1000 mile war - liberating the Aleutians

[Energisteron]

Day 22 - May 06

Despite the severe weather 4 raids target Kiska, only to find the defenders have their airfield operational again.

However our losses are light; 5 bombers damaged for 5 Japanese fighters destroyed. The target is slightly damaged and it seems we destroy another SSX in port.

The bombardment TFs continue towards Attu undetected in the heavy seas. The 2x Infantry Regiments have completed loading at Dutch Harbor but we need available escorts before they can proceed to Attu.

Since enemy subs have been spotted around Attu in the last 48 hrs, the ASW TFs are re-jigged; those at Kiska go to Attu; those at Adak go to Kiska, and 2xDD escorts from the supply convoys are put on ASW patrol at Adak.

[BBfanboy]

Sending groups of DDs hunting subs is good when you have lots of ASW vessels, but don't strip the DDs needed to escort convoys and TFs.
IRL the Allies quickly discovered that when there was a shortage of escorts it was better to keep them with the convoys and let the subs come to them.
Hunter/Killer groups only got successful when air search and SIGINT revealed the sub locations.

[Energisteron]

Day 23 - May 07

The situation before operations on May 07, 1943.

Bombardment of Attu expected tonight. ASW patrol has gone ahead of capital ships to check for mines and subs around Attu.

Attu amphibious invasion TF sets out from Dutch Harbor. Due to a shortage of escorts the CVE Nassau sails with the invasion TF supported by 2xCA and escorted by 5xDD, and 2xDMS (minesweeper destroyers).

Air raids on Kiska will continue.

[Energisteron]

I have a problem!

My two bombarding TF went in on Attu overnight. The results for the BB TF were slightly disappointing, but I got no result at all for the CA TF, just a notification that they had bombarded the target.

BUT, at the end of the turn BOTH of these TF have disappeared! They're not on the map and not listed on the TF listing!

I have re-run the turn from the pre-turn auto-save and obtained exactly the same results (presumably, and sensibly, the pre-turn save also stores a ready list of random rolls? Thereby guaranteeing the same outcome) as regards air-raids and bombardments. Unfortunately, the TF disappear again. And just in case the AI has some sort of super-weapon they're not listed as sunk either!

Now, as I reported in my first playthrough, a 'ghost TF' appeared on the top edge of the map a few turns ago. This cannot be clicked on or controlled in any way.

After that last turn two more have appeared a few hexes west of the ghost. Could these be my missing TF? And we're nowhere near Bermuda!

If anyone has any ideas on how to fix this or has experienced it before (even if you've not found a solution) then I'd much appreciate your feedback. Thanks in advance.

[Will_L]

I started the scenario to take a look at that situation and sent the 2 CL's and 6 DD's to bombard Attu from Dutch Harbor and
exactly the same thing happened, TF ended up on a north edge half hex and was neither clickable or listed in TF screen anymore.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Energisteron

I have a problem!

My two bombarding TF went in on Attu overnight. The results for the BB TF were slightly disappointing, but I got no result at all for the CA TF, just a notification that they had bombarded the target.

BUT, at the end of the turn BOTH of these TF have disappeared! They're not on the map and not listed on the TF listing!

I have re-run the turn from the pre-turn auto-save and obtained exactly the same results (presumably, and sensibly, the pre-turn save also stores a ready list of random rolls? Thereby guaranteeing the same outcome) as regards air-raids and bombardments. Unfortunately, the TF disappear again. And just in case the AI has some sort of super-weapon they're not listed as sunk either!

Now, as I reported in my first playthrough, a 'ghost TF' appeared on the top edge of the map a few turns ago. This cannot be clicked on or controlled in any way.

After that last turn two more have appeared a few hexes west of the ghost. Could these be my missing TF? And we're nowhere near Bermuda!

If anyone has any ideas on how to fix this or has experienced it before (even if you've not found a solution) then I'd much appreciate your feedback. Thanks in advance.

Start by looking at the TFs in the pre-turn save - what routing instructions did they have? What was the home port? What was the threat tolerance?
The most like culprit is a TF commander "retreating from air threat" (I think this message flashes briefly on screen and may be recorded in the ops report. Make sure the routing instructions say "Direct/Absolute" and do not use way points with fuelling (the latter causes some routing anomalies in the GC).

If you are not happy about the TF Commander and there is an equivalent ship that could take over command, swap out the latter ship to another TF and then bring it back in to take over command.

