Matrix Games Forums

The fight for Armageddon begins! The Matrix Holiday sales are starting today! Warhammer - Weapons of WarFlashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm gets huge update and a Steam release!Battle Academy 2 opens up a new front!Flashpoint Campaigns Featured on weekly Streaming SessionFrontline: The Longest Day - New Screenshots!Deal of the Week: Hannibal Rome and CarthageFlashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm gets Players Edition!To End All Wars gets its first major patch!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results

 
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: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results - 1/9/2010 4:13:50 PM   
bsq


Posts: 517
Joined: 1/5/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse


quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewKurtz


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluebook
512 shell hits is nothing since 80-90 percent of those hits were on the same 8-10 PBs. I actually saw PBs obliterated by 16-inch gun hits only to be hit again and again by other guns after that. It seems that each escorting ship was engaged by all CD-guns at the same time, regardless of earlier hits.


They way I'm seeing it, this is the crux of the issue. Had the CDs engaged the troop ships after the PBs were obviously gone (as they would have IRL, if not before they were gone), then much of the force would have been destroy at sea.

The other issue in the combat reports I notice is that the number of CDs seem to drop dramatically each turn. What is destroying them? Blown out of the water PBs?

As I pointed out elsewhere, I don't see this as a land combat issue. It is a tweak to the CD logic.




I tend to agree. From the opening post we can see that every Harbor Defense gun fired at the PB Yodozu Maru, then every gun fired at the Ginyu Maru, then at the Tonon Maru, etc. etc.

If each group of guns fired at a different vessel, then all the PBs would have been stripped away in the first couple of rounds, and more AKs would have been engaged.

If this is either a design-logic or a not working-as-designed issue, it it something to consider addressing in a future patch. I'd be interested to see more posts from players engaging CD defenses, large and small, to see if all the CD guns commonly fire at the same vessel each round.

There is also another factor. One of the limitations of the game engine is that all of the devices in each "weapons slot" fires at 1 target per round. Over half of the CD guns in the Oahu Harbor Defenses are 155mm M1A1 GPF (46 at start, expanding to 68). These are all in Weapons Slot #9. So they all fire at only 1 target.

The LCU for Oahu Harbor Defenses uses eighteen of the maximum possible 20 weapons slots. With the two available slots, the GPF guns could be split into three "batteries" (23 guns in one slot, 23 in a second, and 0 - expanding to 22, in the third). This would enable the 155s to engage three targets per round, instead of one. But this wouldn't make a difference if all the CD guns fire at only ship per round, anyway.



Then perhaps the answer is to split these down into sub units for areas with complex CD emplacements. This way a more realistic pattern of fire might be achieved.

(in reply to Blackhorse)
Post #: 331
RE: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results - 1/9/2010 4:22:20 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 15104
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse

I tend to agree. From the opening post we can see that every Harbor Defense gun fired at the PB Yodozu Maru, then every gun fired at the Ginyu Maru, then at the Tonon Maru, etc. etc.


There are probably several of these kinds of issues in the game engine.

quote:


If each group of guns fired at a different vessel, then all the PBs would have been stripped away in the first couple of rounds, and more AKs would have been engaged.



We have to be careful about having the game engine ensure that 'everything goes right', because IRL it rarely does (nor did it in WWII). The effects of smoke (generated and from burning targets), range, confusion, etc. all would hinder efforts to methodically blast the AK's. But only hinder, not prevent.

The big CD guns probably should spend more time engaging AK's (depending on sighting conditions like smoke), while smaller guns would be the first to deal with the PB's. One thing that might be happening here is that the "AK is standing offshore" code might simply be a "AK is not a target" switch in the code (maybe that's why no AK's were hit at all?). If so, it instead should simply provide a range from shore. That way only CD guns with great enough range could target the AK's. Maybe at most landing they would be immune, but with guns like those described at Oahu they could be targeted by some serious firepower.

Back on the PB thing - It sounds like the PB are maybe a) a little too tough during the combat turn and b) getting too much gunfire even after they've been gutted. On the other hand, when a PB (or anything) makes it close enough to engage then it almost certainly should elicit a response. Suppose out of an escort a PB makes it close enough to engage a 16" gun - and the smaller shore guns are not knocking out the PB quickly enough - then I certainly can see the 16" taking on the PB. After all, 3" rounds flying in through openings or onto firing positions would be damaging and need to be dealt with.

(in reply to Blackhorse)
Post #: 332
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 4:32:50 PM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

Guess a fast firing 6 inch gun firing HE shells is 1000 times more effective than a 16 inch gun slowly firing AP shells at a transport, which wouldn´t happen anyway I guess.



About twice as effective, to be exact.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 333
RE: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results - 1/9/2010 4:58:33 PM   
WITPPL


Posts: 290
Joined: 8/5/2009
Status: offline
EDIT: Actually you might be right. It might mean that they are mostly empty as I am only loading based on troop capacity of a ship and without supplies.

Loading routine as I have done pre PH Invasion:

- I never Load more than 1 LCU per TF. I do combine TFs later.
- If an LCU has troop load cost of ie 1000 I have choosen ships with 1100-1200 troop cap.
- I do not load supplies with troops.
- I do not load suplly ships up to their maximum.
All done in Amphibious mode.

