Dissapointed in IJN Night Combat

[BK6583]

"The latest patch shows me that Bombing PM with 36 bombers and 115 fighters on escort with ZERO fatigue and CLEAR weather
opposed by 21 enemy fighters of various types will at BEST
give me 1:1 losses. "

Are we talking about the same game? I had [mistakenly it turns out] close to 120 P39's and P40's at PM - all well rested with plenty of support and supplies. I was feeling pretty good until my opponent hit me with about 140 Zeros and about 50 bombers. Most of my fighters flew up to meet this strike. I never knew what hit me! Must have lost close to 50 planes as opposed to about 6 (yes, count 'em, SIX) Zeros destroyed. PM's airbase is hopelessly damaged so my fighters seem basically doomed to total destruction. As for Lae, certainly if I had based my two engine bombers at PM I might in retrospect have been able to perhaps bomb its airfield, but now I'm glad I didn't - I hadn't realized how helpless you be rendered when you airbase is bombed into the stone age.

[mogami]

Originally posted by Chiteng
If and when the USN can mass 6 CV into one hex the IJN is screwed (and i don't have a problem with this, the poor allied player has to face these monster TF's sooner and longer. If Allied player has achived this ability he has already won some where without it.
****************************************************
I would argue that he simply has not lost. You have time
to take it all back. You dont need PM to win. Its just easier if
you have it.

In fact I dont see a reason to 'need' anything except SWpac
to win. Just find some islands build lots of big useless bases
and you win.

My point was Mogami, the Jap player CANT shut out the Allied
players Airstrikes, and the Allied player CAN.

If the allies just build large useless bases the Japanese have plenty of rear Islands to do the same.

The allies can not shut out Japanese airstrikes. The Japanese player just has to use a little sense. If you send a daylight raid to a target and it gets hurt by allied CAP what is next thing to do?
(piling alot of airgroups into one base is a good way to lose alot of airgroups)

[Chiteng]

Dont be absurd. Trying to outbuild the allies is an exercise in futility. Especially if you 'rotate' depleted formations back to Truk.
The entire game depends on the EIGHT construction units the
Japs get. Wasting them trying to outbuild the Seebees is insane.

My answer to 'what do we do now' is 'dont attack it with airstrikes'

I assume your hinting at night airstrikes or some such nonsence.
The results are too varied. It isnt dependable.

[Pawlock]

Originally posted by Chiteng

I assume your hinting at night airstrikes or some such nonsence.
The results are too varied. It isnt dependable.

You really hav'nt got the gist of this game or what its about have you? If your after a game that produces accurate hitorical results consistantly your wasting your time here.

I'll think you'll find in Real life War as well as game nothing is guarenteed, yes you can tip the odds in your favour by knowledge and experience but alas no guarentees. There are plenty of games out there where such odds are fixed and you know if A attacks B then A will win every time because it is better, but this is UV and the designers programmed the game for the kind of uncertainty and unpredictability within reason of course.

Perhaps I sound harsh, well maybe , but you keep harping on about this and that everything must but either Black OR White in your opinion there can be no middle ground. Again unfortunatly for you UV works on a shades of grey, and fortuantly for the likes of me I enjoy that aspect.

Enjoy the game and accept it for what it is, not what it is'nt.

[Admiral DadMan]

It's just too bad that UV didn't have Lexington and Saratoga keep their 4 pairs of 8" guns and take those puppies into battle...

Alas, Lexington took hers to the bottom of the Coral Sea, and Saratoga donated hers as shore batteries to Pearl Harbor in Jan 42.

What does this have to do with this discussion? Not much, I just wanted a non-sequitor...

[Chiteng]

No I think I will voice my opinion as often as I like.

Your assumptions as to my motives are no more than assumptions. You cannot read my mind.

Mogami tries to present himself as the 'Grand Strategist' of the board. The man with all the good answers.

All 'I' see are 'HIS' answers. To assume there are no other answers, plays right into his hands.

I have quoted him repeatedly to prove my point,

If they game doesnt simulate reality, then it is simply a GAME.
No better than Checkers.

You can be as harsh as you like. It will not effect me in any way.

[mdiehl]

Heh the tyranny of Democracy. I agree it IS unlikely that any simulations will ever be 'perfect' as far as my opinion of it.

All I can do is state my objections and reasoning. It is very hard
to make a purist happy.

A purist at bs anyhow. You say the system is broke because it hasn't generated any lopsided victories, but you're not interested in the causes. All you want is a protracted unrealistic happy time interval to favor one side, without regard to history.

If the USN player doesn't duplicate the circumstances of Savo (extreme fatigue from essentially 2 *days* at action stations, combined with mission creep guarding two landing locations at the same time while also providing fire supprt, combined with an inaccurate scouting report, combined with the absence of other scouting info [under normal circumstances an afternoon search would have found the IJN TF]) led to Savo. The absence of each of these reduces the probability that IJN will attempt a Savo like encounter (about 2 in 12, counting T'frnga, for 1942), and the absence of all of them should deterministically prevent the result that Chiten craves.

[Pawlock]

this is what you really need:

http://www.navyjobs.com/join_now.jsp


Cant get more real than that !!!

