Rise of the Sheep! JocMeister(A) vs. Obvert(J)

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Can anyone explain to me how a Jap SCTF in late 1944 can get sneak past 6 different SCTFs and annihilate a whole Tanker TF?

There are
2x TFs with 4 BBs + 8 DDs in each
2x 12 Fletcher TFs
2x 4 Fletcher TFs to deal with the MTBs

All in the same hex as the Tanker TF. Yet a lone DD together with a DE can get into the same hex and sink 6 tankers and then get out without being engaged. Really? [8|]

Were your SCTFs in patrol mode or just sitting there "on station". In patrol mode they are moving and searching, in "on station" mode they have steam in the boilers but are not moving. I am not sure if their search ability is less [radar operators should be awake regardless], but in my experience ships "on station" get surprised more than patrolling ships.

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Were your SCTFs in patrol mode or just sitting there "on station". In patrol mode they are moving and searching, in "on station" mode they have steam in the boilers but are not moving. I am not sure if their search ability is less [radar operators should be awake regardless], but in my experience ships "on station" get surprised more than patrolling ships.

All were on Patrol with Tinian set as only patrol zone. The BB TFs had a react setting of 0 but the other had 2. Just odd.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

And can anyone find an explanation for why all my TFs have their homeport reset from Tinian to Sarmi/Manus and ignore or orders to stay put and decide to go to Sarmi/Manus leaving the Tinian CAP. This has happened to several different TFs now and its costing me ships!

If the TFs are not set to "Direct" routing/"Absolute" threat tolerance, they will retreat from any enemy aircraft in the area, even if they only have Babs recon aircraft. If the home port and "Return to Base" are contrary to the desire to flee, the TF will change them. TF commander should have decent "cojones" (aggression) setting too.[;)]

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Were your SCTFs in patrol mode or just sitting there "on station". In patrol mode they are moving and searching, in "on station" mode they have steam in the boilers but are not moving. I am not sure if their search ability is less [radar operators should be awake regardless], but in my experience ships "on station" get surprised more than patrolling ships.

All were on Patrol with Tinian set as only patrol zone. The BB TFs had a react setting of 0 but the other had 2. Just odd.

Wow! Really odd, just like the subs with Zen torpedoes for your CVs and the MTBs that can't be bombed. [:(]

Better check those ships for contraband homemade hooch from the last port ...

[witpqs]

I just set up a quick sandbox. 1000 (yes one thousand P51s) P51H 2 hexes from a Jap base with LRCAP 80 rest 20.
200 Tabbys flying in to pick up a ID. Anyone wants to try a guess on the results?

Day 1
6 Mustangs lost to OPS. 3 Tabbys lost to OPS. More than half the division airlifted out

Day 2
1 Tabby lost to OPS 1 P51 lost to OPS
ID flown out without any loss.

... sounds plausible?

EDIT: Screen uploaded. I have been trying to tell people its not working but I havn´t had the time to sandbox it. But according to some people (one person and its not Erik I´m talking about) this is perfectly fine.

I say something is broken. And if its not and its working as intended it needs to change. No wonder Erik has had no problems just airlifting everything out.

Two things, you didn't say how many transports. I suppose if you put enough transports on the job they could get 1/2 in a day, but I don't know what 'enough' is.

Second, for 1,000 P-51 that sounds like pretty light casualties on the transports. Like the other issue, I suggest sending the sandbox to Michael and because maybe things are not working properly.

[JocMeister]

It does say 200 transport [;)] But the number of transports arn´t the issue but despite the transport being intercepted no losses are incurred neither to the transport nor the troops they are carrying. And it doesn´t stop them from picking up the troops.

I´m not sure I have the energy to report this to Michael. Any hint of a bug always leads to a "discussion" with certain individuals and frankly I´m pretty sick of them. I already tried to discuss this on the forum but was instantly "jumped on" by a certain someone.

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
If the TFs are not set to "Direct" routing/"Absolute" threat tolerance, they will retreat from any enemy aircraft in the area, even if they only have Babs recon aircraft. If the home port and "Return to Base" are contrary to the desire to flee, the TF will change them. TF commander should have decent "cojones" (aggression) setting too.[;)]

They are all set to Direct and Absolute. The first time I though I just had forgotten it on a TF but it has happened on numerous times now. Very weird!

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

It does say 200 transport [;)] But the number of transports arn´t the issue but despite the transport being intercepted no losses are incurred neither to the transport nor the troops they are carrying. And it doesn´t stop them from picking up the troops.

I´m not sure I have the energy to report this to Michael. Any hint of a bug always leads to a "discussion" with certain individuals and frankly I´m pretty sick of them. I already tried to discuss this on the forum but was instantly "jumped on" by a certain someone.

