Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast naval bombardments !

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast naval bombardments !

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast naval bombardments !

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast nav... - 4/27/2010 12:30:42 PM

Swenslim

Posts: 437
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Odessa, Ukraine
Status: offline

In my pbem game my allied opponent regulary uses fast naval bombardment TF's on fast speed to trash my airbases and destroy dozens of aircraft.

Naval search doesnt helps much because his task force makes 10-12 hexes sprint at night and returns back, not a single time I had spotted his TF by my air scouts.

Mines dont help too, for example I have more than 300 in Morsby, but after 5 raids only 1 DD sunk.

I will hear any suggestions how to punish this allied arrogance :)

Post #: 1

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/27/2010 12:40:51 PM

d0mbo

Posts: 592
Joined: 8/21/2009
From: Holland
Status: offline

bomb them back. don't forget to scout the base-to-pummel first :)

(in reply to Swenslim)

Post #: 2

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/27/2010 12:42:31 PM

USSAmerica

Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Graham, NC, USA
Status: offline

Well, if you were the Allied player I would recommend a PT group at the base. Since the Japanese get very few of them, I recommend increasing your Naval Search coverage in the direction the enemy TF is coming from. The Japanese search and Naval Attack aircraft have plenty of range to still spot and nail a Bombardment TF after it has sprinted away from the target at max speed.

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to Swenslim)

Post #: 3

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/27/2010 12:49:23 PM

Atilla60

Posts: 69
Joined: 9/20/2006
From: Jutland, Denmark
Status: offline

I was thinking PT boats too. Base them in the harbor and put them on max reaction range.

(in reply to USSAmerica)

Post #: 4

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/27/2010 6:47:58 PM

wyrmmy

Posts: 214
Joined: 7/19/2004
Status: offline

How about a SCTF to disrupt the bombardments?

(In interests of full disclosure I am the opponent.)

(in reply to Atilla60)

Post #: 5

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/27/2010 7:14:38 PM

jimh009

Posts: 368
Joined: 5/15/2005
Status: offline

I've found the best way to protect a base from bombardment TF's is to have a surface combat force "on patrol" a few hexes away - set to react.

For example, if you're the Allied player and are tiring of the bombardment by Japanese TF's on Lunga, the Allied player sets up a surface TF to patrol and "remain on station" a few hexes away (usually a few hexes to the South of Lunga). Set the react range to 6 and make sure you have an aggressive commander. In my games, the SCTF will react to the Japanese bombardment TF's around 50%+ of the time. What's nice is that the reacting SCTF will often achieve surprise.

PT boats can work alright, and on occasion can disrupt the bombardment - but they usually don't stop it if CA's or BB's are involved and often accomplish nothing but die.

(in reply to wyrmmy)

Post #: 6

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/27/2010 7:31:51 PM

Swenslim

Posts: 437
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Odessa, Ukraine
Status: offline

For my respected opponent Wyrmm specially :)

I am little cautious like old Nagumo, dont want to stuck on few CV's lurking behind bombardment bait TF :)

I am slowly building my defence perimetr, time for japan invasions is over, now it is time for allied side to attack and trust me, this gona be bloody hell :)

(in reply to wyrmmy)

Post #: 7

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/27/2010 7:34:32 PM

Swenslim

Posts: 437
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Odessa, Ukraine
Status: offline

I have few TF on patrol, nothing happens, they dont react.

(in reply to jimh009)

Post #: 8

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/27/2010 9:24:45 PM

Nomad

Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: offline

The maximum his TFs should move is 9 hexes to and back. You need to have Naval Search and Naval Attack air units to cover that area. Subs could help also.

_____________________________

(in reply to Swenslim)

Post #: 9

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/27/2010 10:56:55 PM

aprezto

Posts: 824
Joined: 1/29/2009
Status: offline

My approach is thus:

1. Search for patterns: does he come every 4 days, once every fortnight, from the west, similar TF make-up etc.

2. Is the bombardment part of an invasion armada or one offs (we already know it's the second in this case - but just doing the 'thinking').

