shore bombardment

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers here.

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

Post Reply
User avatar
John B.
Posts: 3985
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:45 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

shore bombardment

Post by John B. »

Can someone give me some pointers as this topic gets more and more frustrating in my games. The Japanese just did their third devastating shore bombardment at Chittagong. My subs don't intercept and mines don't seem to work and this has been true at other locations. But here at Chittagong I have 4 separate CD artillery units. As you can see from the picture at least two of them emerged unscathed by the bombardment. The one shown has high morale and high experience (as do the others).

The problem is that they did not fire a single shot at the bombarding fleet. Not one shot from four units and this has happened with previous encounters. In fact, none of the artillery in the hex (and there is quite a bit) shot at all. So, the IJN can sail in with impunity, not have their aim disrupted at all.

It can't be range because IJN CLs came within 2,000 yards and it can't be low light since at a separate hex Chinese mortar units shot at a bombarding TF on the same night. They didn't hit anything, but at least they were trying. :-)


Image
Attachments
Shorebombardment.gif
Shorebombardment.gif (381.49 KiB) Viewed 1257 times
John Barr
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: shore bombardment

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

Welcome to the club, you are not alone [8|]
my opponent is also very fond of naval bombardment, and there is very little that coastal guns or mines will do. That said, he had lost around 2 or 3 DDs, check at the combat report for ships hitting mines, you can expect some (few) losses, but that is it.

High fort levels will reduce the damage to LCUs and you should re-base planes to non-coastal airfields

look at the bright side, once roles revert around 1943, you should do exactly the same

User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: shore bombardment

Post by obvert »

Yes, this can be frustrating, and from all I've heard it's pretty standard. PTs will help, and I've found can lead to mines being more effective, maybe as the ships maneuver. Ge to 300-400 mines and keep dropping them after each run in (as the field will be 'known' after it's encountered. Also, if you have different mine types each one acts as a separate field, so more chances to hit, but higher cost to maintain in fuel for ACM.

Where mines, CD guns and PTs really work well is defending against invasion. Hard to sweep mines with CD guns present. Lot of ops points wasted against PTs so ships can end up high and dry away from their air cover.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
RogerJNeilson
Posts: 1277
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 5:21 am
Location: Bedlington, Northumberland, UK

RE: shore bombardment

Post by RogerJNeilson »

PT boats, PT Boats and PT Boats.... Every time the bombardment force has to change course or shoot at them it loses op points and runs down the clock. WITP is a massively complex scissors, paper, rock game.

Once you have the nasty bombarders still running for home in daylight you can normally dissuade them from returning with a few well aimed 1000lbers.

On of my opponents has very few CAs left following this treatment.

There seems to be no other method for dealing with them though.

Roger
An unplanned dynasty: Roger Neilson, Roger Neilson 11, Roger Neilson 3 previous posts 898+1515 + 1126 = 3539.....Finally completed my game which started the day WITP:AE was released
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: shore bombardment

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

How many PTs boats would you use per "session"?

what is the attrition? I bet it will be very high, I think you need to be much later on the game (he is in April 42) to get enough PTs to keep it sustained
User avatar
RogerJNeilson
Posts: 1277
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 5:21 am
Location: Bedlington, Northumberland, UK

RE: shore bombardment

Post by RogerJNeilson »

Quite a few, and yes it was later in the game. Early days really the only answer is to entrench your ground troops as well as possible and not base planes at sea bases unless you want to bait a trap or they are float planes - which seem pretty impervious to anything that attacks a base.
An unplanned dynasty: Roger Neilson, Roger Neilson 11, Roger Neilson 3 previous posts 898+1515 + 1126 = 3539.....Finally completed my game which started the day WITP:AE was released
User avatar
Trugrit
Posts: 1186
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 12:31 pm
Location: North Carolina

RE: shore bombardment

Post by Trugrit »

What scenario are you playing?

I show that in scenario 1 the device has no anti armor or anti soft.

A design oversight?





Image
Attachments
Device.jpg
Device.jpg (63.95 KiB) Viewed 1257 times
"A man's got to know his limitations" -Dirty Harry
Alfred
Posts: 6683
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:56 am

RE: shore bombardment

Post by Alfred »

ORIGINAL: Trugrit

What scenario are you playing?

I show that in scenario 1 the device has no anti armor or anti soft.

A design oversight?





Image

That data is not relevant. Anti-armor and anti-soft values are used against LCUs.

The 6"Mk V/VI is a naval gun. The relevant data for use against ships is it's penetration and effect values. In scenario 1 those values are 108 and 100 respectively.

The Combat Report will probably disclose some relevant information.

Alfred
User avatar
1EyedJacks
Posts: 2304
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 6:26 am
Location: Reno, NV

RE: shore bombardment

Post by 1EyedJacks »

Add Naval search AC - night operations - to raise the detection level of enemy TFs. You can also patrol with subs/PT boats in the base hex to help increase the DL and maybe even get in an attack... Just saying - if you can't detect the enemy you can't attack the enemy.
TTFN,

Mike
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5457
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

RE: shore bombardment

Post by Yaab »

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: Trugrit

What scenario are you playing?

I show that in scenario 1 the device has no anti armor or anti soft.

A design oversight?





Image

That data is not relevant. Anti-armor and anti-soft values are used against LCUs.

The 6"Mk V/VI is a naval gun. The relevant data for use against ships is it's penetration and effect values. In scenario 1 those values are 108 and 100 respectively.

The Combat Report will probably disclose some relevant information.

