Dutch AVP Arend: Scenario 1 Exploits

[Ambassador]

Like I said a couple of days ago…

Regarding ships, the ability to appoint a given leader only depends on the following criteria’s :
- the leader is active : some are active starting 411206, others arrive during the war. You can see the dates for the historical non-random leaders in the editor
- the leader has the appropriate nationality
- the leader is defined as a « Ship » leader (you can also see nationality & category in the editor)
- the leader has an appropriate rank

For example, you can’t assign a captain (CPT) to a destroyer or a patrol gunboat. IIRC tonnage has no bearing, but type of the ship is everything, so you may appoint a CPT to a cruiser or most cargo/transport types, like an xAK, but not to a DD or a submarine. Likewise, you can’t have a rear admiral command a task force which only has destroyers in it, and in order to have a full admiral (ADM), you need at least 3 or 4 capital ships (BB/CV)*.

Rank matters, there is no such thing as a « pool » of commanders tied to a given subset of ships. Nationality, type of leader (ships), rank.

I believe I’m exhaustive (for the Allied side at least) with the following :
- Carriers, battleships & cruisers, civilian transports (xAP, xAK/xAKL, TK) : CPT only
- DD, large tenders (AE, AS, AD, AV, AR, ARD, AKE), submarines : CDR/LCDR
- DE, APD, small tenders(AVD/AVP, AG, AGP), AMC, navalized transports (AP/APA/LSI, AK/AKA, AKV, AO), most mine warfare (CM, DM, DMS), LSD/LSV : LT/LCDR
- AKL, CMc, AM, most patrols (PG, PF, KV, PC, SC, PT, MGB/MTB), large landing crafts (LST, LSM) : LT/LTJG
- Landing crafts (LCI & variants, LCT, LSM(R), LCS(L)) : ENS/LTJG
- ACM, YMS, AMc, YP, HDML (harbor ships in fact), barges (LCM/LCVP) : ENS

Tonnage does not matter, and there are weird things (like xAK having CPT, while AK/AKA have LT/LCDR, difference AO/TK).

For the Japanese, if I remember correctly (I rarely play the IJ), it’s the same. IIRC TB & E go with the DE (not sure on the E), and PB with the other patrols.

Off course, the editor may be used to assign any type of leader to any type of ship, but if you make a change in-game, it follows the above guidelines.

[WEXF]

[/quote]
Rank matters, there is no such thing as a « pool » of commanders tied to a given subset of ships. Nationality, type of leader (ships), rank.
[/quote]

I really want to thank you for this. I get it now.
Here's how I am reading your post.
For any nationality there are "pools" of ship leaders based on rank and certain ranks can command certain ships. When a ship commander is replaced he goes back into the "pool" of his rank.
I also noticed in the Editor that navy commanders are designated as "Ship" or "Task Force" and that these different designations create different "pools".
This is a big new understanding of the game for me.
WEXF

[Ambassador]

That’s it, mostly, except the « pools » are not really groups, but every leader is individually checked.

For example, there is not a pool of commanders for « DD, large tenders (AE, AS, AD, AV, AR, ARD, AKE), submarines » even though they share the same requirements (LCDR or CDR), as the same LCDR might be named on one of there or one among the next category (DE, etc).

A better way to look at it is an excel file : each line corresponds to a leader and has columns for the name, date of availability, nationality, rank, type, skills, etc, and a column « already assigned ». When you want to assign a leader to a ship, the game presents you a list of leaders by using different filters for the availability, nationality, rank, type and « already assigned » column.
For example, if you want to assign a new commander to USS Houston at start, it’ll use the filters « USN », « ship », « CPT », « available at this date », « unassigned », and show you all potential leaders corresponding to this selection. And if you want a new leader for USS Paul Jones, it’ll select « CDR OR LCDR » for the rank column. Enzovoort.

[WEXF]

I get it. Thanks again. I have been looking all through the lists of leaders.
I'm not sure if the ground and air leaders work exactly the same way, but I believe I have a good grasp for the naval guys.
WEXF

[Ambassador]

Ground leaders have an added complexity, in that you have « small units » and « large units » leaders, as well as HQ leaders.

