From: Glasgow, Scotland
Maybe the AE hivemind is right. Maybe unguided rocket artillery is virtually worthless. Maybe decades of development of rocket artillery (on both sides of the Iron Curtain) has been completely wasted. Evidently rocket artillery isn't worth it, didn't do much in WW2, and we should break down all the MLRS systems, all the Graz, Smersh and Tornado launchers into something that will be more effective...
Should have done with this one too, it's so ridicoulos that I really wonder if you have any brain left. You have obviously NO clue about the effect of these boats in real life. Do you? Clearly no.
Yes, I did have a read at this - https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/a/amphibious-operations-capture-iwo-jima.html
Section 2-1 onwards may be of interest.
I think it's also reasonable to draw on the performance of Soviet Guards Mortar regiments on the Eastern Front, with results generally consistent with what we're seeing here (in that concentration results in massive disablement/disruption of defending units).
Look at the combat report, troll. Can you even read? I had 300 av on the atoll and all was disabled during the LCI(G) support during the landing. Nothing was left. Can you read??
I refer you to post #1437
Same happened at Wake, with Wake's CD unit in place. GO AWAY TROLL and read up on the performance of these ships in real life, they were nothing more than suppressive weapons at the beaches. Considering your non stop bullsh*t the Allied wouldn't have needed anything else than the LCI(G) to clear islands. They actually used them and nothing, not a single moment in life where they close to as effective in the game. They are most likely 10 times overrated if not more, I wouldn't be surprised if it would be identified as a database error if it came up ten years ago.
So, here's where my understanding breaks down - isn't 350 odd infantry squads disabled (as in capable of fighting, just not currently) consistent with overwhelming suppressive fire? In that, if they were given the chance to recover, they would be able to fight...?
First time ever IIRC to use the green button. If you want to continue this discussion then do it on the main forum not in this AAR. People, pls just answer him anymore, it's going to stop the AAR, one or the other way and Admiral unescorted carrier task force will have achieved his goal.
I think this may be the fourth(?) time you've said you've green buttoned me, so evidently there's something going wrong on your end there.
The personal attacks are quite adorable.
So, I think there's two things to point out.
1. AS BBfanboy has noted, a rocket is not a shell, and thinking about it as such will lead to the wrong conclusions.
2. Is heavy saturation bombardment LCI craft causing large causalities (and critically for AE, massive disruption to units) ahistorical? It's not.
I mean, this is effectively what the LCI conversions were designed to do. Overwhelm the defenders with firepower and allow the landing infantry an easy time ashore.
Worth considering other factors in AE. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but atoll terrain functions like clear terrain. Not good for protection against bombardments of any kind...
Yes it is ahistorical, the LCI(G) rocket was a short range weapon only for beach support with 1 km range. So unless you can argue that enemy is all in small stretch of 500m deep beach and that assuming it fires from 500 out on the sea... not even considered that there is no precision at all.
We have here 26 LCI(G), and LCI(G) rocket with 2.9kg explosive is not certainly better than a 150mm gun/howitzer round. So could you get these results with 26 of said guns firing in day?
Worth noting that not all LCI's use the Beach Barrage Rocket, others use the HVAR.
WRT the comparison with a 155mm shell, it's a case of concentration and timing. How long will it take you to deliver an equivalent volume of explosive, and how many guns would it require to do it in a similar length of time? As mentioned previously, the "shock" value.
M_M these boats seen widespread use irl , despite that most naval invasions were bloody and lengthy . These rockets have very limited range , they were used for beachhead supression for troops to land easier , not wipe out entire island garrisons in 1 day. Its pretty clear that they violate the effect/anti-soft value rules that are used everywhereelse and there is nothing else uses this device type. Unless you come with actual usefull data please stay away i am so done with you
Worth re-reading post #1437 again.
The entire garrison was not wiped out by the pre-invasion bombardment from the LCI craft on day 1.
They were heavily disrupted by the bombardment, to the point that they had zero effective assault value, but they were not wiped out until the Allied auto-shock attack took the base afterwards.
IJ defenders were alive and kicking when the auto-shock attack went in, they just weren't in a position to offer effective resistance (which is probably to be expected after the entire atoll has just been carpeted by rockets).
In other words, WAD.
As for the violation of the effect/anti-soft value rules, I'd be interested to know:
1. What the rules actually are
2. How these rocket devices violate above rules.
AFAIK, the formula behind the game values was never disclosed, so keen to see what insider info you have on this.
i am gonna post this again since apperantly you cant read
normally naval guns have 1/10th of their effect(shell weight) as soft attack value. For example most 8in guns have around 330 effect and 33 soft attack but these 4.5in rockets have higher soft attack value than their effect , causing them to be 10times more effective than what they are supposed to be. 4.5in Rocket has 20 effect and 26 soft attack so each one of these devices are almost as devastating as one 8in device.
Also as a note this 1/10th rule also applies to bombs.
I would guess these rockets are working as a naval gun when put on ships. If you want to come with actual usefull data change these rockets to naval gun in editor and do a test with them as vanilla and changed to naval gun, if you get near identical results , its violating the 1/10th rule
As you're the self-appointed testing guru, I'll leave the testing exercise to you.