Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

My observation is that many of us, me included, are trying to play AE the same as we did WITP. We were able to get away with things then, but that style of play will cost you heavily in AE. Welcome to the learning curve. [:D]

I have lost count of threads about lightly escorted transports able to get away from warships (speed of 10 escaping 30 knot plus warships [:(]). Now, we see that they cannot. Great news!! It looks like a SC TF is very important to have with your invasion TF. No more going in with a few patrol craft and surviving a SC TF coming in.

Thank you AE Team. [&o]

if you see none of the ships survive and this while there is only a max visibility of 1000 yards then I wonder if it helps a warship to find two dozen slow transports if they scatter and disappear in darkness. Visibility doesn´t seem to effect the battles at all, at least not when it comes down to finding the ships.

ORIGINAL: castor troy

I´m sure AE is a far better product than WITP but those ongoing posts of such slaughters make me sceptic.

Its pretty typical of my experiences also. Of the many reasons I dont find AE a fun game to play (and hence I dont), the surface combat routine is one of the "biggies" to me.

Seems like the air vs air battles are somewhat less bloody, but the sea vs sea battles are more bloody.  The air vs sea encounters are downright devastating.
 
Just my impression.
 

So its seems you need escorts in your Transport TF to ward off Subs, and ALSO need a Surface Combat TF to ward off other SurfTF while said TF is unloading.

I would have had started a thread like this, because I found out that imho, Surface Action is far too bloody as well.
 
It was here just the opposite way. I won always and sunk everything that was afloat from the Japanese with less ships-but I always achieved surprise on the japanese ships.
 
first, I tried something bold on Dec 41 9th : KB was still going on my nerv so I decided to sent a SF TF after it. 1 CA 1 CL and 9 DD mauled the entire replenishment TF there. All AOs and DDs there sunk. USN losses : 1 DD, another had some paint scratched. There was no japanese left in this Replenishemnt TF to tell about it. All DDs escorting lost and all AOs.
 
Wow, I thought, what a blast.
 
The next day, I sent lady Lex to have a look ( 10/12/41 ) at the japanese landings at Wake.
 
I parked my carrier TF 1 hex away near Wake and bombed the TF. Some Transports got hit. So far so good, but I wanted more the next day. Knowing that hitting some CLs and DDs with bombs isnt good ( they evade) I sent all the Escorting ships as a FS TF into wake, leaving the Lex alone 1 hex away.
 
Again it happend : ALL japanese ships sunk in a single battle. Losses of the USN : 1 DD.  ( the Invasion TF ceased to exist, no one escaped.)
 
3 CAs, 9 DDs (or similar) mauled all the remining TF to the bottom of the sea. The Japanese CLs were no match to the 8" inch guns from Astoria ( fired all the ammo !!!) and the other 2 Cas. The japanese DDs scored only a few hits, maybe 2 dozend on my Tf while the USN scored hundreds of hits killing everything that had a japanese flag.
 
I gotta love AE but these results..........more like an Arcade game imho.
 
The good ole witp tracked SF action better imho.
 
Since the components japanese Tfs involved here are known to everyone of us (becuase they were the fixed TFs during start of the scenario (big enchilada), maybe some one else can do the same things what I did.
 
 
 
 
 

So we have massacres on both sides. That would indicated some sort of balance.

I think that things like TF detection levels (prior to the battle) and commanders are possibly more important than they used to be.

No complaints from me so far. Surface combat in stock was pretty pointless but now it matters ...

ORIGINAL: treespider

Need more information here --- was the Transport/Amphib TF unloading (ie staitionary) when the Japanese cruiser force attacked?

Tree;

This was 9/42, Guad scenario, and this TF was almost certainly unloading. It had been stationary for a couple days. To be fair also, CL Hobart had already taken 2-3 aerial torps hits, and so was already in sinking condition.

I'm witholding judgement so far due to small sample size, but so far it seems a bloody. I would expect escorts to sacrifice themselves for the transports.

A couple other notes:

1. In both cases, the TF's were led by Raizo Tanaka. He rocks.
2. Two days before this hit, Tanaka's force appeared, engaged, and no hits scored on either side; they broke contact quickly. A human player probably would have raised anchor and moved on at that point, rather than leave ships exposed.

ORIGINAL: Oliver Heindorf

I parked my carrier TF 1 hex away near Wake and bombed the TF. Some Transports got hit. So far so good, but I wanted more the next day. Knowing that hitting some CLs and DDs with bombs isnt good ( they evade) I sent all the Escorting ships as a FS TF into wake, leaving the Lex alone 1 hex away.[/color]

Well,I cant speak to the results, but can you say that this is something that would happen? Can you imagine a CV task force leader leaving a Carrier, alone,without any DD's for sub protection, and without knowledge of where the KB was?

