Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: witpqs
I saw the exchange. I then saw the information you presented, and it simply has too many assumptions in it.

I only made assumptions about the Coral Sea battle, and that was because hard data about the strike is hard to find. But I did post further info that cleared up some of those original assumptions. So what we’re left with is this:

Fact: 69 Japanese planes were in the strike package.

Fact: 27 of these planes were lost.

Fact: 4 of these 27 were lost to SBDs, regular Wildcat CAP played no role in shoot downs because they were out of position.

Fact: That leaves 23 that were flak losses.

So the only thing left we don’t know for a fact is how many of the 69 airframes were zeros. But even if we assume none were zeros and all 69 were strike aircraft, 23 out of 69 is a loss rate of 33%, well within the 30%-60% estimate I gave.

Of course I seriously doubt none of the 69 were zeros, so it was probably closer to 50% of the strike airframes being destroyed by flak. But I freely admit that is an assumption based on an educated guess.

However, nothing above is subjective opinion, it is all based on the actual numbers historically involved in the fight. And more than backs up what I said originally.

Jim

Well, as Kull pointed out in the Coral Sea AAR thread,

ORIGINAL: Kull
The strike package numbers were "twenty fighters and seventy attack planes". The one thing everyone agrees on is that Japanese losses were 27 aircraft:

Of course, the simplest solution if your unhappy with how it turns out is to mod it.

And with the new editor, it'll be so easy, you won't believe it.

ORIGINAL: Elouda
Well, as Kull pointed out in the Coral Sea AAR thread,

Those numbers from that crappy book were pulled out of the authors arse, ignore them. No one could put 100 airframes into the air by the 8th due to the heavy losses taken in previous fighting. Even the US barely got 75 into the air on the 8th.

The two Japanese carriers started the battle with 64 and 57 airframes respectively. Many were lost in the fighting on the7th, including some of their best pilots in a botched night op when 21 of the 27 planes launched were lost. 99% of sources agree that Japan got 69 airframes up on the 8th, no more. I'd say the author of that book made up his numbers out of thin air.

Jim

According to Jim Dunnigan and Albert Nofi from 'Victory at Sea", BB South Dakota had her AA complement upgraded in September 1942 from 16 5" guns, 28 1.1" guns, 6 20mm guns and 8 .50MGs to 16 5" guns, 16 40mm guns, 20 1.1" guns, and 36 20mm guns.


On October 26th, 1942 during the Batlle of the Santa Cruz Islands, BB South Dakota was attacked by at least 69 Japanese dive bombers and torpedo bombers and shot down 26.....by herself.

"The success of BB South Dakota on October 26th, 1942 was not only due to the volume of AA fire but to:

1)Effective radar fire direction
2)The resiliency and maneuverability of the ship
3)The intorduction of proximity-fuzed ammunition for her 5" guns"

Despite the performance of BB South Dakota at Santa Cruz, her volume of AA fire was considered inadequate.

In February 1943, her AA complement was upgraded to 16 5" guns, 68 40mm guns and 35 20mm guns. By March 1945, her AA had been upgraded to 16 5" guns, 68 40mm guns and 77 20mm guns.

ORIGINAL: Halsey

These are all beta examples being given out to the WITP forum.
Flak is still being looked into, among other things on the priority list.
Updating the game on a weekly basis, a step at a time.

Based on the current rate of the weekly progress, how many weeks would it take to work off the remaining items on the priority list?

And, dear Lord, please don't let Terminus answer this one...

ORIGINAL: romanovich

ORIGINAL: Halsey

These are all beta examples being given out to the WITP forum.
Flak is still being looked into, among other things on the priority list.
Updating the game on a weekly basis, a step at a time.

Based on the current rate of the weekly progress, how many weeks would it take to work off the remaining items on the priority list?

And, dear Lord, please don't let Terminus answer this one...

The only thing I can say for sure is, it is getting closer.
You might even see the Japanese with the ability to temporarily shut down Allied airfields.
Improvements in bombload assignments, and such.

No more additions are being made.
It's all about working out the current routines so that they do work.
Without messing up routines in place.

For the forum's information, the testers have already started a list for even more fine tuning.
The aim right now is to get it out to you fanatics.

