Matrix Games Forums

Posted: **Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:12 pm**

ORIGINAL: Puhis

ORIGINAL: Mynok

Did some interesting playing with the Guadalcanal scenario. Put together the CAs and set them up for a fast night run-in to contest the invasion, with retirement set, expecting them to zoom in, do some combat and zoom back out to avoid air attacks. What actually happened is they got surprised by two different cruiser TFs, then retreated SOUTH?!?! [X(] [X(]

Needless to say, they were destroyed by the carrier planes. Time to rethink surface combat tactics as Japanese for sure.

I've run that about ten times now, and results are like you said. Usually japanese cruisers are surprised, and are hammered by the allies. It seems that japanese ships don't know how to use those guns or torpedoes. And that retreating does not work. Sometimes japanese ships just don't retreat at all, or they retreat a few hexes south and US CV planes destroy them. Yesterday I tried to run fast transport TF of 2 CLs to Tassafaronga. There was allied TF (2 AKs and 2 DD) unloading troops, so my TF retreated to Tulagi(??), which is US base now...

So please, can somebody tell me how the retreating works, or does it work at all?

My only experience with this. I sent the historical Mikawa TF on a surface run up the slot and got hammered. The Allies caught the Japanese napping, and shot them to bits. And, as said, the bulk of the IJN survivors did not attempt to retreat but lingered to get obliterated by the Allied carriers. I plan on running the battle ten times tonight to see what the results are.

Posted: **Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:20 pm**

ORIGINAL: crsutton
. The Allies caught the Japanese napping, and shot them to bits.

There does seem to be a problem with Allied search radars working too well too quickly in the game. It is being looked at and will probably be tweaked some. I'm not the one doing it, so I really can't say more than that...

Posted: **Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:24 pm**

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: bklooste

I think a major issue is the accuracy of the US 5" and 6" guns. If the belt can take these hits the accuracy is not relevant but otherwise they will lay waste to the opposition

Actually, this is not quite accurate. Virtually nothing fired at Hiei that night off Guadalcanal could penetrate her main belt..., yet she was left helpless to be finished off the next morning. You can't inflict catastrophic damage..., but the "death of 1000 cuts" can be just as fatal (and much more painfull).

The same can be said about the South Dakota at the second naval battle of Guadacanal. She was hit by one 14 inch shell and many smaller shells. Her belt armor deflected the 14 inch shot but the lesser shells did serious damage to her upper works-knocking out the gun directing and radar systems.

I think AE relects this much better as in my only real naval fight to date the Houston surprise a kongo class BB and heavy CA with two distroyers. In the first round of fire when the Japanese could not fire back the Houston's 8 inch guns actually did some severe damage to the BB. (so unlike WITP) In the second round the BB and CAs guns ate the Houston up for lunch. Bout what I would expect.

The Boise, on the other hand, fired her guns like mad and did not take a hit. Did you guys make this ship out of kryptonite? [:D]

Posted: **Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:36 pm**

Boise has adamantium armor and laser guided 6" automatic guns; it's the only way she can get into so many fights and come out the winner every time.  She's my ABDA fleet's flagship and has already been in more surface fights than any other USN ship (Houston got sunk at Balikpapan by airstrikes); her gunfire is like a hose, sweeping IJN DD's off the surface every time one gets in her sights!

Posted: **Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:58 pm**

Someone's not going to be happy[;)]

Checked and she's at 30/48/19.........

Posted: **Mon Aug 10, 2009 1:02 pm**

One thing I would say which I'm not sure on is the reaction of SC TF's....for example in the same night of combat as the Zuiho encounter above CL Tromp, DD Kortenaer and DD Witte de With were heading back to Tarakan to refuel and re-arm (0 reaction was on) and they reacted (and IJN CA/CL Force) about 3/4 times in the night tto each other. All in all covering about 320 miles of ocean through various 'zipping' movements........

Posted: **Mon Aug 10, 2009 1:35 pm**

My SF TF's have reacted to spotted targets several times.  They appear to need a high detection value to react, though; my ABDA TF sank Zuiho after chasing her for several days through the Java Sea.  Earlier, though, they reacted to an invasion/covering force landing at Miri on northern Borneo.  I haven't gotten PT boats to react much at all, though; I sent three different groups of PT's out of Balikpapan when the KB came steaming through the strait and not one of them made an intercept.
 
I have found that ASW TF's will react onto spotted subs. 

Posted: **Mon Aug 10, 2009 1:57 pm**

I, too have found that once you have a mid sea intercept/combat you often have it happen over and over that same turn (2 to 4 times).
 
You may want to limit the same TFs to only fighting once per phase but:
 
Sometimes the battle results in the formation of an escort TF with damaged ships in it, and that is a different task force (triggering another intercept).
 

Posted: **Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:02 pm**

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

My SF TF's have reacted to spotted targets several times. They appear to need a high detection value to react, though; my ABDA TF sank Zuiho after chasing her for several days through the Java Sea. Earlier, though, they reacted to an invasion/covering force landing at Miri on northern Borneo. I haven't gotten PT boats to react much at all, though; I sent three different groups of PT's out of Balikpapan when the KB came steaming through the strait and not one of them made an intercept.

