Page 1 of 2

Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:44 pm
by RUPD3658
For those of you who do not follow the AAR "The Battle for New Jersey" we declared it a draw at the end of 1944. I took over playing both sides to see if the Allies could still win by bombing Japan's supply production and stockpiles to the point that Japan's VPs would drop significantly. These are the results of the year long (game time) experiment:

1. Japan can not be starved out: Even after having only 100 supplies being produced per day the total supply level barely dropped. Oddest of all, when supply stockpiles were targeted, the overall supply level in the empire went up. Case in point were the supply stock piles at Osaka and Amori. They had 920K and 800K respectively. Even when close to 40 supply hits were scored the supply levels did not change. I thought that maybe supplies had flowed in from othere bases but a check of the industry screen showed that the levels had not changed.

The only thing that seemd to cause the overall supply level to drop was doing nothing. When left alone, supply dropped between 10-20K per day. When bases were bombed the supply level fluctuated between dropping 5K to incresing by 10K. I thought that this may be caused by supply leeching out of LCUs but almost none were seen to be short supply. Also, this should have been a one time cause yet it happened for several months.

Anther supply odditiy was that the supply level at captured Irkustk fluctuated between 5K and 100K despite a minimal garrison. There seemed to be no rhyme or reason to how supplies were being distributed. At one point I had bombed Chungking into the red (Had I dropped nuke #3 at this point the Allies would have scored a Marginal Victory). After 2-3 weeks supplies flowed into the double the needed amount. Once I started an all out assult on Chingking by air (1000+ planes per day) the supply level did not budge.

Clearly the supply model is pooched. Hopefully this will be fixed in AE.

2. Firestorms do not work: Even with over 1000 ac attacking and scoring 2-3K manpower hits, already damaged industry was not destroyed. Fire were in the 200-300,000 level . It is possible that the only way to destroy industry is to start a fire storm when the industry is undamaged.

3. Units take forever to starve: Kwaj was out of supply for over 2 years. While some units would starve, the overall fat/disruption level of the unit barely moved. Even after 2 years the total AV had only been reduced by about 60%.

The same thing happened at Chungking and Iman. At Chungking units were cut off for nearly 2 years. Despite the influx of auto supply the units were barely effected despite daily LCU bombardment. What did seem to work was daily air bombardment but even this took several months to show a significant effect.


RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 7:09 pm
by BlackSunshine
Interesting!  And everyone says this game favors the Allies [:D]

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:31 pm
by witpqs
ORIGINAL: RUPD3658

For those of you who do not follow the AAR "The Battle for New Jersey" we declared it a draw at the end of 1944.

So, umm, you thought better of it and decided New Jersey isn't worth a fight after all? [:D]

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:35 pm
by Charbroiled
ORIGINAL: RUPD3658

Oddest of all, when supply stockpiles were targeted, the overall supply level in the empire went up.

You must have been using the new "pork and beans" bombs.[:D]

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:07 pm
by RUPD3658
ORIGINAL: Charbroiled

ORIGINAL: RUPD3658

Oddest of all, when supply stockpiles were targeted, the overall supply level in the empire went up.

You must have been using the new "pork and beans" bombs.[:D]

In an effort to be more enviornmentally friendly I was dropping hot peppers in lieu of napalm. [8D]

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 10:51 pm
by GaryChildress
These are important findings. Have you posted them in the AE forum also? Hopefully these things can be addressed and corrected in AE. [:(]

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:50 am
by RUPD3658
Done. Welcome back by the way. Now could you please put an end to the infernal anti-thread you started?[:)]

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:54 am
by GaryChildress
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side of The Thread. [:D]

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:09 am
by Hortlund
Hm, I wonder if Im seeing something like this in Manilla. I have the entire allied PI-army caught at Manilla, and Ive been bombarding them daily for the past month or so, with no noticeable effect on their combat performance.

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:46 am
by castor troy
ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Hm, I wonder if Im seeing something like this in Manilla. I have the entire allied PI-army caught at Manilla, and Ive been bombarding them daily for the past month or so, with no noticeable effect on their combat performance.


I don´t know if you´re talking about our game but if so then I can tell you that my supply situation there is.... even worse as you could imagine. It´s the ground combat routine that doesn´t work, therefore those results... [8|]

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 12:21 pm
by herwin
ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Hm, I wonder if Im seeing something like this in Manilla. I have the entire allied PI-army caught at Manilla, and Ive been bombarding them daily for the past month or so, with no noticeable effect on their combat performance.


