Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ???

 
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 >> 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/16/2013 11:25:42 PM   
JSG


Posts: 45
Joined: 10/16/2012
Status: offline
Requesting explanation for THIS




Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/17/2013 1:18:04 AM   
joey


Posts: 844
Joined: 5/8/2004
From: Wilmington, DE
Status: offline
FOW?

(in reply to JSG)
Post #: 2
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/17/2013 1:22:59 AM   
HistoryGuy


Posts: 80
Joined: 1/7/2009
From: Woodbridge, VA
Status: offline
I would vote for FOW....never seen that myself and I have seen US PT boats sink Japanese CVs.............

(in reply to joey)
Post #: 3
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/17/2013 2:20:03 AM   
JSG


Posts: 45
Joined: 10/16/2012
Status: offline
What is FOW?

(in reply to HistoryGuy)
Post #: 4
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/17/2013 2:40:26 AM   
jmalter

 

Posts: 1363
Joined: 10/12/2010
Status: offline
Fog of War, the great ughknown. happens a lot, such as when your Search-planes find a TF of Tankers that later turn out to be CVs (or vice versa).

< Message edited by jmalter -- 3/17/2013 2:48:37 AM >

(in reply to JSG)
Post #: 5
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/17/2013 2:46:27 AM   
jmalter

 

Posts: 1363
Joined: 10/12/2010
Status: offline
looks like one of the 66th Corps' ATguns ate a bomb & the result got misappropriated to a section of the Combat Report that's usually reserved for Base facility or industry hits. Normally, you'd see a line:
Guns: N destroyed, N disabled as part of the Allied Ground losses table.

Check the 66th Corps TO&E, is an ATG missing or disabled?

(in reply to jmalter)
Post #: 6
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/17/2013 3:46:20 AM   
JSG


Posts: 45
Joined: 10/16/2012
Status: offline
Well, since I already showed that pic:

Any guesses why bombing this concentration of forces at Chungking (fortification 6) yields only so few damage, while a mere 100 Ki-21 IIa bombing about half as many troops at Loyang regularly killed 700-1000 (and some of those squadrons were involved in the Chungking bombing)?
Both targets are within "normal" range, and all bombers were set to the limit of "normal" range.
Altitudes were equal - I attempted 6k and 10k ft on both targets each.

I could easily win the continental campaign soon if I only learned how to kill 1k in Chungking per day. 250-350 kills/day is simply not quick enough, despite knocked out production and blockade.

(in reply to jmalter)
Post #: 7
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/17/2013 4:00:47 AM   
crsutton


Posts: 7424
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Well, many things affect bombing results. Detection level, weather, fortifications, terrain, leadership, and luck to name a few. So, it is hard to say why without a little more information. Of all of the above, detection level is probably the most important. Keep searching and keep the DL high and you will get the best results.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to JSG)
Post #: 8
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/17/2013 4:46:28 AM   
JSG


Posts: 45
Joined: 10/16/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Well, many things affect bombing results. Detection level, weather, fortifications, terrain, leadership, and luck to name a few. So, it is hard to say why without a little more information. Of all of the above, detection level is probably the most important. Keep searching and keep the DL high and you will get the best results.


Actually, detection level should be maxed after weeks of photo recce and with a dozen divisions plus dozens of other IJA units in Chungking itself.
Weather does not explain a huge difference in results for weeks, nor would luck.
I doubt that leadership (Chiang K.C. etc) can ward off so many bombs.
The terrain is no doubt different, but I remember bombing of Changsha as much more efficient.
Fortification is probably 5 vs. 3 or so.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 9
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/17/2013 5:29:08 AM   
jmalter

 

Posts: 1363
Joined: 10/12/2010
Status: offline
high forts in the target hex reduce your bombers' effectiveness. Chungking prob'ly has better forts & terrain than Loyang did, & higher auto-supply as well. you'll have to bring many more bombers to Chung, don't bother if they can't carry 250kg bombs. One tactic is, bomb the airfield continuously, the defending engrs are forced to repair AF damage before they can build their forts.

