Rise of the Sheep! JocMeister(A) vs. Obvert(J)

[Encircled]

Tough luck that

Have you tried having your carrier T/F always following an ASW patrol at 0 hexes?

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Dora09

ORIGINAL: witpqs

There are ~4,000 more troops the second day. If you have the unit list for the second day you can compare them and see who showed up late to the party.

As far as adjusted AV goes, if the attacker was less robust the second day (say, disruption and so on) then fewer defender squads would get suppressed by the attackers' firepower. That could account for a defender's adjusted AV being higher the second day.

But if what you are saying above is true, wouldn't the attackers adjusted AV be lowered as well? When the attacker has problems (supply, disruption etc.) it is their adjusted AV that gets takes the hit, that makes sense and is expected and observed in games with regularity. The ones that have vexed me are those where the defender takes relatively substantial damage the first day and then gets a massive boost in adjusted AV the next (without the introduction of new troops (same raw AV). I don't want to highjack this AAR but when I have seen this, my second day (attacker) adjusted AV actually increased slightly but the defende's adjusted AV got a massive jump. It has happened twice in my game at seemingly random times.

He could have brought more stuff that does not have raw AV to the party - arty and HQs, support troops (to truck ammo to the front lines), etc.
Perhaps the game also has a "surprise attack" chance where one side can occasionally catch the other side napping?

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: Dora09

ORIGINAL: witpqs

There are ~4,000 more troops the second day. If you have the unit list for the second day you can compare them and see who showed up late to the party.

As far as adjusted AV goes, if the attacker was less robust the second day (say, disruption and so on) then fewer defender squads would get suppressed by the attackers' firepower. That could account for a defender's adjusted AV being higher the second day.

But if what you are saying above is true, wouldn't the attackers adjusted AV be lowered as well? When the attacker has problems (supply, disruption etc.) it is their adjusted AV that gets takes the hit, that makes sense and is expected and observed in games with regularity. The ones that have vexed me are those where the defender takes relatively substantial damage the first day and then gets a massive boost in adjusted AV the next (without the introduction of new troops (same raw AV). I don't want to highjack this AAR but when I have seen this, my second day (attacker) adjusted AV actually increased slightly but the defende's adjusted AV got a massive jump. It has happened twice in my game at seemingly random times.

Yes, but... notice the the attacker's unadjusted AV was also higher the second day. Why?

JocM explained that in one of his posts:

"Ah, the top one is the second attack. The one under is the first one. I added it for comparison! "

[Dora09]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: Dora09

ORIGINAL: witpqs

There are ~4,000 more troops the second day. If you have the unit list for the second day you can compare them and see who showed up late to the party.

As far as adjusted AV goes, if the attacker was less robust the second day (say, disruption and so on) then fewer defender squads would get suppressed by the attackers' firepower. That could account for a defender's adjusted AV being higher the second day.

But if what you are saying above is true, wouldn't the attackers adjusted AV be lowered as well? When the attacker has problems (supply, disruption etc.) it is their adjusted AV that gets takes the hit, that makes sense and is expected and observed in games with regularity. The ones that have vexed me are those where the defender takes relatively substantial damage the first day and then gets a massive boost in adjusted AV the next (without the introduction of new troops (same raw AV). I don't want to highjack this AAR but when I have seen this, my second day (attacker) adjusted AV actually increased slightly but the defende's adjusted AV got a massive jump. It has happened twice in my game at seemingly random times.

He could have brought more stuff that does not have raw AV to the party - arty and HQs, support troops (to truck ammo to the front lines), etc.
Perhaps the game also has a "surprise attack" chance where one side can occasionally catch the other side napping?

That makes sense. Even though it has been frustrating at times, I like that the outcome of land battles are somewhat unpredictable and not always based purely on AV.

[JocMeister]

Whooops! [:D]

Sorry for the confusion. As I wrote the topmost attack is actually the second. What I find really interesting is this:

First attack:

Ground combat at Port Moresby (98,130)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 45832 troops, 935 guns, 1172 vehicles, Assault Value = 1773
Defending force 25123 troops, 252 guns, 65 vehicles, Assault Value = 844
Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 4
Allied adjusted assault: 1016
Japanese adjusted defense: 1019
Allied assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 4)


Second attack:

Ground combat at Port Moresby (98,130)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 45134 troops, 938 guns, 1179 vehicles, Assault Value = 1695
Defending force 21999 troops, 236 guns, 57 vehicles, Assault Value = 592
Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 3
Allied adjusted assault: 873
Japanese adjusted defense: 1023
Allied assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 3)

Despite having dropped 250 RAW AV the adjusted AV is actually slightly higher in the second attack. I wonder why this is? Probably a combination of dice roll and the fact that his troops didn´t get a negative modifier for disruption. Hopefully mostly a bad roll of the dice because I´m going to try again next turn!

