House rules for impregnable Allied armour

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Gaspote
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:12 am
Location: France

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by Gaspote »

Checking the units in the editor, I noticed japanese units don't get a single device able to penetrate the allied tanks even artillery gun sucks.

Does that mean if armor is superior to penetration, the device can't damage the others ?

Is this the reason why the allied tank didn't get damaged ?
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: Gaspote

Checking the units in the editor, I noticed japanese units don't get a single device able to penetrate the allied tanks even artillery gun sucks.

Does that mean if armor is superior to penetration, the device can't damage the others ?

Is this the reason why the allied tank didn't get damaged ?

I imagine there's a die roll involved. Note that in my previous post of my combat at Urumchi, the Chinese troops didn't have any artillery tubes whatsoever, yet I still lost tanks. Destroyed, not just disabled.
User avatar
Gaspote
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:12 am
Location: France

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by Gaspote »

What was the attack, shock or deliberate ?

Perhaps it make a difference.

Are you absolutely sure they were no gun ? AA guns work against tank too.
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: Gaspote

What was the attack, shock or deliberate ?

Perhaps it make a difference.

Are you absolutely sure they were no gun ? AA guns work against tank too.

No guns. Chinese troops. They don't have any guns. Combat replay said 0 guns. It was a deliberate attack.

What made the difference was a lack of supply in my units. They weren't at 0, but they were definitely below their required amount. Supply has a very bad effect on units if you don't have enough.
AE Veteran
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 5:29 pm

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by AE Veteran »

This is one of my units, with 37 mm At guns and engineers. Everyone has forgotten to bring pole bombs, flamethrowers, satchel charges, magnetic mines, Molotov cocktails etc.
I'm not expecting my boys to rout the Allies but in three turns they have endured 500+ casualties without any Allied losses. Those Humber armoured cars sure are real mean machines!

Image
Attachments
Image1.jpg
Image1.jpg (69.02 KiB) Viewed 357 times
User avatar
SqzMyLemon
Posts: 4239
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:18 pm
Location: Alberta, Canada

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by SqzMyLemon »

Much ado about nothing. I'd suggest you get on with your game. Go back over your old combat reports of Japanese armour attacks in China. It's your turn and you need to put the right units in play to slow down Allied armour rather than ask for an unfair house rule. You can slow Allied armour under the right conditions at this point, but you'll never stop it completely. You better get used to it.
Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)
Werewolf13
Posts: 515
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 8:11 pm

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by Werewolf13 »

Forget the numbers.

Here's a real life story about just how scary tanks can be when thrown at troops that have a minimal ability to fight back.

1973 - Northern Germany. A 5 Army field exercise that lasted a month. The US, German, British, French and Dutch armies participated.

About the 2nd week in, the tank company I was serving in with M-60A1 tanks, Co C, 4th Bn, 64th Armor, 3rd Bgd, 3rd Inf div was assigned to attack a Dutch leg infantry battalion. The dutch (I won't capitalize dutch anymore - they failed as soldiers) were camped out in a valley. Whole battalion, about 800 guys. Ovelooking the valley was a lightly wooded hill. We moved our company to the edge of the woods over looking the dutch camp slowly during the night and shut our engines down.

At dawn, just as the sun begain peeking over the eastern horizon, all 17 tanks fired up their engines and on command rolled out of the woods and moved out towards the dutch camp at 10 mph (if you've ever been in a tank you know moving cross crounty at speed can be a not fun experience so we went slow off that hill). The dutch camp was about 1000 yards away. We lit off our artillery simulators (made big booms) and started firing our coax and TC's cupola mounted 50's.

Here's what happened. Keep in mind this was an exercise. No one was going to be hurt. No bullets flying, no artillery landing just 17 tanks manned by 68 guys charging 800 guys who had AT weapons, foxholes, CAS on call etc. 800 guys took off running, on foot, as fast as they could to get away from us. Took a minute or two for the exercise umpires to bring us to a screeching halt and about an hour to round up the dutch and get 'em back to their camp.

Point of the story! You're lucky your virtual Japs only suffered, what, 289 casualties. In real life against Shermans with little real way to do more than scratch the paint or rattle the inside a little a whole battalion of Sherman's could have wreaked some very real havoc. ROFLMAO! One sherman firing its coax MG and hull mounted bow MG could have taken out twice as many as 289 guys in just a few minutes if they were in a concentrated enough location.

