Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Capt. Harlock, I have 225 P-47D25 in the pools and all squadrons are flush. They are split evenly between CAP, escort and sweep. I am not impressed with them on sweep, so I lean towards Corsairs and Mustangs in that role, with the former doing most of the heavy lifting (and paying for it).

I think the P-47s will make it until the -N model comes online.

This is the exact opposite of my experience in several games, in some respects.

The P-47D25 was a beast in both of my Allied games. In my Japan game that's gone far enough to see it (against obvert now), there aren't many left. I think I basically traded 1:1 against them. It's the Corsair that is giving me effing fits and I don't know why - when I used it as an Allied sweeper, it performed OK but it was really only the deep pools that allowed it to be an effective tool.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

12/24/44

L+3: I'm watching what's going on out here, but I haven't seen anything worrisome yet. A don't think Erik will send carriers into the Gulf of Alaska, but I'm watching.

That CM is one of the larger ones, and JFBs often use her for FT duties because she has a cargo capacity as well as a large number of mines. I wonder if he was hovering, waiting for a chance to evacuate troops from the Eastern Kuriles.

Thanks, BBfanboy, I didn't know those things.

I don't think the CM got near the Kuriles or was being used in that capacity, but I could be wrong.

I wonder if she wasn't out there measuring detection levels from Allied patrol aircraft based at Ketoi and Uruppu? Erik might be thinking of pre-positioning carriers or combat ships to intercept ingressors or egressors.

My guess is he was going to lay a minefield.

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Capt. Harlock, I have 225 P-47D25 in the pools and all squadrons are flush. They are split evenly between CAP, escort and sweep. I am not impressed with them on sweep, so I lean towards Corsairs and Mustangs in that role, with the former doing most of the heavy lifting (and paying for it).

I think the P-47s will make it until the -N model comes online.

This is the exact opposite of my experience in several games, in some respects.

The P-47D25 was a beast in both of my Allied games. In my Japan game that's gone far enough to see it (against obvert now), there aren't many left. I think I basically traded 1:1 against them. It's the Corsair that is giving me effing fits and I don't know why - when I used it as an Allied sweeper, it performed OK but it was really only the deep pools that allowed it to be an effective tool.

My thoughts on sweeps, escorts and CAP are complicated by an oddity of game mechanics that I only realized a few months ago but that most of you have probably known since 1978 or thereabouts.

Sweeps are done in sequential order of the fighter squadron designation. Basically, I know the first fighter squadrons listed at a base will fly first, the middle ones middle, and the late ones late.

At Shikuka, this means mostly Navy squadrons fly early, Marine and Commonwealth fighters next, and Army fighters last.

If I want fighters to sweep ahead of bombers it does no good to order the Army fighters to sweep. They will come in after the bombers.

Usually, I want sweeps ahead of bombers, so mostly I've been using Corsairs.

Another oddity is that early sweepers tend to have a more difficult time, while late sweepers generally clean up (except P-38s, which have wildly varying results more often skewed towards "ewwww!") If I'm sending in a large sweep with no bombers, I'll try to configure so that the P-47s and P-50s can tear into the tuckered out enemy, even if my Corsairs suffered. But this is a fine line - because by then, enemy CAP may be gone, so that my late-arriving sweepers have no targets.

There are various permutations of these things, like trying to sequence early sweeps, middle bombers, and late sweeps.

And then there's the escort mission nuisances to consider, which I won't go into here.

Overall, I've found that I most like the Corsairs to sweep, the P-47s and P-51s to escort, and the P-38s limited to either escort or CAP or LRCAP (though occasionally they do well as late sweepers). I do use the -47s and -51s to sweep pretty often.

This is a complex mix. I think I'm decent at it now, but many of you might laugh and point out, "Hey, dummy, then why are you basically mired down in a 1:1 match against Erik's air force these many months?"

I have not noticed that oddity at all. I'll have to pay closer attention, but I have had P-47s arrive on sweep before bombers. I've also had them not sweep until the PM, so...

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I have not noticed that oddity at all. I'll have to pay closer attention, but I have had P-47s arrive on sweep before bombers. I've also had them not sweep until the PM, so...

There are other variables like departure bases (same as bombers or a closer base or a base just as distant from target), air support (very busy or excess available to handle simultaneous launches), etc. Not sure if leaders influences sequence of strikes.

I think a PM sweep would mean the weather prevented an AM sweep.

Here's what I've found regarding fighter sweep order:

While I also haven't taken note of this , it makes sense in light of how naval combat sequencing works with lower number TFs getting priority over higher number TFs.
Computers programs seem to default to executing things in sequential order.

The naval combat sequential nuance has led me to be constantly disbanding and reforming surface combat TFs to get lower TF numbers.

Any time I form a supply TF that gets allocated TF number 4, I immediately disband it. Then I find a combat TF with TF number 342 and disband and reform it so it will be allocated the number 4 instead of the supply TF.

By '44 the majority of my low numbers are allocated to combat TFs.

Is this 'gaming' the game mechanics....you bet it is.

Even though I play the AI, I try to institute practices that would serve me well in a competitive game.

The kind of TF management I outlined above is exactly the kind of thing that can give you a competitive edge.

Yeah!

A few weeks ago, I mulled over how nice it would be to be able to assign unit numbers to fighter squadrons.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I think a PM sweep would mean the weather prevented an AM sweep.

