shore bombardment

[witpqs]

Example of above, using Moose's "standing on the beach". Let's say that means you are almost 4 feet above sea level. You are average height and wearing combat boots (it's AE!), so let's call your eye height 10 feet as a round number. Looking up on the table gives us 3.7 nm.

The top of the highest mast of the ship you trying to spot is - I am making this up, use your own better figure - 50 ft. Looking that up on the table yields 8.3 nm.

3.7 nm + 8.3 nm = 12 nm.

So standing on the beach in the way I described it, you can see the tip of a 50 ft high object when it is 12 nm away.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Go stand on a beach at sea level. Can you see 40 miles out to sea? Twenty miles? No? There you go.

From Bowditch:

Now do it for the night move phase.

0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0 . . . [:)]

[witpqs]

I thought that mooses ate carrots! [:D]

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I thought that mooses ate carrots! [:D]

When we can get them. The Cub Foods is frequently out, however. [:'(]

[John B.]

Bullwinkle,

Thanks for the very helpful post pointing out that I can't see 40 nm or even 20 nm out to sea. However, I do believe that I can see 1,000 yards, 2,000 yards, heck, I'll be wild and say that I can even see 3,000 yards out to sea. You do know that 3,000 yards is less than 20 nm right? Right?

As I've said all along, it makes sense to me that CD guns are much more helpful against invasion but I think that they would at least shoot when ships are close in and bombarding. As I said, I think that there is a problem with the CD units.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: John B.

Bullwinkle,

Thanks for the very helpful post pointing out that I can't see 40 nm or even 20 nm out to sea. However, I do believe that I can see 1,000 yards, 2,000 yards, heck, I'll be wild and say that I can even see 3,000 yards out to sea. You do know that 3,000 yards is less than 20 nm right? Right?

As I've said all along, it makes sense to me that CD guns are much more helpful against invasion but I think that they would at least shoot when ships are close in and bombarding. As I said, I think that there is a problem with the CD units.

From personal experience in the Pacific and IO I can say you frequently can't see 3000 yards out to sea from a beach on a moonless night. From personal experience I can also say that remaining at battlestations 24/7/365 is impossible. Think of the CD crews as being at chow when the shells start coming in from over the horizon and they're hampered in getting to the guns and unlimbering them before the hailstorm is over.

Or just accept this is the way the game works. As I've said several times there are defenses against bombardments. Use your own navy. Make it costly or at least risky for him.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: John B.

However, I do believe that I can see 1,000 yards, 2,000 yards, heck, I'll be wild and say that I can even see 3,000 yards out to sea.

Are you saying that those bombardments are at 1,000, 2,000, or 3,000 yards off shore? The combat reports screen pics that you give don't have that information. It would be extremely - insanely - unusual for a naval bombardment to be conducted at that range.

[John B.]

Witpqs,

Here, for example, is an IJN CA bombarding from 4,000 yards. I see this all the time. And, I think I've seen DD's come in closer but not in the last few rounds and I don't feel like combing files to find those. Is there a different version of the game where they won't come in this close?

@Bullwinkle, I agree with you that no one can see on a moonless night. Yet the IJN comes in and does quite well in the bombardments. At Henderson field they used star shells and I suspect that's what is modeled here otherwise they would be firing blind and doing a really good job. Just like there would be star shells used by the defending forces. And, I also agree that no installation is manned 100% 24/7. But, the gun emplacements are not empty with everyone miles away. I can understand reduced effectiveness and I can understand fewer shots, it's time and again when no one shoots anything that I don't understand.

If I've offended you by criticizing an aspect of the game that's not my intent and I apologize. I think that the game models many things quite well and is certainly much better than anything I could ever do. I just happen to think that it is quite unrealistic for CD batteries to not shoot at all with shore bombardments coming in night after night. If that's the way the game is than that's the way that it is, but, being on the receiving end I don't have to like it.

[witpqs]

OK, I see 4,000 yards. If you are playing against the AI - I mean this quite sincerely - don't whine, because as you get up to speed on the game the AI will need all the help it can get to give you an enjoyably competitive game.

