Matrix Games Forums

Page 2

Page 3

Page 4

As for seeing different results in Japanese turn and Allied replay, the cause in the case above (and most of those I have seen) is FB starfing ships.

You can notice that both reports are exactly the same (number of men losses and so on) until the attack on TF at 17, 61 where P-39 took part.
You will also notice that the first ship in the list suffers the same fate, probably being attacked by a Beaufort before the first use of P-39.
Once a FB has began strafing ships, results are different in replays.

If Ron is the only opponent of Mogami to use regularly FBs for strafing ships, that is why he is the only one seeing major differences.

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

As for seeing different results in Japanese turn and Allied replay, the cause in the case above (and most of those I have seen) is FB starfing ships.

You can notice that both reports are exactly the same (number of men losses and so on) until the attack on TF at 17, 61 where P-39 took part.
You will also notice that the first ship in the list suffers the same fate, probably being attacked by a Beaufort before the first use of P-39.
Once a FB has began strafing ships, results are different in replays.

If Ron is the only opponent of Mogami to use regularly FBs for strafing ships, that is why he is the only one seeing major differences.

Interesting! I have had about three occurances of this sync issue and that's about as often as I've strafed shipping.[X(]

Hi, Java has hurt my assault lift capacity. Currently in undamaged 1.5k AP I can only lift 105,000 load points. (70AP) This is not counting the 3kAP(402,000 lift points in undamaged ships) I use for follow on or 2nd Wave forces or the 4.5kAP I use for movement between friendly bases. So I am down to only being able to land 4 DIv at once.
I don't use AK for assaults

Using the engineers on Java to concentrate on and expand the Soerabaja port to size 9 easry in the game instead of expanding airfields much continues to reap huge dividends. Today, the valuable cruiser Kitakami strikes one and is subsequently sunk by torpedo bombers stationed on Bali for just such an eventuality. Sayanora to Ens Yoshida and his radar suite capable of directing radioless fighters on CAP!![;)] Good to know one of the torpedo cruisers won't get a chance to use all those Long Lances in combat as well.

The Dutch submarine KVII continues on her rampage in the western end of the Java sea. She picks off another retiring survivor of the Java landings making her total sinkings three APs in three days. These boys are gonna get some R&R in a big way. Perhaps Melbourne is a nice town for pints and bints...

The fighting withdrawl from western Java continues, covered by aircraft attacking all ground targets in the area. I don't know about you guys but I find the Wirraways invaluable at this.

One of the most pleasing sounds during the replay is the sounds of water pouring through holes blasted in ships as they go down and the screams of the crews. This turn was a constant stream of this sound bite. Ten ships must have foundered![:D]

Bangkok continues to receive the attention of the SEAsia flyboys and still no resistance in the air. This is great news as Bangkok is critical to any advance into Burma by Mogamis little pests.

Mogami continues to do the same to Port Moresby, pounding the now defenceless base like clockwork. Hmmmm...I need some reinforcements!

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 06/08/42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 54 encounters mine field at Bali (24,68)

Japanese Ships
CL Kitakami, Mine hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval bombardment of Bali, at 24,68


Allied aircraft
no flights


Allied aircraft losses
Lockheed 212: 6 destroyed, 4 damaged
Swordfish: 2 destroyed, 1 damaged
T.IVa: 3 destroyed, 6 damaged

Japanese Ships
CL Naka
CL Isuzu
CL Yura
CL Kinu
CL Tatsuta
CL Yubari
DD Makigumo
DD Kagero
DD Kuroshio
DD Oyashio
DD Isokaze
DD Shiranuhi
DD Tokitsukaze
DD Hamakaze
DD Akatsuki
DD Ikazuchi
DD Inazuma
DD Amagiri


Allied ground losses:
20 casualties reported

Airbase hits 6
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 18
Port hits 10
Port supply hits 13

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 23,56

Japanese Ships
AP Baikal Maru, Shell hits 4, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
SS KVII

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Bangkok , at 29,40

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 51

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-46-II Dinah: 2 destroyed, 1 damaged


Japanese ground losses:
58 casualties reported
Guns lost 2

Airbase hits 3
Runway hits 32

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Kendari , at 33,71


Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 21
LB-30 Liberator x 12


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
31 casualties reported

Resources hits 2
Runway hits 1
Port hits 4

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Amboina , at 39,73


Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 36


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
34 casualties reported

Manpower hits 2
Runway hits 7

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Port Moresby , at 53,91

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 45
G3M Nell x 26
G4M1 Betty x 96

