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: AAR 1944

 
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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: AAR 1944 Page: <<   < prev  52 53 [54] 55 56   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: AAR 1944 - 5/24/2021 3:26:03 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

No more comments from me, in fact I am going to quit reading this AAR since it appears that you block people who want to help you.


You really think I'd care? Go and keep posting your Nazi stuff that seems to be accepted on the main forum.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 5/24/2021 3:28:13 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 1591
RE: AAR 1944 - 5/24/2021 3:38:53 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 11, 45

As there are no convoys going in and out to Kusai the next days we have withdrawn the two shot up Sentais as they have lost no less than 31 pilots and these pilots are mostly irreplacable as these are the ones with up to 2000 mission, 80+ exp and skill.

The more interesting event seems to be happening in the Bay of Bengal as Dinah-III on nav search have picked up enemy carriers South of Ceylon heading South East. Only this small CV task force was spotted and from the looks of it it's probably mostly CVL/CVE, guess British ones as I'm sure the USN is operating all USN carriers in the Pacific.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1592
RE: AAR 1944 - 5/24/2021 3:43:34 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 12, 45

British carriers are moving South towards Sumatra... no carriers spotted today but several Dinah-III were shot down over the task force, no other ships spotted by increased nav search in the Bay of Bengal or NW and W of Sumatra... no idea what the enemy is up to, that small carrier group is too small to be a real threat nor could it cover an invasion fleet which pretty sure isn't around...

nevertheless we have moved more fighters and bombers into the region but we still have all convoys around Singapore and Sumatra moving along as our oil bases will be well capped...




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1593
RE: AAR 1944 - 5/24/2021 3:50:03 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 13, 45

movement of the enemy carrier group leaves me puzzled as they are directly moving towards Sumatra which is like sticking their head into a hornet's nest... we have like 1000 aircraft in the region with a 70:30 ratio fighters/bombers (100 fighters are actually Randy fighter bombers that won't be used) so one small step further and a good sized LBA strike could be the end of this carrier group...

we have the aircraft, but the good sized strike will be the problem... the enemy is 8 hexes from Medan where we have shipping going in and out but none of my ships were spotted so the enemy might have limited strike range or is only trying to draw in a strike but a carrier group that is reported to have not even 200 fighters isn't really suited as a CAP trap...

we have also put the fleet at Singapore into a higher alert state and we also have a good number of fighters at Palembang's airfield now...




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1594
RE: AAR 1944 - 5/24/2021 4:16:57 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 14, 45
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Medan at 46,76




Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid detected at 77 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 34 minutes

Japanese aircraft
N1K2-J George x 41
Ki-84r Frank x 86

Allied aircraft
Avenger I x 10
Avenger II x 49
Corsair II x 27
Corsair IV x 14
Hellcat I x 18
Hellcat F.II x 19

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-84r Frank: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Avenger I: 6 destroyed
Avenger II: 32 destroyed
Corsair II: 10 destroyed
Corsair IV: 6 destroyed
Hellcat I: 9 destroyed
Hellcat F.II: 10 destroyed

Japanese Ships
SC CHa-4, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
SC CHa-5
SC CHa-12
SC CHa-13
SC CHa-25
SC CHa-8
SC CHa-27


the enemy carrier group moves further South along Sumatra's coast and ends up seven hexes from Medan which apparantly brought them into strike range of my shipping there... besides that this carrier group has nowhere near the strenght to offensively tangle with my massed LBA they also run danger to be hit by my LBA... well, spoiling the rest of this day, despite having full DL on the enemy and being in range of three major airfields that were filled with over 400 fighters and 250 bombers, not a single strike even launched... they just didn't, none of them, from none of the three airfields (level 9, 8 and 5, all with air HQ, 99 morale, nice weather)... they didn't even try...

so let's get back to the Allied strike... must be totally surprising (again?), this time it's just the other way around and as I've said, it's not related to the Allied or Japanese side, it's just related to being in the poor situation of being put below the enemy fighters...

to make matters worse, the enemy escorts are not only hampered by being dived on, they get an additional malus for being on escort... my fighter pilots are mostly in the low 70s skill, not comparable with the 80+ elite that was shot down at 28:0 over Kusai but that doesn't matter... with a 1,5:1 advantage in fighter numbers we had the never ending dive on the enemy, the result is even more loopsided... it's fun to grap a sheet of paper and a pencil and just tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick... and at some point you have and insane long row of ticks on one side and no ticks on the other... how comes?

in this case, we count 51 enemy fighters being outright shot down during the dive for ONE Frank being DAMAGED by a Corsair... 51 kills for 1 damaged fighter? 51:0 kill rate? Sounds reasonable... I can already hear the next claim about skill/exp... well, these enemy carrier pilots are the original ones so even if they wouldn't be trained on map, they are perfectly suited even without training... and what about my 80+ skilled pilots that lost 28:0 over Kusai? Also a matter of skills? You think the enemy had 90 skilled pilots doing the sweeps? When these same fighters on escort were shot down in droves over Kusai by my same Frank pilots when they had the dive? Seriously?

But hey, the enemy fighters, better say another Corsair even managed to down a Frank in the engagement when the dive was over... the only thing the escorts achieved besides dying in droves was pushing a dozen bombers through our CAP that sunk a 1 pt subchaser at Medan, not even a tanker was attacked... the enemy could only hope to see the engagement being over after the bombing runs but he wasn't lucky as our fighters kept pounding the enemy, again with the dive (the kills are already summed above)...



Aircraft Attacking:
7 x Avenger II bombing from 5000 feet *
Naval Attack: 2 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
2 x Avenger II bombing from 5000 feet *
Naval Attack: 2 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
1 x Avenger II bombing from 5000 feet *
Naval Attack: 2 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
1 x Avenger II bombing from 5000 feet *
Naval Attack: 2 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
1 x Avenger I bombing from 5000 feet *
Naval Attack: 2 x 500 lb SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
352 Ku S-1 with N1K2-J George (0 airborne, 28 on standby, 0 scrambling)
13 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 4000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 25 minutes
18th Sentai with Ki-84r Frank (0 airborne, 28 on standby, 0 scrambling)
14 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 4000 and 33910.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 34 minutes
47th Sentai with Ki-84r Frank (0 airborne, 30 on standby, 0 scrambling)
14 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 2000 and 20000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 27 minutes



Attachment (1)

< Message edited by castor troy -- 5/24/2021 4:33:29 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1595
RE: AAR 1944 - 5/24/2021 4:26:08 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
the enemy comes in low, our CAP is positioned higher, add in the escort malus and voila, taking the fighter kills from the air losses list we only get a 78:2 in fighters today... add in the bombers and we are at 120:2 or the like... it's been fixed, yeah, it is...

and I'm sure some yay sayer will find ample of reasons why these results occur on and on? Must be all perfectly sane then...

