Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Imperfect intel on attacking flights?

 
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 >> Imperfect intel on attacking flights? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/5/2020 6:23:10 AM   
alanschu

 

Posts: 405
Joined: 12/21/2006
Status: offline
Picked this up again and am trying out the Ironman scenario and just had an attack on Manila that was this:

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on Manila , at 79,77

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 4 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 1 minutes

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 7

Allied aircraft
P-40E Warhawk x 8

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 3 destroyed

No Allied losses

Allied Ships
xAKL Princess of Negros, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
PG Asheville, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
AS Otus, Bomb hits 1
AM Bittern, Bomb hits 1, on fire
xAP Neptuna, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
AV Langley, Bomb hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAKL Anakan, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
PG Tulsa, Bomb hits 1, on fire
TK Gertrude Kellogg, Bomb hits 1
xAK Bennevis, Bomb hits 1, on fire
xAP President Madison, Bomb hits 1, on fire
xAK Si Kiang, Bomb hits 1, on fire
AS Canopus, Bomb hits 2
xAKL Sagoland, Bomb hits 1, on fire
AM Whippoorwill, Bomb hits 1, on fire
xAKL Corregidor, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
AS Holland, Bomb hits 1, on fire

Port hits 2
Port fuel hits 2

Aircraft Attacking:
7 x G4M1 Betty bombing from 7000 feet
Port Attack: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb, 4 x 60 kg GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
24th PG/17th PS with P-40E Warhawk (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
3 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 29000 , scrambling fighters between 5000 and 7000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 23 minutes
35th PG/21st PS with P-40E Warhawk (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 29000 , scrambling fighters to 6000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 32 minutes
24th PG/3rd PS with P-40E Warhawk (2 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 29000 , scrambling fighters to 5000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 12 minutes


This seems pretty impressive for 7 Bettys (against 8 fighters where 3 bombers were hit!)

Not overly mad since I actually want to get my ass kicked early but 23 bomb hits is pretty darn impressive and just curious if battle reports are ever off in terms of amount of opposition attacked?
Post #: 1
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/5/2020 6:31:03 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 16935
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
Incoming aircraft can be intercepted before they start their attack, during the attack and on retirement after the attack. Chances are those Betties shot down happened after the attack on departure from the area. That would mean they dropped 42 bombs unmolested.

The fighters were on CAP at 29,000 feet and the Betties were attacking at 7,000 feet. The raid was spotted only 4NM from target and one minute away. No way could the CAP intercept until the bombing happened.

The Japanese also got a very good die roll and clear sky which gave them lots of hits, but I don't see any subs on that list. Day 2?

_____________________________

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 alanschu)
Post #: 2
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/5/2020 6:36:24 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6544
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
Who said 3 Bettys were hit.  It could jus as easily have been a single Betty hit three times.  Nor who said 8 fighters intercepted.  Even the Combat Report informs you that at most only 2 fighters intercepted.

Not only does the Combat Report provide some ambiguous information it is also subject to FOW.  Nonetheless a close reading of it provides useful information but watching the Combat Animation is indispensable if you want to know the full picture of what happened.

Alfred

(in reply to alanschu)
Post #: 3
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/5/2020 6:42:08 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 16935
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Who said 3 Bettys were hit.  It could jus as easily have been a single Betty hit three times.  Nor who said 8 fighters intercepted.  Even the Combat Report informs you that at most only 2 fighters intercepted.

Not only does the Combat Report provide some ambiguous information it is also subject to FOW.  Nonetheless a close reading of it provides useful information but watching the Combat Animation is indispensable if you want to know the full picture of what happened.

Alfred

The CR does say three Betties were destroyed. Usually AA destruction is specified separately, so it seems reasonable to expect that interception and shoot-down occurred. FOW may change the numbers involved, but it looks like something along that line happened.

_____________________________

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 Alfred)
Post #: 4
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/5/2020 7:09:38 AM   
alanschu

 

Posts: 405
Joined: 12/21/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Incoming aircraft can be intercepted before they start their attack, during the attack and on retirement after the attack. Chances are those Betties shot down happened after the attack on departure from the area. That would mean they dropped 42 bombs unmolested.

