Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Mundy

Supply in India is getting pretty dry. I'm at 40k at Bombay, but that still puts them in the red. I hope there's a big stockpile on Ceylon if/when I take it, as supplying it will be difficult. I'm wondering if it would help if I shut down all building there. Everything's probably big enough to use anyway right now.

If you don't have good supply here then an invasion is completely out of the question. Really until you get this supply situation sorted out you are stuck in India.

ORIGINAL: Mundy
I took a shot at some ships at Lord Howe from Brisbane. Figures the SBDs didn't want to cooperate. Better luck with the B-25s. Funny how I took P-38 losses, but the Jugs came out clean again.

These are the sort of attritional battles that are preventing you from building up your strength to match Japan. You need to stop with "taking shots" and instead focus on conducting operations. Operations consist of tactical battles that help achieve a larger goal. What's the goal here? Sinking a few cargo ships? You need plans with substance. Trying to sink a few AK is not a worthy operational goal.

26 July 1943

Japan decided to take Norfolk Island between Noumea and New Zealand. That pretty much means that the spotlight will be on Hornet when I decide to get her out of there. I'll let her get as much healed up as possible, so I have some speed when the time comes.

Apart from Hornet, I now have three Essex CVs as well as three CVLs. All the new ones enroute to Cape Town. I'll probably make sure Victorious is ready and present when things kick off. She's in the yard for another 42 days at Pearl. More time to build up.

An S boat sighted Kongo and some destroyers about four hexes west of Noumea, apparently headed west. All transport shipping in Sydney is evacuating to Melbourne. Two USN CAs and 8 DDs will remain there. I've put top notch captains and an admiral on everyone. 8 inch guns will punch the Kongos at close range, plus maybe better torps will help. If it's just her and the destroyers, I'm willing to take that on. I could always wound them enough for the planes to make a difference.

I think all my intended ground troops are finally enroute for Cape Town. Looking at about a month before all the pieces arrive, not counting the RN CV. I'll see about CV-8's condition, and consider waiting for her to join in. I'm in no particular hurry and want to do this right. Some 200+ Hellcats and the like covering the invasion is a nice security blanket.

27 July 1943

Not much to add. KB is sighted about 8 hexes ENE of Lord Howe. It may get dangerous for him if he's thinking about raiding the Australian coast. May.

A third turn today. CF's staying up pretty late.

You have a lot more confidence in USN CAs than I do. I have had major issues with them in combat. At this point I pretty much avoid naval combat with them except under the most favorable odds. Without torpedoes they lack teeth compared to the Japanese cruisers.

ORIGINAL: Sangeli

You have a lot more confidence in USN CAs than I do. I have had major issues with them in combat. At this point I pretty much avoid naval combat with them except under the most favorable odds. Without torpedoes they lack teeth compared to the Japanese cruisers.

I have had them perform well after:
- they get really good commanders - 60+ Naval, 50+ Aggression
- the TF gets a really good commander - high leadership, high naval
- they have some battle experience to raise crew experience to 60 or higher for the battle type (day/night)
- they have radar, especially after they get SG radar (NOT a reference to Cap Mandrake's Significant Other) [;)]
- the TF size is 6-9 ships, preferably 3 cruisers and 5 or 6 DDs
- the engagement doesn't open at point blank torpedo range [X(]

You have a lot more confidence in USN CAs than I do. I have had major issues with them in combat. At this point I pretty much avoid naval combat with them except under the most favorable odds. Without torpedoes they lack teeth compared to the Japanese cruisers.

IMHO the destroyers backing up the cruisers are equally important. If Mundy has Fletcher-class DD's, they can pose a serious threat to the IJN from late '43 on.

The commander and probably 2/3 of the ship captains are 70+ Nav, with the rest in the 60s. My captain's pool seems well stocked at this point.

Kongos, to me, have always seemed a mediocre ship. Nice fast escorts for carriers, but no match for a real battleship. In a prior game, Prince of Wales raked Haruna over good on Dec 8. Inside 3,000 yds, I've seen 8" shells punch holes in the hull. I have raked them over with cruisers before, though I did have more at the time. That battleship in Sydney's drydock would be very welcome right now, but her upgrade is a pretty big one.

I have 8 destroyers with the two cruisers, so I'm hoping they'll add up. Outnumbering any IJN destroyers is a bonus, I figure. I didn't survey the classes I have there, so I'll update later. I think most of my Fletchers were stateside, at Pearl, or enroute to Cape Town. I figure at this point, they have half a chance of doing torpedo damage. The big "if" is getting the hit in the first place. My subs have been sloppy lately too, missing freighters quite a bit.

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock
IMHO the destroyers backing up the cruisers are equally important. If Mundy has Fletcher-class DD's, they can pose a serious threat to the IJN from late '43 on.

I will not deny the power of the Fletcher class DD's. That being said, from what I have seen Fletchers do better in their own TFs than they do when paired with cruisers. As a result I only use lesser DDs to escort my cruisers whose primary job is to simply protect the cruisers from submarines.

