Needs a Patch

[Ike99]

I´ve been running some test to compare the night fighting abilities of the Allies against the Japanese. What I find pretty much proves the game is in serious need of another patch....

In this first test I set up the 1st battle of Savo Island with the editor using the exact ships and commanders involved and fought the battle over and over....

What you will find by doing this is the Allies will 9/10 times best the Japanese. The Allies will almost every time out shell hit the Japanese by a 2-1 margin and the Japanese will on average score less than, that is LESS THAN 2 torpedo hits per battle and sometimes none. At most an EXTREMELY rare 3.

Most times with just one Long Lance torpedo hitting a ship.

Out of all the times I´ve ran this battle only one ship, the sole Japanese destroyer has been sunk.

Now this is with Japanese ships with night EXP in the 80´s and 90´s and Tanaka with a surface rating of 87 going against Allied ships with surface ratings in the 30´s and 40´s and Allied Commander Crutchley with a surface rating of 45!

No way is this even slightly close to the historical outcome of this engagement, that being a victory for the Japanese. No matter how many times I run this battle I can not even slightly approach the historical outcome of this battle.

The Long Lance torpedo is modeled far, far, FAR, FAR

FAR

...too inaccurate and needs to have its accuracy rating adjusted beyond any doubt. It is simply not accurate enough to be of any decisive use, even when being used by the best Japanese ships with the best commanders going against the worst of the Allies.

There were four major battles around Savo Island and the historical record speaks for itself. In the battle of Tassafaronga between Savo and Guadalcanal, 8 Japanese destroyers took on 5, that´s right, FIVE Allied cruisers and sunk one cruiser and severely damaged 3 others so bad they were out for 9 months. Done with the Long Lance.

I don´t have to set this last battle up and test this one because I know what will happen in the game. The Allied cruisers will turn the Japanese destroyers to flaming scrap metal inside of 3 seconds and even if the Japanese destroyers do get a Long Lance attack off to start the battle everyone will miss or at most they will score one hit and then be turned into flaming scrap metal inside 3 seconds.

The game needs a Long Lance accuracy patch because the in game night fighting capabilities of the Japanese do not even come close to reflecting their historical capabilities with the Long Lance.

This inaccuracy of the Long Lance ruins the whole
interesting situation that existed for quite sometime in this theatre where the sea control changed every 12 hours depending on if it was daylight or dark.

There is no point in having great night fighting EXP ships and surface leaders if they can´t hit anything with the Long Lance.

Needs patched Mr. Mike Wood.

[DuckofTindalos]

Yeah, too bad he's busy with other things...[8|]

[Ike99]

Yeah, too bad he's busy with other things...

Then let someone else do it.

[ILCK]

Yeah the Allied ships seem to win surface battles way too often and with stunning disparity in hits and losses.

[RGIJN]

Agree utmost! The surface battle engine lacks many improvements. There is nothing I need to add to ILCKs statement.

just: PATCH IT!

[tocaff]

My guess would be that this a a reflection of radar and the advantage it gives, especially later in the war when the USN figured out that the lead ship, not trailing should have it!  

[decaro]

I agree that gunnery radar is a great equalizer to the superior IJN night fighting abilities, but shouldn't that technology figure later in the conflict, i.e., Leyte Gulf, not Savo Island.

I've noticed many IJN night torpedo attacks at distances way too long for the Long Lance, essentially wasting these torpedoes and the turn.

It's doubtful Wood will be producing a patch for UV anytime soon, esp w/CF still in development, but can anything be tweaked in the editor to correct this situation at the player, not programmer, level? Or is the problem related to the surface combat algorithm for getting "surprised"?

[Ike99]

I agree that gunnery radar is a great equalizer to the superior IJN night fighting abilities, but shouldn't that technology figure later in the conflict, i.e., Leyte Gulf, not Savo Island.

I've noticed many IJN night torpedo attacks at distances way too long for the Long Lance, essentially wasting these torpedoes and the turn.

It's doubtful Wood will be producing a patch for UV anytime soon, esp w/CF still in development, but can anything be tweaked in the editor to correct this situation at the player, not programmer, level? Or is the problem related to the surface combat algorithm for getting "surprised"?

I´m looking into this now Joe. I know for WITP they have this ¨NIK¨ mod & ¨that¨ mod that everyone seems to use to make the game better.

I think we need a ¨Long Lance Mod¨ as this weapon is grossly inaccurate.

Using the editor I´m taking the Long Lance armed ships, tripling the number of launchers and ammo they have and running battles to see what happens.

It looks promising so far. [;)]

[tocaff]

Ike,

Why couldn't this thing be addressed in CF and grafted to UV as things from WITP have been in the past? 

[decaro]

Hopefully CF will prove to be the next set of "patches" for UV, but that remains to be seen.

