Matrix Games Forums

Space Program Manager Launch Contest Announced!Battle Academy 2 is out now on iPad!A closer look at rockets in Space Program ManagerDeal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Aug. 6/42 Brief Update

 
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 >> Aug. 6/42 Brief Update Page: <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Aug. 6/42 Brief Update - 7/1/2013 11:04:30 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
Burma:

I get lucky in Burma when Commonwealth fighters fail to sweep before Blenheim bombers ground attack the 112th Infantry Regiment S.W. of Imphal. Tojo's and Nick's LRCAP'ing from Lashio take a squadron sized bite out of the Allied bomber force in A2A on the day.

The first sweep of Hurricane I Trop's fair poorly against the LRCAP, but a second sweep of IIb's performs much better downing a number of Tojo's and Nick's for no loss after gaining the bounce despite lower altitude settings than the LRCAP.

Overall losses on the day are three Nick's and four Tojo's against 19 Blenheim's and 6 Hurricane I Trop's. More importantly, by fighting over a Japanese controlled hex only two pilots are KIA. Take away the poor performance against the IIb's and the day could have been a clear Japanese victory in the air. Still, the bomber losses hurt and it's the first bloody nose for Allied aircraft in awhile.

China:

Ok, this is becoming ridiculous. Perhaps the combat model requires different parameters for defeating a unit when surrounded as opposed to one that has a valid path of retreat. In any case, it seems absolutely stupid to me that after going to the trouble of surrounding this force, I now can't eliminate if after conducting nearly 10 ground assaults at greather than 2:1 odds. AAR follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 82,53 (near Changsha)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 13379 troops, 172 guns, 69 vehicles, Assault Value = 425

Defending force 17454 troops, 79 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 61

Japanese adjusted assault: 299

Allied adjusted defense: 13

Japanese assault odds: 23 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-), experience(-)
supply(-)
Attacker:

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

Allied ground losses:
883 casualties reported
Squads: 87 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 28 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
15th Division
1st Mortar Battalion
21st Mortar Battalion

Defending units:
49th Chinese Corps
21st Chinese Corps
78th Chinese Corps
3rd New Chinese Corps
19th Group Army
23rd Group Army
50th Chinese Corps
9th Prov Chinese Corps

Things are different at Lanchow thankfully. AAR follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Lanchow (81,34)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 38070 troops, 388 guns, 227 vehicles, Assault Value = 1222

Defending force 28962 troops, 150 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 526

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 1

Japanese adjusted assault: 997

Allied adjusted defense: 1093

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 1)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1548 casualties reported
Squads: 6 destroyed, 169 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 13 disabled
Guns lost 23 (4 destroyed, 19 disabled)
Vehicles lost 19 (7 destroyed, 12 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
1736 casualties reported
Squads: 13 destroyed, 148 disabled
Non Combat: 4 destroyed, 18 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Guns lost 13 (2 destroyed, 11 disabled)

Assaulting units:
41st Division
37th Division
26th Division
Mongol Garrison Army
North China Area Army
6th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
2nd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
3rd Hvy.Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
36th Chinese Corps
81st Chinese Corps
75th Chinese Corps
41st Chinese Corps
2nd Chinese Cavalry Corps
5th War Area
17th Group Army
8th Chinese Base Force
8th War Area
19th Chinese Base Force

The Philippines:

Operations to clean up remaining Allied positions on Mindanao begin. AAR follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Cagayan (79,89)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 615 troops, 50 guns, 41 vehicles, Assault Value = 387

Defending force 8381 troops, 20 guns, 28 vehicles, Assault Value = 238

Allied ground losses:
16 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
4th Division
1st Medium Field Artillery Regiment
8th Medium Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
101st PA Infantry Division
3rd PA Constabulary Regiment
102nd PA Infantry Division
Cagayan USAAF Base Force
III Philippine Corps

Thoughts:

The strengthening of Java and Sumatra is going ahead as planned as two divisions leave Manila to take up defensive positions. I have a gut feeling that Jocke will try something similar to what is happening in Canoerebel's AAR. I'm convinced he'll try a grand slam move against the SRA and DEI to establish bomber bases within range of the oil facilities prior to mid 43. I'm also heavily reinforcing the Marianas.

