Admirals Edition Naval Thread II

[m10bob]

It has been suggested the AE NAVAL THREAD might be given new life so long as rules are obeyed.:
1. Keep all posts relative to AE, and NAVAL comments/queries....
2. Maintain the decorum and rules of the forum.
3. Post as if your comment/question were addressed to a member of the AE team, (not just a long-time forum poster.)
4. Please allow the comment/question be answered/responded to by a AE team member.

Theories...history lessons...etc, can be posted in the general forum, not here in the AE area.


(O.K., boss, sticky)..

[Japan]

Nice

[m10bob]

Okay, I'll ask the AE naval team a question.
Is there anyway to give DP guns special advantage against aircraft than surface main guns, in a way not included in "vanilla"?

[Monter_Trismegistos]

Surface guns cannot fire aircraft, while dual purpose can. Such advantage is too small?

What you probably asking is if there is a possibility to add ability for surface guns to fire (with small chance of hit) at aircrafts.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

Surface guns cannot fire aircraft, while dual purpose can. Such advantage is too small?

What you probably asking is if there is a possibility to add ability for surface guns to fire (with small chance of hit) at aircrafts.

If that is the question, then No. Regular Naval Guns can not fire at aircraft. I'm aware of the (generally useless) use of naval gunfire into the ocean ahead of torpedo planes, but that is not implemented.

[m10bob]

Specifically, I was wondering if naval DP main guns (like the U.S. 5"38) had any greater chance against aircraft than a non-DP type main gun?

[Yamato hugger]

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Specifically, I was wondering if naval DP main guns (like the U.S. 5"38) had any greater chance against aircraft than a non-DP type main gun?

And he answered you. Yes, since a 5"/38 CAN shoot at aircraft (since its DP) and a 5"/25 CANT (since its single purpose).

[RevRick]

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Specifically, I was wondering if naval DP main guns (like the U.S. 5"38) had any greater chance against aircraft than a non-DP type main gun?

And he answered you. Yes, since a 5"/38 CAN shoot at aircraft (since its DP) and a 5"/25 CANT (since its single purpose).

Do you perchance mean the 5"/51 cal? The 5"/25 is a DP gun to the best of my recollection.

Perhaps the initiator of the post is considering the difference between the two varieties of 4.7" guns mounted on RN destroyers. The difference in the mounting prevented the one mounted on the Tribals, for example, from being a truly DP mount since it could only elevate to something like 50-60 degrees, which necessitated the removal of Y mount and its replacement with the 4.5" DP weapon and mount.

[Three63]

I'm really curious how amphibious invasions will go down in AE differently then Witp, especially involving smaller landing craft. Will craft like Jap barges, LCVPs, LVTs, and such be able to attach to a AP with loaded troops at port so they can be a direct assets when there ready to climb down the nets and ride them hard onto the assaulted beach?

[Kull]

ORIGINAL: TheElf

CVs have a finite supply (of torpedos). 36 for Fleet Carriers, less for escort and Light CVs. When they are used up that's it, so better make'em count. Have to unrep with and appropriate tender or pull into an appropriate port.

(This question went unanswered because the old Naval Thread was locked) During your testing, has the AI shown the ability to handle this new complexity? Or does the AI-KB keep patroling long after it's used up it's torpedos? And if/when it does need replenishment, does the AI know it must select an "appropriate port"? (i.e. one with torpedos in supply)

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Three63

I'm really curious how amphibious invasions will go down in AE differently then Witp, especially involving smaller landing craft. Will craft like Jap barges, LCVPs, LVTs, and such be able to attach to a AP with loaded troops at port so they can be a direct assets when there ready to climb down the nets and ride them hard onto the assaulted beach?

No. Each ship's complement of landing craft is accounted for it the unload rate for that specific ship type. APAs are much better than regular APs, etc.

The barges/landing craft enumerated in the OOB are individual units.

[Three63]

Are the landing craft associated with the AP load rate replicated in combat? Do squads get individually shot at while
riding ashore or is the AP the only valid target? Is there any way to calculate how many craft a AP by it's unload rate
or is it abstract all the way around?
 
Also it would great to hear good news on how amphibious invasions will be in AE compared to Witp. [8D]

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Three63

Are the landing craft associated with the AP load rate replicated in combat?

Don't actually understand this question. There are no actual in-game landing craft associated with a transport. Each type of ship has unload "rate" that factors in the landing craft that the ship might carry. Big number of APA, tiny number for freighter (just ask Brady).

Do squads get individually shot at while riding ashore or is the AP the only valid target?

There are two rounds of fire at troops approaching in landing craft (long and short range). Since the landing craft are abstracted, so is the defensive fire at them. But it is reported in the combat report and losses can be sustained.

Is there any way to calculate how many craft a AP by it's unload rate or is it abstract all the way around?

Fully abstract.

Also it would great to hear good news on how amphibious invasions will be in AE compared to Witp. [8D]

More realistic. And, for those players that are used to not properly preparing - more painful.

[eggmansdaddy]

Does US 5" DP "to hit" chance go up to reflect deployment of proximity shells?

[Chad Harrison]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

More realistic. And, for those players that are used to not properly preparing - more painful.

Any additional detail you are willing to divulge would be greatly appreciated Don. Amphib operations are my favorite aspect of WitP, so needless to say I am over joyed with the more realistic changes in AE.