In the mean time, increasing the IJN's torpedoes won't do much good if they still launch out of range; besides, the IJN always carried more than enough of these fish, so numbers probably isn't the answer, although I can't think of what else you can do w/just the UV editor.

It might be helpful to know how the WitP mods work; maybe I'll take a chance a post a query on their forum.

[ILCK]

The problem is that it seems that these night battles are long range affairs rather than close quarter melees. What needs to change are the enagement ranges. My last 3 surface battles opened at:

23,000 yards
18,000 yards
17,000 yards

No wonder torpedoes don't do anything.

[tocaff]

Come to think of it I've had PBEMs where the Japanese won almost every surface engagement, even when they were outgunned.  

[decaro]

Not even the Long Lance will be effective at those ranges -- I think the range has to be under 10,000 for a chance at a descent hit.

Against the AI I've experienced variable night distances, some close enough -- 2,000 yards or so -- for the ships to trade AAA fire!

I wonder if there's a problem w/PBEM play vs. the AI, as I've seen much shorter night distances under the latter w/much beter results for the IJN's LLs. What's that saying: on-line game experience may be different?

[Ike99]

Come to think of it I've had PBEMs where the Japanese won almost every surface engagement, even when they were outgunned.

No you haven´t. I´ve ran enough battles to know. If you want let´s set up such a battle in the editor and replay it over and over and over and post the results.

The Japanese will be butchered. Especially if US BB´s are involved. Those 16inch guns don´t miss very often and when they hit they spit the cruisers wide open and except for the Yamato class they go right through the other lightly armored Japanese battleships.

Not even the Long Lance will be effective at those ranges -- I think the range has to be under 10,000 for a chance at a descent hit.

Against the AI I've experienced variable night distances, some close enough -- 2,000 yards or so -- for the ships to trade AAA fire!

I wonder if there's a problem w/PBEM play vs. the AI, as I've seen much shorter night distances under the latter w/much beter results for the IJN's LLs. What's that saying: on-line game experience may be different?

The Long Lance torpedo is simply not even near accurate enough at any range to be even be close to reality. Period.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

... The Long Lance torpedo is simply not even near accurate enough at any range to be even be close to reality. Period.

Ike, I've experienced numerous night surface engagements vs. the AI at close range near the 'Canal where a LL attack would get good hits on several of my capital ships, despite my destroyer screen. These capital ships were either sunk, scuttled, or limped home where they were immediately sent to PH.

However, I haven't had any surface engagements under PBEM worth speaking of.

[Ike99]

Ike, I've experienced numerous night surface engagements vs. the AI at close range near the 'Canal where a LL attack would get good hits on several of my capital ships, despite my destroyer screen. These capital ships were either sunk, scuttled, or limped home where they were immediately sent to PH.

However, I haven't had any surface engagements under PBEM worth speaking of.

Pick your ships Joe and I´ll set it up in the editor and we´ll run the battle 10 times by PBEM and post the results.

I know what will happen.

[tocaff]

Ike,

How can you tell me what I've had happen in games?  Are you all seeing?  Are you all knowledgeable?  Climb off your high horse and ask Lopo about a game that he and I had.  I believe that he didn't win a single naval engagement in the game, both air and surface.  Remind him that it was the one that I won in 7/43 by auto victory.  Or won't you believe that?

[Ike99]

Ike,

How can you tell me what I've had happen in games? Are you all seeing? Are you all knowledgeable?

Pick your ships Todd and I´ll set the battle up in PBEM and we´ll run it 10 times and we´ll post the results.

Yes, I do know what I´m talking about.

[tocaff]

I know you are knowledgeable about the technical aspects of UV and it's workings, but don't tell me what happened in games that occurred that you know nothing of.  I have no desire to have another PBEM with you as a test, but thanks for the offer anyhow.  I'm not saying that there aren't things that need remodeling, maybe a change in the range of release point of torps would be a good start and a better reflection of command structure or lack thereof.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Ike, I've experienced numerous night surface engagements vs. the AI at close range near the 'Canal where a LL attack would get good hits on several of my capital ships, despite my destroyer screen. These capital ships were either sunk, scuttled, or limped home where they were immediately sent to PH.

However, I haven't had any surface engagements under PBEM worth speaking of.

Pick your ships Joe and I´ll set it up in the editor and we´ll run the battle 10 times by PBEM and post the results.

I know what will happen.

How about a "real world" UV test? Are you familiar w/Eastern Solomons (Scenario #2)?

The AI sends the TK Express down the slot, where I would have a surface fleet w/Lee waiting off shore. We can run this PBEM on historical, hard (and is there a very hard?) and you can post the results of the inevitable night surface action. This is where I experienced most of my surface combat/LL attacks at close range.

You can pick your most aggresive commanders and mix and match your bombardment fleet ships, as I do w/the Allies, forming a surface fleet out of a CV escort that should be in place near the 'Canal in just a few turns.

What do you think?