Surface Combat Sux

[Splinterhead]

So the real problem is that the AI is sending unescorted convoys into places it shouldn't?

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: velkro

Pasternaski, you said:
"From the description, LBA has been active, the situation is fluid, ..."
Yeah, but it was MY LBA, not the Japanese LBA! These chuckleheaded Japanese were near Soerbaja (sic) WAAAYYYY out of range of any known Jap airfields, even Bettys'. He hasn't even taken any bases yet except for Midway, Wake, and Alor Star. I own Hong Kong, all of Malaya except for Star, and all of the PI. MY LBA was plastering them for days and my patrol planes were shadowing them for days. My surface fleets knew exactly where they were and what they were. I had numerous AK / TK TFs surrounding the whole area of action, none of whom had any air or surface action. This Jap TF was totally on its own, deep in my territory, and numerous intell sources confirmed it. The weather was clear. Half the force was burning, yet I only attack 2 ships? In addition, I spotted about 18 of the 26 ships during the surface action (the names appeared on the combat display). In addition, this situation was repeated for the next two days.

You said, " hat I think we're seeing here is the result of a mediocre commander in charge of a thin TF against an unknown quantity and quality of enemy forces..."
Perhaps, but not two or three commanders over three days...

"You know from looking at the combat results that this was a pitiful convoy of 26 undefended transport vessels, many of which are severely damaged, but this information was not available to the captain or admiral standing on the bridge of the one significant ship in the group."
Yes, it was, for the reasons mentioned above.

"Besides, our old girlfriend Betty might have been coming to the dance any time."
No way; unless the Brits were afraid of the Japanese "Doomsday" machine flown by Slim-san Pickens-iwa.

"Again, I, too, would have expected better results, but I don't find anything wrong with this result, either. You pays your money and you takes your chance."

Yeah, I paid my $70 for the game and I just want a patch to address this issue...it just makes common sense.

Thanks for making such a mess out of my post. I would appreciate it if you would respond in such a way as to make it possible for me to defend my statements.

As it is, I am unable to sort it out enough to make an intelligent response.

I can only say this: "It just makes common sense" makes no sense to me.

[velkro]

Negative; this was a pbem game...

[velkro]

Pasternaski:
No need to defend your statements; they aren't under attack, just like 24 of the 26 unescorted merchant ships in the Japanese convoy.

I was just pointing out that none of your explanations or justifications for my absurd combat results were possible in this particular game.

[marc420]

I still think the "navy" that this AI is trying to simulate is "McHale's Navy". I mean if you picture the tactics "McHale's Navy would use to attack 26 completely helpless and slow boats, this AI has it modeled just about right.

Thanks guys. I'd really like to buy a big Pacific War game. So I keep coming back over here. But then I see threads like this that remind me of why I ended up taking UV off my hard drive.

I need to be reminded of all the screwy things this AI does. And I love listening to the tortured explanations from the fanboys who will never, ever admit that this game system does anything screwy. All in all you are saving me $70+ by posting this.

[velkro]

Common sense:
"If 26 Japanese unescorted merchant ships, half of them burning, all of whom are deep in enemy LBA range, all whom are out of friendly LBA range, 18 of which are spotted by a Brit TF, all of whom have been repeatedly attacked by Allied air, all of whom have been repeatedly spotted and tracked by Allied air and surface forces, are attacked by a much faster surface fleet on a clear day, more than 2 of said Japanese ships should be attacked." Whew![:'(]

[velkro]

I wouldn't worry about the AI...playing PBEM is a blast...warts and all...I can accept crappy commanders not carrying out my instructions because that's war. However, it needs a few tweaks. If I were you, I'd buy it and play it asap...no other game out there this good on an operational and strategic level. No other game out there that gives logistics its just due.

[dtravel]

Not taking a stand either way about surface combat. Just want to point out that Japanese bombers are capable of reaching Soerabaja from Saigon. Betty level bombers have an extended range of over 1200 miles (20 hexes).

[frank1970]

I made a test:
I put together a Japanese TF, 30 ships, some damaged and let those go into a hex with a bBrit surfacecombat TF (1BB, 2 Cl, 5DD). In first accounter 5 Japanese ships went down (4 of those were damaged before. The next day I caught the TF again and sunk further 8 ships.
This means that my forces were able to sink about half the enemy force in two days.

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: caslug

Splint, i was talking more surface combact ship-to-ship. When the IJN raided ceylon, the RN didn't have carrier(hermes doesn' count) to go head-to-head. [:'(]. but more importantly, the RN wasn't didn't have a "important" mission, like protecting an major evacuation/landing, etc.,. that had to be done.