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 1 damaged

Airbase hits 10
Airbase supply hits 5
Runway hits 76


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 21st Mixed Brigade, at 29,39


Allied aircraft
Hurricane II x 9
Blenheim I x 6


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
12 casualties reported

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 21st Mixed Brigade, at 29,39


Allied aircraft
Blenheim IV x 41
Beaufort V-IX x 7


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
141 casualties reported
Guns lost 8

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 16th Division, at 22,64


Allied aircraft
Wirraway x 15
CW-21B Demon x 8
Brewster 339D x 6
Martin 139 x 22
Beaufort V-IX x 10
P-39D Airacobra x 21
P-40E Warhawk x 3
B-25C Mitchell x 6


Allied aircraft losses
Wirraway: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
68 casualties reported
Guns lost 1


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 16th Division, at 22,64


Allied aircraft
Wirraway x 14


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
19 casualties reported

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 48th Division, at 19,60


Allied aircraft
Wirraway x 10
Kittyhawk I x 5


Allied aircraft losses
Wirraway: 8 destroyed, 2 damaged

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 5th/B Division, at 19,62


Allied aircraft
Wirraway x 14


No Allied losses

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 18,60


Allied aircraft
Hudson I x 10


No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
PG Tatsumiya Maru, Bomb hits 9, on fire, heavy damage

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 25,67


Allied aircraft
Swordfish x 8
T.IVa x 6


No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
CL Kitakami, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 22,64

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 3547 troops, 85 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 16343 troops, 153 guns, 1 vehicles


Japanese ground losses:
21 casualties reported
Guns lost 4
Vehicles lost 1


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tjilitjap

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 2806 troops, 38 guns, 13 vehicles

Defending force 5171 troops, 30 guns, 0 vehicles


Japanese ground losses:
53 casualties reported
Guns lost 6

Thought I'd post a pick for those nay sayers who may think that the modifications being made to the logistics model in the Combined Historical Scenario mod are unwarranted and that the current one is fine. This is the supply situation and does not include the bases with the most supply, I simply started the list at Perth as this is the Australian base with the most supply. Half a million supply in Perth alone folks! Every base in Australia has ay least 12,000 supply. I'm running moderate size convoys (approx 20 AKs with one or two escorts). I'm going to be able to convert the four bases along the noth shore of Oz into bases capable of handling 4E bombers without payload penalties. The DEI when in Japanese hands is going to be worthless rubble. This is obviously so far from the reality of the situation I could laugh. I am going to adopt some sort of house rule here for the sake of the game. This is just silly and my taking advantage of it would be gamey.

What limitations do you think I should place on myself?

Oh, we need some sort of cap on supply storage at bases as well I think. Half a million! [:D][8|]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Page 4

I can't believe those losses on the Japanese! I guess I ought to have decided to fight for the Dutch possessions afterall. Maybe next time I will.

I'be got to believe Japan will find itself terribly hamstrung the rest of the war from the damage you've inflicted to his ability to lift troops anywhere. We'll see down the road.

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Java has hurt my assault lift capacity. Currently in undamaged 1.5k AP I can only lift 105,000 load points. (70AP) This is not counting the 3kAP(402,000 lift points in undamaged ships) I use for follow on or 2nd Wave forces or the 4.5kAP I use for movement between friendly bases. So I am down to only being able to land 4 DIv at once.
I don't use AK for assaults

Do you mean you never bring supply in AKs along with your assault force? If not, why not?

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Thought I'd post a pick for those nay sayers who may think that the modifications being made to the logistics model in the Combined Historical Scenario mod are unwarranted and that the current one is fine. This is the supply situation and does not include the bases with the most supply, I simply started the list at Perth as this is the Australian base with the most supply. Half a million supply in Perth alone folks! Every base in Australia has ay least 12,000 supply. I'm running moderate size convoys (approx 20 AKs with one or two escorts). I'm going to be able to convert the four bases along the noth shore of Oz into bases capable of handling 4E bombers without payload penalties. The DEI when in Japanese hands is going to be worthless rubble. This is obviously so far from the reality of the situation I could laugh. I am going to adopt some sort of house rule here for the sake of the game. This is just silly and my taking advantage of it would be gamey.

What limitations do you think I should place on myself?