I'd call it broken sh*t and it's never been different nor has it been fixed... I could have set my fighters to 1000ft and have no radar in the hex to end up below the escorts which would have made the outcome reasonable at best but having the altitude advantage and the enemy getting the malus from flying escort has made this a totally unplausible and idiotic outcome... that way the Allied would still fight in the Pacific nowadays and the Mariana's Turkey shoot would have happened on and on and on, but with Allied carrier fleets being stripped of aircraft each time they engaged land based fighters on CAP...

the enemy could do nothing here, his torpedo bombers were set to 5000ft to hit something with their bombs, that means their escorts will be no higher than 8000ft so our CAP will always be higher, either because I have set them to 10k+ by default or due to radar pushing them up into a favourable position... the only thing not getting them up higher would be not enough prewarning time compared to climb or their ceiling being maxed out below the enemy but that would never happen against a carrier strike and only occurs against strato sweeps...

120:2... zzzZZZzzz and please don't tell me I have to add in the 6 aircraft shot down over the carriers while being on nav search...

and there is only one constant every time when I see these loops and it's always the dive... if it's such an obvious, different reason, why does that never happen when the dive isn't involved? Bad luck? For sure...




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by castor troy -- 5/24/2021 4:40:45 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1596
RE: AAR 1944 - 5/24/2021 5:17:16 PM   
29000Kevin

 

Posts: 56
Joined: 9/26/2020
Status: offline
Well obviously for anymore games their should be House Rules against High Altitude Dog fighting since it nevered really happened in the real Pacific War, 25,000ft is enough.

Secondly you should never play this version of the Babs Mod ever again since it loves and hates you too much (looking at the lopsided results on both sides in the air and the ASW missions where seeing a Submarine = Plane crash)

But the strangest thing is, I've seen the Strato-Sweep strategy completely fail against an organised Layered CAP in a Scenario 2 Game, the game ended with the Allies Giving up (because Free Time became nonexistence).

It seems for some unknowable reason that the Mod broke the Pilot skills system in some way or form since Elite Pilots don't matter anymore in CAP duties.
You should post the Stats of the P-51D and the Thunderbolts and compare them against the Ki-84R Frank just to prove your point that something is not working as intended in this version of the mod.
But maybe seeing the stats could "plausibly" explain in some way how the lopsided results happened.

Another Tactic you should try is to CAP an area at the lowest altitude possible and see if anything happens whenever a Strato Sweep happens.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1597
RE: AAR 1944 - 5/24/2021 6:09:06 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 17277
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
There was an update to the air combat model - it may have come out after the DBB mods were made in which case it would not have been incorporated in them. I don't remember the details of what changed in the air combat model but it seemed like a big deal to air war fans at the time.

_____________________________

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 29000Kevin)
Post #: 1598
RE: AAR 1944 - 5/25/2021 5:03:21 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
The Frank -r is pretty much equal to Allied fighters like the Corsair or the Mustang when it comes down to speed, climb. More maneuverable, bad service rating and lower gun value. Frank is better than the Hellcats, George is a copy of the Hellcat. The P-47 is better in every aspect except maneuverability.

It's not the stats of the aircraft, we are comparing pretty much equal aircraft on both sides, same goes for the pilots. In one case my pilots are like super heroes, followed by the next moment they are trashed like ****. Same aircraft, same pilots, the only thing different is one side getting a loopsided long period of dives where they get unbeatable and a loopsided result in the end. Doesn't matter if one side is at 20k and the other at 5k or one side at 5k and the other at 1k. What staggered or layered CAP does is at some point pulling the sweeper hopefully down to lower level but that's not bullet prove, there's still the chance to watch replays with one side diving the other on and on.

And that's against sweeps, but it doesn't work at all with escorted bomber strikes (for the attacker) because the defender will have his CAP higher and the outcome is seen above and in hundreds of other combat reports on the forum. Loops on and on.

If someone thinks results like the above posted is fine, then be it, I will just ignore him and accept that he has no clue of how real life worked which is pretty much the same as 4,5kg rockets clearing a whole island. No need to discuss.

I also don't think the mod is the reason for the results because I get the same with vanilla and a mod never changes a routine, it only changes stats.

_____________________________


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 1599
RE: AAR 1944 - 5/25/2021 5:07:40 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 15, 45

needless to say the British carriers turned around this turn to get out of range of my bases on and around Sumatra... I was asking Mundy what the Brits were doing there and I only received "adventure" as a reply

I still can't figure out what the real reason was though because if my bomber strikes would have launched the enemy could have lost more than just the 110 carrier based aircraft which already is a big loss for the Brits as their replacements are low, very low...




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1600
RE: AAR 1944 - 5/25/2021 5:16:33 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 20, 45

five days later I might have an answer why the Brits were on their close to suizide raid near Sumatra, I think Mundy was trying a feint to draw out KB as we have spotted several USN carrier groups in the Pacific East of the Marianas... wouldn't be surprised if the enemy is attempting a frontal attack here but to be honest, I'd rate it suizide...

the fleet is set on full alert and we have flown in more aircraft into the region which brings LBA up to near 1,100 aircraft (700 fighters) and KB has another 1,400 carrier based aircraft ready... if this is really an invasion coming we will only have LBA fighting the first couple of days and on day three or four at the latest we will also get KB into play if a good chance arises... we are not attempting to stop the enemy from landing ground troops at the invasion sites, we are heartly welcoming these as the plan is to have them land and being destroyed by the defenders and reinforcements... I know this sounds like Hitler and his dreams about throwing the Allied back into the Sea in Normandy but in this case I guess we have a fair chance to do so... the only thing we don't know is the effect of the island nukers aka LCI(G) and the like because if they can not only clear whole atolls but also fully fortified islands like Saipan, Tinian or Guam then nothing can be defended against an Allied invasion but then it's even more borked than it already is...

KB will move into a position North West of the Marianas to be in strike range within one day but distant enough not to be engaged by Allied carriers that just have to cover the invasion sites...




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1601
RE: AAR 1944 - 6/4/2021 1:18:02 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 21, 45
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Pagan at 110,89




Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid detected at 78 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 33 minutes

Japanese aircraft
N1K2-J George x 36
Ki-84r Frank x 37

Allied aircraft
F4U-1D Corsair x 115
F6F-3 Hellcat x 11
F6F-5 Hellcat x 105
SB2C-3 Helldiver x 11

Japanese aircraft losses
N1K2-J George: 1 destroyed
Ki-84r Frank: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1D Corsair: 23 destroyed
F6F-3 Hellcat: 2 destroyed
F6F-5 Hellcat: 12 destroyed
SB2C-3 Helldiver: 6 destroyed


clearly the enemy is attempting a frontal attack on the Marianas!!! now I'd say this won't serve them good, even in early 45 when the IJN hasn't been broken at all but we'll see the coming turns... the enemy Armada was moving to a position seven hexes East of Saipan and started launching several airstrikes against my shipping in the area... while I couldn't be sure about it at that stage we could well expect a reversed Mariana's Turkey Shoot after how my LBA fighters performed against the British carrier based Corsairs as the USN ones aren't different and here we go...

