[MM/RP] ND vs. UIW - ToP for Obvious Lie - Kowloon (1312) [Complete]

[Cannonshop]

[ooc] per the statement of Fatebringer and the Roleplay, we're not coordinating. (If I'm wrong, then just don't count it...)

[blockquote]Rolled 2d6 : 1, 2, total 3[/blockquote]

[Cannonshop]

Well, my dice are per normal.
(which is why I despise doing simres for these...)

Entries into the deadbox (in red):

Kowloonese/UIW Naval Forces:

UIS Obvious Lie (Cameron) 10.5 FP 9.75

UIS Littoria *(Star Lord) 6FP
UIS Cecilia Moreau (Star Lord) 2.25FP
UIS Gordon Kurst (star Lord) 3.5fp
UIS Lisa Tauber (Tramp) 3.5
UIS Gerda Mastiff (Invader) .75
UIS Rebecca Shaw (Merchant) 1.75
UIS Commandant David Ngo (Explorer) .25

UIS Fateshaper (Newgrange) 9.25 8.5

Coast Guard 12th Sqdn
UCGS Giant Patriarchiarchial Tool (Explorerl) .25 FP
UCGS Bianh Vu Lo (merchant) .75
UCGS Venh Lanh Dao(Merchant) .75
UCGS Ton Son Nhut (Invader) .5
UCGS Truk Lanh (Invader PPC) .25

Fleet Base Kowloon 6.75

[Fatebringer]

Aegis

[blockquote]Rolled 2d6 : 1, 2, total 3[/blockquote]

York

[blockquote]Rolled 2d6 : 4, 5, total 9[/blockquote]

[Fatebringer]

And initiative for the New Dominion

[blockquote]Rolled 2d6 : 4, 2, total 6[/blockquote]

[Cannonshop]

I'm putting together  a proper force-listing in Megamek, I'll take my turn this round in MA, if there's someone to play it for the WoBbies, I can't possibly do worse than I am, right now, under SimRes, and at least in MM I'm not stuck dying on a single die-roll.

Listing put together, seems to work okay in the 35.24 variant of MM.

mind that it took a hell of a lot LESS time to assemble, than it's going to take for the guys on the other end, but I think I might actually manage to do something besides dying anonymously.

[Dave Baughman]

I have no objection to this op round being megamekked. FYI, in addition to the warships, the attackers have a number of dropships present, some of which are pocket warships that definitely should be included in MegaMek scenarios. Specifically:

Should be used in MegaMek
9 Interdictor (PWS type)
1 Interdictor (SC type)

Can be omitted from MegaMek
4 Union (upgrade)
4 Leopard-CV (upgrade)
2 Triumph (upgrade)
1 Assault Triumph

The attackers also had almost 500 fighters present, but obviously those can't be reflected in MegaMek. Before the damage from the first round of combat they had...

8 FP of light fighters
22.5 FP of medium fighters
36.0 FP of heavy fighters

If, for simplicity's sake, we assume the 36.25 FP of damage sustained by the attackers was all borne by its fighters, there are still 30.25 out there which will need to be separately rolled for simple rez if they are omitted from megamek (like what was done at Vorzel). I'm not sure how much fighter screen remains with the defenders, but presumedly they would be similarly set aside and rolled out.

Finally, the attackers has three battle taxis (two on Vulpes and one on Vision of Justice) that should be present in any megamek game.


Bearing those conditions in mind, I am OK with megamekking this out. I wouldn't mind driving the attacking force myself... what time works best for everyone?

[Cannonshop]

I have no objection to this op round being megamekked. FYI, in addition to the warships, the attackers have a number of dropships present, some of which are pocket warships that definitely should be included in MegaMek scenarios. Specifically:

Should be used in MegaMek
9 Interdictor (PWS type)
1 Interdictor (SC type)

Can be omitted from MegaMek
4 Union (upgrade)
4 Leopard-CV (upgrade)
2 Triumph (upgrade)
1 Assault Triumph

The attackers also had almost 500 fighters present, but obviously those can't be reflected in MegaMek. Before the damage from the first round of combat they had...

8 FP of light fighters
22.5 FP of medium fighters
36.0 FP of heavy fighters

If, for simplicity's sake, we assume the 36.25 FP of damage sustained by the attackers was all borne by its fighters, there are still 30.25 out there which will need to be separately rolled for simple rez if they are omitted from megamek (like what was done at Vorzel). I'm not sure how much fighter screen remains with the defenders, but presumedly they would be similarly set aside and rolled out.

Finally, the attackers has three battle taxis (two on Vulpes and one on Vision of Justice) that should be present in any megamek game.


Bearing those conditions in mind, I am OK with megamekking this out. I wouldn't mind driving the attacking force myself... what time works best for everyone?

Assuming I'm not working overtime next weekend (shouldn't be) we could maybe start the MM action Saturday?

(and, if you need it, I have a .mul file for the surviving UIW forces from last.)  
As for the over-500 fighters, are you sure they're all going to be in the same place at the same time?  Don't these guys have to re-load, re-fuel, and re-arm?  I KNOW they're MD supercyborgs and all, but reaction mass is reaction mass, ammo is ammo, and the battlespace is literally SPACE-three dimensional.  They don't need to be available all at the same time, all at the same place.  just...delay them in bursts during the game, either by packing them back on the dropships, or having them 'load' onto the map in later turns(reflecting movement from one side of the battle to another.)

It's not like the MD/Blood/WoB/Terries aren't going to win this outright-the Falcons bravely ran away because this was WAY above their ability to cope.

[Dave Baughman]

The problem with the fighters isn't deployment, its a (suspected memory leak) issue in MegaMek related to having too many units loaded into the game, even if they aren't deployed. Experience has shown that the game starts to become unstable the more units that are loaded, especially when the number gets into the high double-digits. This, in turn, results in crash disconnects which make the game unplayable.

I'm not opposed in principal to using fighters (in fact, they are an important part of the TH's naval doctrine, acting as ECM and ECCM platforms at the squadron level) so if you want to give it a try we can.

[Dave Baughman]

It also looks like squadrons are broken in this version. I will look into it to see if I can find a workaround, but that may be a killer for using fighters.

EDIT: This is apparently actually a bug with realistic space movement. If we use 'starwars' movement, they should work.

[Cannonshop]

The problem with the fighters isn't deployment, its a (suspected memory leak) issue in MegaMek related to having too many units loaded into the game, even if they aren't deployed. Experience has shown that the game starts to become unstable the more units that are loaded, especially when the number gets into the high double-digits. This, in turn, results in crash disconnects which make the game unplayable.

I'm not opposed in principal to using fighters (in fact, they are an important part of the TH's naval doctrine, acting as ECM and ECCM platforms at the squadron level) so if you want to give it a try we can.

is the memory leak issue still present in the 35.24 version?

[Dave Baughman]

The problem with the fighters isn't deployment, its a (suspected memory leak) issue in MegaMek related to having too many units loaded into the game, even if they aren't deployed. Experience has shown that the game starts to become unstable the more units that are loaded, especially when the number gets into the high double-digits. This, in turn, results in crash disconnects which make the game unplayable.

I'm not opposed in principal to using fighters (in fact, they are an important part of the TH's naval doctrine, acting as ECM and ECCM platforms at the squadron level) so if you want to give it a try we can.

is the memory leak issue still present in the 35.24 version?

There's one way to find out I suppose 

[Cannonshop]

The problem with the fighters isn't deployment, its a (suspected memory leak) issue in MegaMek related to having too many units loaded into the game, even if they aren't deployed. Experience has shown that the game starts to become unstable the more units that are loaded, especially when the number gets into the high double-digits. This, in turn, results in crash disconnects which make the game unplayable.

I'm not opposed in principal to using fighters (in fact, they are an important part of the TH's naval doctrine, acting as ECM and ECCM platforms at the squadron level) so if you want to give it a try we can.

is the memory leak issue still present in the 35.24 version?

There's one way to find out I suppose  

Indeed.
I've actually considered suggesting a workaround if it IS a problem that persists.

run the fight in heats, say, 10 round bites, and stock in replacements for the Terrie fighters each heat until all my forces are dead.  That allows for the big ships to slug it out as they will until the Wob/Terrans win.  ('cause, y'know, I just don't see the RD/Snow Raven players letting me touch their stuff.)

We save-and-add at the end of each 10 turns of Megamekking, that has, in the past, kept the damage...there...in subsequent MM games.  We could probably work through several 'bursts' that way, without having to simpres a slaughter.  Split things right, and the guys who want Simple Res can still get their one-dice-battles at the same time-just adjust the next 'pulse' accordingly.

[edited to remove douchebaggery.]

[Dave Baughman]

The two Whirlwinds and most of the attacker's fighers move to engage the remaining Dominion WarShip while the main task force burns towards Kowloon.

7.25 x2 = 14.50 + 25.00 FP of fighters for a total of 39.50 FP

[blockquote]Rolled 2d6 : 6, 3, total 9[/blockquote]

[Dave Baughman]

[blockquote]Rolled 2d6 : 2, 3, total 5[/blockquote] crit check

[Fatebringer]

ND is at 33.75 after BFR

Crit Roll

[blockquote]Rolled 2d6 : 1, 3, total 4[/blockquote]