[Will_L]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: Energisteron

I have a problem!

My two bombarding TF went in on Attu overnight. The results for the BB TF were slightly disappointing, but I got no result at all for the CA TF, just a notification that they had bombarded the target.

BUT, at the end of the turn BOTH of these TF have disappeared! They're not on the map and not listed on the TF listing!

I have re-run the turn from the pre-turn auto-save and obtained exactly the same results (presumably, and sensibly, the pre-turn save also stores a ready list of random rolls? Thereby guaranteeing the same outcome) as regards air-raids and bombardments. Unfortunately, the TF disappear again. And just in case the AI has some sort of super-weapon they're not listed as sunk either!

Now, as I reported in my first playthrough, a 'ghost TF' appeared on the top edge of the map a few turns ago. This cannot be clicked on or controlled in any way.

After that last turn two more have appeared a few hexes west of the ghost. Could these be my missing TF? And we're nowhere near Bermuda!

If anyone has any ideas on how to fix this or has experienced it before (even if you've not found a solution) then I'd much appreciate your feedback. Thanks in advance.

Start by looking at the TFs in the pre-turn save - what routing instructions did they have? What was the home port? What was the threat tolerance?
The most like culprit is a TF commander "retreating from air threat" (I think this message flashes briefly on screen and may be recorded in the ops report. Make sure the routing instructions say "Direct/Absolute" and do not use way points with fuelling (the latter causes some routing anomalies in the GC).

If you are not happy about the TF Commander and there is an equivalent ship that could take over command, swap out the latter ship to another TF and then bring it back in to take over command.

Hi BB,
When I did it the TF positioned itself NW of Dutch Harbor 10 hexes away from Attu Isl. with home port of Dutch Harbor
(also loaded save and changed that to Adak and TF ended in same map edge partial hex), routing was unchanged
from initial setting when formed, bombardment range was set to 10k, TF commander was captain of one of the CL's. Both times
the TF bombarded. I'll do it again in the morning with the settings you mentioned.

[Energisteron]

Thanks for your help, WRLertola and BBfanboy.

What seems likely is that the actual bombardment of Attu and the disappearance of the TF are linked to the appearance of the 2 new ghost TF in the same hex on the northern mapedge.

I have been operating SS and DD in the Attu hex without ill effect (they've come and gone freely) and in my previous game on 3 occasions I bombarded the Attu Island hex without incident. (See page 5, Game 1 : Day 51 onwards)

BBF, I did think of the reaction to threat possibility (reaction is set to 4 hexes) but the TF went in at night, no surface or sub contacts were reported and there has seemed to be precious little air threat on Attu itself. Also, the map-edge is more then 4 hexes away from Attu, although only just and a reaction outbound from Attu could have kicked them 'off map'?

Before, I try your more complex solutions, I'm going to try switching both incoming TF to surface combat from bombardment to isolate that it is the act of bombardment that causes the problem.

[Energisteron]

Interesting.

I restarted from the pre-turn auto-save, cancelled all orders except for the incoming CL TF (the third in line) and changed the mission of the 2 TF (BB and CA) from bombardment to surface combat only (i.e. no bombardment).

Result : BB TF is delayed (presumably not rushing as not dashing in for a night bombardment) and is still on the map just north of Attu at the beginning of the next turn. BUT the CA TF does go through the Attu hex and promptly (by daylight pulse) ends up stuck on the north map-edge.

Since the CL bombardment TF is about to hit Attu next, I run the next turn with no further changes.

Result : Both the BB and CL TF end up on the northern map edge! One new ghost TF symbol appears in the middle of a line of three and it identifies as 2xTF, presumably the 2 that have gone AWOL this turn.

Incidentally the CL TF had a reaction set to zero hexes!

[Energisteron]

BBfanboy

For the two BB and CA bombarding TFs:-

Routing instructions : Normal, no refuelling

Threat tolerance : Normal

Reaction : 4 hexes

Bombard range : minimum 0

Home port : Dutch Harbor

Re-test 1: So, restarting the pre-turn auto-save again, I now change routing to direct, threat tolerance to absolute, and reaction to zero hexes. Remember I've changed their mission to surface combat from bombardment also!

That's better! Both TF pass through Attu Island hex (I presume so since because nothing happens this not actually shown) and emerge returning to Dutch Harbor unscathed and entirely still under my control.

