Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Mistmatz

ORIGINAL: herwin

The number of torpedo hits at Pearl is excessive. The first wave of B5Ns carried 40 torpedoes and 50 heavy modified AP projectiles. The second wave of B5Ns carried lighter HE bombs used for attacking the airbases. The actual pHit for the torpedoes during this attack was about one in three, while the pHit for the AP projectiles was apparently lower. The performance of Japanese torpedo bomber crews at the beginning of the war was about 22% hitting, twice that of USN torpedo bomber crews throughout the war, and they had a further advantage of surprise at Pearl Harbor. However they did not get more hits than torpedoes launched!

We don't want to discuss the same thing over and over again, do we?

Check the japanese AAR for a lenghty and in the end unneccessary discussion regarding the PH attack.

No, I'd just like to see something that looks like it might be a game instead of a two year proctological exam.

ORIGINAL: treespider

So after one day this is what the "Ships Under Repair" screen (as opposed to the "Active Ships" screen) looks like at Pearl Harbor....

Thanks for taking the time and explaining those graphics. Great new feature!

Responding to the questions on repair:

Is this estimated time to finish the repairs or is it WILL be finished after x# of days?

It's pretty accurate at the time that you first set it. However, things can change. Adding other ships to be repaired by the same repair assets, moving in more naval support, changing repair priorities or so on can adjust the results. In addition, for "offline" repair modes (everything other than "Readiness") there can be a delay of a few days before the ship is ready to sail again after repairs are complete.

That is awesome but does the AI know how to do this?

The AI does handle its own repairs.

Since you are using less than capacity in shipyard, will the ships repair quicker or should you fill to capacity to gain maximum benefit?

If there's enough excess capacity to "upgrade" the priority on one of the ships being repaired, then it will speed things up. Each priority level effectively increases the repair cost of a ship in exchange for faster repairs.

The 105# days repair time with pierside repair, do that mean that it will repair for 105 days and then stop with the ship still damaged or dose it mean that it will repair for say 80 days and then stop

That means that it will take 105 days to repair the damage that can be repaired in Pierside mode. It will then be left with some Major damage that will still need to be repaired in a Shipyard (or if only a few points of Major damage, a Repair ship could do it).

Regards,

- Erik

ORIGINAL: RevRick
No, I'd just like to see something that looks like it might be a game instead of a two year proctological exam.

Ok, I'm sure we could delay the release for a while to fully script the PH attack, since everyone knows that if you have bad luck and lose a few more BBs at PH, there's no way the Allies can win the rest of the war. Similarly, if the Japanese sink 0 BBs, which is about as likely as sinking 6 BBs in my test, the Japanese player should just restart - right? [;)]

Seriously though, I think folks that are very bothered by the fact that there is a bell curve on the PH results need to step back and remember that the war goes on for years and PH means very little. In addition, I'm sure that after release there will be a December 8th scenario for those that want their results to precisely match history every time.

Could we spend more time tweaking various factors of the PH attack? Yes, but the results right now are close enough, the results for the overall war in all situations are excellent and so we'd end up effectively making lots of little custom tweaks for PH and only PH, which doesn't seem like a good use of time for what would be fairly little return. I'd rather release AE and if a much larger body of results (and customers) after release suggest we should tone things down further in PH, we will.

Regards,

- Erik

And who is to say that the historic result is the "normal" result. The IJN did not have multiple attempts at attacking PH. It could easily be that their real world results were from either end of the bell curve and AE may more accurately represent the real range of possible outcomes.

Variance all probably caused by that butterfly . . . . . . . . . .

ORIGINAL: treespider

Here we see what the Wee-Vee would look like if I decided to stick her in the Yard. However her 32,600 tons would count against Pearl Harbor's 100,000 ton yard limit. Since her major Float damage is only 29 I'll opt for Pierside for now...and fill the yard up with lesser combatants that will repair quickly.

Also note the Wee-Vee will fully repair in the yard as denoted by the white current repair time estimate.

since she has 29 major flood damage can we not do like we used to be able to and pumper her out and patch her up at pearl and then send her to the west coast for major repairs?

ORIGINAL: bobogoboom

ORIGINAL: treespider

Here we see what the Wee-Vee would look like if I decided to stick her in the Yard. However her 32,600 tons would count against Pearl Harbor's 100,000 ton yard limit. Since her major Float damage is only 29 I'll opt for Pierside for now...and fill the yard up with lesser combatants that will repair quickly.

Also note the Wee-Vee will fully repair in the yard as denoted by the white current repair time estimate.

since she has 29 major flood damage can we not do like we used to be able to and pumper her out and patch her up at pearl and then send her to the west coast for major repairs?

Yes we can.

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins


... I'd rather release AE and if a much larger body of results (and customers) after release suggest we should tone things down further in PH, we will.

Regards,

- Erik

That's the spirit!