I'm going to recapture Makin and then pull a massive withdrawal of most combat LCU's back to my main defensive positions being established. I will rely on a counterattack strategy to defend the Solomons, Gilbert and Marshall Islands and establish a static defence in the DEI and SRA. I don't plan on having most of my combat LCU's simply bypassed if committed too far forward in the Pacific.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/16/2013 9:15:54 PM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 751
RE: Aug. 6/42 Brief Update - 7/1/2013 11:19:42 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5913
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Perhaps the combat model requires different parameters for defeating a unit when surrounded as opposed to one that has a valid path of retreat. In any case, it seems absolutey stupid to me that after going to the trouble of surrounding this force, I now can't eliminate if after conducting nearly 10 ground assaults at greather than 2:1 odds. AAR follows:


No, I think it is correct ... you have the upperhand, but you are facing a numerically far superior force. Until they fail a morale/leadership check they fight on, but you inflict serious losses each turn to little of your own. Think of it this way: you can only fire so many bullets at the force in front of you. Most of the force you are facing is NOT in front of you. They are scattered around trying to find a way out or resting. You will win this, and your forces are likely gaining a LOT of exp doing so. Settle back, enjoy the seige.

OR
Think of how it feels on the other side watching all these troops get ground up every day.

< Message edited by PaxMondo -- 7/1/2013 11:22:35 PM >


_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 752
RE: Aug. 6/42 Brief Update - 7/1/2013 11:39:58 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

OR
Think of how it feels on the other side watching all these troops get ground up every day.


I don't think Jocke is losing any sleep over what happens in China.

I hear you though and what you say makes sense in RL terms. It's still frustrating on my end considering this enemy force is clearly spent, yet continues to gain Jocke a strategic benefit out of all proportion to what they could ever bring to the table otherwise...time.


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 753
RE: Aug. 6/42 Brief Update - 7/2/2013 12:55:53 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5913
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
Hey, it's June 42, The way you are going through china a few days isn't likely to change the outcome ... he's in deep trouble here. When all these units disappear, your units will be that much more exp'd. Coonsider that, and if you can rotate units in this situation ... ramp up experience of multiple units...

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 754
RE: Aug. 6/42 Brief Update - 7/2/2013 1:05:22 AM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Hey, it's June 42...


We're in August.

I don't know the exact date I started to try and reduce this pocket, but we are looking at almost 3-4 weeks now by my reckoning. I had been using more troops (at least three divisions) previously to try and destroy this force with no better results. It's all good, I'm getting benefits there's no doubt, but reducing these two pockets of Chinese are tying up 5 divisions that are needed elsewhere so it's becoming an issue for Lemon-san.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 755
RE: Brief update - 7/3/2013 12:20:49 AM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Maybe you don't need to take back anything in the Gilberts!? That might make him choose that vector instead of another, and I for one would like that better than a landing in Sumatra.


This comment has been nagging at me ever since first reading it. I just can't convince myself that reinforcing the Gilbert or Marshall Island chains is a smart move, or that destroying the Allied position on Makin is in my best interest. However, do I risk allowing Makin to be used as a platform for providing valuable intelligence on Japanese naval movements in the Central Pacific, especially in Aug. 42?

The biggest threats that I see are Allied thrusts aimed directly at Malaya or Sumatra. A Malayan campaign relegates the Burma theatre to irrelevance, especially if the fuel/oil facilities have already been destroyed from bombing. No attempts have been made to destroy the facilities at Magwe and Rangoon, but I believe they will be targeted soon. I don't believe Jocke will make a big push in Burma knowing the effect of stacking limits in good defensive terrain.

My gut tells me the Gilbert Islands is a huge bluff to divert my attention. The lacklustre Allied attempt to resupply the base just seems wrong and warning bells are going off. I've committed far too much of the Combined Fleet to the theatre and that may prove disastrous if the enemy moves against the SRA anytime soon.