I wish I were a fly on the wall.
When everyone opens the game.
My guess is, the first thing that comes to your mind will be...
Whoa, where do I start![;)][:D]

ORIGINAL: romanovich

ORIGINAL: Halsey

These are all beta examples being given out to the WITP forum.
Flak is still being looked into, among other things on the priority list.
Updating the game on a weekly basis, a step at a time.

Based on the current rate of the weekly progress, how many weeks would it take to work off the remaining items on the priority list?

And, dear Lord, please don't let Terminus answer this one...

I'm not going to answer it.

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: romanovich

ORIGINAL: Halsey

These are all beta examples being given out to the WITP forum.
Flak is still being looked into, among other things on the priority list.
Updating the game on a weekly basis, a step at a time.

Based on the current rate of the weekly progress, how many weeks would it take to work off the remaining items on the priority list?

And, dear Lord, please don't let Terminus answer this one...

I'm not going to answer it.

You just did [:'(]

I have over 4 weeks of vacation on the books along with enough sick time to keep me out of the office for about 4 months. I can see many "mental health" days of being sick in my future. [:D]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: romanovich

ORIGINAL: Halsey

These are all beta examples being given out to the WITP forum.
Flak is still being looked into, among other things on the priority list.
Updating the game on a weekly basis, a step at a time.

Based on the current rate of the weekly progress, how many weeks would it take to work off the remaining items on the priority list?

And, dear Lord, please don't let Terminus answer this one...

I'm not going to answer it.

Because it does not exist.

ORIGINAL: Halsey

The only thing I can say for sure is, it is getting closer.
You might even see the Japanese with the ability to temporarily shut down Allied airfields.
Improvements in bombload assignments, and such.

No more additions are being made.
It's all about working out the current routines so that they do work.
Without messing up routines in place.

For the forum's information, the testers have already started a list for even more fine tuning.
The aim right now is to get it out to you fanatics.

"The aim right now"? What the heck were you guys up to in all those months prior? Keeping it away from us?

I'm just kidding, of course.

"For the forum's information, the testers have already started a list for even more fine tuning." Is that the priority list that was mentioned is being worked on? Or is that the also-got-to-be-fixed-before-release list that is growing in size behind that nifty priority list?

There are 13 weeks remaining in 2008. Given that it progress is measured in weekly builds now, that leaves 13 tries to make it a 2008 release. That, of course, if there is not that dreaded one or two months delay between "going gold" and Matrix getting the opening credits right...

Oh, please do tell: are you guys expecting this to be a 2008 release??

I think there's no risk in telling us so. It'll just allow me to skip the forums for a few months and come back early next year. All would be good!

ORIGINAL: romanovich

ORIGINAL: Halsey

The only thing I can say for sure is, it is getting closer.
You might even see the Japanese with the ability to temporarily shut down Allied airfields.
Improvements in bombload assignments, and such.

No more additions are being made.
It's all about working out the current routines so that they do work.
Without messing up routines in place.

For the forum's information, the testers have already started a list for even more fine tuning.
The aim right now is to get it out to you fanatics.

"The aim right now"? What the heck were you guys up to in all those months prior? Keeping it away from us?

I'm just kidding, of course.

"For the forum's information, the testers have already started a list for even more fine tuning." Is that the priority list that was mentioned is being worked on? Or is that the also-got-to-be-fixed-before-release list that is growing in size behind that nifty priority list?

There are 13 weeks remaining in 2008. Given that it progress is measured in weekly builds now, that leaves 13 tries to make it a 2008 release. That, of course, if there is not that dreaded one or two months delay between "going gold" and Matrix getting the opening credits right...

Oh, please do tell: are you guys expecting this to be a 2008 release??

I think there's no risk in telling us so. It'll just allow me to skip the forums for a few months and come back early next year. All would be good!

No, this is beyond the priority list.
Everyone knows you players won't be satisfied, unless every decision you make, forces you to pull your own hair out at their roots beforehand.[:D]


That's up to the bigshots at Matrix to make that call.
I'm sure when the game gets to a certain point they'll call our hand.[;)]

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Jim, not to be a stickler, but by definition Decimation has never resulted in more than 10% losses...[;)]

Well, not to be a stickler myself, but the origin of the word has little realationship to the common use of the word today. While it originally meant "1 in 10," that proper understanding has been radically modified in everydayspeak, the language of pseudo military historians and journalists describing the results of modern combat action. Depending on their political orientation 1% can be decimation (if you're against a particular war) or 99% can be decimation (if you're not).