If you play ahistorical, you will get ahistroical results. When I play (and its your game, play anyway you want) I try to remember that those little icons represent real people, and as such I would not do tactics that I know would result in me (the task force commander) being removed from command. The problem is that we know the AI has limits, and its reaction will not be that as a human player. So when playing the AI, knowing it has limits, if we do something that, while innovative, would not be within the realm of policy of the force we are representing, results may not be typical.

You'd expect combat results to follow a bell curve - the majority of results on "the hump" with extreme "tail end" results occuring rarely. That's what we're hoping for - every now and then you should get a whacked out combat where something totally illogical and unpredictable happens, because that's the way war works. But these events would be fairly rare, and, usually, the one who "gets there the firstest with the mostest wins."

We're all still evaluating AE in this regard. Results are coming in and are so far inconclusive, but some of us are wondering if the bell curve is actually misshapen with humps on both ends and a flat middle. Don't know yet and I hope not.

Unrealistic bloodbaths, even if balanced, are undesirable for two reasons:

a) Everyone wants combat to be realistic for the sake of realism
b) Bloodbaths on an unrealistic scale means folks are gonna run out of ships (and planes? and pilots?) pretty soon.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Unrealistic bloodbaths, even if balanced, are undesirable for two reasons:

a) Everyone wants combat to be realistic for the sake of realism
b) Bloodbaths on an unrealistic scale means folks are gonna run out of ships (and planes? and pilots?) pretty soon.

1st question - What constitutes unrealistic ...and why?

Is it unrealistic that 5 cruisers and 2 CL's with a couple destroyers wiped out a force that was at anchor in the midst of unloading...


I'm not suggesting the current system is accurate...just asking what constitutes Realistic?

Perhaps this is more realistic than WitP...perhaps its not. Certainly though the game tactics we use have to change.

I've had lots of transport TFs ambushed by small japanese TFs (2-3 cruisers and 2-3destroyers usually).
The transports all had escorts, mostly destroyers and the odd cruiser.
I've never seen anything like what you describe.
The superior japanese forces just sweep their guns across my whole fleet like a garden hose and wipe everybody out. And I mean everybody. NO survivors.
Well, not quite true, I've had a CA get away once, but that is all.

I love the idea of this 'screening' feature, but I've yet to see it in my game.

I was talking about IRL. It is dificult for a force to have time to slaughter another of that size.

See the exemple at top of this page 1 CL, plus 3 DD's and a E slaughter 6 DD's and 17 merchants. In my book that is almost impossible to happen. I would expect that happen once in a 5 years war at most and in some freak situation only.

From this results and comments of YH i can see : "We have a problem Houston"

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Is this a typical result in AE? This is the Guadalcanal Scenario, just playing the US AI, nice result, but WOW is this lopsided! Granted I probably caught this TF unloading at the pier, but still......this seems BLOODY to me. Complete wipeout!

Do I even carry this much ammo on board?

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Aug 22, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Lunga at 114,138, Range 10,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai, Shell hits 3
CL Tenryu
CL Tatsuta, Shell hits 14
CL Yubari
E Yunagi

Allied Ships
DD Bagley, Shell hits 11, and is sunk
DD Blue, Shell hits 15, and is sunk
DD Helm, Shell hits 5, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Henley, Shell hits 9, and is sunk
DMS Zane, Shell hits 6, and is sunk
DMS Trevor, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
AP Hunter Liggett, Shell hits 25, and is sunk
AP American Legion, Shell hits 22, and is sunk
AP George F. Elliot, Shell hits 15, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AP Fuller, Shell hits 4, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
AP McCawley, Shell hits 22, and is sunk
AP Henderson, Shell hits 18, and is sunk
AP President Jackson, Shell hits 15, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AP President Adams, Shell hits 15, and is sunk
AP President Hayes, Shell hits 6, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AP President Monroe, Shell hits 3, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
AP Crescent City, Shell hits 16, and is sunk
AP Heywood, Shell hits 11, and is sunk
AKA Bellatrix, Shell hits 10, and is sunk
AKA Libra, Shell hits 16, and is sunk
AKA Fomalhaut, Shell hits 20, and is sunk
AKA Betelgeuse, Shell hits 8, and is sunk
AKA Alhena, Shell hits 3, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk

PS: I loaded up the US Side to check FOW....It's all real!

Do you have a save just before this turn?

I would like to look through it and see what is gong on.

Realistic would be defined as the expected results creating a bell-shaped curve when put on a graph for a given force facing a given force ("given" meaning the same makeup for each test run). Thus if you had clear weather, moderate seas, high noon, five Jap CAs and seven Jap DDs led by Admiral Tanaka against five Allied CAs and seven Allied DDs led by Admiral Spruance you'd expect the results to model that curve - most of the time the results would be pretty similar, but occasionally you'd get a skewed result one way or the other. (Note, this doesn't mean you'd always get a draw - in this case perhaps Tanaka is the better commander and thus the hump in the bell favors a Japanese victory; or maybe the Americans have better radar and fire control so that results typically favor them). If you're always getting skewed results, though, something's wrong.