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: bobogoboom

ORIGINAL: treespider

Here we see what the Wee-Vee would look like if I decided to stick her in the Yard. However her 32,600 tons would count against Pearl Harbor's 100,000 ton yard limit. Since her major Float damage is only 29 I'll opt for Pierside for now...and fill the yard up with lesser combatants that will repair quickly.

Also note the Wee-Vee will fully repair in the yard as denoted by the white current repair time estimate.

since she has 29 major flood damage can we not do like we used to be able to and pumper her out and patch her up at pearl and then send her to the west coast for major repairs?

Yes we can.

so once i repair the minor flood damage can i sail her back to the west coast without fear of it sinking?

Is there a break even point for an Allied ship like Wee-Vee that you would put into the shipyard when it comes to flood damage?? Her's is at 64 and with Allied damage control, she is probably safe from sinking. I've had many BBs with 99/95/x after the initial attack and survive as long as they take no more hits.

alot depends on how much major flood damage there is. If it's high your ship is in danger and can't really move either (to another port) so, at least for me, that would be a prime candident for a critical rating while in the shipyard

ORIGINAL: bobogoboom
so once i repair the minor flood damage can i sail her back to the west coast without fear of it sinking?

There is a (random) chance that ships with major FlotDam will have repairs give way and start flooding again. Bigger the Major FlotDam, bigger the chance; faster you try to go, bigger the chance.

Try putting ships with big Major FlotDam numbers into the yard at Pearl for a while. When Major FlotDam gets down to about 25-30 or so, pull them out and send em off to the coast. But just make sure that before you go the only FlotDam you got is Major FlotDam, i.e., everything else cofferdamed and pumped out.

Back to the Tree v Yammy show.

ORIGINAL: bobogoboom
so once i repair the minor flood damage can i sail her back to the west coast without fear of it sinking?

That's the general idea. The Major flotation damage represents actual holes in the hull. The Minor flotation damage represents the fact that part of the ship is now filled with sea water and will need to be pumped out. If you get rid of all the Minor damage, you can assume that the water has been pumped out and the holes "patched". That's not a guarantee of safety (there is a small chance that patches will leak or fail and Minor flotation damage will accrue again once a ship that still has Major flotation damage is underway) but I would feel confident getting a ship with no Minor flotation damage from PH to the West Coast at Cruise speed as long as its Major flotation damage was not extremely high.

cool thanks guys.
plus it makes sense from a historical perspective. temporary repairs sometimes failed.

Having followed the "debates" over the PH strikes in the recent AARs and the "rebuttles"/explanation from the AE team and Erik Rutins. I looked at bit at the numbers behind the PH strikes given in these PARTICULAR AARs from these PH strikes.
Im very well aware these ARENT representive, just trying to explain why these strikes seem to turn out the way the do. Maybe, underlining maybe some thing can be learned from that and if deemed so, up for possible tweeking in post-patches.

First off, im not here to yell broken or the opposite. As shown in multiple threads by AE team members and Erik R the sunken BBs vary quite when making a sample data by doing PH strikes multiple times. What isnt reported by the AE members and Erik is the number of hits on other ships than BBs in their test samples. Why that could be importand, hopefully will be obvious later on.

My figurs are exclusivly drawn from the data in the AAR on day 1 in Tree's first post in this thread. I assume(could be wrong) even with FoW on, semi confirmed from the later post showing whats left in PH after the strike, that the number of hits and on in the AAR is fairly accurate if not 100% so.

Port attacking:
Kates 85, number of torpedo hits: 75 = 88,2%, number of different ships hit: 33
Vals 76, number of bomb hits: 71=94.67%, number of diffirent ships hit: 34

Assuming that the torpedoes have a dud rate of maybe(underlining his is purely speculation on my part) around 10%. Taken from WiTP numbers.
That leaves the port attacking planes both torpedo and bombers with a hit ratio of around 95%. If u remove the planes shot down, but i got no way of telling if it happens pre or post release of bombs/torpedoes u cound hit near 100% hit marks. Even considering that PH was a suprise attack having a 95%(possibly 95%+) hit rate is very very very impressive. My point being having that kinda hit rate in a unopposed training excercise would be IMO some what more than expected. U'd be hard pressed to ever see such numbers.
Not only that. There seem to be no "overkills". No planes attacking alrdy sinking/sunk ships. As soon as one ship is down all the other pilots seem to know to attack other targets. Seen by the IMO high number of different ships hit.

This seems a picture perfect strike. A text book strike, with nothing i mean nothing going wrong at all. Near 100% hits, near 100% awareness by the pilots.

While the historical strike was an utter supprise atleased the historical 1st strike there was some flak, some friction. Obviously things didnt go 100% and question is if they ever can. That it could go to 100% seems IMO an impossibilty. Some things always goes just a bit wrong. I mean I couldnt set up a better strike than the above. Every thing goes very very nearly a 100% per plan or even better. U cant really better the "plan".