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Tough luck that

Have you tried having your carrier T/F always following an ASW patrol at 0 hexes?

I had the CV TFs following a ASW TF. Don´t know if it makes a difference but it feels better having the ASW TF go "first". I also had a ASW TF following the CVs. I reloaded the turn and checked my setup and I had 36 DDs with the CV/CVEs (most with ASW 8) and two ASW TFs with 4 SC each. That makes the ASW value around 320 in the hex and he still got 3 attempts on my CVs... Makes me very nervous for the future...

I´m going to try and flood the area with ASW TFs and see if I can nail some of the subs.

[BBfanboy]

I have been sandboxing for some time and have found that having too many ASW TFs in the same hex seems to negate their effectiveness. Best results from two TFs of four ships. Three TF are OK, but don't seem to work quite as well. Four or more seem to rarely find the sub. The only sense I can make of this is that the sub will come near the surface when there is space enough between the TFs but if not, it dives deep - below the thermal layers that cloak it.
The game doesn't model the need for the sub to come up for air and battery recharge, as far as I can tell, so they stay out of sight indefinitely.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Whooops! [:D]

Sorry for the confusion. As I wrote the topmost attack is actually the second. What I find really interesting is this:

First attack:

Ground combat at Port Moresby (98,130)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 45832 troops, 935 guns, 1172 vehicles, Assault Value = 1773
Defending force 25123 troops, 252 guns, 65 vehicles, Assault Value = 844
Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 4
Allied adjusted assault: 1016
Japanese adjusted defense: 1019
Allied assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 4)


Second attack:

Ground combat at Port Moresby (98,130)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 45134 troops, 938 guns, 1179 vehicles, Assault Value = 1695
Defending force 21999 troops, 236 guns, 57 vehicles, Assault Value = 592
Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 3
Allied adjusted assault: 873
Japanese adjusted defense: 1023
Allied assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 3)

Despite having dropped 250 RAW AV the adjusted AV is actually slightly higher in the second attack. I wonder why this is? Probably a combination of dice roll and the fact that his troops didn´t get a negative modifier for disruption. Hopefully mostly a bad roll of the dice because I´m going to try again next turn!

Certainly possible, but remember to consider things having to do with the attacker. Adjusted AV is what's left at the end of combat. In addition to those many, wonderful random die rolls, there are also the effects of the various firing phases. The adjusted AV is the original AV minus squads/devices destroyed or disabled during the firing phases (disabled squads might count partial) and minus squads/devices that are suppressed. Suppressed is not the same as disabled. Think of suppressed as squads (or other weapons groups like guns, tanks, etc.) that are pinned down, disorganized, thrown off their objective (whether defensive or offensive), etc. etc. by enemy fire during that combat. Suppressed in AE is temporary for that combat only, and does not carry over to the next turn. Disruption and fatigue carry over, and I presume that deep inside the calculations there is some connection where things that are suppressed have chance of becoming disrupted.

Why does this matter? Because each side starts with an AV total. Then various modifiers are applied. Then there are firing phases where attacker and defender fire at each other. But remember that 500 squads and 30 tanks with 0 disruption are many times more effective than 500 squads and 30 tanks with a disruption value of 30. Un-disrupted troops will suppress enemy squads/devices much more. Now, note that this is a high-level abstraction of the way I've learned that combat is resolved. I am not suggesting that this is specifically how it happens. Given what developers have said over time and what I and others have seen and posted about the game, it is a reasonable metaphor to help conceptualize the situation we are discussing.

For the first combat the attackers were fresh (presumably). That is not true for the second combat. The attacking troops might well be disrupted, fatigued, lower in morale. The point is, they might well have done a less effective job of suppressing the defenders during the second combat. So even if all other things were equal, the defenders could have higher adjusted AV even starting with a lower original AV.