3. Now, either follow jimh009's advice, with a SCTF on react, if you don't want to over-commit, but if you really want to give him a bloody nose try this:

Look for the pattern, try to find the time you'll get your highest likelihood of his arriving.
* Have a SCTF on react
* Have another SCTF, give it move orders to the base-in-danger, but with retire-allowed orders. This TF must be within cruise distance of your endangered base. This TF should move in at night and retire again by the morning (this can be a little difficult to keep secret, especially if they get low on fuel - leaving them at your base by sun-up, so maybe include a mid-ocean refueling option). This TF should be able to rinse and repeat as long as it has fuel.
* Put dedicated anti-naval planes at your base. These should be safe from damage as a naval engagement should cancel the enemy bombardment mission.
* And for the coup de grace, put a carrier force in range of his likely retreat track. Obviously this is a dangerous option and wont fit all situations.

If the moons are in alignment for you this should happen:

Your SCTF that moves in and out of the base will find the enemy bombardment TF;
The SCTF set to react, will react, and also meet the bombardment TF;
The enemy bombardment TF converts to a SCTF and does not bombard;
You damage enemy ships, and most importantly, use up their op points;
By sun up, damaged ships and ships that have used up op points that they cannot use for movement, are left within range of your fully operational battlestation (ahem - I mean your base) and it's anti-naval ACs, and hopefully you can finish off some of the cripples.
If nothing else he'll think twice about doing it, and it may lead to an escalation of commitment that he really doesn't want to make.

_____________________________

Image courtesy of Divepac

(in reply to Nomad)

Post #: 10

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/27/2010 11:32:01 PM

wyrmmy

Posts: 214
Joined: 7/19/2004
Status: offline

I actually hope he does that, it would put at least some of his ships within range of allied air power. It's July '42 in our game, and Sven's gone turtle. ;)

(in reply to aprezto)

Post #: 11

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/28/2010 1:25:28 AM

jeffs

Posts: 644
Joined: 2/19/2004
From: Tokyo
Status: offline

Why don`t you have bases behind PM that have the bulk of the planes? PM is very vulnerable (if Japan) to attack....The bases on the other side of NG are not (except by 4e bombers).
Disperse and be safer...PM is an allied attack magnet.

_____________________________

To quote from Evans/Peattie`s {Kaigun}
"Mistakes in operations and tactics can be corrected, but
political and strategic mistakes live forever". The authors were refering to Japan but the same could be said of the US misadventure in Iraq

(in reply to wyrmmy)

Post #: 12

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/28/2010 6:27:56 AM

Swenslim

Posts: 437
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Odessa, Ukraine
Status: offline

Bases behind Owen Stanley ridge proofed to be�unable to spot and attack anything in range more than 5-7 hexes from Lae and Buna.

But now, after I had resolved supply problem in Moresby, he can bomb him as much as he wants :)

< Message edited by Swenslim -- 4/28/2010 6:29:12 AM >

(in reply to jeffs)

Post #: 13

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/28/2010 9:30:00 AM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

the only thing that is more or less bullet prove against nuke bombardments would be keeping your enemy from achiving a 9+/11 detection level over your base. But that is hardly possible if he uses long range recons.

You�re pretty much save if detection level is lower but as soon as your enemy gets the 9/11 detection level it�s like an alarm button saying "ready to nuke".

_____________________________

(in reply to Swenslim)

Post #: 14

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/29/2010 1:16:21 AM

minnowguy

Posts: 85
Joined: 7/12/2005
From: St Louis
Status: offline

Mines in the base hex? Gauntlet of subs? Does naval search at night work at all? Given luck you'll slow one of his big ships down enough to nail it with LBA the next day as it tries to limp out of range.

