B-17 supremacy

B-17 supremacy (Full Version)

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

Message

btbw -> B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 3:25:43 PM)
So WITP AE still have same stupid level bomb system like WITP?

pompack -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 3:34:45 PM)
[8\|] no

bk19@mweb.co.za -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 3:54:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pompack [8\|] no A bit brief that..... You could have used, non, nein, nyet, not bloody likely.... Heck, there wasn't even any punctuation! On the other hand this may also have been an appropriate response to such an allegation. [sm=comp16.gif]

btbw -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 3:54:56 PM)
My experience said YES. Here example how wonderful B-17 and how devastate them which never happen in really. Morning Air attack on Noumea , at 115,160 Weather in hex: Partial cloud Raid spotted at 33 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet. Estimated time to target is 9 minutes Japanese aircraft A6M2 Zero x 31 Allied aircraft B-17D Fortress x 1 B-17E Fortress x 38 Japanese aircraft losses A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed Allied aircraft losses B-17D Fortress: 1 damaged B-17E Fortress: 1 destroyed, 13 damaged Japanese Ships CV Soryu, Bomb hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage BB Kirishima, Bomb hits 1 CV Kaga, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage CV Shokaku, Bomb hits 1 Japanese ground losses: 5 casualties reported Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled Port hits 2 Aircraft Attacking: 2 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 13000 feet * Port Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb 6 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 13000 feet * Port Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb 2 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 13000 feet * Port Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb 5 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 13000 feet * Port Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb 3 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 13000 feet * Port Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb 5 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 13000 feet * Port Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb 2 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 13000 feet * Port Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb 1 x B-17D Fortress bombing from 13000 feet * Port Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb 7 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 13000 feet * Port Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb 2 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 13000 feet * Port Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb 2 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 13000 feet * Port Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb CAP engaged: Hiryu-1 with A6M2 Zero (2 airborne, 4 on standby, 6 scrambling) 2 plane(s) intercepting now. Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters to 15000. Time for all group planes to reach interception is 32 minutes Kaga-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 2 on standby, 0 scrambling) 1 plane(s) intercepting now. Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters to 15000. Time for all group planes to reach interception is 9 minutes Soryu-1 with A6M2 Zero (2 airborne, 6 on standby, 0 scrambling) 2 plane(s) intercepting now. Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters to 15000. Time for all group planes to reach interception is 9 minutes Shokaku-1 with A6M2 Zero (2 airborne, 6 on standby, 0 scrambling) 2 plane(s) intercepting now. Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters to 15000. Time for all group planes to reach interception is 9 minutes Kasai S. in a A6M2 Zero makes head on attack ... forces B-17E Fortress out of formation Ammo storage explosion on CV Soryu

Grfin Zeppelin -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 3:58:58 PM)
Well ships at anchor are very vulnerable. A couple of Hudsons could have accomplished a similar result. Especially against such a minicap. (with some luck I admit)

LoBaron -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:00:10 PM)
Ouch. Disbanding carriers in port within heavy bomber range at a base without or bad radar? Big boo.

Chickenboy -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:00:56 PM)
Did you actually have your carriers disbanded in port within B17 range of your enemy? Also, you are aware of diminished CAP efficacy by fleet CVs in a port hex, aren't you? There's probably a host of other issues that need to be looked at. Your post doesn't provide sufficient information for any meaningful advice. ETA: I love it. 3 posts within 2 minutes on the topic. [:D]

LoBaron -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:03:08 PM)
Saturday. [:D]

bk19@mweb.co.za -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:04:14 PM)
Hmmm... how difficult do you believe it would be for an experience bomb aimer (and pilot) to hit a stable ship at anchor from 15,000 feet? Given that an aircraft carrier is probably the size of a small football field, and not moving... I would submit it is way easier to do than if the same target was underway.

PaxMondo -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:08:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: btbw My experience said YES. Here example how wonderful B-17 and how devastate them which never happen in really. You are absolutely correct. The IJN never would disband carriers into a port within 4E range and insufficient CAP. Never happened in reality. [;)] EDIT: So yes, WitPAE is exactly the same as WitP in this area. Players can make any mistake they want and the game will "faithfully" reward them. [:D]

Grfin Zeppelin -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:09:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PaxMondo quote: ORIGINAL: btbw My experience said YES. Here example how wonderful B-17 and how devastate them which never happen in really. You are absolutely correct. The IJN never would disband carriers into a port within 4E range and insufficient CAP. Never happened in reality. [:D] [sm=happy0005.gif]