[JocMeister]

24th - 28th November -43

As seen in previous posts this havn´t been the best of days for the allies. It didn´t get any better on the 27th. But at least some good news on the 28th!

Port Moresby

It finally succumbed to the allied onslaught! [&o]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Port Moresby (98,130)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 45018 troops, 937 guns, 1177 vehicles, Assault Value = 1600

Defending force 19771 troops, 236 guns, 56 vehicles, Assault Value = 407

Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 2

Allied adjusted assault: 718

Japanese adjusted defense: 189

Allied assault odds: 3 to 1 (fort level 2)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), disruption(-), experience(-)
supply(-)
Attacker: shock(+)

Japanese ground losses:
2118 casualties reported
Squads: 116 destroyed, 40 disabled
Non Combat: 8 destroyed, 158 disabled
Engineers: 7 destroyed, 7 disabled
Guns lost 65 (31 destroyed, 34 disabled)
Vehicles lost 5 (3 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Units destroyed 1


Allied ground losses:
349 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 45 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 6 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 16 disabled
Vehicles lost 16 (1 destroyed, 15 disabled)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Port Moresby (98,130)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 44415 troops, 937 guns, 1176 vehicles, Assault Value = 1563

Defending force 16707 troops, 205 guns, 53 vehicles, Assault Value = 338

Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 1

Allied adjusted assault: 953

Japanese adjusted defense: 99

Allied assault odds: 9 to 1 (fort level 1)

Allied forces CAPTURE Port Moresby !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
4708 casualties reported
Squads: 99 destroyed, 52 disabled
Non Combat: 318 destroyed, 38 disabled
Engineers: 93 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 73 (62 destroyed, 11 disabled)
Vehicles lost 54 (54 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units retreated 8


Allied ground losses:
140 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 8 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Vehicles lost 20 (1 destroyed, 19 disabled)


Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

The 1st Marines together with a Corp HQ and two combat engineer units set out after his troops retreating towards Buna. The USAAF will continue to harass from the air. I think Erik will have some problems getting the troops out from Buna unless his marches them. He might try to evac them via air. I will put LRCAP up once he arrives.

The involved units have already started prepping for the next targets. But before that I need to take Milne Bay. Erik has 25.000 troops there. If I´m unlucky its another division. I will start bombing from the air shortly to try and gauge what is there. I have two divisions, some tanks and combat engineers fully prepped. If this takes the same effort PM did I will be in trouble.

Erik sent in a bombardment on Groyte Island that did little damage.

Burma

I did some test bombings of his troops that are in open terrain but in the fortified bases. Results were somewhat encouraging. I´m starting to wonder if its possible to suppress his troops in Prome enough for me to capture the base? He has 125.000 troops in place and probably 5-7 forts. Clear hex. I have my 5000AV. Lots of tanks and engineers.

What do you guys think? Is it possible to make enough damage from the air to have a shot at it? I´m really uncomfortable with my own inexperience and don´t want to waste a month bombing Prome to then have my forces smashed in the first attack. The possibility of removing the threat of those 125.000 troops is very exciting. Opinions very welcome!

CENTPAC

This is getting tiresome. The TF had 56 ASW rating. [8|] It doesn´t look like much but 40 Flood (32 Major) and 32 Engine (32 Major) I guess she will be gone for a year. So in 5 turns the Jap subs have made more damage then the combined US sub fleet has done over the course of the war.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Enderbury Island at 159,144

Japanese Ships
SS I-172, hits 1

Allied Ships
BB Maryland, Torpedo hits 1
BB Idaho
DD Hazelwood
DD Crane
DD Kennison
DD Dent
DD Schley



SS I-172 launches 4 torpedoes at BB Maryland
I-172 diving deep ....
DD Crane attacking submerged sub ....
DD Kennison fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Dent fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Schley fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Crane fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Dent fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Dent attacking submerged sub ....
DD Dent fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Dent fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub

With the BB shortage I´m suffering from this is kind of devastating. Ships have returned to Christmas to replenish. Troops have started the loading process. Should be able to land in 8-12 days. Wan´t to try and clear out the subs first.

