Matrix Games Forums

I'm pretty sure aviation support works in all modes. At least it's counted in base totals regardless of strat, combat, move, reserve, rest, luau, etc.

Wow! Surprised this is still on. Good going. I'll have a look through and try to catch up.

July 19th, 1944

MTB try to disrupt the bombardment TF. Unfortunately, you can see the APD present, and yes the Allies hit me with two faux amphibious bombardments and three normal ones.

Ouch.

The mtbs' go down without a hit.

I lost my first Tonan Whaler, off Davao, yesterday. A little sweet revenge that took a shot at the Tonan three days ago.

A Dutch sub from the early days. I wonder what the crew experience was?

Allies go timid, and don't take control of this hex.

A nasty attack at Nagoya, after every Allied plane bombs. I switched all AA into reserve status, and they did keep up a steady fire on the bombers, but I have no clue if they avoided the ship bombardments.

A 1-1 attack, but I did have significant forces on reserve (no pursuit) mode.

Nagoya


Ground combat at Nagoya (111,60)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 86521 troops, 1234 guns, 2315 vehicles, Assault Value = 3266

Defending force 77632 troops, 1122 guns, 520 vehicles, Assault Value = 2000

Allied adjusted assault: 1612

Japanese adjusted defense: 1529

Allied assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 0)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 0

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

Japanese ground losses:
3230 casualties reported
Squads: 17 destroyed, 317 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 40 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 20 disabled
Guns lost 97 (5 destroyed, 92 disabled)
Vehicles lost 73 (7 destroyed, 66 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
2324 casualties reported
Squads: 8 destroyed, 276 disabled
Non Combat: 7 destroyed, 103 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 21 disabled
Guns lost 61 (7 destroyed, 54 disabled)
Vehicles lost 233 (39 destroyed, 194 disabled)

Assaulting units:
44th Tank Battalion
193rd Tank Battalion
4th Armoured Brigade
3rd NZ Armoured Sqn
1st Filipino Inf Regiment
4th USMC Tank Battalion
1st Marine Division
1st Cavalry (Spec) Cavalry Division
7th Australian Division
775th Tank Battalion
1st USMC Tank Battalion
2nd Marine Division
25th Infantry Division
3rd USMC Tank Battalion
9th Australian Division
XIV Corps Artillery
4th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
3rd USMC Field Artillery Battalion
XI Corps Artillery
2nd USMC Field Artillery Battalion
8th USMC Field Artillery Battalion

Defending units:
3rd Guards/A Division
4th Ind.Mixed Regiment
124th Infantry Regiment
3rd Guards/B Division
18th Tank Regiment
11th Tank Regiment
10th Ind.Infantry Brigade
15th Tank Regiment
54th/C Division
54th/B Division
54th/A Division
27th Tank Regiment
9th Ind.Mixed Regiment
48th Ind.Mixed Brigade
84th Division
66th Ind.Mixed Brigade
52nd Ind.Mixed Brigade
34th Ind.Mixed Brigade
58th Ind.Mixed Brigade
3rd Guards/C Division
158th JAAF AF Bn
63rd JNAF AF Unit
7th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
2nd JAAF AF Bn
19th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
8th Ind. Field Artillery Battalion
3rd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
67th JAAF AF Bn
89th Field AA Battalion
96th JAAF AF Bn
22nd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
2nd RF Gun Battalion
18th RF Gun Battalion
9th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
20th RF Gun Battalion
42nd Ind.AA Gun Co
49th JAAF AF Bn
157th JAAF AF Bn
72nd Air Flotilla
77th Field AA Battalion
29th Army
58th JNAF AF Unit
11th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
16th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
21st AA Regiment
25th Ind. Field Artillery Battalion
29th Ind. Engineer Regiment
6th RF Gun Battalion
Kanto JNAF Base Force

Faux amphibious goodness. I guess I have to pen a letter.[:(]

Pre-Invasion action off Nagoya (111,60)
Defensive Guns engage approaching landing force

157 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
BB Alabama
BB New Mexico
BB Pennsylvania
BB Colorado
CA San Diego II
CA Canberra II
CA Wichita
CA Minneapolis
CA Astoria
CA Northampton
CL Trenton
DD Saufley
DD Renshaw
DD Mertz
DD McDermut
DD Dortch
APD Goldsborough

Japanese ground losses:
1204 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 65 disabled
Non Combat: 7 destroyed, 95 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 8 disabled
Guns lost 25 (3 destroyed, 22 disabled)

