Surface Combat Sux

[Nikademus]

I ran similar tests a long time ago. My findings are generally similar to the thread originator. In general comprable sized or larger sized transport TF's will escape with only light or at best moderate losses regardless of circumstances. Primary reason for this is that the engine treats Surface TF vs Transport TF 'as' Surface vs Surface. i.e. they exchange a few rounds of fire, then mutually break off.

An exception can be when a large surface TF engages a small transport TF...under those circumstances you can achieve a large degree of damage vs the TF.

Based on my test findings, the recommendation i forwarded (and currently on the wish list) is that it be made that surface TF vs transport TF be made more aggressive to simulate a commander's realization that he has in a sense, "hit the jackpot" and realizes he has achieved the goal of breaking through to a vulnerable transport fleet, instead of treating said TF as a combat TF with comprable firepower (and a chance to sig damage you in return)

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Same test ... better weather.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat at 61,74

Japanese Ships
AK Hakkai Maru, Shell hits 32, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage (sunk immediately after)
AK Hakodate Maru, Shell hits 2
AK Hakonesan Maru, Shell hits 42, and is sunk
AK Hakubasan Maru, Shell hits 8, on fire, heavy damage (88/42/30)

Allied Ships
CA Minneapolis
CL Cleveland
CL Montpelier
DD Anthony
DD Aulick
DD Charles Ausburne
DD Charles Badger
DD Beale
DD Bell

Again, my advice is to change your test criteria according to my suggestion above.

For what it's worth I haven't had one of these engagements yet in WitP so I've no particular ax to grind here. But I can't imagine people fabricating their results--what would be the point? Soooo . . . I remain with food for thought and doubt re the WitP naval model. It sure seems to be performing no better then it did in UV.

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

I ran similar tests a long time ago. My findings are generally similar to the thread originator. In general comprable sized or larger sized transport TF's will escape with only light or at best moderate losses regardless of circumstances. Primary reason for this is that the engine treats Surface TF vs Transport TF 'as' Surface vs Surface. i.e. they exchange a few rounds of fire, then mutually break off.

An exception can be when a large surface TF engages a small transport TF...under those circumstances you can achieve a large degree of damage vs the TF.

Based on my test findings, the recommendation i forwarded (and currently on the wish list) is that it be made that surface TF vs transport TF be made more aggressive to simulate a commander's realization that he has in a sense, "hit the jackpot" and realizes he has achieved the goal of breaking through to a vulnerable transport fleet, instead of treating said TF as a combat TF with comprable firepower (and a chance to sig damage you in return)

I hadn't read anything simlar from you, Frag, and so didn't realize this was your position. However, I would argue something of this magnitude ought not to have gotten out of beta, but have been put on the old "wish list" a year or so ago. And then screeeeeeamed! for incessantly ever since. (Behind closed doors, of course. [:D])

[Mike Scholl]

Certainly a more acceptable result, FRAG. But it still begs one big question.
ALL of the attacking ships have a MINIMUM 20-knot speed advantage over
any of the defenders; and they outnumber them over 2:1. Which means that
within a single hour of the daylight game phase, they can all move from over
the horizon to boarding distance. The defenders are virtually defenseless.
How do ANY of them survive? The game keeps making it happen virtually
every time..., but never supplies a rational for this "Houdini-like" ability. If
some of the defenders escaped maybe 1/4th to 1/3rd of the time you could
say it was unusual conditions (rain squalls, Islands, mix-up orders, etc) and be
in the realms of believability. But it seems to occur virtually EVERY time? And
that just doesn't make any sense.