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Certainly possible, but remember to consider things having to do with the attacker. Adjusted AV is what's left at the end of combat. In addition to those many, wonderful random die rolls, there are also the effects of the various firing phases. The adjusted AV is the original AV minus squads/devices destroyed or disabled during the firing phases (disabled squads might count partial) and minus squads/devices that are suppressed. Suppressed is not the same as disabled. Think of suppressed as squads (or other weapons groups like guns, tanks, etc.) that are pinned down, disorganized, thrown off their objective (whether defensive or offensive), etc. etc. by enemy fire during that combat. Suppressed in AE is temporary for that combat only, and does not carry over to the next turn. Disruption and fatigue carry over, and I presume that deep inside the calculations there is some connection where things that are suppressed have chance of becoming disrupted.

Why does this matter? Because each side starts with an AV total. Then various modifiers are applied. Then there are firing phases where attacker and defender fire at each other. But remember that 500 squads and 30 tanks with 0 disruption are many times more effective than 500 squads and 30 tanks with a disruption value of 30. Un-disrupted troops will suppress enemy squads/devices much more. Now, note that this is a high-level abstraction of the way I've learned that combat is resolved. I am not suggesting that this is specifically how it happens. Given what developers have said over time and what I and others have seen and posted about the game, it is a reasonable metaphor to help conceptualize the situation we are discussing.

For the first combat the attackers were fresh (presumably). That is not true for the second combat. The attacking troops might well be disrupted, fatigued, lower in morale. The point is, they might well have done a less effective job of suppressing the defenders during the second combat. So even if all other things were equal, the defenders could have higher adjusted AV even starting with a lower original AV.

Thank you for the explanation. I did not know that! Makes sense! [:)]

[ny59giants]

Milne Bay - My list of items to check off 'before' I invade.
1) A Corp/Army HQ and a Command HQ near or at 100% prepped.
2) At least three combat engineers and three tank units included (at this point in the game, probably SOP for any invasion).
3) An Amphib TF with just supplies to unload alongside the troops quickly.

There may be other items to include, but I'm still drinking my first cup of coffee. [:D] I awoke thinking I need to start a bigger list for my future counter attacks. ID all my tank and combat engineers and list them. My multiple list of stuff to keep track of as Allies is growing. Details will be talked about in my own AAR. Don't want Olorin to get too much free intel. [;)]

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Milne Bay - My list of items to check off 'before' I invade.
1) A Corp/Army HQ and a Command HQ near or at 100% prepped.
2) At least three combat engineers and three tank units included (at this point in the game, probably SOP for any invasion).
3) An Amphib TF with just supplies to unload alongside the troops quickly.

There may be other items to include, but I'm still drinking my first cup of coffee. [:D] I awoke thinking I need to start a bigger list for my future counter attacks. ID all my tank and combat engineers and list them. My multiple list of stuff to keep track of as Allies is growing. Details will be talked about in my own AAR. Don't want Olorin to get too much free intel. [;)]

Its a good list. But unfortunately I havn´t had a command HQ available for the task!

Despite being allied I have found the things I´m lacking most are combat engineers and Tanks. I have two of each prepped for Milne but thats pretty much all I have to spare in OZ. The three tank units at PM have started prepping for Milne but since we arn´t using the BETA they reset to 0.

Number three on the list I can manage though! [:)]

[ny59giants]

Command HQs - You have assigned what bases to prep for??

Australia Command HQ (Restricted to OZ, but range of 9 x 2 = 18 hexes) =
North Pacific HQ =
Central Pacific HQ (Pacific Area - name depends on the scenario or mod your playing))=
South Pacific HQ =
SouthWest Pacific HQ =

Signed,
Allied Operations Dept. [:D]

[BBfanboy]

Pacific Fleet/Ocean Areas HQ is also unrestricted and historically it did move from PH to Saipan when that island was secured. Don't know off hand if it can help with army support though. It can certainly help with ship loading/reammunitioning and repairs.
You should also bring an Amphib HQ to help coordinate the landing. I don't think you need to wait for an AGC to use them - load them in a couple of transports in a separate TF set to "DO NOT UNLOAD" and park them one hex back from the landing, or in the landing hex if you prefer.
MB is dangerous because of subs so do lots of ASW and mine clearing before the landings.

[JocMeister]

Going by memory here but I´m fairly certain its accurate! [:D]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Command HQs - You have assigned what bases to prep for??

