Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Losing the initiative

 
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 >> Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Losing the initiative Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Losing... - 7/14/2019 5:14:40 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1752
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
Anyone an idea how the fluctuation of my (=IJ) combat values came to pass? As you will note the troops are same in general, I have 2 high values in the first 2 combats but a much lower one in the 3rd combat and my division did not suffer much....mostly some disablements.


Mar 29, 43

Ground combat at Sambalpur (48,34)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 5900 troops, 36 guns, 579 vehicles, Assault Value = 370

Defending force 13309 troops, 124 guns, 120 vehicles, Assault Value = 498

Allied adjusted assault: 204

Japanese adjusted defense: 3133

Allied assault odds: 1 to 15 (fort level 3)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
348 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 25 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Vehicles lost 25 (6 destroyed, 19 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
94 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 14 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Vehicles lost 12 (2 destroyed, 10 disabled)

Assaulting units:
3rd Carabiniers Regiment
255th Armoured Brigade
43rd Cavalry Regiment
267th Armoured Brigade
45th Recce Regiment
3rd Central India Base Force

Defending units:
56th Division
3rd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
-------------
Mar 30, 43

Ground combat at Sambalpur (48,34)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 6755 troops, 52 guns, 504 vehicles, Assault Value = 345

Defending force 12972 troops, 139 guns, 114 vehicles, Assault Value = 466

Allied adjusted assault: 135

Japanese adjusted defense: 5377

Allied assault odds: 1 to 39 (fort level 3)

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

Japanese ground losses:
288 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 21 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 9 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 5 disabled
Vehicles lost 5 (3 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
176 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 19 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 18 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Vehicles lost 26 (2 destroyed, 24 disabled)

Assaulting units:
267th Armoured Brigade
43rd Cavalry Regiment
3rd Carabiniers Regiment
255th Armoured Brigade
45th Recce Regiment
3rd Central India Base Force

Defending units:
56th Division
3rd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
3rd Mortar Bn /1
5th RF Gun Bn /1
------------
Mar 31, 43

Ground combat at Sambalpur (48,34)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 4551 troops, 25 guns, 442 vehicles, Assault Value = 327

Defending force 12771 troops, 154 guns, 113 vehicles, Assault Value = 446

Allied adjusted assault: 99

Japanese adjusted defense: 1073

Allied assault odds: 1 to 10 (fort level 3)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), preparation(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
167 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 12 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 25 (1 destroyed, 24 disabled)
Vehicles lost 6 (4 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
193 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 16 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 27 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Guns lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Vehicles lost 23 (2 destroyed, 21 disabled)

Assaulting units:
43rd Cavalry Regiment
255th Armoured Brigade
3rd Carabiniers Regiment
267th Armoured Brigade
45th Recce Regiment
3rd Central India Base Force
2nd West Coast Base Force

Defending units:
56th Division
3rd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
3rd Mortar Bn /1
5th RF Gun Bn /1

I had flown in some 81mm mortars and 47mm guns.. I was amazed I had so high adjusted combat values in the first 2 combats but then it fell down sharply even if not much changed.

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 7/14/2019 5:19:56 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 5:30:08 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1752
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
2nd topic:

I had played the Allies vs. the AI twice and normally know in theory where Allied TFs should be, I mean these running supply, fuel and troops. As well new combat ship arrivals. However in this PBM I have subs down to New Zealand to Fiji to the area west of Pearl Harbour. Some of them of course have Glen planes for search, however I cannot get my subs to attack anything, they even seem not to find convois. And when they meet combat ships (DDs) they get sunk. Yes I checked commanders. I wonder if someone has an idea where the US supply/shipping lanes could be ? I also have Nauru island and Tabituea at these places are long range search planes and they also do not find anything....while I lose regulary to Allied subs even from good escorted convois - I lost 1 medium tanker, 2 escorts and a big AK alone in the last 2 turns. While my subs seem to be only laughed at by the Allies.

3rd topic:

It seems I lost the iniative in this game and some say this is the 1st sign of going downhill with the empire. I wonder what could be done to regain "the iniative" ? Here is a small AAR from this game, so you can get an idea what is going on there: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4175198

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 7/14/2019 5:32:22 PM >

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 2
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 6:06:36 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14261
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: online
Something you didn't bring up, the Allied casualties are amazingly light in all three cases, given the other circumstances. Perhaps the answer you seek also will illuminate this. I generally like being the defender, but the yield here is pathetic.

