Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Ok, so based upon the reading suggested above, killing all those HQs really did nothing other than dispose of support squads, right? The critical HQ to kill is the last one of the type (corps or command). Apparently, the HQ a unit is assigned to makes no difference concerning the combat bonus. Or anything else I can see, for that matter...

Is it safe to assume an air or naval HQ has no impact on the land combat bonus?

Assuming that all HQs are providing a bonus, then sure, it did "nothing."

And yes, HQa/HQn do not provide land combat bonuses. I know there are some "naval" HQs that do (e.g., 5th Fleet which is an HQ), but the actual unit type of HQn does not, to my knowledge.
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: GetAssista
ORIGINAL: Alfred

Not so.

A Corps HQ can provide a combat bonus of up to 10%. A Command HQ can provide a combat bonus of up to 90%. The combat bonus is fed into the firepower phase of the combat algorithm, it has nothing to do with the adjusted AV which is determined after combat and which counts who is "left standing" for further combat.

Read this thread for how the land combat bonus operates.
tm.asp?m=3545042&mpage=1&key=bonus�
Alfred
And then also take a peek on how HQc AV bonus measures up in the actual game tm.asp?m=4211316&mpage=1&key=# post #25


If you read GA thread, you will see why I never go the extra distance to Neikiang to recover.

Literally from that thread:
Main finding #2 (a bit surprising) is that IDs seem to repair slightly faster in a developed base hex compared to non-base, but not that much faster. In 60 turns standard TOE IDs repaired about 23-30% in base and 16-25% in non-base hexes.
GetAssista
Posts: 2836
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:13 am

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by GetAssista »

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: Mike Solli
Ok, so based upon the reading suggested above, killing all those HQs really did nothing other than dispose of support squads, right? The critical HQ to kill is the last one of the type (corps or command). Apparently, the HQ a unit is assigned to makes no difference concerning the combat bonus. Or anything else I can see, for that matter...
Assuming that all HQs are providing a bonus, then sure, it did "nothing."
Land ratings of the commanders play a role. You can hope that you removed some of the skilled ones [:)]
Preparation target of the HQ also matters for the AV. Although I assume your opponent most probably set every HQ to Chungking as a target, there may be a few reasons for him to not do that, like experience training. So you can hope that you removed all of the 100% CK trained HQs
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: GetAssista


And then also take a peek on how HQc AV bonus measures up in the actual game tm.asp?m=4211316&mpage=1&key=# post #25


If you read GA thread, you will see why I never go the extra distance to Neikiang to recover.

Literally from that thread:
Main finding #2 (a bit surprising) is that IDs seem to repair slightly faster in a developed base hex compared to non-base, but not that much faster. In 60 turns standard TOE IDs repaired about 23-30% in base and 16-25% in non-base hexes.


Correct, the delta is so small not to merit the extra six days of travel time.
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16580
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Mike Solli »

Ok, the turn is off. Next turn I'll see what ground units I destroyed. I'm not sure it really matters though. I'm really curious to see what the Chinese raw AV has been degraded to...

I really appreciate all the discussion going on. I've learned a lot (and am trying to unlearn things like fatigue, etc.). This is all new ground for me, as will be the rest of the war.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16580
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Mike Solli »

Lowpe, I've stopped moving my troops to rest. They're now resting in Chungking. Lots of B&Bs there. [;)]
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Lowpe, I've stopped moving my troops to rest. They're now resting in Chungking. Lots of B&Bs there. [;)]


Some vacancies are opening up I guess.[;)]
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Lowpe





If you read GA thread, you will see why I never go the extra distance to Neikiang to recover.

Literally from that thread:
Main finding #2 (a bit surprising) is that IDs seem to repair slightly faster in a developed base hex compared to non-base, but not that much faster. In 60 turns standard TOE IDs repaired about 23-30% in base and 16-25% in non-base hexes.


Correct, the delta is so small not to merit the extra six days of travel time.

Except that it's over 60 days. That is not really relevant to an ongoing assault. We know/suspect that a lot of recovery is done in the short term. A test done over a period of 14-21 days would be relevant.
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Lowpe, I've stopped moving my troops to rest. They're now resting in Chungking. Lots of B&Bs there. [;)]

This works fine when the units are not in very rough shape. For units that are majority disabled, I'd move them.
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16580
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Mike Solli »

I came very close to 2:1 odds on that last attack. I'll rest all those with >100 disabled infantry squads (probably 3 by the next attack) but may throw everyone in for the attack after that, if needed. I figure 2 more attacks max to take Chungking.

Next question for the group. In the ground combat screen, when you see a HQ you see:

HQ: 1

-or-

HQ: 0

Anyone know what that means? My guess is that the 0 means there are only disabled squads in that HQ. If that is the case, does that HQ still available to give a bonus?
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16580
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Mike Solli »

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Lowpe, I've stopped moving my troops to rest. They're now resting in Chungking. Lots of B&Bs there. [;)]

This works fine when the units are not in very rough shape. For units that are majority disabled, I'd move them.

