Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Has the imperium rebuilt its Death Star ?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Has the imperium rebuilt its Death Star ? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Has the imperium rebuilt its Death Star ? - 10/14/2011 9:12:04 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
and what Iīm saying is that if you are the DEFENDER (if you want to) and sit behind LEVEL 9 forts and ORDER a bombardment you do LESS damage than if you are the same defender doing a counterbombardment, which is what I canīt find a reasonable explanation for. But, as said earlier, I welcomed the change of nuclear bombardments (which I thought to be ok if they would require real amounts of supply) and arty effect isnīt an issue for me anymore as it nearly isnīt used anymore, only for attack support. And that is what it was used anyway in the Pacific in WWII. What we players used it for during nuclear bombardment time was WWI Verdun style.

_____________________________


(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 31
RE: Has the imperium rebuilt its Death Star ? - 10/14/2011 9:58:19 AM   
herwin

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

and what Iīm saying is that if you are the DEFENDER (if you want to) and sit behind LEVEL 9 forts and ORDER a bombardment you do LESS damage than if you are the same defender doing a counterbombardment, which is what I canīt find a reasonable explanation for. But, as said earlier, I welcomed the change of nuclear bombardments (which I thought to be ok if they would require real amounts of supply) and arty effect isnīt an issue for me anymore as it nearly isnīt used anymore, only for attack support. And that is what it was used anyway in the Pacific in WWII. What we players used it for during nuclear bombardment time was WWI Verdun style.


Verdun was not a German victory...

_____________________________

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

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 32
RE: Has the imperium rebuilt its Death Star ? - 10/14/2011 12:19:28 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

and what Iīm saying is that if you are the DEFENDER (if you want to) and sit behind LEVEL 9 forts and ORDER a bombardment you do LESS damage than if you are the same defender doing a counterbombardment, which is what I canīt find a reasonable explanation for. But, as said earlier, I welcomed the change of nuclear bombardments (which I thought to be ok if they would require real amounts of supply) and arty effect isnīt an issue for me anymore as it nearly isnīt used anymore, only for attack support. And that is what it was used anyway in the Pacific in WWII. What we players used it for during nuclear bombardment time was WWI Verdun style.


Verdun was not a German victory...



did I say that?

_____________________________


(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 33
RE: Has the imperium rebuilt its Death Star ? - 10/14/2011 2:24:58 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Misconduct

Yeah, hate to say this - but you are going to need some massive airpower to break this defense. Even then with the losses you will need some serious reinforcements to that.

I really ignore all Chinese units, AI or PBEM - I even gave my PBEM opponent a great tip by telling him i won't even bother with it, really the key is to defend and hold up objectives, however when you lack supplies or airpower, in my "opinion" its not worth since he can easily out gun me in every respect except manpower.


From my game, January 1945:
===============================
Ground combat at Taiyuan (91,40)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 43724 troops, 663 guns, 253 vehicles, Assault Value = 795

Defending force 80289 troops, 496 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2876

Japanese adjusted assault: 398

Allied adjusted defense: 7285

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 18

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

Japanese ground losses:
10540 casualties reported
Squads: 264 destroyed, 170 disabled
Non Combat: 395 destroyed, 124 disabled
Engineers: 34 destroyed, 33 disabled
Vehicles lost 46 (17 destroyed, 29 disabled)


Allied ground losses:
254 casualties reported
Squads: 22 destroyed, 8 disabled
Non Combat: 5 destroyed, 21 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled


Assaulting units:
110th Division
41st Division
9th Ind.Mixed Brigade
4th Cavalry Brigade
27th Division
36th Division
69th Division
37th Division
3rd Ind.Mixed Brigade
9th Mongol Cavalry Division
1st Army
6th Medium Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
43rd Chinese Corps
1st Chinese Cavalry Corps
40th Chinese Corps
4th Chinese Cavalry Corps
33rd Chinese Corps
80th Chinese Corps
8th Route Army
1st Chinese Corps
47th Chinese Corps
27th Chinese Corps
34th Chinese Corps
57th Chinese Corps
3rd Prov Chinese Corps
24th Group Army
14th Group Army
13th Group Army
15th Group Army
Jingcha War Area
18th Group Army
8th Group Army
39th Group Army
36th Group Army
6th Group Army
1st War Area
7th Group Army
10th Chinese Base Force
===========================

This is not an abberation; there have been dozens of attacks such as this as the Japanese AI seeks to stop the steamroller a late-war, well-supplied, Chinese army can be. Note that the Chinese side has a (-) in experience, yet still won decisively.

I'll say it again--many Allied players need to get into the late war and stop re-playing 1942 over and over. It's a different game.

Would a human Japanese player make this attack? Maybe not. But the AI is doing it largely because I'm not giving it a choice. A PBEM game could be directionally the same.


And the one tool available to reduce those enormous, unbalancing stacks was nerfed into oblivion (IE bombardment).

Yes it worked too good early war, but come late war and the enormous stacks that are faced you need it to make any progress.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 34
RE: Has the imperium rebuilt its Death Star ? - 10/14/2011 2:30:28 PM   
chesmart


Posts: 908
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Malta
Status: offline
And Castor is back ! Missed the forum wars when you where gone

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 35
RE: Has the imperium rebuilt its Death Star ? - 10/14/2011 4:19:49 PM   
Panther Bait


Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline
The best strategy against mega-stacks is probably pin them with enough force to hold against an attack and bypass them. Every unit holding one particular base hex is a unit you won't need to fight somewhere else. Keep an eye on them and if they move out from the base at some point, bomb them to death on the road network.

Mike

_____________________________

When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard

(in reply to chesmart)
Post #: 36
RE: Has the imperium rebuilt its Death Star ? - 10/14/2011 4:29:58 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


He's just smarting from our last little contest which led CR to swear off of AE for a while. The rematch between us is inevitable...



Especially since he single-handedly convinced the devs to nerf artillery.

Oh, wait . . .

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 37
RE: Has the imperium rebuilt its Death Star ? - 10/14/2011 11:21:26 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17171
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
He used a 'Jedi mind trick' to accomplish that!



_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 38
RE: Has the imperium rebuilt its Death Star ? - 10/15/2011 2:01:57 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

He used a 'Jedi mind trick' to accomplish that!




Tell that to beppi, the OP.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 39
RE: Has the imperium rebuilt its Death Star ? - 10/15/2011 11:14:36 AM   
ilovestrategy


Posts: 3611
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
.

Eight . . . hundred . . . ships.

I love 1945.


This post is so full of win.

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Has the imperium rebuilt its Death Star ? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

0.326