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 3
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 6:08:25 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14261
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: online
I didn't study your offering, but the Japanese are going to lose the initiative once they run out of things they can viably invade. After that the ball is in the American court.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 4
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 6:14:34 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14261
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: online
You didn't mention whether you're playing the AI. If you are, that could answer all questions. The AI cheats like the disgusting, loathesome sociopath it is.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 5
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 6:43:41 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1752
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
This game this thread is about is a PBM..this is my 2nd PBM and my 1st grand campaign as PBM.

And regarding losses I attribute the low Allied losses to those units being mostly armor and I guess many have the M3 Lee tanks by now. SO naturally the IJA has some trouble taking out these tanks. This division has 22 x 47mm AT guns and some light tanks plus 36 x 75mm field guns as "serious AT weapons". Not that much..

I play another game as Allies vs. the AI and played before 1 grand campaign game as Allies vs. AI and 1 game as IJ vs the AI. But this thread is about the PBM only

I realize that Allied players will not give out potentiell secrets regarding their shipping lines etc. but perhaps some hints. I am at a loss our subs find zero and even only seldom a Glen finds some ships but we get no shots at them. I was amazed when I searched the forum for older posts that ALlied players complained their subs were too harmless and got sunk while IJN subs they said were "uber subs" (must have been some other game )

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 7/14/2019 6:56:14 PM >

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 6
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 7:01:11 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14261
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: online
Allied surface ASW is completely superior to Japanese. Other than that many of the IJN subs have scout planes, and none of the Allied do. Japanese surface ASW can't even find targets and if they do they will get no or next to no hits. Allied surface ASW will be unlucky if they only severely damage your sub. For the Japanese, well trained air ASW is essential, both from land bases and from the sea.

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 7
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 7:21:58 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1752
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
I know the Allies are much better in 43 for ASW that is ok. But at least my subs should find also some ships and perhaps even hit some (I would be glad to hit a single AK in a turn I find nothing for 10 turns or so already and many subs are out there from me).


If it helps here a pic of the division with the strange fluctuation of adjusted combat value:






Attachment (1)

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 8
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 7:28:45 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14261
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: online
Everything looks solid. He can beat himself senseless knocking on the door, unless he has reinforcements on the way. You've got plenty of engineers, keep digging in.

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 9
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 7:40:26 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1752
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
He has reinforcements at least 6 units of which 2 are the 2nd british and 37th US divs.....well I did not want to commit to this place at all at first, as it is quite isolated...I had before only 2 smaller units holding there. These were thrown out, but then the enemy left the place and I snt this division plus the hv arty unit to re-take Sambalpur. But I changed my mind from the 1st plan not to commit there much. It is alos not on a rail line and has no CAP. Now I am sitting there with a good div and I am not pleased OTH if Allies take the town they have a base nearer to my other big bases (mainly Calcutta, Howrah, Dacca etc.). But it is as it is... my question was the adjusted combat value going from ca. 3000 to 5000 and then falling to ca. 1000 As I cannot explain it.

And here for other reference a pic from one of my ASW planes on duty. They did hit subs untill before 2 months or so and then their hits got less and less even if subs are shown (found). I can only attribute this to new air warning radar the Allied subs get. The worst thing (aks insult to the IJN) was 2 subs near Makassar even in shallow water I had 2 or 3 ASW plane units and 3 ASW fleets hunting them all in good range, but it seems these subs just laughed it off




Attachment (1)

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 10
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 8:46:23 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14261
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: online
As long as you're tying up more of his troops than he is of yours, you win. I don't think they're laughing. It's fine to train Betty crews to attack subs, as long as they are fully trained at naval torpedo attacks, naval bomb attacks and naval search. The guys you want doing most of the ASW work are Lillys, both the level bomber and the dive bomber. Remember for the dive bomber to be most effective it needs to start from at least 10k. Those aircrews should also be trained at bombing ships, but I would counsel against training them to bomb land targets. Train IJA crews to do every job they can do effectively. Use Dinahs to do most of your naval search and recon duties, for instance. You'll never have enough IJN crews, trained or otherwise, to do what you might wish them to do. Train IJA crews to do it instead. Also, you may be easily, way too easily tempted to produce a lot more IJN airframes than you will ever need, and end up wishing you'd made more IJA airframes.