(in reply to JSG)
Post #: 10
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/17/2013 5:47:26 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5925
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JSG

Actually, detection level should be maxed after weeks of photo recce and with a dozen divisions plus dozens of other IJA units in Chungking itself.

"Should" is a risky word. DL is displayed. It is either 10 or it is not maxxed out and you need to increase the recon efforts. I never assume what the DL is, I check it.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to JSG)
Post #: 11
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/17/2013 4:12:17 PM   
Cap Mandrake

 

Posts: 17148
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Anyone who hits a moving aircraft with a 37mm AT gun is going to want to brag about it.

(in reply to JSG)
Post #: 12
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/17/2013 6:16:34 PM   
JSG


Posts: 45
Joined: 10/16/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: JSG

Actually, detection level should be maxed after weeks of photo recce and with a dozen divisions plus dozens of other IJA units in Chungking itself.

"Should" is a risky word. DL is displayed. It is either 10 or it is not maxxed out and you need to increase the recon efforts. I never assume what the DL is, I check it.


It's 9/14 and doesn't change, despite divisions in the hex and four RC units making photos of it.


< Message edited by JSG -- 3/17/2013 6:22:45 PM >

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 13
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/17/2013 7:26:48 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 8791
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JSG

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: JSG

Actually, detection level should be maxed after weeks of photo recce and with a dozen divisions plus dozens of other IJA units in Chungking itself.

"Should" is a risky word. DL is displayed. It is either 10 or it is not maxxed out and you need to increase the recon efforts. I never assume what the DL is, I check it.


It's 9/14 and doesn't change, despite divisions in the hex and four RC units making photos of it.



"Yes, there are DLs getting above the stated maximum value.

The max DL gets updated in several aspects of the game, but there is no check against "going above 10" in AE (or surprisingly in stock).
I suspect in AE, we used DL more often which impacted the max DL.

I have already built-in checks for the next build to correct this. Though the max DL can go a few points above 10 in some cases, it will always come back into the defined levels as the turn progresses. These cases are usually with high attack/search against TFs.

The max DL is used in a few places to influence search, but the normal DL is used in the majority of instances for attacks.


< Message edited by michaelm -- 5/14/2010 11:28:50 PM > "

Check upgrade notes for any further changes to the code on DL.

Edit: Let me add me vote to the side saying that differences in Fort levels are the main reason you see such different results in base bombing. A Forts of 6 is huge protection versus, say, a 2.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 3/17/2013 8:05:49 PM >


_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to JSG)
Post #: 14
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 1:11:49 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 8380
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Anyone who hits a moving aircraft with a 37mm AT gun is going to want to brag about it.


The British hit some Ju-52s during the invasion of Crete with 25 pounders. The guns were up in the hills above the airfields and they were able to fire down on the Ju-52s as they flew past. The Ju-52s were flying very slow and it was a unique situation.

I think in this case the AT gun was hit by one of the bombers, but it got reported on the wrong line for some reason.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 15
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 1:30:40 AM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18489
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline
Just curious, JSG, but are you playing some sort of mod? The listing of Japanese aircraft damaged (i.e.," Ki-21-Ic x48; Ki-21-IIa x194; Ki-49-IIa x20") is not what I would expect from stock, in that your listing contains no "Lilly" or "Sonia" or other codename descriptor.

Don't know if this has something to do with your unusual / odd 37mm AT gun hit, but just a thought.

_____________________________


(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 16
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 3:32:29 AM   
JeffK


Posts: 5233
Joined: 1/26/2005
From: Back in the Office, Can I get my tin hut back!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Anyone who hits a moving aircraft with a 37mm AT gun is going to want to brag about it.


The British hit some Ju-52s during the invasion of Crete with 25 pounders. The guns were up in the hills above the airfields and they were able to fire down on the Ju-52s as they flew past. The Ju-52s were flying very slow and it was a unique situation.

I think in this case the AT gun was hit by one of the bombers, but it got reported on the wrong line for some reason.