[Mr.Frag]

Day Time Surface Combat at 61,74

Japanese Ships
AO Hayasui, Shell hits 39, and is sunk
TK Choran Maru, Shell hits 3 (21/6/6)
TK Gen'yo Maru, Shell hits 66, and is sunk
TK Kyokuto Maru
TK Nihon Maru, Shell hits 6, on fire (42/13/49)
TK San Pedro Maru
AK Genoa Maru
AK Getuyo Maru, Shell hits 3, on fire (55/21/17)
AK Glasgow Maru
AK Gosyu Maru
AK Goyo Maru
AK Hague Maru
AK Hakkai Maru
AK Hakodate Maru
AK Hakonesan Maru
AK Hakubasan Maru
AO Medan Maru, Shell hits 12, on fire, heavy damage (83/72/49)
TK Kyokuho, Shell hits 4, on fire (42/26/36)

Allied Ships
CA Minneapolis
CL Cleveland
CL Montpelier
DD Anthony
DD Aulick
DD Charles Ausburne
DD Charles Badger
DD Beale
DD Bell

More ships ... only some ships spotted (weather Rain)

Here's my question ... do you expect more of those ships to be sunk? Like all of them?

I need to know what you expect to happen.

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Day Time Surface Combat at 61,74

Japanese Ships
AO Hayasui, Shell hits 39, and is sunk
TK Choran Maru, Shell hits 3 (21/6/6)
TK Gen'yo Maru, Shell hits 66, and is sunk
TK Kyokuto Maru
TK Nihon Maru, Shell hits 6, on fire (42/13/49)
TK San Pedro Maru
AK Genoa Maru
AK Getuyo Maru, Shell hits 3, on fire (55/21/17)
AK Glasgow Maru
AK Gosyu Maru
AK Goyo Maru
AK Hague Maru
AK Hakkai Maru
AK Hakodate Maru
AK Hakonesan Maru
AK Hakubasan Maru
AO Medan Maru, Shell hits 12, on fire, heavy damage (83/72/49)
TK Kyokuho, Shell hits 4, on fire (42/26/36)

Allied Ships
CA Minneapolis
CL Cleveland
CL Montpelier
DD Anthony
DD Aulick
DD Charles Ausburne
DD Charles Badger
DD Beale
DD Bell

More ships ... only some ships spotted (weather Rain)

Here's my question ... do you expect more of those ships to be sunk? Like all of them?

I need to know what you expect to happen.

That's an excellent question and really needs to be asked of everyone joining this thread.

I'm not sure how to answer it. I suppose it would depend on how much detail Gary were willing to add to the surface-combat routines, such as spotting information, what the weather is like "inside that hex" (squalls would mitigate possibly, just for example), whether the convoy scattered (we'd expect it to but at what range, and then how does the combat force react?), and then does the combat force send a parcel after one ship and another parcel after another? What?

It gets involved fast.

I'd think the fewer the merchies the less likely any would escape. That strikes me as superficially correct. Agree on that?

Thanks for taking the time, Frag. This is a system wrinkle that needs ironing.

[Mike Scholl]

Given poor visability (rain) and an excess in defender numbers, the only real problem I
have with the result's you show is that the ships that were sighted and hit should have
taken a worse beating. With Nine attackers concentraiting on those 7 defenders, the
rest excaping makes some sense..., but those that were being "Run Down" and shot
up should probably have suffered more sinkings.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Day Time Surface Combat at 61,74

Japanese Ships
AO Hayasui, Shell hits 39, and is sunk
TK Choran Maru, Shell hits 3 (21/6/6)
TK Gen'yo Maru, Shell hits 66, and is sunk
TK Kyokuto Maru
TK Nihon Maru, Shell hits 6, on fire (42/13/49)
TK San Pedro Maru
AK Genoa Maru
AK Getuyo Maru, Shell hits 3, on fire (55/21/17)
AK Glasgow Maru
AK Gosyu Maru
AK Goyo Maru
AK Hague Maru
AK Hakkai Maru
AK Hakodate Maru
AK Hakonesan Maru
AK Hakubasan Maru
AO Medan Maru, Shell hits 12, on fire, heavy damage (83/72/49)
TK Kyokuho, Shell hits 4, on fire (42/26/36)

Allied Ships
CA Minneapolis
CL Cleveland
CL Montpelier
DD Anthony
DD Aulick
DD Charles Ausburne
DD Charles Badger
DD Beale
DD Bell

More ships ... only some ships spotted (weather Rain)

Here's my question ... do you expect more of those ships to be sunk? Like all of them?

I need to know what you expect to happen.