If You do that, Forces will unload in one go, Anything from 1 impulse of a turn (as happened in PH) max 1 day. It works for every type of equipment, including 320 mm artillery pieces (which is BS IMHO ).

It was 3rd invasion in this game like this regarding speedy unloading.

BTW: I think that historicaly, Japanese were able to unload in one night during a Malaya invasion so i think that a model might be right here. Im just unsure about the heaviest pieces.



quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman

quote:

They were loaded to a TFs equal to their troop capacity about +20%. Thats a lot of ships but they unload in one go. That was a plan.



Do you mean that when loaded the transports had only 20 % of their load capacity utilized, and were thus 80 % empty ? Just curious.

That took a lot of planning



< Message edited by WITPPL -- 1/9/2010 5:11:05 PM >

(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 334
RE: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results - 1/9/2010 5:09:19 PM   
stuman


Posts: 3864
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline
quote:

"Doctor, the stress test killed the patient."
"No, nurse, it was the 145,000 cheeseburgers he ate over the last thirty years."


I will have to disagree with this example Bullwinkle58. At most I think it is reasonable to assume no more than 2 cheeseburgers per day. That comes out to 21,900 chesseburgers. 145,000 is just not realistic.

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 335
RE: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results - 1/9/2010 5:18:29 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline
Since the rangefinders could detect ships out to 125,000 yds from Oahu, and the 16" guns could fire on targets within 35,000 yds, I'd say there's no place an invasion fleet's transports could unload the men and supplies without coming under fire from at least the largest guns.  Even at Normandy the transports were unloading their troops within 20,000 yds of the shore; several were fired upon by large caliber guns but none were hit.  USS Arkansas, OTOH, took several 11" shell hits while bombarding the positions.

(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 336
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 5:21:42 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

Guess a fast firing 6 inch gun firing HE shells is 1000 times more effective than a 16 inch gun slowly firing AP shells at a transport, which wouldn´t happen anyway I guess.



About twice as effective, to be exact.



against a transport? What can a 16 inch gun achieve against an unarmored target if it fires AP? Not much I guess when I look at the LVPs of Treespider´s pic. The 6 inch HE shell would actually explode and the 16 inch AP would just pass through the target.

_____________________________


(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 337
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 5:30:15 PM   
Jim D Burns


Posts: 3225
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
against a transport? What can a 16 inch gun achieve against an unarmored target if it fires AP? Not much I guess when I look at the LVPs of Treespider´s pic. The 6 inch HE shell would actually explode and the 16 inch AP would just pass through the target.



Not true, if the shell hits below the waterline then you've got major problems. And in reality the further offshore transports sit the higher the angle of the plunging fire, so at some point every hit passes through the ship and exits the ship below the water line. And each different caliber of shell has a different angle of plunging fire, so there is no sweet spot a transport could sit in to avoid this at extreme ranges. AP shells might also hit something solid in the ship causing it to slow enough to detonate within the ship.

Jim


_____________________________



(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 338
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 6:15:46 PM   
ADB123

 

Posts: 1559
Joined: 8/18/2009
Status: offline
Here is a combat report from my game against the AI in which the AI attempted to move a number of multi-ship transport TFs past the guns at Bataan to Clark Field, which the AI had just captured. The mines and guns at Bataan didn't have much trouble with the small ships, and most were reported as being "obliterated" during the Combat Replay. The one MGB that got through to Clark tried to come out the next turn, and was sunk by a mine and more CD fire.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 17, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval Gun Fire at Bataan - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

3 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Japanese Ships
LB-116, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-115, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-114, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-113, Mine hits 1, heavy damage



Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-116
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-115
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-114
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-113

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval Gun Fire at Bataan - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

3 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Japanese Ships
LB-112, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-111, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-110, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-109, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-108, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-107, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-106, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-105, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-104, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-103, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-102, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-101, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 1, heavy damage



Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-112
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-111
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-110
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-109
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-108
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-107
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-106
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-105
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-104
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-103
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-102
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-101


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 413 encounters mine field at Bataan (78,77)

Japanese Ships
LB-112, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-111, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-110, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-109, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-108, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-107, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-106, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-105, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-104, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-103, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-102, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-101, Mine hits 1, heavy damage



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval Gun Fire at Bataan - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

38 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Japanese Ships
LB-505, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-504, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-503, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-502, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-501, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-135, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-134, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-133, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
MGB G-5
MGB G-4, Mine hits 2, heavy damage



Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-505
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-504
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-503
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-502
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-501
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-135
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-134
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-133
Manila Bay Defenses firing at MGB G-5
Manila Bay Defenses firing at MGB G-4


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 349 encounters mine field at Bataan (78,77)

Japanese Ships
LB-505, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-504, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-503, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-502, Mine hits 1, heavy damage





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval Gun Fire at Bataan - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

Japanese Ships
LB-120, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-119, Shell hits 1, heavy damage
LB-118, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-117, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-515, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-514, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-513, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-510, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-509, Shell hits 1, heavy damage
LB-508, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-507, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-506, Mine hits 1, heavy damage



Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-120
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-119
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-118
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-117
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-515
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-514
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-513
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-510
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-509
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-508
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-507
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-506


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 389 encounters mine field at Bataan (78,77)

Japanese Ships
LB-119, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-118, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-117, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-515, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-514, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-513, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-510, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-509, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-508, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-507, Mine hits 1, heavy damage





