CV Battles in 42 - IJN perspective

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

CV Battles in 42 - IJN perspective

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 >> CV Battles in 42 - IJN perspective

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

CV Battles in 42 - IJN perspective - 6/20/2010 12:23:00 PM

vonSchnitter

Posts: 310
Joined: 7/2/2004
From: Germany - still
Status: offline

I am just playing the AI, just to learn about the mechanics of things.
I do not mind to own up to limited "replays" - just for the purpose.

By december 42 - it is 6(IJN) to = 0 (USN) - not counting a field goal (CVE).
Banzai !

Lesson one: The 1 CV USN TF ver IJN multiple CV TF no longer works. On the contrary.
Lesson two: If the IJN achieves a 2 to one CV battle - or rather a 2 to 1 ratio - it is curtains for USN.
Lesson three: Using 2 CV TFs as IJN is the way to go - even the small boys (Hiyo and Junyo - given some reasonably trained aircrew) get the job done.

On the other hand:
Early USN Air crews are very well trained -AI. IJ land based bombers - whatever - do not stand a chance.
Do not count on fighter escorts to wear down CV based CAP - for some reason or another - the land based attack pulses are disconnected from CV based pulses.
At least I never managed to achive a coordinated land based/CV based naval attack,

Just my experience. Please contibute your findibgs.

cheers

Post #: 1

RE: CV Battles in 42 - IJN perspective - 6/20/2010 5:56:52 PM

Rob Brennan UK

Posts: 3685
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline

quote:

Lesson one: The 1 CV USN TF ver IJN multiple CV TF no longer works. On the contrary.
Lesson two: If the IJN achieves a 2 to one CV battle - or rather a 2 to 1 ratio - it is curtains for USN.
Lesson three: Using 2 CV TFs as IJN is the way to go - even the small boys (Hiyo and Junyo - given some reasonably trained aircrew) get the job done.

On the other hand:
Early USN Air crews are very well trained -AI. IJ land based bombers - whatever - do not stand a chance.
Do not count on fighter escorts to wear down CV based CAP - for some reason or another - the land based attack pulses are disconnected from CV based pulses.
At least I never managed to achive a coordinated land based/CV based naval attack,

RE lesson 1 . if you mean keeping the USCV's 1/TF to avoid being attacked .. nope if they are in the same hex . but seperate hexes can work .weather permitting.

lesson 2 , allied 1000lb's can really really ruin japans day. but overall yes.

lesson 3 .. maybe vs the AI. but not vs a human or when the AI starts putting together multiple CV groups

OTOH .. IJ land based bombers can kill us CV's early just fine .. escorts are needed ofc. but dont expect range 20 torp attacks vs CAP.

Pulses can be good and bad .. 5 waves of 5 zeros vs cap in the same phase (i.e AM or PM) can really wear out CAP despite not actually killing much. then its much more likey unescorted or weakly escorted bombers can get through.

Co-ordination requires alttitude coordination, Air HQ's .. as few diff types of a/c as possible and ofc sacrificing at least one chicken to the god of good luck.. Can happen , just not too often

.

_____________________________

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)

(in reply to vonSchnitter)

Post #: 2

RE: CV Battles in 42 - IJN perspective - 6/20/2010 6:09:19 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

There are few instances where intentionally taking on KB before mid-1942 is a good idea for the Allies. If ANY.

Even if you have TBFs, at best you can hope for is parity in aircraft numbers, and the Zero is better than the F4F anyway.

If the result is a draw, it is a temporary Japanese Victory on two levels. First, Japan is more likely to be able to replace losses, while the USN is chronically short of SBDs and Wildcats. Second, an even exchange means the IJN has more hulls after the battle. Although the KB CVs are weaker than the USN CVs, the IJN can draw on a "Baby KB" (the JUNYOS, ZUIHOS,and RYUJO) that isn't there for the Allies. In fact, the CVLs should be running with KB by mid-1942. The "Baby" units have alot of limitations, but they are Carriers, and do matter in the strategic calculation.

Better to wait until you have the 1943 reinforcements coming

_____________________________

(in reply to Rob Brennan UK)

Post #: 3

RE: CV Battles in 42 - IJN perspective - 6/20/2010 6:18:42 PM

herwin

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

There are few instances where intentionally taking on KB before mid-1942 is a good idea for the Allies. If ANY.