Sorry - missed the # Tabbys.

If you had the energy to sandbox it then surely you have the energy to present it. You don't have to reply to comments.[:)]

[Speedysteve]

Crazy results indeed Jocke. Definitely doesn't feel right with air transport............

[JocMeister]

Well, I posted in the Tech forum. I know exactly what will happen now so I took precautions and green buttoned two people in advance! [;)]

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Well, I posted in the Tech forum. I know exactly what will happen now so I took precautions and green buttoned two people in advance! [;)]

You could always bomb the snot out of their destination base . . .

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Well, I posted in the Tech forum. I know exactly what will happen now so I took precautions and green buttoned two people in advance! [;)]

You could always bomb the snot out of their destination base . . .

Jocke's in-game situation is at Davao where he has shut the AF, but Mavis and Emily are not affected by this. He would need to figure out the originating AFs and bomb them at night to get the transports, maybe.
The issue is the transport interception algorithm. I am not sure if the issue is that the Transport phase of the turn takes place AFTER all the Morning/Afternoon air strikes/sweeps/etc. [just before the ground combat phase]. If this is the reason, it should be fixed in some way to make interception result in losses. I am not sure how the game can give an intercept message but not seem to model any air combat.

IRL I know that operations "over the hump" in Burma/China resulted in occasional losses to fighters. Since the game does not do en-route intercepts, it should model some equivalent at departure and arrival bases.

[Bullwinkle58]

I thought it was Tabbys. Crossed his posts.

[JocMeister]

Well I do have a pretty good idea of what bases he is using. But its not one base but rather 6 bases. One of them Manilla which is covered by 500 Fighters and would cost me more than I can afford. So its not really an option right now.

[JocMeister]

Game suspended

Well. Right now the game is on hold. Frankly I don´t know if I will find the energy to get going again. Right now I just feel drained of all motivation.

The readers that has followed this AAR for some time know have much time and energy I have spent on trying to stop the constant flow of troops flying in or out. My frustration has been pretty much endless with this and I constantly bring it up in this AAR. I brought it up for the first time in mid 42 when I myself was able to airlift out the entire 1st USMC from Noumea without any losses despite the KB being on station just one hex from the base.

The frustration has risen steadily throughout the game with constant comment from me about "the point of doing it as Erik will just fly everything out". His ability to reinforce isolated islands like Jolo, Sorong and Biak despite me having a massive LRCAP up doing as much as possible to stop the flow of troops. The frustration has always been there and always nagging at me. It just gives that "all in vain" feeling and it has been ever present.

I wonder how many times I have written in this AAR "I don´t know what the point of this is as he will just fly everything out". 10 times? 50 times? It just goes to show my frustration with this.

I have of course brought this up with Erik on numerous times but he has always talked about "taking losses getting fragments out". So I thought "fine it sucks but its not changing much". But this situation at Davao was kind of the last straw and does show very clearly that it changes a HUGE deal. Erik is not flying fragments out. He is flying whole units out with no extra losses at all. Only the usual OPS losses. I don´t know if he has found some way to resize his float transport capacity but air lifting out 25.000 troops in 4 days despite 200 Fighters stationed on LRCAP only 1 hex away. Losses: 4-6 Transports in OPS losses. Really? [8|]

Some people might be entirely fine with invulnerable air transports. But for me this is equal to having invulnerable transport ships that cannot be attacked or stopped. Its a game stopper for me. Erik admitted he wouldn´t even have placed 100.000 troops on Mindanao if he hadn´t been sure he could get them out by air. That in itself speaks volumes.

You know my plan to land behind his lines on Luzon? Its pointless. Even if I could box him in from two sides around Manilla he will just fly everything out and I will face it again on Formosa or Okinawa. That feeling of what's the point comes back again.

Some people might be entirely okay with this Japanese ability to move huge amount troops at will absolutely unhindered and without loss. But I´m not and thats what its all about right? If that take all the enjoyment out of the game for me it does. But I have a hard time picturing many players being okay with this to be honest. As I asked Erik in a email this morning.

"To put yourself a bit in my situation how motivated would you have been to play on in the early days if I would just have flown everything in the PI, Java and Malaya out to OZ leaving behind only that I deemed not worth lifting out? And there would have been absolutely no way for you to stop me"

Anyway. It actually feels pretty good now that I decided to finally act on this. If the game is over now I´m fine with it and I will feel no loss. [:)] Playing on with the current system would only have left me with frustration anyway. The frustration has always been there taking part of the enjoyment away. I actually feel very relieved right now.

