DG experience

[mike_espo]

Hello all!:) My first post here. I saw this game while doing a google search and felt I had to have it. I have some knowledge of the Russo Japanese war at sea and wanted some opinions on DG.

How realistic is the simulation? I know that no game is perfect, but do realistic tactics pay off? I always seek the most realistic experience instead of playabilty in computer games...;)

Any thoughts?

thanks

[Haida]

Good tactics generally do pay off; if you plan your engagements carefully you will get good results, all other things being equal. The gunnery and damage model is very realistic and there is an element of luck as well. The AI could use some work but for the most part the computer makes logical moves during battle.

Overall I think the game strikes a good balance between realism and playability. One of the things they did was make the Russians better than they were historically. This makes the game more interesting; the "what if" factor is really good.

[mike_espo]

Thanks! :thumup: I made the plunge and bought the whole shebang: campaign and all. Look forward to playing the Russians. :)

While playing Ulsan, It seems the AI is sort of relentless: The Japanese cruiser division always at flank speed and never giving up, even when 2 of my 3 ships- the Rurik never can escape-is over 7km away....:surprise:

Also seems that guns get damaged very easily in this sim. Other than that, I am very happy with the purchase. :smoke:

[Blackcloud6]

First time I played with the demo I had trouble with the interface. I then went on travel for awhile and my time with the demo expired. But I eneded up buying the game. I've played it a few times and fully enjoy it. I just don't have the time yet to really get into it. The campaign system looks cool.

[Robus]

Once you've got the basics of gameplay from the scenarios, jump right into the Russian campaign. The Strategy sticky thread above has a lot of interesting discussion and will give you an idea of the depth of this war game.

[mike_espo]

Once you've got the basics of gameplay from the scenarios, jump right into the Russian campaign. The Strategy sticky thread above has a lot of interesting discussion and will give you an idea of the depth of this war game.

Started my Russian campaign. Port Arthur attacked by Japanese TBs. Lost two cruisers!:cry: 4 BBs damaged. Getting the hang of this both Battlespace and the Campaign Screen. It was tough at first ( see my other post) to organize my fleet into task forces....was difficult to get ships in divisions. But I finally muddled through. :laugh:

I was wondering: does anybody know if its possible to coal at sea? It was done during this war alot. Damage model seems good, but guns are easily put out of action......:surprise: I wonder if Different types of armor is modelled too?

Awesome wargame!:smoke:

[Rhetor]

I was wondering: does anybody know if its possible to coal at sea? It was done during this war alot. Damage model seems good, but guns are easily put out of action......:surprise: I wonder if Different types of armor is modelled too?

Awesome wargame!:smoke:

Coaling at sea is simulated through "sharing" - ships with more coal capacity will resupply ships with smaller capacity, thus extending their radius.

I don't know about the armor types; probably it is modelled. Guns were pretty fragile at the time. One heavy shell which managed to penetrate the armor could easily knock out the crews of two or three neighbouring casemates. Some guns were totally unprotected or had only shields - splinters were terribly effective against their crews. Only turrets provided reasonably good protection against enemy fire.
However, note how rarely a shell would knock out machinery or cause major leak. Flat trajectory of the shells at low distances meant that the ships would get demolished above the water line, but none of the vital parts would get destroyed. Only when fires spread, the ships were doomed.
As far as fire is concerned, I have a vague feeling that Mr. Koger has tuned it somewhat down. It seems to me that fires spread more and were extingushed much slower before some patch.

[mike_espo]

Hmmm. About the fires, I had one noteworthy engagement to speak of..