Bill


It would be interesting to more infor about the succes of the 25pdrs, given that all were left behind on Greece.
I have seen a website with a bit of info but far from anything detailed.
(Of course any aircraft could be hit "while landing" )

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 17
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 3:53:28 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 8380
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: online
It's possible I misremembered something. I recall reading about the British using field artillery on the Ju-52s from the hills. They probably only scored a couple of hits at best.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to JeffK)
Post #: 18
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 5:34:11 AM   
DivePac88


Posts: 3123
Joined: 10/9/2008
From: Somewhere in the South Pacific.
Status: offline
It was New Zealanders Bill... On maleme airfield in Crete, after the Germans had pushed us off the field and were reinforcing.

_____________________________


When you see the Southern Cross, For the first time
You understand now, Why you came this way

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 19
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 6:06:09 AM   
JeffK


Posts: 5233
Joined: 1/26/2005
From: Back in the Office, Can I get my tin hut back!
Status: offline
Both NZ & OZ Official Histories state that there were no 25pdrs on Crete, all had been lost in Greece.

While most of the Gunners were armed as Infantry, some of the NZ Field Rgts(including that covering Maleme airfield) were equipped with French or Italian 75mm and did conduct direct fire on the the airfield.

No doubt that many Ju52's were destroyed while on the ground or even in the last stages of landing, I seriously doubt any were shot down in the air although the golden BB effect could have intervened.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to DivePac88)
Post #: 20
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 8:06:03 AM   
DivePac88


Posts: 3123
Joined: 10/9/2008
From: Somewhere in the South Pacific.
Status: offline
I heard the story from my best friend's father, who was there. He was pinned down in a ditch at the edge of the airfield, and said 'that our gunners on the hillside were shooting at the Ju52's as they were landing'. He also said that 'they were hitting some of them', and he remembered that they burned really easily. I do have all the battalion histories for NZ Army, and one of them states that the guns were captured 75's, but doesn't say who they were captured from.

_____________________________


When you see the Southern Cross, For the first time
You understand now, Why you came this way

(in reply to JeffK)
Post #: 21
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 12:13:50 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 3830
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
This is not a "WTF" warranted thread. Although I am very suspicious as to the basis of the makeup of this "scenario" (see Chickenboy's post #16) and therefore the possible ramifications of equipment specifications, nor have we been provided with any meaningful data of what occurred at Loyang and therefore a comparison between the two locations is not possible and of no value to the OP, still there is enough provided to set the OP on the correct thinking path.

Before proceeding with the commentary there are a couple of things the OP should do himself.

(a) Do not rely just on reading the Combat Report. You must also view the combat animation to gain a fuller understanding of what factors are at play.

(b) Forget about this expectation that Loyang results can automatically be generated at Chungking. There are many significant differences between the two and the OP has yet to realise what those differences are, even though the differences are not hidden from a player.

Also before commentating on this particular incident, I strongly urge the OP to read this recent thread.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3251828&mpage=1&key=bombing%2Ceffect�


Chungking Result

1. No timeline has been provided. Nonetheless it is quite likely that Chungking has level 6 forts whereas Loyang probably had only level 1, perhaps level 2, forts. That is a huge difference and alone would suffice to explain the alleged differences in bombing results. But wait, there are other factors too at play.

2. The Chinese have very limited flak assets.

(a) Most infantry divisions have no organic flak, and the few that do have some are only equipped with flak limited to a ceiling of less than 4000 feet.

(b) Chinese Base Forces have a TOE which includes some limited medium AA guns which can fire up to 7500-9800 feet, and a few large AA guns which can reach 27k-28k feet. I said TOE, because in reality the large flak guns are not distributed to all the units in the field and with the supply problems in china, it is difficult to fill up depleted units.

(c) The only Chinese units equipped with a reasonable number of AA guns are the two Anti-Aircraft Regiments located at Chungking. These units have flak which can reach Japanese bombers flying up to 27k feet.