[WEXF]

As the sun came up on 29Apr LCDR Gorek was expecting a pretty quiet day where he hoped he would be updated on the status of the repair on Arend. He quickly realized that the day would not be as he planned. He, and the other officers in Perth, were called to a meeting where some intel was to be shared.
When the meeting started details were shared on a recent report received from the Dutch submarine KXVI. 4 torpedoes had been fired at the Japanese CL Kuma near Kangean, located 240 miles east of Soerabaja and 160 miles west of Makassar. One of the torpedoes hit the light cruiser. No degree of damage could be assessed by the sub commander. (The combat animations showed "belt armor penetration", "listing/counter flooding" and "damage to engines".)
While it is unlikely that the torpedo would have caused the CL to sink, it is hoped that it would be forced to head for the safety of a ship yard, perhaps at a reduced speed. The nearest SY would be Singapore, almost 900 miles away. The trip could take at least a week during which CL Kuma would be vulnerable to additional attacks.
CL Kuma was part of a TF that contained at least 2 CL and 5 DD. Three of the 5 DD attempted to locate or attack the sub but none were successful.
With CL Kuma damaged, the rest of the TF is likely to abort their mission and provide escort for Kuma to reach safety. DD Uzuki and DD Shirayuki took part in the attempted attack on the sub confirming previous intel that they had been upgraded with ASW armaments they did not have earlier.
The consensus of opinion of the intel officers is that this TF was providing cover for the Japanese landing on and taking Denpasar, with its AF3 about 200 miles rom the Australian coast.

CLKuma.jpg (123.03 KiB) Viewed 1024 times

[RangerJoe]

Actually, 1 DD would join the damaged CL in an escort mission and the rest would continue on their merry way . . .

[WEXF]

Actually, 1 DD would join the damaged CL in an escort mission and the rest would continue on their merry way . . .

I agree that the "game" would only assign a single DD to escort the CL. My comment was more on what the Japanese commander would do after he saw the results. Since CL Kuma was likely the flagship of the TF, maybe the commander of the TF would abort. No way to know, my comment was only a "hopeful suggestion".

[RangerJoe]

Actually, 1 DD would join the damaged CL in an escort mission and the rest would continue on their merry way . . .

I agree that the "game" would only assign a single DD to escort the CL. My comment was more on what the Japanese commander would do after he saw the results. Since CL Kuma was likely the flagship of the TF, maybe the commander of the TF would abort. No way to know, my comment was only a "hopeful suggestion".

It also depends upon "when" in the turn the ship was damaged and how fast the TF was going, among other things, as to how far away the rest of the TF is. So the rest of the TF rejoining the Escort TF may not be the best thing. Also, a human may direct the Escort TF to a close base to "dewater" the CL and possibly repair other damage.

[Ambassador]

Torpedoes have a very high damage variability, so Kuma might have anywhere from 1 to 30-40 major damage. The good thing is that KXVI has 53.3cm torpedoes IIRC, and those are powerful (around 20-25% more Effect and Penetration than Mk14), so it might be quite high.
The bad is that Jintsu would have been a better target (she has type 93 torpedoes - Long Lances -, while Kuma-class only have the older type 92).

[WEXF]

Torpedoes have a very high damage variability, so Kuma might have anywhere from 1 to 30-40 major damage. The good thing is that KXVI has 53.3cm torpedoes IIRC, and those are powerful (around 20-25% more Effect and Penetration than Mk14), so it might be quite high.
The bad is that Jintsu would have been a better target (she has type 93 torpedoes - Long Lances -, while Kuma-class only have the older type 92).

Thanks for all this. Crazy question I have is whether the location of the torpedo hit on the combat animation has any significance? I know the animations and the report are FOW variables but I was wondering about this.
I also hope that there was some engine damage that slowed Kuma down. Time will tell.

[RangerJoe]

While there is Fog Of War, the combat animation comments sound good for you. It depends upon things that you would see in a movie but not in the game, the sonar reports as well as if the submarine Captain was looking at the target when the torpedo hit and exploded.

