Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port?

Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Tech Support

Message

Marcus_Antonius -> Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (2/23/2011 4:12:24 PM)
I have heard this mentioned before, but I have never seen any indications that the designers were looking to change it? Port bombing seems really rough on ships disbanded in port. Its almost as if you can drop 4 bombs on a port and hit 3 different ships there, often at night :). The lesson, for the time being, is that you try to never leave disbanded ships in air attack range. Its especially tough on minetenders, ammo ships and sub tenders that need to disband in a port to function. I am thinking that the percentages in these attacks is way off and would even consider some sort of house rule in our game until something is adjusted. Thoughts?

Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (2/23/2011 5:57:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: a_gonatas I have heard this mentioned before, but I have never seen any indications that the designers were looking to change it? Port bombing seems really rough on ships disbanded in port. Its almost as if you can drop 4 bombs on a port and hit 3 different ships there, often at night :). The lesson, for the time being, is that you try to never leave disbanded ships in air attack range. Its especially tough on minetenders, ammo ships and sub tenders that need to disband in a port to function. I am thinking that the percentages in these attacks is way off and would even consider some sort of house rule in our game until something is adjusted. Thoughts? It's fine. Piers are big and flat, and disbanded ships like ASes will be tied to them.

herwin -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (2/23/2011 10:38:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: a_gonatas I have heard this mentioned before, but I have never seen any indications that the designers were looking to change it? Port bombing seems really rough on ships disbanded in port. Its almost as if you can drop 4 bombs on a port and hit 3 different ships there, often at night :). The lesson, for the time being, is that you try to never leave disbanded ships in air attack range. Its especially tough on minetenders, ammo ships and sub tenders that need to disband in a port to function. I am thinking that the percentages in these attacks is way off and would even consider some sort of house rule in our game until something is adjusted. Thoughts? Historically in WWII, ports that experienced repeated air attacks were not considered good places to anchor. To evade bombs, ships had to get up steam and move around, which disrupted most routine port operations. Mark Herman discusses this in his monograph on the air operations against Truk.

Marcus_Antonius -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (4/14/2011 4:49:10 AM)
I can appreciate that ships disbanded in port are more vunerable. But this is absurd. It happened to me again tonight. I had two CVE's disbanded in Singapore and 9 Dutch B-25's flew over from Batavia. There were 25 ships disbanded in Singapore and the two CVE's (only) each took 3-4 bomb hits. Now that is what I call level bombing!!! I didn't even know there were B-25's that could reach Singapore. Now I do. the only viable counter seems to be NEVER disband ships in port within range of even a handfull of level bombers or they are likely to become automatic victims.

Nomad -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (4/14/2011 4:59:14 AM)
Did you have any fighters on night CAP? Even if they don't shoot any attacking bombers down, they will disrupt them and the hit percentage seems to go way down. BTW, CVEs will be large targets and very easy to find next to the pier.

herwin -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (4/14/2011 7:29:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: a_gonatas I can appreciate that ships disbanded in port are more vunerable. But this is absurd. It happened to me again tonight. I had two CVE's disbanded in Singapore and 9 Dutch B-25's flew over from Batavia. There were 25 ships disbanded in Singapore and the two CVE's (only) each took 3-4 bomb hits. Now that is what I call level bombing!!! I didn't even know there were B-25's that could reach Singapore. Now I do. the only viable counter seems to be NEVER disband ships in port within range of even a handfull of level bombers or they are likely to become automatic victims. Historically, that's exactly what happened in the Pacific.

Puhis -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (4/14/2011 8:25:34 AM)
When and where?

herwin -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (4/14/2011 9:23:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Puhis When and where? See this paper.

LoBaron -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (4/14/2011 9:40:29 AM)
Wow Herwin! Very interesting work, thank you I enjoyed the read. Just a small question: is there a technical difference between pound, hit, strike, and bomb in the Appendix? Or did you just get tired of using the same word for the same thing over and over again? [:D]

Puhis -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (4/14/2011 10:17:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: herwin quote: ORIGINAL: Puhis When and where? See this paper. "exactly what happened..." Sorry, where was the 9 B-25 bombing CVEs? I could only find something about massive airstirkes versus Truk in 1944... [:-]

herwin -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (4/14/2011 2:34:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LoBaron Wow Herwin! Very interesting work, thank you I enjoyed the read. Just a small question: is there a technical difference between pound, hit, strike, and bomb in the Appendix? Or did you just get tired of using the same word for the same thing over and over again? [:D] You need to ask Mark Herman that.