Protected cruiser Varyag and Gunboat Koreets vs about 7 Jap TBs and a armored cruiser divison. Varyag managed to give them the slip, but the Koreets was sunk by persistant fire from the TBs. Koreets managed to kill 4 of the boats and damage the rest severely...but I wonder if it would have been sunk by the low calibre guns of the TBs. The reason for the sinking is what you said...fire. but would these small shells cause a fire to rage out of control? :surprise:

[Shanghai Slim]

(...) but would these small shells cause a fire to rage out of control? :surprise:

In case you have not yet discovered this, in addition to monitoring how far fires are spreading, you have to also watch crew casualties. If many of the crew have been killed, and the rest are busy throwing shells back at the enemy, fires can quickly spread out of control. In this situation, even a ship with only "moderate" damage may be doomed unless it can cease firing (to allow more crew to fight the flames) and get out of the enemy's gunsights (to stop more fires from starting).

Norm Koger once explained here that the condition of the ship's propulsion system is also important for determining how fast fires spread. Heavily damaged engines may not be able to supply adequate pressure for fire hoses.

Welcome to this forum, and enjoy your campaign! :-)

[Robus]

Just as Slim said. When fire becomes a concern, disengage if possible and reduce spead. This frees up crew members from manning the guns and shoveling coal so that they can fight the fire. Watch fires and crew levels carefully. If fire begins to spread, it can incapacitate your crew members very quickly. That leaves fewer crew to fight the fire, allowing the fire to spread even faster, and so on.

Japanese TBs can be a formidable force if you encounter them at night in large numbers. In daylight at longer ranges they are less of a threat. It sounds like you're doing well so far. The first order of business in the Russian campaign is to clear the light Japanese forces that patrol around Port Arthur. Just try not to lose any of your valuable PCs or destroyers in doing this. The gunboats are actually pretty useful in this task because they are well armed and too slow to be used on longer range missions.

[Rhetor]

Destroyers and torpedo boats are the weapon for the night or bad visibility. During daytime cruisers or larger vessels would destroy them long before they manage to close in for the torpedo run - because the gun accuracy has been enhanced for the sake of gameplay.
Night gives the gunners less time to kill off a swarm of destroyers/tropedo boats - I have described in the AAR section how I got bruised by two Japanese protected cruisers during daytime, and sunk both of them the following night. Even then, however, it is usually a costly experience for small boats. Note that in almost every campaign game the initial Port Arthur attack ends in sinking 4-6 Japanese destroyers, whereas in reality all of them managed to get away.

The increased accuracy works the other way round - the DDs and TBs are very good at knocking out unarmored artillery emplacements and rudders on Russian gunboats and auxilliary cruisers.

[Robus]

Torpedo boats are meant to be sacrificed in order to destroy valuable enemy ships. The way to use them is to send swarms of them against enemy ships that are already heavily engaged by big guns at longer range, preferably at night. But make sure the target is worth the sacrifice.

Destroyers are much more valuable ships than TBs. Husband them carefully and don't even consider sacrificing them like you might do with TBs. The role of DDs is escort and recon. They have longer range, are faster, and can withstand heavier seas. Unlike TBs they can escore a cruiser force without hampering its speed. Use them to screen your task forces, do patrol and reconaissance, and chase down merchantmen in the company of PCs. For the Russians, the loss of a DD is a minor catastrophe in the campaign game. They are a limited and precious asset, and once gone there is no replacing them. Make it a point to keep them alive.

[mike_espo]

Thanks for the reply guys!:)

I have a few issues with the TB modelling: during my campaign, The Varyag is trying to reach Port Arthur. I have so far avoided the Armored Cruiser squadron, Togo's BB group, and some light forces that have taken over the port just east of Port arthur.

One of the battle scenarios involved the Varyag and the armored cruser division of 4 ships and a Jap TB division of 7 TBs. I figured no big deal, as I can snipe the boats from long range.....NOT SO!:mad: :surprise: After the ACs disengaged, the TBs closed, quickly incapacitated the Varyag by knocking out all weapon mounts and starting a fire which inevitably, sunk the ship.:blab: :freak: ...I did not let this unrealisitc situation stand and did'nt save this part of the campaign. :halo:

I recreated the same condition later and let the computer resolve the battle: the TBs ran off and one was sunk! :surprise:

Anyway, I feel that TBs are a little uber in this game. They are deadly accurate and fast so you cant outrun.:angry:

Also, I noticed something unusual about turnover time for ships/divisions:
once a ship/division returns to port after a mission, the ship/division is automatically considered rested.