[WEXF]

To be sure, the intel on the enemy TF was the main discussion point between the officers at Perth, but Goerk was concerned about the status of his ship and the others being repaired. He was able to find out that quite a bit of progress had been made.
Arend had reduced flotation damage from 49>48 and was showing RP 19(46%)=41.3. His ship had received 26 RP this turn. Pretty good!
He also learned that 2 of the ML had been fully repaired and returned to service while the 3rd needed another day of work. It was interesting to him that the ML data showed RP21(80%)=26.3 RP needed to repair 1 point of damage. It made sense as the ML was only 86 tons. (not shown in screen)

A429a.jpg (159.53 KiB) Viewed 972 times

S-39 was still being repaired with the assistance of the repair ships and strangely it was now showing that it would take 3 more days to complete the work. System damage had been eliminated and the 2 major engine damage remained. The numbers on S-39 were RP 7(14%)=50 RP needed for next damage point repairs. In total it looks like S-39 only received 8.4 RP last turn. Perhaps the reason is that all of the 2 system damage was repaired on S-38 and that sub had been returned to service.

S39429a.jpg (118.44 KiB) Viewed 970 times

O23 had also done very well this turn. System damage had been reduced from 29>24 after O23 had received a total of 314.5 RP. She was now showing RP37(67%)=55.2.

O23429a.jpg (115.66 KiB) Viewed 968 times

After stopping in at the communications office Goerk was happy to get a message that the TF bringing his aircraft had unloaded 500 tons of supply and should complete the unloading process in about a week. The pilots were continuing to train on "naval search" and PO Caruthers has improved that skill another point from 48>49.

It was time to head for the officers club and see what other scuttlebutt he could pick up over some drinks.

pilots429a.jpg (52.91 KiB) Viewed 967 times

[BBfanboy]

The location of the hit on animation is purely random, but I am pretty sure the damage messages (listing/counterflooding/engines) is accurate. Since fast ship use most of their engine power to get to their max speed, a hit that damages the ship's engines 50% might only slow it by 25% of its max speed. The additional slowing from water shipped aboard is another issue and I am not sure how the AI calculates that.

[WEXF]

The location of the hit on animation is purely random, but I am pretty sure the damage messages (listing/counterflooding/engines) is accurate. Since fast ship use most of their engine power to get to their max speed, a hit that damages the ship's engines 50% might only slow it by 25% of its max speed. The additional slowing from water shipped aboard is another issue and I am not sure how the AI calculates that.

Thanks for the info on the random hit location on the animation. I am trying to understand which inputs are worth focusing on. I noticed that the hit on the CL was in the stern and was thinking that might have a bigger impact on engine damage. IRL I can imagine a sub commander watching the action through a periscope would think that way.

[BBfanboy]

The location of the hit on animation is purely random, but I am pretty sure the damage messages (listing/counterflooding/engines) is accurate. Since fast ship use most of their engine power to get to their max speed, a hit that damages the ship's engines 50% might only slow it by 25% of its max speed. The additional slowing from water shipped aboard is another issue and I am not sure how the AI calculates that.

Thanks for the info on the random hit location on the animation. I am trying to understand which inputs are worth focusing on. I noticed that the hit on the CL was in the stern and was thinking that might have a bigger impact on engine damage. IRL I can imagine a sub commander watching the action through a periscope would think that way.

I asked that question soon after the game came out. Either Alfred or one of the developers explained that they had to keep the code compact to be able to sell the game to people with limited storage and processing power at the time (and probably because of time limitations for the monstrous coding job overall). So the decision was made just to make the animations a bit of "eye candy" rather than try and show exactly what transpired.

[RangerJoe]

The location of the hit on animation is purely random, but I am pretty sure the damage messages (listing/counterflooding/engines) is accurate. Since fast ship use most of their engine power to get to their max speed, a hit that damages the ship's engines 50% might only slow it by 25% of its max speed. The additional slowing from water shipped aboard is another issue and I am not sure how the AI calculates that.

Thanks for the info on the random hit location on the animation. I am trying to understand which inputs are worth focusing on. I noticed that the hit on the CL was in the stern and was thinking that might have a bigger impact on engine damage. IRL I can imagine a sub commander watching the action through a periscope would think that way.

I asked that question soon after the game came out. Either Alfred or one of the developers explained that they had to keep the code compact to be able to sell the game to people with limited storage and processing power at the time (and probably because of time limitations for the monstrous coding job overall). So the decision was made just to make the animations a bit of "eye candy" rather than try and show exactly what transpired.