I don´t know if you´re talking about our game but if so then I can tell you that my supply situation there is.... even worse as you could imagine. It´s the ground combat routine that doesn´t work, therefore those results... [8|]

I saw the same thing in a combomod beta test. An LCU appears to have a minimum combat power--if that's enough to keep the enemy out, they'll never get in. Think Stalingrad.

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 12:41 pm
by Hortlund
ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Hm, I wonder if Im seeing something like this in Manilla. I have the entire allied PI-army caught at Manilla, and Ive been bombarding them daily for the past month or so, with no noticeable effect on their combat performance.


I don´t know if you´re talking about our game but if so then I can tell you that my supply situation there is.... even worse as you could imagine. It´s the ground combat routine that doesn´t work, therefore those results... [8|]

Yeah, its our game.

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:36 pm
by GaryChildress
ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Hm, I wonder if Im seeing something like this in Manilla. I have the entire allied PI-army caught at Manilla, and Ive been bombarding them daily for the past month or so, with no noticeable effect on their combat performance.

I had a similar situation with VSWG. I pounded Manila for a month or two with daily artillery attacks. Finally I tried a deliberate assault IIRC (I don't think it was a shock attack) his defenders decimated my attackers, leaving me with almost no functioning rifle squads. Next turn he launched an all out offensive and ended up retaking the entire Philippines. I was a little shocked that his troops were able to do that after a month of daily pounding. I guess my troops just launched a "banzai" charge and simply walked into the Allied machine guns or something. I lost almost an entire division worth of squads in a single day. [&:]

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:54 pm
by RUPD3658
The moral of the story is that LCU bombardments do not have much effect. Use ships or AC and you will see a much greater effect on the defender's combat performance.

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:54 pm
by Chimaera
ORIGINAL: Gary Childress
I had a similar situation with VSWG. I pounded Manila for a month or two with daily artillery attacks. Finally I tried a deliberate assault IIRC (I don't think it was a shock attack) his defenders decimated my attackers, leaving me with almost no functioning rifle squads. Next turn he launched an all out offensive and ended up retaking the entire Philippines. I was a little shocked that his troops were able to do that after a month of daily pounding. I guess my troops just launched a "banzai" charge and simply walked into the Allied machine guns or something. I lost almost an entire division worth of squads in a single day. [&:]

Scary, especially since I am in a similar situation [;)]

Do you remember the approximate assault values of both sides when you launched the attack? I assume you outnumbered and outgunned your opponent there.

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:30 pm
by RUPD3658
Keep in mind that Manilla is an urban hex and gives a 4x multiplier to the AV of the defenders in addition to those given by the forts. Even out of supply and disrupted, urban hexes are hard to take.

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:33 pm
by Andy Mac
Stock lvl 9 forts plus urban benefit = x 16 AV x out of supply = x .25 = MIMIMUM 4 x Base AV or to put it another way the attacker needs AT Least 4x the base AV or to be safe 8x to ensure 1:1 as you cannot rely on all units being out of supply.

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:54 pm
by castor troy
ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Stock lvl 9 forts plus urban benefit = x 16 AV x out of supply = x .25 = MIMIMUM 4 x Base AV or to put it another way the attacker needs AT Least 4x the base AV or to be safe 8x to ensure 1:1 as you cannot rely on all units being out of supply.


thought lev 9 forts give you 2x... so urban: 4x2=8av x0.25 = 2 base av

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:58 pm
by Hortlund
Out of supply is only x0.25? Regardless of the time the unit has been out of supply? Wow
 
Please tell me this will change in AE

RE: Findings of the Strategic bombing experiment

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:08 pm
by castor troy
ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Out of supply is only x0.25? Regardless of the time the unit has been out of supply? Wow

Please tell me this will change in AE

IMO every unit that is out of supply (let´s say 5-10% of it´s normal needs, if that´s not far too few already) should immediately surrender when attacked, or even surrender when enough enemy forces are just present in the hex. That´s why I already thought about just offering you the surrender of my troops at Manila. I haven´t offered it yet because I lost 17.000 supplies when I moved out of Clark before you even attacked there and all the supply was just left behind. Strangely enough that the supply in China moves out with my units leaving the base...

we will see how Manila will go on...