Untrue - the Brits had 2 fleet carriers dancing with the IJN (Indomitable and Formidable in Force F, along with BB Warspite, and Cruisers Cornwall, Dorsetshire, Emerald and Enterprise. all under RADM Boyd with VADM Somerville in overall controll of all Brit forces). They didn't accomplish much - and given the odds of the typical Brit fighter aircraft vs. the Zero, it's probably a good thing for the Brits that they didn't try to go toe-to-toe. They did dance around at 200 miles range, but the Brit carriers were never spotted. The Cornwall and Dorsetshire were spotted, and were promptly bombed out of existance.

Bob T.

[velkro]

Who was in command, Adm Nelson?

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl
Neither example has anything to do with a beat-up group of 10-knot Merchies all by themselves being engaged in daylight by numerous and much faster group of warships.

Can't agree, Mike. Look at the surface TF from the example: an old "R" class BB, 21 knots max, four of those dreadful old undergunned British CLs, and a couple of destroyers. Yes, I would have expected better results, too, but you've got to remember that you were not in command of the TF. From the description, LBA has been active, the situation is fluid, and the commander is one of those early Brits, all of whom are "careful" except for Layton, and he's a CVTF commander.

What I think we're seeing here is the result of a mediocre commander in charge of a thin TF against an unknown quantity and quality of enemy forces. You know from looking at the combat results that this was a pitiful convoy of 26 undefended transport vessels, many of which are severely damaged, but this information was not available to the captain or admiral standing on the bridge of the one significant ship in the group. Besides, our old girlfriend Betty might have been coming to the dance any time.

Leyte Gulf is directly applicable. Time was a-wastin' and the American battle line could have come over the horizon at any time. Aircraft were making attacks (even if only strafing), and more could have arrived any moment. Remember that the Musashi had been lost to air attack only shortly before.

Savo Island is even more pertinent. Retirement was the only alternative available due to the fast approach of sunlight and the known presence in the area of at least one fleet carrier (Fletcher screwing the pooch notwithstanding).

Again, I, too, would have expected better results, but I don't find anything wrong with this result, either. You pays your money and you takes your chance.

Based on the statements above..., I don't think I'd want your agreement. "Savo Island is even more pertinant."? How do you figure
that? The action in question was a group of warships engaging a beat-up convoy of merchantmen. It was in daylight, so the British
TF was already under whatever air threat existed since dawn anyway. It was sent there to pound this convoy, and even the slowest
ship in the formation was almost twice as fast as the fastest of the defenders. And you want us to believe that after finding the convoy
and bringing it under fire, the same "air threat" they attackers have been under all day looking for it is suddenly enough to chase
them away from "dead meat on the table"? Savo Island is a night action, and Mikawa had already scored an outstanding triumph.
Maybe not the one he was sent to achieve, but the worst beating the US navy ever took nonetheless. He knew by the time he re-
grouped his forces and got to the transports he might face an air attack, and decided to rest on his laurels. The British CO had no
laurels to rest on when the game broke off the action. Based on Calder, Troubridge, and many others, he could expect dismissal and
public disgrace for such a pitiful performance. Savo Island doesn't even work as a "red herring".

Leyte Gulf is just as bad an example. Kurita was under air attack while he was trying to engage, and dealing with what he thought
were Essex class CV's. He wasn't closing in hand-over-fist on a bunch of totally defenseless targets without a plane in the sky as
the example that started this thread relates. About the only thing in common is daylight. You say "You pays your money and you
takes your chance---but in the game it often comes out as "You rolls your dice, actually get a seven, and the croupier announces
that the house is only paying off 2 cents on the dollar." It happens far too often to be the 1 in fifty chance it should be---the game
makes it more like 1 in 2 that the result will be a joke.

[pasternakski]

Well, the bottom line is that I would also like for my surface ships to spread their fire around more when blasting away at defenseless transports and cargo ships, but I also accept that most times you're not going to get them all or even very many of them.

I still say a British "R" class, four light cruisers, and two destroyers ain't a lot of firepower.

Since it's on the wish list, it'll probably get a tweak, considering the number of people in favor of it. Whatever happens will be okay by me (unless we get an uber-surface-combatant effect).

[steveh11Matrix]

I'd say it was more likely that their would be some RN crews celebrating some prize money. They wouldn't have sunk those unescorted transports, they'd have captured them![8D]

Steve.

[RAM]

Hhhhmmm...this is going to be a bit long, so bear with me (or jump directly to the next message if you don't like long posts )

I am speaking after going through 3 surface combates, in the Big Campaign (and the first one was a PT attack), so I'm not sure if my experience is enough to make a judgement...however...


