A little help, please! (no rusty plz)

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

A little help, please! (no rusty plz)

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 >> A little help, please! (no rusty plz)

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/4/2012 3:29:54 AM

jetjockey

Posts: 256
Joined: 11/23/2009
Status: offline

Help! It's April '42, scenario 1, and I have been stopped at Palembang, Moulmein, and Rabaul. In China I face many stacks of 100,000+ Chinese troops, and now I find his carriers immune to my LBA:

Morning Air attack on TF, near Lahat at 46,94

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid detected at 95 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 37 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 58
G3M2 Nell x 25

Allied aircraft
Sea Hurricane Ib x 6
Martlet II x 18
F4F-3A Wildcat x 26
F4F-3 Wildcat x 33

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 8 destroyed
G3M2 Nell: 6 destroyed, 8 damaged
G3M2 Nell: 1 destroyed by flak

Allied aircraft losses
Sea Hurricane Ib: 1 destroyed
Martlet II: 2 destroyed
F4F-3A Wildcat: 1 destroyed
F4F-3 Wildcat: 2 destroyed

Allied Ships
CV Hornet
CV Lexington
CL Hobart
CV Formidable

Aircraft Attacking:
13 x G3M2 Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo

CAP engaged:
VF-42 with F4F-3 Wildcat (0 airborne, 10 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 4 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 12000 , scrambling fighters between 4000 and 12000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 21 minutes
4 planes vectored on to bombers
VF-6 with F4F-3A Wildcat (0 airborne, 9 on standby, 13 scrambling)
4 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 12000 , scrambling fighters between 1000 and 34300.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 35 minutes
8 planes vectored on to bombers
VF-8 with F4F-3 Wildcat (0 airborne, 8 on standby, 8 scrambling)
3 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 7000 , scrambling fighters between 7000 and 11000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 22 minutes
No.880 Sqn FAA with Sea Hurricane Ib (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 2 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 12000 , scrambling fighters between 4000 and 8000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 18 minutes
No.888 Sqn FAA with Martlet II (0 airborne, 5 on standby, 11 scrambling)
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 12000 , scrambling fighters between 6000 and 12000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 33 minutes

---------------------------------------------

Morning Air attack on TF, near Lahat at 46,94

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid detected at 13 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 4 minutes

Japanese aircraft
G3M2 Nell x 24

Allied aircraft
Sea Hurricane Ib x 3
Martlet II x 2
F4F-3A Wildcat x 13
F4F-3 Wildcat x 14

Japanese aircraft losses
G3M2 Nell: 4 destroyed, 5 damaged
G3M2 Nell: 2 destroyed by flak

No Allied losses

Allied Ships
CV Enterprise
CV Formidable
CV Indomitable
CV Lexington

Aircraft Attacking:
10 x G3M2 Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo

CAP engaged:
VF-42 with F4F-3 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
8 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 12000 , scrambling fighters between 10000 and 12000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 66 minutes
VF-6 with F4F-3A Wildcat (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
12 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 12000 , scrambling fighters between 5000 and 12000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 123 minutes
No.880 Sqn FAA with Sea Hurricane Ib (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 12000 , scrambling fighters between 11000 and 13000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 75 minutes
VF-8 with F4F-3 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 7000 , scrambling fighters between 10000 and 11000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 93 minutes
No.888 Sqn FAA with Martlet II (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 12000 , scrambling fighters between 10000 and 12000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 50 minutes

I got one torpedo hit from the second wave, which turned out to be a dud; third or fourth 18" dud of the game.

Any advice would be appreciated.

Post #: 1

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/4/2012 4:28:44 AM

Dan Nichols

Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline

It looks like he has at least 5 CVs there, you are going to need more than what you have.

< Message edited by Dan Nichols -- 6/4/2012 4:30:07 AM >

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 2

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/4/2012 6:08:32 AM

msudrala8

Posts: 42
Joined: 3/17/2012
Status: offline

I thought I read somewhere on the forum it was not a good idea to stack CV's in a single TF, better to spread them out say 1 CV to a task force.
This good advice as I'm gearing up for some massive attacks and need all the advantage I can get. Playing Allies BTW.

(in reply to Dan Nichols)

Post #: 3

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/5/2012 2:34:49 PM

Rob Brennan UK

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: msudrala8

I thought I read somewhere on the forum it was not a good idea to stack CV's in a single TF, better to spread them out say 1 CV to a task force.
This good advice as I'm gearing up for some massive attacks and need all the advantage I can get. Playing Allies BTW.