Marcus_Antonius -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (4/14/2011 2:41:22 PM)
I have to agree that when you say that is "exactly" what happened, you are a bit off the mark. Nobody is saying the disbanded ships should be safe from attack. All I am saying is that the number of level bombing hits against the number of bombs being dropped by very small to modest bomber forces is mind numbing in these situations! My opponent had not even reconed Singapore and had no intelligence on the ships disbanded there. The port was packed with large AP's and AK's that were similiar in size to the small CVE's. The 9 B-25's merely turned up and took out the most valuable ships there as a target of opportunity. And I have seen even more austounding precision bombing when a port with a few small ships is similiarly attacked. The small ships are always hit in my exerience day or night. Its automatic. Now granted, I know CAP will spoil their aim some. But the percentages they are starting from have to be way out of whack. Here is the thing: My obvious counter to all this is to keep all ships within range of port attacks formed up in TFs all the time. That makes them pretty much invunerable. Then when you need to reprovision a sub or rearm a cruiser you disband to get the work done and then form up again quick. Talk about making a labor intensive game more so. I have never played against the AI, maybe it does not attack ports with bombers. But live opponents will when they find the extreme vunerability here. And I am not sure its adding much to the game. Its just making it a bit less playable.

beppi -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (4/14/2011 2:58:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: a_gonatas I have to agree that when you say that is "exactly" what happened, you are a bit off the mark. Nobody is saying the disbanded ships should be safe from attack. All I am saying is that the number of level bombing hits against the number of bombs being dropped by very small to modest bomber forces is mind numbing in these situations! My opponent had not even reconed Singapore and had no intelligence on the ships disbanded there. The port was packed with large AP's and AK's that were similiar in size to the small CVE's. The 9 B-25's merely turned up and took out the most valuable ships there as a target of opportunity. And I have seen even more austounding precision bombing when a port with a few small ships is similiarly attacked. The small ships are always hit in my exerience day or night. Its automatic. Now granted, I know CAP will spoil their aim some. But the percentages they are starting from have to be way out of whack. Here is the thing: My obvious counter to all this is to keep all ships within range of port attacks formed up in TFs all the time. That makes them pretty much invunerable. Then when you need to reprovision a sub or rearm a cruiser you disband to get the work done and then form up again quick. Talk about making a labor intensive game more so. I have never played against the AI, maybe it does not attack ports with bombers. But live opponents will when they find the extreme vunerability here. And I am not sure its adding much to the game. Its just making it a bit less playable. During the day such hits are okay as i can imagine that the B-25 could distinguish between the targets and where focusing on the flat tops. Even an hit rate like that is possible if the attack is low and not interfered by CAP. If you get such results in a day attack it is more or less you own fault. Night attacks are completely different. As currently night attacks are massive overpowered two equal and fair opponents should negotiate some additional rules (no night airfield and port attacks for example, or only allowed for some special squads which are defined). In general night attacks are massive overpowered and even CAP does not really help to stop them. Put 20 Attack Bombers on 100feet night port attack and you can have as much cap as you want. If they do not turn around they will nuke your ships. The thrown off aim at 100 feet does not really makes any difference. You can even nuke from 20k feet ships in a port using night attack with 4E.

Marcus_Antonius -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (4/14/2011 3:22:32 PM)
Hey, everything is my own fault no doubt. :) But I really don't believe that a level bomber in daylight on a bomb range could achieve the sort of hit rates/accuracy I am seeing. Obviously, much less so at night which we will not disagree on. The size of the target doesn't seem to matter either. If you have a few motor launches disbanded in a port, a handful of passing bombers will nail them too. You can have a 100,000 gross tonnage of cargo ships unloading in a port and you can hardly even hit them with a level bomber (naval attack), but you go an disband a few small ships and they are a very likely victim in a port attack.

Puhis -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (4/14/2011 3:32:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: a_gonatas Hey, everything is my own fault no doubt. :) But I really don't believe that a level bomber in daylight on a bomb range could achieve the sort of hit rates/accuracy I am seeing. Obviously, much less so at night which we will not disagree on. The size of the target doesn't seem to matter either. If you have a few motor launches disbanded in a port, a handful of passing bombers will nail them too. I agree. I've destroyed lots of disbanded PT-boats using level bombers. Just set bombers to port attack, and PT-boats are gone. If there's disbanded ships, the always seems to take hits. Ships are not very big targets, IMO level bombers should have hard times hitting even stationary ships. Isn't this the reason why they invented mast high attacks?

inqistor -> RE: Thoughts on bombing ships disbanded in port? (4/15/2011 5:34:18 PM)
I constantly gets more hits, than planes in attack (so some of them hit with multiple bombs). Actually I think hit-ratio vs ships is better, than vs airfield. It is possible, that it is the same mechanism, which is used in ASW. With 1 bomb DBs it works fine, but when using several bombs (or DCs) hit probability tends to accumulate.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.984375