Use of LCI(G)
Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
Use of LCI(G)
Hi-Got some at forward bases. Want to use them in an invasion. Hit their mission button, got "Transport". I thought these ships delivered rockets or gunfire support on invasion beaches. Would someone please inform me as to how to use these ships? Thanks, Hugh Browne.
hbrsvl
-
Yamato hugger
- Posts: 3791
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 5:38 am
RE: Use of LCI(G)
You put them in a TF just like CLs or DDs.
RE: Use of LCI(G)
Put them in an invasion TF to soak up CD fire. They take the heat for your beaching craft. Get your troops ashore with less fatigue and disruption, fewer disablements.
It's a nice story anyway.
It's a nice story anyway.
Fear the kitten!
RE: Use of LCI(G)
Irrelevant is right. They were supposed to provide covering shore bombardment but someone (I think Apollo11, but I'm not sure) ran some tests and found that they do ... absolutely nothing. I can't remember if it turned out that their fire did nothing or that they just didn't fire at all. (Or was it both?)
This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.
"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy
Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.
"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy
Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.
RE: Use of LCI(G)
I can't remember if it turned out that their fire did nothing or that they just didn't fire at all. (Or was it both?)
[:D][:D]
IIRC - they never fired![:(]
RE: Use of LCI(G)
ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
I can't remember if it turned out that their fire did nothing or that they just didn't fire at all. (Or was it both?)
[:D][:D]
IIRC - they never fired![:(]
Someone, I believe it was Desertdaddy, did some tests and found out that to get the 5 inch rockets on LCIs to fire he had to change their range to that of a US 5/38" gun.
Maybe the same needs to be done for the LCI(G)?
PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
RE: Use of LCI(G)
FWIW,
I just ran two tests (so it hardly consitutes a proper sample), but the only thing I could see that LCI(G)s did, was to give the CD guns more targets to shoot at.
I took the tutoial scenario, and landed at Wolei. It is lightly defended by a CD unit and a BF with SNFL squads, which actually gives me exactly what I wanted.
Do the LCI(G) suppress or disable enemy CD guns before or during the attack, the reducing the amount of damage to other ships in the invasion TF?
Do the LCI(G) provide counter-battery fire to suppress the amount of fire against the invasion LCUs (thus reducing the amount of disablements?).
===
I formed an invasion TF with only LST and LCI (all of them), and then loaded the 2nd USMC Div, then landed at Wolei. Needless to say, it wasn't pretty (2nd USMC Div is 100 prepped for Saipan, and no escorts the CD units pummeled the TF).
End result
26 landing craft sunk, or will very soon, and the Div attacked at 10% assault strenght (about 30 AV).
[sorry, i forgot to save off the combat.txt].
===
Next, same invasion TF, but this time with all the LCI(G)s available (about 15 I think).
End result, an even worse slaughter (I was rather surprised at this).
46 landing craft sunk, or will very soon (including all the LCI(G)), and the Div attacked at about 15% assault strenght (about 40 AV).
There -were- more disabled guns in the defending CD unit, but it could just as well been from the (slightly) stronger shock attack made by 2nd USMC Div.
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 06/14/44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coastal Guns at Woleai, 57,72, firing at TF 1001
TF 1001 troops unloading over beach at Woleai, 57,72
6072 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.