3. If you read the thread I hyperlinked above, you will see the importance and effect of degrading enemy bombing. Loyang almost certainly had no flak which could reach Japanese bombers flying at 6000 feet. Chungking instead has probably about 20 guns which can fire above 27k feet and even more guns which can hit planes flying in the delta 6-9k feet. Your Chungking Combat Report ("CR") shows about 5.7% of the attacking bombers were damaged by "flak" (you have not updated the game because flak losses are now recorded separately on CRs). For the China Theatre, that is a significant loss rate and impact on bomber degradation.

4. Having flak present is in itself of no value if there is insufficient supply. You place emphasis on having destroyed facilities and blockade at your bombing targets. Loyang has very limited supply generating capacity and would have only a 20 auto supply capacity which means that even if there was any flak present there, it would not have fired due to lack of shells. Chungking is quite different. Not only is it the Ruhr of Chinese industry, particularly when compared to Loyang, even with all its industrial facilities shut down it would still generate 400 supply automatically. That means that unless the entire Chinese army is trapped at Chungking, there should still be some supply available to provide shells for the AA guns.

5. In military terms it is almost always true that dissipation of effort is not only inefficient, but prone to generate poor results. You cannot complain about your bombing results regarding number of enemy casualties (which is the wrong metric anyway, see point 6 below) when you have assigned 30% of your bombers to "city attack". I very much suspect that at Loyang you had the bombers 100% on "ground attack"; certainly after the very limited industrial facilities there had been quickly destroyed.

6. Time after time I see players assessing their performance on the basis of enemy men "casualties". It was a poor metric in Vietnam; it is fairly meaningless in AE. It is the number of devices killed outright or disabled which counts (again look at the thread provided above). All that the casualty men number records is the combat load factor associated with the various devices which have been destroyed/disabled. It is not practically possible from that metric, to ascertain which devices are involved. Nor are all "similar" devices equal in their combat load factor. But the real reason why it is such a poor metric is that the main value of bombers on "ground attack" is not recorded on the CR at all. Disruption to combat defending units is extremely important, as is destruction of supply (but the latter is more efficiently handled by "airfield attack"), and that is all handled "under the hood".

7. In point (1) above I mentioned the great disparity between the two locations in terms of their fortification levels. Just as important, because it also accentuates the protection from bombing, is the great disparity of terrain. Loyang is clear terrain, Chungking is Light Urban. Look up the table on page 189 of the manual to see the impact of the different terrain. When combined with its fortification level, even without taking into account any bomber degradation suffered, you should expect that Chungking will suffer only about 25% of the "casualties" that a similar sized and weighted attack would inflict at Loyang.

8. Bearing in mind the preceding points, on what authority do you base the statement that inflicting "250/350 kills a day is simply not quick enough" (post #7). Firstly, what is the relevance of the time; do you have to rush to the supermarket before closing time to buy a litre of milk? Secondly, as I pointed out in the above thread, "ground attack" is the wrong tactic unless you are concurrently making infantry attacks. Consistent with the lack of relevant data provided, I very much doubt that you are launching infantry attacks. Furthermore, again on what authority do you believe that inflicting 1k daily losses will ensure an easy continental win. This is not Kosovo 1999. Airpower alone does not win battles, you need the army. Have a proper army attacking Chungking and you will get far better results than is possible with Japanese airpower.

Alfred

(in reply to DivePac88)
Post #: 22
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 12:20:25 PM   
castor troy


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: joey

FOW?



more like a flaw than FOW

_____________________________


(in reply to joey)
Post #: 23
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 12:21:45 PM   
castor troy


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Anyone who hits a moving aircraft with a 37mm AT gun is going to want to brag about it.


The British hit some Ju-52s during the invasion of Crete with 25 pounders. The guns were up in the hills above the airfields and they were able to fire down on the Ju-52s as they flew past. The Ju-52s were flying very slow and it was a unique situation.

I think in this case the AT gun was hit by one of the bombers, but it got reported on the wrong line for some reason.

Bill



you sure they were hit when they were actually flying?