Oh, we need some sort of cap on supply storage at bases as well I think. Half a million! [:D][8|]

I thought the CHS had corrected the Australian situation by removing the railway and such stuff. Well, there is still a problem here.

What limitations do you think I should place on myself?

Ship supplies in NW Australia from another port than Perth.

I also noticed that there are 800 000 points in fuel in NZ (Auckland & Wellington). No shortage here either.

Fall back men!

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Thought I'd post a pick for those nay sayers who may think that the modifications being made to the logistics model in the Combined Historical Scenario mod are unwarranted and that the current one is fine. This is the supply situation and does not include the bases with the most supply, I simply started the list at Perth as this is the Australian base with the most supply. Half a million supply in Perth alone folks! Every base in Australia has ay least 12,000 supply. I'm running moderate size convoys (approx 20 AKs with one or two escorts). I'm going to be able to convert the four bases along the noth shore of Oz into bases capable of handling 4E bombers without payload penalties. The DEI when in Japanese hands is going to be worthless rubble. This is obviously so far from the reality of the situation I could laugh. I am going to adopt some sort of house rule here for the sake of the game. This is just silly and my taking advantage of it would be gamey.

What limitations do you think I should place on myself?

Oh, we need some sort of cap on supply storage at bases as well I think. Half a million! [:D][8|]

I'm beginning to understand the real nature of the supply problem in Oz. I'd no idea such a steady buildup of supply was possible. Had I known this I never would have sent a large convoy initially to Australia. Silly me. What I unloaded there is a mere drop in the bucket![:D]

I might have to be "gamey" with re to using the airfields in northern Oz, however, seeing as how I'm strapped with the even less sensible "Allied Sub Doctrine" restriction. A year and a half before the Allied subs will reasonably engage? [:(]

"I say, Magnum, this reminds me of a time when I was serving as Mountbatten's dogsbody in Burma...."

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Using the engineers on Java to concentrate on and expand the Soerabaja port to size 9 easry in the game instead of expanding airfields much continues to reap huge dividends. Today, the valuable cruiser Kitakami strikes one and is subsequently sunk by torpedo bombers stationed on Bali for just such an eventuality. Sayanora to Ens Yoshida and his radar suite capable of directing radioless fighters on CAP!![;)] Good to know one of the torpedo cruisers won't get a chance to use all those Long Lances in combat as well.

Sorry to butt in, has anyone ever seen the Kitakami or Oi used in a surface combat?

BTW, the IJN cap system involved the use of really big flags, no radio was necessary. [;)]

I'm beginning to understand the real nature of the supply problem in Oz. I'd no idea such a steady buildup of supply was possible. Had I known this I never would have sent a large convoy initially to Australia. Silly me. What I unloaded there is a mere drop in the bucket!

While supply is overdone in Oz, and everywhere for that matter because the AI needs help and auto convoys blow chunks, the majority of this supply was shipped in.

This is a problem and here are some of the causes.

- generic supply model...being able to fire spam out of a cannon and have it explode like a shell eases the supply problem by an astronomical degree
- an equal amount of supply is produced in resource centres which, buy doing this, the devs have erased the need to move raw material to manufacturing centres and supply to the front..which leaves alot of merchants free to move military supply
- there is too much supply at the source ports
- there is no operational maximum for ports so a thousand ships can load/unload simultaneously, immensely speeding up turn around times
- there is no civilian economy which eats supply and necessitates the use of a large percentage of merchants to sustain it leaving all the shipping for military usage
- the rate of supply usage by units seems negligable
- innaccurate map with railroads everywhere when IRL there were much fewer

there are many more issues but I'm getting depressed and my head hurts[:(]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I'm beginning to understand the real nature of the supply problem in Oz. I'd no idea such a steady buildup of supply was possible. Had I known this I never would have sent a large convoy initially to Australia. Silly me. What I unloaded there is a mere drop in the bucket!

While supply is overdone in Oz, and everywhere for that matter because the AI needs help and auto convoys blow chunks, the majority of this supply was shipped in.

This is a problem and here are some of the causes.