Your assumptions as to my motives are no more than assumptions. You cannot read my mind.

My assumptions are based on what you've written before, unless you care to deny what you have written I will make assumptions based on this.

I have quoted him repeatedly to prove my point,

How does constantly repeating someone prove your point?

If they game doesnt simulate reality, then it is simply a GAME.

See above link, but glad you brought it up though because damm I though it was real life .

[Chiteng]

Below is an example of what is actually typical for a night action.
The Jap commander was Tanaka. The allied player had no edge,
and yet there is no doubt at all that he won. The Mutsu accomplished nothing. The Takao sank the next day.


AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/19/42

Night Time Surface Combat, near Lunga at 38,40

Japanese Ships
BB Mutsu, Shell hits 3
CA Takao, Shell hits 16, on fire, heavy damage
CA Atago, Shell hits 2
CA Chokai, Shell hits 5
CA Aoba, Shell hits 6, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CA Furutaka, Shell hits 4
CA Kako, Shell hits 2
CL Jintsu, Shell hits 4
DD Yugumo, Shell hits 6, on fire
DD Urakaze
DD Tanikaze, Shell hits 2, on fire
DD Oshio, Shell hits 1
DD Michishio, Shell hits 2
DD Arashio, Shell hits 2

Allied Ships
CA Chicago, Shell hits 6
CA Pensacola
CA San Francisco
CA Australia
CL Leander, Shell hits 1
DD Wilkes, Shell hits 1
DD Monssen
DD Hughes
DD Mustin, Shell hits 2, on fire
DD O'Brien
DD Walke, Shell hits 1
DD Craven
DD Cummings
DD Farragut, Shell hits 1
DD Monaghan, Shell hits 2, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage

[mdiehl]

As a matter of curiousity, how often has UV generated a *daylight* surface action?

It almost never happened in PW, even though many of these historically occurred in the Malay barrier/Indonesian barrier area, and late in the war, and were entirely *possible* around the Solomons or near Port Moresby.

By the way, I see nothing wrong with the AAR sample that Chiteng just posted. Its within the range of historical results.

[Chiteng]

Well you two may be satisfied with playing a enhanced game of checkers, but you are not the designers, and I suspect they attempted more than that.

I do not ask for a determined result. I ask for a simulation of reality. For example: You could kludge the first fight, that would be the MOST simple solution.

You continued attempts to disparage clearly show your bias.
I do not for example tell YOU to shut up and go away.
Your lack of courtesy does you little credit.

The 'facts' are that early unpreparedness COULD be simulated,
and indeed IS simulated is several games. Just not this one.

[Chiteng]

By the way, I see nothing wrong with the AAR sample that Chiteng just posted. Its within the range of historical results.
****************************************************
At least what Mdiehl accepts as what HE expects historical results to be. Yes Mdiehl, I am certain that you DONT find anything wrong
with that battle. The statement speaks for itself.

[mogami]

Hi, As already noted the next patch has changes for surface combat. If the IJN suprises the USN every IJN ship fires torpedos before any shooting starts. I did not see if the above combat report was an IJN suprise or not. Had the IJN TF been spotted during the day? (Having Mutsu in TF meant the TF speed was 25k (If Mutsu at 100 percent) This means it could not use the run in undetected as well as a 30k TF could have.
Also missing are the range combat began, moved to and ended at.
The IJN did fire torpedos (and score hits)

Not a very good battle for IJN but aside from UV just being broke what other factors could have produced the result.

Tanaka is a good leader who was in commnad of USN TF?
could IJN damage control versus USN damage control be also contributing to result?

[Chiteng]

Hi, As already noted the next patch has changes for surface combat. If the IJN suprises the USN every IJN ship fires torpedos before any shooting starts.
****************************************************
How hard is it to achieve surprise?


****************************************************
I did not see if the above combat report was an IJN suprise or not.
****************************************************
I dont know, I dont watch the battles takes too much time.

****************************************************
Had the IJN TF been spotted during the day? (Having Mutsu in TF meant the TF speed was 25k (If Mutsu at 100 percent) This means it could not use the run in undetected as well as a 30k TF could have.
****************************************************
I am sure it was spotted, it left from Shortlands. However
the USN force was ALSO spotted, clearly visible on multiple
recon reports.


****************************************************
Also missing are the range combat began, moved to and ended at.
The IJN did fire torpedos (and score hits)

Not a very good battle for IJN but aside from UV just being broke what other factors could have produced the result.

Tanaka is a good leader who was in commnad of USN TF?
could IJN damage control versus USN damage control be also contributing to result?
****************************************************
Truthfully I dont know, I assume it was Lee, but that is a guess.
In most of my battles vs the Computer the Computer uses Lee.

I can only pay better attention next time =)
But as I said, the result is typical for what I see with night battles.
So it wont be hard to replicate.

[Sonny]

Originally posted by denisonh
..............

(except when Sonny sent an IJN DD with 23 sys damage against 7 PT boats and it got sunk).

....................

Hey, what you didn't mention was that there were no reported hits on any of the PT boats - and that of the 31 hits on the DD approx.25-29 of them came from ONE boat!.

But I found out how to fight thoses PT boats 'cause the next turn one of my barges got one!:D