The fighters were on CAP at 29,000 feet and the Betties were attacking at 7,000 feet. The raid was spotted only 4NM from target and one minute away. No way could the CAP intercept until the bombing happened.

The Japanese also got a very good die roll and clear sky which gave them lots of hits, but I don't see any subs on that list. Day 2?


I fully concede that all of the Bettys likely dropped their bombs before CAP was able to do anything about it, and that my knowledge of the game is quite rusty at this point. I thought that at most bombs from one plane could just hit one ship, buuuuuuuuuuut, that might just apply to actual task forces. Or maybe it was only 1 bomb from an attack could hit a plane... or maybe I'm just wrong!

It's not quite Day 2. It's December 15th though and I have scurried away most of my subs to help intercept the landing fleet. I typically role play that I only send out 4-6 a day to simulate some level of scrambling from the attack and getting the ships ready to sail, but fortunately none of the attacks happened before my subs got out.

quote:

Who said 3 Bettys were hit. It could jus as easily have been a single Betty hit three times.


Typically I have taken the aircraft losses as being matter of fact, so suggesting 3 Bettys were destroyed would mean that at the very least we (believed we) downed 3 different planes, not 3 successful "destructions" of the same plane.

Although good point that I just focused on the planes involved and not the actual combat interactions.


Also just want to reiterate that I'm not implying the game is cheating nor am I upset at the results. I considered it an impressive result and combination of a lot of factors that I (perhaps in error) only really recalled with a stronger attacking force.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 5
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/5/2020 7:49:38 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6544
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Who said 3 Bettys were hit.  It could jus as easily have been a single Betty hit three times.  Nor who said 8 fighters intercepted.  Even the Combat Report informs you that at most only 2 fighters intercepted.

Not only does the Combat Report provide some ambiguous information it is also subject to FOW.  Nonetheless a close reading of it provides useful information but watching the Combat Animation is indispensable if you want to know the full picture of what happened.

Alfred

The CR does say three Betties were destroyed. Usually AA destruction is specified separately, so it seems reasonable to expect that interception and shoot-down occurred. FOW may change the numbers involved, but it looks like something along that line happened.


What exactly do you think FOW means.

3 Betties destroyed could just as easily be only 1 Betty destroyed claimed by multiple pilots who may, or may not have been engaged in shooting at the Betties. The Combat Reports do not necessarily tie in with the end of turn aggregated aircraft loss tally. TheElf (the air team development leader) was always at pains to state that there simply was no substitute to watching the Combat Animation to see what actually happened.

Alfred

PS: As you have pointed out, the kills could have all been on the egress. IOW the number of reported kills doesn't really indicate whether the attack run was interrupted and therefore reduced the impact of the strike. Again why the Combat Animation has to be watched.

< Message edited by Alfred -- 1/5/2020 7:55:05 AM >

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 6
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/5/2020 3:05:19 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7488
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline
29k was simply too high. No need for high level CAP if there is no immenent threat of enemy sweeps. Better to be at an altitude that has a better chance of intercepting bombers at expected bombing altitudes.

This is always the case if you have it one squadron on CAP. With at least two squadrons you can cover both high and low threats.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 7
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/5/2020 6:48:20 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14684
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Usually whatever it says about your losses is the minimum, you may lose some more on the way home. Whatever it says about enemy losses is generally more conservative than if you look at air losses for the day, and I think, closer to the truth. I'm not sure, but the cumulative losses shown from day 1 may be dead on correct for both sides.

_____________________________

Currently fighting for the Emperor against AW1Steve. As of 6/21 it is 7/45.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 8
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/5/2020 9:13:21 PM   
alanschu

 

Posts: 405
Joined: 12/21/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Who said 3 Bettys were hit.  It could jus as easily have been a single Betty hit three times.  Nor who said 8 fighters intercepted.  Even the Combat Report informs you that at most only 2 fighters intercepted.

Not only does the Combat Report provide some ambiguous information it is also subject to FOW.  Nonetheless a close reading of it provides useful information but watching the Combat Animation is indispensable if you want to know the full picture of what happened.