after losing about halve a dozen aircraft during the search phase enemy carriers launch a dozen Helldivers against shipping at Pagan which was covered by just over 70 of our fighters that were awaiting the incoming strike in the usual higher position... while the enemy had a HUGE escort, the higher position means what??? Tell me, please! It meant: DIVE, DIVE, DIVE, DIVE... I'm sure people are getting sick of reading it, I've been sick of experiencing it for over a decade now even though I have to admit I get even sickier reading about it being fixed when it never was and never will be... our 73 fighters are outnumbered 1:3 vs the enemy escorts but being higher by default against such a bomber strike (it's no strato sweep so what gives) and the enemy fighters getting the escort malus it's well, it's the next totally absurd massacre...

like I've done in all the latest A2A engagements I also took a pencil and a sheet of paper this time, starting to tick... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter... DIVE, shooting from behind, dead Allied fighter...

at some point, well, at some point I just stopped... must have been like 40-45 Allied fighters shot down for no loss on our side during the "dive phase", then it stopped for a minimal time, the escorts down two or three of our fighters for the same number of losses on their side, then our fighters completely maul the bombers with all shot down... MASSACRE, a DIVE MASSACRE... can only repeat it, the escorts could do nothing at all, not even damage our LBA fighters... the dive might not make much of a difference when people send out unskilled pilots in Zeroes against skilled pilots in Corsairs but if you have equally skilled pilots in more or less equal airframes the dive is so huge you get from one loop into the other, nothing more, nothing less...

would anybody with a grain of historical knowledge and a sense of reality think that 227 Corsairs/Hellcats could hold their own against 73 Franks/Georges? No? Fixed...




Aircraft Attacking:
9 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
9 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
9 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
2 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
7 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
9 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
2 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
10 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
7 x F6F-3 Hellcat sweeping at 15000 feet *
5 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
7 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
9 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
9 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 15000 feet
9 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
8 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
9 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
5 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
9 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
9 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
5 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 10000 feet *
2 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet

CAP engaged:
S-301 Hikotai with N1K2-J George (0 airborne, 27 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 11000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 25 minutes
104th Sentai with Ki-84r Frank (0 airborne, 28 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 8000 and 20000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 28 minutes




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by castor troy -- 6/4/2021 1:19:42 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1602
RE: AAR 1944 - 6/4/2021 1:32:09 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Saipan at 108,93




Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 76 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 34 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-84r Frank x 130
Ki-94-II x 43

Allied aircraft
F4U-1D Corsair x 94
F6F-3 Hellcat x 11
F6F-5 Hellcat x 127
TBM-1C Avenger x 15

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1D Corsair: 4 destroyed
F6F-3 Hellcat: 2 destroyed
F6F-5 Hellcat: 15 destroyed
TBM-1C Avenger: 7 destroyed


guess I gotta call it bad luck or the like because unlike usually the carriers seem to actually launch against all enemy shipping in range as we get about the same sized carrier strike against shipping at Saipan... Saipan isn't Pagan and the shipping there to cover as well as the island is more important than that at Pagan so we see a hundred fighters more engaging the incoming strike and we also see the KI-94-II in action for the first time... everything else is the same except that our fighters NEVER ran out dives for the whole duration of the engagement which means we didn't lose a SINGLE aircraft in this engagement! Not even ONE! Gotta admit we had a KI-94 and a Frank damaged...

in return we shot down all bombers before they could even reach the target and also mauled the escorts with dozens and dozens of them being shot down... radar picked up the enemy at max range, all fighters being set higher than the strike anyways, dive massacre... 232 Corsairs/Hellcats couldn't do anything about it... it's like sending out Nates escorting Lillies when they are bounced by Thunderbolts... dive, shooting from behind, boom boom boom...


CAP engaged:
29th Sentai with Ki-84r Frank (0 airborne, 29 on standby, 0 scrambling)
14 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 2000 and 33910.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 26 minutes
59th Sentai with Ki-94-II (0 airborne, 29 on standby, 0 scrambling)
14 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 5000 and 20000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 25 minutes
200th Sentai with Ki-84r Frank (0 airborne, 58 on standby, 0 scrambling)
29 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 4000 and 33910.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 24 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Pagan at 110,89

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 70 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 30 minutes

Japanese aircraft
N1K2-J George x 31
Ki-84r Frank x 35

Allied aircraft
F4U-1D Corsair x 136
F6F-3 Hellcat x 16
F6F-5 Hellcat x 80
SB2C-3 Helldiver x 7

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-84r Frank: 2 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1D Corsair: 14 destroyed
SB2C-3 Helldiver: 5 destroyed


as if the morning wouldn't have been bad enough with losing over a hundred carrier based fighters for no gain at all the enemy is unlucky and his carriers also launch strikes during the afternoon against the same deadly targets...

difference to the morning? There is none... same outcome... better (=higher) position, enemy fighters on escorts, a hundred dives, a hundred dead Allied fighters... of course we also kill every single incoming bomber...


Aircraft Attacking:
9 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
6 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
9 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
9 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
9 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
1 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
9 x F6F-3 Hellcat sweeping at 15000 feet *
7 x F6F-3 Hellcat sweeping at 20000 feet *
8 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
8 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
7 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
9 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
9 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 10000 feet
9 x F6F-5 Hellcat sweeping at 15000 feet
7 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
9 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
9 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
9 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
8 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
9 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
8 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
9 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
5 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 15000 feet *
4 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 10000 feet *

CAP engaged:
S-301 Hikotai with N1K2-J George (0 airborne, 23 on standby, 0 scrambling)
8 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 9000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 26 minutes
104th Sentai with Ki-84r Frank (0 airborne, 26 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 6000 and 20000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 30 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Saipan at 108,93

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 79 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 35 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-84r Frank x 123
Ki-94-II x 43

Allied aircraft
F4U-1D Corsair x 68
F6F-5 Hellcat x 125
TBM-1C Avenger x 3

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-94-II: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1D Corsair: 4 destroyed
F6F-5 Hellcat: 20 destroyed
TBM-1C Avenger: 2 destroyed



and to make everything worse Saipan's shipping is also attacked again... don't have to comment it anymore, total massacre with the usual kill rate of dozens:1...


CAP engaged:
29th Sentai with Ki-84r Frank (0 airborne, 25 on standby, 0 scrambling)
12 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 2000 and 33910.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 27 minutes
59th Sentai with Ki-94-II (0 airborne, 29 on standby, 0 scrambling)
14 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 6000 and 37370.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 26 minutes
200th Sentai with Ki-84r Frank (0 airborne, 58 on standby, 0 scrambling)
28 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 5000 and 33910.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 28 minutes




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1603
RE: AAR 1944 - 6/4/2021 1:42:21 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
well knowing that the casual YAY sayer also isn't able to read the numbers out of a common combat report, saying it's all not that bad, let's also post the air losses list... FOW aside, the numbers are huge again... nothing but a horrible loop and it's all about the dive, no matter what... have the dive end (if it ever ends) you get nearly 1:1 (slightly favouring the defender) when you got equally skilled escorts, have the dive never end and you get a result like today or like the one against the British carriers a couple of turns ago...

we "only" employed some 300 land based fighters and in four different strikes they down no less than 200 enemy fighters and two dozen bombers... for the loss of 200 LBA fighters? No, not really, for the loss of a whopping 8 (in words: EIGHT) Franks, Georges and KI-94 while about halve of the losses were write offs... we have lost 3!!! pilots today and downed over 200 enemy first line aircraft coming in in perfectly coordination with huge escorts... but the huge escorts just resulted in huge losses... if we wouldn't have suffered the usual vacuum cleaner kills of all nav search it would look even worse but the LBA over Saipan and Pagan got a 30:1 over the course of the day... but people still claim it's all working well... I can repeat these results on and on and on, independet of side, all you need are equally skilled pilots, equal airframes and one side getting the dive while the other side dies in droves in the escort role...