BB Alabama firing at 84th Division
BB New Mexico firing at 84th Division
BB Pennsylvania firing at 84th Division
BB Colorado firing at 84th Division
CA San Diego II firing at 54th/C Division
CA Canberra II firing at 84th Division
CA Wichita firing at 84th Division
CA Minneapolis firing at 3rd Guards/A Division
CA Astoria firing at 84th Division
CA Northampton firing at 54th/A Division
CL Trenton firing at 84th Division
DD Saufley firing at 3rd Guards/A Division
DD Renshaw firing at 54th/A Division
DD Mertz firing at 9th Ind.Mixed Regiment
DD McDermut firing at 54th/A Division
DD Dortch firing at 84th Division
DD Renshaw fired at enemy troops
DD McDermut fired at enemy troops
DD Dortch fired at enemy troops
10cm T92 Gun battery firing at APD Goldsborough
10cm T92 Gun battery firing at APD Goldsborough
30cm Howitzer (l) battery firing at APD Goldsborough
75mm Infantry Gun battery firing at APD Goldsborough
8cm/40 T88 DP Gun battery firing at APD Goldsborough
75mm T90 Field Gun battery firing at APD Goldsborough
10cm T91 Howitzer battery firing at APD Goldsborough
10cm T91 Howitzer battery firing at APD Goldsborough


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amphibious Assault at Nagoya (111,60)

TF 17 troops unloading over beach at Nagoya, 111,60



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-Invasion action off Nagoya (111,60)
Defensive Guns engage approaching landing force

177 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
BB Nevada
BB West Virginia
CA Salt Lake City
CA Portland
DD McCook
DD Wickes
DD Irwin
DD Hailey
DD Boyd
APD Waters

Japanese ground losses:
344 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 23 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 20 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

BB Nevada firing at 84th Division
BB West Virginia firing at 84th Division
CA Salt Lake City firing at 84th Division
CA Portland firing at 84th Division
DD McCook firing at 84th Division
DD Wickes firing at 84th Division
DD Irwin firing at 84th Division
DD Hailey firing at 84th Division
DD Boyd firing at 52nd Ind.Mixed Brigade
DD Irwin fired at enemy troops
DD Hailey fired at enemy troops
75mm Infantry Gun battery firing at APD Waters
75mm T94 Mtn Gun battery firing at APD Waters
75mm T90 Field Gun battery firing at APD Waters
75mm T94 Mtn Gun battery firing at APD Waters
8cm/40 T88 DP Gun battery firing at APD Waters
75mm T90 Field Gun battery firing at APD Waters
75mm Infantry Gun battery firing at APD Waters
75mm Infantry Gun battery firing at APD Waters


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amphibious Assault at Nagoya (111,60)

TF 23 troops unloading over beach at Nagoya, 111,60

It looks on the brink...

Katsuragi got away, well at least for one day. Spotted.[:(]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

It looks on the brink...

Yep.[:D]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Faux amphibious goodness. I guess I have to pen a letter.[:(]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amphibious Assault at Nagoya (111,60)

TF 23 troops unloading over beach at Nagoya, 111,60

Looks like Alfred is mostly correct here. My amphib TFs still have the combat ships shot to hell, but not so much if the largest actual shore battery gun is 8cm. Bigger to me than targeting is the two phases vs one for bombardments. Also that it takes more supply from your guys and the infantry guns will fire more at an amphib TF. They wouldn't do anything to a bombardment TF (as so many irate posters have mentioned over time). [;)]

I think he's just trying to get them to shoot during multiple phases and empty their mags. How often have your BBs gone on a bombardment ru and not emptied out, and especially not the secondary guns? In this case I bet he's got everything down to the Bofors taking a few shots as the "unloading" occurs.

Whatever it is it's just obviously an exploit or else he wouldn't be doing it!! [:D]

Haven't you had a few other problems in this game, like the single PT TFs and something else IIRC?

The 2nd RTA has done wonderful service the last several months and will continue to cut the railroad for another 14 days before disappearing to the hills as all RTA units are dissolved.

Just thought they deserved a picture.[;)]

ORIGINAL: obvert


Haven't you had a few other problems in this game, like the single PT TFs and something else IIRC?

He likes to be creative in his use of the game engine. I am sure he doesn't know this tactic is an exploit of the game engine, simply that it is a creative use of it instead.

My sons would describe his playstyle as powergaming,or a min/maxer.

He has been a wonderful opponent over the years. I wish I could have given him a stronger game.

Finished my turn and sent missive about faux amphibious invasions.

We will see what happens.

157 shots, then 117? That's honestly not very many.

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

157 shots, then 117? That's honestly not very many.

157, 177.

But if I understand Alfred correctly more devices fire but aren't reported, basically any device that has the range down to even machine guns. Need to pass a check of some sort I guess.

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

157 shots, then 117? That's honestly not very many.

157, 177.

But if I understand Alfred correctly more devices fire but aren't reported, basically any device that has the range down to even machine guns. Need to pass a check of some sort I guess.