Even if you have TBFs, at best you can hope for is parity in aircraft numbers, and the Zero is better than the F4F anyway.

If the result is a draw, it is a temporary Japanese Victory on two levels. First, Japan is more likely to be able to replace losses, while the USN is chronically short of SBDs and Wildcats. Second, an even exchange means the IJN has more hulls after the battle. Although the KB CVs are weaker than the USN CVs, the IJN can draw on a "Baby KB" (the JUNYOS, ZUIHOS,and RYUJO) that isn't there for the Allies. In fact, the CVLs should be running with KB by mid-1942. The "Baby" units have alot of limitations, but they are Carriers, and do matter in the strategic calculation.

Better to wait until you have the 1943 reinforcements coming

Well, I find intelligently committed SAGs can really mess up the IJN player's day.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 4

RE: CV Battles in 42 - IJN perspective - 6/20/2010 7:47:02 PM

Ametysth

Posts: 74
Joined: 12/10/2009
Status: offline

I wouldn't discount IJN land based air. Mitshubishi bombers together with land based fighters can actually sink a CV, so IJN player can really even the odds by baiting the US CV TF close to IJN land base.

(in reply to herwin)

Post #: 5

RE: CV Battles in 42 - IJN perspective - 6/20/2010 8:33:16 PM

Zebedee

Posts: 535
Joined: 8/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin
Well, I find intelligently committed SAGs can really mess up the IJN player's day.

Many seem to inadequately protect the KB from that threat it would seem. Can understand why given a shortage of escorts and the KB's previous all-conquering power from WitP. The KB is more of a rapier now whereas in WitP it was a cudgel. It's a good change (and I play almost exclusively as Japan, albeit solely against the AI).

(in reply to herwin)

Post #: 6

RE: CV Battles in 42 - IJN perspective - 6/21/2010 7:40:37 AM

castor troy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

There are few instances where intentionally taking on KB before mid-1942 is a good idea for the Allies. If ANY.

Even if you have TBFs, at best you can hope for is parity in aircraft numbers, and the Zero is better than the F4F anyway.

If the result is a draw, it is a temporary Japanese Victory on two levels. First, Japan is more likely to be able to replace losses, while the USN is chronically short of SBDs and Wildcats. Second, an even exchange means the IJN has more hulls after the battle. Although the KB CVs are weaker than the USN CVs, the IJN can draw on a "Baby KB" (the JUNYOS, ZUIHOS,and RYUJO) that isn't there for the Allies. In fact, the CVLs should be running with KB by mid-1942. The "Baby" units have alot of limitations, but they are Carriers, and do matter in the strategic calculation.

Better to wait until you have the 1943 reinforcements coming

can only support this. After being defeated with an equal carrier force (when speaking about aircraft - both sides around 600ac with the Allied 150 fighters more) in 1/43 I can only give the old advise from WITP: stay away from KB as long as you can and hope to see either your subs or your LBA kill some of the Japanese flight decks. I had probably three times more capitol ships, flak values in the TFs of above 11000 but that didn�t help. For the sinking of perhpas 2 second class CVs and light damage on some more, my fleet was completely trashed.

The game always had the tendency to see the Japanese coming out totally superior in a one on one and that obviously hasn�t changed, even if I would have rated my fleet superior to the enemy�s in real life. And usually you don�t achieve a draw or something, no, one side usually is whiped out.

_____________________________

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 7

RE: CV Battles in 42 - IJN perspective - 6/21/2010 12:33:16 PM

xj900uk

Posts: 1340
Joined: 3/22/2007
Status: offline

I've had IJ LBA's attacking my carriers and causing a good deal of damage, even with the presence of CAP. Just had some Beatties do a long-range attack on a british CV in the Indian ocean, either the Illustrious or the Indomitable (4get which). Got hit by 9 Beatties when I wasn't expecting it, CAP got two but of the remaining 7 two hit with their fish which has knocked out said carrier, now has 45+ flotation damage but should make it back to Madras ok for emergency repairs.
Also had the Lady Lex attacked by Beatties or Nells out of the Ekinowok group of islands, one got through the 60% CAP and put a fish into my CV, very fortunately for me it was a dud!

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 8

RE: CV Battles in 42 - IJN perspective - 6/24/2010 6:07:45 AM

Deca