Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

LBA problem

 
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 >> LBA problem Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
LBA problem - 9/27/2008 12:30:55 AM   
cato13

 

Posts: 453
Joined: 6/29/2005
From: scotland
Status: offline 		for the 2nd turn in a row my LBA units have failed to launch against a CV force whos planes have no such problem. ive read through the checklist on the must see threads but none of them seem to apply to my situation.

has anyone else had similar problems?
Post #: 1
RE: LBA problem - 9/27/2008 12:34:07 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		Hard to develop any ideas without further information. How about showing us screenshots of the base and the LBA units that aren't launching? 

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to cato13)
Post #: 2
RE: LBA problem - 9/27/2008 12:37:58 AM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		You probably need more escorts.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 3
RE: LBA problem - 9/27/2008 12:44:21 AM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1941
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline 		When I play as allies, I have this problem. It is only solved, at least in my games, with lots and lots of escorts. And the escorts seem to need to be above 60 in exp and they have to have the legs to reach the CV's. Aggressive leaders help too. B-17's flying at 30000 feet will sometimes take off on their own. They wont hit anything but they will show the flag of freedom. Frankly, when I play as Japan, I don't worry about LBA against strong CV TF's until P-38's show up in force.

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to cato13)
Post #: 4
RE: LBA problem - 9/27/2008 12:45:13 AM   
cato13

 

Posts: 453
Joined: 6/29/2005
From: scotland
Status: offline 		ok i have 4 groups of hudsons based at a level 5 airbase.  supply exceeds requirments 10 times over. morale is high.

do all bomber attacks need a set amount of escort as i just cant see what else it could be

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 5
RE: LBA problem - 9/27/2008 1:03:45 AM   
cato13

 

Posts: 453
Joined: 6/29/2005
From: scotland
Status: offline 		it just seemd crazy that bombers wont take of without escorts.  in ww2 in the air war over europe b17's flew for many months without escort.

if i want bombers to fly without escort then thats my call as commander, the AI shouldnt have any sway on this in my opinion.  what the point of havin LBA when they wont sortie?

(in reply to cato13)
Post #: 6
RE: LBA problem - 9/27/2008 1:06:02 AM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		Normally, you need at least 1 escort for every 3 CAP.

Granted, you don't actually know how much CAP there is, but stack a couple fighter squadrons (with sufficient range), set as escorts, and you'll probably launch.

Note that DBs, TBs usually can launch without escorts against CAP.  Altho tends to be unhealthy for them.

4e bombers are also able to launch without escorts.  I don't think they ignore the need for escorts, but they've got a fair shot of going by themselves.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to cato13)
Post #: 7
RE: LBA problem - 9/27/2008 4:46:55 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: khyberbill

When I play as allies, I have this problem. It is only solved, at least in my games, with lots and lots of escorts. And the escorts seem to need to be above 60 in exp and they have to have the legs to reach the CV's. Aggressive leaders help too. B-17's flying at 30000 feet will sometimes take off on their own. They wont hit anything but they will show the flag of freedom. Frankly, when I play as Japan, I don't worry about LBA against strong CV TF's until P-38's show up in force.


I used to not worry about LBA either till the AI launched a strike with a total of 16 A/C from Kendari, the 4 B-17s got through and 1 laid a 500 lbs egg on Shoho. This was through a cap of over 100 Zeros and Claudes. It was the 1 in a million strike no doubt, but strange things can happen.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to khyberbill)
Post #: 8
RE: LBA problem - 9/27/2008 2:17:54 PM   
Yamato hugger

 

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline 		Could also be you have the naval search set to 100%. If they were on naval search before you changed them to naval attack and didnt change the search percentage, setting it to naval attack does not change this value.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 9
RE: LBA problem - 9/29/2008 12:13:25 PM   
cato13

 

Posts: 453
Joined: 6/29/2005
From: scotland
Status: offline 		ok im gettin reall p****d of with these LBA noy flyin.  im a pbem game and ive had surface TF's sittin just a few hexes from noumea for 3 turns (2 days turns) and my planes just wont fly.  it cant be cos if escort cos i set a squadron of 20 p-40's to fly 100% escort and still the bombers wont fly.

what would be great would be for the game to tell me why they aint flyin!  is there anyone who can try n clear this up for me?

how do i take a screenshot in game so i can post it?

(in reply to Yamato hugger)
Post #: 10
RE: LBA problem - 9/29/2008 1:30:27 PM   
saj42


Posts: 1125
Joined: 4/19/2005
From: Somerset, England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tonedog

ok im gettin reall p****d of with these LBA noy flyin.  im a pbem game and ive had surface TF's sittin just a few hexes from noumea for 3 turns (2 days turns) and my planes just wont fly.  it cant be cos if escort cos i set a squadron of 20 p-40's to fly 100% escort and still the bombers wont fly.

what would be great would be for the game to tell me why they aint flyin!  is there anyone who can try n clear this up for me?

how do i take a screenshot in game so i can post it?