Like one poster said: Take yur lumps and move on!
Freedom is not free! Nor should it be. For men being men will neither fight for nor value that which is free.

Michael Andress
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: AE Veteran

This is one of my units, with 37 mm At guns and engineers. Everyone has forgotten to bring pole bombs, flamethrowers, satchel charges, magnetic mines, Molotov cocktails etc.
I'm not expecting my boys to rout the Allies but in three turns they have endured 500+ casualties without any Allied losses. Those Humber armoured cars sure are real mean machines!

Image

The Humbers are in Reserve mode, as shown in the screenshot. You aren't getting to shoot at them.

You've got to read the thread and give up on your wishes how you'd like the game to behave. The answers to why this is happening are all there, and your opponent has been kind enough to give you FULL info, including disablements, supply state, leadership, and shoe sizes on his units. Take the learning and play on.
The Moose
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Much ado about nothing. I'd suggest you get on with your game. Go back over your old combat reports of Japanese armour attacks in China. It's your turn and you need to put the right units in play to slow down Allied armour rather than ask for an unfair house rule. You can slow Allied armour under the right conditions at this point, but you'll never stop it completely. You better get used to it.

If you play long enough to see full Soviet armored divisions . . .
The Moose
AE Veteran
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 5:29 pm

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by AE Veteran »

A fair number of people goe on about the Chinese. Cant remember any suicide Chinese squads? Apples and pears. Fraid the game is broken. Allied Abrams tanks vs Japs inferior technology. Draw your conclusions.
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: AE Veteran

A fair number of people goe on about the Chinese. Cant remember any suicide Chinese squads? Apples and pears. Fraid the game is broken. Allied Abrams tanks vs Japs inferior technology. Draw your conclusions.

I conclude this ain't the game for you. Bye.
The Moose
User avatar
USSAmerica
Posts: 19211
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 4:32 am
Location: Graham, NC, USA
Contact:

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by USSAmerica »

Where's Ron when we need him? [:D]

"The Allied armor is BORKED!!!" [8D]
Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Image
Artwork by The Amazing Dixie
User avatar
Jim D Burns
Posts: 4001
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 6:00 pm
Location: Salida, CA.

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by Jim D Burns »

ORIGINAL: AE Veteran

This is one of my units, with 37 mm At guns and engineers. Everyone has forgotten to bring pole bombs, flamethrowers, satchel charges, magnetic mines, Molotov cocktails etc.
I'm not expecting my boys to rout the Allies but in three turns they have endured 500+ casualties without any Allied losses. Those Humber armoured cars sure are real mean machines!

Image


I’m starting to think this has to do with the combat odds ratio. He has such an abysmal odds ratio, his guys are probably breaking off the combat before the tanks can close in to range with your AT guns, so they never actually get to shoot back. Someone with a much better understanding of the combat routines would have to confirm this, but my guess is your guns aren’t even getting to shoot at him. Simply put, he outranges you then the combat breaks off due to his low odds attack.

Slow down your combat replay and carefully read all the messages in the battle display as they come up. It may give you some insight into what is going on.

Jim
Czert
Posts: 595
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 10:56 pm

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by Czert »

ORIGINAL: AE Veteran

This is one of my units, with 37 mm At guns and engineers. Everyone has forgotten to bring pole bombs, flamethrowers, satchel charges, magnetic mines, Molotov cocktails etc.
I'm not expecting my boys to rout the Allies but in three turns they have endured 500+ casualties without any Allied losses. Those Humber armoured cars sure are real mean machines!

Image

well i just have to ask - why 37mm guns dont fire back ? lack of range ? and since enemy tank units dont have artylery gun there, why uits are not set al least to bombard ? yeah, knocking out enemy tank will be mamtter of luck, but you can disable him, and minimaly play on tankers nerves.
Mayby even deliberate attack should be considered - it it fail, well whats difference if that place fall one week earlier or later ?
Czert
Posts: 595
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 10:56 pm

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by Czert »

ORIGINAL: AE Veteran

A fair number of people goe on about the Chinese. Cant remember any suicide Chinese squads? Apples and pears. Fraid the game is broken. Allied Abrams tanks vs Japs inferior technology. Draw your conclusions.