Alfred

The CR does say three Betties were destroyed. Usually AA destruction is specified separately, so it seems reasonable to expect that interception and shoot-down occurred. FOW may change the numbers involved, but it looks like something along that line happened.


What exactly do you think FOW means.

3 Betties destroyed could just as easily be only 1 Betty destroyed claimed by multiple pilots who may, or may not have been engaged in shooting at the Betties. The Combat Reports do not necessarily tie in with the end of turn aggregated aircraft loss tally. TheElf (the air team development leader) was always at pains to state that there simply was no substitute to watching the Combat Animation to see what actually happened.

Alfred

PS: As you have pointed out, the kills could have all been on the egress. IOW the number of reported kills doesn't really indicate whether the attack run was interrupted and therefore reduced the impact of the strike. Again why the Combat Animation has to be watched.


This is part of my inquiry... is it possible that the number of planes in the report is actually wrong?

People are getting a bit too hung up on the CAP and its effectiveness and in retrospect I shouldn't have bothered commenting on it. I was actually surprised that 17 different ships were able to be hit by 7 planes.

Part of my inquiry is because I'm super rusty, and didn't think that this was possible, but may be misremembering something that maybe only applies to ships at sea (only possible for 1 attack/1 bomb) - which BBfanboy did point out that there as 42 bombs that were dropped.

Is it safe to assume that what I remembered about combat resolution was actually wrong? Or are there differences between attacking ships at port and attacking ships at sea (which is probably entirely reasonable). My question is more about trying to better understand/reacquaint myself with how some of the game mechanics work.

< Message edited by alanschu -- 1/5/2020 9:16:12 PM >

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 9
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/5/2020 9:58:20 PM   
btd64


Posts: 8389
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in OHIO
Status: offline
I once had a sub surface do to the beating it was taking. The game then reported as sunk. Six weeks later the sub limped into a forward base for repairs in an ARD I moved up. I love FOW....GP

< Message edited by btd64 -- 1/5/2020 9:59:24 PM >


_____________________________

Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

I don't like paying for the same real estate twice..Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to alanschu)
Post #: 10
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/5/2020 10:34:17 PM   
BillBrown


Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline
FoW, I love it and hate it. I had CV Enterprise take 2 torpedoes from Bettys, thought she was a goner, but when I opened the turn file, she had 2 float damage and 6 sys damage.
My opponent crowed about sinking her, until she sank his amphip TF.

(in reply to btd64)
Post #: 11
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/6/2020 1:20:20 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14684
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
If it's precision you want ...




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Currently fighting for the Emperor against AW1Steve. As of 6/21 it is 7/45.

(in reply to BillBrown)
Post #: 12
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/6/2020 3:06:28 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6544
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: alanschu

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Who said 3 Bettys were hit.  It could jus as easily have been a single Betty hit three times.  Nor who said 8 fighters intercepted.  Even the Combat Report informs you that at most only 2 fighters intercepted.

Not only does the Combat Report provide some ambiguous information it is also subject to FOW.  Nonetheless a close reading of it provides useful information but watching the Combat Animation is indispensable if you want to know the full picture of what happened.

Alfred

The CR does say three Betties were destroyed. Usually AA destruction is specified separately, so it seems reasonable to expect that interception and shoot-down occurred. FOW may change the numbers involved, but it looks like something along that line happened.


What exactly do you think FOW means.

3 Betties destroyed could just as easily be only 1 Betty destroyed claimed by multiple pilots who may, or may not have been engaged in shooting at the Betties. The Combat Reports do not necessarily tie in with the end of turn aggregated aircraft loss tally. TheElf (the air team development leader) was always at pains to state that there simply was no substitute to watching the Combat Animation to see what actually happened.

Alfred

PS: As you have pointed out, the kills could have all been on the egress. IOW the number of reported kills doesn't really indicate whether the attack run was interrupted and therefore reduced the impact of the strike. Again why the Combat Animation has to be watched.


This is part of my inquiry... is it possible that the number of planes in the report is actually wrong?

