Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

shore bombardment

 
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 >> The War Room >> shore bombardment Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 12:25:05 PM   
John B.


Posts: 279
Joined: 9/25/2011
Status: offline
Can someone give me some pointers as this topic gets more and more frustrating in my games. The Japanese just did their third devastating shore bombardment at Chittagong. My subs don't intercept and mines don't seem to work and this has been true at other locations. But here at Chittagong I have 4 separate CD artillery units. As you can see from the picture at least two of them emerged unscathed by the bombardment. The one shown has high morale and high experience (as do the others).

The problem is that they did not fire a single shot at the bombarding fleet. Not one shot from four units and this has happened with previous encounters. In fact, none of the artillery in the hex (and there is quite a bit) shot at all. So, the IJN can sail in with impunity, not have their aim disrupted at all.

It can't be range because IJN CLs came within 2,000 yards and it can't be low light since at a separate hex Chinese mortar units shot at a bombarding TF on the same night. They didn't hit anything, but at least they were trying. :-)





Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 12:46:09 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 1544
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Lima and Toronto
Status: offline
Welcome to the club, you are not alone
my opponent is also very fond of naval bombardment, and there is very little that coastal guns or mines will do. That said, he had lost around 2 or 3 DDs, check at the combat report for ships hitting mines, you can expect some (few) losses, but that is it.

High fort levels will reduce the damage to LCUs and you should re-base planes to non-coastal airfields

look at the bright side, once roles revert around 1943, you should do exactly the same



< Message edited by Jorge_Stanbury -- 3/21/2015 1:47:54 PM >

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 2
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 1:30:28 PM   
obvert


Posts: 8171
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: online
Yes, this can be frustrating, and from all I've heard it's pretty standard. PTs will help, and I've found can lead to mines being more effective, maybe as the ships maneuver. Ge to 300-400 mines and keep dropping them after each run in (as the field will be 'known' after it's encountered. Also, if you have different mine types each one acts as a separate field, so more chances to hit, but higher cost to maintain in fuel for ACM.

Where mines, CD guns and PTs really work well is defending against invasion. Hard to sweep mines with CD guns present. Lot of ops points wasted against PTs so ships can end up high and dry away from their air cover.

_____________________________


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

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 3
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 2:02:29 PM   
Roger Neilson 3


Posts: 619
Joined: 4/12/2012
From: Bedlington, Northumberland, UK
Status: offline
PT boats, PT Boats and PT Boats.... Every time the bombardment force has to change course or shoot at them it loses op points and runs down the clock. WITP is a massively complex scissors, paper, rock game.

Once you have the nasty bombarders still running for home in daylight you can normally dissuade them from returning with a few well aimed 1000lbers.

On of my opponents has very few CAs left following this treatment.

There seems to be no other method for dealing with them though.

Roger

_____________________________


(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 4
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 2:24:56 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 1544
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Lima and Toronto
Status: offline
How many PTs boats would you use per "session"?

what is the attrition? I bet it will be very high, I think you need to be much later on the game (he is in April 42) to get enough PTs to keep it sustained

(in reply to Roger Neilson 3)
Post #: 5
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 2:47:18 PM   
Roger Neilson 3


Posts: 619
Joined: 4/12/2012
From: Bedlington, Northumberland, UK
Status: offline
Quite a few, and yes it was later in the game. Early days really the only answer is to entrench your ground troops as well as possible and not base planes at sea bases unless you want to bait a trap or they are float planes - which seem pretty impervious to anything that attacks a base.

_____________________________


(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 6
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 3:13:13 PM   
Trugrit


Posts: 131
Joined: 7/14/2014
From: North Carolina
Status: offline
What scenario are you playing?

I show that in scenario 1 the device has no anti armor or anti soft.

A design oversight?








Attachment (1)

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 7
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 4:02:47 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 3998
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trugrit

What scenario are you playing?

I show that in scenario 1 the device has no anti armor or anti soft.

A design oversight?









That data is not relevant. Anti-armor and anti-soft values are used against LCUs.

The 6"Mk V/VI is a naval gun. The relevant data for use against ships is it's penetration and effect values. In scenario 1 those values are 108 and 100 respectively.

The Combat Report will probably disclose some relevant information.

Alfred

(in reply to Trugrit)
Post #: 8
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 4:23:57 PM   
1EyedJacks


Posts: 2050
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: The Eastern Sierras
Status: offline
Add Naval search AC - night operations - to raise the detection level of enemy TFs. You can also patrol with subs/PT boats in the base hex to help increase the DL and maybe even get in an attack... Just saying - if you can't detect the enemy you can't attack the enemy.

< Message edited by 1EyedJacks -- 3/21/2015 5:24:22 PM >


_____________________________

TTFN,

Mike

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 9
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 4:27:17 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 1222
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poznan, Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Trugrit

What scenario are you playing?

I show that in scenario 1 the device has no anti armor or anti soft.

A design oversight?









That data is not relevant. Anti-armor and anti-soft values are used against LCUs.