To put it briefly; I had intel info on an attack on Jolo, so the Surface TF I had amassed at Soerebaja (Sp?) consisting on the Prince of Wales, Revenge, Houston, 3 Dutch CLs and 6 DDs set sail on surface action orders, full speed and retirement allowed, under a quite capable commander (can't remember now his name, but can check for him). I was hesitant to put Revenge in the pack because her slow speed but I knew some BBs were around the Phillipines so I decided to play it safe.


On the way to Jolo the fleet came under air attack by some Ki21s and Ki30s, and got some 100kg bomb hits on the Revenge (not a problem) and on the CL Tromp (light SYS damage, light enough to not having to make him return). Luck wanted that no Betty gave me a kind visit (they're too busy up north pounding Singapore into rubble), mixed with bad weather that was all the air threat I had to face. After the turn the Fleet had been attacked, the commander had decided to return home, but I pressed him on to get to Jolo and sink the Transport TF that was unloading at just that moment.

So I guess that the "air scare" thought could play a role in the later engagement.


Ok, the TF gets to Jolo and (my air search units will receive a spanking for this) found a nice Japanese surface combat TF in the hex with four CAs, wich attacked by surprise. Showing a brilliant lack of accuracy no heavy impacts were put into any of them during a fierce fight ranging from 7000 to 9000 yards, but the secondary guns of the BBs and the other ship's 4 to 8' guns gave quite a headache to the japanese...Barring one lucky Long Lance hit (lucky because it only made 35 SYS- 31 Flood damage) to the Java, and some light impacts, I got the upper hand of the fight and made the japanese flee.

In this fight I indeed noticed that the AI tends to fire to the burning ships, one of the Japanese DDs was ablaze and took most of the pounding, wile other burning ships were also quite targetted...the damage was more or less widespread, the DD sank and two of the CAs received a good spanking. Nothing serious to put them into the bottom, but they got a good load of medium caliber impacts -they will be sleeping at Japan for quite a while-.

So this combat favours my impression about the surface combat rutine...but there's more.


After putting the japanese CAs on the run, I was amused to see that my TF actually got through the invasion force!!!...it was defended only by a PG and a MSW, so I started rubbing my hands- but there wasn't a reason to.

The MSW got the bulk of the fire in the first round of the engagement, no less than 4 14' hits, and 3 15', plus a lot of 4', 5,25' ,etc fire. The PG was targetted by three of my destroyers and put ablaze.

On the second round the MSW was already going down (heh, not hard to guess after that smashing!), and the PG acted like a fire-attractor. I got 4 hits on the transports (they were seen, their names appeared on hte screen), but no less than 60 rounds, roughly 5 of them of BB caliber, were absorbed by it.

then the combat ended, both sides disengaging.


Ok, I can see the reasoning behind targetting the escort ships first, I don't have anything against my BBs and a couple or three of cruisers targetting them first...but having such amazing load of fire directed at those two ships, the rest of the force should fire to the transports...but its' not to be that way, almost every ship directs their rage towards the puny little ships even after they have been volatilized by 14 and 15 inch fire...

On a lesser degree I saw the same in my first combat, the burning DD took a sack of impacts when it was already clearly going down, and two japanese CAs limped out almost unscathed...



The disengagement rules on both combats seemed quite reasonable for me. First one the Japanese fleed as fast as they could (as they should do against such a superior foe), second one both fleets disengaged after a couple of rounds of fighting (again, japanese fleeing is normal; my own TF had been through a fleet engagement already, and had suffered air attacks previously, so the decision to retire is one I understand because of the air scare and probably because ammo was running low).



The combat rutine itself is what I have some of a problem with. I think what it's lacking in the surface combat routine is a better way of assigning targets. If the MSW and the PGs are already been fired at by a couple of BBs there's no need to target them with the CA, the CLs and almost all the DDs too!!!!...

The superior force should have something of a "pairing up" of targets, such ship targets this, such ship targets the other, etc, from most dangerous to less dangerous. Once the damage is clearly too much for a ship to stand, or the AI thinks so, the ship targetting it shifts fire to the next on the list. Historically many ships were left almost dead on the water to shift fire to more important and evident targets, even while they were not actually sinking at the moment...so this should cover it.

the inferior force should target mostly the most dangerous enemy assets, concentrating fire on them (was quite funny to see to of the japanese CAs firing at my cruisers, and one of them to one of my DDs while there were two full-size Battleships throwing 14 and 15 inch stuff all around the place!) with some random-dice-the-roll throws to see if they happen to fire at anything else instead (should be unlikely but could happen).