Some questions:

1. Will there be a limit to how many ships can be unloading in an assault (ie. if its exceeded, the other ships unload nothing)? Or will there be an optimum number of ships that can unload (ie. if its exceeded, all ships can unload, just slower because of congestion)? Or will be 'same as it ever was'?

For instance, in vanilla WitP I would have a TF of only AK's which would unload supply in my amphib operations. On a bigger battle, like taking Guam, at the end of day one I would have almost 100,000 supply from this TF onshore. Are the days of doing this over?

2. Outside of the limit of troops on an island, will there be any limitation as to how many troops can be landed at the same time? Or will the island size, with its increased supply penalties, represent trying to cram too many troops into the D-Day waves?

3. The combat reports in WitP for amphib casulties were quite confusing. All you got was '2,346 caulties'. So you were left to wonder how much of that was ops or enemy fire. Will AE shed any additional light in the combat reports regarding the landing troops? An example would be awesome [:D]

4. Same goes for pre invasion naval bombardments and coastal gun duels with ships in the invasion TF. I have obviously seen the screen shots, and read Andy's AAR, but can you shed any additional light on how this will work and how it will be presented in the game? For ships in an invasion TF, will we see something like 'DD Fletcher destroys coastal gun' or 'DD Fletcher suppresses coastal battery'?

5. Can we get any new details on mines? I know that there will be a limited number, but how limited? In my ongoing WitP PBEM game (March 1944), in any given invasion I am more concerned with mines that I am with the troops defending the island or any CD defences. Will Japan be able to build more if the need exists or will it be a set number, ie. 10/month?

Thanks in advance. Nice to have a naval thread open again.

Chad

[String]

ORIGINAL: eggmansdaddy

Does US 5" DP "to hit" chance go up to reflect deployment of proximity shells?

Afaik it already does in the vanilla version as well.

[Nikademus]

prox shell effect is in Stock.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Chad Harrison

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

More realistic. And, for those players that are used to not properly preparing - more painful.

Any additional detail you are willing to divulge would be greatly appreciated Don. Amphib operations are my favorite aspect of WitP, so needless to say I am over joyed with the more realistic changes in AE.

Some questions:

1. Will there be a limit to how many ships can be unloading in an assault (ie. if its exceeded, the other ships unload nothing)? Or will there be an optimum number of ships that can unload (ie. if its exceeded, all ships can unload, just slower because of congestion)? Or will be 'same as it ever was'?

For instance, in vanilla WitP I would have a TF of only AK's which would unload supply in my amphib operations. On a bigger battle, like taking Guam, at the end of day one I would have almost 100,000 supply from this TF onshore. Are the days of doing this over?

The limit on amphibious unload is based on capabilities of the ships present. More amphibious ships, more unload capability. There is nothing to represent limited beach space for unloading - and the current structure does not give us any way to calculate such a limit. Excepting atolls and small islands, a 40-mile hex would tend to have plenty of unloading beaches in any event.

2. Outside of the limit of troops on an island, will there be any limitation as to how many troops can be landed at the same time? Or will the island size, with its increased supply penalties, represent trying to cram too many troops into the D-Day waves?

As above, the limitation is based purely on the capabilities of the ships doing the unloading.

3. The combat reports in WitP for amphib casulties were quite confusing. All you got was '2,346 caulties'. So you were left to wonder how much of that was ops or enemy fire. Will AE shed any additional light in the combat reports regarding the landing troops? An example would be awesome [:D]

Changed, improved, much more info.

4. Same goes for pre invasion naval bombardments and coastal gun duels with ships in the invasion TF. I have obviously seen the screen shots, and read Andy's AAR, but can you shed any additional light on how this will work and how it will be presented in the game? For ships in an invasion TF, will we see something like 'DD Fletcher destroys coastal gun' or 'DD Fletcher suppresses coastal battery'?

Also a lot of data. In fact, one of your “something likes” is almost spot on.

5. Can we get any new details on mines? I know that there will be a limited number, but how limited? In my ongoing WitP PBEM game (March 1944), in any given invasion I am more concerned with mines that I am with the troops defending the island or any CD defences. Will Japan be able to build more if the need exists or will it be a set number, ie. 10/month?

Mines are built like any other device. You start with however many the scenario designer chooses to put into the pool (plus), and you get however many the scenario designer chooses to specify as being built. (plus) minelayers in non-minelaying TFs will NOT be equipped with mines at scenario start, but all others will. So you actually start with some number greater than the pool.

To address the question everyone is about to post: a minelayer in a non-minelaying TF is not given an initial load out of mines because it is assigned a mission that does not require mines and probably conflicts with carrying mines. Okinoshima, for instance, was acting as a troop transport.

[Chad Harrison]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

Changed, improved, much more info.

Also a lot of data. In fact, one of your “something likes” is almost spot on.

You tease! [:D] Any chance on begging additional details out of you on either? I know they fall under the umbrella of 'it may change', but would be nice to have to atleast see the direction you all are going.

Thanks for the reply Don. I never tire of saying how great these improvements are looking. WitP will be a entirely different beast with AE. And incase its not obvious, thats a good thing.

Chad

[Dili]

prox shell effect is in Stock.

How this will work for AE? Hardcode that improves hit chances at a certain date?