I'm not saying that's the case here yet. We're too early into the process to know. We "think" we've spotted a trend that makes us curious, though, so we're looking at it.

I had a US SAG of 3 CL's (1 was a Cleveland) and 4 DD's catch the japs landing at Lea. (7/12/41 grand campaign) The results could only be described as horrific from the jap point of view. But these are the kind of results that I would expect if you catch ships sitting at anchor unloading supplies and troops.

Its almost unfair to look at the historic results and try to compare that to this game. If the ABDA had commanders like Burke and Halsey think what would have happend. Think how much different the ships would have been handled and the possible results.

I am now in the month of January 42 and the losses are;

Jap 2 CV
1 CVL
1 CA
4 CL
6 DD
15-20 xAk/xAp
lots of PC/TB etc

US 1 CV
1 BB I really lucked out and lost no BB's on Dec 7
3 CA
3 CL
6 DD
more aux than I care to count

I think the results "feel" right. The air attacks have little success against single warships but tend to nail support ships. Both sides subs are doing fair even though I think the Allied subs are a little too succesful. Both sides have suffered losses in aircraft and depending who is flying and what type of plane it can be pretty ugly for the bombers. The F4's at Wake did well but the F2's in DEI have little success.

Over all I am happy with the AI and the results. I would not tweek much untill we get several weeks of feed back.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Realistic would be defined as the expected results

But the question is what are expected results?

I posted an IRL example of some DD's attacking a loading/unloading TF that had a Surface Action Group in the same hex....at Balikpapn and the results were pretty ugly..

Are there other examples of a SAG attacking a TF that is engaged in loading/unloading or a convoy... I found some in the Med...but the results weren't pretty for the Convoys.

ORIGINAL: Dili

I've had lots of transport TFs ambushed by small japanese TFs (2-3 cruisers and 2-3destroyers usually).
The transports all had escorts, mostly destroyers and the odd cruiser.
I've never seen anything like what you describe.
The superior japanese forces just sweep their guns across my whole fleet like a garden hose and wipe everybody out. And I mean everybody. NO survivors.
Well, not quite true, I've had a CA get away once, but that is all.

I love the idea of this 'screening' feature, but I've yet to see it in my game.

I was talking about IRL. It is dificult for a force to have time to slaughter another of that size.

See the exemple at top of this page 1 CL, plus 3 DD's and a E slaughter 6 DD's and 17 merchants. In my book that is almost impossible to happen. I would expect that happen once in a 5 years war at most and in some freak situation only.

From this results and comments of YH i can see : "We have a problem Houston"

Uh, mate, that's 1 CA, 3 CL, and an E (whatever that denotes in AE)

You are right sorry. I can't think of how i have made that mistake.

You were probably freaked out by String's revolving eye. Yikes!

ORIGINAL: Sonny II

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Is this a typical result in AE? This is the Guadalcanal Scenario, just playing the US AI, nice result, but WOW is this lopsided! Granted I probably caught this TF unloading at the pier, but still......this seems BLOODY to me. Complete wipeout!

Do I even carry this much ammo on board?

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Aug 22, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Lunga at 114,138, Range 10,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai, Shell hits 3
CL Tenryu
CL Tatsuta, Shell hits 14
CL Yubari
E Yunagi

Allied Ships
DD Bagley, Shell hits 11, and is sunk
DD Blue, Shell hits 15, and is sunk
DD Helm, Shell hits 5, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Henley, Shell hits 9, and is sunk
DMS Zane, Shell hits 6, and is sunk
DMS Trevor, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
AP Hunter Liggett, Shell hits 25, and is sunk
AP American Legion, Shell hits 22, and is sunk
AP George F. Elliot, Shell hits 15, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AP Fuller, Shell hits 4, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
AP McCawley, Shell hits 22, and is sunk
AP Henderson, Shell hits 18, and is sunk
AP President Jackson, Shell hits 15, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AP President Adams, Shell hits 15, and is sunk
AP President Hayes, Shell hits 6, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AP President Monroe, Shell hits 3, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
AP Crescent City, Shell hits 16, and is sunk
AP Heywood, Shell hits 11, and is sunk
AKA Bellatrix, Shell hits 10, and is sunk
AKA Libra, Shell hits 16, and is sunk
AKA Fomalhaut, Shell hits 20, and is sunk
AKA Betelgeuse, Shell hits 8, and is sunk
AKA Alhena, Shell hits 3, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk

PS: I loaded up the US Side to check FOW....It's all real!

Do you have a save just before this turn?

I would like to look through it and see what is gong on.

Sorry, I don't. I did verify this by immediately loading the US side, and all these ships sunk. I haven't counted all the Shell Hits, but that's a pretty high percentage I think vs. the Ammo those cruisers would carry.