Here's what I've found regarding fighter sweep order:

For other combats the game engine seems to use the database index number of the unit to do the sequencing - e.g., multiple bombardment TFs going to the same target bombard in TF order, but individual ship bombardment order within the TF and ship type (BB, CA, etc.) seems to be by index number. Same for ground combat sequence. Low numbered units take the brunt of the action.

I think that when you split an air unit into a/b/c that those then fly before any other ones. So if one were to play where they could and would increase the size of a carrier capable fighter unit, max it to the highest possible size for whatever size that it can the for what side that they are playing, then set those fragments to 100% sweep with enough air support and within HQ command range, you could see some massive fighter sweeps come in before the bombers.

Yes, if the air sweeps can't fly in the am due to weather, they will fly in the pm - if they can.

I also believe that same type missions from bases that are closer to the target will arrive before the aircraft from bases farther away.

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

I think that when you split an air unit into a/b/c that those then fly before any other ones. So if one were to play where they could and would increase the size of a carrier capable fighter unit, max it to the highest possible size for whatever size that it can the for what side that they are playing, then set those fragments to 100% sweep with enough air support and within HQ command range, you could see some massive fighter sweeps come in before the bombers.

Yes, if the air sweeps can't fly in the am due to weather, they will fly in the pm - if they can.

I also believe that same type missions from bases that are closer to the target will arrive before the aircraft from bases farther away.

Caveat on the last statement - sometimes the closer base is socked in during the AM phase and only flies in the PM phase when the weather improves. Another situation where the game keeps chance on the table.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I think a PM sweep would mean the weather prevented an AM sweep.

Except I've had PM sweeps occur on the same day AM sweeps (from the same base of origin) occurred. I think it's just up to the dice gods at that point.

Your hypothesis is a good one. We know that the movement dots also follow the "top" unit in the stack.

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

I think that when you split an air unit into a/b/c that those then fly before any other ones. So if one were to play where they could and would increase the size of a carrier capable fighter unit, max it to the highest possible size for whatever size that it can the for what side that they are playing, then set those fragments to 100% sweep with enough air support and within HQ command range, you could see some massive fighter sweeps come in before the bombers.

Yes, if the air sweeps can't fly in the am due to weather, they will fly in the pm - if they can.

I also believe that same type missions from bases that are closer to the target will arrive before the aircraft from bases farther away.

Look closely at what happens when you split units into A/B/C - they get moved to the "front" of the air unit queue.

Movement Issue

Erik has politely raised a technical issue that resulted from some key units resetting accumulated mileage on the march to Wakkanai from 30 to 0.

See image for explanation.

I understand his frustration. IMO, it's just one of the things we deal with in the game, and it was something I knew might arise here (not as serious as this, but in a smaller way). IMO we should just deal with it and move on.

But he's really troubled by it, so I've offered to re-set the movement of that one unit so that it doesn't enter his hex today. He hasn't replied yet, but I think that will solve the issue.

So he wants an "Ignore Threat" setting for his units and have them blithely march onwards ignoring the threat on his flank.
Is he in MOVE or COMBAT mode, thoUgh in either mode he probably would'NT move to the next hex.

Its quite possible that the armoured unit is sitting on the only bridge across a river/pass/swamp and he must deal with it before moving on.

But IRL that was the quality of japanese commanders, follow orders regardless...

EDITED.

Yeah. It's an issue I think nearly all experienced players are familiar with. I think Lowpe got bit by some version of this issue (strat mode version) in Indochina in his game against Erik.

I sent the modified turn file to Erik but didn't hear back. It was already midnight, so he'd probably logged off. Hopefully we'll get back on track tomorrow.

What I really hope is that re-doing the turn doesn't affect what happened on Christmas Day at Wakkanai (see below). The Japanese are in big, big trouble. And if Erik is relying on ground movement to save the base, he's almost certainly lost it.

If the re-do results in a materially better result from him, then I'll be squawking. My combat engineer units are small and probably get only one or two cracks at reducing forts. So this result was key.

But your engineers didn't do the fort-reducing, it was just your attack that did it more generally [:)]

I have seen this happen as well but always thought I did something goofy when
issuing orders. I thought I may have clicked, perhaps on something unrelated
to destination (mode?)and effected a change. I would be curious why this happens.
I do believe in the play through it school of thought, in PBEM anyways, as
we all forget, omit, and generally SNAFU "stuff" through out the game.

I have had this happen and I think I understand it. I believe that the unit was given orders to move to the hex that
is SE of Wakanni. When CRs unit moved into the hex to the SW of Wakanni, that move became invalid and the unit had
its movement orders cancelled. If he had originally given an order to move to the hex to the SW of Wakanni, it would
have continued to move since that movement order would have still been valid.

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

But your engineers didn't do the fort-reducing, it was just your attack that did it more generally [:)]

I'm not sure what you mean. I have two small combat engineer units present. I think they play a key role in reducing forts, though perhaps not as much as usual given their respective sizes. Am I wrong?

ORIGINAL: BillBrown
I have had this happen and I think I understand it. I believe that the unit was given orders to move to the hex that
is SE of Wakanni. When CRs unit moved into the hex to the SW of Wakanni, that move became invalid and the unit had
its movement orders cancelled. If he had originally given an order to move to the hex to the SW of Wakanni, it would
have continued to move since that movement order would have still been valid.

Yes, that's exactly what happened.