Running a successful bomber base

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Running a successful bomber base

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> The War Room >> Running a successful bomber base

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Running a successful bomber base - 11/21/2005 11:19:20 PM

Cpt.Buckmaster

Posts: 65
Joined: 9/16/2004
From: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
Status: offline

OK, so I've got Port Moresby built up to a size 7 AF. I've got 4 B-17E BGs, 2 B-24D BGs, and 3 P-38G FGs stationed there right now. If the groups were at full strength, we'd be talking about a total of like 600 aircraft, but there's probably 500 there right now. I've got about 300 air support dudes stationed there right now.

Here are the questions:

Is this too much for a size 7 AF?

Should I station a couple hundred more air support dudes there?

I've already got the 7th AF HQ stationed there, but I was thinking of moving SWPAC there as well since Moresby is quickly becoming a "rear area" and should be quite safe from invasion (at least, it'd be stupid to try it at this point). Will this make any difference?

Does the CO of the AF HQ have any major impact on operations?

Any other tricks/advice/ideas would be most appreciated!

< Message edited by Cpt.Buckmaster -- 11/21/2005 11:49:48 PM >

_____________________________

"In life, as in a football game, the principle to follow is: Hit the line hard!"-Theodore Roosevelt

Post #: 1

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/22/2005 12:43:11 AM

jrlans

Posts: 180
Joined: 8/27/2005
From: Los Angeles, CA
Status: offline

Well quickly adding more AV support wont help as AV support is capped at 250 per base. If you overstack your bases it just takes a little bit longer for all your planes to repair and come back online. (Which in the long run isnt horrible, if your launching long range strikes, say against rabaul, your pilots need some time to recover fatigue)

(in reply to Cpt.Buckmaster)

Post #: 2

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/22/2005 12:54:18 AM

niceguy2005

Posts: 12523
Joined: 7/4/2005
From: Super secret hidden base
Status: offline

Short answer to your question is I would distribute my air power a little.

Long answer = Sounds like your fairly for along in your game. I am going to guess you are playing against the AI, but if not, look out. I don't think you have enough fighter support for that base. If I were the Japs and knew you had that much air power stacked at a base I would raid it for sure. I'd start with airfield raids to reduce the effectiveness of the strip and then I'd move about 4BBs in to clobber the air field. I might follow that up with some carriers or another bombardement task force.

If you aren't using all those heavy bombers rotate them to OZ for R&R. Move them forward only a few days before you need them. Otherwise they are just parked on the grass with big bullseyes painted on them.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Cpt.Buckmaster)

Post #: 3

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/22/2005 1:54:19 AM

Cpt.Buckmaster

Posts: 65
Joined: 9/16/2004
From: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

Short answer to your question is I would distribute my air power a little.

Long answer = Sounds like your fairly for along in your game. I am going to guess you are playing against the AI, but if not, look out. I don't think you have enough fighter support for that base. If I were the Japs and knew you had that much air power stacked at a base I would raid it for sure. I'd start with airfield raids to reduce the effectiveness of the strip and then I'd move about 4BBs in to clobber the air field. I might follow that up with some carriers or another bombardement task force.

If you aren't using all those heavy bombers rotate them to OZ for R&R. Move them forward only a few days before you need them. Otherwise they are just parked on the grass with big bullseyes painted on them.

Well as far as the fighters go, we're talking 3x 72-pilot P-38 groups (216 max fighters).

The idea behind this base is to rotate the resting BG's so I can hit Rabaul almost every night and still put a good amount of planes in the air per strike. Depending on morale/fatigue levels, I have been able to send an average of 50 bombers every night while keeping fatigue under 10 and morale above 95 for each group.

I want to damage/destroy as many damned Bettys and Zeros on the ground as I can, and the airfield hits are nice too.