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval Gun Fire at Bataan - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

37 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Japanese Ships
LB-132, Shell hits 1, heavy damage
LB-131, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-130, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-129, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-128, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-127, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-126, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-125, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-124, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-123, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-122, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-121, Mine hits 2, heavy damage



Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-132
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-131
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-130
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-129
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-128
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-127
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-126
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-125
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-124
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-123
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-122
Manila Bay Defenses firing at LB-121


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 392 encounters mine field at Bataan (78,77)

Japanese Ships
LB-132, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-131, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-130, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-129, Mine hits 2, heavy damage
LB-128, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-125, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-124, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-122, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
LB-121, Mine hits 1, heavy damage




(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 339
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 6:23:51 PM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
Those were some interesting photos Castor Troy put into the discussion..., but does anyone have some photos of the Japanese Amphibious landings in Lingayen Gulf in 1941?  That was about the largest amphibious effort the Japs made during their offensives, so it should show their landing doctrine and equipment at the time.  

(in reply to ADB123)
Post #: 340
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 7:10:24 PM   
WITPPL


Posts: 290
Joined: 8/5/2009
Status: offline
Question:

Results were funny but the important question for me is:

What the heck should i do now?

Ive lost WEEKS of family life preparing whole operation. Not only it is fully disclosed but I am a sitting duck.
What the hell am I about to do with this damn situation?

Should I compose my TFs by my best and invade again (probably with similiart results)?
Maybe just give up a game or what?

How much loses will look GOOD?

I am really puzzled here!




< Message edited by WITPPL -- 1/9/2010 7:15:49 PM >

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 341
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 7:17:14 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Those were some interesting photos Castor Troy put into the discussion..., but does anyone have some photos of the Japanese Amphibious landings in Lingayen Gulf in 1941?  That was about the largest amphibious effort the Japs made during their offensives, so it should show their landing doctrine and equipment at the time.  



the photo was posted by Treespider though, I´ve only quoted his post.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 342
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 7:19:22 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9784
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Those were some interesting photos Castor Troy put into the discussion..., but does anyone have some photos of the Japanese Amphibious landings in Lingayen Gulf in 1941?  That was about the largest amphibious effort the Japs made during their offensives, so it should show their landing doctrine and equipment at the time.  


quote:

"Seventy minutes before Pearl Harbor"
The landing at Kota Bharu, Malaya, on December 7th 1941

On Saturday, December 6, 1941, during a conference in Manila (the Philippines) between Admiral Thomas C. Hart, the commanding officer of U.S. Asiatic Fleet and Admiral Sir Thomas Phillips, the British naval commander, Far East, an American naval officer entered the room with an important message.

An Australian reconnaissance aircraft Lockheed Hudson from Malaya airfields had discovered the Japanese convoy had departed from Saigon, French Indochina. The plane commander, Flying Officer Ramshaw, reported at first only three ships sailed, followed shortly by at least another 25 transport ships. They were escorted by a battleship, five cruisers and seven destroyers [Ramshaw had mistaken the heavy cruiser for a battleship]. In his personal opinion, the ships were headed to neutral Thailand, or to Malaya Peninsula. This was no doubt a clear sign to both admirals that war was close. Both admirals reacted immediately. Four American destroyers in Balikpapan received orders to sail at open sea, while Rear-Admiral Arthur E.F. Palliser, Phillip's Commander-in-Chief, received instructions to order HMS Repulse to cancel its trip to Darwin, Australia, and return to Singapore as quickly as possible. More messages about the Japanese convoy followed. The British planes soon received orders to conduct further reconnaisance flights, but luck that day was on the Japanese side as bad, stormy weather prevented the British planes from taking off. At 7 p.m. the Japanese invasion fleet changed course and traveled north into the Gulf of Siam ...

The main Japanese attack force for the invasion of Malaya, Lieutenant General Tomoyuki Yamashita's 25th Army, had sailed from Samah Harbour on Hainan Island on December 4, 1941. Additional ships carrying more troops joined the convoy from Saigon, French Indochina. On both the 6th and 7th of December Lockheed Hudson aircraft flown by No.1 Squadron RAAF, Kota Bharu, and No.8 Squadron RAAF, Kuantan, spotted and attempted to shadow these ships.


On December 7th, a flying boat PBY Catalina of No. 205 Squadron RAF, captained by Flying Officer Bedell, was shot down by Japanese aircraft while attempting to monitor the progress of the Japanese fleet. Flying Officer Bedell and his crew became the first Allied casualties of the war with the Empire of Japan. At 10:00 a.m., the Japanese invasion convoy split up to reach their prearranged landing positions. The war in the Pacific was just about to begin.


At 10.30 p.m., a top Malaya Command conference was called in the Naval Base's War Room in Singapore. Air Marshal Sir Robert Brooke-Popham, commanding officer of all British forces in the Far East hesitated to launch Operation ''Matador" - the capture of Northern Thailand. He decided to delay the operation, at least for the night.

Shortly after midnight on 7th/8th December, a group of Indian guards at Kota Bharu spotted three large shadows, the IJN transport ships: the Awagisan Maru, the Ayatosan Maru and the Sakura Maru, dropping anchor approximately 3 km's off the coast of Kota Bharu.