Re-test 2 : Now I will try the same but re-set the CA TF mission to bombardment, leaving the BB mission to surface combat.

Excellent! CA TF bombards Attu (and I get a result reported this time) and both the CA and BB TF are on the map returning to Dutch Harbor at the end of the turn.

Re-test 3 : Now, both the BB and CA TF will bombard with routing at direct, threat at absolute, and reaction at zero. Minimum bombardment range is 1 for BBs (seems cannot be 0) and 0 for CAs.

Even more excellent! Both TF bombard immediately after each other on the same night and emerge on their way back home in the morning.

Now I will continue to the subsequent day and allow the third bombardment TF, the CLs, to go in to Attu and bombard without changing its settings (route normal, threat normal, reaction zero, bombard range 0).

And, of course, it disappears! It would appear to become part of the original ghost TF symbol which now lists 2 TF present.


So, what's happened? What's the solution?

It would seem the jump to the map-edge is NOT dependent on the TF making a bombardment nor is it dependent on the reaction setting. It does seem to be dependent on the TF traversing the Attu hex and on the routing and / or threat tolerance settings.

As a precaution I will set all bombarding TF to direct routing and absolute threat tolerance on the turn they go into the attack. This really should not be necessary but I don't want any more glitches!

[tarkalak]

May be the plotted the return leg away from Kiska and through the north of the map. This is controlled by the treat and routing configuration.

Look at your Routing set up and try making it "Direct" and "Absolute". This one on the bottom of the routing screen.

The reaction range comes in if your task force is using a patrol order or it has retirement allowed. If your ASW DDs have Destination set and Remain on station, they will not react. If they have a patrol order with a single hex, then I think they will sit in it, but not run away from planes.

[Energisteron]

Hi tarkalak

Thanks. As you will see, I have tried changing the routing settings and it works!

I came to the conclusion that reaction settings were not relevant because the CL TF had a reaction setting of zero yet it still disappeared. However, I could easily be wrong because its routing and threat tolerance were both normal, and of course, for the successful bombardments by the BB and CA TFs I had set reaction to zero.

I did not report it here but my first test was to set patrol zones for the BB and CA just west of Attu and avoiding actually entering its hex. Sure enough they stayed on the map but one of them had a most peculiar friendly AI route setting for its patrol (which was triangular 2 hexes apart) wherein there was a huge detour between two of the waypoints which were only 2 hexes apart. I can only assume that during daylight the TF was very wary of air attack from Attu even though no significant threat has been discovered on Recon.

[Energisteron]

OK, hopefully I'm back in business!

In my next gaming session I'll re-start the scenario from the May 07 auto-save, changing the bombardment TFs routing as above, and continue as before.

Incidentally, from Recon the greatest naval threat based on Attu is the presence of coastal batteries, up to a hundred guns, but these would hardly justify a detour of 160 nautical miles!

[Energisteron]

OK, let's get this bedevilled turn out of the way!

Day 23 - May 07

Both the bombarding TFs attack Attu Island during the night. Results are satisfactory and we sustain no hits despite defensive fire from coastal batteries. The capital ships are well on their way back to Dutch Harbor by dawn.

Behind these lead TF, another bombarding TF (2xCL 1xDD) is expected to hit the same target tomorrow night.

The amphibious invasion force follows in the track of the bombarding TFs.

Air raids against Kika continue all day, and once again no enemy fighters are sent up to oppose our bombers or fighter sweeps. With bad weather continuing and with all raids attacking at 10k ft or higher, results are disappointing, although minor damage is inflicted on the target. We have 5 bombers damaged but no outright losses.

Subsequent Recon shows Kiska airfield is in bad shape (92% damaged) but Attu is hardly scratched.

[Energisteron]

Day 24 - May 08

Terrible weather suspends all air operations. The pilots probably deserved a break in any case.

The 2xCL TF does attack Attu but bad visibility hampers the bombardment and the CL Richmond breaks off after expending only 25% of its ammunition.

Although the troops are certainly throwing up in buckets, the invasion TF has not been detected and proceeds towards Attu Island without incident.



*INCIDENTALLY - I forgot to change the routing instructions for the bombarding TF (Normal x2, Reaction zero) yet it sailed straight into Attu bombarded and left without disappearing. Strange but, thanks!

