Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Night Bombing Overpowered?

 
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 >> RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/27/2011 2:34:43 PM   
beppi

 

Posts: 382
Joined: 3/11/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kaletsch2007

@PaxMondo

Using your arguments, the solution would be:

- start night attacks not before Jan43 (to reflect the technical aspect)
- allow only units with 80+ Exp to conduct such missions

???

Of course the coding of a complete night training und exp routine would do the job even better


80+ exp would mean no night bombing by B-29 and even if you husband your pilots i doubt that anyone can get more than 2 or 3 units with an average of > 80 exp. Better rule would be ->

- No night bombing of airfields and ports ever.

And this rule would kinda suck as we get a nice feature and cant use it cause it overpowered.

(in reply to Kaletsch2007)
Post #: 91
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/27/2011 3:20:07 PM   
Tullius

 

Posts: 1174
Joined: 11/18/2004
From: Saxony (Germany)
Status: offline
It seems that the attacks are not to powerful. They are simply to accurate so that the size of the target did not matter. Also should be the experience of the pilots factored in. Less skills (esp. leaders) should mean less accuracy and more accidents. It seems to me also that bad weather has no real effect besides search planes.

quote:

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIa Nick: 3 destroyed on ground
A6M2 Zero: 4 destroyed on ground
Ki-43-Ic Oscar: 13 destroyed on ground
Ki-44-IIa Tojo: 3 destroyed on ground
Ki-46-II Dinah: 1 destroyed on ground

In total 50 aircraft were destroyed


3 + 4 + 13 + 3 + 1 = 24 (not 50).

_____________________________


(in reply to beppi)
Post #: 92
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/27/2011 3:21:01 PM   
Kaletsch2007

 

Posts: 142
Joined: 4/2/2008
Status: offline
@All

- is verifying needed ? I feel sorry for those of you, playing against somebody, you do not trust (i know, i am spoilt in this case with my opponents)
- why can't you use B29's ? micromanage your pilots
- maybe 80 Exp would be to high (depending on total numbers)

All in all it was an idea, worth trying i thought.
Any AFB willing to check in his game (late43+), how many units he could put in night action under this circumstances ?

(in reply to beppi)
Post #: 93
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/27/2011 4:51:44 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

...My final thought on this topic is simple: if it were easy everyone would have gone to it in '42.  The fact is that it didn't really catch on until '44.  Sure the Brits were doing it from '40 onwards.  But look at their numbers, the training involved, the pilot experience, their targets, their effectiveness ... GER, SOV, USA, JAP, ITA ... none of the other really picked it up until much later.  It wasn't a fashion trend, it needed both time and technology to bring it up.   Once units had effective radio guidance (amoung other items) to get them back home safely, night bombing came into being. 


With the greatest respect, this is simply not true.

From very early on after entering the war, the Italians quickly switched over to flying night bombing operations, particularly in the eastern Mediterranean using their 3 engined transport planes. Not surprising this has been missed, few people ever seem to look at the Italians relying instead on stereotypes for their knowledge. Much harder to understand is the overlooking of the widespread night bombing during the London Blitz in 1940 and of course the German bombing campaigns against Britain in subsequent years. Then of course there are all those night operations conducted by both the Germans and the Soviets, all prior to 1944 on the eastern front.

Let us not confuse the relative lack of effectiveness due to lack of suitable equipment and mass with some sort of aleged late fashion trends.

Alfred

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 94
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/27/2011 4:52:48 PM   
castor troy


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: beppi


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kaletsch2007

@PaxMondo

Using your arguments, the solution would be:

- start night attacks not before Jan43 (to reflect the technical aspect)
- allow only units with 80+ Exp to conduct such missions

???

Of course the coding of a complete night training und exp routine would do the job even better


80+ exp would mean no night bombing by B-29 and even if you husband your pilots i doubt that anyone can get more than 2 or 3 units with an average of > 80 exp. Better rule would be ->

- No night bombing of airfields and ports ever.

And this rule would kinda suck as we get a nice feature and cant use it cause it overpowered.



I´m in 4/44, have not suffered horrendous heavy bomber crew losses and if I would take my best pilots with hundreds of missions each I would probably fail to find 16 to form a >80 exp squadron with 12 bombers (4 reserve crews). This is AE, not WITP but ppl still talk about WITP experiences.