People are getting a bit too hung up on the CAP and its effectiveness and in retrospect I shouldn't have bothered commenting on it. I was actually surprised that 17 different ships were able to be hit by 7 planes.

Part of my inquiry is because I'm super rusty, and didn't think that this was possible, but may be misremembering something that maybe only applies to ships at sea (only possible for 1 attack/1 bomb) - which BBfanboy did point out that there as 42 bombs that were dropped.

Is it safe to assume that what I remembered about combat resolution was actually wrong? Or are there differences between attacking ships at port and attacking ships at sea (which is probably entirely reasonable). My question is more about trying to better understand/reacquaint myself with how some of the game mechanics work.


The easy answer is that it is basically the same mechanics involved in attacking ships whether they be in port or at sea. The detection levels, and how they are achieved, can aid one type of attack over another. In very general terms, you will probably have better detection on anchored ships and that will aid the bombers in distributing their bombs.

As to the number of aircraft involved, that is usually close to the mark. What the combat report doesn't tell accurately is how they performed in combat or at what stage in the combat did they participate. The FOW is primarily achieved by providing ambiguous data.

You will have to be more specific in what is your understanding of combat resolution.

Alfred

(in reply to alanschu)
Post #: 13
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/6/2020 3:56:43 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9742
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
As has been said by Alfred, and many others, if you want/need to understand an air combat then you must watch the air combat animation. LoBaron was one who spent quite a bit of time looking into from the players perspective and he was adamant. And of course, the dev The Elf has said the same thing. Without the animation, you are speculating a great deal.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 14
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/6/2020 2:08:56 PM   
ETF


Posts: 1734
Joined: 9/16/2004
From: Hamilton Area, Canada
Status: offline
No way to turn on the animation in a PBEM game if it was off at the beginnning correct?

_____________________________

My Top Matrix Games 1) CMO MP?? 2) WITP/AE 3) SOW 4) Combat Mission 5) Armor Brigade

Twitter
https://twitter.com/TacticWargamer

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 15
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/27/2020 9:49:25 PM   
alanschu

 

Posts: 405
Joined: 12/21/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

As has been said by Alfred, and many others, if you want/need to understand an air combat then you must watch the air combat animation. LoBaron was one who spent quite a bit of time looking into from the players perspective and he was adamant. And of course, the dev The Elf has said the same thing. Without the animation, you are speculating a great deal.


That's fair. I'm often don't just for time considerations and I typically only play against the AI (and usually as Allies as I grew up loving the US WW2 warships). I also kind of "like" just hearing about the report and taking into account my estimated hits without too many details. This thread has been interesting is that, while I understood the casualty numbers could be imperfect, I didn't realize that multiple kills could be referring to the same plane which is interesting. Would seem that this could also extend to the naval casualty estimates as well.

About to start my first PBEM game and I'll probably want to watch those ones.

Though it does mean that I don't *know* how many of the 17 shell hits are .50 MG fire (interestingly, in this game I allegedly sunk an AKL with a PT boat MG) or 16" shells.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 16
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/27/2020 10:49:16 PM   
inqistor


Posts: 1813
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
If there is enough ships in port, and planes carry several bombs, you will see that hit rate. In fact, 4Es tends to have over 100% hit rate during port attacks, routinely. Although that result is extremely good.

Under "Aircraft Attacking" you will see how many planes actually attacked. If some were destroyed before attack, or retreated because of low morale, you will see lower number, than reported approaching.

(in reply to alanschu)
Post #: 17
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/28/2020 12:11:34 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14684
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ETF

No way to turn on the animation in a PBEM game if it was off at the beginnning correct?


That's up to each player and you can change that at any time, before you load the turn.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Currently fighting for the Emperor against AW1Steve. As of 6/21 it is 7/45.

(in reply to ETF)
Post #: 18
RE: Imperfect intel on attacking flights? - 1/28/2020 1:56:17 AM   
alanschu

 

Posts: 405
Joined: 12/21/2006
Status: offline
Yeah, you can also set it in the preferences page from the game screen (bottom panel on the right).

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 19
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Imperfect intel on attacking flights? 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

0.320