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Energisteron

BBfanboy

For the two BB and CA bombarding TFs:-

Routing instructions : Normal, no refuelling

Threat tolerance : Normal

Reaction : 4 hexes

Bombard range : minimum 0

Home port : Dutch Harbor

Re-test 1: So, restarting the pre-turn auto-save again, I now change routing to direct, threat tolerance to absolute, and reaction to zero hexes. Remember I've changed their mission to surface combat from bombardment also!

That's better! Both TF pass through Attu Island hex (I presume so since because nothing happens this not actually shown) and emerge returning to Dutch Harbor unscathed and entirely still under my control.

Re-test 2 : Now I will try the same but re-set the CA TF mission to bombardment, leaving the BB mission to surface combat.

Excellent! CA TF bombards Attu (and I get a result reported this time) and both the CA and BB TF are on the map returning to Dutch Harbor at the end of the turn.

Re-test 3 : Now, both the BB and CA TF will bombard with routing at direct, threat at absolute, and reaction at zero. Minimum bombardment range is 1 for BBs (seems cannot be 0) and 0 for CAs.

Even more excellent! Both TF bombard immediately after each other on the same night and emerge on their way back home in the morning.

Now I will continue to the subsequent day and allow the third bombardment TF, the CLs, to go in to Attu and bombard without changing its settings (route normal, threat normal, reaction zero, bombard range 0).

And, of course, it disappears! It would appear to become part of the original ghost TF symbol which now lists 2 TF present.


So, what's happened? What's the solution?

It would seem the jump to the map-edge is NOT dependent on the TF making a bombardment nor is it dependent on the reaction setting. It does seem to be dependent on the TF traversing the Attu hex and on the routing and / or threat tolerance settings.

As a precaution I will set all bombarding TF to direct routing and absolute threat tolerance on the turn they go into the attack. This really should not be necessary but I don't want any more glitches!

The key part of my previous advice was setting the set tolerance and routing to Direct/Absolute!
It does not matter that it is night or that you have no direct indication of air threat, the AI knows about air threats, including if it has Bettys at PJ set to naval attack and it will cause your TFs to flee. Given the proximity of the map edge they seem to be choosing to flee in that direction rather than back to their base.

Always set bombardment TFs to "Direct/Absolute" to keep them on course. If you don't, sometimes the AI reacts to a sub threat a hex or so away and makes a wide loop around it, causing your TF to use up its movement points too soon. I don't think this happens in PBEM games but the AI knows too much in games against it. You can test this a little by picking a location with a known threat and routing a TF close to that threat to a point beyond, then play with the threat tolerance and see what the routing does.

[Energisteron]

Hi BBfanboy

Thanks again. Indeed that's what I did in the end and I'm now progressing normally.

I now realise that the original ghost TF was in fact my missing 2xCL 1xDD (TF02) but we'll assume they were suddenly called away somewhere unexpectedly!

[Energisteron]

Day 25 - May 09

Amphibious Invasion TF nears Attu.

Here's the Naval Situation as planned.

[Energisteron]

Day 25 - May 09

Air operations will benefit from the addition of CVE Nassau's 27x Wildcats and 8x Spotter planes aboard 2xCA.

Here's the Air Operations situation

[Aurorus]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


The key part of my previous advice was setting the set tolerance and routing to Direct/Absolute!
It does not matter that it is night or that you have no direct indication of air threat, the AI knows about air threats, including if it has Bettys at PJ set to naval attack and it will cause your TFs to flee. Given the proximity of the map edge they seem to be choosing to flee in that direction rather than back to their base.

Always set bombardment TFs to "Direct/Absolute" to keep them on course. If you don't, sometimes the AI reacts to a sub threat a hex or so away and makes a wide loop around it, causing your TF to use up its movement points too soon. I don't think this happens in PBEM games but the AI knows too much in games against it. You can test this a little by picking a location with a known threat and routing a TF close to that threat to a point beyond, then play with the threat tolerance and see what the routing does.

These sorts of things can happen in a PBEM. Known and unknown submarine threats can cause a TF for change its course. Control of the air also impacts TF movement. Oftentimes, with a low aggression commander, for example, a bombardment TF will fail to approach its target. It is my understanding that a key variable is set in the "Calculate Air Superiority" phase. If your side does not have "air superiority" in a theater, your less aggressive commanders (if not set to "absolute"), both air and naval, will be more skittish. I may be mistaken somewhat on this point, but it seems to hold true in either PBEM or against the AI.