_____________________________


(in reply to beppi)
Post #: 95
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/27/2011 5:10:26 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

...My final thought on this topic is simple: if it were easy everyone would have gone to it in '42.  The fact is that it didn't really catch on until '44.  Sure the Brits were doing it from '40 onwards.  But look at their numbers, the training involved, the pilot experience, their targets, their effectiveness ... GER, SOV, USA, JAP, ITA ... none of the other really picked it up until much later.  It wasn't a fashion trend, it needed both time and technology to bring it up.   Once units had effective radio guidance (amoung other items) to get them back home safely, night bombing came into being. 


With the greatest respect, this is simply not true.

From very early on after entering the war, the Italians quickly switched over to flying night bombing operations, particularly in the eastern Mediterranean using their 3 engined transport planes. Not surprising this has been missed, few people ever seem to look at the Italians relying instead on stereotypes for their knowledge. Much harder to understand is the overlooking of the widespread night bombing during the London Blitz in 1940 and of course the German bombing campaigns against Britain in subsequent years. Then of course there are all those night operations conducted by both the Germans and the Soviets, all prior to 1944 on the eastern front.

Let us not confuse the relative lack of effectiveness due to lack of suitable equipment and mass with some sort of aleged late fashion trends.

Alfred


Everyone night bombed. It just wasn't very effective overall. At the tactical level it was mainly used as a harrasement tool. Often the target wasn't even hit. (airfield/port facility-docked ship etc)

_____________________________


(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 96
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/27/2011 6:47:13 PM   
Yakface


Posts: 846
Joined: 8/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tullius

It seems that the attacks are not to powerful. They are simply to accurate so that the size of the target did not matter. Also should be the experience of the pilots factored in. Less skills (esp. leaders) should mean less accuracy and more accidents. It seems to me also that bad weather has no real effect besides search planes.

quote:

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIa Nick: 3 destroyed on ground
A6M2 Zero: 4 destroyed on ground
Ki-43-Ic Oscar: 13 destroyed on ground
Ki-44-IIa Tojo: 3 destroyed on ground
Ki-46-II Dinah: 1 destroyed on ground

In total 50 aircraft were destroyed


3 + 4 + 13 + 3 + 1 = 24 (not 50).



Your'e maths is spot on. However the game under reports losses to airfield attacks. The info screen at the end of the turn has information that is basically accurate. That's why I had to post the actual number rather than people being misled by a the combat report

< Message edited by Yakface -- 1/27/2011 6:51:50 PM >

(in reply to Tullius)
Post #: 97
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/28/2011 1:16:50 PM   
PaxMondo


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

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

...My final thought on this topic is simple: if it were easy everyone would have gone to it in '42.  The fact is that it didn't really catch on until '44.  Sure the Brits were doing it from '40 onwards.  But look at their numbers, the training involved, the pilot experience, their targets, their effectiveness ... GER, SOV, USA, JAP, ITA ... none of the other really picked it up until much later.  It wasn't a fashion trend, it needed both time and technology to bring it up.   Once units had effective radio guidance (amoung other items) to get them back home safely, night bombing came into being. 


With the greatest respect, this is simply not true.

From very early on after entering the war, the Italians quickly switched over to flying night bombing operations, particularly in the eastern Mediterranean using their 3 engined transport planes. Not surprising this has been missed, few people ever seem to look at the Italians relying instead on stereotypes for their knowledge. Much harder to understand is the overlooking of the widespread night bombing during the London Blitz in 1940 and of course the German bombing campaigns against Britain in subsequent years. Then of course there are all those night operations conducted by both the Germans and the Soviets, all prior to 1944 on the eastern front.

Let us not confuse the relative lack of effectiveness due to lack of suitable equipment and mass with some sort of aleged late fashion trends.

Alfred

Agree with all of your examples, at least the ones I am familiar with. Using the London night bombings and working from memory here.. compared to the early day bombings where they tried +1000 bombers, the night bombings (as I recall them) were done by small, select groups. Even then, op losses were high.