Well, you didnt knowed that allied will have booth numbers and quality advantages in tank over japs from 43 and mainly 44+ on ?
Ok, np it is just lack of history knowlenge, no one can know all.
but you have problem that you can deal with it in game ? well, that your problem.¨
deliberate attack with tanks is, well, just direct fire artilery with some nice anti-shell protection :). It is NOT charging of enemy treches with tanks they will NEVER do it unless defender colapse) for that it is shock assault.
You want to get to molotov coctails range ? well, wait eigter for shock attack (which may never come), or well do counterattack by yourself (deliberate/shock) - but well, you will lose defence bonuses.
User avatar
LoBaron
Posts: 4775
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by LoBaron »

ORIGINAL: czert2

ORIGINAL: AE Veteran

A fair number of people goe on about the Chinese. Cant remember any suicide Chinese squads? Apples and pears. Fraid the game is broken. Allied Abrams tanks vs Japs inferior technology. Draw your conclusions.
[...]It is NOT charging of enemy treches with tanks they will NEVER do it unless defender colapse) for that it is shock assault.
You want to get to molotov coctails range ? well, wait eigter for shock attack (which may never come), or well do counterattack by yourself (deliberate/shock) - but well, you will lose defence bonuses.

This is a very good comment actually.

And in AE, depending on the circumstances, Inf, even with low antiarmor values, can dish out quite well against tanks in case the tanks are not supported by Inf themselves. But for this they have to attack with reasonable numbers (triple to quadruple AV as minimum).

In this specific case I doubt though that IJA numbers and unit quality is anywhere near the amount required. The results are pretty unsurprising.
Image
User avatar
AW1Steve
Posts: 14527
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:32 am
Location: Mordor aka Illlinois

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by AW1Steve »

ORIGINAL: Werewolf1326

Forget the numbers.

Here's a real life story about just how scary tanks can be when thrown at troops that have a minimal ability to fight back.

1973 - Northern Germany. A 5 Army field exercise that lasted a month. The US, German, British, French and Dutch armies participated.

About the 2nd week in, the tank company I was serving in with M-60A1 tanks, Co C, 4th Bn, 64th Armor, 3rd Bgd, 3rd Inf div was assigned to attack a Dutch leg infantry battalion. The dutch (I won't capitalize dutch anymore - they failed as soldiers) were camped out in a valley. Whole battalion, about 800 guys. Ovelooking the valley was a lightly wooded hill. We moved our company to the edge of the woods over looking the dutch camp slowly during the night and shut our engines down.

At dawn, just as the sun begain peeking over the eastern horizon, all 17 tanks fired up their engines and on command rolled out of the woods and moved out towards the dutch camp at 10 mph (if you've ever been in a tank you know moving cross crounty at speed can be a not fun experience so we went slow off that hill). The dutch camp was about 1000 yards away. We lit off our artillery simulators (made big booms) and started firing our coax and TC's cupola mounted 50's.

Here's what happened. Keep in mind this was an exercise. No one was going to be hurt. No bullets flying, no artillery landing just 17 tanks manned by 68 guys charging 800 guys who had AT weapons, foxholes, CAS on call etc. 800 guys took off running, on foot, as fast as they could to get away from us. Took a minute or two for the exercise umpires to bring us to a screeching halt and about an hour to round up the dutch and get 'em back to their camp.

Point of the story! You're lucky your virtual Japs only suffered, what, 289 casualties. In real life against Shermans with little real way to do more than scratch the paint or rattle the inside a little a whole battalion of Sherman's could have wreaked some very real havoc. ROFLMAO! One sherman firing its coax MG and hull mounted bow MG could have taken out twice as many as 289 guys in just a few minutes if they were in a concentrated enough location.

Like one poster said: Take yur lumps and move on!
+1
User avatar
AW1Steve
Posts: 14527
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:32 am
Location: Mordor aka Illlinois

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by AW1Steve »

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: AE Veteran

A fair number of people goe on about the Chinese. Cant remember any suicide Chinese squads? Apples and pears. Fraid the game is broken. Allied Abrams tanks vs Japs inferior technology. Draw your conclusions.

I conclude this ain't the game for you. Bye.
+1
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5542
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by Yaab »

Those two brigades and the AA battalion should have enough field, AT and AA artillery pieces to at least successfully disable the Stuarts and halftracks. What is wrong with their targeting?
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: House rules for impregnable Allied armour

Post by witpqs »

For one thing the morale of the unit shown is 56 - really terrible.
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”