ORIGINAL: Mundy
Kongos, to me, have always seemed a mediocre ship. Nice fast escorts for carriers, but no match for a real battleship. In a prior game, Prince of Wales raked Haruna over good on Dec 8. Inside 3,000 yds, I've seen 8" shells punch holes in the hull. I have raked them over with cruisers before, though I did have more at the time. That battleship in Sydney's drydock would be very welcome right now, but her upgrade is a pretty big one.

I did not think 8 inch shells could punch hulls through the hull of a Kongo at any range! Granted I can't remember how good their belt armor is. That being said, I still don't think USN CA vs Kongo BBs is a great match up. Kongo is almost as fast, has more armor, and much bigger guns. On the other hand, a large Fletcher TF sounds like it would be a better match up. At any range those torpedoes will do some serious damage to the Kongo. And if things go poorly they can disengage easier with superior speed. One need look no further than Lowpe's AAR to see this in action when a Fletcher TF managed to sink the BB Yamato in a surface engagement. And on the other side, I'm unaware of any battles in any AAR where a pair of USN CAs has sunk a combat ready Japanese BB. If someone has an example I'd definitely like to see it.

ORIGINAL: Sangeli

You have a lot more confidence in USN CAs than I do. I have had major issues with them in combat. At this point I pretty much avoid naval combat with them except under the most favorable odds. Without torpedoes they lack teeth compared to the Japanese cruisers.

I second this. US CAs have always performed abysmal for me. I try to avoid using them in SCTFs. Better to use Fletchers, Clevelands or British CAs.

28 July 1943

Not watching what I'm doing.

KB and the surface stuff are a hex away from Lord Howe, with an apparent western setting.

You know when you create a task force after the first, and, by default, they get the same course setting? Happened to me. The surface forces I set up at Sydney are now sitting at Melbourne. [:@]

Hopefully I can get them back and not get attacked doing it.

ORIGINAL: Mundy
The surface forces I set up at Sydney are now sitting at Melbourne. [:@]

Hopefully I can get them back and not get attacked doing it.

Seriously, don't you think that you are better off not attacking a FAR superior force? If the goal is to get the KB to attack a heavily LRCAPed fleet there are better ways to do that than putting out your cruisers and destroyers on a limb like that. But if you are aiming to engage the Japanese fleet in surface combat then your plan is suicide. Maybe you get lucky and it turns out alright but you need a LOT of help from things you have no control over like weather.

Is there a way to prevent a massive bombardment of Sydney?

ORIGINAL: Sangeli

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock
IMHO the destroyers backing up the cruisers are equally important. If Mundy has Fletcher-class DD's, they can pose a serious threat to the IJN from late '43 on.

I will not deny the power of the Fletcher class DD's. That being said, from what I have seen Fletchers do better in their own TFs than they do when paired with cruisers. As a result I only use lesser DDs to escort my cruisers whose primary job is to simply protect the cruisers from submarines.

ORIGINAL: Mundy
Kongos, to me, have always seemed a mediocre ship. Nice fast escorts for carriers, but no match for a real battleship. In a prior game, Prince of Wales raked Haruna over good on Dec 8. Inside 3,000 yds, I've seen 8" shells punch holes in the hull. I have raked them over with cruisers before, though I did have more at the time. That battleship in Sydney's drydock would be very welcome right now, but her upgrade is a pretty big one.

I did not think 8 inch shells could punch hulls through the hull of a Kongo at any range! Granted I can't remember how good their belt armor is. That being said, I still don't think USN CA vs Kongo BBs is a great match up. Kongo is almost as fast, has more armor, and much bigger guns. On the other hand, a large Fletcher TF sounds like it would be a better match up. At any range those torpedoes will do some serious damage to the Kongo. And if things go poorly they can disengage easier with superior speed. One need look no further than Lowpe's AAR to see this in action when a Fletcher TF managed to sink the BB Yamato in a surface engagement. And on the other side, I'm unaware of any battles in any AAR where a pair of USN CAs has sunk a combat ready Japanese BB. If someone has an example I'd definitely like to see it.

Not quite sunk, but disabled to the point of impotence - the RL 1st Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, in which CA San Francisco + another (Portland?) knocked out Hiei's steering and started fires which were added to by the DDs 5" guns. The steering compartment was flooded and although the Hiei's crew tried desperately to patch and pump, they were frustrated by bombers from Guadalcanal and ended up scuttling the BB. See CombinedFleet.com for the detailed account.

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: Sangeli

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock
IMHO the destroyers backing up the cruisers are equally important. If Mundy has Fletcher-class DD's, they can pose a serious threat to the IJN from late '43 on.

I will not deny the power of the Fletcher class DD's. That being said, from what I have seen Fletchers do better in their own TFs than they do when paired with cruisers. As a result I only use lesser DDs to escort my cruisers whose primary job is to simply protect the cruisers from submarines.