_____________________________


(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 24
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 5:29:53 PM   
JSG


Posts: 45
Joined: 10/16/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Just curious, JSG, but are you playing some sort of mod? The listing of Japanese aircraft damaged (i.e.," Ki-21-Ic x48; Ki-21-IIa x194; Ki-49-IIa x20") is not what I would expect from stock, in that your listing contains no "Lilly" or "Sonia" or other codename descriptor.

Don't know if this has something to do with your unusual / odd 37mm AT gun hit, but just a thought.


I renamed the aircraft because I dislike reading American call signs all the time while playing as a Japanese.
There were no substantial changes that could explain this, neither in bomber armament nor in ground units.
I hadn't this message at other times either, so I assume it was probably caused by a corrupted byte.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 25
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 5:50:25 PM   
JSG


Posts: 45
Joined: 10/16/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
(...)
That means that unless the entire Chinese army is trapped at Chungking, there should still be some supply available to provide shells for the AA guns.
(...)

8. Bearing in mind the preceding points, on what authority do you base the statement that inflicting "250/350 kills a day is simply not quick enough" (post #7). Firstly, what is the relevance of the time; do you have to rush to the supermarket before closing time to buy a litre of milk? Secondly, as I pointed out in the above thread, "ground attack" is the wrong tactic unless you are concurrently making infantry attacks. Consistent with the lack of relevant data provided, I very much doubt that you are launching infantry attacks. Furthermore, again on what authority do you believe that inflicting 1k daily losses will ensure an easy continental win. This is not Kosovo 1999. Airpower alone does not win battles, you need the army. Have a proper army attacking Chungking and you will get far better results than is possible with Japanese airpower.

Alfred


There are more than 440 k Chinese trapped in Chungking. I hammer them with almost all army artillery units there are, about 400 medium bombers, attacked them with more than 7500 AV only to be reduced to 4400 AV next day without inflicting substantial damage - and all this while their supply situation is down to auto supply + about 50-70 LI.
Killing them while they're unable to recover from losses way my only plan to eliminate Chungking once and for all.
Brute force on the ground did not help.


Chungking before assault : after:
6/9 fort 5/9
7782 AV 7667
117443 infantry 118084
120682 other 121544
1231 guns 1249

They even grew stronger during the 24 hrs period while I lost the equivalent of two armies there!

I'm not going to beat them with even more troops, as I could at most mobilise 6 more divisions and reach about 9000 AV. About 80% of my tanks are already at Chungking, as are almost 100% of army field/siege artillery units.
The bombers were my big hope.



Now I suppose if the bombers don't work, I need to withdraw and lure them out, for battle against only part of the whole Chungking army at Chengtu. They lost 40k personnel during my initial river crossing to the west of Chungking and 10 k during a counterattack after my one big attack on Chungking, but have never displayed any thirst for battle afterwards (and I am down to 3 divisions + ARM + ART in the Chungking hex - they still don't attack any more).

< Message edited by JSG -- 3/18/2013 6:47:59 PM >

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 26
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 6:02:41 PM   
HistoryGuy


Posts: 80
Joined: 1/7/2009
From: Woodbridge, VA
Status: offline
Having stood on the New Zealand defensive positions overlooking Maleme airfield, I would entertain serious doubts that aircraft in flight were being hit. Its a LONG way off (surprisingly so) and howitzer shells travel fairly slowly. Vickers HMGs would seem to be the best weapon to use against the Germans at that range (1000 meters plus or so it seemed). I could see why the New Zealanders pulled off the hill that night because they did not realize how it commanded the airfield. It would have been very hard to see what was happening there.

(in reply to JSG)
Post #: 27
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 7:56:00 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 3830
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
Selective facts again which do not disclose the full picture.

1. I think you are playing a human opponent. That can be a significant factor to take into account.

2. I assume this info

Chungking before assault : after:
6/9 fort 5/9
7782 AV 7667
117443 infantry 118084
120682 other 121544
1231 guns 1249


represents Chinese data. With no context provided it is meaningless, other than it shows forts were reduced which in itself is an important achievement. Sieges always take time but fort reduction is always a positive outcome worth incurring heavier losses than the enemy, and over a sustained period of time too.