What exactly does radar do again? I'm beginning to wonder if it does anything at all besides detect aircraft and maybe increase accuracy of gunfire. All these ships are SG equipped (exception maybe Minneapolis) yet the APs remain undetected.

Which Americanships were "undetected" during the battle? Does anyone not find this strange that ships in a TF, especially the aggressor force, would be somehow unable to participate because they are undetected?

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Given poor visability (rain) and an excess in defender numbers, the only real problem I
have with the result's you show is that the ships that were sighted and hit should have
taken a worse beating. With Nine attackers concentraiting on those 7 defenders, the
rest excaping makes some sense..., but those that were being "Run Down" and shot
up should probably have suffered more sinkings.

You forget that the Americans have SG radar.

[Mr.Frag]

I hadn't read anything simlar from you, Frag, and so didn't realize this was your position. However, I would argue something of this magnitude ought not to have gotten out of beta, but have been put on the old "wish list" a year or so ago.

Then you completely fail to understand our role. We simply test what we are given to see if it is broken. If broken, we report what is broken. Don't assume I have *any* position on things. I look for problems and note them then pass them on. It seems a lot of folks are under the impression that we control the game developers [:D]

As to the magnitude ... thats subjective.

If there is a problem, the problem needs to be localized better because not all agreeing that there is actually a problem.

Very few naval battles that I am aware of were fought to the death. Ships are far too precious for that.

From what I have been able to gather from these types of posts ... there are two separate complaints.

a) completely unescorted ships should be getting murdered. They are not currently.

b) large formations of ships don't parse out well with damage done.

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Given poor visability (rain) and an excess in defender numbers, the only real problem I
have with the result's you show is that the ships that were sighted and hit should have
taken a worse beating. With Nine attackers concentraiting on those 7 defenders, the
rest excaping makes some sense..., but those that were being "Run Down" and shot
up should probably have suffered more sinkings.

Except in the most rare of circumstance any merchie caught on the open sea would be dead meat, and if given the chance would lower its colors, depending on cargo and orders and mindset, naturally. Regardless, all "caught" should be rendered hors de combat.

Results of 59 hits on any given merchie are rediculous in and of themselves. A few hits and away with you, one way or the other.

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Day Time Surface Combat at 61,74

Japanese Ships
AO Hayasui, Shell hits 39, and is sunk
TK Choran Maru, Shell hits 3 (21/6/6)
TK Gen'yo Maru, Shell hits 66, and is sunk
TK Kyokuto Maru
TK Nihon Maru, Shell hits 6, on fire (42/13/49)
TK San Pedro Maru
AK Genoa Maru
AK Getuyo Maru, Shell hits 3, on fire (55/21/17)
AK Glasgow Maru
AK Gosyu Maru
AK Goyo Maru
AK Hague Maru
AK Hakkai Maru
AK Hakodate Maru
AK Hakonesan Maru
AK Hakubasan Maru
AO Medan Maru, Shell hits 12, on fire, heavy damage (83/72/49)
TK Kyokuho, Shell hits 4, on fire (42/26/36)

Allied Ships
CA Minneapolis
CL Cleveland
CL Montpelier
DD Anthony
DD Aulick
DD Charles Ausburne
DD Charles Badger
DD Beale
DD Bell

More ships ... only some ships spotted (weather Rain)

Here's my question ... do you expect more of those ships to be sunk? Like all of them?

I need to know what you expect to happen.

What exactly does radar do again? I'm beginning to wonder if it does anything at all besides detect aircraft and maybe increase accuracy of gunfire. All these ships are SG equipped (exception maybe Minneapolis) yet the APs remain undetected.

Which Americanships were "undetected" during the battle? Does anyone not find this strange that ships in a TF, especially the aggressor force, would be somehow unable to participate because they are undetected?

Short answer: no. [:D]

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

I hadn't read anything simlar from you, Frag, and so didn't realize this was your position. However, I would argue something of this magnitude ought not to have gotten out of beta, but have been put on the old "wish list" a year or so ago.