The ships were carrying approximately 5,200 troops of the Takumi Detachment, commanded by Major-General Hiroshi Takumi, who was on board IJN transport Awajisan Maru. The majority of them were already the war veterans, with several months of harsh jungle training and battles in China. The force consisted of the 56th Infantry Regiment (Colonel Yoshio Nasu, on board IJN transport Sakura Maru), one mountain artillery battery of the 18th Mountain Artillery Regiment (Lieutenant Colonel Katsutoshi Takasu), the 12th Engineer Regiment (Lieutenant Colonel Ichie Fujii), the 18th Division Signal Unit, one company of the 12th Transport Regiment, one company of the 18th Division Medical Unit and No. 2 Field Hospital of the 18th Division Medical Unit.

They were escorted by a powerful escort fleet (Kota Bharu Invasion Force) under the command of Rear-Admiral Shintaro Hashimoto, consisting of a light cruiser Sendai, destroyers Ayanami, Isonami, Shikinami and Uranami, minesweepers No. 2 and No. 3, and subchaser No. 9. Seconds later the guards heard shells passing over their heads. World War II in Pacific had begun, while the Japanese planes from Nagumo's carriers were still flying towards Pearl Harbor.

The loading of landing craft began almost as soon as the transports dropped anchor. Rough seas and strong winds hampered the operation and a number of smaller craft capsized. Several Japanese soldiers drowned. Despite these difficulties by 12.45 hours, the first wave of landing craft carrying troops under the command of Colonel Masu were heading for the beach in four lines.

Brigadier B.W. Key's 8th Indian Infantry Brigade of the 9th British-Indian Infantry Division were the main defending force at Kota Bharu, supported by the 21st Mountain Battery - four 3.7in howitzers (Major J.B. Soper). The 3/17th Dogras in battalion strength had responsibility for a ten mile stretch of beach Panti Dasar Sabak front which included the Japanese landing sight. The troops had mined and wired the beach and built a number of pillboxes. They were supported by the 73rd Field Battery of the 5th Field Regiment, deployed adjacent to the airfield.

British artillery immediately began firing along the shore line and out to sea once it became clear the Japanese were coming ashore. Additionally, the Dogra units opened fire on the landing craft once they were illuminated. The defence effort seemsedto have been quite stout and the out numbered Dogras put up a savage resistance. Their MG fortifications on the beach were fiercely firing against the Japanese soldiers, landing on the beach. Many Japanese soldiers had fallen, including battalion commander, Major Nakamura, who charged at the enemy position leading his troops. Colonel Masanobu Tsuji recalled in his book about Malaya Campaign: "The enemy pillboxes, which were well prepared reacted violently with such heavy force that our men lying on the beach, half in and half out of the water could not raise their heads".

It was not until the Japanese concentrated their attack on the two pillboxes and supporting trenches which dominated the landing area that they began to secure a foot hold. In vicious hand to hand fighting the invading troops over came and wiped out the defenders of these key points. During this action the second wave of attackers were pinned down on the open beach suffering casualties from British artillery fire. However, once the pillboxes had been silenced, these forces were able to move forward and infiltrate the Dogra positions. Despite local counter attacks, the Indian sepoys position became untenable and the defenders began to fall back.

Having been alerted to the presence of the invasion force just a few miles north of their airfield, the senior airforce officers at Kota Bharu sought permission to launch an attack. Once it became clear the the Japanese were indeed landing, Hudsons of No.1 Squadron began taking off to bomb the transports. The first wave of seven aircraft, led by Flight Lieutenant Lockwood made the initial attack at about 02.10. Flight Lieutenant O.N. Diamond of No. 1 Squadron selected the largest transport which he dive-bombed. From his own account two 250 lb. bombs released in his first attack scored direct hits and on his second run his remaining two bombs also struck the vessel which was then machine-gunned and left on fire. It was the IJN transport Awajisan Maru (9,794 tons) which was the first Japanese ship of any type to be sunk in World War II by enemy action. No.1 Squadron RAAF continued making bombing runs, some 17 sorties being flown, landing , rearming and taking off again until 05.00. Japanese escorts put up a thick cover of AA fire, shooting down at least two Hudsons and badly damaging three others. One crippled aircraft flown by Flight Lieutenant Leighton-Jones is reported to have crashed into a fully laiden landing craft. Despite the intensity of the AA fire, the Hudson crews seem to have pressed home their attacks with vigour. All the transports were repeatedly hit with a number of fires being started. Colonel Masanobu Tsuji, a staff officer with Yamashita's Headquarters, described the reports he received from Kota Bharu: "Before long enemy planes in formations of two and three began to attack our transports, which soon became enveloped in flame and smoke". By 04.30 the close escort commander, worried by the damage inflicted by the RAAF, requested permission to withdraw. Major-General Takumi successfully argued that he needed to reinforce his troops ashore and it was not until 06.00 that two transpots and the escorts withdrew north. The Awagisan Maru, burning fiercly and destined to be the first Japanese vessel sunk in the war, was too badly damaged to move. About 02:00 hours (on 8 December) Kuantan airfield received a signal of the Japanese attempting landings at Kota Bharu. The No. 8 formed four flights of three Hudsons with the first airborne at 06.30 hours. The Hudsons attacked the IJN transports, covered in smoke at 08.00, but some were damaged, including A16-43, captained by Flight Lieutenant G. Hitchcock which suffered forty-three bullet holes but returned to Kuantan. Flight Lieutenant "Spud" Spurgeon in A16-41 bombed a ship but crash-landed at Kota Bahru due to damage to the Hudson. Flight Lieutenant Russell Bell had the hydrodraulics made unservicable by bullets in his Hudson A16-81 and flew it to Seletar from Kota Bahru. Of the 12 aircraft in this attack, five were damaged with one crash landing at Kota Bharu. By this time Japanese fighters, who had been covering the main landings in Thailand, began to arrive and a further attack, this time with RAF Blenheims, proved costly. Also by morning it became clear that despite the efforts of No.1 Squadron the Japanese had successfully landed their invasion force. At 10:30 hours the Japanese forces finally reached Kota Bahru.