Alfred

Strange, in DaBig BabesC, those guns have 54 anti-armor /20 anti-soft rating. There are no naval guns with 0/0 ratings in DaBigBabes C.
User avatar
Trugrit
Posts: 1186
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 12:31 pm
Location: North Carolina

RE: shore bombardment

Post by Trugrit »

Thanks Alfred,

It's good to know that it is my mistake and not the new update.

Interesting that in scenario 1 there are only 4 naval guns like that.

Keith
"A man's got to know his limitations" -Dirty Harry
User avatar
IdahoNYer
Posts: 2743
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 2:07 am
Location: NYer living in Boise, ID

RE: shore bombardment

Post by IdahoNYer »

the only times I find that mines work against a bombardment is when the mines are placed in a hex that the bombardment task force traverses BEFORE it reaches the bombardment hex.
User avatar
John B.
Posts: 3985
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:45 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

RE: shore bombardment

Post by John B. »

@Alfred,

Here is the combat report. I don't see anything in here that would indicate why none of the CD batteries even bothered to open fire let alone get hits. As for D/L level, I don't know what it was, but I did see the ships TF before it showed up as there were several PBY squadrons with overlapping coverage of the area.

Incidentally, this is not the first time that these batteries failed to fire during shore bombardments. The last bombardment took place during the day after the TF spent the entire previous day in the Chittagong hex without firing.

@Jorge, would that it were true that there would be turnabout. In my first campaign game when I invaded Saipan I had wicked fight with a IJN artillery unit (I think it was a CD but I'm not sure) that did a great deal of damage to a couple of US BBs.

Image
Attachments
combatreport.gif
combatreport.gif (295.21 KiB) Viewed 1257 times
John Barr
User avatar
John B.
Posts: 3985
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:45 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

RE: shore bombardment

Post by John B. »

And, just so you can see the whole picture, here is the upper part of the combat report.

The four CD units were the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Indian CD units each of whom was at 60 experience and either 98 or 99 morale and were prep level Chittagong 17 or 14. And, the Chittagong fort was there at experience 39 Morale 63 and it was prep'd at Chittagong 100. Each of these units was at 0 disruption and minor (if any) fatigue at the start of the bombardment and, two of them finished the bombardment that way as shown by the original example.

Is there any way to get these guys to shoot?



Image
Attachments
Upperpart.gif
Upperpart.gif (295.62 KiB) Viewed 1257 times
John Barr
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: shore bombardment

Post by witpqs »

Is there any way to get these guys to shoot?

It is very difficult in this game, and not necessarily unrealistic. Sure, in some circumstances it is clearly unrealistic, but we have to keep in mind that the game can only have so much data provided and stored and decision making programmed in. Otherwise it would simply be unplayable. And that doesn't take into account its roots on far smaller/slower less capable platforms.

The ways that you can influence things have largely been mentioned: DL - get enemy detection level as high as you can with search the day before and nighttime search that same turn; leadership of the CD unit as good as you can; experience; morale; preparation; fatigue; disruption; supply present (maybe?).

Other things (also already mentioned by others) like: use PT boats to patrol there and have 1 hex React settings; DD flotillas to intercept; subs.

When all else fails, send a massive invasion force to capture the base where they are rearming and refueling! [:D]
User avatar
John B.
Posts: 3985
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:45 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

RE: shore bombardment

Post by John B. »

Witpqs,

Thanks for the feedback. It just seems very odd to me that whenever there's an invasion task force everything shoots (even Chinese mortars) and yet, when it's a bombardment task force it is so hard to even get shots out of CD units whose job it is to shoot back at enemy ships. I could understand if it was harder for them to hit depending on DL, fatigue, moonlight etc... but not shooting at all does not seem right. Still, it is what it is I suppose. Thanks again for the prompt response, especially on a weekend.

John
John Barr
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: shore bombardment

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: John B.

Witpqs,

Thanks for the feedback. It just seems very odd to me that whenever there's an invasion task force everything shoots (even Chinese mortars) and yet, when it's a bombardment task force it is so hard to even get shots out of CD units whose job it is to shoot back at enemy ships. I could understand if it was harder for them to hit depending on DL, fatigue, moonlight etc... but not shooting at all does not seem right. Still, it is what it is I suppose. Thanks again for the prompt response, especially on a weekend.

John
That last bit is no mystery - invasions are coming ashore. Landing craft/landing ships get fired at almost all the time. The ships launching them do sometimes also, especially because they stop or basically stop to get the boats and troops off. But bombardments are totally different. They are moving through at speed, have plan course changes ahead of time, and overall have a focus on getting in and out of enemy gun range in the shortest amount of time. Transports, even APA that unload farther out, show up and stay!
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: shore bombardment

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: John B.

Thanks again for the prompt response, especially on a weekend.

John
BTW, I don't work for matrix, just a fellow player. [8D]
User avatar
John B.
Posts: 3985
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:45 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

RE: shore bombardment

Post by John B. »

I agree, it makes a lot of sense that the invasions take more damage and hits, but it's the not shooting at all that I don't get. But, I do really appreciate you getting back to me!
John Barr
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: shore bombardment

Post by Lowpe »

Here is the Saipan CD gun unit in action recently in my AAR game. WITPQS is right: morale, disruption, disablements, leadership, supplies, experience, range, detection level, range, moonlight, weather all probably play a part. I have a feeling how well the unit is prepped for the base (i.e. filled out range cards, etc) makes a difference too. Your 14 prep here is my guess why they don't fire.

In the rules of the game it say the CD guns may fire...not that they always do so. They generally always fire at minesweepers clearing locale mines, and during invasions.

This was against a normal bombardment, the Allies got a little too close.[:)] Of course, damage to the base, despite spotters and very close range, was very minimal.

Image
Attachments
saipan.jpg
saipan.jpg (12.26 KiB) Viewed 1257 times
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”