So, to prevent such misunderstanding on these boards, I propose that in common usage decimation now means 1 in 10 survive, or perhaps more accurately, "up to 90% casualties." 90% to 99% becomes "anihilated."

100% becomes "They had a very, very bad day."

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Jim, not to be a stickler, but by definition Decimation has never resulted in more than 10% losses...[;)]

Well, not to be a stickler myself, but the origin of the word has little realationship to the common use of the word today. While it originally meant "1 in 10," that proper understanding has been radically modified in everydayspeak, the language of pseudo military historians and journalists describing the results of modern combat action. Depending on their political orientation 1% can be decimation (if you're against a particular war) or 99% can be decimation (if you're not).

So, to prevent such misunderstanding on these boards, I propose that in common usage decimation now means 1 in 10 survive, or perhaps more accurately, "up to 90% casualties." 90% to 99% becomes "anihilated."

100% becomes "They had a very, very bad day."

I tend to have those more than I'd like in PBEM games. [:(]

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Jim, not to be a stickler, but by definition Decimation has never resulted in more than 10% losses...[;)]

Well, not to be a stickler myself, but the origin of the word has little realationship to the common use of the word today. While it originally meant "1 in 10," that proper understanding has been radically modified in everydayspeak, the language of pseudo military historians and journalists describing the results of modern combat action. Depending on their political orientation 1% can be decimation (if you're against a particular war) or 99% can be decimation (if you're not).

So, to prevent such misunderstanding on these boards, I propose that in common usage decimation now means 1 in 10 survive, or perhaps more accurately, "up to 90% casualties." 90% to 99% becomes "anihilated."

100% becomes "They had a very, very bad day."

We could just go metric instead. Especially in honor of the roots of the words decimation itself. For example:

millidecimation - Their feelings were hurt.

centidecimation - They actually thought about their aircraft being damaged. Maybe it was FOW.

decidecimation - A few of their aircraft were lost or knocked out of commission.

decimation - About 10% lost or knocked out of commission.

decadecimation - Bloody well just about the whole unit was wiped out.

hectodecimation - Unit wiped out. Support facilities over-run and vandalized. Copyrighted music downloaded.

kilodecimation - Unit wiped out. Service records burned.

megadecimation - Enemy used time machine to hunt down ancestors.

gigadecimation - Enemy crossed beams of fusion powered backpack weapons. Very Bad.

teradecimation - Raised and refitted as spaceship, BB Yamato time travels to scenario and destroys original Yamato in friendly fire accident. Having destroyed itself in the past, spaceship Yamato vanishes, leaving behind a black hole. AE swallowed by black hole.

Bravo[&o][&o][&o][&o][&o][&o][&o][&o]

I must now mention that the original roman meaning of the term "decimation" was, as a form of punishment, to kill 1 in 10 men in a certain unit ....

ORIGINAL: AdmSpruance

According to Jim Dunnigan and Albert Nofi from 'Victory at Sea", BB South Dakota had her AA complement upgraded in September 1942 from 16 5" guns, 28 1.1" guns, 6 20mm guns and 8 .50MGs to 16 5" guns, 16 40mm guns, 20 1.1" guns, and 36 20mm guns.


On October 26th, 1942 during the Batlle of the Santa Cruz Islands, BB South Dakota was attacked by at least 69 Japanese dive bombers and torpedo bombers and shot down 26.....by herself.

"The success of BB South Dakota on October 26th, 1942 was not only due to the volume of AA fire but to:

1)Effective radar fire direction
2)The resiliency and maneuverability of the ship
3)The intorduction of proximity-fuzed ammunition for her 5" guns"

Despite the performance of BB South Dakota at Santa Cruz, her volume of AA fire was considered inadequate.

In February 1943, her AA complement was upgraded to 16 5" guns, 68 40mm guns and 35 20mm guns. By March 1945, her AA had been upgraded to 16 5" guns, 68 40mm guns and 77 20mm guns.

And are those numbers supported by japanese records or are they just US claims?

Well, according to Japanese reports, their bomber air groups were decimated.
But there is allways problem with overclaiming. How many of these 26 bombers were also claimed by AA crews of other escorting ships?