By morning Major-General H. Takumi had three full infantry battalions ashore. Brigadier Key attempted a counter attack in force and when this failed he began to fall back. As it became clear during the day that the local airfields could not be held, Key, who had been ordered to fight a battle of denial rather than annihilation, asked for and recieved permission to withdraw.


The Japanese, now backed by freshly landed troops, forced the British-Indian troops to retreat to the Kuala Lipis area and advanced south to capture Kota Bahru (township) by 2 p.m. on the 9th.


Both sides sustained substantial casualties during the battle. There are no reliable records of British losses, but they certainly were high. Accounts of Japanese casualties vary wildly. Louis Allen, quoting Japanese sources, put the number at 500. Of these, 150 were suffered by troops still on board the transports and the remaining 350 were inflicted during the short journey to the shores or on the beach. On the other hand, Colonel Tsuji put in his book the Japanese losses at 320 killed in action and 538 wounded and calls Kota Bharu "one the most violent actions of the Malaya Campaign".



< Message edited by treespider -- 1/9/2010 7:21:48 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 Mike Scholl)
Post #: 343
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 7:22:05 PM   
bsq


Posts: 517
Joined: 1/5/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Those were some interesting photos Castor Troy put into the discussion..., but does anyone have some photos of the Japanese Amphibious landings in Lingayen Gulf in 1941?  That was about the largest amphibious effort the Japs made during their offensives, so it should show their landing doctrine and equipment at the time.  


Who would have taken them? Japanese were more interested in taking the PI than recording it for posterity. MacArthurs much vaunted (by him) troops were too busy running away from the landing beaches.

You'd probably have to rely on eye-witness reports from the survivors.

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 344
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 7:24:45 PM   
Mark VII


Posts: 1446
Joined: 8/11/2003
From: Brentwood,TN
Status: offline
Invade again. If same results maybe start again. There is no going back without invading PH. To much of a waste of game resources sailing to PH and back doing nothing.


quote:

ORIGINAL: WITPPL

Question:

Results were funny but the important question for me is:

What the heck should i do now?

Ive lost WEEKS of family life preparing whole operation. Not only it is fully disclosed but I am a sitting duck.
What the hell am I about to do with this damn situation?

Should I compose my TFs by my best and invade again (probably with similiart results)?
Maybe just give up a game or what?

How much loses will look GOOD?

I am really puzzled here!






_____________________________


(in reply to WITPPL)
Post #: 345
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 7:29:23 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
I can´t dish out such damage to the attacker if I´ve got three dozen 6 inch guns firing at a landing. Losses range from 1 to 5 squads. In real life a couple of MGs did more damage to an amphib invasion compared to major CD installations in AE.

_____________________________


(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 346
RE: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results - 1/9/2010 7:57:15 PM   
stuman


Posts: 3864
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline
quote:

Perhaps it's just that all IJ Players are astoundingly adept planners and incredible tacticians though.


Nope, I am at least one exception to that rule

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to spence)
Post #: 347
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 8:21:13 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl
Those were some interesting photos Castor Troy put into the discussion..., but does anyone have some photos of the Japanese Amphibious landings in Lingayen Gulf in 1941?  That was about the largest amphibious effort the Japs made during their offensives, so it should show their landing doctrine and equipment at the time.  

Only have one photo of an actual landing op, the rest are exercises. Pic is Ayatosan (Ayotasan) Maru; one of 3 sister ships modified by the IJA (not IJN) to be landing craft carriers in the 1941, early ’42 time frame. Really beefed up king posts, and each configured to host a company (approx 170 men) of an Army Landing unit.




After the landing, the Army unit would remain ashore and function in a manner akin to a Port Service unit. They did not remain with the ship, and institutional memory was lost.

These ships were designated to carry the majority of landing craft, and functioned to support all the other ships in an invasion TF, which were simple expedient, temporary merchant conversions.

Japanese assault doctrine put the first wave ashore as light infantry elements; some few light tanks and 75mm guns came ashore in wave 2 and 3; one lt tank or two 75s per Daihatsu, but limited by the facilities of the individual carrier ships. Larger guns were problematic – while the guns might be accommodated, their prime movers had a problem – only one truck to a Daihatsu.

While the Daihatsu’s were moving troops and equipment, supply and ammunition was off-loaded by means of ship’s boats, and any harbor lighters that could be crammed on the decks of the TF participants.



Attachment (1)

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 348
RE: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results - 1/9/2010 8:37:39 PM   
stuman


Posts: 3864
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman

quote:

.....ask your self why lighthouses have coded beams.....


bsq, being the landlubber that I am, what do you mean by " coded beams " ?


