How to Pearl Harbour ?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

How to Pearl Harbour ?

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 >> How to Pearl Harbour ?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

How to Pearl Harbour ? - 2/4/2021 7:33:30 PM

Cohen_slith

Posts: 2552
Joined: 10/5/2010
From: Italy
Status: offline

Greetings,

I've cycled through a rinse repeat of Pearl Harbour (once economics have got the best of me for the time being), and noticed the Japanese do relatively little to the USA fleet, do nothing to the USA airfields (at least compared to the historical results), and get shanked.

I've gone through a few runs of 'Historical Turn 1' (easy in single player to just skip everything with ESC!), I've just adjusted KB orders myself a few times - but it seems the results are quite pro-Allies in general. At -best- 3 BBs and 1-2 other ships are sunk, that by putting all the bombers on the port, and leaving the airfield unmolested barring Zeros (which are quite useless for that unless they maybe strafe, and get butchered by AA...).

I've seen in AARs that some players go for fancy attacks like Manila strike for submarines or even Sidney / Melbourne shipping strike ... but there are no 'historical comparison' of outcome there to weight the fine tuning.

So how you players handle Pearl Harbour with the 'surprise' effect turned on, from the Japanese side, assuming your KB will go there. (You can alter the parameters of the planes - which for instance have some Vals set to naval search and so they're not there for the main show I feel).

Post #: 1

RE: How to Pearl Harbour ? - 2/4/2021 8:35:04 PM

RhinoDad

Posts: 219
Joined: 12/22/2020
Status: offline

Not sure on game design decisions, but would suggest that it is a game abstraction for realistic results.

My thoughts are the Pearl Harbour attack results in less ships sunk in WitP AE than historically, to account for the relatively shallow harbor. Only the USS Oklahoma, USS West Virginia, and USS Arizona were actually sunk do to damage. USS California was just prematurely abandoned and had no reason to sink. USS Nevada was beached. The U.S. was able to refloat and repair all but USS Oklahoma, and USS Arizona. USS Oklahoma was refloated and could have been repaired but it was decided that it was less costly to just scrap it and rebuild if necessary. Historically only one lost was the Arizona. Sometimes the game will result in a sunk Battleship but my experience is that it does not happen that often. But a magazine hit, as on the Arizona, is not that common either.

They did not have the personnel at Pearl to effect the repairs in harbour but the facilities did allow for refloating. So you end up in game with more damage but less sunk than historically. Ships needing to be sent to west coast for repairs and refit before available ready on west coast. Just like historically, you will have the battleships repaired refitted and ready for use on the west coast months to year(s) later.

In the game you will need to do some repairs in Pearl and then ship them to the west coast after they are repaired enough to make the trip safely in order to regain their use. Depending on the outcome that can take numerous months to well over a year before your ships are repaired and upgraded. Resulting in something close to what it was historically; both in the near and longer term.

If the ships are sunk in the game as in the actual battle then you would not be able to repair as was done historically. The predecessor WitP did sink the ships and as the allied player was left with far fewer battleships than was historical, even after a few years.

The game does not allow you to deploy torpedo nets on ships in harbor or to use submarine nets at harbour entrances as they did or were supposed to do, but did not always follow protocol.

< Message edited by RhinoDad -- 2/4/2021 8:45:57 PM >

_____________________________

Improvise, Adapt and Overcome

Success is how you bounce on the bottom

Experience is a comb life gives us after we have lost our hair

(in reply to Cohen_slith)

Post #: 2

RE: How to Pearl Harbour ? - 2/4/2021 10:00:35 PM

mind_messing

Posts: 3055
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cohen_slith

Greetings,

I've cycled through a rinse repeat of Pearl Harbour (once economics have got the best of me for the time being), and noticed the Japanese do relatively little to the USA fleet, do nothing to the USA airfields (at least compared to the historical results), and get shanked.