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by castor troy -- 6/4/2021 1:43:31 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1604
RE: AAR 1945 - 6/4/2021 2:01:16 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
it's early 45, the enemy has something between 1.500 and 2.000 carrier based aircraft and he just has to do something so the assault on the Marianas is not really a surprise but I wonder if he will be able to pull it off without wrecking his fleet and lose the ground troops on the invasion beaches as we are just so strong here... guess only attacking the home islands would come closer to suizide than attacking the Marianas with "only" carrier based air... one just can't pull this off in the game, you can't do it with KB in 42 when the Allied have 300 LBA fighters and you can't do it with an Allied death star in 45 when the enemy has thousands of land based aircraft that are flown by skilled crews, fly at least equal airframes (the KI-94-II is even superior to the Corsair) and with the IJN literally fully intact...

what really pissed me once again is the naval movement... no idea how often I have seen this now, also this time KB didn't move!!! We have the ASW TF move four hexes to the NW and a SAG that is followed by three carrier groups should follow the ASW TF but they moved only two hexes leaving them just 10 hexes to the enemy... what the f*ck? Our carriers should be 8 hexes NW of Guam but they moved a whopping two hexes even though they were fully fueled and had all op points, the damn task forces were just created last round and their settings were checked three times... even checking them this turn they show nothing weird, they just didn't move and only the borked routine knows why they didn't yet AGAIN... being 10 hexes from the enemy meant our float plane squadrons on the ships lost like 3/4 of their float planes to the vacuum cleaner CAP over the carriers... having to fly a 360 degree nav search it always strikes me how ALL would go into the hex with the enemy carriers but that's just another unexplained mistery of the game (funnily enough they designed search archs at some point)...

as you can see on the screenshot our sub menace is also moving into position... as in previous fleet engagements the plan is to hit a carrier or two with a couple of sub torps, have the enemy deplete their aircraft against our LBA, then offensively strike with LBA and lastly with KB's 1.300 carrier based ac (850 Sams)... when the enemy carriers are depleted, damaged or sunk we will fly in land based dive bomber squadrons to replace KB's offensive air arm and wreck havoc on enemy SAGs and amphibious shipping...

coming in from the South (Truk) is also another heavy cruiser SAG that is commanded by Tanaka... Guam is our main airbase and is covered by several heavy IJN units that are covered by 500 first line fighters... we have another 250 fighters on Truk on standby and another 300 at Iwo Jima so with today's kill ratio we could kill several ten thousand enemy aircraft, we just have to make sure we get the dive but that's an easy one against incoming bomber strikes...




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1605
RE: AAR 1945 - 6/4/2021 4:01:21 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
Rantin' CT:

I'm not arguing your air combat outcomes, all I'm gonna do is point out that not everyone else sees this in their games so you need to ask yourself: why do you repeatedly get these outcomes?

I don't get these outcomes at all. However I play against the AI so it can (will) be argued that it is not a fair comparison even though most would admit that the AI uses the same A2A model.

Previously I suggested that you review other AAR's from Lowpe, 1275psi, and obvert among others. Sadly, you claim to find the exact same outcomes. Sad as it is a minority opinion. You might want to ask one of the authors their opinion, 2 are currently in active games, you should get a response. Herb is a pretty good guy you know.

Anyway, this is an answer that you need to seek. Here is part of your answer: no, not everyone sees the outcomes that you do.

In the meantime, I continue to enjoy your AAR's. You have some good over-arching strategy that I like to watch put into action.

< Message edited by PaxMondo -- 6/4/2021 4:29:27 PM >


_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1606
RE: AAR 1945 - 6/4/2021 9:34:17 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3256
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Rantin' CT:

I'm not arguing your air combat outcomes, all I'm gonna do is point out that not everyone else sees this in their games so you need to ask yourself: why do you repeatedly get these outcomes?

I don't get these outcomes at all. However I play against the AI so it can (will) be argued that it is not a fair comparison even though most would admit that the AI uses the same A2A model.

Previously I suggested that you review other AAR's from Lowpe, 1275psi, and obvert among others. Sadly, you claim to find the exact same outcomes. Sad as it is a minority opinion. You might want to ask one of the authors their opinion, 2 are currently in active games, you should get a response. Herb is a pretty good guy you know.

Anyway, this is an answer that you need to seek. Here is part of your answer: no, not everyone sees the outcomes that you do.

In the meantime, I continue to enjoy your AAR's. You have some good over-arching strategy that I like to watch put into action.


I mean, it's pretty obvious. With no disrespect to Mundy, he's not being particularly innovative in the air war and is suffering as a result. Total air losses should absolutely not be 1:1 at this point of the war given the assets the Allies have to hand.

The combat reports posted illustrate this nicely.

Every Allied squadron, without fail, is coming in either at 10k or 15k feet.

IJ aircraft are positioned at 15k and 20k, so can climb to get the dive advantage.

A half hour of warning for the IJ to get in to position.

It's the air-to-air equivalent of going over the top, into machine guns over open terrain.

From memory, training sufficient USN fighter pilots is a bit tricky for the Allies in the early stages of the war, so I'd bet that the experience delta between the frontline IJ and USN carrier pilots is feeding in to the positive feedback loop for Japan as well.

I won't comment on the naval movement other than to say I've never had any problems with getting my carriers to go where I wanted them. Even if that was into Allied CA's...



(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 1607
RE: AAR 1945 - 6/4/2021 11:47:34 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
I won't comment on the naval movement other than to say I've never had any problems with getting my carriers to go where I wanted them. Even if that was into Allied CA's...




I have had similar "success" ... kinda of a "be careful what you ask for" thing, right? ...



_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 1608
RE: AAR 1944 - 6/5/2021 1:12:58 AM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
.. the only thing we don't know is the effect of the island nukers aka LCI(G) and the like because if they can not only clear whole atolls but also fully fortified islands like Saipan, Tinian or Guam then nothing can be defended against an Allied invasion but then it's even more borked than it already is...


Allies can just send the nuke missile boats and a bunch of ex-luxury liners (aka xAPs) and storm every beach
I wonder however how the Trident and Poseidon missiles fit on the LST´s devs should look into this

Re. the air issues, while I agree mostly that the dive routine is a bit "borked" their are counters to it.
It seems neither you nor your opponent do adapt to this. As obviously it is known now by both of you for at least a hundred game turns or more

Eg. why does Allies send these strikes in at all, he must know he was detected and also know you have good and many CAP planes on the islands.

