Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: Demosthenes

ORIGINAL: treespider

Figured people would find this interesting...

So the Japanese did not get all 26 PTs lost to hostile action during the war...
All I can say is once again, the Japanese ability to kill PTs in this game is obviously beyound the wildest dreams of what the Japs could actually achieve...

Likewise the ability to avoid hidden reefs and friendly fire is beyond the wildest dreams of what the Allies achieved.

How many of these engagements actually involved Japanese hunter/killer groups composed of a light cruiser and 4-6 destroyers that were not involved in some other activity like trying to run supply to Guadacanal or escorting Battleships on a bombardment mission? I would suggest...none. How many PT's are sunk in game to this tactic?

How many of the sinkings by surface craft were daylights engagements?

"...on the night of 1-2 February the Japanese navy sent another Tokyo Express destroyer flotilla, this time with orders to beginn pulling off troops. They were attacked by aircraft then surface vesseels, then the PT Boats were sent in. This time the fighting took place at daylight, which placed the 11 small vessels at a disadvantage, given the greater range and firepower ogf the Japanese guns. Worse, the Americans vessels were exposed to Japanese aircraft. PT-37 exploded when her fuel tanks were hit, and PT-111 and PT-125 were wrecked by Japanese shells and bombs, and the near suicidal attack was abandoned before further boats were lost."

Due to game mechanics how many daylight battles are being fought with PT's in the game?

Here are some real-life incidents that don't jive with game mechanics...

"In late May (1944), six boats were sent from Tulagi to reinforce the squadrons operating New Guinea. They sailed in company of PT-boat Tender Niagra, but on 23 May the force was attacked by Japanese aircraft. Although all of the boats managed to survive the attack with only light dameage, the precious tender was sunk, along with all of its spare parts, supplies and ammunition. It would be months before the boats reached their new squadrons, and longer before the spare parts were replaced."

Perhaps not allowing PT boats to refuel and/or rearm unless a tender is present is warranted.

"Meanwhile, a freighter carrying reinforcements for the 1st Flotilla was torpedoed and sunk as it approached the Solomons, taking PT-165 and PT-173 down with her, as they were strapped to her decks. The other boats in the gropu (Pt-167, PT-171, PT-172 and PT-174) were being towed behind the freighter and managed to escape disaster"

ORIGINAL: Demosthenes


Ummm,...in two encounters listed above - you just accounted for almost every PT lost during the war to surface action... along with an unwitting example of PTs in action escaping with only light damage [8|]

So if you think it's feasible that PT losses should be in the 100+ range in a year or so of use - I'm not following the logic.

Hunter-Killer groups? I think you better do some more figuring about any probable success rate based on historical patterns.

Perhaps you did not read my post above about the Maddox in 1964 at the Gulf of Tonkin? A modernized Destroyer with modern RADAR controlled guns (with a much better train and elevation capability than a WWII Jap DD)?

Sorry, but I don't see the likelihood that WWII Japanese Hunter-Killer groups would be particularly successful.

We do agree that uncharted shoals were far more dangerous to PTs than the Japanese Navy.

ORIGINAL: treespider

I'm suggesting there will be no patterns because historically the Japanese did not form TF for the sole purpose of hunting down and engaging PT boats that were spotted. In the game I do ...I imagine others do as well.

ORIGINAL: treespider
Are you refering to this action...

"On the afternoon of 2 August 1964, while steaming well offshore in international waters, Maddox was attacked by three North Vietnamese motor torpedo boats. The destroyer maneuvered to avoid torpedoes and used her guns against her fast-moving opponents, hitting them all. In turn, she was struck in the after gun director by a single 14.5-millimeter machine gun bullet. Maddox called for air support from the carrier Ticonderoga, whose planes strafed the three boats, leaving one dead in the water and burning. Both sides then separated."

Sounds like the maddox was fairly sudccessful considering they were on an intelligence gathering mission.

ORIGINAL: treespider
In the one incident I quoted a PT squadron engaged the Japanese in daylight and ended up getting three of their boats sunk...and the Japanese were on a fast transport pickup mission and not out seeking a fight.

in WitP at a rate that is higher than historical by a good 10 orders of magnitude.

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
...surface combat between warships and transports...

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

in WitP at a rate that is higher than historical by a good 10 orders of magnitude.

What in WITP is not massively accelerated or bloody? Really, I can't think of one issue which is actually anywhere near a real life pace. This is one of the issues which the design needed to be built upon but for some reason no game designers ever seem to.

Oh, just thought of one...surface combat between warships and transports...the one instance where one expects the results to be one sided and bloody never is...the warships always break off early after sinking the weak escort, if there was even an escort provided.

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

Although I wholeheartedly agree, in GNB3 Fury in the pacific Yamato + 5 DDs could not sink 10+ AKs expanding all theri primary and seconfdary ammo, and a full deckload of SBDs from CV Enterprise had problems with sinking a 3 DD Tokyo express docked for unloading. Well I gues it is because some of the routines do have the same age. [;)][:D]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

in WitP at a rate that is higher than historical by a good 10 orders of magnitude.

What in WITP is not massively accelerated or bloody? Really, I can't think of one issue which is actually anywhere near a real life pace. This is one of the issues which the design needed to be built upon but for some reason no game designers ever seem to.

Oh, just thought of one...surface combat between warships and transports...the one instance where one expects the results to be one sided and bloody never is...the warships always break off early after sinking the weak escort, if there was even an escort provided.