I've gone through a few runs of 'Historical Turn 1' (easy in single player to just skip everything with ESC!), I've just adjusted KB orders myself a few times - but it seems the results are quite pro-Allies in general. At -best- 3 BBs and 1-2 other ships are sunk, that by putting all the bombers on the port, and leaving the airfield unmolested barring Zeros (which are quite useless for that unless they maybe strafe, and get butchered by AA...).

That's why there's a December 8th scenario.

On a Dec 7th turn, the results can be fairly random. I've seen results that are fairly light on the Allies, and complete wipeouts.

quote:

I've seen in AARs that some players go for fancy attacks like Manila strike for submarines or even Sidney / Melbourne shipping strike ... but there are no 'historical comparison' of outcome there to weight the fine tuning.

As a side note, on fine tuning, the reason that Utah isn't in WitP is that it ended up taking too many bombs at Pearl Harbour and skewing the results.

quote:

So how you players handle Pearl Harbour with the 'surprise' effect turned on, from the Japanese side, assuming your KB will go there. (You can alter the parameters of the planes - which for instance have some Vals set to naval search and so they're not there for the main show I feel).

A worthwhile consideration is having the fighters join in on the naval attack too, flying with their 60kg hand grenades at 7k feet or so. The 60s won't kill battleships or cruisers, but they will start fires, put the hurt on smaller ships and add to the general disorder.

(in reply to Cohen_slith)

Post #: 3

RE: How to Pearl Harbour ? - 2/5/2021 2:39:10 AM

spence

Posts: 5342
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline

quote:

I've cycled through a rinse repeat of Pearl Harbour (once economics have got the best of me for the time being), and noticed the Japanese do relatively little to the USA fleet, do nothing to the USA airfields (at least compared to the historical results), and get shanked.

In the actual attack on Pearl Harbor a total of 18 ships sustained some damage. 200 odd aircraft were destroyed/damaged. I've never seen the Japanese damage significantly fewer than 30 ships nor destroy damage less than 200 odd aircraft. The airfield has always been significantly damaged for the next week or so.

Yamamoto's objective was to sink at least one battleship as a means to demoralize the US at the start of hostilities. They sank the USS Arizona with an AP bomb/shell which has obscured the fact that the majority of AP bomb/shells actually were duds/low order detonations that did almost no significant damage to their targets (the 3 inboard BBs) although total number of hits was exactly the number predicted. They also sank USS Oklahoma, USS West Virginia, USS Nevada and USS California although the shallowness of the harbor meant most of them would ultimately be repaired and return to service (a SHORT war was Japan's only hope and their principle guiding light as they planned the operation and they kinda blew that on Dec 7th, 1941).

Frankly you need to read a bit of actual history about the attack.

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 4

RE: How to Pearl Harbour ? - 2/5/2021 7:13:12 AM

Ambassador

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline

In a big number of campaigns, I�ve had results ranging from 0 to 6 battleships sunk, and rarely did I get more than 2 battleships untouched (and more often none at all). As spence says, most of the ��historical�sinking�� were ephemeral. The game engine doesn�t have the ability to refloat a ship sunk in shallow waters, but for all purpose and effect, a ship with very high damage at anchor in a base, while it won�t ��sink��, can be considered to have done so, and the repairs to actually be the process to refloat it.

In real history, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Maryland were all three ready for service in early �42, and Nevada by the end of �42. The last two, West Virginia and California, were only returned to service in mid- and early-44 respectively, so two to two-and-a-half years after the attack which ��sank�� them.

In ��game terms��, one could consider the Oklahoma did not sink, but suffer from 99/99/99 major damage, which would have taken the duration of the war to repair (hence the ��economic loss��, like a car wrecked in an accident, which could be repaired but whose repair costs would be higher than buying a new one).

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 5

RE: How to Pearl Harbour ? - 2/5/2021 8:45:17 AM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9237
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: online

Dec 7th attack can be frustrating to IJ player, but sometimes very rewarding. I play exclusively Allied vs. AI and I don't think I have ever had PH attack to do even equal to historical damage. This suggests that default attack orders are sub-optimal. Some players have achieved better results and some even had done multi-day attacks.