I will continue to suppress Makin, but otherwise will not show my hand until I ascertain exactly what Jocke is up to. I want to see where the Allies make their next move, and with what, before committing to a particular counter at this time.

The pace of the game is still slow and the next week or two may see sporadic turns from Jocke. Obviously the slow pace is affecting the ability to provide anything new to the AAR. My updates will continue to suck until the pace of the game increases and events begin to unfold.

Now I'm off to find a cool place in the shade to enjoy a beer and the +35 degree weather we are having today.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/3/2013 12:22:06 AM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 756
Off Topic, model talk to be specific - 7/3/2013 7:26:09 AM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
No turn from Jocke yesterday so I got some model time on DD Yukikaze in. Nothing spectacular, mostly prep work and figuring out how I'm going to tackle the photo-etch. I've got the strengthening bulwarks for the hull and supports for the propellor shafts glued in. Next up will be drilling out all the portholes and numerous locating holes in the deck.

The kit is by Tamiya and I have to say the engineering is really something, so far the pieces fit like a glove and some dry fitting shows no seams to fill when attaching the ships sides. Hopefully I'll be able to get more done this week, it's a busy little model and with the photo-etch there's going to be a lot of small pieces and some funky masking going on when it's time to paint.

On another note, we ended up with almost 40 degree weather here yesterday and the ensuing thunderstorm showed me the power of wind. I'll try and take a picture in the morning if I remember. A house across the street has two large Spruce trees in the front yard surrounded by decorative brick work and glancing out the window earlier I noticed something wrong. Well, one of the trees has snapped at the base and fallen right down along the sidewalk. A pretty impressive display by Mother Nature. The tree must have had a trunk almost 2' in diameter.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/3/2013 10:14:51 PM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 757
My Empire for bombardment waypoints - 7/4/2013 2:21:40 AM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
With all the problems associated with waypoints and naval bombardments and my lack of knowing whether the issue has been fixed in a current beta, I still rely on trying to bombard from a route that will minimize my exposure to enemy submarines without setting waypoints. However, without waypoints I have no way of controlling how my ships leave the target hex. Today BB Fuso paid the price for what I consider a monumental design failure and was nailed on the egress from Makin. Damage is 20/25/31/0 so she's out of commission for some time, providing she even makes it back to Japan for repairs considering ASW is completely nerfed for Japan. Jocke says it's equally nerfed, but considering the capabilities of either side, nerfing Japan's has way more impact in the game. Jocke will never understand this until he plays Japan and learns things firsthand and feels the frustration that goes along with it.

Japanese ASW is a joke in DaBabes, historic sure, but as a player it still sucks ass to have to sit there and watch enemy submarines simply sail at will immune to attack or suppression regardless of deep or shallow water. I can't wait till most of my carriers are taken out by submarine, historic sure, but still going to leave a sour taste in my mouth.

It's not so much the hit, it's going to happen, but in this case if I'm allowed to set my movement path then this submarine is avoided all together. Since my ASW platforms don't count for squat anymore in this mod, all I can do is watch it happen.

I want waypoints that work with bombardments.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/4/2013 2:23:09 AM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 758
RE: My Empire for bombardment waypoints - 7/4/2013 2:44:53 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5913
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
Joseph,

You use bombardments a lot. Far more than I do for exactly the reasons you state. However, I don't look at it as a limitation in the game. I look at it as a fuzziness of the era and the role that you have in the game. You want to be able to exactly plot a bombardment run in the role as CINC. But that is the role of a ship captain or TF commander, of which you are neither.

Shoals, moonlight, shadows, .... all of these factored into what route would actually be taken. These are facts of the era that are not discretely modeled, but are instead accounted for by not allowing you to set the exact path. Sure moonlight is given, but it isn't modeled into what paths you might or might not take due to it.