The way I understood it, if that were a real amphib invasion imaginary landing craft would be bringing in the pixeltruppen and the AI would apply some of the artillery fire to hitting them. The results would be reflected in troop/device casualties because the imaginary landing craft cannot be hit. Since there were no actual troops to apply results to, the artillery fire is wasted. Not really to do with range - artillery fire at landing troops is never reported in numbers of shots.

Adding one APD to a big surface combat TF, and giving it a mission of Amphibious instead of Bombardment is a deliberate series of steps. Why would a player do that if he felt it had no effect?

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

157 shots, then 117? That's honestly not very many.

157, 177.

But if I understand Alfred correctly more devices fire but aren't reported, basically any device that has the range down to even machine guns. Need to pass a check of some sort I guess.

Not really certain what Lokasenna's point is. But if he meant to say that 157, then 117 (sic) guns firing is not that heavy an expenditure, then he has misunderstood the supply consumption routines. He wouldn't be alone in that.

1. All LCUs consume 100% supply. The base line is 1 supply point per device. So if a unit has 1500 devices (the ball park figure for a full division), its monthly base line supply consumption is 1500 for doing absolutely nothing - no base building, no combat whatsoever etc.

2. Here comes the bit which seems to be misunderstood by players, in part because of the terminology used by the devs. Keeping faith with the devs I've used their terminology when explaining this bit but maybe I should use different terminology.

Every LCU has a maximum of 10 "shots" which are used up in any form of combat. Each "shot" used increases the supply consumption by 10%. The confusion is that these "shots" do not equal guns firing per se. A better way of looking at "shots" is to consider them to be "combat participation levels". I'll demonstrate what this entails as follows.

(a) LCU (of 1500 devices) is attacked by a single enemy aircraft on ground attack in the morning. The LCU has no flak and therefore does not return fire, it merely absorbs the attack which causes zero casualties to the LCU. "Shot" count (or "combat participation level) = 1. Means supply required for next turn jumps to 1650 (or 110%).

(b) same as 1 above but LCU has 3 flak guns which return fire. "Shot" count (or "combat participation level") = 2. Supply required for next turn jumps to 1800 (or 120%).

(c) same as (a) above with difference that 3 separate (with varying number of enemy aircraft) ground attacks are made in the morning. Still no flak so no return fire. "Shot" count (or CPL) = 3. Supply required for next turn jumps to 1950 (or 130%).

(d) same as (c) but each ground attack also receives fire from 3 flak guns. "Shot" count (or CPL) = 6. Supply required for next turn jumps to 2400 (or 160%).

(e) same as (d) but in addition there are two afternoon ground attacks from enemy planes which get fired on by the same 3 flak guns. "Shot" count (or CPL) = 10. Supply required for next turn jumps to 3000 (or 200%).

3. From point 2(e) above it can be seen that the act of 15 flak gun replies in aggregate results in 5 "shots" (or CPL) and an increased supply requirement 750 (assuming no losses were incurred by the LCU). Rather disproportionate some might think but remember this is an abstraction.

4. Assume the LCU has no "offensive" firepower whatsoever. During the course of a turn (both night and day phases) it is the subject of 10 separate naval bombardments, air attacks, ground assaults, to which it makes no response ever, just absorbing the attacks. Its "shot count is 10 and next turn its required supply is 200%.

5. Assume that no attacks are made against the LCU next turn. At the end of the day 2 turn, its "shot" count does not necessarily decrease. Removal of "shots" is dependent on several factors, suffice to say that it is not uncommon for there to be a lag in getting back to zero "shots" or 100% supply consumption. Having the LCU in "rest" mode (="reserve" when enemy LCU are in the same hex) helps to get the "shot" count down.

6. And now for something almost completely different[:)]. Read my posts in this thread about artillery participation in land combat.

tm.asp?m=3701981&mpage=1&key=counter%2Cbattery&#3702249

It is possible that artillery will participate in land combat and not fire at ships, and vice versa.

7. In a separate post, Lowpe raised some questions re "reserve" mode. A couple of quick answers.

(a) I'm not certain the manual is correct in saying that units are placed in "move" mode if they get activated on the defence in land combat. You will just have to wait to see the revised manual for the correct position.[;)]

(b) the reserve mode benefits only apply to land combat. They do not apply to naval or air combat. But I suggested that Lowpe put up to 1/4 into reserve as they would still benefit from the as regular as clockwork daily land combat which follows the faux invasion bombardments. Means they don't get further damaged/destroyed by the land combat, helps in getting the "shot" count down (and thus their supply consumption)

(c) defenders released from reserve mode receive all the benefits enjoyed by the other LCUs in combat mode receive from; terrain, base fortification level leadership, HQ bonus etc. The only malus would be if they are in move mode and as I said in (a) I'm not certain that actually occurs

(d) activation check is unit leadership. IIRC, unit experience may also be a smallish component.

Alfred