Regarding Japanese threats, I've got hundreds of B-25s, B-26s, A-20s, etc etc stationed at the surrounding New Guinea airbases (Gili-Gili, Dobodura), so I'm HOPING a group of BBs tries to approach PM ;)

At any rate, I'm concerned about the impact of the HQs, the COs, the AF size, and the air support numbers. I know that night flying takes a bite out of strike size, so I want to limit anything else that does as well.

_____________________________

"In life, as in a football game, the principle to follow is: Hit the line hard!"-Theodore Roosevelt

(in reply to niceguy2005)

Post #: 4

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/22/2005 2:35:14 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

Is this too much for a size 7 AF?

The optimal ratio of planes to airfield size is 50:1, so for a level 7 AF you should limit yourself to 350 planes to get the best results.

Since you have other airfields in the region such as Dobodura and Gili-Gili, you may as well build them up to maximum air size and spread your planes to them too. "DB" in particular is good because it is closer to Rabaul, and the less distance your planes have to fly, the better they will perform.

Have fun -

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to Cpt.Buckmaster)

Post #: 5

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/22/2005 3:20:26 AM

niceguy2005

Posts: 12523
Joined: 7/4/2005
From: Super secret hidden base
Status: offline

I misunderstood about the fighters. I was thinking squadrons, not groups. 216 should definetly be enough. However, in that case, you just have too many planes at the airfield. Most will sit on the ground.

To stop BBs in this game, medium bombers won't do it - unless some carry torps that I don't know about. To stop BBs you need:

1. Surface TF
2. Torp bombers
3. Carriers
4. Really big CD guns

If you have Beufort (sp?) they may work in mass.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Cpt.Buckmaster)

Post #: 6

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/22/2005 8:28:19 PM

Cpt.Buckmaster

Posts: 65
Joined: 9/16/2004
From: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
Status: offline

Trust me, I've got the defense of PM covered. I'm on the offensive, I've got air and sea superiority in the Coral Sea area. I've got PBYs spotting anything south of Truk and I've got plenty of LCUs, CV groups, BB groups, planes... I'm moving up the solomon chain right now and the Japanese are on the defensive. If a group of japanese BBs were to try to make a run towards PM, I'd know about it days in advance and I'd be hitting it the whole way there. I'm just not concerned with an attack.

What I am trying to learn, however, is the 'secret sauce' that will tweak my bomber base so it's most efficient at getting planes in the air per strike. Every day I've got 4 of the groups resting, so it's not like I'm trying to mount 200+ bomber raids. I'm usually only sending one or two groups per strike per day.

What you guys have said so far is I've probably overloaded the AF, so I'll prolly move a couple groups to another AF. What I'm still curious about, though, is will moving SWPAC HQ in have any additional impact on this that the current 7th AF HQ that's there doesn't already? Also, does the CO of these HQ's have much impact either in anybody's experience?

In addition to all that, I'm still not clear about the air support troops. I know that 250 is the most that will be *required* by a big base like this, but if I keep more stationed there will the planes repair faster?

Thanks for the replies so far!

_____________________________

"In life, as in a football game, the principle to follow is: Hit the line hard!"-Theodore Roosevelt

(in reply to niceguy2005)

Post #: 7

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/23/2005 2:46:42 AM

Gem35

Posts: 3420
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Dallas, Texas
Status: offline

NOpe, 250 aviation will support 2500 planes as well as 250.

They do not really control it all though, like ADavidB stated, the size of the airfield(50:1) affects the operational status of bombers as well as an Air HQ unit. ANY base not within an operational range of an AIR HQ will have a 25% penalty to the amount of bombers that fly a given mission. They also effect the morale of air squadrons.

Bombers at a base in say Dutch Harbor have a 25% penalty during the winter. So you see, there are certain factors to keep in mind instead of "stacking the deck".

_____________________________

It doesn't make any sense, Admiral. Were we better than the Japanese or just luckier?