3. You did not lose the equivalent of two armies at Chungking, however without providing the data (best done via screenshots) who knows exactly what really occurred. Most likely you merely suffered disablements. Japanese disablements usually recover much more quickly than chinese disablements which are hamstrung by lack of supply.

4. It doesn't appear that you have set up properly the investing force.

(a) artillery bombardment only attacks is not the way to capture a level 6 fortification. All that you have been accomplishing is to improve the experience levels of the enemy units.

(b) Japanese tanks do very well against the Chinese simply because they do not come up against any anti-tank weapons except when they invest Chungking. The only Chinese anti-tank weapons are found in Chungking where they expose the inherent weakness of Japanese tanks. You need infantry, not tanks to invest Chungking.

(c) Three Japanese infantry divisions to invest Chungking is just laughable. Even an additional 6 infantry divisions, whilst considerably improving the situation, is not enough to efficiently prosecute the attack. Trapping 440k Chinese at Chungking means that most of the rest of China is under your control and more than 6 additional Japanese divisions can be scrapped together. If you can't do it then you have seriously mismanaged your operations or had unrealistic assumptions from the start as to how to handle China.

5. Again the wrong metric is being used. How many times does it have to be said that AV is fairly meaningless; what matters is combat firepower. Here Japan has a distinct advantage, not just in the raw firepower of its devices compared to Chinese devices but in being able to bring it to bear effectively as your disruption, morale and leadership levels should be far superior.

6. Who said anything about more brute force being the key to cracking open Chungking. In my earlier post I said you needed a proper army attacking. reading between the lines, and really I shouldn't have to do so, it doesn't seem like you have a proper army present.

(a) are your units 100% prepped for Chungking?

(b) have you set up your HQs correctly to take full advantage of the possible combat and supply benefits?

(c) are you rotating your divisions into/out of the Verdun cauldron of continuous combat, this being one of the main reasons why you need infantry rather than tanks?

(d) have your land attacks been made hastily with unready units?

7. You are not conducting a properly co-ordinated combined arms operation. The hyperlink I gave before explained what should be done. In short you are badly misusing your air force.

(a) You say there is still 50-70 LI centres. As it has been your intention from the beginning to destroy the industrial infrastructure, you should not have used your air force on anything other than industry destruction. Nor have launched any land attacks until subjective had been accomplished.

(b) It was probably not the best to have launched any bombers at all on city attack. That many Chinese mouths quickly consume the available supplies plus with the rest of China in your hands, the necessary raw materials to feed the Chungking industry would be lacking. More importantly, for the reasons outlined in the other thread, your bombers should be conducting airfield attacks which can be a force multiplier to land attacks.

(c) A single big attack never, I repeat never, not even against 1942 Chinese units, suffices to capture a festung. It requires the equivalent of a creeping barrage of deliberate attacks with support from bombardment only capable units, and not shock attacks.


What you really should do is search the forum for the many threads which discuss how to conduct operations in China. That is really the issue here, not the unwarranted "WTF" opening comment.

Alfred

(in reply to HistoryGuy)
Post #: 28
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/18/2013 10:16:23 PM   
JeffK


Posts: 5233
Joined: 1/26/2005
From: Back in the Office, Can I get my tin hut back!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HistoryGuy

Having stood on the New Zealand defensive positions overlooking Maleme airfield, I would entertain serious doubts that aircraft in flight were being hit. Its a LONG way off (surprisingly so) and howitzer shells travel fairly slowly. Vickers HMGs would seem to be the best weapon to use against the Germans at that range (1000 meters plus or so it seemed). I could see why the New Zealanders pulled off the hill that night because they did not realize how it commanded the airfield. It would have been very hard to see what was happening there.

Take the 25pdr out of the equation, they didnt exists.

The French 75mm which was in place (not on pt107 but in direct line of sight of the airfield) had a much flatter trajectory and was used as an AT Gun in this period. At one point "over 60 Ju's" were on the airfield and on fire.

I hate to question oral histories, but too many incorrect stories come out of them. The person honestly, 110% believes, but as the Digger in the trench cant know exactly what hit what.

