****** OFFICIAL ADMIRAL's EDITION AAR V2*****

[DuckofTindalos]

Well, they were damaged and aborted, obviously. The Jap planes were only Nates, after all.

[Q-Ball]

Great AAR Andy!!!!!

Question: Did PoW and Repulse sink?

Can you show us the new ships sunk screen?

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

2 days later the armour retreated them again

As all the units were involved nothing was in reserve so no pursuit - the days of shock attack pursuit over hundreds of miles are over as you need 1 unit to attack 1 to pursue no longer can units attack AND exploit

Thanks for spelling that out. Yet another big step toward greater realism!

[moose1999]

A general question:
What factors lie behind the adjusted assault/defense values?
I assume things like morale, terrain, fortifications?

[wild_Willie2]

ORIGINAL: briny_norman

A general question:
What factors lie behind the adjusted assault/defense values?
I assume things like morale, terrain, fortifications?

A LOT of things go into this value....

These come to my mind.

Experience, morale, leadership, terrain, supply, preppoints, HQ in range, support available, disruption and fortifications...

Most likely there are even more factors involved that these.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: pad152

pad,
I'll take a stab at these without benefit of looking over Andy's shoulder during the replay.

1. Why are some Sally's droping 250 kg bombs and other droping 100 kg bombs?

4 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 1200 feet (12th Sentai / 3rd Air)
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
4 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 1200 feet (98th Sentai / 3rd Air)
Airfield Attack: 4 x 100 kg GP Bomb

We needed a way to better represent the missionized loadouts that LBA (Particularly IJ side) carried. More smaller bombs equate to more "hits" against non-naval targets and are less concerned with AP capability than spreading effects over a larger unarmored area. There are behind the scene checks that determine what loadout is used. Not at liberty to divulge the details of this yet.

2. Still not sure I've seen a Buffalo I, lost to A2A in either AAR, how about a view of the air losses at the end.

To be fair, if you've read Shores Vol I, you'll remember that the great majority of Buffalo kills rarely resulted in an outright, blow up in your face, kill. Usually they were deadsticked or the victim of several attacks, the last of which culminating in a kill. Most were destroyed or made unserviceable on the ground owing to poor field conditions and the rapid advance of the IJAAF air campaign.

That said, I can assure you that Buffaloes can be destroyed. But it takes a strong fighter Sweep or Escort to do so. As the IJ player it has to be a primary focus to seek out and degrade the RAF in Malaya. The best way to do this is to operate Sweeps and Escorts in large numbers. I recommend Sentai strength operations at a minimum and heavy escort when Bombers are involved, otherwise the RAF will linger. Bottom line is minimum 2:1 force ratios, ideally 3:1.

In Andy's case, I could be wrong, he is better equipped to plan, execute, and report the ground component of this AAR, and may not be fully realizing the potential of the new A2A code with his style of play. There is a lot to learn even for the Devs when it comes to other areas of this monster. I admit to being wholly unqualified to speak to the Sea or Land components...

3. 12:1 odds and no allied A2A loss?

Japanese aircraft
Ki-27b Nate x 24

Allied aircraft
Blenheim IF x 1
Buffalo I x 1

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-27b Nate: 2 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
Blenheim IF: 1 damaged
Buffalo I: 1 damaged

We coded several "situational" aspects to A2A. The task was to somehow represent how a smaller force could engage a much larger force, and at a minimum survive, and at a maximum make an effective attack and retreat following proper and advantageous positioning. What you are seeing here is, possibly this new dynamic combined with the good durability of the Buffalo against weaker though accurate machine gun caliber weapons.

If the first attack against each of these Buffs resulted in a certain damage level, it would cause them to "dive away", or retire with severe damage and take them out of position to continue the fight. Lower DUR A/C might otherwise just blow up.

Additionally there is an economy of force aspect to A2A where as a flight lead I may have my 3rd Chutai engage the 2 Buffaloes that are lurking to the east, and keep my main force in an effective Escort position rather than have all my A/C bite off on what could be a decoy...

4. 4:1 + odds and no allied A2A loss?
Morning Air attack on Georgetown , at 49,74

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ia Oscar x 13

Allied aircraft
Buffalo I x 3

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
Buffalo I: 3 damaged
Buffalo I: 1 destroyed on ground

In this case you'll notice the Oscars are carrying bombs...depending on the positioning of the different flights the Buffs may have fumbled their first attack, yet caused a flight of Oscars to jettison their bombs to deal with the Buffs at an initial disadvantage. Given the EXP and relative disposition of RAF Buffalo units in Malaya, it isn't unreasonable that this might be the case, especially since the Higher EXP pilots don't ALWAYS fly first anymore.