Banner By Feurer Krieg

(in reply to Cpt.Buckmaster)

Post #: 8

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/23/2005 5:19:44 AM

Feinder

Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline

Beisdes being a magnet for bombardment (overstuffing an AF will cause lots of planes destroyed on the ground)...

In the manual 9.4:
If you have more than the max planes at a base (size x 50), there is a 25% reduction in strike size.
If you have more than the max planes at a base (size x 100), there is an additional 25% reductin in strike size (so 50% reductin in strike size).

Overstuffing is generally a bad idea.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

(in reply to Gem35)

Post #: 9

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/24/2005 3:21:28 PM

leehunt27@bloomberg.net

Posts: 533
Joined: 9/6/2004
Status: offline

thanks for these replies as well- these issues are much bigger in the 1944 scenario as the Americans. I think i have 1,000 planes on Saipan :) Time to move some around...

_____________________________

John 21:25

(in reply to Cpt.Buckmaster)

Post #: 10

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/24/2005 4:02:11 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

NOpe, 250 aviation will support 2500 planes as well as 250.

This is the standard rule-book answer. However, i've found that if you have a large base, if you put more than 250 av support in the base, the planes seem to be repaired faster. As commented on elsewhere, the rule book does not always seem to give the correct answer everytime.

(in reply to Gem35)

Post #: 11

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/25/2005 11:47:39 PM

Cpt.Buckmaster

Posts: 65
Joined: 9/16/2004
From: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
Status: offline

Interesting!

So some have seen an improvement in repair time with more than 250 a/s, eh? I think I'll just stick with the "1 dude per plane" rule instead of depending on only 250 and see what happens.

Also, I've already trimmed PM down to 400 planes, but I'm gonna transfer one more squad out to put me around 350 (so it fits the 50 per size rule thingy). I've got Dobodura built up enough now, so I can spread the bomber squads around a bit.

I've got my seebees and EABs working their tails off building AFs on New Guinea since SWPAC is overflowing with squadrons right now. It's a struggle to get all these planes flying... I'm going to have to start transferring air support units from the central pacific!

Well, most of my questions have been answered (and thanks for the help)... but there's one left: does having SWPAC present (in addition to an Air Force HQ) have any further benefit (air op wise) to a base and the surrounding bases? If so, I'm gonna move MacArthur to PM. Otherwise I'll wait until I've started cleaning Japanese off the northern coast.

_____________________________

"In life, as in a football game, the principle to follow is: Hit the line hard!"-Theodore Roosevelt

(in reply to rtrapasso)

Post #: 12

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/25/2005 11:55:52 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

Well, most of my questions have been answered (and thanks for the help)... but there's one left: does having SWPAC present (in addition to an Air Force HQ) have any further benefit (air op wise) to a base and the surrounding bases?

I think only indirectly, in that it improves efficiency in ground ops, improves morale - things like that, not DIRECTLY affecting flight ops.

(in reply to Cpt.Buckmaster)

Post #: 13

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/27/2005 11:24:43 PM

denisonh

Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline

Also ensure you have adequate supply, at least 2x what is listed as "required".

_____________________________

"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to rtrapasso)

Post #: 14

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/28/2005 6:11:08 AM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

quote:

Regarding Japanese threats, I've got hundreds of B-25s, B-26s, A-20s, etc etc stationed at the surrounding New Guinea airbases (Gili-Gili, Dobodura), so I'm HOPING a group of BBs tries to approach PM ;)

Don't expect those medium bombers to do much to Jap BB's. Their 500lb bombs won't penetrate.

(in reply to denisonh)

Post #: 15

RE: Running a successful bomber base - 11/28/2005 9:14:41 PM

bradfordkay

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

Cap Buckmeister, if you have your SWPac HQ unit within transfer range (and with enough supply) of any airbase or air unit that is attached to it, those units will be able to receive replacements. That is about the only advantage it will give to your air units.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 16

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> The War Room >> Running a successful bomber base

Page: [1]