That makes sense. Beat up units shouldn't be attacking so they may as well move to a secure area for R&R.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
jdsrae
Posts: 2796
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:58 am
Location: Gandangara Country

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by jdsrae »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

17 Dec 43

Sub War

Brutal today.

The improved Escort ships start arriving soon but not in large numbers unless you’ve accelerated some?
I’ve been pondering how best to use them, more ASW groups to add to the SC force, or join/replace the PB on convoy duty.
If today’s results become a trend probably most to convoy duty to try and protect your TK and bigger AK?
Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 11125
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by PaxMondo »

Well, the allies have already gotten their first BIG ASW upgrade. All under the hood, but it happens before the end of '43. Don't know if the date is hardcoded or not, but sometime H2Y43, there is the first big upgrade. And it stings.

[:(]
Pax
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16580
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Mike Solli »

If it's a DD, then it'll be accelerated. What classes are you talking about? I have some Matsus coming soon along with some others. I've gotten a string of Etorofus, which I use as escorts from Singapore. They have that nice 8k endurance. I'll check it out in the morning.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
Alfred
Posts: 6683
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:56 am

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Alfred »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I came very close to 2:1 odds on that last attack. I'll rest all those with >100 disabled infantry squads (probably 3 by the next attack) but may throw everyone in for the attack after that, if needed. I figure 2 more attacks max to take Chungking.

Next question for the group. In the ground combat screen, when you see a HQ you see:

HQ: 1

-or-

HQ: 0

Anyone know what that means? My guess is that the 0 means there are only disabled squads in that HQ. If that is the case, does that HQ still available to give a bonus?

1. The combat bonus is derived from the nature of the HQ, not what is inside it.

2. The land combat screen shows the raw unadjusted AV of a unit. This raw metric is reduced as AV qualified devices are destroyed or disabled.

3. HQs can have so many non AV qualified devices that a nominal AV of "1" is displayed for these extremely large units. If the displayed value is reduced to "0" it simply points out the unit is below the display threshold. It can be below the display threshold even if all it's non AV qualified devices are in a ready state.

4. Between the end of combat and the next turn's input orders phase there is a logistics phase wherein disabled devices can be recovered to ready status.

Alfred
User avatar
jdsrae
Posts: 2796
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:58 am
Location: Gandangara Country

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by jdsrae »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli
What classes are you talking about?

These bad boys. You should have a couple of Mikura class E by now, with 8 x Type 2 DC + 1 x 3in AS Mortar + Type 22 surface search radar I think that's as good an ASW package as you can get.
Your Shimushu and Etorofu can upgrade to a similar package by now too. I use the E W-## ships in SNLF with their DMS cousins so they aren't included in this image.

I only looked at the details of IJN ASW weapons a few days ago. My initial excitement at seeing the 3in AS Mortar could reach a depth of 1000' was tempered when I saw the effect of 35, compared to 357 effect for a Type 2 DC.
Not sure what a 35 effect means (is that like a tickle compared to a punch?) but at 1000' down that tickle might still do bad things to a submarine hull. Even if it only does a little bit of damage, that's better than nothing and might make it easier to find/hit again the next day.

As the Matsu and Tachibana classes were simplified DDs with less capability than earlier DDs, I'm thinking they are better used in ASW or convoy roles rather than operating with Combined Fleet. They arrive with the Type 2 DC (476' deep & 357 effect) but no AS Mortar.

Image
Attachments
ijnEclasses.gif
ijnEclasses.gif (12.99 KiB) Viewed 441 times
Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16580
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Mike Solli »

Thanks Guys! That makes sense, Alfred. The reason why I asked was because of artillery. It usually flips from 1 to 0 when it fires.

That chart is great! I have all the DD types accelerating as soon as I can. I'll have to check the E types to see if they use naval or merchant points. Lots of excess merchant points (most are turned off) but the naval points are still at a premium.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
jdsrae
Posts: 2796
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:58 am
Location: Gandangara Country

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by jdsrae »

bad news, naval points... but they're only about 4 points/ship.
I'll have to check how it works again but does that mean even if you accelerate them they don't arrive much earlier?
Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16580
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by Mike Solli »

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

bad news, naval points... but they're only about 4 points/ship.
I'll have to check how it works again but does that mean even if you accelerate them they don't arrive much earlier?

Figures. When you accelerate them, they use 3x the points but advance 2 days per day. So advance something 10 days out, it arrives in 5 days, but at triple the cost.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
jdsrae
Posts: 2796
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:58 am
Location: Gandangara Country

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Post by jdsrae »

I concur. Also ref manual 13.4.1: acceleration only kicks in during the period >10x and <30 x durabilty, so there’s limited benefit accelerating small ships.
I’ve had a couple of beers this evening so my maths might be out, but for a 4 durability E you can accelerate inside the zone 40 to 120 days out.
Paying triple price for the 80 days “in the zone” could get you the ship 40 days quicker. So to my brain, in its current state, it doesn’t look like you can get a ship more than 10xdurability ahead of schedule even if accelerated.
Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”