You say you have set 100% escort - is that what shows on the unit screen - the figures 100%???

If you have a squadron set to escort and a figure of say 60% showing this means 60% are flying CAP over the base and 40% are available for escorting strikes out to the range they are set too. For the fighters to escort set sufficient range to reach the target TF and CAP percentage low or zero.

p.s. sorry if you already know this but the wording in your post rang alarm bells .....

(in reply to cato13)
Post #: 11
RE: LBA problem - 9/29/2008 1:51:15 PM   
cato13

 

Posts: 453
Joined: 6/29/2005
From: scotland
Status: offline 		sorry if i misworded it but yeah, i have the fighters set to escort and the cap level set at 0%.

can someone confirm if the problem is indeed that i dont have enough fighters flyin escort? 
if this rule is the cos then its one of the dumbest rules ive ever heard of in wargame.

there are numerous examples of bombers flyin offensive missions is ww2, the battle of britain and the strategic bombing campaign of germany sping to mind!  

it should be be my choice as CIC when bombers fly and dont fly not some silly rule about escorts.

(in reply to saj42)
Post #: 12
RE: LBA problem - 9/29/2008 3:39:01 PM   
Yamato hugger

 

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline 		Whats the range to target and the range of your fighters?

How many fighters are at the base?

What is the damage level of the base?

What is the weather in the area?

Without VERY detailed info, some questions just cant be answered.

(in reply to cato13)
Post #: 13
RE: LBA problem - 9/29/2008 4:26:56 PM   
cato13

 

Posts: 453
Joined: 6/29/2005
From: scotland
Status: offline 		the base is undamaged and my opponent has been lauching air strikes from his carriers for the last 3 turns now. 
on the last turn a TF was spotted 3 hexes away and the bombers still refused to launch.  the TF is still there now but why should it worry eh,  my bombers have went on strike!!

ive looked at all the rules regarding why they wont fly and the only one which is could be looks to be the dumb lack of escort rule.

in a game thats all about capturing/holding air bases im beginnin to wonder whats the point.  if the reason why the bombers wont fly is because the escorts wont fly then that sucks bigtime.



(in reply to Yamato hugger)
Post #: 14
RE: LBA problem - 9/29/2008 6:20:50 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
Aggressive leaders help. Passive leaders hurt. Is your morale high or low? They have to pass several morale checks in order to fly.



_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to cato13)
Post #: 15
RE: LBA problem - 9/29/2008 10:55:18 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		Do you have an air HQ? how is the morale?

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 16
RE: LBA problem - 9/29/2008 11:50:26 PM   
cato13

 

Posts: 453
Joined: 6/29/2005
From: scotland
Status: offline 		ok all units have morale of 99 and no fatigue.  there is an air hq and a regular hq at the base.  the commanders for the bomber units vary from passive to aggressive but i cant change any cos for some reason it says my political points are -73?

so r u guys sayin that its not the dumb escort rule thats the problem but something else?  what the official word on this, is there someone i can send the save game file to?

ive been enjoyin my pbem game up till now, there have been highs and lows.  i can accept losin carriers and other battles but im findin this hard to take to be honest.

the thing thats killin it for me is what the point in capturing/holding air bases only to have the bombers refuse to fly for several turns for some unknown reason when my opponent can fly bombers outa rabaul and down to guadalcanal without an escort in sight?

if theres logic reason to this problem im failin to see it.

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 17
RE: LBA problem - 9/30/2008 12:55:29 AM   
Oldguard1970

 

Posts: 578
Joined: 7/19/2006
From: Hiawassee, GA
Status: offline 		Hi Tonedog,

All of us have had planned strikes that do not fly.  The normal causes have all been provided in this thread. (Weather, morale, escorts, leadership, range, settings, base condition, sightings, etc.)  Based on your replies, I would have expected your boys to take off. 

I can think of one area that merits additional attention.  As Feinder said, most LBA will not attack if the CAP is greater than three times the number of escorts.  You assigned 20 P40's to escort. If all of them got into the air, then a 60+ CAP would be enough to cause the strike to abort.  (I think you can tell if the bombers at least got airborne by checking to see if any mission numbers increased among the pilots in your bomber squadrons.)

_____________________________

"Rangers Lead the Way!"

