. I take it the Yokohama base force has had it's TOE upgrade?

If so, that's 90 odd 12.7cm DP guns firing that didn't manage to destroy a plane outright, let alone what other AA units were in the hex. Considering the 12.7cm DP is one of the (if not the best) Japanese flak device, that has me worried. At 7000ft even the 8cm flak pop-guns should have been having a go...

Granted, nearly 10% of the raid suffered damage, but not a single outright loss to flak?



Not very pleasant eh?


This seems not quite right. I can't remember now completely but I'm pretty sure either Yokohama or Hiroshima was hit in my game and the AA did some damage.

Base leaders?

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 6930
Page:   <<   < prev  229 230 [231] 232 233   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Disaster! Page: <<   < prev  229 230 [231] 232 233   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

1.172