If you are playing against another player, it works the same for both sides. Allies take it on the chin from bombardments early, and deliver loads and loads of payback later on. See my own AAR for examples, or many others.

If you take the time to search the forum for older threads on this topic, you will see that we have gone through this many times. The answers you are getting are only so quick because they have been hashed out before. This is what we got.

[wegman58]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I thought that mooses ate carrots! [:D]

When we can get them. The Cub Foods is frequently out, however. [:'(]

You're shopping at the wrong Cub.

[Yaab]

Strange.

All the Japanese navy guns used by Jap coastal artillery units have a CD flag in Tracker.

All the Japanese DP guns used by Jap coastal artillery units have a DP flag in Tracker.

Allies have to quaint guns - the 6" gun and 155mm GPF. Both guns lack the CD flag in Tracker. All other movable Allied navy guns have the CD flag.

I guess the 6" gun (device 1036) is treated by the game code as an army weapon, and not as a naval gun. They will probably shoot when an amphibious TF unloads at Chittagong.

I guess it is a bug.

[John B.]

@Yaab, that is very interesting. I wonder if it is supposed to be that way for the 6" CD units. If so, then perhaps they can be relabled or perhaps they can be given the internal CD designation. Should I report this as a potential bug in at the other forum site?

@Witpqs. This is my fourth game. The first one was against the AI and you're more than correct, the poor AI needs all the help it can get. Both Scott and I messed up with carriers in the next two games hence we've only made it to 1943 once.

The reason why I even brought this up was when I invaded Saipan in the time I invaded in 1943 the IJA CD unit kept bashing my bombardment TFs and now I'm not getting anything out of my own CD units.

Interestingly, I tried to run some allied bombardments so I set up face to face for 1941 and grounded all aircraft and sent ships out of the way to hurry through turns to get bombardment TFs to Saipan and Cam Ranh Bay to try some experiments. I did one bombardment with PoW and Repulse on Cam Ranh at 14K and it did give me the same results I have been getting in Chittagong. That is, no CD fire. So, maybe it is a range thing.

I could not continue to try other bombardments. The funny thing is that I could not rerun the turns. In fact, the computer has taken over and converted the game into one against the AI and it has flown planes and sent out ships to intercept me. I guess it just could not stand the fact that the IJN was not bashing the allies in December 1941 [:)].

[Yaab]

The range of 6" guns is 17,000 yards. If you check the manual for field guns and their range, it says the bigger the range the higher the CHANCE to shoot. Maybe it works the same for naval guns? Ships bombarding at 14,000 yards may not be engaged by guns with max range of 17,000 yards. Try to run bombardment TFs at 5,000 yards and see if you get any reaction from the CD unit.

[Symon]

I don't really care what Tracker says. The 6in M1903, 6" Mk V/VII and 6" Mk XI/XII are Naval Guns (at least in Babes, other scens, you are on your own). That means they shoot in any combat algorithm designated as Naval, including bombardment. Period. There is no such thing as a CD Gun. There are only CD units. And just because a unit has a gun that you people think should be a CD gun, isn't informative. The 155mm GPF was an ARTILLERY weapon. Ok, it was used as an anti-ship weapon, but BFD! If you think you are informed enough to tweak the paradigm, I would love to hear from you. Otherwise,you get what you get.

[Yaab]

Symon, I am nowhere near to tweak anything. I just find it puzzling why a CD unit equipped with navy guns would not consistently engage a bombarding TF firing at 4,000 yards. CD units for both sides are few and far between, and if they do not fire, it is a major disappointment for the player using them.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Symon, I am nowhere near to tweak anything. I just find it puzzling why a CD unit equipped with navy guns would not consistently engage a bombarding TF firing at 4,000 yards. CD units for both sides are few and far between, and if they do not fire, it is a major disappointment for the player using them.

Of course there could be more than one thing involved. The scenario they (he) are playing might have an error in the definition (Babes corrected many, many such things). "But" I am not convinced that the performance is so wrong. Yes, ships in AE probably do get to bombard more than IRL, and that's a separate issue. The CD unit in the pic does not have a radar device. Ships at night are going to be in and out of visual detection range pretty quickly. Maybe there are other surface search radars in the hex, but I don't recall reading that.