You might find this book interesting. It's published by the US government and is not under copyright. Find it here (government website) for free download.

American Practical Navigator


thx. I am a sucker for stuff like this

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 349
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 8:46:20 PM   
stuman


Posts: 3864
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: WITPPL

Question:

Results were funny but the important question for me is:

What the heck should i do now?

Ive lost WEEKS of family life preparing whole operation. Not only it is fully disclosed but I am a sitting duck.
What the hell am I about to do with this damn situation?

Should I compose my TFs by my best and invade again (probably with similiart results)?
Maybe just give up a game or what?

How much loses will look GOOD?

I am really puzzled here!





I think you should proceed as planned, assuming your opponent still wants too.

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to WITPPL)
Post #: 350
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 8:52:32 PM   
ckammp

 

Posts: 799
Joined: 5/30/2009
From: Rear Area training facility
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bsq


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Those were some interesting photos Castor Troy put into the discussion..., but does anyone have some photos of the Japanese Amphibious landings in Lingayen Gulf in 1941?  That was about the largest amphibious effort the Japs made during their offensives, so it should show their landing doctrine and equipment at the time.  


Who would have taken them? Japanese were more interested in taking the PI than recording it for posterity. MacArthurs much vaunted (by him) troops were too busy running away from the landing beaches.

You'd probably have to rely on eye-witness reports from the survivors.



The initial Japanese landings occured at 0540. At the time of the first landings, a heavy rainstorm developed and continued all day. Given the time and weather conditions, it's not so surprising that there are few, if any, photos of the landings.
As for the defenders, while the Japanese encountered little resistance, and easily achieved their initial objectives, I've never read any account that claimed the Filipino/US force "ran away". Instead, they conducted a fighting withdraw, one which would prove to seriously upset the Japanese time-table for victory.

(in reply to bsq)
Post #: 351
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 9:01:17 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman
quote:

ORIGINAL: WITPPL
What the heck should i do now?

I think you should proceed as planned, assuming your opponent still wants too.

Why not proceed as planned. The game allows it. You have done a wonderful job in defining your TFs, why should that not be rewarded?

Just remember, sending about 210 high-value merchies (over 10% of the entire merchant fleet in hulls, and probably well beyond that in tonnage) on an op like this might be real exciting at first, but when your economy grinds to a halt in 1943, Oahu just might turn into one big POW camp.

(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 352
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 9:04:27 PM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bsq


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Those were some interesting photos Castor Troy put into the discussion..., but does anyone have some photos of the Japanese Amphibious landings in Lingayen Gulf in 1941?  That was about the largest amphibious effort the Japs made during their offensives, so it should show their landing doctrine and equipment at the time.  


Who would have taken them? Japanese were more interested in taking the PI than recording it for posterity. MacArthur's much vaunted (by him) troops were too busy running away from the landing beaches.

You'd probably have to rely on eye-witness reports from the survivors.



The same Army propaganda photographers who took pictures at the Marco Polo Bridge, the Fall of Singapore, and everywhere else the IJA did anything worth note.

(in reply to bsq)
Post #: 353
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 9:25:30 PM   
bsq


Posts: 517
Joined: 1/5/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl


quote:

ORIGINAL: bsq


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Those were some interesting photos Castor Troy put into the discussion..., but does anyone have some photos of the Japanese Amphibious landings in Lingayen Gulf in 1941?  That was about the largest amphibious effort the Japs made during their offensives, so it should show their landing doctrine and equipment at the time.  


Who would have taken them? Japanese were more interested in taking the PI than recording it for posterity. MacArthur's much vaunted (by him) troops were too busy running away from the landing beaches.

You'd probably have to rely on eye-witness reports from the survivors.



The same Army propaganda photographers who took pictures at the Marco Polo Bridge, the Fall of Singapore, and everywhere else the IJA did anything worth note.



Granted...

But then they'd be posed, after the actual event and not much use to the discussion here as they would show the 'perfect' IJA kicking the ass of US/PI forces...'

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 354
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 9:46:05 PM   
stuman


Posts: 3864
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE


quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman
quote:

ORIGINAL: WITPPL
What the heck should i do now?

I think you should proceed as planned, assuming your opponent still wants too.

Why not proceed as planned. The game allows it. You have done a wonderful job in defining your TFs, why should that not be rewarded?

Just remember, sending about 210 high-value merchies (over 10% of the entire merchant fleet in hulls, and probably well beyond that in tonnage) on an op like this might be real exciting at first, but when your economy grinds to a halt in 1943, Oahu just might turn into one big POW camp.


That is one of the reasons I would like to see them proceed. Playing the Japanese atm I am not through June 42 yet in one game and I am already using every single ship I have to move resources, etc.

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 355
RE: 16 INCH GUNS - 1/9/2010 9:46:36 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bsq
But then they'd be posed, after the actual event and not much use to the discussion here as they would show the 'perfect' IJA kicking the ass of US/PI forces...'

Not exactly, bsq. They had their propaganda films, like everybody else, but many individual snapshots survive - like this one from from the Kota Bharu landings - around noon of Dec. 8, 4th wave, bringing in a 75 and its prime mover.