I would as Allies do this in the situation shown:

a) Do not fly anti ship missions in range of the base itself
b) Sweep said bases a LOT and then think about further strikes
c) Send 4-5 cruisers at least to bombard

Seems rather obvious to me, but your opponent has shown before he does not particulary care for his assets. Maybe blinded by all the huge reeinforcements the Allies get at this time or by carlessness - I do not know

I do not see the point flying against ships perhaps docked at the bases themselves at least not before the nature of the ships is clear. They can easily be a bunch of xAKs and some SCs so not worth losing even 20 planes to sink them (except they have very important cargo on board, but one does not know that). Only if it is known that the CAP at the base is weak I would do such stikes (but I am a bad player so prob I am wrong). However a recon result a turn before indicating a weak CAP can easily be deceiving when new planes are flown in. What D/L has the enemy on the bases in question?

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 6/5/2021 1:52:44 AM >

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1609
RE: AAR 1944 - 6/5/2021 2:02:49 AM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
Re. your TFs movement issues it is pretty clear you have problems with your setup following ASW fleets. ASW means anti sub warfare, their job is to look out and hunt subs. And even if they do not encounter subs they patrol the hex(es) and look for subs. Means they slow down to "listen" to subs (this is known as passive sonar hunt compared to active sonar it is depended that the ships are as silent as possible themselves, otherwise the passive sonar would not get a "good listen" which in turn means the ASW ships use lowest possible speed for their passive listening duty, they also adapt search pattern "criss crossing" the hex etc) I advise deleting the ASW TF - this should resolve it... .. and play some Harpoon to learn about ASW tactics (in fact cold war and 1945 sonar listening tactics are not that much different) or watch some vids by the ex-USN sonar operator on YT (name forgotten I can look it up if interested).

I assume strongly this is included in AE (passive sonar vs. active, search asw patterns etc.)

Edit, you can ofc have the ASW TFs but indipendent, not following CVs or have CVs follow them.



< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 6/5/2021 2:09:46 AM >

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 1610
RE: AAR 1945 - 6/5/2021 10:17:46 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Rantin' CT:

I'm not arguing your air combat outcomes, all I'm gonna do is point out that not everyone else sees this in their games so you need to ask yourself: why do you repeatedly get these outcomes?

I don't get these outcomes at all. However I play against the AI so it can (will) be argued that it is not a fair comparison even though most would admit that the AI uses the same A2A model.

Previously I suggested that you review other AAR's from Lowpe, 1275psi, and obvert among others. Sadly, you claim to find the exact same outcomes. Sad as it is a minority opinion. You might want to ask one of the authors their opinion, 2 are currently in active games, you should get a response. Herb is a pretty good guy you know.

Anyway, this is an answer that you need to seek. Here is part of your answer: no, not everyone sees the outcomes that you do.

In the meantime, I continue to enjoy your AAR's. You have some good over-arching strategy that I like to watch put into action.



I was exactly doing what you ask me to do, was going into these AARs (those that actually showed combat report because all others are doing nothing than saying "there was an airstrike and A lost this and B lost that). And like Lowpe's AAR for example (was it against obvert?), what did I see there? Strato sweeps on and on. I was even posting several combat reports out of these AARs in my AAR, just go back to look at them. I have seeked the answer for over a decade now and the only answer after arguing and arguing and over arguing was the F-18 pilot coming up with the conclusion that it is not the dive that is borked but strato sweeps are gaming the game. Ooooffff... Ok we game the game by doing strato sweeps that do nothing else than guarantee you the dive but the dive isn't too powerful. LOL.

But strato sweeps is about sweeps, yeah, all the layered CAP and woodoo is all nice, but these aren't strato sweeps, these are escorted bomber strikes, the one that launches them has pretty much no chance other than to set his bombers to somewhere up to 15k if he doesn't want to get his dive bombers doing useless level bombing runs. And then? The defender will be just higher most of the time, no matter what. The result? The result can be seen here and can be seen in hundreds of other combat reports on the forum but people seem to just ignore them because if there isn't someone bitching as hell it's just accepted to see reports where 1000 aircraft are shot down against a higher CAP for literally no loss. Ahh, that must be the Mariana's Turkey shoot over and over is usually the thinking, not taking into account, what aircraft are attacking and what pilots are flying them.

Kill rates over and over again going up to 30:1 or even higher, then being reversed when the exact same air units with the same aircraft and pilots are involved, no there can't be something wrong when the combat replay / report shows nothing else different than the dive going from one side to the other which then reverses the totally looped outcomes? Seriously?

If I'd launch 500 aircraft at 10,000ft against the carriers the CAP would most likely shred them because his fighters are probably set to 10-15k ft which would result in endless dive sessions and when our fighters down the enemy over our bases at kill rates up to 30:1 they would be shred over the carriers if the CAP flies higher. If you look up the last carrier engagement with my Sams going into battle for the first time they were doing very well over the enemy fleet and the reason was that the enemy CAP was completely set to 10k ft IIRC and my strike came in at 15k (means fighters at 18k). No insane dive sessions, end result was no loop in the kill ratios. But the Allied strikes were shred by my CAP that was flying higher.

But I have long accepted that there are loads of people here that seem to think that kill rates like shown here are perfectly ok. Corsairs and Hellcats vs Georges and Franks, both being flown by equally skilled pilots. One side getting the dive, the other one dying in droves. No dive and roughly 1:1 kill rates? Hmm, how comes? Equally skilled pilots, equal aircraft and equal kills on both sides? And the remaining answer, what is the magic condition then to suddenly turn equal kill rates and reasonable outcomes into 30:1 loops? hmmmmm....



_____________________________


(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 1611
RE: AAR 1944 - 6/5/2021 10:37:52 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
.. the only thing we don't know is the effect of the island nukers aka LCI(G) and the like because if they can not only clear whole atolls but also fully fortified islands like Saipan, Tinian or Guam then nothing can be defended against an Allied invasion but then it's even more borked than it already is...


Allies can just send the nuke missile boats and a bunch of ex-luxury liners (aka xAPs) and storm every beach
I wonder however how the Trident and Poseidon missiles fit on the LST´s devs should look into this

Re. the air issues, while I agree mostly that the dive routine is a bit "borked" their are counters to it.
It seems neither you nor your opponent do adapt to this. As obviously it is known now by both of you for at least a hundred game turns or more

Eg. why does Allies send these strikes in at all, he must know he was detected and also know you have good and many CAP planes on the islands.