I want to add here that I tried to discuss the issue some time ago on the forum to see if others were having issues with the way it worked. This discussion was instantly slammed by "a leading authority" on the forum quickly destroying any possibility to discuss the issue and any possibility for other people to discuss it and/or form their own opinion on the matter. This is sadly the case in many instances on the forum over the last few years. Its a shame what the forum has become when a select few peoples own opinions on things are stated as absolute truths and nothing that goes against their own views are allowed to be discussed nor questioned. It wasn´t always like that. If this turns out to be a bug in the end it might have been uncovered right there and then. Even if it isn´t a bug but another for those "design features" I doubt many people would be fine with this if they knew how it works.

But then again it might just be me that thinks airlifting troops should be interceptable/stoppable...

Signing off for now.

[RogerJNeilson]

I understand your frustration, the game engine seems to be allowing something that is not realistic at all.

I am however a little puzzled by all of this for a variety of reasons....

1. As an Allied player I can airlift men with rifles - but that's about all. Men with rifles are not much good, is there a qualitative difference in the Japanese airlift capacity - do their planes have huge airlift capacity to move heavy equipment? Is this realistic? If they are just moving men with rifles then they have to leave their heavy equipment in situ and this should degrade their ability to fight....
2. How many transport planes do the Japanese have? If its more than the Allies then where is the justification for this?
3. If heavy planes are doing long journeys then there should be very significant ops degredation - in terms of maintenance, ops losses etc. If this is not happening then there has to be something wrong.

Following the debate elsewhere the issue seemed to be focused on could fighters intercept transports and at what range. The above factors also seem to be pertinent.

I'm not seeing the same in my 1944 game - maybe its happening, but I'm not seeing the effects. My Jap opponent does not seem able to airlift in this way - but maybe the context or his play is different. I'm certainly aware that a base I recently captured is only getting men with rifles delivered by air.....all their heavy equipment is sitting in storage sheds at the airlift base.

Roger

[RogerJNeilson]

I am reading both sides here so will not make any comment that could compromise anything. I think there is a clear distinction between game play and game mechanics which hopefully you two can help to resolve. If its a case that your opponent has a way of getting the transports in and out that is realistic and possible then its up to you to figure it out. If its a case that transports cannot be stopped then that is a situation that is unrealistic. You will be doing us all a service if you can discover which it is.

Essentially what I posted in the opposing AAR


Roger

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3

I understand your frustration, the game engine seems to be allowing something that is not realistic at all.

I am however a little puzzled by all of this for a variety of reasons....

1. As an Allied player I can airlift men with rifles - but that's about all. Men with rifles are not much good, is there a qualitative difference in the Japanese airlift capacity - do their planes have huge airlift capacity to move heavy equipment? Is this realistic? If they are just moving men with rifles then they have to leave their heavy equipment in situ and this should degrade their ability to fight....
2. How many transport planes do the Japanese have? If its more than the Allies then where is the justification for this?
3. If heavy planes are doing long journeys then there should be very significant ops degredation - in terms of maintenance, ops losses etc. If this is not happening then there has to be something wrong.

Following the debate elsewhere the issue seemed to be focused on could fighters intercept transports and at what range. The above factors also seem to be pertinent.

I'm not seeing the same in my 1944 game - maybe its happening, but I'm not seeing the effects. My Jap opponent does not seem able to airlift in this way - but maybe the context or his play is different. I'm certainly aware that a base I recently captured is only getting men with rifles delivered by air.....all their heavy equipment is sitting in storage sheds at the airlift base.

Roger

Well the quick answer is that it takes more time. But both the Emilies and Tabbys have way more lift capacity then the allied planes. 12400 and 9920 respectively. They can lift pretty much everything out. The engine starts lifting in the troops first but eventually most of it will go including the big guns.

I don´t know if my opponent has used some creative methods of resizing to get the ability to airlift the way he does. I have asked him but havn´t received an answer yet. Also I guess it could be hard to miss your opponent doing this if you arn´t really looking for it.

But the main problem for me remains that he can do this with impunity with no risk to the transports involved. IE. His transports cannot be shot down. By now he should have lost thousands of transports putting a massive drain on his economy. Instead I have lost more transports to OPS then him lifting supply 4-5 hexes from airfield to airfield while he has lifted hundred of thousands of troops in and out of combat zones with only half the losses I have suffered flying to friendly airfield to friendly airfield.

[RogerJNeilson]

If transports of the 2nd WW era can lift heavy stuff then there is something seriously wrong - this should not be possible - never mind the lift capacity, how do they actually get the stuff on board?

There also should be serious ops losses and downtime for maintenance.....

Roger

[Speedysteve]

Sorry to see the game's on hold Jocke. Can understand your frustration though. Think I'd feel the same if there's no way to stop any air transportation at all!