If both forces are equal, rules are like that of the superior force.

That way if you have superior ships you cover the whole enemy line with fire (which was the usual thing to do, because I agree that in very confusing combats like Savo Island each ship fired mostly at will, however that was a full feet engagement while in an attack against a convoy there should be no such heavy confusion), and shift targets when the targetted enemy is clearly dying or no longer a threat... which is my tho only major complaints about the surfacte combat routine at this moment, after this couple of combats.

If you are in disadvantage, your ships concentrate on the most dangerous enemy assets...if you have four CAs and you're fighting 2 BBs, all four should be firing at the big ships (unless the random dice says otherwise-but this should be rare)!!


BTW, In the end I found out that the transports were already empty or almost empty (no japanese soldier casualties in the battle report, should be some if they were still loaded).

But it would've been nice to sunk 4 of 5 of those AKs and APs

[Black Cat]

No matter how you Spin it there are issues with the Surface Combat.

It`s not a big deal here since WITP is about CV vs CV combat and Amphib. opps and really about logistics and all of those are more or less well done IMO.

However IF they do a Med. Game, which was all about Surface Actions, based on this model it will " Sux"[:D]

[pasternakski]

Many of you are presupposing knowledge to the TF commander on the scene that he had no way of knowing.

You also seem to think of these quaint WWII vessels as some kind of super-powerful convoy killers.

It just wasn't that way. I vote for leaving the game alone, but maybe taking a look at improving TF targeting in surface actions, but only to a limited degree.

[RAM]

hmmmm if there's been a thorough air research which gives the commander a quite good view of the situation I'd say that he really would know what he would be facing...most of the time. However I agree that the disengagement rules are quite good, so no problem from this side.

However if he's in the middle of a battle, if he's seeing 6 transports covered only by a MSW and a PG, it's highly unlikely that he'll concentrate ALL his TF's fire onto the MSW and PG and leave the transports mostly alone, or concentrate on a couple of ships while the other ones he is seeing are left almost untouched. That is what happened in the account I wrote before ,and this is what mostly happened again in the last turn I played on my campaign game (again the Revenge and PoW with their cruisers and DDs, one PG took 15 hits, one AP 25,both were beaten up for a long time after they were clearly doomed... the rest of the formation -6 transports clearly visible during the battle- got only 8 light hits between them)


the issue is not a game killer but certainly can be annoying. The question to ask is "is that correct"?. If it is, leave it alone...

but I'd say it's not correct, and that the surface combat needs some tweaks to be not only realistic, but at least plausible -something that at this stage I'm starting to think it's not-.


For sure is something to improve in future patches...I hope Matrix has open ears in this issue .

[The Gnome]

ORIGINAL: Montrose

Please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please please MATRIX PLEASE DROP DETECTION LEVELS AS THE TARGETTING DETERMINANT.

It's fine for determining who is visible, but for targetting anything else would be a huge improvement, even if they were just chosen randomly.

Yeah I could not agree with this more, the surface combat routine is awful. Matrix: pretty please with sugar on top, look into this.

[Ron Saueracker]

Well, Dave Mitchell and I are three turns into our PBEM and we've had a few surface clashes in the DEI as one would imagine.

The first was funny. The lone CL Boise was ordered to run full speed to Davao to meet up with Houston and a couple of DDs. She arrives first and runs into an invasion TF covered by CL Nagara and 2 Kagero class DDs. Three separate surface battles are fought between the two TFs during the night surface combat phase...three. First one Boise hits a DD a few times they break off. Suddenly, Boise is "surprised" by the same TF in whichg one DD is on fire. Hard to believe that Boise is surprised when she was just in combat. More shots, Boise hits remaining two ships and get hit by a torp. Contact is broken but a third battle starts, with Boise once again being surprised. ???? Unbelievable.

The other battle of note was Force Z slipping into the Kuching roadstead undetected and finding a TOTALLY undefended Transport TF of about 12-16 APs...not even a sampan as escort. Well, should have been a glorious action for the RN as they were fully appraised of what was in the hex, but no. The overwhelming power of Force Z unleashes a few shots from a DD and Repulse only. (the modern radar equipped flagship POW is parked at a pub or something having a jar and does nothing, even though it is the bloody flagship and is in the centre of a five ship TF) So...the TR group escapes with damage to one AP, moves out one hex and is back unloading next day!! It's just not worth initiating naval combat in a naval game. The risk is great but hardly worth taking if surface combat remains as is. The sighted/not sighted silliness needs to be rethought, not just combat vs Transport TFs. Luckily, Force Z was not plowed under by LBA...yet.