I would as Allies do this in the situation shown:

a) Do not fly anti ship missions in range of the base itself
b) Sweep said bases a LOT and then think about further strikes
c) Send 4-5 cruisers at least to bombard

Seems rather obvious to me, but your opponent has shown before he does not particulary care for his assets. Maybe blinded by all the huge reeinforcements the Allies get at this time or by carlessness - I do not know

I do not see the point flying against ships perhaps docked at the bases themselves at least not before the nature of the ships is clear. They can easily be a bunch of xAKs and some SCs so not worth losing even 20 planes to sink them (except they have very important cargo on board, but one does not know that). Only if it is known that the CAP at the base is weak I would do such stikes (but I am a bad player so prob I am wrong). However a recon result a turn before indicating a weak CAP can easily be deceiving when new planes are flown in. What D/L has the enemy on the bases in question?



Literally no games (at least PBEMs) go into the very late stages and I am not surprised that the rocket armed support ship thing wasn't as much tested (if at all). But also here, there are people that think that this small boats are working perfectly fine, being able to delete whole islands all on their own, no need to even send in the Marines when some Seabee units can land and take the heavily fortified atoll because there is nothing alive left. Think of real life Tarawa, if the USN had LCI(G) at that time, they would have suffered no KIA and literally no wounded because the LCI(G) could have cleared the atolls. Something five hundred BB/CA/CL/DD couldn't do because the "routine" is different. That's the difference between real life and this game, in real life there is no such routine and things just wouldn't work, in the game they do. But people then claim it's all ok, that's also a difference, between real life and a forum.

I'm not saying it's a good idea but tell me what Mundy could do when he goes to frontally attack the Marianas with his fleet of carriers? I stated myself that frontally attacking the Marianas is kind of suizide but would you really stand down your bombers? How many people would do this? I have done it ONE turn, this was when my carriers moved into the Indian Ocean to attack his carriers and the result was his carriers getting away.

I totally agree, you have to sweep, bombard, starve, sweep, bomb and so on. But from where should he do this? That's his dilemma! Marcus Island, a mini atoll is something like 25 hexes away, how on Earth could he sweep? How many players would send in the carriers and stand down the bombers and start sweeping my bases with the carrier fighters, well knowing that I have KB with 1,500 carrier based aircraft, all Sams, Graces and Judies? He most likely has 1,500-1.800 aircraft aboard his carriers and he has no chance to do anything?

Again, standing down all bombers on a carrier fleet like this is a big decision and I bet 95% of the players would refrain doing it. Guess the comments when you lose KB and have done no damage in return because your bombers didn't fly because you all set them to stand down? He got full DL on my bases as he has done recon the prior weeks. And he has to be aware that the majority of the IJN fleet is sitting there so again, standing down the bombers is quite a decision. But then there's the question if you really have to expect to lose 200 of your first line fighters to 8 enemy LBA fighters lost. Well, in the game yes, you have to expect it.

You know the dive and the airroutine yourself, IIRC you have hrs on max alt sweeps and in your PBEM both you and your opponent are fighting in the stratosphere too and not down at sea level. If the dive isn't that powerful, have the P-38 go in at 10k ft and not 39kft (aircraft types to be randomly replaced). But then what happened last turn wasn't about strato sweeps, it was about an escorted strike. Not only do you get super hampered by the dive but also by flying escort.

Not aimed at you but what really strikes me though is that on this forum there seem to be people after all those years that are talking about this routine, that workaround, woodoo, guides and what not. But they seem to be so far into fantasy land that they obviously accept that 200 Hellcats and Corsairs stand no chance on escort vs 70 Georges and Franks! When the result is like a 20-30:1 or even higher in KILL RATES! I wonder (do I really still wonder) what kind of WWII knowledge they reall have when they think that 200 Hellcats and Corsairs would lose that hard vs 70 Georges and Franks just because the IJ fighters were flying higher and the USN fighters were on escort. No doubt they would be at a disadvantage first but heck, they even outnumber the enemy 3:1 so guess how long that advantage would hold true.

But no, the outcome must be good because the game is showing this outcome? This game is not a sim, it's not reality and it sure doesn't come close. If it were a sim it would be in pre alpha stage and such loops over and over would not be accepted. I'm not blaming them that it's not working better but I do blame them and the YAY sayers for constantly claiming how perfectly well this works.

I would just put my head into my arse rather than trying to justify how these results are ok. In any context of reality they are clearly not!

Where this game works very well are the early months and the the battles with low numbers. Who cares about the dive when you have 20 Zeroes fighting 15 Warhawks when the end result are 5 dives and 4 Warhawks downed for 1 or 2 Zeroes. Reasonable outcomes on and on. The game always had a problem when you min/max and with numbers. Have a dozen Nates dive Buffaloes? Lol, who cares? Have 200 Franks dive 200 Corsairs and the dive never ends? Well, then you do have a problem with the outcome, at least if you think that 30:1 kill rates are so far off the line that it should actually be insane to even discuss if it is right or wrong.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 6/5/2021 10:55:06 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 1612
RE: AAR 1944 - 6/5/2021 11:02:31 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Re. your TFs movement issues it is pretty clear you have problems with your setup following ASW fleets. ASW means anti sub warfare, their job is to look out and hunt subs. And even if they do not encounter subs they patrol the hex(es) and look for subs. Means they slow down to "listen" to subs (this is known as passive sonar hunt compared to active sonar it is depended that the ships are as silent as possible themselves, otherwise the passive sonar would not get a "good listen" which in turn means the ASW ships use lowest possible speed for their passive listening duty, they also adapt search pattern "criss crossing" the hex etc) I advise deleting the ASW TF - this should resolve it... .. and play some Harpoon to learn about ASW tactics (in fact cold war and 1945 sonar listening tactics are not that much different) or watch some vids by the ex-USN sonar operator on YT (name forgotten I can look it up if interested).

I assume strongly this is included in AE (passive sonar vs. active, search asw patterns etc.)

Edit, you can ofc have the ASW TFs but indipendent, not following CVs or have CVs follow them.





It's surely not about following an ASW TF or any other type of task force. This is a bit too much "what is real life" and what is in the game. What you describe above is surely not what is happening in the game. I've got way over 10,000 PBEM turns under my belt now and if only 5% of the time my carriers (both Allied and IJ) were at sea that would be 500 turns where the carrier groups were following other task forces. It works 99% of the time. In this game I have it twice not working already, both times in very dangerous moments. The next turns, all is moving as expected so the flaw about not moving for no apparent reason is surely not related to following an ASW TF when they always do that. Havind the ASW TF in the lead is exactly what should pass through the hex first, how many times have I had an Allied ASW TF kill a sub in the path of my carriers before my carriers even moved through, uncountable times. ASW group in the lead, followed by a SAG, then the carriers. Always been that for me and many others since release. TF numbers going up from the ASW group to the SAG to the carrier TFs.

It's the same with fast transports. They sprint in and out during the night 99 times, just as they should. And then the 100th time they just stay at their target, have not unloaded and are bombed. It's funny that it seems to only happen to me, but hey, how many times I was asking an opponent why he had his ships in this or that position when he lost them and the answer was "I don't know, they should have moved four hexes further". And no, it was not about refulling or the like.