Definitely , as attacks will go for any ships in the hex .. so CV TF's have to be in separate hexes or one lucky attack could sink the lot even if they are in different TF's . You will most likely be limited by escorts early on however.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to msudrala8)

Post #: 4

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/5/2012 10:03:44 PM

jetjockey

Posts: 256
Joined: 11/23/2009
Status: offline

It doesn't appear that stacking 5 (or 7) allied CVs affects coordination. I have been on the receiving end of several large, coordinated strikes. I have only penetrated his defenses once with a CA task force (sank one, damaged another CV).

(in reply to Rob Brennan UK)

Post #: 5

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/5/2012 10:09:30 PM

Commander Stormwolf

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

looks like only 23 planes made runs at the carriers --> the rest were shot down or turned back

if you don't have enough fighters to escort, consider using Mavis and Emily for torpedo attack

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 6

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/5/2012 11:55:41 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

Hi jetjockey,

I'm not seeing anything overtly wrong with your combat report. You've got outnumbered A6M2s escorting a pretty small attack package. Against all but unarmed opponents, Nells are brittle, particularly into a formidable CAP.

In your first attack, your escort did well-considering. Half of your Nells (12) made attack runs on fast-moving combatants. They were probably harried all the way. Not surprisingly-you scored no hits.

In the second attack, 24 unescorted Nells attack into a CAP that more than outnumbers them. They get shredded. About what I'd expect.

The listing of the combat report showing all his CVs in "one TF" may be FOW. He may have them in multiple supporting TFs in the same hex, but this can be hard to discern.

_____________________________

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 7

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 2:44:56 AM

Hanzberger

Posts: 921
Joined: 4/26/2006
From: SE Pennsylvania
Status: offline

Post some of your China screen shots. I would like to hear what CB has to say.

_____________________________

Planning for #17 Ironman Tier2

Japan AC wire chart here
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2769286&mpage=1&key=?

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 8

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 3:29:56 AM

jetjockey

Posts: 256
Joined: 11/23/2009
Status: offline

OK. China is not going so well. Quite frankly, I'm gettin' my but kicked! I've already sent a number of divisions (four or five) and numerous other LCUs back for refit; I have three of these divisions garrisoning Tientsin, barely. I had been advancing on Lanchow, now those forces are in full retreat. I've attached a map with approximate troop numbers for the general areas.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Hanzberger)

Post #: 9

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 3:31:13 AM

jetjockey

Posts: 256
Joined: 11/23/2009
Status: offline

Southern China is worse...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 10

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 3:35:56 AM

jetjockey

Posts: 256
Joined: 11/23/2009
Status: offline

That advance toward Lanchow was a disaster. I went over the river with three regiments and two independent mixed brigades, all well lead and amply supplied against four Chinese LCUs. This is what I have left...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 11

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 3:37:15 AM

Commander Stormwolf

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

Do not fight the chinese troops, fight the chinese supplies

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 12

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 3:56:49 AM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

Clear terrain (not rough, forest, mountain, etc.) would be my first line goal.

At the beginning of the game, Chinese units start with *some* supply. Your opponent has done a good job of pulling back into a series of defensive lines in rough terrain. When combined with some expedient fortifications, they are capable of fending off your advances, particularly across a river-unless you have overwhelming strength (which it didn't sound like you did-can you post the combat report with 'adjusted' AVs and combat modifiers?)

My first phase goal is liquidation of the enemy within the Nanyang-Chengchow-Loyang triangle. Near a rail line that you should control, the Chinese cannot hold this ground. It's also near your airfields, so daily LBA bombing of his troops can help to start softening them. Cut off this triangle from Sian and then reduce the cities present. You haven't done this yet-this area appears to be a focus of strength for the Chinese when it should be a deathtrap. In fact, there are many 'open' terrain cities and Chinese troop concentrations on your maps.

Other 'open' terrain troop concentrations that you should retain as short-term goals (or at least consideration): Sian, the tri-city triangle just west of Changsa and a few others should be considered as well. You appear to have dispersed a number of your troops in the far north (who cares about Lanchow?), so you may want to consider concentration of your forces to match his larger stacks.

Bomb the **** out of his Chinese troops, especially if they're on the move. It will eventually pay dividends. A Chinese stack of 100,000, if subjected to 500 casualties by daily bombardment will find itself out of supply, heavily disrupted and fatigued within a few weeks. In clear terrain, they can be pushed out then. Follow their retreat and butcher them as they run in disarray.

Good luck!