So, you should NOT be able to exactly plot the bombardment path and you should take that into account when you order up the missions. I rarely try to do these in the DEI because the odds of a screw up are high. This all sits well with historical results. Tokyo express got hung out to dry plenty of times trying to negotiate the shoals and shadows of the Solomon's. You shouldn't expect anything other than that. I think Gary got this right ... really.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 759
RE: My Empire for bombardment waypoints - 7/4/2013 9:05:13 AM   
obvert


Posts: 7225
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

With all the problems associated with waypoints and naval bombardments and my lack of knowing whether the issue has been fixed in a current beta, I still rely on trying to bombard from a route that will minimize my exposure to enemy submarines without setting waypoints. However, without waypoints I have no way of controlling how my ships leave the target hex. Today BB Fuso paid the price for what I consider a monumental design failure and was nailed on the egress from Makin. Damage is 20/25/31/0 so she's out of commission for some time, providing she even makes it back to Japan for repairs considering ASW is completely nerfed for Japan. Jocke says it's equally nerfed, but considering the capabilities of either side, nerfing Japan's has way more impact in the game. Jocke will never understand this until he plays Japan and learns things firsthand and feels the frustration that goes along with it.

Japanese ASW is a joke in DaBabes, historic sure, but as a player it still sucks ass to have to sit there and watch enemy submarines simply sail at will immune to attack or suppression regardless of deep or shallow water. I can't wait till most of my carriers are taken out by submarine, historic sure, but still going to leave a sour taste in my mouth.

It's not so much the hit, it's going to happen, but in this case if I'm allowed to set my movement path then this submarine is avoided all together. Since my ASW platforms don't count for squat anymore in this mod, all I can do is watch it happen.

I want waypoints that work with bombardments.


I agree to some extent here with Pax, but the other item to add is that yes, it is immensely frustrating to play the side of the war where every loss is irreplaceable. Yet we choose to do it, and I'm still not sure why. There is a higher pressure to get things right, to not lose something due to seemingly controllable factors, and yet we can't control where that sub goes during our movement either.

The fact that we are seeing it at all is most likely the biggest 'design flaw' in the game, and if you want to destroy them by the dozens, simply train up the IJAAF 2E to hunt them down. That is fun, to see several 'HIT' messages a turn every turn.

We IJ players need a support group, but we also have to have some resiliance to the chance aspects of this game. If not we'll begin not to have as much fun, and this should be fun , right?

< Message edited by obvert -- 7/4/2013 3:00:20 PM >


_____________________________


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

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 760
RE: My Empire for bombardment waypoints - 7/4/2013 2:07:20 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5913
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
If 'support' group includes beverages, I'm all about that!



_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 761
RE: Aug. 6/42 Brief Update - 7/4/2013 5:49:44 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with both of you here. I want to make this clear, whenever I raise an issue with the game, it's not because I'm seeking a 100% guarantee of success. I get the random.

My point is this. In DaBabes I have weaker ASW. That's a fact and I live with it. In an effort to reduce the chance of getting torpedoed I want to avoid enemy submarines. If I can set waypoints to avoid known threats or reduce the chance of interdiction for any other type of naval movement, why is bombardment treated differently? Why can't I have the option of having a TF enter from a direction of my choosing and exiting the same route if possible. Yes, even with waypoints there's no guarantee that something won't go wrong, the random and I get it. Waypoints are used almost exclusively to avoid threats and I see no reason why bombardment runs are the exception.

I know I'm taking a risk with bombardments. I could collide, hit a mine, receive CD gunfire, be interdicted by an enemy SCTF, use up Ops points and be left stranded within range of enemy LBA or yes, even torpedoed by an enemy submarine. There's a whole lot of risk there. I want to bombard Makin, Jocke has positioned one submarine to the N.W. of the Atoll. All I want to do is REDUCE the chance of that submarine interdicting my TF. If my TF sails West that means Jocke's submarine has to react to me and travel theoretically 1 to 80 nautical miles to get an interception. However the fact that the routine doesn't allow me any input and the fact that the AI in this game makes poor choices at the best of times, I'm pretty sure my risk of interdiction increases substantially having to travel THROUGH the hex containing a patrolling submarine as opposed to the submarine having to pass whatever checks and such to interdict me in another hex.