< Message edited by castor troy -- 6/5/2021 11:07:23 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 1613
RE: AAR 1945 - 6/5/2021 12:42:16 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3256
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
The other aspect that hasn't been mentioned is that fighter aircraft conducting an escort mission are at a significant tactical disadvantage - the parameters of their mission require them to cleave tightly to the bomber formation, which will typically be slower and much easier to detect, allowing the defending fighters flexibility to position for effective attacks.


quote:

Literally no games (at least PBEMs) go into the very late stages.


False.

quote:

and I am not surprised that the rocket armed support ship thing wasn't as much tested (if at all).


The devs have been quite open about the lack of balance testing in the late war, but the issue is wider than just the testing of the game IMO, as the issue is really one of game balance vs historical authenticity.

quote:

Think of real life Tarawa, if the USN had LCI(G) at that time, they would have suffered no KIA and literally no wounded because the LCI(G) could have cleared the atolls. Something five hundred BB/CA/CL/DD couldn't do because the "routine" is different. That's the difference between real life and this game, in real life there is no such routine and things just wouldn't work, in the game they do. But people then claim it's all ok, that's also a difference, between real life and a forum.


If the US had their 1945 bombardment capability in place at Tarawa, then it would have been significantly easier in terms of losses on the US.

It's worth realising that the development of these ships came about precisely because it was challenging to effectively suppress beach defences.

I also note that you've made the same mistake of thinking disabled squads are the same as destroyed. They are different things.

quote:

I'm not saying it's a good idea but tell me what Mundy could do when he goes to frontally attack the Marianas with his fleet of carriers? I stated myself that frontally attacking the Marianas is kind of suizide but would you really stand down your bombers? How many people would do this? I have done it ONE turn, this was when my carriers moved into the Indian Ocean to attack his carriers and the result was his carriers getting away.


Maybe...not conduct a frontal attack the Marianas...?

When you've a game that stretches from Alaska to Australia, there's plenty of space to work around defensive positions and into rear-areas. See for example Greyjoy v Rader

quote:

Not aimed at you but what really strikes me though is that on this forum there seem to be people after all those years that are talking about this routine, that workaround, woodoo, guides and what not. But they seem to be so far into fantasy land that they obviously accept that 200 Hellcats and Corsairs stand no chance on escort vs 70 Georges and Franks! When the result is like a 20-30:1 or even higher in KILL RATES! I wonder (do I really still wonder) what kind of WWII knowledge they reall have when they think that 200 Hellcats and Corsairs would lose that hard vs 70 Georges and Franks just because the IJ fighters were flying higher and the USN fighters were on escort. No doubt they would be at a disadvantage first but heck, they even outnumber the enemy 3:1 so guess how long that advantage would hold true.


So lets flip that example, and look at the Battle of the Philippines Sea.

Except, rather than the IJN sending half-baked pilots into action, it's the Allies.

Would you be complaining about the results then?


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Re. your TFs movement issues it is pretty clear you have problems with your setup following ASW fleets. ASW means anti sub warfare, their job is to look out and hunt subs. And even if they do not encounter subs they patrol the hex(es) and look for subs. Means they slow down to "listen" to subs (this is known as passive sonar hunt compared to active sonar it is depended that the ships are as silent as possible themselves, otherwise the passive sonar would not get a "good listen" which in turn means the ASW ships use lowest possible speed for their passive listening duty, they also adapt search pattern "criss crossing" the hex etc) I advise deleting the ASW TF - this should resolve it... .. and play some Harpoon to learn about ASW tactics (in fact cold war and 1945 sonar listening tactics are not that much different) or watch some vids by the ex-USN sonar operator on YT (name forgotten I can look it up if interested).

I assume strongly this is included in AE (passive sonar vs. active, search asw patterns etc.)

Edit, you can ofc have the ASW TFs but indipendent, not following CVs or have CVs follow them.





It's surely not about following an ASW TF or any other type of task force. This is a bit too much "what is real life" and what is in the game. What you describe above is surely not what is happening in the game. I've got way over 10,000 PBEM turns under my belt now and if only 5% of the time my carriers (both Allied and IJ) were at sea that would be 500 turns where the carrier groups were following other task forces. It works 99% of the time. In this game I have it twice not working already, both times in very dangerous moments. The next turns, all is moving as expected so the flaw about not moving for no apparent reason is surely not related to following an ASW TF when they always do that. Havind the ASW TF in the lead is exactly what should pass through the hex first, how many times have I had an Allied ASW TF kill a sub in the path of my carriers before my carriers even moved through, uncountable times. ASW group in the lead, followed by a SAG, then the carriers. Always been that for me and many others since release. TF numbers going up from the ASW group to the SAG to the carrier TFs.

It's the same with fast transports. They sprint in and out during the night 99 times, just as they should. And then the 100th time they just stay at their target, have not unloaded and are bombed. It's funny that it seems to only happen to me, but hey, how many times I was asking an opponent why he had his ships in this or that position when he lost them and the answer was "I don't know, they should have moved four hexes further". And no, it was not about refulling or the like.



Not to state the blinding obvious, but ever think that it gets borked because the ASW TF (*gasp*)_reacts towards a sub? Because it's...an ASW TF...on an ASW mission...?

The point on real life vs the game is a valid one. Just because you think it should work as an ASW TF acting as a screening force following by your SAG and then your CV's doesn't mean that's how the game handles it.

(Hint: it's not).

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1614
RE: AAR 1944 - 6/5/2021 12:45:06 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
If you search my posts (if it works actually) than you can find severall not so old posts by me about the "strato" issue where I not only go into the dive issue but more into the altitude issue. Briefly said it is not realistic that planes (esp. in the pacific war where it was mostly below 20k in Europe height was sometimes often higher) fly regulary at eg. 40k. Especially not over big distances, in this game this can be done without much punishment. My opponent for example also flies at these alts eg. even 10 hexes far with P38s or max range with P47. However the ops losses and fatigue suffered from this is way too low very rare ops losses and I guess his fat is also not so high cause he flies turn after turn sometimes. I have seen the same with Georges on my side and recently Franks flying extended range at their max alt. But this is only 34 in their case, while George flying at 41. I also have not experienced the punishment I "should" get for this - I mean if no combat occurs. Still there should be more ops and more fat.

If it was even technical possible in 43 in my game to do so. You need specialized ocygen masks etc. for the pilot for whom flying this way is not very "comfortable or reassuring" if soemthing happens with the plane engine for example at this alt...

And yes you are "/mostly/" right that the alt advantage is too high in game and also that escorts especially if they outnumber the CAP should not only be lambs for the slaughter...Before "naysayers" come and say but higher alt WAS important in air combat YES it was but not so much like in the game. There were countermeasures for this and pilots trained to fight better vs. higher enemies.

However this won´t be changed or updated in the game I guess, so one needs to arrange with the circumstances. Sich mit der Situation abfinden und so gut es geht damit leben.

He can sweep from the CVs - just needs to fine tune position and range to target with his fleets. Getting a fix on the KB is needed first of course to this "finetuning"

I said not to stand all bombers down, but to arrange their range, so they do not fly in a heavy CAP without even knowing if the risk is worth it for the potential target(s). Has also the advantage he can set eg. 2 bomber formations to ASW, as we have seen your subs actually hit something big once in a while..