_____________________________

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 13

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 4:10:46 AM

jetjockey

Posts: 256
Joined: 11/23/2009
Status: offline

Ground combat at 82,34 (near Lanchow)

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 20617 troops, 192 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 710

Defending force 33231 troops, 217 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1172

Japanese adjusted assault: 392

Allied adjusted defense: 1485

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 3

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+), disruption(-)

Japanese ground losses:
4772 casualties reported
Squads: 320 destroyed, 122 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 171 disabled
Engineers: 12 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 75 (40 destroyed, 35 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
390 casualties reported
Squads: 3 destroyed, 78 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled

Assaulting units:
2nd Ind.Mixed Brigade
12th Indpt Infantry Regiment
11th Indpt Infantry Regiment
15th Ind.Mixed Brigade
13th Indpt Infantry Regiment
Mongol Garrison Army
11th Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
76th Chinese Corps
85th Chinese Corps
82nd Chinese Corps
3rd Chinese Cavalry Corps

Followed by...

Ground combat at 82,34 (near Lanchow)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 32741 troops, 217 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1109

Defending force 14999 troops, 159 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 331

Allied adjusted assault: 283

Japanese adjusted defense: 123

Allied assault odds: 2 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-)
experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: shock(+), supply(-)

Japanese ground losses:
4778 casualties reported
Squads: 111 destroyed, 113 disabled
Non Combat: 148 destroyed, 37 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 35 (19 destroyed, 16 disabled)
Units retreated 7

Allied ground losses:
1929 casualties reported
Squads: 11 destroyed, 204 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 11 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 3 disabled

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
82nd Chinese Corps
85th Chinese Corps
76th Chinese Corps
3rd Chinese Cavalry Corps

Defending units:
15th Ind.Mixed Brigade
11th Indpt Infantry Regiment
13th Indpt Infantry Regiment
Mongol Garrison Army
2nd Ind.Mixed Brigade
12th Indpt Infantry Regiment
11th Field Artillery Regiment

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 14

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 4:30:29 AM

Commander Stormwolf

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEC2h6HJ48o

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 15

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 4:51:58 AM

PaxMondo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Hi jetjockey,

I'm not seeing anything overtly wrong with your combat report. You've got outnumbered A6M2s escorting a pretty small attack package. Against all but unarmed opponents, Nells are brittle, particularly into a formidable CAP.

In your first attack, your escort did well-considering. Half of your Nells (12) made attack runs on fast-moving combatants. They were probably harried all the way. Not surprisingly-you scored no hits.

In the second attack, 24 unescorted Nells attack into a CAP that more than outnumbers them. They get shredded. About what I'd expect.

The listing of the combat report showing all his CVs in "one TF" may be FOW. He may have them in multiple supporting TFs in the same hex, but this can be hard to discern.

+1

A realistic attack would need +100 fighters escorting +200 attack bombers. Double that is better. Vals will have the best hit percentage, but also the highest losses. Netties are very long odds to hit against CV's. Use Kates instead. You can send in Sally's if your pilots have NavBomb trained >50. Against allied CV's, you need to completely overwhelm his defenses. He's got +100 fighters for you to get through.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 16

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 7:12:55 AM

Erkki

Posts: 1461
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jetjockey

This is what I have left...

Yep. Japan can afford very few mistakes and depending on situation NO major drawbacks during the first couple of months of the game. Or you're screwed - as in, game over man, game over. Whats your situation in the DEI and Burma? Once you have the primary targets in Malaya, Sumatra, Java and Timor cleared you should have troops to relocate where they're needed the most.

_____________________________

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 17

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 7:31:32 AM

bradfordkay

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

It is my belief that your opponent does not have all his allied CVs in one TF, but rather has them in multiple TFs in the same hex. In WITP, a naval strike would only hit the ships of a single TF in any hex and this was changed for AE where a naval strike will hit ships from any or all of the TFs in a single hex. Carrier combat has a much more realistic feel in AE because of this.

If he has too many CVs together for your air units to get through, make use of your submarine forces. You can whittle down those carriers with a few well placed torpedoes.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Erkki)

Post #: 18

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 7:32:55 AM

bradfordkay

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

sorry, guys.. double post. It happens when a PM arrives right as you click "submit"!

< Message edited by bradfordkay -- 6/6/2012 7:34:02 AM >

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Erkki)

Post #: 19

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 7:43:11 AM

Puhis

Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

I'm not sure what is replacement rate of Chinese infantry squads, but my one goal in China is to kill at least 300 squads/month. And not to destroy Chinese units, even when my opponent is trying to get them killed.

(in reply to bradfordkay)

Post #: 20

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 2:25:28 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: msudrala8

I thought I read somewhere on the forum it was not a good idea to stack CV's in a single TF, better to spread them out say 1 CV to a task force.
This good advice as I'm gearing up for some massive attacks and need all the advantage I can get. Playing Allies BTW.

There are a variety of opinions about this. I basically keep my CVs in one or two TFs because of the benefits of massed AA (not like it should be but better than nothing) and more important to prevent small CV TFs from reacting towards the enemy and getting creamed. The penalty for using large carriers groups is not that harsh. But others view this differently.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to msudrala8)

Post #: 21

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 10:20:37 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jetjockey

It doesn't appear that stacking 5 (or 7) allied CVs affects coordination.