Then you completely fail to understand our role. We simply test what we are given to see if it is broken. If broken, we report what is broken. Don't assume I have *any* position on things. I look for problems and note them then pass them on. It seems a lot of folks are under the impression that we control the game developers [:D]

As to the magnitude ... thats subjective.

If there is a problem, the problem needs to be localized better because not all agreeing that there is actually a problem.

Very few naval battles that I am aware of were fought to the death. Ships are far too precious for that.

From what I have been able to gather from these types of posts ... there are two separate complaints.

a) completely unescorted ships should be getting murdered. They are not currently.

b) large formations of ships don't parse out well with damage done.

I don't fail to understand "our role," you do.

You have an obligation over and above whatever corny document Matrix and/or 2by3 give you to sign to try and make this product as good as possible. If you can't understand that then you ought not to be a playtester. I don't care whose toes you step on along the way, I don't care if you're summarily dumped as tester, your ultimnate role and objective as a tester remains as stated above.

[Mr.Frag]

Does anyone not find this strange that ships in a TF, especially the aggressor force, would be somehow unable to participate because they are undetected?

As the animation runs, you will see some of the ships join in after the initial round ... these are ships that were out of position coming in to join the fight.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

I hadn't read anything simlar from you, Frag, and so didn't realize this was your position. However, I would argue something of this magnitude ought not to have gotten out of beta, but have been put on the old "wish list" a year or so ago.

Then you completely fail to understand our role. We simply test what we are given to see if it is broken. If broken, we report what is broken. Don't assume I have *any* position on things. I look for problems and note them then pass them on. It seems a lot of folks are under the impression that we control the game developers [:D]

As to the magnitude ... thats subjective.

If there is a problem, the problem needs to be localized better because not all agreeing that there is actually a problem.

Very few naval battles that I am aware of were fought to the death. Ships are far too precious for that.

From what I have been able to gather from these types of posts ... there are two separate complaints.

a) completely unescorted ships should be getting murdered. They are not currently.

b) large formations of ships don't parse out well with damage done.

"Then you completely fail to understand our role. We simply test what we are given to see if it is broken. If broken, we report what is broken. Don't assume I have *any* position on things."

Betas also point out design suggestions, flaws, potential problems etc, but they can only ask for a change.

"It seems a lot of folks are under the impression that we control the game developers."

[:D]

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn


I hadn't read anything simlar from you, Frag, and so didn't realize this was your position. However, I would argue something of this magnitude ought not to have gotten out of beta, but have been put on the old "wish list" a year or so ago. And then screeeeeeamed! for incessantly ever since. (Behind closed doors, of course. [:D])

Screaming tends to be non-condusive towards winning over the powers that be. [;)] The tests I did were not posted on the public forum.

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Very few naval battles that I am aware of were fought to the death. Ships are far too precious for that.

I think these kinds of engagements ought to be rare in the Pacific. The larger convoys were mainly sailing within interior lines for the Japanese and were strongly escorted in the case of the Allies (I stress strongly, even though the USN had some bad hair days off Savo Island and elsewhere in the Solomons, still the convoys were protected, and of course you know what happened up in the Phillipines when the Combined Fleet decided to sally).

But. When these engagements do take place all merchies caught need to be deep sixed. Perhaps one in a hundred might wiggle off the hook and find a friendly squall to paddle away in, but that should be it. The majority of these merchies need to be sighted, and the vast majority of those then should go glubglubglub.

As noted previously, the entire routine should be upgraded to show only those ships actually sighted on the screen. Why show unsighted ships on the screen? How stupid is that?

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn


I hadn't read anything simlar from you, Frag, and so didn't realize this was your position. However, I would argue something of this magnitude ought not to have gotten out of beta, but have been put on the old "wish list" a year or so ago. And then screeeeeeamed! for incessantly ever since. (Behind closed doors, of course. [:D])

Screaming tends to be non-condusive towards winning over the powers that be. [;)] The tests I did were not posted on the public forum.

There are many different kinds of "screams," my friend.

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Does anyone not find this strange that ships in a TF, especially the aggressor force, would be somehow unable to participate because they are undetected?