So I get random, but removing my input just for the sake of random is wrong. Regardless of whether I can select a route, random still applies and always will. I should be allowed to reduce the chance and I've never asked to eliminate the chance aspect of the game as you seem to think I am. I think they pooched bombardments and it wasn't until a player such as myself who uses bombardments as much as I do, started to question how they were working. It was me that noticed waypoints were interfering with the routine. I've since had to adjust the way I conduct them, allowing the game that randomness that everyone just accepts means things are working as designed. However, the fact that my input seems to not matter, I most likely will stop using bombardments altogether. The alternative is a micromanagement nightmare in order to have the bombardment TF's move as intended (not expecting 100% success, just wanting to lower the risk as much as anybody else would) and quite frankly ridiculous that it's even necessary.

So in this case I strongly disagree that allowing waypoints for bombardments somehow is asking for a free pass, it isn't. If that's the case then waypoints and patrol points should be eliminated from the game altogether. Why should a ship assigned to normal naval movement using waypoints be treated differently and be allowed to improve its chance to avoid interdiction and a warship performing a bombardment mission against a static target can't? It's already risky enough for me without arbitrarily increasing that risk by poor movement routines controlled by a weak AI deliberately putting my ships at increased risk because it's too stupid to know that if it shifts movement one hex West it reduces that chance substantially rather than heading straight for the known threat.

Erik, Jocke patrols the same hexes daily with submarines that are spotted everyday by aircraft assigned to ASW. They are still there everyday, so your suggestion isn't working. Japanese ASW in DaBabes has been nerfed, bigtime, so what works for you in stock does not work in this mod. I'm learning that the hard way, and that's why avoidance is so important. Yet I'm expected to not rock the boat and just let the AI and 'random' put my forces at unnecessary risk. No thanks. It might as well be Jocke playing the AI in that case, because I'm learning that my input as a player is being nerfed all for the sake of random and in some cases this game takes it too far.

Anyway, that's my spiel.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 762
RE: Aug. 6/42 Brief Update - 7/4/2013 6:04:11 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 14937
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

If I can set waypoints to avoid known threats or reduce the chance of interdiction for any other type of naval movement, why is bombardment treated differently?

To the best of my knowledge, bombardments are not treated differently - there was/is a bug. I don't know if it exists in the latest Beta or not, but I recall that at one point Michael thought he had fixed it. As we have all come to realize sometimes a bug is not fixed even when thought to be, and sometimes there turns out to be more than one bug so even successfully fixing one gets rid of only some cases of the issue. I haven't kept a close eye on this one because I haven't run into it myself, so sorry I can't say for certain if it is fixed or extant.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 763
RE: Aug. 6/42 Brief Update - 7/4/2013 6:48:02 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

If I can set waypoints to avoid known threats or reduce the chance of interdiction for any other type of naval movement, why is bombardment treated differently?

To the best of my knowledge, bombardments are not treated differently - there was/is a bug. I don't know if it exists in the latest Beta or not, but I recall that at one point Michael thought he had fixed it. As we have all come to realize sometimes a bug is not fixed even when thought to be, and sometimes there turns out to be more than one bug so even successfully fixing one gets rid of only some cases of the issue. I haven't kept a close eye on this one because I haven't run into it myself, so sorry I can't say for certain if it is fixed or extant.


That's pretty much my understanding of things too. I haven't tried waypoints with a bombardment in the current official patch and we are not using the current beta so I don't know. I haven't tried to use waypoints with a bombardment TF ever since I first encountered the problem.

I do hope it is fixed, or will be. I find it hard to believe I'm the only player that seems to have had a problem with bombardments or the fact that waypoints were not considered necessary or desirable when conducting a bombardment mission. Considering they are used in every other aspect of naval movement, I'm really surprised it wasn't identified as a problem way back in development and testing.