I'd love to find a solution because the AI (!) does exactly this to me every now and then at Pearl Harbor (kudos to Andy Mac). Nothing like having two Japanese BBs show up while unloading a dozen fat xAKs.

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 15

RE: Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast... - 4/29/2010 4:28:54 AM

Knavey

Posts: 3052
Joined: 9/12/2002
From: Valrico, Florida
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wyrmm

How about a SCTF to disrupt the bombardments? (In interests of full disclosure I am the opponent.)

Doesn't always work.

My PBEM game had me holding Guad, and a Japanese bombardment TF at Tass. I had a BB SCTF at Guad "protecting" it. He ran in that night with his most aggressive commander, and we had a 2 IJN BB v 1 USN BB + escorts slug fest. Very even results with no ships sunk.

IJN then completed thier bombardment attack with 302 hits on the airfield alone. Luckily my Seabees ARE just like RL and fix that place in about 2 days but he did trash about 30 a/c. The IJN then withdrew via Tulagi passing right through my amphib TF (with escorts inside the amphib TF) without firing a shot. I suppose they were out of ammo (he did confirm that) at the time.

This is the Guad scenario (and not a BORKED thread so don't bother using google for those of you in the know

). We are within about 2 weeks of the end with very little left on either side that does not have holes in it or is at the bottom of the sea.

And just an aside as I ramble...EVERYONE should find an opponent who is about as experienced as themself, and play the Guad scenario. We are having a blast. At first it seemed a bit lopsided, but we have both changed our minds on that one. VERY evenly matched if you don't have some major screwup.

_____________________________

x-Nuc twidget
CVN-71
USN 87-93
"Going slow in the fast direction"

(in reply to wyrmmy)

Post #: 16

CAP works, but not perfectly as IRL - 4/29/2010 3:51:17 PM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

the only thing that is more or less bullet prove against nuke bombardments would be keeping your enemy from achiving a 9+/11 detection level over your base. But that is hardly possible if he uses long range recons. You�re pretty much save if detection level is lower but as soon as your enemy gets the 9/11 detection level it�s like an alarm button saying "ready to nuke".

This is what I have also seen. And the only defense to LR Rec is a really good CAP, but this is far from perfect. What I've seen so far is IN THE LONG RUN, you can attrit his REC and PATROL a/c with your CAP. However, if he is willing to take the losses in the short term, even the best CAP will allow him enough LR Recon to get the detect level up there.

From my perspective, this is fairly accurate until late war with really good radar. Spotting single plane recons was very hard, killing them even harder in the Pacific due to all the cloud cover. Exp recon pilots knew how to dip in and out of the clouds ...

So again, kudos to the designers ... great job.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 17

RE: CAP works, but not perfectly as IRL - 4/29/2010 4:35:22 PM

Xargun

Posts: 3690
Joined: 2/14/2004
From: Near Columbus, Ohio
Status: offline

There are several solutions to this problem but they all depend on what he is doing exactly and with what. If he is raiding with some cruisers and destroyers, put a few BBs in a TF at the port and wait - the BBs should engage and smash the smaller ships.

If he is using cruisers and battleships then you have a few options...

He is raiding from the same location every time
Put a line of 3-4 subs along his path. If they damage even 1 ship that will slow them down enough to stop the hit and run.
If he hits and runs from the exact same hex everytime, put your battleship TF there and hit him when he returns low on fuel, ammo and op points.
Put a pair of CVs alongside his route and let them say hi. (My favorite)
Move a CD unit to the port to fire back

A lot more examples could be thought of depending on the exact circumstances.

Xargun

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 18

RE: CAP works, but not perfectly as IRL - 4/30/2010 5:06:07 PM

koontz

Posts: 274
Joined: 8/27/2009
Status: offline

500 mines

_____________________________

Amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics.

"All warfare is based on deception. There is no place where espionage is not used. Offer the enemy bait to lure him."

(in reply to Xargun)

Post #: 19

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> Need ideas on how to protect airfields against fast naval bombardments !

Page: [1]