Allied Ships
LCI LCI-400, Shell hits 7, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-61, Shell hits 77, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-402, Shell hits 22, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-65, Shell hits 54, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-435, Shell hits 9, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-436, Shell hits 37, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-66, Shell hits 20, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-443, Shell hits 22, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-444, Shell hits 30, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-68, Shell hits 36, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-584, Shell hits 61, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-585, Shell hits 14, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-67, Shell hits 62, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-64, Shell hits 43, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-586, Shell hits 31, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-69, Shell hits 48, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-587, Shell hits 28, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-621, Shell hits 5, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-622, Shell hits 1, on fire
LCI(G) LCI-70, Shell hits 1, on fire
LCI(G) LCI(G)-76, Shell hits 13, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-623, Shell hits 13, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI(G)-77, Shell hits 27, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-625, Shell hits 8, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-179, Shell hits 16, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-180, Shell hits 1, on fire
LCI(G) LCI(G)-79, Shell hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-202, Shell hits 24, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI(G)-78, Shell hits 26, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-203, Shell hits 12, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI(G)-81, Shell hits 11, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-204, Shell hits 11, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-205, Shell hits 25, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI(G)-80, Shell hits 7, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-215, Shell hits 10, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI(G)-82, Shell hits 7, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-217, Shell hits 11, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-270, Shell hits 7, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-273, Shell hits 16, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-274, Shell hits 10, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-275, Shell hits 3, on fire
LST LST-277, Shell hits 5, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-355, Shell hits 19, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-357, Shell hits 4, on fire
Japanese ground losses:
10 casualties reported
Allied ground losses:
6086 casualties reported
Guns lost 94
Vehicles lost 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Woleai
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 1856 troops, 56 guns, 0 vehicles
Defending force 5883 troops, 41 guns, 11 vehicles
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Woleai
Allied Shock attack
Attacking force 5883 troops, 41 guns, 11 vehicles
Defending force 4991 troops, 68 guns, 0 vehicles
Allied assault odds: 0 to 1 (fort level 4)
Japanese ground losses:
340 casualties reported
Guns lost 15
Allied ground losses:
151 casualties reported
Guns lost 3
Vehicles lost 2
====
THIS WAS JUST 1 TEST AND 1 TEST. NEEDS FURTHER TESTING!!!!
But it looks like
a. LCI(G) give more targets for the CD guns.
b. More targets means that fire is spread out against more ships, and thus more troops can come ashore (since fewer troop carying ships are damaged).
c. Even more landing ships were sunk tho. I think this MIGHT have been because the LCI(G)s spend an extra round FIGHTING the CD guns. This endagers the other landing craft for an extra round, and they take more damage. Whereas with no LCI(G)s, they MIGHT just be bugging out asap.
d. I did not see any significant extra damage to the enemy LCUs by including the LCI(G)s in with the invasion TF.
=========
This certainly needs more testing. But that's what ONE landing of each revealed.
-F-
I just ran two tests (so it hardly consitutes a proper sample), but the only thing I could see that LCI(G)s did, was to give the CD guns more targets to shoot at.
I took the tutoial scenario, and landed at Wolei. It is lightly defended by a CD unit and a BF with SNFL squads, which actually gives me exactly what I wanted.
Do the LCI(G) suppress or disable enemy CD guns before or during the attack, the reducing the amount of damage to other ships in the invasion TF?
Do the LCI(G) provide counter-battery fire to suppress the amount of fire against the invasion LCUs (thus reducing the amount of disablements?).
===
I formed an invasion TF with only LST and LCI (all of them), and then loaded the 2nd USMC Div, then landed at Wolei. Needless to say, it wasn't pretty (2nd USMC Div is 100 prepped for Saipan, and no escorts the CD units pummeled the TF).
End result
26 landing craft sunk, or will very soon, and the Div attacked at 10% assault strenght (about 30 AV).
[sorry, i forgot to save off the combat.txt].
===
Next, same invasion TF, but this time with all the LCI(G)s available (about 15 I think).
End result, an even worse slaughter (I was rather surprised at this).
46 landing craft sunk, or will very soon (including all the LCI(G)), and the Div attacked at about 15% assault strenght (about 40 AV).
There -were- more disabled guns in the defending CD unit, but it could just as well been from the (slightly) stronger shock attack made by 2nd USMC Div.
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 06/14/44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coastal Guns at Woleai, 57,72, firing at TF 1001
TF 1001 troops unloading over beach at Woleai, 57,72
6072 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.