The 6"Mk V/VI is a naval gun. The relevant data for use against ships is it's penetration and effect values. In scenario 1 those values are 108 and 100 respectively.

The Combat Report will probably disclose some relevant information.

Alfred


Strange, in DaBig BabesC, those guns have 54 anti-armor /20 anti-soft rating. There are no naval guns with 0/0 ratings in DaBigBabes C.

< Message edited by Yaab -- 3/21/2015 5:35:12 PM >

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 10
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 4:38:25 PM   
Trugrit


Posts: 131
Joined: 7/14/2014
From: North Carolina
Status: offline
Thanks Alfred,

It's good to know that it is my mistake and not the new update.

Interesting that in scenario 1 there are only 4 naval guns like that.

Keith

< Message edited by Trugrit -- 3/21/2015 5:38:38 PM >

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 11
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 6:21:48 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 1325
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
the only times I find that mines work against a bombardment is when the mines are placed in a hex that the bombardment task force traverses BEFORE it reaches the bombardment hex.

(in reply to Trugrit)
Post #: 12
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 7:26:39 PM   
John B.


Posts: 279
Joined: 9/25/2011
Status: offline
@Alfred,

Here is the combat report. I don't see anything in here that would indicate why none of the CD batteries even bothered to open fire let alone get hits. As for D/L level, I don't know what it was, but I did see the ships TF before it showed up as there were several PBY squadrons with overlapping coverage of the area.

Incidentally, this is not the first time that these batteries failed to fire during shore bombardments. The last bombardment took place during the day after the TF spent the entire previous day in the Chittagong hex without firing.

@Jorge, would that it were true that there would be turnabout. In my first campaign game when I invaded Saipan I had wicked fight with a IJN artillery unit (I think it was a CD but I'm not sure) that did a great deal of damage to a couple of US BBs.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 13
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 7:35:59 PM   
John B.


Posts: 279
Joined: 9/25/2011
Status: offline
And, just so you can see the whole picture, here is the upper part of the combat report.

The four CD units were the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Indian CD units each of whom was at 60 experience and either 98 or 99 morale and were prep level Chittagong 17 or 14. And, the Chittagong fort was there at experience 39 Morale 63 and it was prep'd at Chittagong 100. Each of these units was at 0 disruption and minor (if any) fatigue at the start of the bombardment and, two of them finished the bombardment that way as shown by the original example.

Is there any way to get these guys to shoot?






Attachment (1)

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 14
RE: shore bombardment - 3/21/2015 7:52:22 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 16010
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

Is there any way to get these guys to shoot?


It is very difficult in this game, and not necessarily unrealistic. Sure, in some circumstances it is clearly unrealistic, but we have to keep in mind that the game can only have so much data provided and stored and decision making programmed in. Otherwise it would simply be unplayable. And that doesn't take into account its roots on far smaller/slower less capable platforms.

The ways that you can influence things have largely been mentioned: DL - get enemy detection level as high as you can with search the day before and nighttime search that same turn; leadership of the CD unit as good as you can; experience; morale; preparation; fatigue; disruption; supply present (maybe?).

Other things (also already mentioned by others) like: use PT boats to patrol there and have 1 hex React settings; DD flotillas to intercept; subs.

When all else fails, send a massive invasion force to capture the base where they are rearming and refueling!

_____________________________

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

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 15
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 12:18:11 AM   
John B.


Posts: 279
Joined: 9/25/2011
Status: offline
Witpqs,

Thanks for the feedback. It just seems very odd to me that whenever there's an invasion task force everything shoots (even Chinese mortars) and yet, when it's a bombardment task force it is so hard to even get shots out of CD units whose job it is to shoot back at enemy ships. I could understand if it was harder for them to hit depending on DL, fatigue, moonlight etc... but not shooting at all does not seem right. Still, it is what it is I suppose. Thanks again for the prompt response, especially on a weekend.

John

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 16
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 12:27:50 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 16010
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John B.

Witpqs,

Thanks for the feedback. It just seems very odd to me that whenever there's an invasion task force everything shoots (even Chinese mortars) and yet, when it's a bombardment task force it is so hard to even get shots out of CD units whose job it is to shoot back at enemy ships. I could understand if it was harder for them to hit depending on DL, fatigue, moonlight etc... but not shooting at all does not seem right. Still, it is what it is I suppose. Thanks again for the prompt response, especially on a weekend.

John

That last bit is no mystery - invasions are coming ashore. Landing craft/landing ships get fired at almost all the time. The ships launching them do sometimes also, especially because they stop or basically stop to get the boats and troops off. But bombardments are totally different. They are moving through at speed, have plan course changes ahead of time, and overall have a focus on getting in and out of enemy gun range in the shortest amount of time. Transports, even APA that unload farther out, show up and stay!

_____________________________

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

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 17
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 12:28:51 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 16010
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John B.

Thanks again for the prompt response, especially on a weekend.

John

BTW, I don't work for matrix, just a fellow player.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 18
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 12:39:20 AM   
John B.