I have found that ASW TF's will react onto spotted subs.

Understood but as I'm saying I wonder if there's a little too much reaction.

For example in my Tromp battle. She got reacted to then bolted east 40 miles (out of ammo so escaped out of the fight), but then headed west straight away as was heading to Tarkan, another battle, then retreated NE, then headed west again and IJN SC TF was there too.....etc etc......

Posted: **Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:08 pm**

ORIGINAL: Speedy
For example in my Tromp battle. She got reacted to then bolted east 40 miles (out of ammo so escaped out of the fight), but then headed west straight away as was heading to Tarkan, another battle, then retreated NE, then headed west again and IJN SC TF was there too.....etc etc......

Its because they just don't ever give up. They have a tendency to react even when out of ammo or ordered to retire.

There is a roll, apparently, but it seems too much in favour of reaction. Either that or my default SCTF commanders are very aggressive.

Posted: **Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm**

I get that constant re-reaction as well; it gets so bad that if I want a TF to go to a certain base, I turn off the reaction range completely.  PT boats are really annoying when doing this.  I had a group at Tawi Tawi move to hit some TF's at Jolo (two hexes away); they performed their mission then withdrew.
 
They withdrew east.  On their return home, they reentered Jolo's hex, met the remnants of the same TF, fought an inconclusive battle (all torpedoes expended already), withdrew EAST again, tried to return to base, hit Jolo a third time, took some damage, and withdrew EAST one more time.
 
Now they're out of fuel and 3 hexes away from their base, with an enemy base between them and home.  Just great.

Posted: **Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:03 pm**

The reacting/engaging over and over when out of ammo is particularly annoying. I have been changing any out of ammo TF to escort/return/direct/React 0 but that is a bother to check each for remaining ammo.
 
 

Posted: **Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:39 pm**

I'm not sure how reasonable it is - would De Ruyter be able to stay afloat long enough to take 11 hits? I suppose it would depend on how many came from those 14" guns of Yamashiro. Still, Yamashiro didn't prove to be the best led of the BB's in the IJN. It's an interesting battle.

ORIGINAL: Beezle

Here is my most recent surface battle (ie not chosen for any reason other than it occured this turn):

Day Time Surface Combat, near Manado at 77,100 (Allied TF was on react. mid ocean, daytime), Range 20,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
     BB Yamashiro, Shell hits 14
     CL Yubari
     DD Mutsuki, Shell hits 4, heavy fires
     DD Kisaragi, Shell hits 12, heavy fires, heavy damage
Results
................Sy-Fl-En-FI
Yamashiro...04-02-02-02 Shell hits 14
Yubari........00-00-00-00
Mutsuki......44-38-18-04 Shell hits 4, heavy fires
Kisaragi......Sunk heavy fires, heavy damage

Allied Ships
     CL De Ruyter, Shell hits 11, heavy fires, heavy damage
     CL Tromp, Shell hits 2
     DD Alden, Shell hits 1
     DD Edsall
     DD John D. Edwards
     DD Whipple, Shell hits 2, and is sunk
     DD Banckert
     DD Witte de With, Shell hits 2, heavy fires
     DD Kortenaer
     DD Piet Hein

Results
.................Sy-Fl-En-FI
De Ruyter....63-73-35-99 Shell hits 11, heavy fires, heavy damage
Tromp ........03-03-00-00 Shell hits 2
Alden..........04-00-01-00 Shell hits 1
Edsall..........00-00-00-00
JD. Edwards.00-00-00-00
Whipple.......Sunk Shell hits 2
Banckert......00-00-00-00
Wte de With.23-30-27-00 Shell hits 2, heavy fires
Kortenaer.....00-00-00-00
Piet Hein......00-00-00-00

Maximum visibility in Clear Conditions: 30,000 yards
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 20,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 20,000 yards
Closed to 8,000 yards, then opened to 13,000 then closed again to 9,000 then opened to 20,000 (no more combat) and disengaged. Torpedoes fired but no torp hits
The damage values are taken by opening the autosave after the battle so they are not affected by Fog of War, and they include any preexisting minor damage and any repairs that occurred that turn. De Ruyter looks sure to sink, making the initial odds

IJ BB, CL 2xDD
Al 2xCL 8xDD
and results

IJ lose 1 DD
Al lose 1 CL, 1 DD

That all looks very reasonable to me

Matrix Games Forums

Surface combat bias ?

RE: Surface combat bias ?

RE: Surface combat bias ?

RE: Surface combat bias ?

RE: Surface combat bias ?

RE: Surface combat bias ?

RE: Surface combat bias ?

RE: Surface combat bias ?

RE: Surface combat bias ?

RE: Surface combat bias ?

RE: Surface combat bias ?

RE: Surface combat bias ?

RE: Surface combat bias ?

RE: Surface combat bias ?