I will attempt to use waypoints with my next bombardment mission to see if it works. If the issue has been fixed in the official patch then my bad. I applaud the continued support, but don't have the time/energy of others anymore to keep abreast of every little change. If it doesn't, well I guess bombardments will be removed from my arsenal of tactics. I refuse to let a wonky AI with poor threat identification put my forces at even more risk and directly in harm's way, when there are more obvious and safer routes to take. That's just me I guess.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 764
RE: Aug. 6/42 Brief Update - 7/4/2013 6:54:45 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
Now I'm off to find some appropriate beverages (without the support group) that Pax is talking about. Life's too short to let this game get under my skin.



_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 765
RE: Aug. 6/42 Brief Update - 7/4/2013 6:57:59 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5913
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
I have a designated driver for tonight, a ticket to VIP tent all U can eat/drink seats, and a fireworks display over the lake. Don't get much better!!!

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 766
RE: Aug. 6/42 Brief Update - 7/4/2013 7:01:07 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

I have a designated driver for tonight, a ticket to VIP tent all U can eat/drink seats, and a fireworks display over the lake. Don't get much better!!!


I'm envious. Happy 4th to you and yours, enjoy!


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 767
RE: Aug. 6/42 Brief Update - 7/4/2013 7:46:38 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
I think enjoying this game is all about letting go. Until you can understand what the game does and how it was designed, you set yourself up for continual frustration. I'm clearly not there yet, but that's not from lack of effort. I continue to try and dumb myself down (I'm not saying I'm smarter than the game) to adapt my play style in such a way that the game can understand. Right now I'm trying to battle Jocke and WitPAE and that's a no-win situation. I'm still trying to figure out how to get the game to do what I want it to do without banging my head against the wall of what it often can't do or does poorly.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 768
RE: Aug. 6/42 Brief Update - 7/5/2013 12:01:47 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 14937
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

If I can set waypoints to avoid known threats or reduce the chance of interdiction for any other type of naval movement, why is bombardment treated differently?

To the best of my knowledge, bombardments are not treated differently - there was/is a bug. I don't know if it exists in the latest Beta or not, but I recall that at one point Michael thought he had fixed it. As we have all come to realize sometimes a bug is not fixed even when thought to be, and sometimes there turns out to be more than one bug so even successfully fixing one gets rid of only some cases of the issue. I haven't kept a close eye on this one because I haven't run into it myself, so sorry I can't say for certain if it is fixed or extant.


That's pretty much my understanding of things too. I haven't tried waypoints with a bombardment in the current official patch and we are not using the current beta so I don't know. I haven't tried to use waypoints with a bombardment TF ever since I first encountered the problem.

I do hope it is fixed, or will be. I find it hard to believe I'm the only player that seems to have had a problem with bombardments or the fact that waypoints were not considered necessary or desirable when conducting a bombardment mission. Considering they are used in every other aspect of naval movement, I'm really surprised it wasn't identified as a problem way back in development and testing.

I will attempt to use waypoints with my next bombardment mission to see if it works. If the issue has been fixed in the official patch then my bad. I applaud the continued support, but don't have the time/energy of others anymore to keep abreast of every little change. If it doesn't, well I guess bombardments will be removed from my arsenal of tactics. I refuse to let a wonky AI with poor threat identification put my forces at even more risk and directly in harm's way, when there are more obvious and safer routes to take. That's just me I guess.

AFAIK there is a bombardment bug in the latest official patch. Like you I can't keep up with all the changes, so that's just my best recollection!

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 769
Getting my life back! - 7/11/2013 6:14:16 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
Jocke's been away for the week and back home this Saturday so the turns will begin flowing again on Sunday.

I've just finished a project for work that has been 6 months of stress and downright angst most times. I can't tell you how relieved I am that it's now finished and my life can return to normal somewhat. Stress levels for me have been through the roof, so I plan on taking more time to look after myself.

I'll spend a few days on the next turn then post a few screens showing the most active theatres. It will be a good thing to get this game moving forward again.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 770
RE: Getting my life back! - 7/11/2013 6:23:19 PM   
1EyedJacks


Posts: 1939
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: The Eastern Sierras
Status: offline
Back from the living un-dead? Pray tell how you have accomplished this feat? Is there a magik potion or special ritual required? Please tell me! I want my life back too!

