Matrix Games Forums

OK. Couple questions here.

I just lost all units in Singapore after only one attack. Fortress level 7. 48000 troops, 60+ EXP and all with high Singapore prep...it was April 15th, 42, entrenched vs approx 250000. Japanese shock attack yields 32:1 odds after eng reduce fort to 6. Surrender! While I'm not questioning the result from an historical rationale (like IRL, the British surrendered by prolonged negotiation), I'm wondering about the difference in performance under similar odds by units surrounded by enemy in non base hexes. These non base hex units seem to withstand these same odds turn after turn yet when a base hex is involved the forces simply crap their pants and throw in the kerchief (pansies!).

Second observation/possible design flaw. I had two squadrons of P40E based at Singapore and these were lost. (Arrrgh[X(][;)]) Darn retards should know to fly to next base...after all, LCUs can retreat, why not aircraft?) I digress...this is not the problem. Both squadrons were understrength and I had approx 25 P40E in the pool with no squadrons set to receive replacements or upgrade to P40E. After the squadrons were lost, the pool shows 2 P40E. I think when squadrons are lost in this manner the pool is raped to fill out the squadrons.

I'll send the saves to anyone who wants to look at this.

Hi, And your sure no new P-40E group arrived or is organizing off map? No fragments of groups flew to nearby airfield, became parent set to receive replacements?

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, And your sure no new P-40E group arrived or is organizing off map? No fragments of groups flew to nearby airfield, became parent set to receive replacements?

Nope. I knew the situation in detail as I was managing the upgrades very closely to maintain a optimal P40B/P40E transition. Checked LBA everywhere.

Were you a bit surprised by the immediate capitulation, Mog? I knew with their morale that they would not withstand too much but one turn was a bit brutal. I've had pathetic Chinese units with dismal morale, massive disruption and fatigue, surrounded and being pounded by vastly superior forces withstand repeated battering turn after turn. Not saying this is right either but I'd would have expected to see some level of consistency.

Hi, Well squadrons only draw aircarft if there are enough to fill out the group. So 24 should have been drawn for each group. With a build rate of 1 per day and 25 in pool it appears 24 aircraft were drawn but unless the group is now in the replacement que it was not one of the destroyed groups.

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Well squadrons only draw aircarft if there are enough to fill out the group. So 24 should have been drawn for each group. With a build rate of 1 per day and 25 in pool it appears 24 aircraft were drawn but unless the group is now in the replacement que it was not one of the destroyed groups.

Both groups are in the reinforcement pipeline...399 turns to go![X(] Basically all aircraft which were present and the difference sitting in pool which would have been needed to "fill out" the squadrons were lost. I can't see this being the designer's intent.

Hi, They are 12 plane squadrons?

OK it is Feb 13 42 in my Pbem game I have entered Singapore with 200,000 + troops. I
am sure Singapore is at max Fort level with between 50,000 to 60,000 troops, how is it you could get 32:1 odds with that fortification level. I figured I might get 1:1 at most, will I be pleasantly surprised I have only just issued attack orders and have not seen results yet.[:)]

24 plane squadrons not suffering from combat losses. One squadron was about 60% of TOE while the other was about 30% of TOE. Loss of aircraft in pool match the number of aircraft needed to fill out squadrons.

ORIGINAL: Captain Ed

OK it is Feb 13 42 in my Pbem game I have entered Singapore with 200,000 + troops. I
am sure Singapore is at max Fort level with between 50,000 to 60,000 troops, how is it you could get 32:1 odds with that fortification level. I figured I might get 1:1 at most, will I be pleasantly surprised I have only just issued attack orders and have not seen results yet.[:)]

Japanese losses were approx 1500. I was a bit surprised to see the 32:1 odds but many of the troops were second line. Had about a total Assault value of 450 according to base screen prior to combat modifiers.

Hi, The Allied troops had been retreated into Singapore. The Japanese sat outside Singapore for quite a while resting and rebuilding. Total force employed was 8 Div and 1 Bde plus support troops (Tanks, Arty and Engineers)
Total force of SAA currently is 12 Div and 5 Bde so the Singapore Operation was a major event.

(Total AV of over 3400 in Singapore attack)

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

24 plane squadrons not suffering from combat losses. One squadron was about 60% of TOE while the other was about 30% of TOE. Loss of aircraft in pool match the number of aircraft needed to fill out squadrons.

I was under the understanding they qued airgroups drew planes upon return??

Ok Ed, I need that little super soldier I loaned you to beat on Ron back now [:D]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, The Allied troops had been retreated into Singapore. The Japanese sat outside Singapore for quite a while resting and rebuilding. Total force employed was 8 Div and 1 Bde plus support troops (Tanks, Arty and Engineers)
Total force of SAA currently is 12 Div and 5 Bde so the Singapore Operation was a major event.

I realize this but the remaining fort strength was level 6. The troops in Singapore recovered fairly quickly due to many support troops but morale was still low. My main point here is that units outside of base hexes and in a worse state and against worse odds withstand reoated attacks while those in bases simply surrender. I think this is lacking in consistency.

I'm completely lost when it comes to undertanding the LC rules.

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Ok Ed, I need that little super soldier I loaned you to beat on Ron back now [:D]

Why would I require a beating for bringing up two valid and interesting issues? [&:] Simply because it's me?[:D] What am I? (stick your favourite racial slur/nationality/style of prepared liver here)[:D]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Ok Ed, I need that little super soldier I loaned you to beat on Ron back now [:D]

Why would I require a beating for bringing up two valid and interesting issues? [&:] Simply because it's me?[:D] What am I? (stick your favourite racial slur/nationality/style of prepared liver here)[:D]

Just giving you are hard time as always. [:'(]

As to your *my* aircraft didn't fly away and escape complaint ... been that way since day one, not going to change. You assume the risk by keeping aircraft at a base once enemy units move into that hex completely.

If you give it any real thought, it is pretty safe to assume that the first target for the guns attached to the units that are invading is pummelling the airfield to prevent it's use for escape, reinforcements and ground support.

Yeah, Ron, if they can't flog and flay you, they might come looking for me.

Do me a favor. When you have more than one unit in a non-base hex (or in an enemy-controlled base hex), click on the hex and check how much supply there is.

What you see indicates to me that there is at least one glitch in the handling of units in non-base hexes. Others may exist that cause units in these hexes to be tougher to defeat than if they were entrenched in bases (I think I have noticed this, too) ...

I'll send the saves to anyone who wants to look at this.

Anytime you feel like sending it, you know where they go.

What you see indicates to me that there is at least one glitch in the handling of units in non-base hexes.

You mean this one right?

1) Land combat occurring not in a base has had the negative modifier for the attacker decreased.