Posts: 279
Joined: 9/25/2011
Status: offline
I agree, it makes a lot of sense that the invasions take more damage and hits, but it's the not shooting at all that I don't get. But, I do really appreciate you getting back to me!

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 19
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 1:44:45 AM   
Lowpe

 

Posts: 4583
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Here is the Saipan CD gun unit in action recently in my AAR game. WITPQS is right: morale, disruption, disablements, leadership, supplies, experience, range, detection level, range, moonlight, weather all probably play a part. I have a feeling how well the unit is prepped for the base (i.e. filled out range cards, etc) makes a difference too. Your 14 prep here is my guess why they don't fire.

In the rules of the game it say the CD guns may fire...not that they always do so. They generally always fire at minesweepers clearing locale mines, and during invasions.

This was against a normal bombardment, the Allies got a little too close. Of course, damage to the base, despite spotters and very close range, was very minimal.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 3/22/2015 2:55:59 AM >

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 20
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 1:58:14 AM   
John B.


Posts: 279
Joined: 9/25/2011
Status: offline
Lowpe,

I've had the IJA do that to me as well and it was also at Saipan. Maybe Siapan is a magic hex and Chittagong is a cursed one. :-) I'm not disagreeing at all that the factors you and others have listed play a role and I'm sure that there is some die roll as to whether units fire, but three bombardments later two at night and one at dawn (and as you see from the first post) against decent CD units with decent leaders with lots of supplies etc.. you'd think someone somewhere might be tempted to pull a lanyard now and again.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 21
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 1:59:29 AM   
John B.


Posts: 279
Joined: 9/25/2011
Status: offline
Oh, just to be clear, the Chittagong CD fortress unit has a 100 prep and it has not fired either.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 22
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 2:04:52 AM   
Lowpe

 

Posts: 4583
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Shouldn't that unit have a lot more support units in it? I also would add that inspiration 42 is not real good...inspiration is usually used in the die roll for attacks in some manner. Not sure it is here though.

I agree it is a black science seemingly. Keep on experimenting.

Having been burnt by Dutch guns in the SRA, I always try to bombard from outside the range of the guns. Personally.

Do you have a screenshot of something showing the Chinese mortars shooting at a bombardment fleet. Didn't know that could happen.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 3/22/2015 3:10:09 AM >

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 23
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 2:19:27 AM   
John B.


Posts: 279
Joined: 9/25/2011
Status: offline
Lowpe,

I'm not sure. But, I did check out the IJA CD unit on Saipan (at least how it is on Dec. 7, 1941) and that had 34 support and needed 35 for more guns so the support for the Chittagong units seems in line with the Saipan CD unit that we know has at least fired twice and inflicted significant damage. It is a real puzzlement.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 24
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 2:21:46 AM   
John B.


Posts: 279
Joined: 9/25/2011
Status: offline
Sorry for the fragmented nature of my replies, it seems that I only see part of your message each time. I was wrong about the Chinese. They shot at the invasion TF (183 times but, sadly yet not unexpectedly, no hits) but they did not shoot at the bombardment fleet. There are no CD units in that hex which is Cox's Bazar.

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 25
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 10:01:50 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 8868
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John B.

I agree, it makes a lot of sense that the invasions take more damage and hits, but it's the not shooting at all that I don't get. But, I do really appreciate you getting back to me!


When an invasion is landing, the CD crews have time to get to their guns and fire. Unless the bombardment TF was expected, the CD gun crews aren't sleeping at their mounts. By the time they get there, the bombardment force has left.

I have not checked the code, so this is speculation, but I suspect the response of CD guns to bombardment TFs is affected by the detection level.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 26
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 10:44:03 AM   
John B.


Posts: 279
Joined: 9/25/2011
Status: offline
Bill, you mean there is no "sleep by guns" option I can choose????

What you say makes sense but I went back to the turn before and what I believe is the bombardment task force has been spotted (see below) along with the other TFs off of Akyab and Cox's Bazar. I'm not sure of the detection level, but I'll ask Scott (my opponent) if he can tell me what it was since our game is on hold right now. But as I've noted above, I've had IJN bombardment TFs spend the entire day in the same hex as Chittagong and then bombard me the next dawn with no effort by my units to stop them.

Thanks for jumping in on this.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 27
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 11:08:39 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 8868
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
If a TF is in a hex and not engaged in something that will bring them near shore, it is presumed they are out at sea and out of range of any CD guns. A hex is 40 nautical miles across.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 28
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 11:39:38 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 1222
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poznan, Poland
Status: offline
John B., what scenario/mod are you playing?

The 6" MK guns have 54 anti-soft/20 anti-armor ratings in the stock/DaBabes scenarios. There are no navy guns with 0/0 ratings in those scenarios either.



< Message edited by Yaab -- 3/22/2015 12:55:45 PM >

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 29
RE: shore bombardment - 3/22/2015 4:23:10 PM   
Lowpe

 

Posts: 4583
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Do you have night naval search up? Also, put some planes on night naval attack. The combination can be very nice even without hits.

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> shore bombardment Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   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

0.115