Welcome back good Sir. I wish you many hours of fun and relaxation in the hollowed halls of the AE Forum.

_____________________________

TTFN,

Mike

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 771
RE: Getting my life back! - 7/11/2013 6:47:22 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18244
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon
It will be a good thing to get this game moving forward again.


Aye. Think of your readers awaiting developments with bated breath.

_____________________________


(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 772
RE: Getting my life back! - 7/11/2013 8:40:50 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Aye. Think of your readers awaiting developments with bated breath.


The way I play?


< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/11/2013 8:44:03 PM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 773
RE: Getting my life back! - 7/11/2013 8:43:02 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks

Back from the living un-dead? Pray tell how you have accomplished this feat? Is there a magik potion or special ritual required? Please tell me! I want my life back too!

Welcome back good Sir. I wish you many hours of fun and relaxation in the hollowed halls of the AE Forum.


No potion, just have to figure out a way to get through life without working for the man! Will be good to focus on something else for a change other than pipeline construction. Glad to see you popping in 1Eyed.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to 1EyedJacks)
Post #: 774
RE: My Empire for bombardment waypoints - 7/11/2013 9:59:35 PM   
kjnoel

 

Posts: 83
Joined: 3/10/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

I want waypoints that work with bombardments.



I use a work-around that isn't always available but can usually help. I set the home base of the bombardment to some random base I own that is in range (so there's no refuel activity!) and in the direction I want my bombardment group to egress. Gets round this problem most of the time.

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 775
RE: My Empire for bombardment waypoints - 7/11/2013 10:58:13 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kjnoel

I use a work-around that isn't always available but can usually help. I set the home base of the bombardment to some random base I own that is in range (so there's no refuel activity!) and in the direction I want my bombardment group to egress. Gets round this problem most of the time.


I try this when I can too, sometimes it just isn't practical. Kwajalein is the only base capable of rearming my BB's, so the longer it takes between sorties due to routing, the less effective my operations will be. Good point though.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to kjnoel)
Post #: 776
The war resumes - 7/15/2013 5:43:50 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
After a bit of a hiatus, game turns began to flow once again with Jocke and I getting three in over the weekend. The game date is Aug. 9/42.

Nothing of note to report though. The battle for Lanchow continues with forts being reduced to 0 and another deliberate assault ordered for today. The isolated Chinese stacks continue to hold out, but more deliberate attacks are scheduled for today.

I've decided to eliminate the Allied position on Makin after debating whether to leave it alone. I don't want to allow an Allied foothold in the Central Pacific at this time. The 38th Division, combat engineers and a tank regiment will make an amphibious assault as soon as additional transport shipping arrives. I will use a large number of xAK's and xAKL's to unload as quickly as possible in an effort to reduce disruption. KB will remain out of sight, but if the landings go poorly I may have to use KB to hammer the defenders. Enemy FLAK has stopped against LBA attacks so supply for the defenders is low again.

Japanese forces are now attempting to clear the remaining Allied forces out of the Philippines. Troops are almost in position for an assault on Cagayan.

Other than that, pretty quiet with no sign of enemy movement. I'll be shifting my focus to getting defences on Java and Sumatra prepared. I'm also preparing to defend against massed Allied bombing attacks in Burma. I plan to fight a purely defensive air war in Burma.

I'll post some screens once Lanchow falls or when my second amphibious landing is ready to go against Makin.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 777
Aug. 10/42 Update and lessons learned - 7/16/2013 5:25:13 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
All the action was in China, some good, some bad.

First off, the good news. Lanchow falls against a 2:1 deliberate attack. Chinese losses are heavy with over 800 infantry and non-combat squads destroyed. Japanese losses are light in comparison. The fuel/oil facilities are largely intact at 74(16). One division will rest at Lanchow, the remaining forces will push on to Sining.

The bad news is the isolated Chinese forces continue to hold out against repeated assaults. Japanese forces finally achieved a 2:1 against the larger enemy force near Nanyang, but suffered higher casualties than the defenders, including having a mortar battalion almost wiped out.

I'm freeing up additional forces to put an end to this debacle. Every day of delay allows the Chinese to strengthen their defences throughout China.