I know this is a game with alot of abstractations and i dont AT ALL mind different results. I welcome it.
Non the less the possibility of such a perfect strike. This suggests to me that possibly if deemed needed to tweek PH strikes. That looking in the the math model behind hits ratio, number of ships attack(pilot awareness) there is possibly room for a change. Or maybe(i dont know the code obviously) rather how the supprise bonus are applied. Maybe there should be more randomness making picture perfect strikes like this, impossble. NOT that they always or even near that, happens, as ably shown in number of BBs sunk in the test examples given by the AE team and Erik R. I still hold out a final "judgement" in that in the test samples given by AE team members and Erik R i/we got no info on total number of hits, number of ships attacked(pilot awareness) and so on. So u cant necesarrily generalize from this.

It just seems to me that the math model behind the scene in this instance of the game. Possibly/ in some cases lacks showing friction and that again if deemed wanted, a possible avenue of approche in tweeking PH strikes.


Kind regards,

Rasmus

In regards to the Pearl Harbor strike ... just remember there is one important variable that has been overlooked by many of you. I will now try to explain that variable...

About 40 years ago on the summer solstice at approximately 10:38 am EST the stars were arranged in such a fashion in the universe as to cause a radiological altering of my DNA sequencing. This unfortunately is not an uncommon event and many of you (not all but many) have also been so affected. The side effect of this alteration has been to impart a negative influence on random numbers generated in connection with my existence. On rare insistences when the stars in the universe achieve various different alignments this side affect can be mitigated.

Received a note from Yammy late yesterday...evidently the last turn I sent him has caused him to chip a tooth. He has been in extreme pain ever since and has not been able to work on the turn...perhaps this evening after dental treatment we will be able to resume our programming.

ORIGINAL: treespider

In regards to the Pearl Harbor strike ... just remember there is one important variable that has been overlooked by many of you. I will now try to explain that variable...

About 40 years ago on the summer solstice at approximately 10:38 am EST the stars were arranged in such a fashion in the universe as to cause a radiological altering of my DNA sequencing. This unfortunately is not an uncommon event and many of you (not all but many) have also been so affected. The side effect of this alteration has been to impart a negative influence on random numbers generated in connection with my existence. On rare insistences when the stars in the universe achieve various different alignments this side affect can be mitigated.

Sounds u are about to hit the jackpot soon. Karma is with you! Start playing [;)]


Kind regards,

Rasmus

P.S My above post is intended purely as a tool for learning if needed/wanted, by pointing out things that IMO, taken into account of the statiscal uncertainty are hard pressed to explain/make happen. Even accounting for the aligment of stars and ect [:D]
I tried hard to point out u cant necesarily generalize, but u can learn about this particular instance. Question is IMO, if such a thing is wanted as a possibilty.

P.P.S Whether is this some thing to act on or not. Or possibly alrdy have been discussed and made a decision on is ofc not some thing im privy too nor in the decision making loop on.

Unbelievable performance given what I remember about pre-war proving ground figures.

1. The best USN dive bombing performance against non-manoeuvring passive targets in peacetime was about 67% hits.
2. Half the US battleships were screened from torpedo attack--hence the use of heavy AP bombs against them.
3. The best USN level bombing performance against non-manoeuvring passive targets in peacetime was about 20-30% hits. This was the reason for the development of dive bombing.
4. The best USN torpedo attack performance against non-manoeuvring passive targets in peacetime was comparable to the level bombing performance. (At 800 yards, the target occupied about 30 degrees if it was stationary, and about 10 degrees if it was moving at 25 knots and had to be led. The pHit for a 10 degree target was about 10%.)

The historical performance statistics make good sense for non-manoeuvring surprised (but hardly passive) targets. 90-100% hits are well over the top.

ORIGINAL: herwin

Unbelievable performance given what I remember about pre-war proving ground figures.

1. The best USN dive bombing performance against non-manoeuvring passive targets in peacetime was about 67% hits.
2. Half the US battleships were screened from torpedo attack--hence the use of heavy AP bombs against them.
3. The best USN level bombing performance against non-manoeuvring passive targets in peacetime was about 20-30% hits. This was the reason for the development of dive bombing.
4. The best USN torpedo attack performance against non-manoeuvring passive targets in peacetime was comparable to the level bombing performance. (At 800 yards, the target occupied about 30 degrees if it was stationary, and about 10 degrees if it was moving at 25 knots and had to be led. The pHit for a 10 degree target was about 10%.)

The historical performance statistics make good sense for non-manoeuvring surprised (but hardly passive) targets. 90-100% hits are well over the top.

Well then, we’ll just defer release until you provide us with a pseudo code specification that implements what you think is appropriate.

Since you are so damn smart and are the self anointed professional expert in all these areas, it should be a simple evening’s exercise for you. Otherwise bugger-off.

You are damn right I’m pissed. It’s people like you that make some of us feel like it’s just not worth it anymore. Maybe Joe and Erik and others will proceed, but far as I’m concerned, you and others like you can go whine and try to impress everybody else as much as you like. I’m finished.