Using your Eastern Front example: was night bombing the primary bombing tactic of either the SOV or GER? What I recall is that the vast majority of bombers on both sides were used in daylight support of ground troops ... not to suggest there wasn't night bombing (of course there was), but what percentage of bombing missions? 2%? Less? Any training program? Not that I recall, only select, high time pilots were culled from all groups.

I still maintain, and I might be overlooking the ITA, that ENG was the only significant night bombing nation that I recall. Significant meaning, the majority of their bombing missions and their crew training for a theatre of war was centered around night bombing operations for a period of time. Their rationale was, as I recall, that night ops losses (high as they were) were lower than day ops air-air losses. They were absolutely correct in that as proven by early USAAF losses that were staggering. It should also be pointed out that, unlike the GER, ENG had no ground support bombing mission for over 3 years in Europe. This drove the need for an effective retaliatory bombing operation, and night bombing was their choice.

So circling back. Yes, maybe accuracy is also too high but I defer to others on that subject. I still beleive that op's losses have to bumped up significantly for both IJ and Allies. Neither side (except ENG, but not sure if their night training program carried to the FAR EAST, but you could argue that it could have) had a significant night bombing training program or mission profile. Lacking that (night training program and night experience), you are then faced with using high time pilots and accepting high ops losses.

I wouldn't suggest that pilots<80 could not fly night ops, just below 80, the op's losses should start to be high enough to be a deterrent in themselves. Think about it: at 50 we say that pilots have a high chance of not forming up correctly in daylight. What chance do those pilots have of flying blind 400 miles each way correctly? A slight NAV error and they end up in the drink, and that is exactly the outcome that ocurred.

Again, late war, a large amount of technology starts to come into play that helps significantly. You cannot overvalue the radio direction gear that started appearing in 45 (or late 44?). Saved a LOT of pilots, particularly DAYTIME in bad weather.

Nerf night bombing? No. But, you have to pay the price to make that decision, particularly in the early war. Does IJ want to spend her crack pilots on night bombing of Singers? I have little doubt it would have worked (meaning bombs on target and the associated damage). But just like many players do not bomb PH for a 2nd day due to high pilot losses to AA, the ops loss attrition of the night bombing missions in 42 should mean after a week you see significant losses of even those highly experienced pilots. Those guys are +90exp. What would happen to 80? 50?

BTW: I associate 90 exp pilots to be 10,000 hour type. 80 exp to be 2000 hour, 70 to be 500 hour, 50 to be 50 hour.

< Message edited by PaxMondo -- 1/28/2011 1:28:34 PM >


_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 98
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/28/2011 5:22:47 PM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline
In May or June of 42, the bombers assigned to 10th AF, all 3 that were able to fly, bombed Rangoon docks at night. They made it there and back and had no losses. Damage to the docks was not excessive but they rattled some cages, it took almost a week to get the planes ready to fly again but they did and hit the docks a second time. What is the real concern? You too many planes at night when your hit? What kind of overhead shelters do you have on your airstrips? I would guess none and they are parked in the open. The real problem is players concentrate all their planes into big raids that were not done for various reasons. So the choice really is, do we force players to not concentrate the squadrons or nerf the bombers? Personally I think finding a logistic solution is the best.

_____________________________


(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 99
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/28/2011 7:52:33 PM   
Patbgaming

 

Posts: 103
Joined: 2/28/2010
From: Houston, Texas
Status: offline
I have used night bombing fairly often in my PBEM and have never seen those kind of results. I as a rule I have my Heavy Bombers fly at 15k for daytime raids and 10k for night raids ( its just my way of toning down the damage from 4E without complicating things too much ). It seems to me the results from the initial post are based on the following

1 ) The low altitude of the attack ( increasing accuracy )
2 ) The large number of bombers involved in the raid.

I believe the altitude of the attacking bombers had a greater effect than the number of bombers did.

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 100
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/28/2011 7:55:30 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
you don't need to concentrate bombers to get good results, though it helps. particularily for the 4E's which have the best per bomber load. In a current Burma test game, my opponent is attacking with an average of 30 bombers and getting good results while i did similar with 15.

By "good results" mind you, i mean frequent hits on the field that cause damage to planes as well as destroyed and damage to the field itself. (these damaged planes do not show up in the combat report)

The tally quickly adds up with consistancy. The bigger raids can at times score spectacularily netting several dozen plane casualties. Consistant bombing with under 2 Sally Sentais has Rangoon airfield half damaged (50%)....all done at night.