(in reply to cato13)
Post #: 18
RE: LBA problem - 9/30/2008 2:26:31 AM   
pompack


Posts: 2582
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline 		In one of my games I have over 70 4E bombers within range of a base with multiple TFs detected in the hex and adjacent hexes. All have good leaders, they have high experience and they have not attacked for the last 12 turns (at least) because there are over 40 Zeros there and the base is outside the range of my escorts. Now I can get them to attack the base (at least in good weather) and that is the way I know about all those Zeros. Why they attack the base and not the TFs is the mystery. In another part of the map I have 7 4E bombers with pretty much the same stats and situations; this group consistently ignores TFs in the open sea and attacks TFs either in or adjacent to a base with at least 10 Zeros. The only way I can stop their suicidal attacks is to reduce the range since they will attack about one turn in three otherwise. Go figure

(in reply to Oldguard1970)
Post #: 19
RE: LBA problem - 9/30/2008 3:10:00 AM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
Bottom line: it isn't a science.

What kind of bombers are these BTW?


_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 20
RE: LBA problem - 9/30/2008 3:55:27 AM   
pompack


Posts: 2582
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Bottom line: it isn't a science.

What kind of bombers are these BTW?



B17C, B17E and LB30

Also on the 13th turn (just completed) they did attack, losing two B17

As I say, go figure

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 21
RE: LBA problem - 9/30/2008 8:32:10 AM   
cato13

 

Posts: 453
Joined: 6/29/2005
From: scotland
Status: offline 		my bombers are A-20 hudsons.   can someone please explain why such a stupid rule is in a otherwise realistic game such as witp? 

1 - for a start, if bombers are tied to the range of fighters, an easy exploit is for players to leave TF's just outside the range of fighters (4 hexes) cos they know that bombers wont launch! ridiculous.

2 - if this escort rule stands, then how come jap torpedo bombers can routinely sortie from rabual down to guadalcanal without any escorts?

in a game thats all about control this rule dont make any sense.

so how am i supposed to resolve my noumea situation, have more fighters?  oh wait, my fighters range is only 3 hexes so i screwed!  and why are torpedo and dive bombers exempt from this rule?

has anyone else flipped their lid about this daft escort rule?  cos for me its on the verge of spoiling a very good pbem game.

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 22
RE: LBA problem - 9/30/2008 4:30:37 PM   
pompack


Posts: 2582
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tonedog

my bombers are A-20 hudsons.   can someone please explain why such a stupid rule is in a otherwise realistic game such as witp? 

1 - for a start, if bombers are tied to the range of fighters, an easy exploit is for players to leave TF's just outside the range of fighters (4 hexes) cos they know that bombers wont launch! ridiculous.

2 - if this escort rule stands, then how come jap torpedo bombers can routinely sortie from rabual down to guadalcanal without any escorts?

in a game thats all about control this rule dont make any sense.

so how am i supposed to resolve my noumea situation, have more fighters?  oh wait, my fighters range is only 3 hexes so i screwed!  and why are torpedo and dive bombers exempt from this rule?

has anyone else flipped their lid about this daft escort rule?  cos for me its on the verge of spoiling a very good pbem game.



Well Tonedog, as I implied in my earlier post, I am actually upset that it does not enforce this rule more stringently and uniformly. I don't want my bombers making suicidal attacks against well defended TFs, I want them to attack undefended convoys instead of wasting my few and feeble air groups on hopeless attacks. Also, as I noted, when I ask it to attack a named base it usually will even if there is a large CAP thus providing your Schweinfurt type attacks when desired.

Bottom line: Some people hate the rule, some love it, some don't care. Typical WitP

< Message edited by pompack -- 9/30/2008 4:31:04 PM >

(in reply to cato13)
Post #: 23
RE: LBA problem - 9/30/2008 6:59:44 PM   
cato13

 

Posts: 453
Joined: 6/29/2005
From: scotland
Status: offline 		so basically my bombers are tied to the range of my fighters?  and why are jap torpedo bombers and other such planes not included in this rule then?

does anything else factor into it?  does experience count? 

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 24
RE: LBA problem - 9/30/2008 8:23:33 PM   
morganbj


Posts: 3634
Joined: 8/12/2007
From: Mosquito Bite, Texas
Status: offline 		Check and see if a Betty Grable movie is the current rotation at the airbase.  Those flyboys never missed an opportunity to see those legs.

(in reply to cato13)
Post #: 25
RE: LBA problem - 9/30/2008 11:12:11 PM   
cato13

 

Posts: 453
Joined: 6/29/2005
From: scotland
Status: offline 		i just looked at a combat report from earlier on in the game where my opponent launched 12 betty's unescorted from rabaul against my carrier TF near guadalcanal which had over 70 planes on CAP. 

yet my planes wont fly 4 hexes under similar circumstances.  i think consistency is the key word here.  im assumin from the above example some planes are exempt from this escort rule.   even though ive had witp since release ive only really got into it over the last few months so id really appreciate other peoples knowledge on this.