Re, the following order I have not so good experience with it even non ASW fleets sometimes it gets screwed.

Re, AARs not showing the details aka complete CRs, yes this is correct. That is wasting otherwise worthwile to read AARs AND if AAR writers read this DO NOT POST pics that are too big for the forum.

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 6/5/2021 1:05:55 PM >

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1615
RE: AAR 1944 - 6/5/2021 1:38:43 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4702
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline
quote:

If the US had their 1945 bombardment capability in place at Tarawa, then it would have been significantly easier in terms of losses on the US.

It's worth realising that the development of these ships came about precisely because it was challenging to effectively suppress beach defences


You still really don't get it... don't even have the concept of aimed fire vs not aimed that is done by these boats.
And what is again the range of those rockets?

< Message edited by Dili -- 6/5/2021 1:39:48 PM >

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 1616
RE: AAR 1944 - 6/5/2021 1:46:36 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

quote:

If the US had their 1945 bombardment capability in place at Tarawa, then it would have been significantly easier in terms of losses on the US.

It's worth realising that the development of these ships came about precisely because it was challenging to effectively suppress beach defences


You still really don't get it... don't even have the concept of aimed fire vs not aimed that is done by these boats.
And what is again the range of those rockets?



Impossible to teach a monkey how to fly This game is rewriting history and even more so real life, some people have obviously been so long around they mismatch the game with reality and if reality doesn't suit the game's result then reality must be wrong.

_____________________________


(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 1617
RE: AAR 1944 - 6/5/2021 1:53:54 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

quote:

If the US had their 1945 bombardment capability in place at Tarawa, then it would have been significantly easier in terms of losses on the US.

It's worth realising that the development of these ships came about precisely because it was challenging to effectively suppress beach defences


You still really don't get it... don't even have the concept of aimed fire vs not aimed that is done by these boats.
And what is again the range of those rockets?


You can easily find that out Wiki is quite good for technical specs. You can read the warhead weight there, then take eg. a 50kg HE bomb as comparison and perhaps add 1-2 points for acceleration (ie. impact force higher than bomb?).

I have done the research already and in game the 4.5 (ground fired) rocket is seriously overrated even when you adjust the value a bit up for the rocket.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4.5-Inch_Beach_Barrage_Rocket

"Warhead weight 6.5 lb (2.9 kg)"

So 3 KG HE, look up value in game look up other HE shells / bombs and compare

In game named "4.5 inch M3 BBR"

We can take the 30kg HE bomb for easier comparion. 3 KG warhead - rocket 30kg warhead bomb. Meaning the rocket should be roughly 10times less anti soft value then the bomb. But adjusted upwards a bit for the rocket (higher impact force). And / or look up warhead HE weight of naval guns and compare.

For example here: (for 6inch / 47 MK16)
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_6-47_mk16.php

Look up value in game - compare w/ rocket, done.

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 6/5/2021 2:17:28 PM >

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 1618
RE: AAR 1945 - 6/5/2021 1:55:12 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13841
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 22, 45
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Saipan at 115,93

Japanese Ships
SS I-15

Allied Ships
BB South Dakota
DD Charles S. Sperry
DE Silverstein
APA Briscoe
APA Meriwether
APA Bingham
APA Sibley
APA Dutchess
APA Goshen
APD Knudson
APD Reeves
AKA Cyrene
AKA Towner
AP Gen. J.R.Brooke
LCI(G)-463
LCI(G)-457
LCI(G)-408
LCI(G)-396
LCI(R)-339
xAP Chief Washakie
xAP Charles H. Windham
xAP Perida
xAP David W. Branch
xAK El Reno Victory
xAK Laura Drake Gill
xAK Hawaiian Farmer
DD Aulick
DD Abbot
DD Fletcher
DD John W. Weeks



I-15 tries to engage one of the amphib TFs, would have been cool to hit South Dakota... have to be glad the sub survived the encounter though...

SS I-15 is sighted by escort
DD Aulick fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Abbot fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Fletcher fails to find sub and abandons search
DD John W. Weeks fails to find sub and abandons search
Escort abandons search for sub


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Saipan at 115,93




Japanese Ships
SS I-15, hits 24, heavy damage

Allied Ships
CV Bunker Hill, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
BB Wisconsin
CL Biloxi
DD Caperton
DD Bryant
DD Boyd
DD Dortch
DD Cowell
DD Colahan
DD Claxton


JACKPOT! I-15 now gets a shot at Bunker Hill and launches KAITENS! One of them slams into the carrier and immediately causes an ammo storage explosion... right after launching the Kaitens the sub fires a torp spread of four and another two Type 95 torps hit the carrier... wow, looks like Kaiten carrying subs first fire their Kaitens and right after a spread of torps, that makes a lot of torpedoes for an attack on a capital ship... effect of a Kaiten is huge, an ammo storage explosion and two more torps pretty much means that Bunker Hill is in sinking condition... BANZAI!!!

looks like copying IJN's real life sub strategy pays off another time... I-15 is heavily damaged but has a 30/70 chance to make a port in the Marianas if not attacked again... have never seen Kaitens in use before not to talk about one actually hit something, this attack is the prove they work...


Ammo storage explosion on CV Bunker Hill
SS I-15 launches 8 torpedoes at CV Bunker Hill

DD Dortch attacking submerged sub ....
DD Cowell fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Colahan attacking submerged sub ....
DD Claxton fails to find sub and abandons search
Escort abandons search for sub



Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1619
RE: AAR 1944 - 6/5/2021 1:58:25 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3256
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

quote:

If the US had their 1945 bombardment capability in place at Tarawa, then it would have been significantly easier in terms of losses on the US.

It's worth realising that the development of these ships came about precisely because it was challenging to effectively suppress beach defences


You still really don't get it... don't even have the concept of aimed fire vs not aimed that is done by these boats.
And what is again the range of those rockets?


It's you that evidently doesn't understand. Let me be clear.

- These ships can only be deployed in amphibious task forces
- These ships fire in response to the amphibious task force being engaged as part of the pre-invasion element of a landing
- During this action, the ships within an amphibious task force are providing fire support to the assets approaching the shore.
- The targets for both sides are completely different from a conventional bombardment mission. For the amphibious task force, the fire is concentrated completely on suppressing the shore defences, while the defenders are engaging the unloading ships and disembarking troops.

The damage profile of these weapons systems is consistent with reality. Extreme disruption and dislocation to defensive fire, but little in the way of outright losses.

Range is immaterial for these weapons as they are targeting troops with direct line of sight on the shore. They are shock weapons to make sure that Severloh and his friends in WN-62 are too busy trying to stop their ears from bleeding to man the machine guns.

Worth reiterating that the results seen in this AAR have been significantly exacerbated by the questionable decision to engage in massive overstacking on Marcus Island.

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 1620
Page:   <<   < prev  52 53 [54] 55 56   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: AAR 1944 Page: <<   < prev  52 53 [54] 55 56   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

1.074