Also see above as to other contributing factors.

Hope this helps.

[HansBolter]

The extreme darkness of the generic terrain background gives the impression that all of the attacks are taking place at night.

Since the semi-transparent area wide overlay carrying the unit icons and strengths serves to darken the background you might want to consider making the background overly light to compensate.

[Andy Mac]

Elf knows better than me on this stuff I have not been paying much attention to air as I am trying to show offgroundstuff !!!
 
Having said that I just found a bug so may have to end (new build out anyway)
 
Andy

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Elf knows better than me on this stuff I have not been paying much attention to air as I am trying to show offgroundstuff !!!

Having said that I just found a bug so may have to end (new build out anyway)

Andy

Andy, I'm referrring to the ground combat screens you have posted here.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

This is what I am referring to. Note that the sort-of transparent overlay carrying the unit icons and strengths darkens the background artwork (the lighter background artwork can be seen unfiltered around outside the edges of the overlay. The combination of the background and the overlay becomes so dark it gives the visual impression of a night battle. Lightening the background so the overlay doesn't cause everything to be so dark would go a long way toward making the image look more like daytime and less like nighttime. Obviously not a big deal, but my profession involves graphic presentation so I tend to notice these kinds of things.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: TheElf

ORIGINAL: pad152

pad,
I'll take a stab at these without benefit of looking over Andy's shoulder during the replay.

1. Why are some Sally's droping 250 kg bombs and other droping 100 kg bombs?

4 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 1200 feet (12th Sentai / 3rd Air)
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
4 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 1200 feet (98th Sentai / 3rd Air)
Airfield Attack: 4 x 100 kg GP Bomb

We needed a way to better represent the missionized loadouts that LBA (Particularly IJ side) carried. More smaller bombs equate to more "hits" against non-naval targets and are less concerned with AP capability than spreading effects over a larger unarmored area. There are behind the scene checks that determine what loadout is used. Not at liberty to divulge the details of this yet.

2. Still not sure I've seen a Buffalo I, lost to A2A in either AAR, how about a view of the air losses at the end.

To be fair, if you've read Shores Vol I, you'll remember that the great majority of Buffalo kills rarely resulted in an outright, blow up in your face, kill. Usually they were deadsticked or the victim of several attacks, the last of which culminating in a kill. Most were destroyed or made unserviceable on the ground owing to poor field conditions and the rapid advance of the IJAAF air campaign.

That said, I can assure you that Buffaloes can be destroyed. But it takes a strong fighter Sweep or Escort to do so. As the IJ player it has to be a primary focus to seek out and degrade the RAF in Malaya. The best way to do this is to operate Sweeps and Escorts in large numbers. I recommend Sentai strength operations at a minimum and heavy escort when Bombers are involved, otherwise the RAF will linger. Bottom line is minimum 2:1 force ratios, ideally 3:1.

In Andy's case, I could be wrong, he is better equipped to plan, execute, and report the ground component of this AAR, and may not be fully realizing the potential of the new A2A code with his style of play. There is a lot to learn even for the Devs when it comes to other areas of this monster. I admit to being wholly unqualified to speak to the Sea or Land components...

3. 12:1 odds and no allied A2A loss?

Japanese aircraft
Ki-27b Nate x 24

Allied aircraft
Blenheim IF x 1
Buffalo I x 1

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-27b Nate: 2 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
Blenheim IF: 1 damaged
Buffalo I: 1 damaged

We coded several "situational" aspects to A2A. The task was to somehow represent how a smaller force could engage a much larger force, and at a minimum survive, and at a maximum make an effective attack and retreat following proper and advantageous positioning. What you are seeing here is, possibly this new dynamic combined with the good durability of the Buffalo against weaker though accurate machine gun caliber weapons.

If the first attack against each of these Buffs resulted in a certain damage level, it would cause them to "dive away", or retire with severe damage and take them out of position to continue the fight. Lower DUR A/C might otherwise just blow up.

Additionally there is an economy of force aspect to A2A where as a flight lead I may have my 3rd Chutai engage the 2 Buffaloes that are lurking to the east, and keep my main force in an effective Escort position rather than have all my A/C bite off on what could be a decoy...