ORIGINAL: Mundy
Kongos, to me, have always seemed a mediocre ship. Nice fast escorts for carriers, but no match for a real battleship. In a prior game, Prince of Wales raked Haruna over good on Dec 8. Inside 3,000 yds, I've seen 8" shells punch holes in the hull. I have raked them over with cruisers before, though I did have more at the time. That battleship in Sydney's drydock would be very welcome right now, but her upgrade is a pretty big one.

I did not think 8 inch shells could punch hulls through the hull of a Kongo at any range! Granted I can't remember how good their belt armor is. That being said, I still don't think USN CA vs Kongo BBs is a great match up. Kongo is almost as fast, has more armor, and much bigger guns. On the other hand, a large Fletcher TF sounds like it would be a better match up. At any range those torpedoes will do some serious damage to the Kongo. And if things go poorly they can disengage easier with superior speed. One need look no further than Lowpe's AAR to see this in action when a Fletcher TF managed to sink the BB Yamato in a surface engagement. And on the other side, I'm unaware of any battles in any AAR where a pair of USN CAs has sunk a combat ready Japanese BB. If someone has an example I'd definitely like to see it.

Not quite sunk, but disabled to the point of impotence - the RL 1st Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, in which CA San Francisco + another (Portland?) knocked out Hiei's steering and started fires which were added to by the DDs 5" guns. The steering compartment was flooded and although the Hiei's crew tried desperately to patch and pump, they were frustrated by bombers from Guadalcanal and ended up scuttling the BB. See CombinedFleet.com for the detailed account.

Basically, a portion of the projectile's kinetic energy is often turned into heat upon impact, partly sort of melting its way through. If the velocity is high enough (with a projectile of enough mass) then even an 8" round could (and did) punch through battleship armor. The trick was very, very close range. Everything else matters, too, but to have a chance the range had to be as short as possible so the projectile was as close to its maximum velocity (basically muzzle velocity) as possible.

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Basically, a portion of the projectile's kinetic energy is often turned into heat upon impact, partly sort of melting its way through. If the velocity is high enough (with a projectile of enough mass) then even an 8" round could (and did) punch through battleship armor. The trick was very, very close range. Everything else matters, too, but to have a chance the range had to be as short as possible so the projectile was as close to its maximum velocity (basically muzzle velocity) as possible.

Oh yes, I understand the real life physics behind this. But is this modeled in the game? As in, can anyone post a combat report of USN CAs sinking a BB? Or at least heavy fires/heavy damage?

Basically, a portion of the projectile's kinetic energy is often turned into heat upon impact, partly sort of melting its way through. If the velocity is high enough (with a projectile of enough mass) then even an 8" round could (and did) punch through battleship armor. The trick was very, very close range. Everything else matters, too, but to have a chance the range had to be as short as possible so the projectile was as close to its maximum velocity (basically muzzle velocity) as possible.

MV plus a good angle of impact, virtually 90º to the armour face. The USN also had a "super heavy" 8" AP shell that weighed a whopping 355 lbs., compared to around 250 lbs. for those in most other navies (42% heavier). I am unsure whether the shell was used at Guadalcanal.

Another factor may have been the quality of the Japanese armour. The British built BC Kongo for the IJN in WW I and the Japanese then proceeded to copy the design and build the other three of the class. I doubt the British shared the secrets of making good armour and this was the IJNs first go at making armour that thick. At any rate, it was only designed to stop WW I era Armoured Cruiser shells (which did not have the MV of the later models of 8" guns developed post-war).

The Germans got a similar wake-up call at the Battle of the River Plate when British AP shells went through Graf Spee's 5" armour belt. It may not have been heavy but the British AP shell had an excellent cap design for boring through once the surface hardness was cracked.

ORIGINAL: Sangeli

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Basically, a portion of the projectile's kinetic energy is often turned into heat upon impact, partly sort of melting its way through. If the velocity is high enough (with a projectile of enough mass) then even an 8" round could (and did) punch through battleship armor. The trick was very, very close range. Everything else matters, too, but to have a chance the range had to be as short as possible so the projectile was as close to its maximum velocity (basically muzzle velocity) as possible.

Oh yes, I understand the real life physics behind this. But is this modeled in the game? As in, can anyone post a combat report of USN CAs sinking a BB? Or at least heavy fires/heavy damage?

As was mentioned, I also have seen 8" shell penetrations of Kongo Class BB armour at close range causing significant damage, but inevitably there are too many other ships in the IJN TFs for the Allied CAs to keep the hits coming and wreck the ship. The potential is there though, if an IJN player foolishly sent a Kongo BB home for upgrade with only a couple of DDs to keep it company. Stranger things have happened.

They don't call him BBFanboy for nothing! [8D]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

They don't call him BBFanboy for nothing! [8D]

[:D]
Does it show?? [8|]

Hijack now off thanks for your patience ....

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: witpqs

They don't call him BBFanboy for nothing! [8D]

[:D]
Does it show?? [8|]

Hijack now off thanks for your patience ....

"And our humble purveyor of ballistic knowledge disappears into the crowd... until next time!" [:)]