Note the sea state and the fact that the Daihatsu is still broached. And that its bow ramp is too small to allow for offloading on long shoal beaches.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by JWE -- 1/9/2010 9:48:57 PM >

(in reply to bsq)
Post #: 356
RE: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results - 1/9/2010 10:35:46 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 8697
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse


I tend to agree. From the opening post we can see that every Harbor Defense gun fired at the PB Yodozu Maru, then every gun fired at the Ginyu Maru, then at the Tonon Maru, etc. etc.

If each group of guns fired at a different vessel, then all the PBs would have been stripped away in the first couple of rounds, and more AKs would have been engaged.

If this is either a design-logic or a not working-as-designed issue, it it something to consider addressing in a future patch. I'd be interested to see more posts from players engaging CD defenses, large and small, to see if all the CD guns commonly fire at the same vessel each round.



FWIW, here are the combat reports for one portion of my painful invasion of Wotje Island. I've only editte dout the portions from other battles in other hexes far away.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jul 20, 43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Invasion Support action off Wotje
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft

4 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
AK Albireo, Shell hits 1
BB Pennsylvania



12cm 3YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging AK Albireo at 12,000 yards
BB Pennsylvania fires to suppress enemy guns at 12,000 yards


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Invasion Support action off Wotje
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft

15 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
xAKL Honomu, Shell hits 9, on fire, heavy damage
xAK Golden Gate
xAK Cape Orange



12cm 3YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAKL Honomu at 12,000 yards
12cm 10YT DP Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAKL Honomu at 12,000 yards
xAKL Honomu firing at enemy troops
15cm 41YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAKL Honomu at 1,000 yards
12cm 3YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAKL Honomu at 1,000 yards
12cm 10YT DP Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAKL Honomu at 1,000 yards
xAK Golden Gate firing at enemy troops
xAK Cape Orange firing at enemy troops


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Invasion Support action off Wotje
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft

9 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
LSD Carter Hall, Shell hits 3, heavy fires
BB Pennsylvania



15cm 41YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging LSD Carter Hall at 12,000 yards
BB Pennsylvania fires to suppress enemy guns at 12,000 yards


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Invasion Support action off Wotje
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft

21 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
xAK Unicoi, Shell hits 1, on fire
xAK Golden Gate, Shell hits 3, on fire
xAK Alcoa Puritan, Shell hits 2
xAK Cape Orange, Shell hits 5, on fire



15cm 41YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Unicoi at 12,000 yards
12cm 10YT DP Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Golden Gate at 12,000 yards
xAK Golden Gate firing at enemy troops
xAK Alcoa Puritan firing at enemy troops
15cm 41YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Alcoa Puritan at 1,000 yards
12cm 10YT DP Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Alcoa Puritan at 1,000 yards
xAK Cape Orange firing at enemy troops
12cm 3YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Cape Orange at 1,000 yards
12cm 10YT DP Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Cape Orange at 1,000 yards


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Invasion Support action off Wotje
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft

9 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
xAK Unicoi, on fire
xAK Alcoa Puritan, Shell hits 4, on fire



xAK Alcoa Puritan firing at enemy troops
12cm 3YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Alcoa Puritan at 1,000 yards
12cm 10YT DP Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Alcoa Puritan at 1,000 yards



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Invasion Support action off Wotje
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft

7 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
LSD Carter Hall, Shell hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
BB Pennsylvania



15cm 41YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging LSD Carter Hall at 12,000 yards
BB Pennsylvania fires to suppress enemy guns at 12,000 yards


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Invasion Support action off Wotje
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft

15 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
xAK Golden Gate, Shell hits 1, on fire
xAK Unicoi, Shell hits 8, heavy fires, heavy damage



12cm 3YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Golden Gate at 12,000 yards
xAK Unicoi firing at enemy troops
15cm 41YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Unicoi at 1,000 yards
12cm 3YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Unicoi at 1,000 yards
12cm 10YT DP Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Unicoi at 1,000 yards



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Wotje (135,115)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 1605 troops, 31 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 66

Defending force 7120 troops, 156 guns, 328 vehicles, Assault Value = 185

Japanese ground losses:
70 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 4 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled


Allied ground losses:
41 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 4 destroyed, 0 disabled
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)


Assaulting units:
44th Naval Guard Unit
Wotje Naval Fortress
Wotje Base Force

Defending units:
767th Tank Battalion
102nd Combat Engineer Regiment
19th Infantry Regiment
27th Infantry Regiment
87th Mountain Regiment
808th Engineer Aviation Battalion
39th USN Naval Construction Battalion


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Wotje (135,115)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 5469 troops, 153 guns, 246 vehicles, Assault Value = 184

Defending force 3213 troops, 40 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 64

Japanese ground losses:
48 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled



Assaulting units:
19th Infantry Regiment
102nd Combat Engineer Regiment
27th Infantry Regiment
767th Tank Battalion
87th Mountain Regiment
808th Engineer Aviation Battalion
39th USN Naval Construction Battalion

Defending units:
44th Naval Guard Unit
Wotje Naval Fortress
Wotje Base Force


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Blackhorse)
Post #: 357
RE: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results - 1/9/2010 10:41:20 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 8697
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
Whoops, sorry. Here is the day before, the first day of the Wotje invasion. It may be a better example of the CD routine's target mixing between warships and merchants.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-Invasion action off Wotje - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