4. 4:1 + odds and no allied A2A loss?
Morning Air attack on Georgetown , at 49,74

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ia Oscar x 13

Allied aircraft
Buffalo I x 3

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
Buffalo I: 3 damaged
Buffalo I: 1 destroyed on ground

In this case you'll notice the Oscars are carrying bombs...depending on the positioning of the different flights the Buffs may have fumbled their first attack, yet caused a flight of Oscars to jettison their bombs to deal with the Buffs at an initial disadvantage. Given the EXP and relative disposition of RAF Buffalo units in Malaya, it isn't unreasonable that this might be the case, especially since the Higher EXP pilots don't ALWAYS fly first anymore.

Also see above as to other contributing factors.

Hope this helps.

thanks for those explanations Elf! [&o] When you say that especially the IJA uses more smaller bombs on ground attacks instead of fewer big bombs then why do some Sallies drop 4 x 250kg (big) bombs and other Sallies drop also only 4 x 100kg (small) bombs. Couldn´t they carry 6 or 8 bombs then. Perhaps 10 x 100kg bombs don´t fit in the bomb bay but can they only carry 4 bombs max?

And does the game differentiate between ground hits of 250kg bombs and 100kg bombs? Never found an answer to this.

[Kaletsch2007]

Maybe it is all just about the white colour of the text ?

[DuckofTindalos]

Or maybe somebody should consider that the game does not, and has never, featured night-time land combat.[8|]

[Andy Mac]

Its the JPEG compression I aqm using MSPaint so itmakessomescreenshots look dire

I will be back testing and tweaking AI so I will be dark for a few days

I will re run the Japanese side of this testto completion after the next couple of builds.

Thanks for reading guys we are honestlygoing as fast as we can

Andy

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Or maybe somebody should consider that the game does not, and has never, featured night-time land combat.[8|]

Thanks for that totally useless comment. Typical of what we have come to expect from you.

Regardless of anything exactly what part of the darkness of the graphics creating a visual impression of night persists in escaping your grasp?

I make a perfectly valid observation and offer a suggestion and I get your stinking sarcasm in response.

How about doing is all a favor and make an effort to crawl back under your rock.

[pad152]

I'll take a stab at these without benefit of looking over Andy's shoulder during the replay.
[blockquote]quote:

1. Why are some Sally's droping 250 kg bombs and other droping 100 kg bombs?

4 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 1200 feet (12th Sentai / 3rd Air)
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
4 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 1200 feet (98th Sentai / 3rd Air)
Airfield Attack: 4 x 100 kg GP Bomb
[/blockquote] We needed a way to better represent the missionized loadouts that LBA (Particularly IJ side) carried. More smaller bombs equate to more "hits" against non-naval targets and are less concerned with AP capability than spreading effects over a larger unarmored area. There are behind the scene checks that determine what loadout is used. Not at liberty to divulge the details of this yet.

Elf - please explain!

4 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 1200 feet (12th Sentai / 3rd Air)
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
4 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 1200 feet (98th Sentai / 3rd Air)
Airfield Attack: 4 x 100 kg GP Bomb

4 - planes with 250 kg = 1000 kg
4  -planes with  100 kg  = 400 kg

Why do the same bombers on the same mission carry 600 kg less in bombs?

How do you get more hits with 4 - 100 kg bombs Vs. 4 - 250 kg bombs?

[Andy Mac]

As I said my JPEG was darker than the actual screen because of the software I use - its fine !!

[Andy Mac]

OK Guys as I said earlier new build is out with new AI functionality to test so most of the team including myself will be MIA for a few days - we have a lot of testing to do.
 
Will be back with more after the next build cycle ta ta for now !!!

[modrow]

Andy,

once again thanks for sharing this. I am impressed by all the changes that have been introduced; and I am sure that based on this information people will understand much better why it takes so much time to complete. Not sure whether we will get more patient... while these updates do make clear to everyone that there is a lot going on in this project, they make me want to get my hands on AE even more [:)]

Hartwig

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


This is what I am referring to. Note that the sort-of transparent overlay carrying the unit icons and strengths darkens the background artwork (the lighter background artwork can be seen unfiltered around outside the edges of the overlay. The combination of the background and the overlay becomes so dark it gives the visual impression of a night battle. Lightening the background so the overlay doesn't cause everything to be so dark would go a long way toward making the image look more like daytime and less like nighttime. Obviously not a big deal, but my profession involves graphic presentation so I tend to notice these kinds of things.

Hans,

Good comment and I understand but I think I disagree with the solution. I'm most concerned with being able to quickly and easily read the text, and a lighter background might impede that.