Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Good luck, guys!

quote:

Regarding the use of 4EB:

Naval Attack from a minimum altitude of 10,000 Ft.
Strategic Bombing is allowed at any point after January 1, 1943.
B-29s may only be used for Airfield, port, and city bombing. No ground attack upon troops.



The use of One ship TF is allowed if the ships are warships or it is the first two weeks of December 1941 (the fleeing Thundering Herd).

quote:

I'm thinking I might as well go offensive with the subs and try to interdict a TF or two in the southern Phillipines or maybe go near Saigon for the second wave of Malaysia invasion troops. That area is Larry's turf so I'd want to know what he's doing first before I committed those subs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

Regarding the use of 4EB:

Naval Attack from a minimum altitude of 10,000 Ft.
Strategic Bombing is allowed at any point after January 1, 1943.
B-29s may only be used for Airfield, port, and city bombing. No ground attack upon troops.



The use of One ship TF is allowed if the ships are warships or it is the first two weeks of December 1941 (the fleeing Thundering Herd).

I don't like any of these. Best of luck with them!

quote:

ORIGINAL: moore4807
I have never strat bombed anything in my entire AE career... It was certainly doctrine of the USAAF, just had more fun pounding the troops to rubble instead of the cities. The B-29 rule will cause me to change my tactics.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Some players are (IMO) almost religious about the 4E naval attack altitude thing. From what I see, pilot skill training takes care of things. When you add in two other factors - code patches improved the functioning of flak, and babes (which RA is based on) recalibrated all flak - there is no reason to have altitude restrictions on 4E. When you go low with 4E against hard targets you will pay a price. If you are willing to pay that price you might get hits to make it worth it in your eyes. Some targets are soft - merchants with almost no AA. 4E should not be allowed to go low against them?

The B-29 restrictions make no sense at all. It should be up to you how you use them. Discussions on the forum have shown that IRL 4EB were used against ground troops including at low altitude. The effects were devastating.

The Japanese 2EB are devastating against ground troops in game everywhere for the first third to half of the campaign, and in China for the entire game. Meaning they only become less effective when and where sufficient defense against them is present. Allied 2EB are only as effective under the same conditions, namely when sufficient defense is not available. 2EB as attack bombers get ripped apart by flak in the game (see my AAR).

I notice that there are no such restrictions on other 4EB against ground troops, only B29, so it could be worse. Still, in my view totally unjustified. If you want to use B29 to bomb troops (from any altitude), that should be up to you.

And, I assume the HR means no port mining by B29. there should be no restrictions on that. BTW, a recent patch fixed issues with air mining missions being intercepted by CAP. If you are at or near the current Beta, they can be intercepted. Players have shown the intercept messages in AARs.

Strat bombing - it's part of the game. Even early on. Be advised that if you dump this HR then you will suffer greatly in China. But part of this game is eating sandwiches made from questionable substances, and making your opponent do the same!

The single ship TF thing is just trying to micromanage a player who might try to game the system by flooding the area near enemy CV with single ships so as to soak off sorties. But it's a failure as a rule and unjustly stops you from using single ship TF in situations where it is warranted. For example, instead of 20 single ship TF you could use 10 two-ship TF to game the system. Where does the rule end? It's silly. Just play fair. I use single ship TF here and there (supply little islands and such), and totally reserve the tactic to scatter a TF if I feel need to. Obviously running away from the PI/DEI early on is big one, but I think that could occur at other times and places too, not just during the first two weeks.

This one is controversial. I will not mention it again, only here to provide perspective. An example of a large CV raid going after a small or single-ship TF in your opponent's previous game was never sent to Michael for bug analysis in spite of a couple of suggestions to do so. So is it really about perceived gaming of the system, or about imposing one's view of operations on one's opponent?

These are my opinions on these specific HR. All that matters is your opinions and your opponent's opinions. Make agreements that you are comfortable with. Be flexible if things don't work out the way you anticipated. Have fun with the game and don't get too hung up on technical details working a certain way. Just learn how they work and then work with that the way that you work with the law of gravity every day (can't change that, can you?!).

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

I know John very well, probably better than any other player. We often talk weekly and sometimes more. He knows I'll be in both AAR, but will not break "Op Security." I'll be here to offer some suggesting on things you could do that are more behind the scene stuff rather than 'defend here' or 'attack there.'

I would not disband some of your early war bomber air group HQ units with 5 planes in them. I'm using those that get withdrawn/disbanded in mid-42 as ASW platforms. Train them up in ASW after their moral goes to 99. Then, either NavS or LowN to attack subs.

The reduced cargo capacity takes some time to get use to. I use xAKs which have speed of 14 or greater that have both a cargo and liquid capacity to carry fuel. That is your early war bottle neck that needs to be addressed. Some of your shipping in Burma and India can convert to xAPs, I do so in the safety of Cape Town and then they mainly go to USA. Drop me a PM and I'll forward some of my info I've gathered over the years.

John is 'obsessed' about sinking shipping of all sizes and types. Use that to your advantage.

Good luck!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: moore4807

I have to laugh at the ASW bomber comment... because I told John that was where I'm a B*st*rd about it... In my game against Larry when I was the Allies, EVERY bomb carrying fighter group on the West Coast was placed on Naval ops at 1000ft and 80% LRCAP/20% rest and the search planes were pointing out at least 3-4 subs in the beginning of the war along the coast... by one year in Larry had 2/3rds of his sub fleet laid up for repairs or sunk. I think my all time best was 16 hits by P-40's outside of Los Angeles by 3 squadrons on one sub... obviously it sank. I asked him if he wanted to make a HR about it and he never answered, so I figured I
would just dial it back to emergencies only.

quote:

ORIGINAL: moore4807
Larry

If I remember correctly - you need to keep them stocked with supply like tenders and I always kept two or three AS at a base when I had multiple subs stationed there. I'll stock Pago Pago with the AS ships from CONUS and Johnston Is for the US S-boats (short range) to keep Kwajalein area busy...