Counter-Bombardments

Post bug reports and ask for help with other issues here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

Counter-Bombardments

Post by witpqs »

Michael,

For your consideration. This is an example of something we've seen before in this PBM and I know it's been seen in others. The defending Japanese on Iwo Jima are hard up against it to be sure. They get bombed by clouds of bombers all day after being bombarded from the sea all night. Under cover of the bombing two fresh Allied divisions land. Allied troops ashore deliberate attack in support of the auto-shock attack. None of that is remarkable. What stands out is that the Japanese forces made an auto-bombardment, which is also normal, but the Allied counter-battery fire disabled or destroyed almost two hundred Japanese squads. The guns lost makes sense, but the squads lost makes this seem like a "nuclear" counter-bombardment! [:D]

I'm attaching a save game (prior to turn resolution) just in case there is something amiss with the counter-battery routine.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Iwo-jima (108,77)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 11723 troops, 71 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 322

Defending force 47524 troops, 883 guns, 617 vehicles, Assault Value = 1083

Japanese ground losses:
1152 casualties reported
Squads: 34 destroyed, 143 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 6 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 2 disabled
Guns lost 21 (2 destroyed, 19 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
11 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
65th Brigade
7th Ind.Mixed Brigade
Iwo-jima Naval Guard Unit
71st Field AA Battalion
69th Field AA Battalion
7th Air Division
26th Special Base Force

Defending units:
33rd Infantry Division
3rd Marine Division
1st Marine Division
24th Infantry Division
763rd Tank Battalion
XI US Corps
225th Field Artillery Battalion
198th Field Artillery Battalion
33rd Medium Regiment


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Iwo-jima (108,77)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 44809 troops, 883 guns, 617 vehicles, Assault Value = 1083

Defending force 14415 troops, 215 guns, 35 vehicles, Assault Value = 165

Allied adjusted assault: 1315

Japanese adjusted defense: 91

Allied assault odds: 14 to 1 (fort level 5)

Allied forces CAPTURE Iwo-jima !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), disruption(-)
Attacker: shock(+), disruption(-)

Japanese ground losses:
1523 casualties reported
Squads: 60 destroyed, 59 disabled
Non Combat: 38 destroyed, 24 disabled
Engineers: 31 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 101 (90 destroyed, 11 disabled)
Vehicles lost 33 (33 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units destroyed 1

Allied ground losses:
4094 casualties reported
Squads: 171 destroyed, 70 disabled
Non Combat: 29 destroyed, 12 disabled
Engineers: 9 destroyed, 11 disabled
Guns lost 50 (28 destroyed, 22 disabled)
Vehicles lost 22 (13 destroyed, 9 disabled)

Assaulting units:
1st Marine Division
33rd Infantry Division
3rd Marine Division
24th Infantry Division
763rd Tank Battalion
XI US Corps
198th Field Artillery Battalion
225th Field Artillery Battalion
33rd Medium Regiment

Defending units:
7th Ind.Mixed Brigade
65th Brigade
Iwo-jima Naval Guard Unit
69th Field AA Battalion
71st Field AA Battalion
7th Air Division
26th Special Base Force


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachments
19440502wpae015.zip
(3.72 MiB) Downloaded 17 times
User avatar
LoBaron
Posts: 4775
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

RE: Counter-Bombardments

Post by LoBaron »

Remember this post and ff?
ORIGINAL: Symon

Gosh, I really feel the pain, here.[8D] No .. I really do. This has been tweaked often - the last time was michaelm did something in 1123x6 on 03/05/2014. You would not believe how involved the routines are: there's naval bombardment, CD bombardment and counter fire, arty bombardment, defensive counter-battery, bombs, rockets, Woof !! And you can have Bombardment Attacks and defensive counter-battery, and bombardment in the initial phases of Deliberate or Shock assaults, and defensive counter fire phases, and ... well, you get the idea.

There's a gazillion opportunities for something to go 'worng'. And fixing one bug might (will) dig up 3 or 4 others - implications, and all that.