Allied Ships
LCI LCI-400, Shell hits 7, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-61, Shell hits 77, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-402, Shell hits 22, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-65, Shell hits 54, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-435, Shell hits 9, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-436, Shell hits 37, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-66, Shell hits 20, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-443, Shell hits 22, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-444, Shell hits 30, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-68, Shell hits 36, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-584, Shell hits 61, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-585, Shell hits 14, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-67, Shell hits 62, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-64, Shell hits 43, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-586, Shell hits 31, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI-69, Shell hits 48, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-587, Shell hits 28, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-621, Shell hits 5, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-622, Shell hits 1, on fire
LCI(G) LCI-70, Shell hits 1, on fire
LCI(G) LCI(G)-76, Shell hits 13, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-623, Shell hits 13, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI(G)-77, Shell hits 27, on fire, heavy damage
LCI LCI-625, Shell hits 8, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-179, Shell hits 16, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-180, Shell hits 1, on fire
LCI(G) LCI(G)-79, Shell hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-202, Shell hits 24, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI(G)-78, Shell hits 26, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-203, Shell hits 12, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI(G)-81, Shell hits 11, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-204, Shell hits 11, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-205, Shell hits 25, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI(G)-80, Shell hits 7, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-215, Shell hits 10, on fire, heavy damage
LCI(G) LCI(G)-82, Shell hits 7, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-217, Shell hits 11, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-270, Shell hits 7, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-273, Shell hits 16, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-274, Shell hits 10, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-275, Shell hits 3, on fire
LST LST-277, Shell hits 5, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-355, Shell hits 19, on fire, heavy damage
LST LST-357, Shell hits 4, on fire
Japanese ground losses:
10 casualties reported
Allied ground losses:
6086 casualties reported
Guns lost 94
Vehicles lost 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Woleai
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 1856 troops, 56 guns, 0 vehicles
Defending force 5883 troops, 41 guns, 11 vehicles
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Woleai
Allied Shock attack
Attacking force 5883 troops, 41 guns, 11 vehicles
Defending force 4991 troops, 68 guns, 0 vehicles
Allied assault odds: 0 to 1 (fort level 4)
Japanese ground losses:
340 casualties reported
Guns lost 15
Allied ground losses:
151 casualties reported
Guns lost 3
Vehicles lost 2
====
THIS WAS JUST 1 TEST AND 1 TEST. NEEDS FURTHER TESTING!!!!
But it looks like
a. LCI(G) give more targets for the CD guns.
b. More targets means that fire is spread out against more ships, and thus more troops can come ashore (since fewer troop carying ships are damaged).
c. Even more landing ships were sunk tho. I think this MIGHT have been because the LCI(G)s spend an extra round FIGHTING the CD guns. This endagers the other landing craft for an extra round, and they take more damage. Whereas with no LCI(G)s, they MIGHT just be bugging out asap.
d. I did not see any significant extra damage to the enemy LCUs by including the LCI(G)s in with the invasion TF.
=========
This certainly needs more testing. But that's what ONE landing of each revealed.
-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me
-
Cpt Sherwood
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 12:27 am
- Location: A Very Nice Place in the USA
RE: Use of LCI(G)
So we have a bug that was reported a long time ago and nothing has been done about it? [&:]
It would seem that just parking them somewhere out of the way is the only thing to do with them. Just great. [:@]
It would seem that just parking them somewhere out of the way is the only thing to do with them. Just great. [:@]
“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca
RE: Use of LCI(G)
ORIGINAL: Cpt Sherwood
So we have a bug that was reported a long time ago and nothing has been done about it? [&:]
It would seem that just parking them somewhere out of the way is the only thing to do with them. Just great. [:@]
"A bug"? There is a multiple page list of bugs that have been reported almost since the game came out that are still not fixed. Since I don't work at Matrix or 2by3 I can't say which bugs they have worked on or not. (And I'm sure that they are tired of hearing me rant so I will try to avoid further speculation.)
This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.
"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy
Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.
"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy
Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.
-
Cpt Sherwood
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 12:27 am
- Location: A Very Nice Place in the USA
RE: Use of LCI(G)
I was only referring to this one, BTW, did they fix the LCI(R) ships? Or are they bugged also? [&:] I am wondering if the money I spent for this game was well spent or not.
“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca
RE: Use of LCI(G)
1. Yes, it was well worth it.
2. Probably, the LCI(R) doesn't work either (the LCI(G) main gun is a rocket anyway).
You can get around around this issue by:
a. Put a larger ship in the TF to absorb the CD fire. This is explointing the routines a bit, but frankly, everyone does it.
b. Don't include the LCI(G)s into your TF to begin with.
d. If they weren't in game to begin with, no one would have missed them, so just leave them in port.