1 - are bombers tied to the range of fighters?

2 - if bombers need to be escorted, how r u supposed to know how many fighters are required if u dont know how strong the CAP is?

3 - what bombers are exempt from this rule?

4 - the whole point of capturing/holding air bases was to dominate the the surrounding area (100's of miles).  if allied bombers in witp can only fly against targets with CAP from 3 hexes then whats the point in having airbases?

thanks in advance.


(in reply to morganbj)
Post #: 26
RE: LBA problem - 9/30/2008 11:48:22 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
quote:


in a game thats all about control this rule dont make any sense.


I discovered your problem. You have a gross misconception of what this game is about. It is not about control in any way, shape or form. It is about herding cats.



Let me add also, since I just saw your most recent: naval attack is NOT the primary mission of the A-20. Indeed, it is really not very good at it. Betties, on the other hand, are specifically designed for the mission.



< Message edited by Mynok -- 9/30/2008 11:49:54 PM >

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to cato13)
Post #: 27
RE: LBA problem - 10/1/2008 12:02:45 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		The problem with LBA not launching to attack a TF is primarily a problem for the Allied Player. IRL and in the game the Japanese seem to routinely launch their LBA regardless of the strength of the CAP.

IMHO it results from a lack of historical data or misunderstanding of such historical data as does exist. IRL the KB did not place itself within range of substantial Allied LBA much.
1) The confusion in the American command following the PH strike resulted no return strikes because the Americans concentrated their searches in the wrong places so they never found KB. Thus any return strikes (however pathetic they might have been) never happened.
2) KB's next activity was near Rabaul. No major Allied air presence was to be found there and thus KB suppressed whatever was there quite handily and sailed on its merry way.
3) In the DEI in late February 42 the KB doesn't seem to have drawn any attacks but neither did it place itself in a position to intervene with the ABDAFLOT (offensive) sorties that resulted in the battles of Bandoeng Strait or the Battle of the Java Sea. KB did participate in the mop up of Allied shipping South of Java after the Battle of the Java Sea but it seems neither to have effected ABDA Commands naval efforts nor launched substantial strikes on ABDA shore facilities (actually I may just be unaware of any such KB efforts but KBs participation in the campaign seems almost superfluous).
4) When KB next appeared in the Indian Ocean it did draw a counterstrike by Allied LBA (a quite pathetic counterstrike of just 9 Blenheims but an unescorted counterstrike nonetheless in which most of the bombers were shot down). Perhaps the failure of that strike resulted in the British deciding to hold back further strikes but I have not found any information about that.
5) Certainly KB's next foray into the range of Allied LBA at Midway resulted in it drawing quite a few strikes onto itself from the island; all unescorted. At the same time American LBA was attacking the Ryujo and Junyo which were supporting the Aleutians Operation (again without any escort)
6) After Midway Japanese carriers pretty much avoided the effective radius of Allied LBA entirely.

All in all not much historical evidence to support what seems to be a hard-coded Allied "reluctance" to engage the KB with LBA.

(in reply to cato13)
Post #: 28
RE: LBA problem - 10/1/2008 12:32:08 AM   
pompack


Posts: 2582
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tonedog

so basically my bombers are tied to the range of my fighters?  and why are jap torpedo bombers and other such planes not included in this rule then?

does anything else factor into it?  does experience count? 



yep, and when you get adequate attack bombers (B25) and good escort fighters (P38), no Japanese ship can live within B25 range

As to why Japanese torpedo planes somethimes attack without escort and get slaughtered, well it's the same problem my B17 have when they go out without escort and attack targets protected by CAP, gets very ugly. I really wish they wouldn't do that

(in reply to cato13)
Post #: 29
RE: LBA problem - 10/1/2008 3:08:13 AM   
Halsey

 

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack


quote:

ORIGINAL: tonedog

so basically my bombers are tied to the range of my fighters?  and why are jap torpedo bombers and other such planes not included in this rule then?

does anything else factor into it?  does experience count? 



yep, and when you get adequate attack bombers (B25) and good escort fighters (P38), no Japanese ship can live within B25 range

As to why Japanese torpedo planes somethimes attack without escort and get slaughtered, well it's the same problem my B17 have when they go out without escort and attack targets protected by CAP, gets very ugly. I really wish they wouldn't do that


It should be SOP for players for both sides to do this.
At least until you have air supremacy over a given area.
Fighter range sets the base range for airstrikes.

Those ignoring that do so at their own peril.


_____________________________


(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> LBA problem Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
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

3.000