Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war

 
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] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/11/2006 1:13:03 PM   
Knaust

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 3/5/2001
From: Rivoli ITALY
Status: offline 		I have never heard of such a devastating usage of LRBs in early stage of war
Am I wrong?
Moreover, if the Jap player plans retaliation attacks, the Allied player, planning second, has a look on the planes based in Jap airfields and starts a devastating airfield attack.
This seems highly frustrating for Jap player, above all if all this is ahistorical
Post #: 1
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/11/2006 1:56:26 PM   
XENXEN


Posts: 53
Joined: 12/1/2004
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		A house rule saying that 2E bomber can't be upgradet to 4E bomber can help alot

(in reply to Knaust)
Post #: 2
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/11/2006 2:27:51 PM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Knaust

I have never heard of such a devastating usage of LRBs in early stage of war
Am I wrong?
Moreover, if the Jap player plans retaliation attacks, the Allied player, planning second, has a look on the planes based in Jap airfields and starts a devastating airfield attack.
This seems highly frustrating for Jap player, above all if all this is ahistorical


knowledge which airfield was reinforced during my planning turn was used against me the same turn once or twice - i hate it too

_____________________________


(in reply to Knaust)
Post #: 3
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/11/2006 2:40:56 PM   
Arkady


Posts: 1262
Joined: 5/31/2002
From: 27th Penal Battalion
Status: offline 		if you know how your opponent react on massive reinforcement of front line airfield you can use it against him.
Put there few transport units (mouse hover intelligence report over enemy base mixes bombers and auxiliary planes) to absorb those damage from planes that get through
And defend the base with 100+ crack forces (with Zero planes if bonus still active)...you will not encounter B-17 for few weeks or months

_____________________________


(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 4
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/11/2006 3:37:13 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Knaust

I have never heard of such a devastating usage of LRBs in early stage of war
Am I wrong?
Moreover, if the Jap player plans retaliation attacks, the Allied player, planning second, has a look on the planes based in Jap airfields and starts a devastating airfield attack.
This seems highly frustrating for Jap player, above all if all this is ahistorical



How about this rule: no ahistorical Allied air bombardments in return for no ahistorical Japanese naval bombardments (i.e. - you get ONE bombardment of an Allied base per year if no substantial Japanese ground forces are present. This would probably give you 4x as many as actually occurred in the war (only one AFAIK).)

(in reply to Knaust)
Post #: 5
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/11/2006 5:03:29 PM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Arkady

if you know how your opponent react on massive reinforcement of front line airfield you can use it against him.
Put there few transport units (mouse hover intelligence report over enemy base mixes bombers and auxiliary planes) to absorb those damage from planes that get through
And defend the base with 100+ crack forces (with Zero planes if bonus still active)...you will not encounter B-17 for few weeks or months



not valid if it is within range of 100+ allied fighters too

_____________________________


(in reply to Arkady)
Post #: 6
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/11/2006 5:10:32 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso


quote:

ORIGINAL: Knaust

I have never heard of such a devastating usage of LRBs in early stage of war
Am I wrong?
Moreover, if the Jap player plans retaliation attacks, the Allied player, planning second, has a look on the planes based in Jap airfields and starts a devastating airfield attack.
This seems highly frustrating for Jap player, above all if all this is ahistorical



How about this rule: no ahistorical Allied air bombardments in return for no ahistorical Japanese naval bombardments (i.e. - you get ONE bombardment of an Allied base per year if no substantial Japanese ground forces are present. This would probably give you 4x as many as actually occurred in the war (only one AFAIK).)


I agree - it's just one of several things in the game that are ahistorical...but it kind of balances the BS for the allied player.
I don't care for the way it is - but unless the Japanese player is willing to sit down and negotiate restrictions - all's fair in war.

B

_____________________________

Big B's Shipyard

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 7
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/11/2006 6:38:06 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		What about the view that the various historical inaccuracies tend to cancel out?

The Japanese get very powerful battleline bombardments while the Allies get four-engined bombers. Both are instruments which must be massed in order to achieve any operationally or strategically decisive effect and, once massed, they are vulnerable. Certainly their very concentration gives them excellent defensive strength but it also allows counter-concentrations.

It is true that the four-engined bombers are more renewable than the japanese battleline but this very renewability tends to cause Allied players to use them for unimportant attritional missions in several missions across the front instead of as an operationally decisive hammer at a strategically vital point at a crucial point in time. Really I think it will all balance out. Of course one of the ways this balances out is that the battleline can stage from anywhere ( including mid-ocean... with a suitable replenishment fleet and CV cover) while the bombers can only stage from certain, predictable airfields.

If you feel four-engined bombers are going to be operationally and strategically decisive weapons systems then your operations and overall strategy should be aimed at eliminating this potential. I believe that with an appropriate focus and committment of resources this can be done, even into 1943.

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 8
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/11/2006 7:16:21 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline 		Right!!

Either except the game as it is (a game, not terribly historically accurate (imo)) - or NEGOTIATE a set of rules you can live with (i.e. - you want historical accuracy, negotiate for it, not demand it).


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 9
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/11/2006 7:30:59 PM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		Or play either the CHS or RHS with more realistic numbers for the aircraft.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 10
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/11/2006 9:25:16 PM   
ckk

 

Posts: 1268
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: Pensacola Beach FL
Status: offline 		or Nik's Mod

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 11
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/11/2006 9:33:07 PM   
mjk428

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline 		After WWII the world finally realized the value of the BB. Thats' why we see so many battleships today and air power was phased out.

_____________________________


(in reply to ckk)
Post #: 12
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/12/2006 2:18:23 AM   
Monter_Trismegistos

 

Posts: 1359
Joined: 2/1/2005
From: Gdansk
Status: offline 		Well I think that actually USA in ninetys had more BBs than 4 non-jet engine bombers...

_____________________________

Nec Temere Nec Timide
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą

(in reply to mjk428)
Post #: 13
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/12/2006 4:36:15 PM   
Bearcat2

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 2/14/2004
Status: offline 		The plan for B-17's in the Phillipines upon declaration of war was to hit the Japanese airfields on Formosa at daylight. This was to hit the Japanese planes as they were getting ready for takeoff. Like every thing else on the first day in the Phillipines, they screwed it up. They had some effective measures for a Japanese attack, but didn't execute them, instead the Japanese, basically, destroyed the American air force as a cohesive force on day 1.

(in reply to Monter_Trismegistos)
Post #: 14
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/12/2006 8:38:28 PM   
MkXIV


Posts: 343
Joined: 6/4/2005
From: North Georgia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

Well I think that actually USA in ninetys had more BBs than 4 non-jet engine bombers...


Or 4 engine jet bombers for that matter

_____________________________

F4U Corsair; When you Absolutely, Positively need to kill every freaking Zero in a 40 mile hex....

(in reply to Monter_Trismegistos)
Post #: 15
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/12/2006 11:05:04 PM   
Wolfie1

 

Posts: 360
Joined: 12/22/2004
From: Blackpool, England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MkXIV


quote:

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

Well I think that actually USA in ninetys had more BBs than 4 non-jet engine bombers...


Or 4 engine jet bombers for that matter


Disagree - the B1 Lancer has 4 jet engines, and don't forget the B-52 (ok 8 I know)

_____________________________




Teamwork is essential - it gives the enemy someone else to shoot at.....

(in reply to MkXIV)
Post #: 16
RE: Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war - 5/12/2006 11:11:35 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Or the B-2...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Wolfie1)
Post #: 17
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Ahistorical usage of B17s in early war 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

2.500