But as mentioned, there is also Dec 8th scenario.

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von B�lov, 1870-

(in reply to Ambassador)

Post #: 6

RE: How to Pearl Harbour ? - 2/5/2021 9:09:42 AM

RhinoDad

Posts: 219
Joined: 12/22/2020
Status: offline

quote:

The last two, West Virginia and California, were only returned to service in mid- and early-44 respectively, so two to two-and-a-half years after the attack which ��sank�� them.

The WeeVee and California only took so long because of torpedo damage which would need more intensive repair in Pearl before moving to the west coast. With more damage than others they moved towards the end of the queue.

Pearl did not have the skilled manpower to enact the repairs the yard facilities were capable of and so repairs of torpedo damage were slower than later as skilled labor was imported. So ships were repaired enough to ship them to the west coast yards where they had skilled labor to work on them.

California only suffered two torpedoes and near bomb hit that caused leakage. It also suffered one bomb hit that destroyed the radio shack and its gedunk bar.

Once back in the west coast yards a good deal of "repair" time of all the battleships was not repair but a refit. The navy took the opportunity while in the yard to refit the ships.

In the game this pretty much happens if you click on upgrade for the battleships undergoing repair. The game is quite good at getting the ships upgraded and repaired along a historical timeframe.

< Message edited by RhinoDad -- 2/5/2021 9:30:16 AM >

_____________________________

Improvise, Adapt and Overcome

Success is how you bounce on the bottom

Experience is a comb life gives us after we have lost our hair

(in reply to Ambassador)

Post #: 7

RE: How to Pearl Harbour ? - 2/5/2021 11:04:35 AM

ITAKLinus

Posts: 485
Joined: 2/22/2018
From: Italy
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

In a big number of campaigns, I�ve had results ranging from 0 to 6 battleships sunk, and rarely did I get more than 2 battleships untouched (and more often none at all). As spence says, most of the ��historical�sinking�� were ephemeral. The game engine doesn�t have the ability to refloat a ship sunk in shallow waters, but for all purpose and effect, a ship with very high damage at anchor in a base, while it won�t ��sink��, can be considered to have done so, and the repairs to actually be the process to refloat it.

In real history, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Maryland were all three ready for service in early �42, and Nevada by the end of �42. The last two, West Virginia and California, were only returned to service in mid- and early-44 respectively, so two to two-and-a-half years after the attack which ��sank�� them.

In ��game terms��, one could consider the Oklahoma did not sink, but suffer from 99/99/99 major damage, which would have taken the duration of the war to repair (hence the ��economic loss��, like a car wrecked in an accident, which could be repaired but whose repair costs would be higher than buying a new one).

In all of my PBEMs, I bombed PH only once since I am a Manila-boy. Still, I have been on the receiving end and I would say that PH bombing is quite well-modeled in terms of ship sinkings.

Your BBs do not get actually sunk, rather damaged enough to align them to the historical situation, where they have been raised from shallow waters.

I think this is an elegant solution to the absence of the entire "refloating a sunk ship" game mechanism.

In terms of destroyed planes, I have always seen sub-par results, but it is probably due to the fact that many (most?) players prefer to strike harder the ships and lighter the airfield.

Broadly speaking, I would say that I would personally prefer to bomb PH instead of Manila if I would somehow be allowed to decide the priority targets for my planes. Given that the game is as it is (and it's historically accurate in this), you are stuck with BBs as priority target and you end up badly damaging them and keeping them out of war for X months.

NOTE. Sinking big ships in big harbours is quite a tricky business everywhere at every possible moment of the game. I had poured dozens of big bombs (800Kgs from Kates) to the Repulse in Colombo and it sunk after a looong series of strikes over few weeks.

< Message edited by ITAKLinus -- 2/5/2021 11:05:59 AM >

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to Ambassador)

Post #: 8