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 11
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 8:53:02 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14261
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: online
I didn't mention it, so I will now. Never, ever waste one single day training an IJN aircrew to drop eggs on stationary targets, meaning LCUs, airfields, ports or whatever. You simply cannot afford to use them that way. Use Helens when you must. If you ever use a Betty or a Nell to bomb a stationary target, you are cutting your own throat with a very dull knife.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 12
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 9:00:41 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2236
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77
my question was the adjusted combat value going from ca. 3000 to 5000 and then falling to ca. 1000 As I cannot explain it.

You had good random multiplier in the first battle, and very lucky random one in the second battle. That's all. Grigsby game for you

That's all assuming you don't have HQs travelling in and out of range somewhere around the base

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 13
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 9:02:44 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1752
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I didn't mention it, so I will now. Never, ever waste one single day training an IJN aircrew to drop eggs on stationary targets, meaning LCUs, airfields, ports or whatever. You simply cannot afford to use them that way. Use Helens when you must. If you ever use a Betty or a Nell to bomb a stationary target, you are cutting your own throat with a very dull knife.


Totally agree I do not train ground attack for the navy at all, and only few for the IJA. Allied AA will be so good that bombing defended places will be costly even without serious CAP.

I use IJA planes mostly for ASW. Only 2-3 Netty units cause they have no other job at the moment. They could launch attacks in the salomones tho and get shred by the over 200 fighters there. So I better use em for asw and search.

Problem with the Lily and all light bombers are their bombs are too small. Only 2E bombers like Sally or Helen will carry 250kg bombs that could be deadly potentially. Yes, I use many recons for search... we see subs then on the map - however can not sink them.

I set level bombers and Kates to 1000 - 3000 for asw and dive bombers to 10000 so they in theory dive on the subs. However the number of hits is quite low even if I now have more trained asw units. As said it must be a function of Allied subs getting in 43 the EAW radar...I checked this a while ago, this radar becomes too early availalbe in the game in reality it came later. But I guess the Allies need every bit of help

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 7/14/2019 9:04:26 PM >

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 14
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 9:07:44 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1752
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77
my question was the adjusted combat value going from ca. 3000 to 5000 and then falling to ca. 1000 As I cannot explain it.

You had good random multiplier in the first battle, and very lucky random one in the second battle. That's all. Grigsby game for you

That's all assuming you don't have HQs travelling in and out of range somewhere around the base



Yeah I know the Grigsby factor. However this seems way too serious. If it would change for 500-600 or so points ok no problem with "randomness" or dice rolls. I have southern army now planning in range for the base but it is only at 12 prep or so. Here another question will support squads from HQs also help recover if they are in range or only in the same hex - I believe the latter one, right?

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 7/14/2019 9:08:36 PM >

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 15
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/14/2019 11:10:08 PM   
jdsrae


Posts: 1255
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: The Land Downunder
Status: offline
Random dice rolls was my first thought.
Apart from that, what did the morale, fatigue and supply of your defenders change to each day?
They might not like fighting against tanks and they may have had x2 supply previously now just enough.
Or if fighting for 72 hours straight I’d expect fatigue to start impacting adjusted AV in a big way.

What’s the morale of your Betty group?
I found flying more than about 60-70% Naval Search at max range starts to reduce morale, which I assume reduces performance with it.
It could be that allied subs have air warning radars so they dive, but just because you can’t bomb them doesn’t mean those Airgroups are wasting their time.
Friendly Task Forces set to “safer” routing have a chance of going around hexes with spotted subs in them

< Message edited by jdsrae -- 7/15/2019 1:34:53 AM >


_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no CrackSabbath): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 16
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/15/2019 1:40:08 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 14674
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77
my question was the adjusted combat value going from ca. 3000 to 5000 and then falling to ca. 1000 As I cannot explain it.