As the animation runs, you will see some of the ships join in after the initial round ... these are ships that were out of position coming in to join the fight.

You're misquoting me here. Those were Ron's words. (I happen to agree with him, but point of order, please. [:)])

[mogami]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Certainly a more acceptable result, FRAG. But it still begs one big question.
ALL of the attacking ships have a MINIMUM 20-knot speed advantage over
any of the defenders; and they outnumber them over 2:1. Which means that
within a single hour of the daylight game phase, they can all move from over
the horizon to boarding distance. The defenders are virtually defenseless.
How do ANY of them survive? The game keeps making it happen virtually
every time..., but never supplies a rational for this "Houdini-like" ability. If
some of the defenders escaped maybe 1/4th to 1/3rd of the time you could
say it was unusual conditions (rain squalls, Islands, mix-up orders, etc) and be
in the realms of believability. But it seems to occur virtually EVERY time? And
that just doesn't make any sense.

Hi, Depending on the range the surface ships first spot the transports and change course and when the transports spot the surface ships and begin scattering. (I think all transport versus surface ship battles have "TF scatters" message early in battle.

Now a ship moving 20 knots will not overtake a ship doing 10kts in 1 hour. It will cut the distance in half every hour. (depending on where the ships begin changing couse in reaction to each other.

(TF spot one another at 20k yards. In time pursuit moves 20k yards Transports move 10k yards. But every transport has taken a different course so the surface ship has only closed the range on 1 transport. Other transports depending on course might now have opened range to 30k. )

In order for the surface ships to fire broadsides thay must assume a course that results in opening of the range or take a course 15 degrees or so from the target ship and wait. Each surface ship will be able to do this to 1 target. The transports are no longer in formation. The surface ships speed advantage allows them to manoveor to avoid the transports fire and of course the larger surface ships can begin firing while out of range of return fire but any DD that uses guns or torpedos is in range for return fire.


If there are 6 transports and they each upon contact with enemy TF assume a course 60 degrees (12 transports do a 30 degree course difference) from one another they will be running in all directions. A surface ship cannot close the range with one without opening the range with all the others.

Of course TF in restricted waters might not have the option of going in every direction but I think if you picture a fan and open it in the direction of the open sea you'll notice that if you track down any one line you open the distance with all the others. Also the transports might risk running aground (not shown in WITP) and enter waters where pursuit unlikely from larger ships)
In battles around ports and restricted waters the TF would have to have a pilot or be familair with the area to just break formation and allow each ship to pick a target and give chase.


Ship captains do not always see everything and they often make the wrong choice. (They still collide today) Just turning the wrong way for a few minutes before realizing it can open or close range. Nothing should be considered "automatic" There were battles in WW2 (and all through history) where the side on paper that should have had an easy victory failed to win (and sometimes even lost outright)

OK now that I've said all that. Nothing I've said means that if there is a real problem it will not be fixed. I'm only posting because I am seeing quite a few miconceptions about ships and naval battles. Ships do not turn like cars or stop like cars or fly. A ship in formation only moves out of formation under orders and when it does so it executes a preplanned movement. (Like soldiers drilling doing a by the right flank or a column left)
Nothing happens instantly. Ship Captains do not stand on the bridge shouting "left full rudder, right full rudder" They plot their position and the position they want to move to. In formation they execute turns on command. If the TF leader orders a left turn to bring all guns to bear then the target is going to open the range. If the target does a full right turn while the TF does a full left turn they are now openiing the range at the combined speeds (range is opening now at 30kts) No matter which way you turn your ship the target can turn the other. If you just keep a CBDR (contant bearing decreasing range) you can only use your forward guns.

If the lead ship in a TF spots enemy TF at 20k yards this means the rear ship in this TF could be at 30k yards from the contact. (ships in line 1k between ships rear ship in 10 ship TF is 10k behind foward ship) At same time the ship you spot at 20k is part of 10 ship TF the lead ship of this TF could be another 10k out. (Distance from your rear ship to lead enemy ship is 40k) Once you begin to engage the ship at 20k you lose the chance to catch the one at 40k