Not just the people's limited storage and processing power but also the computers limited storage and processing power!

[WEXF]

LCDR Gorek sat down for a drink with the commander of S-39 and they talked about all of the different ships arriving at Perth needing various degrees of repair. They both had noticed that the British DD Paladin had reached port with 7 system and 2 engine damage. What was interesting to the two officers was that DD Paladin was not going to be repaired at Perth. Paladin was scheduled to be withdrawn from the region in about 6 weeks and Naval Command was not going to utilize repair capabilities needed locally on her. Instead she was going to escort a small convoy moving supplies to an isolated port as she headed for a destination where she could meet the requirements of withdrawing.

Paladina.jpg (163.87 KiB) Viewed 920 times

This AAR is serving as a learning vehicle for me on the mechanics of WITP-AE. Perth is currently a P(6) and, I believe, is not one of the locations where ships can be withdrawn. I know that National Home Bases and Off Map Bases are OK. I also remember seeing a forum post that said that level 7 ports also work in Australia and on the east coast of the US. I am planning to increase Perth to its max size of P7 but I am not expecting that to be done in the next 6 weeks so Paladin needs to move. I do not want to pay the PP for a late withdrawal.
In the upper left of the screen shot it shows the Day/Night Crew Experience of Paladin as 72/55. Pretty nice! I checked the Editor to see the listing for DD Paladin's crew and I learned something. It lists the experience as 0/0.

paleditora.jpg (89.98 KiB) Viewed 917 times

I then looked at the Editor Manual and found that there is a table and a series of formulas that determine what the actual crew experience will be in any given game. For Paladin the base number is in the table on the lower left DD65. The Day Rating is 65 + a random number from 0-10. That comes out as 65-75. In my game it is 72.
The Night Rating is a bit more complicated. It is a percentage of the base number 65 + 1-10. The manual does not tell you the percentage but does tell you that depending on the year the ship enters active duty the percentage increases. I did a little math and I think the percentage for a ship entering when Paladin does the percentage has to be around 70-80% for the Night Experience to be 55.

extaba.jpg (264.82 KiB) Viewed 916 times

I also looked at the commander of DD Paladin to see if it was wise to exchange him for a lesser experienced officer. A change could be made but I decided not to make it as DD Paladin does return to the region later in the war (Dec43).

[WEXF]

The two officers reviewed the progress that had been made in repairing all of the ships in Perth last turn, looking most closely at those on S-38 and S-39 being repaired with the assistance of the relevant "Repair Ships".
The only repair ships that are relevant are the AS and AR. Only the AR can repair "major" damage and that was done previously on S-38. Going into this last day of repairs S-38 had only 2 system damage, S-39 had 1 system and 2 "major" engine damage.
It looks like the "repair manager" directed the RP from both tenders to remove all of the system damage from both subs with any remaining RP from the AR being directed to start work on the major engine damage on S-39.
As the next turn evolves, only the AR will be able to provide repairs to S-39. That should be a maximum of 83RP. Since around 47RP are needed for each point of damage the 3 days shown may not be that far off.

S39429a.jpg (118.44 KiB) Viewed 894 times

We'll see what happens.

[BBfanboy]

I looked at Wikipedia for info on the RL S-38 and S-39. It gives a good insight into the mechanical and crew problems of these boats that limited their usefulness. For example, an S-38 crewman removing a valve cover while in port resulted in flooding of the motor room on S-38. Later improperly vented battery caused an explosion that sent the boat to shipyard repairs.
The war started badly for S-38 too - it sank Norwegian freighter Hydra II around the Philippines on Dec.11, 1941. I suppose coordination between Allies was not really a thing yet!
S-38's major accomplishments were the sinking of IJN transports Hayo Maru in Lingayen Gulf and Meiyo Maru off Cape St. George. And did you know there is a whirlpool and rapids in Lombok Strait (SE end of Java I think) that makes navigating there tricky?

S-39 had worse luck, only succeeding in sinking medium sized tanker Erimo near Timor in March 1942. The rest was a series of mechanical problems, crew illnesses and dodging depth charges until she grounded on rocks off Rossel Island in August 1942. Efforts to get her off failed and she was abandoned there to break up. One has to marvel at the men manning these boats for their perseverance and effort amid little reward.