I noticed a cheat: If you move the division that just returned, into another ready or on duty division, the ships that just returned and are part of a new division is now considered ready...in other words, the division does not have to wait the day or so turnover time to return to duty...:surprise:

I should think that some turnover time is required to put the ships back into fighting trim..even if undamaged.

Anybody else notice this?

thanks

[Damascus]

Letting the computer finish the battle is sometimes a bad thing. Three Russian ACs destroyed 18 TBs and 3 Protected Cruisers in one, and then took out 2 ACs and a BB.

[Mobeer]

I noticed a cheat: If you move the division that just returned, into another ready or on duty division, the ships that just returned and are part of a new division is now considered ready...in other words, the division does not have to wait the day or so turnover time to return to duty...:surprise:

I should think that some turnover time is required to put the ships back into fighting trim..even if undamaged.

Anybody else notice this?

thanks

I think you can do this easier by giving a resting unit to sail (delay 19 hours) then cancelling the order to sail. This changes the unit to ready, and then the sailing orders can be repeated with just a 1 hour delay.

[mike_espo]

But I would think this would not be too realistic, as the ships need time to replenish, change crews and repair damage. I would think the program would prevent a player from doing that.

[Haida]

Thanks for the reply guys!:)

Anyway, I feel that TBs are a little uber in this game. They are deadly accurate and fast so you cant outrun.:angry:

Really? A ship like Varyag should be able to eat TBs and destroyers for lunch, given the poor tactics of the AI. Did you use the 'target specific ship' command? Using that command I have always been able to pick off each TB one by one as they approach.


I should think that some turnover time is required to put the ships back into fighting trim..even if undamaged.


Normally it takes 25 hours to turn a ship over, if you don't exploit the game and cheat! Also if you do not allow your ships to rest long enough they accumulate days at sea. You can see this in the ship information screen, "ship was last overhauled XX days ago". From the manual:

Each day of rest will reduce the sea days of every ship in the task force by 6 days, so a force with the maximum accumulation of 120 sea days will be reduced to zero in 20 days of rest. Accumulated sea days affect crew quality (and all the checks dependent upon it, such as damage control and weapon accuracy) and ship maximum speed. The first 30 days have no effect. Accumulations of from 30 to 120 days will have progressively greater effects on ship performance.

[Damascus]

Is there a way to see the sea days on a menu or something?

[Rhetor]

Is there a way to see the sea days on a menu or something?

The number of days at sea can be seen in ship information screen (press I in tactical game).

Unfortunately, the ship information screen cannot be accessed from campaign screen. Bullethead has asked in wish list thread to make that screen accessible at all times. Perhaps it has already been added, as I haven't had time to play the game since a few patches.

[Daedalus]

Started my Russian campaign. Port Arthur attacked by Japanese TBs. Lost two cruisers!:cry: 4 BBs damaged. Getting the hang of this both Battlespace and the Campaign Screen. It was tough at first ( see my other post) to organize my fleet into task forces....was difficult to get ships in divisions. But I finally muddled through. :laugh:

I was wondering: does anybody know if its possible to coal at sea? It was done during this war alot. Damage model seems good, but guns are easily put out of action......:surprise: I wonder if Different types of armor is modelled too?