You had good random multiplier in the first battle, and very lucky random one in the second battle. That's all. Grigsby game for you

That's all assuming you don't have HQs travelling in and out of range somewhere around the base



Yeah I know the Grigsby factor. However this seems way too serious. If it would change for 500-600 or so points ok no problem with "randomness" or dice rolls. I have southern army now planning in range for the base but it is only at 12 prep or so. Here another question will support squads from HQs also help recover if they are in range or only in the same hex - I believe the latter one, right?


That random factor may be meant to account for things like weather. Suppose your attack was in a blinding rainstorm where your troops could not really locate the enemy ...


_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 17
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/15/2019 12:04:40 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 2743
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77
my question was the adjusted combat value going from ca. 3000 to 5000 and then falling to ca. 1000 As I cannot explain it.

You had good random multiplier in the first battle, and very lucky random one in the second battle. That's all. Grigsby game for you

That's all assuming you don't have HQs travelling in and out of range somewhere around the base



Yeah I know the Grigsby factor. However this seems way too serious. If it would change for 500-600 or so points ok no problem with "randomness" or dice rolls. I have southern army now planning in range for the base but it is only at 12 prep or so. Here another question will support squads from HQs also help recover if they are in range or only in the same hex - I believe the latter one, right?


The Grigsby factor is in almost everything.

That unit with 99 EXP might just fail a roll for experience to modify combat value.

Looking at your combat reports above, I'd suggest that your widely variable results is due to fatigue and disruption building up over several turns worth of combat, combined with the fact that the IJ troops are in defensive terrain. Sambalpur is Woods, which is a flat x2 terrain bonus to the IJ troops, regardless of what else is going on.

This is why terrain is such a critical factor when on the defensive!

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 18
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/15/2019 12:29:24 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7339
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline
The really important question is why were the second and third attacks made at all?

Why would anyone keep attacking when they have a deficiency in raw un-adjusted AV and could easily see what kind of a multiplier the raw defensive AV was undergoing after the first attack?

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 19
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/15/2019 1:11:10 PM   
Gridley380


Posts: 464
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

2nd topic:

I had played the Allies vs. the AI twice and normally know in theory where Allied TFs should be, I mean these running supply, fuel and troops. As well new combat ship arrivals. However in this PBM I have subs down to New Zealand to Fiji to the area west of Pearl Harbour. Some of them of course have Glen planes for search, however I cannot get my subs to attack anything, they even seem not to find convois. And when they meet combat ships (DDs) they get sunk. Yes I checked commanders. I wonder if someone has an idea where the US supply/shipping lanes could be ? I also have Nauru island and Tabituea at these places are long range search planes and they also do not find anything....while I lose regulary to Allied subs even from good escorted convois - I lost 1 medium tanker, 2 escorts and a big AK alone in the last 2 turns. While my subs seem to be only laughed at by the Allies.



Haven't played the Japanese side so I can't offer tips, but I'll note that I have trouble replicating the success of the US sub force even playing against the AI. Some players seem to manage it, but even reading their tips I can't seem to rack up the kills.

You're probably still doing better than the historical IJN SS force: http://www.combinedfleet.com/ss.htm

The historical force barely sank an average of one MV each over the course of the war, and while there were a few spectacular successes against naval units, the *total* count isn't very high.

Remember that the real IJN didn't sink any fleet carries after 1942, any battleships after 1941, and in the entire 1943-1945 period sank just two CA, one CL, and six CVL/CVE (and many of those weren't SS kills).

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 20
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/15/2019 1:19:38 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 4085
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

The really important question is why were the second and third attacks made at all?

Why would anyone keep attacking when they have a deficiency in raw un-adjusted AV and could easily see what kind of a multiplier the raw defensive AV was undergoing after the first attack?


Why not? The Allied AV devices are 100% tanks, and the inflated Jap AV cannot beat them. Japs have only 100 guns that can shoot reasonably well at tanks ( I exclude AAMGs, which code treats as guns as well). It is a stalemate.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 21
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/15/2019 3:21:23 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7339
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

The really important question is why were the second and third attacks made at all?

Why would anyone keep attacking when they have a deficiency in raw un-adjusted AV and could easily see what kind of a multiplier the raw defensive AV was undergoing after the first attack?


Why not? The Allied AV devices are 100% tanks, and the inflated Jap AV cannot beat them. Japs have only 100 guns that can shoot reasonably well at tanks ( I exclude AAMGs, which code treats as guns as well). It is a stalemate.



Exactly. Its a stalemate wherein the attacking Allies are losing more destroyed and disabled than the defenders on each subsequent attack. Why keep attacking? The only plausible reason would be to drain the defenders supply while awaiting the arrival of more force.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 22
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/15/2019 3:46:54 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1752
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
First off, the Allied pools must be overflowing of tanks of all sorts, second, as indicated above many tanks those units have should be Lee´s or Mathildas by now, which are difficult to destroy. And 3rd see here the relevant part written in the AAR linked above:

quote:

Anns and Helens bomb more of the soon to be withdrawn troops and cause light damage, the units are 45th recce, 73th motor and 267th armor


3 of the units will withdraw so even if they take some losses it does not matter much. The Allied likes to drive withdrawal units hard. He eg. also send British cruisers /which will withdraw) twice to try get a surface combat with a small CV fleet of mine. He did not succeed but put LR CAP over the ships which shot down a dozen of my good CV planes. We hit one of the cruisers with 1 bomb and another one with 3 bombs (not sunk). We sunk a small Brit DD however which will also withdraw :)
Btw. I just got a turn and 4-5 more enemy units have arrived at Sambalpur... incl. 3 divisions I believe. And 1 of our subs found a TF finally but it was a DD fleet it seems. But this time neither side got a hit, even all the DCs dropped by a Fletcher class missed..and our torps of course too.

For a weather modifier it would help if it was indicated in the combat report, just like other modifiers are (even if sometimes unclear)

@ jdsrae: Morale of the asw groups incl. the Betty one from above is 95 - 98. I never use max. range for search or asw. But fatigue goes up anyway which then leads to some op losses. Also it costs supply to have so many bombers fly ASW. And also it costs time and clicks - with are tertiary factors to the Allied sub effort. Esp. when no subs are sunk. I do not like "mission kills" which sends sub to home damaged, cause eventually they all come back. Only 100% sure sinkings count for me and the Allies have no fuel trouble. For the IJN this is more serious if they send out many subs with no result but getting them sunk/damaged. Sub needs to return and rapair then march back to op area which all costs fuel / clicks. I bet the fuel bill alone for damaged subs, missions with no result and TFs re-reoutings due to enemy subs is quite serious for the IJN.

I got many "unsunk" messages for subs. I think they may be a bit too sturdy compared to reality btw.

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 7/15/2019 4:19:13 PM >

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 23
RE: Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Lo... - 7/15/2019 8:48:40 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14261
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I didn't mention it, so I will now. Never, ever waste one single day training an IJN aircrew to drop eggs on stationary targets, meaning LCUs, airfields, ports or whatever. You simply cannot afford to use them that way. Use Helens when you must. If you ever use a Betty or a Nell to bomb a stationary target, you are cutting your own throat with a very dull knife.


Totally agree I do not train ground attack for the navy at all, and only few for the IJA. Allied AA will be so good that bombing defended places will be costly even without serious CAP.

I use IJA planes mostly for ASW. Only 2-3 Netty units cause they have no other job at the moment. They could launch attacks in the salomones tho and get shred by the over 200 fighters there. So I better use em for asw and search.

Problem with the Lily and all light bombers are their bombs are too small. Only 2E bombers like Sally or Helen will carry 250kg bombs that could be deadly potentially. Yes, I use many recons for search... we see subs then on the map - however can not sink them.

I set level bombers and Kates to 1000 - 3000 for asw and dive bombers to 10000 so they in theory dive on the subs. However the number of hits is quite low even if I now have more trained asw units. As said it must be a function of Allied subs getting in 43 the EAW radar...I checked this a while ago, this radar becomes too early availalbe in the game in reality it came later. But I guess the Allies need every bit of help


I use Lilly dive bombers to do ASW from 10k and they're pretty lethal. They are the best performing air ASW I have, and next are the Lilly level bombers. IJN crews have so many things to learn that it takes awhile before I can train them in ASW. The Lilly crews I also train to do Naval attack, and that's it. Dinahs do recon and Naval search, and that's it.

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 24
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Land combat values strange, Allied supply lines, Losing the initiative Page: [1]
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

0.289