As to lessons learned, I won't isolate Chinese troops in anything other than a base hex in the future. The fact Lanchow fell easily against a 2:1 attack after forts were reduced to zero, shows me that the land combat model favours defending a non-base hex. All it took was a 2:1 attack to force a retreat. If Lanchow had been isolated, these troops would have simply surrendered. In comparison to what their brethren can do in a non-base hex with no supply and completely isolated, taking Lanchow or any other base hex is a piece of cake.

In a non-base hex in good defensive terrain, fort levels aren't reduced, supply is not required to prevent collapse and if isolated the enemy force will fight to the death. If I'm going to fight Chinese troops in non-base hexes, I must leave an open hex side to allow a retreat, otherwise I'll become mired in an attritional battle that will last for weeks/months on end. Isolated Chinese forces in a non-base hex have survived attacks as high as 23:1 odds in my experience.

The latest attack where I just had a mortar battalion all but wiped out against a Chinese force that has had no supply for months, tells me the key to attacking in China is brute force. Economy of force doesn't matter in this game, if anything it only hurts you. Maneuvering to isolate and destroy enemy forces is a complete waste of time and counterproductive. My forces are weaker for it and the time I have lost will only lead to confronting a stronger and well dug in enemy moving forward.

At least Lanchow's fuel/oil are now in Japanese hands and will go a long way to supporting the war effort. An Air HQ will be deployed to Lanchow and the three bases (Sining, Lanchow and Kungchang) will be developed into large airfields in order to provide protection against Allied bombing raids to destroy the production facilities.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/16/2013 9:13:29 PM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 778
Aug. 11/42 - 7/18/2013 5:48:13 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
A quiet day. A few small deliberate assaults against isolated Allied units in Borneo and the Philippines don't yield any outright victories, but the enemy is reduced for little cost to Japan.

In China, I'm shifting bomber operations to target Tienshui and moving in an additional division before launching a deliberate attack against the base. Hex stacking limit is 60k and I'm currently only at 36k, the additional firepower another division will provide should overcome the forts and defensive terrain.

I've begun loading a number of amphibious TF's for the second assault against Makin. I plan on using 3-4 TF's in an effort to unload as much material on day one as possible. I'll support the invasion with a number of naval bombardments, but KB will remain hidden at this time. Prep for 38th Division isn't great, but I need to deal with Makin so I can focus efforts on more important areas.

Allied recon is targeting New Caledonia and New Guinea. I wouldn't rule out another Allied amphibious landing soon, so Makin must be dealt with so I can free up assets to respond appropriately.

In Burma, an additional Allied unit has reinforced their forces trying to push back my Inf. Rgt. I'm expecting another Allied bombing attack against my ground forces prior to a ground assault. I have deployed four fighter Sentai's at Lashio to provide LRCAP to interdict possible enemy air attacks.

I'm busy trying to strengthen my position defensively. A reorganization is due once the Philippines are consolidated. Air units definitely need to be redistributed in order to provide a more effective defence.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/18/2013 5:49:44 PM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 779
Aug. 12/42 Update - 7/19/2013 5:32:16 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
Another quiet day to report.

However, the amphibious TF's have set sail and will arrive at Makin in three days. Strong SCTF's are providing escort while KB remains hidden within a days sail of trouble.

In Burma there was no Allied air attack as anticipated. I chose to keep flying the LRCAP as fatigue levels are manageable.

Damaged BB Fuso has made Truk safely, now begins the long hazardous trip back to Japan for repairs.

Economy wise, two large tanker TF's have just unloaded fuel/oil in the Home Islands. I seem just able to maintain current stocks with the shipping available. As more tankers come online this should improve to where the stockpiles are actually increasing.

Supply is increasing roughly 10-15k a day in the Home Islands and will reach one million by the end of the month, if not sooner. I still have over one million in aircraft R&D to complete, but at least the pool is growing now that only about 4-7k is used daily for repairs.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 780
Page:   <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> Aug. 6/42 Brief Update Page: <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   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

0.152