Wdolson and I are aware of all this and are looking at ways and means by which we can consult with michaelm and get this stuff rewritten in a more compact and rational manner. Please be aware that Bill and I have no official status where the game code is concerned, so we cannot offer any definitive comfort level on this issue. But I do believe that Bill and I have a history of "gettin her done" where it really matters.

I am asking ya'll to take it easy, don't go overboard, accept some bizarre outliers, restart every turn from desktop, be righteous with your memory use, and have FAITH.

JWE

I agree with you that there are some situations a bit out of whack, some more some less - I think in your case at least you also got some real 'nucular' arty in place so one could live with it although I would expect less casualties with level 5 forts. But anyways as John explained addressing one situation from a routine perspective without negatively influencing others seems to be very difficult.

What I always wondered though is if it is possible in certain situations to disable auto-bombardment until a tweak justifies reactivation. I find it easily exploitable and difficult to control by the defender.
Image
Andav
Posts: 487
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 7:48 pm

RE: Counter-Bombardments

Post by Andav »

What I always wondered though is if it is possible in certain situations to disable auto-bombardment until a tweak justifies reactivation. I find it easily exploitable and difficult to control by the defender.


Having the option to disable auto bombardment would be VERY nice.

As the former owner of Iwo in this example, I think the island would have fallen to the shock attack anyway but it might have cost a bit more. Supplies were in good shape but disruption would have been very high with all the night naval bombardments combined with all of the air attacks. I guess my Fort Level 5 caves were not deep enough.

Wa
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Counter-Bombardments

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Remember this post and ff?
ORIGINAL: Symon

Gosh, I really feel the pain, here.[8D] No .. I really do. This has been tweaked often - the last time was michaelm did something in 1123x6 on 03/05/2014. You would not believe how involved the routines are: there's naval bombardment, CD bombardment and counter fire, arty bombardment, defensive counter-battery, bombs, rockets, Woof !! And you can have Bombardment Attacks and defensive counter-battery, and bombardment in the initial phases of Deliberate or Shock assaults, and defensive counter fire phases, and ... well, you get the idea.

There's a gazillion opportunities for something to go 'worng'. And fixing one bug might (will) dig up 3 or 4 others - implications, and all that.

Wdolson and I are aware of all this and are looking at ways and means by which we can consult with michaelm and get this stuff rewritten in a more compact and rational manner. Please be aware that Bill and I have no official status where the game code is concerned, so we cannot offer any definitive comfort level on this issue. But I do believe that Bill and I have a history of "gettin her done" where it really matters.

I am asking ya'll to take it easy, don't go overboard, accept some bizarre outliers, restart every turn from desktop, be righteous with your memory use, and have FAITH.

JWE

I agree with you that there are some situations a bit out of whack, some more some less - I think in your case at least you also got some real 'nucular' arty in place so one could live with it although I would expect less casualties with level 5 forts. But anyways as John explained addressing one situation from a routine perspective without negatively influencing others seems to be very difficult.

What I always wondered though is if it is possible in certain situations to disable auto-bombardment until a tweak justifies reactivation. I find it easily exploitable and difficult to control by the defender.
Yeah, I do remember it but I didn't specifically look for that thread before I posted. I understand and basically accept it, I just figure that Michael might eventually be able to key on something that won't have the unwanted side effects. The real issue in dealing with the code for this is probably what is buried in the core of the older code where it's more difficult to cut & re-solder without nipping adjacent parts.
User avatar
Puhis
Posts: 1741
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:14 pm
Location: Finland

RE: Counter-Bombardments

Post by Puhis »

If there's going to be auto-bombardment anyway, why not bring some heavy guns to defend the base? That's what I do, my key bases sure have 1-3 heavy gun regiments firing landing troops.

This doesn't fix the issue, but at least heavy guns do some damage and cause disruption. Those infantry units usually have only 75 mm crap guns.
Post Reply

Return to “Tech Support”