56 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
BB Pennsylvania, Shell hits 6
CA Astoria
CL Cleveland, Shell hits 3
DD Sterett
APA Fuller

Japanese ground losses:
8 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)



BB Pennsylvania firing at Wotje Naval Fortress
CA Astoria firing at Wotje Base Force
CL Cleveland firing at Wotje Naval Fortress
DD Sterett firing at Wotje Base Force
BB Pennsylvania fires to suppress enemy guns at 12,000 yards
DD Sterett firing at enemy troops
15cm 41YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging DD Sterett at 3,000 yards
12cm 10YT DP Gun Coastal Battery engaging DD Sterett at 3,000 yards
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amphibious Assault at Wotje

TF 275 troops unloading over beach at Wotje, 135,115


Allied ground losses:
442 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 207 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 115 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 86 (1 destroyed, 85 disabled)
Vehicles lost 96 (0 destroyed, 96 disabled)


81mm M1 Mortar dropped into water during unload of 87th Mountain Rgt
10 Support troops lost in surf during unload of 87th Mountain Rgt /2


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-Invasion action off Wotje - Coastal Guns Fire Back!
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft

16 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
xAKL Mauna Ala, Shell hits 6, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAKL Pacific, Shell hits 4
xAK Adabelle Lykes
xAK Santa Monica



Wotje Naval Fortress firing at xAKL Mauna Ala
15cm 41YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAKL Mauna Ala at 12,000 yards
12cm 3YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAKL Pacific at 12,000 yards
12cm 10YT DP Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAKL Pacific at 12,000 yards
xAKL Mauna Ala firing at enemy guns
xAK Adabelle Lykes firing at enemy troops
xAK Santa Monica firing at enemy troops


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amphibious Assault at Wotje

TF 315 troops unloading over beach at Wotje, 135,115


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Invasion Support action off Wotje - Coastal Guns Fire Back!
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft

83 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
BB Pennsylvania, Shell hits 2
CA Astoria, Shell hits 1
CL Cleveland, Shell hits 2
DD Sterett, Shell hits 4, on fire
AK Albireo, Shell hits 1



BB Pennsylvania firing at Wotje Naval Fortress
CA Astoria firing at Wotje Naval Fortress
CL Cleveland firing at Wotje Naval Fortress
DD Sterett firing at Wotje Naval Fortress
12cm 3YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging AK Albireo at 12,000 yards
BB Pennsylvania fires to suppress enemy guns at 12,000 yards


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Invasion Support action off Wotje - Coastal Guns Fire Back!
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft

23 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
xAKL Kahuku, Shell hits 10, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAKL Pacific, Shell hits 3, heavy fires
xAK Adabelle Lykes
xAK Santa Monica, Shell hits 4, heavy fires



Wotje Naval Fortress firing at xAKL Kahuku
15cm 41YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAKL Pacific at 12,000 yards
xAKL Kahuku firing at enemy troops
xAK Adabelle Lykes firing at enemy troops
xAK Santa Monica firing at enemy troops
15cm 41YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Santa Monica at 1,000 yards
12cm 3YT CD Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Santa Monica at 1,000 yards
12cm 10YT DP Gun Coastal Battery engaging xAK Santa Monica at 1,000 yards



_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 358
RE: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results - 1/9/2010 10:45:11 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 8697
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman

quote:

"Doctor, the stress test killed the patient."
"No, nurse, it was the 145,000 cheeseburgers he ate over the last thirty years."


I will have to disagree with this example Bullwinkle58. At most I think it is reasonable to assume no more than 2 cheeseburgers per day. That comes out to 21,900 chesseburgers. 145,000 is just not realistic.


Yeah, but this is Dr. Cox from "Scrubs". Hyperbole is his practice.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 359
RE: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results - 1/9/2010 10:52:29 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 8697
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Since the rangefinders could detect ships out to 125,000 yds from Oahu, and the 16" guns could fire on targets within 35,000 yds, I'd say there's no place an invasion fleet's transports could unload the men and supplies without coming under fire from at least the largest guns.  Even at Normandy the transports were unloading their troops within 20,000 yds of the shore; several were fired upon by large caliber guns but none were hit.  USS Arkansas, OTOH, took several 11" shell hits while bombarding the positions.


I checked the TOE in the game and Oahu has only four 16-in guns if I read it right. Also some 14-inchers and railroad 8-inchers, and a pantload of 155s. From discusisons this week it seems as if the game's 16-inch TOE might be light. What was their rate of fire? If they were installed post-WWI, did they have SOTA loading gear? And how many rounds do you get out of a WWI-era barrel? (Not in the game of course.)

I also notice, in looking at my Wotje data, that AKs in the game while under CD fire seem to always be at either 12,000 yds, or 1000 yds, making me think that range is window-dressing in the algorithm. Maybe. I think range ought to be hugely important in target selection, and especially hit rate, followed by target speed and maneuverability, but it might not be that complex as coded. It might be a weighed, randomized, pick of targets there weighted by "firing back?" and/or target "value" from a table of some kind. Just speculaiton. In my Wotje results, BB and CA took hits as well as merchants of various sizes and classes.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 1/9/2010 11:00:55 PM >


_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 360
Page:   <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Amphibious invasion of Pearl Harbor - results Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   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

1.531