City bombing is even easier which is why the Ozzie PBEM i'm in has a rule for no city bombing at all till 43 either side. Were it not in place cities within reach of 2E bombers can easily be plastered and Player one can cripple the Chinese economy using 2E and even 1E bombers range permitting. We also placed restrictions on tactical night bombing as well.



_____________________________


(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 101
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/28/2011 8:16:11 PM   
ChezDaJez


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline
In reply to all regarding whether night bombing is too overpowered.

I have not had much experience with night bombing, either giving or receiving so I have no opinion as to whether it is overpowered or not. But a small litmus test should help answer the question.

Assuming all factors are the same (non-city target, bombing altitude, # of bombers, CAP, etc...) then:

1. If night bombing is achieving results equal to or greater than day bombing then it is probably overpowered.

2. If night bombers are shooting down fighters at a rate equal to or greater than day bombers, it is probably overpowered.

3. If fighters are shooting down night bombers at a rate equal to or greater than in the daytime then the fighters are probably overpowered.

Chez


_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 102
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/28/2011 8:23:47 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
I havn't found bomber def fire or NF fire to be overpowered. Much of the time NF's and bombers miss each other completely. Nothing out of wack there given lack of AI sets.

The 'overpower' comes from the consistant hitting of the target. Not every single time, but much of the time leading to a cumulative effect. Indiv results may not seem like much till you start adding up the damaged and destroyed planes.

Strategic bombing, (day or night) is so easy it would make Bomber Harris cry. This is largely unchanged from stock. Night ops are safer however given the difficulty in intercepting the strikes.

_____________________________


(in reply to ChezDaJez)
Post #: 103
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/29/2011 1:36:44 AM   
Yakface


Posts: 846
Joined: 8/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

In reply to all regarding whether night bombing is too overpowered.

I have not had much experience with night bombing, either giving or receiving so I have no opinion as to whether it is overpowered or not. But a small litmus test should help answer the question.

Assuming all factors are the same (non-city target, bombing altitude, # of bombers, CAP, etc...) then:

1. If night bombing is achieving results equal to or greater than day bombing then it is probably overpowered.

2. If night bombers are shooting down fighters at a rate equal to or greater than day bombers, it is probably overpowered.

3. If fighters are shooting down night bombers at a rate equal to or greater than in the daytime then the fighters are probably overpowered.

Chez



Chez. Your test is setting the bar far too low. If night bombing of airfields is even a quarter as effective as daytime bombing, then it's overpowered. If night bombers are shooting down even a fraction of the fighters it does in the daytime then it is overpowered (given that fighters can't engage bombers it is difficult to see how bombers engage fighters)

I'm with Nik. THe real problem is not the aircombat at night, but the effectiveness of the bombing. My opponent has closed at one time or another 5 different bases (2 or 3 at any one time) in Northern Oz, with sizes between 4 and 9. This is with an average of 35 4E bombers (mix of B17's and B24's) flying every night. It takes about 3 nights to get a base to essentially 100% damage, with reasonable numbers of engineers trying to repair the damage. I've tried 3 or 4 LRCAP night intercepts with the net effect.....fighters are shot down virtually no damage to bombers.

In my game as the Allies I have 160 4E bombers on the Burma border (roughly 40% of my entire force. I am fairly sure that I could close all airfields in Burma for with negligible losses. At this point that is just my opinion. I'm going to my opponent if we can run a 3 or 4 week test. If I'm right, that's curtains for an interesting game.

< Message edited by Yakface -- 1/29/2011 1:40:26 AM >

(in reply to ChezDaJez)
Post #: 104
RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? - 1/29/2011 9:58:48 AM   
ChezDaJez


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline
quote:

Chez. Your test is setting the bar far too low. If night bombing of airfields is even a quarter as effective as daytime bombing, then it's overpowered.


And I may very well be setting it too low. As I said, I have no experience with night bombing.

I would agree that night bombing should not achieve results anywhere near day bombing. A quarter as effective would probably be considered a good raid IMO but should not be the norm.

Chez

_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to Yakface)
Post #: 105
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Night Bombing Overpowered? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
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

1.518