[witpaemail]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Symon, I am nowhere near to tweak anything. I just find it puzzling why a CD unit equipped with navy guns would not consistently engage a bombarding TF firing at 4,000 yards. CD units for both sides are few and far between, and if they do not fire, it is a major disappointment for the player using them.

Of course there could be more than one thing involved. The scenario they (he) are playing might have an error in the definition (Babes corrected many, many such things). "But" I am not convinced that the performance is so wrong. Yes, ships in AE probably do get to bombard more than IRL, and that's a separate issue. The CD unit in the pic does not have a radar device. Ships at night are going to be in and out of visual detection range pretty quickly. Maybe there are other surface search radars in the hex, but I don't recall reading that.

Umm, a ship that shoots at night is pretty easily spotted out to 17,000 yards or more...

Not to mention that Japanese optics and listening gear was actually better than early allied RADAR units. And since you pointed out the NAVAL guns attached to CD units are in fact NAVAL, they would be manned by NAVAL crews, which were well trained in night combat techniques.

Now, from the allied side, they should be handicapped until the superior RADAR sets arrived in 43 and later. Tell that to the Dutch shore guns that always seem to b*tch-slap my landing forces

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: witpaemail

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Symon, I am nowhere near to tweak anything. I just find it puzzling why a CD unit equipped with navy guns would not consistently engage a bombarding TF firing at 4,000 yards. CD units for both sides are few and far between, and if they do not fire, it is a major disappointment for the player using them.

Of course there could be more than one thing involved. The scenario they (he) are playing might have an error in the definition (Babes corrected many, many such things). "But" I am not convinced that the performance is so wrong. Yes, ships in AE probably do get to bombard more than IRL, and that's a separate issue. The CD unit in the pic does not have a radar device. Ships at night are going to be in and out of visual detection range pretty quickly. Maybe there are other surface search radars in the hex, but I don't recall reading that.

Umm, a ship that shoots at night is pretty easily spotted out to 17,000 yards or more...

USN early war gun flashes, USN later war gun flashes, or IJN and other navies' gun flashes? Non-flashless propellant was only used early war by USN. Japanese (and AFAIK other navies) used it for the entire war.

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Strange.

All the Japanese navy guns used by Jap coastal artillery units have a CD flag in Tracker.

All the Japanese DP guns used by Jap coastal artillery units have a DP flag in Tracker.

Allies have to quaint guns - the 6" gun and 155mm GPF. Both guns lack the CD flag in Tracker. All other movable Allied navy guns have the CD flag.

I guess the 6" gun (device 1036) is treated by the game code as an army weapon, and not as a naval gun. They will probably shoot when an amphibious TF unloads at Chittagong.

I guess it is a bug.

Why do you guess device #1036 is treat by the code as an army weapon? You have looked up the editor to see the stats for that device. There is zero ambiguity in the scenario 1 database that device #1036 is a naval gun, not an army weapon nor any other type of device. The game code therefore sees device #1036 only as a naval gun and treats it as such.

There are too many people around here who accord Tracker God like qualities and infallibilities. It is neither. Whenever there is a conflict between Tracker and the game's database, Tracker is to be disregarded and only the game database is to be used. The CD flag you refer to is a Tracker invention which has no game meaning.

So far I have seen no evidence adduced to support the assertion that there is a bug here.

Alfred

[1EyedJacks]

ORIGINAL: Symon

I don't really care what Tracker says. The 6in M1903, 6" Mk V/VII and 6" Mk XI/XII are Naval Guns (at least in Babes, other scens, you are on your own). That means they shoot in any combat algorithm designated as Naval, including bombardment. Period. There is no such thing as a CD Gun. There are only CD units. And just because a unit has a gun that you people think should be a CD gun, isn't informative. The 155mm GPF was an ARTILLERY weapon. Ok, it was used as an anti-ship weapon, but BFD! If you think you are informed enough to tweak the paradigm, I would love to hear from you. Otherwise,you get what you get.

KA-CLICK!