Frankly, I believe this MIGHT have something to do with the fact the rockets have a penetration value of 50, but an EFFECT (and anti-armor/anti-soft) value of 0. I can bump of the effect and attack ratings of the rockets, to see if that helps at all. But it could be that the LCI(G)s are simply throwing dandilions at the shore batteries.
Then again, it could be that the routine is coded for a round of naval combat when unloading, and because of the LCI(G)s, an extra round (attack by them) is included (thus endagnering the tranports 2x). But again, I can't see the code, so more than likely, I'm just talking out of my ass (which is actually always the case).
But I will try to run a test tonight, after bumping up the "boom!" rating of the rockets to see what happens.
-F-
2. Probably, the LCI(R) doesn't work either (the LCI(G) main gun is a rocket anyway).
You can get around around this issue by:
a. Put a larger ship in the TF to absorb the CD fire. This is explointing the routines a bit, but frankly, everyone does it.
b. Don't include the LCI(G)s into your TF to begin with.
d. If they weren't in game to begin with, no one would have missed them, so just leave them in port.
Frankly, I believe this MIGHT have something to do with the fact the rockets have a penetration value of 50, but an EFFECT (and anti-armor/anti-soft) value of 0. I can bump of the effect and attack ratings of the rockets, to see if that helps at all. But it could be that the LCI(G)s are simply throwing dandilions at the shore batteries.
Then again, it could be that the routine is coded for a round of naval combat when unloading, and because of the LCI(G)s, an extra round (attack by them) is included (thus endagnering the tranports 2x). But again, I can't see the code, so more than likely, I'm just talking out of my ass (which is actually always the case).
But I will try to run a test tonight, after bumping up the "boom!" rating of the rockets to see what happens.
-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me
RE: Use of LCI(G)
ORIGINAL: Cpt Sherwood
I was only referring to this one, BTW, did they fix the LCI(R) ships? Or are they bugged also? [&:] I am wondering if the money I spent for this game was well spent or not.
Despite my (severe) reservations with the game, i think it is money well spent, as you will get more entertainment value for your money over the long run than anything else i know of. You might also get more aggravation for your money than most games, but, i think overall the game is a winner.
Just keep in mind that it IS a game (and not really a working truly historical simulation) and your aggravation level drops (at least mine did once i discovered this fact.)
RE: Use of LCI(G)
Just keep in mind that it IS a game (and not really a working truly historical simulation)
Don't let Nik hear you say that...
[;)]
-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me
RE: Use of LCI(G)
ORIGINAL: Feinder
Just keep in mind that it IS a game (and not really a working truly historical simulation)
Don't let Nik hear you say that...
[;)]
-F-
Well - maybe Nik's mod hits closer to the mark, but haven't tried it (yet).
RE: Use of LCI(G)
So, if the LCI(G), LCI(R) and LCI(M) don't work against shore batteries - do they have any other effect?? Suppresion of troops, etc???
RE: Use of LCI(G)
So far as anyone has been able to determine thru testing, none of those ship types do anything but provide the defenders with more targets.
This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.
"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy
Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.
"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy
Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.
RE: Use of LCI(G)
ORIGINAL: Cpt Sherwood
I was only referring to this one, BTW, did they fix the LCI(R) ships? Or are they bugged also? [&:] I am wondering if the money I spent for this game was well spent or not.
Repeat from a post above concerning the LCI(R). Just make the change in your scenario editor (though it doesn't help at all with current games).
Someone, I believe it was Desertdaddy, did some tests and found out that to get the 5 inch rockets on LCIs to fire he had to change their range to that of a US 5/38" gun.
PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
-
Cpt Sherwood
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 12:27 am
- Location: A Very Nice Place in the USA
RE: Use of LCI(G)
I would but I am waiting for my first PBEM turn from my Japanese opponent. I think it is a bit late. [:(]
“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca
RE: Use of LCI(G)
It can take some time....[;)]waiting for my first PBEM turn from my Japanese opponent. I think it is a bit late.
Fear the kitten!
-
Cpt Sherwood
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 12:27 am
- Location: A Very Nice Place in the USA
RE: Use of LCI(G)
Well, well, yes it does take time for that first all important Japanese turn, but since he has been working for more than a day now, I do not think I should ask him to start over with a modified senario file. [:D]
“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca