Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Land-based dive bombers?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Land-based dive bombers? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Land-based dive bombers? - 4/27/2003 10:43:11 PM   
Grotius


Posts: 5798
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline 		Hi all,

Are dive- and torpedo-bombers (e.g., Dauntlesses, Devastators, Avengers, Vals, Kates) less likely to fly "Naval Attack" missions if they are based on land (say, a size 8 or higher airfield with adequate air support and supply) than on a CV? That seems to be my experience, in several of my PBEM games and in tests against the AI. I would think the same squadron would be *more* likely to attack if based on land, since it knows its home airfield won't sink. But the opposite seems true. Is this the way the game is supposed to work? Is the idea that CV-based aircraft are always better "prepped" for combat? Or is it a bug?
Post #: 1
- 4/27/2003 11:00:04 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline 		I noticed this as well, for both sides.

Maybe the "attacks from coastal hexes are halved" rule is (wrongly) applied to CV squadrons even when they fly from land bases?

Anyway, I doubt this, since my problem is them not flying at all, not with half strength.

But when they do fly, they seem to fly with full strength, so I don't believe this is the reason.

O.

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 2
- 4/28/2003 12:19:34 AM   
Nasrullah

 

Posts: 44
Joined: 2/14/2003
From: Annapolis, Md, USA
Status: offline 		Land-based TBs and DBs do not have their usual accompaniment of float-plane searchers. The cause of the seeming shyness may be lack of spotting.

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 3
- 4/28/2003 12:22:11 AM   
Snigbert

 

Posts: 2956
Joined: 1/27/2002
From: Worcester, MA. USA
Status: offline 		Have you tried playing with the naval search percentage on the naval attack mode, or launching from bases with float search planes set on naval search missions?

_____________________________

"Money doesnt talk, it swears. Obscenities, who really cares?" -Bob Dylan

"Habit is the balast that chains a dog to it's vomit." -Samuel Becket

"He has weapons of mass destruction- the world's deadliest weapons- which pose a direct threat to the

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 4
- 4/28/2003 12:39:45 AM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nasrullah
[B]Land-based TBs and DBs do not have their usual accompaniment of float-plane searchers. The cause of the seeming shyness may be lack of spotting. [/B][/QUOTE]

Not so.

As IJN I always base CV airwings on landbases with abundance od Emilys, Jakes, Mavises etc.) (Read - I base them at Lunga :o)

As USN I always leave scouting squadrons (VS) at 10-20% search, regardless be they on CV or on land, and they do work.

Here's what happened to me in one of the last turns as USN. I unloaded 3 fresh full sqdns of SBDs in Brisbane, as I noticed IJN CV group is nearby, and didn't want to risk carriers in open fight. It was clear day, and one of the scouting SBDs spotted CVs 5-6 hexes from Brisbane (B. is level 9 airbase). Both Birsbane and CV hex were clear to fly, escorts were available, yet no SBDs attacked that turn!

O.

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 5
- 4/28/2003 12:43:03 AM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oleg Mastruko
[B]Not so.

As USN I always leave scouting squadrons (VS) at 10-20% search, regardless be they on CV or on land, and they do work.
O. [/B][/QUOTE]

Just to make myself clear - I meant they work as scout-spoters (those 20%), but they are still reluctant to attack, even when the target is spotted by their own squadron (20% ordered to scout).

O.

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 6
- 4/28/2003 2:07:22 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline 		Presence and allocation of escort fighters figure in, as well. Unescorted LBA are most reticent about attacking air combat TFs.

Also, the usual LBA effects of supply, support, and HQs have an effect that is not present with CV-based attack groups.

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 7
- 4/29/2003 5:28:49 AM   
Grotius


Posts: 5798
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline 		Well, I'm glad I'm not the only one who's noticed a greater reluctance on the part of land-based torpedo- and dive-bombers to fly -- for both sides. In my various games, I've tried to address this as best I can with abundant air support, supply, escorts, search assets, and where possible Air HQs. Even with all that in place, the land-based crowd seems a bit less inclined to fly than equivalent squadrons (in terms of morale, fatigue, experience) based on aircraft carriers. Still seems a bit odd to me.

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 8
- 4/29/2003 10:42:28 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 4378
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oleg Mastruko
[B]Not so.

As IJN I always base CV airwings on landbases with abundance od Emilys, Jakes, Mavises etc.) (Read - I base them at Lunga :o)

As USN I always leave scouting squadrons (VS) at 10-20% search, regardless be they on CV or on land, and they do work.

Here's what happened to me in one of the last turns as USN. I unloaded 3 fresh full sqdns of SBDs in Brisbane, as I noticed IJN CV group is nearby, and didn't want to risk carriers in open fight. It was clear day, and one of the scouting SBDs spotted CVs 5-6 hexes from Brisbane (B. is level 9 airbase). Both Birsbane and CV hex were clear to fly, escorts were available, yet no SBDs attacked that turn!

O. [/B][/QUOTE]

hehe yes well now to be fair my cv airgroups did not attack that turn either and for what reason i have know idea either hehe
but we both got what we wanted on the next turn though. but you seemed to have gotten the better of me in stopping my bombardment force.

_____________________________


(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 9
- 4/29/2003 11:31:10 AM   
Philwd

 

Posts: 285
Joined: 3/19/2002
From: Arizona
Status: offline 		Grotius,
In my game with Attack Condor he moved 2 carriers worth of SBDs and F4Fs into GG; at that time a lvl 2 base. I can unfortunately say the SBDs flew every possible mission they could have for 3 days.:( He didn't need to have any on naval search as his PBYs found everything he could ask for.
Maybe I should cancel all my plans and let him build GG up. Maybe then the SBDs won't attack:D .

Quark

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 10
- 4/30/2003 5:56:03 AM   
Grotius


Posts: 5798
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline 		LoL, Quark! I've been following your game with interest, since you and I have a common enemy.

FWIW, Condor also built Gili to level 2 in my game against him, but he only had time to fly one or two air strikes from it before I took the base. Still, that's one or two more air strikes than my land-based Avengers and Dauntlesses are conducting from places like Townsville, Cooktown and Cairns in my game against SoulBlazer. LoL. Maybe you're right: the secret is to fly from a level 2 base!

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 11
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Land-based dive bombers? Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

6.078