Could have been a Vickers or Bofors or 3" AA or 75mm shell, a hit on a load of explosives creates an explosion, must have been a 25pdr even though we couldnt squeeze them on the Destroyer that lifted us of the beaches of Kalamanata!

Part of 22Bns problem is that more than 10 coomands were represented on Maleme Airfield, nobody was in charge, plus when the CO (Andrews?) reported he moved the HQ, higher ups assumed the whole Bn was evacuating and a complete evacuation occured. Total SNAFU!

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to HistoryGuy)
Post #: 29
RE: 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? - 3/19/2013 1:10:01 AM   
JSG


Posts: 45
Joined: 10/16/2012
Status: offline
quote:

1. I think you are playing a human opponent. That can be a significant factor to take into account.


It's against the AI.

quote:

3. You did not lose the equivalent of two armies at Chungking, however without providing the data (best done via screenshots) who knows exactly what really occurred. Most likely you merely suffered disablements. Japanese disablements usually recover much more quickly than chinese disablements which are hamstrung by lack of supply.


Seriously, I lost thousands of destroyed infantry squads and hundreds of tanks. I know what I lost, and I called it the equivalent of two armies.

(c) Three Japanese infantry divisions to invest Chungking is just laughable.
quote:



Obviously, I did attack with more, since I told that I could at most muster six more.
I thinned down to three divisions on-site to provoke bloody Chinese attacks.
Lots of infantry divisions are trying to rebuild at Chengtu, none of them are back at more than 75% of their original strength yet. One was decimated to battalion strength and was sent to Changsha as occupation force. One tank regiment was annihilated.

quote:

5. Again the wrong metric is being used. How many times does it have to be said that AV is fairly meaningless; what matters is combat firepower. Here Japan has a distinct advantage, not just in the raw firepower of its devices compared to Chinese devices but in being able to bring it to bear effectively as your disruption, morale and leadership levels should be far superior.


Except that betting on superior quality once led to more losses than conquering or encircling everything on my side of Lanchow.

quote:

6. Who said anything about more brute force being the key to cracking open Chungking. In my earlier post I said you needed a proper army attacking. reading between the lines, and really I shouldn't have to do so, it doesn't seem like you have a proper army present.


You read wrongly.
I had
16 infantry divisions
2 tank divisions
7 tank regiments
2 armoured car companies
1 mixed brigade
1 infantry regiment
3 HQc
approx. 90% of all field and heavy artillery units of the IJA
300 bombers (4x250 kg each) for preparatory ground attack
The vast majority of which were 100% prepared for this location.

Almost all non-ART units were set to deliberate attack.

quote:

7. You are not conducting a properly co-ordinated combined arms operation. The hyperlink I gave before explained what should be done. In short you are badly misusing your air force.


Except of course you have no clue about what I actually did.

quote:

(a) You say there is still 50-70 LI centres. As it has been your intention from the beginning to destroy the industrial infrastructure, you should not have used your air force on anything other than industry destruction. Nor have launched any land attacks until subjective had been accomplished.


Except that after weeks of bombardment with 300+ bombers I learned I couldn't make progress below LI about 60.

The refineries at Lanchow and Sian have been knocked out (and kept so) since early 1942 (Kweisui airbase) and the entire Chinese army thus received almost no supplies from HI during 1942. This doesn't look mishandled to me.


quote:

(b) It was probably not the best to have launched any bombers at all on city attack. That many Chinese mouths quickly consume the available supplies plus with the rest of China in your hands, the necessary raw materials to feed the Chungking industry would be lacking. More importantly, for the reasons outlined in the other thread, your bombers should be conducting airfield attacks which can be a force multiplier to land attacks.


Chungking has its own supply of raw materials, which suffices to supply its LI (as long as I had no ground units in the hex) even before taking into account that necessarily huge resource stocks exist in the city due to the inactive Chinese HI and months of surplus resource production by the Chinese.

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> 37 mm AT Gun hits 1 - WTF ??? Page: [1] 2   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

0.119