Australia Command HQ (Restricted to OZ, but range of 9 x 2 = 18 hexes) = Darwin
North Pacific HQ = Dutch Harbour
Central Pacific HQ (Pacific Area - name depends on the scenario or mod your playing))= Tarawa
South Pacific HQ = Ndeni (This one I might change soon as Ndeni lost its significance)
SouthWest Pacific HQ = Was PM now set to Rabaul. Unsure about this one as I might never invasde Rabaul

Signed,
Allied Operations Dept. [:D]

Looks good? [:)]

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

You should also bring an Amphib HQ to help coordinate the landing. I don't think you need to wait for an AGC to use them - load them in a couple of transports in a separate TF set to "DO NOT UNLOAD" and park them one hex back from the landing, or in the landing hex if you prefer.
MB is dangerous because of subs so do lots of ASW and mine clearing before the landings.

Are you sure about the Amphib HQ? Very good info if you are right. Especially as we are playing with the version the messes up HQs when they land!

As soon as PMs AF is operational I will start working on Milne. Need to be able to provide LRCAP for the AMs. Engineers started unloading at PM this turn!

[ny59giants]

Looks good? [:)]

No!! If most of those bases are not scheduled to be invaded in the next two to three months, the Command HQ and its ability to influence Adjusted AV is being wasted. Of course each of those Command HQs needs to be teamed up with a Corp/Army HQ.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

You should also bring an Amphib HQ to help coordinate the landing. I don't think you need to wait for an AGC to use them - load them in a couple of transports in a separate TF set to "DO NOT UNLOAD" and park them one hex back from the landing, or in the landing hex if you prefer.
MB is dangerous because of subs so do lots of ASW and mine clearing before the landings.

Are you sure about the Amphib HQ? Very good info if you are right. Especially as we are playing with the version the messes up HQs when they land!

As soon as PMs AF is operational I will start working on Milne. Need to be able to provide LRCAP for the AMs. Engineers started unloading at PM this turn!

Which part are you asking about being right?
The use of an Amphib HQ - yes, coordination of landings is what they are designed for, and the need to do it from the sea where the ships are lining up waves of landing craft.
Not needing an AGC? I am not certain about this but why would you get an Amphib HQ at PH over a year before you get any AGC. They would be more efficient on an AGC because of the extra radio equipment and the ice cream machines, but I see no reason they could not try to do their job from an xAP.

[witpqs]

Pacific Fleet/Ocean Areas HQ is also unrestricted and historically it did move from PH to Saipan when that island was secured. Don't know off hand if it can help with army support though. It can certainly help with ship loading/reammunitioning and repairs.

It certainly does, yes. In AE a command HQ is a command HQ, which is how it worked IRL also so that is accurate enough.

[witpqs]

I'm not looking at the game right now but as I remember there are two kinds of Amphib HQ - one is Amphib Corps and the other is Amphib Force. Corps is just a Corps HQ. Force is the HQ that goes on the AGC and helps the amphibious landing to go better.

BTW, as I recall, MichaelM clarified that an Amphib Force aboard an AGC only helps the TF in which it is a member. The advice in old WITP (before AE) had been that it helped all TFs in the hex, so I'm not sure if that is a change or if the old advice was simply mistaken.

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Looks good? [:)]

No!! If most of those bases are not scheduled to be invaded in the next two to three months, the Command HQ and its ability to influence Adjusted AV is being wasted. Of course each of those Command HQs needs to be teamed up with a Corp/Army HQ.

Some of them are like Darwin, Dutch and Tarawa. Rabaul and Ndeni are unsure. I just don´t really know what other targets might be better to prep for! I have teamed them with a Corps HQ of course [:)]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Not needing an AGC? I am not certain about this but why would you get an Amphib HQ at PH over a year before you get any AGC. They would be more efficient on an AGC because of the extra radio equipment and the ice cream machines, but I see no reason they could not try to do their job from an xAP.

I see your reasoning. Just assumed and AGC was needed! [:)]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I'm not looking at the game right now but as I remember there are two kinds of Amphib HQ - one is Amphib Corps and the other is Amphib Force. Corps is just a Corps HQ. Force is the HQ that goes on the AGC and helps the amphibious landing to go better.

BTW, as I recall, MichaelM clarified that an Amphib Force aboard an AGC only helps the TF in which it is a member. The advice in old WITP (before AE) had been that it helped all TFs in the hex, so I'm not sure if that is a change or if the old advice was simply mistaken.

Again, I had no clue about that! [X(] Good info!