Awesome wargame!:smoke:

On the damage of the guns you need to know that it is not just the gun its self getting damaged. The sites on the gun where very fragile. And there where a lot of other things that could be damaged that would cause the gun not to work. Some of the smaller guns where not in casments and where taken out or damaged by shell strikes on the deck. And reading about the torpedo mounts of the day they where very easy to damage by shell fragment. But they where also easy to repair.
But as to the game and how real it is, It does seem to be very real and the damage models are very good, and the shell penetration values on the armor types work very well. You can see some of the shells go through the ships that are lite armored and splash on the other side.
The fires will burn and get out of control if you do not watch them, I have had to take a ship out of battle and let them get the fires under control and do repairs and then bring it back in.
Over all the game is great and a whole lot of fun to play. That makes it worth it IMHO. If some one likes Naval Sims I do not think they can go wrong by getting this one.

[Bullethead]

Anyway, I feel that TBs are a little uber in this game. They are deadly accurate and fast so you cant outrun.:angry:

This is my pet peeve with the game. All TBs and DDs on both sides, but most especially those of the IJN, are WAY uber and bear little, if any, resemblance to reality in any of their main game-related features. I've posted numerous times on this subject since the game came out. Hopefully, this situation will be changed in the next game, and perhaps then they'll go back and fix the RJW ships.

To summarize, the RJW TBs/DDs have the following major issues:

Speed: The Russians mostly have the correct service speeds (except Lt. Burakov which is totally ridiculous), but the IJN ships all have their trials speed. Given that they ran trials with no guns, no torps, a crew consisting mostly of specially trained stokers, and only the minimum amount of hand-selected coal to make the trip, trials speeds for these ships was nowhere near their service speed. They should be no faster than the Russians. Lt Burakov is documented to be capable only a little over 20 knots in service condition.
Guns: These ships could not fire their guns unless moving at very slow speed, due to the intense spray, vibration, and rolling/pitching at high speed. They also had much lower rates of fire than at present, due to exceedingly difficult ammo supply. The guns could shoot as fast as they do in the game, but only if there was a pile of ammo right beside them, which these ships didn't have, nor even ammo hoists. Finally, given the complete absence of fire control and stabilization methods, these ships could not shoot very far with any hope of hitting anything, and had little hope at short range. They should in no way be the 3500m snipers picking off guns like they are now.
Ammo: On the IJN DDs, the ammo capacity for each gun is actually the total amount of ammo of that caliber in the entire real ship. This oversupply allows the gun-killing sniper fire to continue way longer than it should. In addition, no DDs or TBs in this war carried reload torpedoes.


But apart from that, they're fine ;).

[mike_espo]

This is my pet peeve with the game. All TBs and DDs on both sides, but most especially those of the IJN, are WAY uber and bear little, if any, resemblance to reality in any of their main game-related features. I've posted numerous times on this subject since the game came out. Hopefully, this situation will be changed in the next game, and perhaps then they'll go back and fix the RJW ships.



But apart from that, they're fine ;).

Agreed:;) You make alot of great points that I did not think of... However, I noted another inconsistancy:

I was also wondering if depression angles/tracking with large guns on smaller ships is modelled: I mean is it realistic for large calibre guns to be able to target TBs and DDs? I noted this while playing one of the stock scenarios where the russian TBs are attacking two Jap cruisers in terrible weather. As soon as the cruisers sounded GQ, the cruisers unloaded with main armaments and my boats got torn to shreads with of course, no torpedo hits. :surprise: :cry:

[Daedalus]

Agreed:;) You make alot of great points that I did not think of... However, I noted another inconsistancy:

I was also wondering if depression angles/tracking with large guns on smaller ships is modelled: I mean is it realistic for large calibre guns to be able to target TBs and DDs? I noted this while playing one of the stock scenarios where the russian TBs are attacking two Jap cruisers in terrible weather. As soon as the cruisers sounded GQ, the cruisers unloaded with main armaments and my boats got torn to shreads with of course, no torpedo hits. :surprise: :cry:


After looking up the angles on most of the ships and guns of that time they could hit targets as close as 250' with all but there biggest guns. It is almost like they built there ships along the lines of the old ship of the line. But yes they could shoot close in.