- generic supply model...being able to fire spam out of a cannon and have it explode like a shell eases the supply problem by an astronomical degree
- an equal amount of supply is produced in resource centres which, buy doing this, the devs have erased the need to move raw material to manufacturing centres and supply to the front..which leaves alot of merchants free to move military supply
- there is too much supply at the source ports
- there is no operational maximum for ports so a thousand ships can load/unload simultaneously, immensely speeding up turn around times
- there is no civilian economy which eats supply and necessitates the use of a large percentage of merchants to sustain it leaving all the shipping for military usage
- the rate of supply usage by units seems negligable
- innaccurate map with railroads everywhere when IRL there were much fewer

there are many more issues but I'm getting depressed and my head hurts[:(]

Yes, lack of civilian supply usage strikes me as a huge oversight (probably not even that, as I believe the developers simply didn't want to bother with yet another detail--though when you think of it, when one detail is rendered senseless by the lack of inclusion of another detail, then what's the good point to the first detail?), which leads into the problem of being able to use all available shipping for strictly military needs (a point which strikes me as being rather obviously dumb); no need to move raw materials to manufacturing centers just baffles me (then why have all this other "detail" about keeping Japan's economy going to begin with?--I thought the purpose was to give the so-called grognards a complete hands-on experience); watching a very large convoy in, say, Noumea, unload like nobody's business is a bad joke (building the port up as fast as the USN can is another problem, for it wasn't just the physicalities at work there but also the need for competent organization skills to operate the port efficiently, which were not available for awhile); and with re to supply usage by units, apparently there was no thought of all to the fact that American units used a whole helluva lot more supply than any of the other Allies or any other enemy in the war as far as I know. Just guessing, but I'd dare say a 2:1 factor wouldn't be overstating it. More for sure, whatever the actual ratio was.

As for the generic nature of supply: I'd have to side with Gary on that one. There'd be no end to it if you started to break supply down into the countless individual items of actuality.

Railroads I'm not sure about, though there is a pretty good case that the one to northern Oz should at least be "reduced" in terms of its efficiency. I just haven't bothered to research it thoroughly, but wasn't there a rail going up there at the time but of a different gauge? And if so, what use were the Allies able to make of this line?

As for too much supply at the main source points: I'd have to say there ought to be nearly an unlimited source of supply in America after the middle of 1942. Before that, who knows? Probably much less than what is available from the designer. Don't know about Karachi as I haven't researched the movement of British (and American, eventually) supply to India through the Suez canal. Have you? If so, what is your estimate?

As for the generic nature of supply: I'd have to side with Gary on that one. There'd be no end to it if you started to break supply down into the countless individual items of actuality

Agreed, but at least do something to make it harder for certain units to get supply than it is for others. Ie. Warships...why not restrict warship reamament to bases of either a specific minimum size or even better, have a naval base unit there. Otherwise, why not call base forces lemonade stands. What's the point of having all these different types of units if the have no special roles?

As for what levels should be? Who knows. I just want to make it necessary to use civilian merchant shipping as movers of goods, not just troops. We are fiddling with this in the mod. You and Chez should be testing it given your flaming pace.

Mogami, having taken Yenen after six months of fighting, has pulled back his troops and has the advantage of rail lines to attack any point faster than I can react. Hopefully the the size 9 fortifications, a core of well trained troops, and the defence in depth I have deployed will repulse any move the hated Japanese may try.

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

As for the generic nature of supply: I'd have to side with Gary on that one. There'd be no end to it if you started to break supply down into the countless individual items of actuality

Agreed, but at least do something to make it harder for certain units to get supply than it is for others. Ie. Warships...why not restrict warship reamament to bases of either a specific minimum size or even better, have a naval base unit there. Otherwise, why not call base forces lemonade stands. What's the point of having all these different types of units if the have no special roles?

I agree, at least in certain cases. Let's get that straight.

As to answering your question . . . it's called chrome. [:D]

But let's take this further. Toward the end of the war the USN became capable of (and extremely proficient at) reprovisioning and even rearming ships at an incredibly quick rate. At sea, during combat! How would you possibly account for this with just an adjustment to port sizes and whatnot? See what I mean? We'd need special ships and rules for that kind of realism. (I'd love it but we're not going to see it.)

As for what levels should be? Who knows. I just want to make it necessary to use civilian merchant shipping as movers of goods, not just troops. We are fiddling with this in the mod. You and Chez should be testing it given your flaming pace.

Well, check with Chez. Maybe he's willing to devote yet more time to that. If it's against me, that'd be okay, too. He's a reliable opponent.

By the way, didn't you indicate that this mod plays in conjunction with Andrew Brown's map? (I guess it would have to, huh?)