This is counter to my understanding of how coordination affects CVTFs. I strongly encourage you to abide by the 'overstacking' formulae found in the manual. 2 CVs/TF or 2 CVs & 1 CVL / TF (Japanese keep under 200 planes) is pretty sensible, IMO. You can keep them all in the same hex to maximize their supportive CAP.

_____________________________

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 22

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/6/2012 10:41:14 PM

Dan Nichols

Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: jetjockey

It doesn't appear that stacking 5 (or 7) allied CVs affects coordination.

This is counter to my understanding of how coordination affects CVTFs. I strongly encourage you to abide by the 'overstacking' formulae found in the manual. 2 CVs/TF or 2 CVs & 1 CVL / TF (Japanese keep under 200 planes) is pretty sensible, IMO. You can keep them all in the same hex to maximize their supportive CAP.

Why? The manual states that if you fail the check your chance of being uncoordinated is doubled. What is the chance before doubling? What effects it? KB seems to be able to attack with no problem with 6 CVs and 400+ aircraft, which means that KB should be failing the check every time.

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 23

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/10/2012 12:55:09 AM

jetjockey

Posts: 256
Joined: 11/23/2009
Status: offline

An update.

In my original post I complained that my opponents allied carriers seemed invulnerable. It was explained that my strike package of 58 Zeros and 49 Nells was not large enough and that it was too much to expect the remaining 23 Nells to actually obtain hits. Fine. But turn around should be fair game. This is the second such raid in two days; the first severely damaged the Akagi and nearly crippled the CVL Zuiho. How can 9, unescorted Devastators survive 38 Zeros, much less hit three carriers?

Comments please:

Morning Air attack on TF, near Semarang at 52,101

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 22 NM, estimated altitude 2,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 11 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 38

Allied aircraft
TBD-1 Devastator x 9

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
TBD-1 Devastator: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged
TBD-1 Devastator: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
CV Kaga, Bomb hits 2
CVL Shoho

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x TBD-1 Devastator bombing from 1000 feet *
Naval Attack: 2 x 500 lb SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Kaga-1 with A6M2 Zero (3 airborne, 7 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 18000 , scrambling fighters between 18000 and 32810.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 12 minutes
Soryu-1 with A6M2 Zero (3 airborne, 8 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 8000 , scrambling fighters between 2000 and 8000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 17 minutes
Shokaku-1 with A6M2 Zero (3 airborne, 8 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters to 13000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 17 minutes
Shoho-1 with A6M2 Zero (2 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters to 1000.
Raid is overhead

(in reply to Dan Nichols)

Post #: 24

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/10/2012 1:21:07 AM

Icedawg

Posts: 1610
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: Upstate New York
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jetjockey

Southern China is worse...

I've never played PBEM, but against the AI, I fair far worse than you appear to be doing in these screenshots. You've captured several bases and haven't lost any of your originally-held bases to the Chinese.

When I play against the AI, in the South, all I can hold is Canton and Hong Kong. All of the other bases along the coast (Amoy, Foochow, etc) end up being captured by the Chinese within 3 or 4 weeks. In the North and Central areas, it's pretty much a standstill.

Maybe PBEM is different. I know the AI gets huge cheats to allow it to compete, so maybe that's the difference. Or maybe I'm just a horrible player.

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 25

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/10/2012 2:07:28 AM

Dan Nichols

Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline

He sent his TBDs in at 1000 feet. Your fighters were mostly very high up and probably did not get much of a chance to shoot at them.

(in reply to Icedawg)

Post #: 26

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/10/2012 2:12:01 AM

Commander Stormwolf

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

remember in war, as in the universe

all things happen, some of the time

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 27

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/10/2012 2:12:51 AM

jetjockey

Posts: 256
Joined: 11/23/2009
Status: offline

1/4 of my fighters were at 8K and half were at 13K. Even a Cessna would have plenty of time to descend to 1K in the 11 minutes available, much less a fighter with 130 kt overtake.

(in reply to Dan Nichols)

Post #: 28

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/10/2012 2:14:47 AM

jetjockey

Posts: 256
Joined: 11/23/2009
Status: offline

My fighters made two or three passes and called it a day.

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 29

RE: A little help, please! (no rusty plz) - 6/10/2012 4:26:45 AM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

Yep, sometimes when you are too high, they can sneak in. I had it happen with about a dozen kates slipping under 100 wildcats and putting three bombs into my carriers. It is rare but anything can happen. Don't let a few odd events cloud your thinking and don't be surprised if you get a surprise here and there. That is what keeps the game from getting boring in the long run. This sort of stuff happens in war.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to jetjockey)

Post #: 30