Chickenboy -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:10:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gr�fin Zeppelin Well ships at anchor are very vulnerable. A couple of Hudsons could have accomplished a similar result. Especially against such a minicap. (with some luck I admit) Totally wrong, GZ. [:-] Two Hudsons wouldn't carry 9 bombs between 'em. [;)]

Grfin Zeppelin -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:13:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: Gr�fin Zeppelin Well ships at anchor are very vulnerable. A couple of Hudsons could have accomplished a similar result. Especially against such a minicap. (with some luck I admit) Totally wrong, GZ. [:-] Two Hudsons wouldn't carry 9 bombs between 'em. [;)] Grrrrrrr [sm=00000007.gif]

btbw -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:13:34 PM)
Some digits. Area of Noumea port around 5 square km. Accuracy of B-17 on Pacific theater around 30% in 1000 feet round from aiming point. Only first bomb going to targetted area, all other laying in string with delay=huge distance between. What we see in report? Despite on hard damage from aces on Zeros, all B-17 sections scoring a hit. And it with limitation on 1 bomb hit per plane ( see "Only first bomb going to targetted area, all other laying in string with delay=huge distance between."). Bombers make 10 hits ( 8 to ships and 2 to port buildings with 5 casualties in it). Simple math give to us effectivness of that B-17s. ONE B-17 BOMBER CAN GUARANTIED SHOT ANYTHING IN AREA OF 350x350 meters. WHOA!

btbw -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:15:39 PM)
Carrier battle was before so cap cutted and CV need emergency repair.

btbw -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:17:23 PM)
I dont ask about where disband carriers. I ask about who make Loser Bomber same effective as Dive Bomber? How i understand not many people here know about bombing.

btbw -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:21:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PaxMondo quote: ORIGINAL: btbw My experience said YES. Here example how wonderful B-17 and how devastate them which never happen in really. You are absolutely correct. The IJN never would disband carriers into a port within 4E range and insufficient CAP. Never happened in reality. [;)] EDIT: So yes, WitPAE is exactly the same as WitP in this area. Players can make any mistake they want and the game will "faithfully" reward them. [:D] Very sarcastic but after carrier battle near Brisbane can you show me way how save 2 carriers from major fire and floating? Mr. Genius

LoBaron -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:30:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: btbw after carrier battle near Brisbane can you show me way how save 2 carriers from major fire and floating? According to your experience probably not by disbanding them in range of a potential retaliation strike? btbw, my advice would be to calm down, reassess the situation, accept you made a big mistake by getting your CVs damaged far from safety in the first place, and then by disbanding them in port in the face of enemy heavy bombers, and then wise up and move on. From what I see 37 B17s whacked some nice big static targets. Don�t confuse naval attack routine with a port strike. You wont get much sympathy by blaming the game for your own errors.

btbw -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:33:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LoBaron quote: ORIGINAL: btbw after carrier battle near Brisbane can you show me way how save 2 carriers from major fire and floating? According to your experience probably not by disbanding them in range of a potential retaliation strike? btbw, my advice would be to calm down, reassess the situation, accept you made a big mistake by getting your CVs damaged far from safety in the first place, and then by disbanding them in port in the face of enemy heavy bombers, and then wise up and move on. From what I see 37 B17s whacked some nice big static targets. Don�t confuse naval attack routine with a port strike. You wont get much sympathy by blaming the game for your own errors. Why you talking about me? Can you reveal how B-17 can have same bomb accuracy like Helldiver? Umm? No? Touche.

PaxMondo -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:35:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: btbw Very sarcastic but after carrier battle near Brisbane can you show me way how save 2 carriers from major fire and floating? Mr. Genius Sorry, but you seem to be under the false impression that there is a solution to every problem. IRL, there are problems for which there is no solution. If you had damaged carriers from action that deep into allied territory, then the expectation is that they are indeed lost. That is why those raids were rarely done. There is, in fact, huge risk in doing them. You wish to do actions which IRL were highly risky and then to have an unrealistic outcome and blame the game. I don't claim to be Mr. Genius, but I am smart enough to understand the risks inherent with your type of op and avoid them. [;)] Continue to blame the game for your actions and there is a name for that.

LoBaron -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:40:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: btbw Why you talking about me? LOL, tbh I have no idea. First I thought you just did not understand the root cause of your defeat and needed help, now I rather believe you should chose an easier game... [8\|]

Empire101 -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 4:58:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PaxMondo quote: ORIGINAL: btbw Very sarcastic but after carrier battle near Brisbane can you show me way how save 2 carriers from major fire and floating? Mr. Genius Sorry, but you seem to be under the false impression that there is a solution to every problem. IRL, there are problems for which there is no solution. If you had damaged carriers from action that deep into allied territory, then the expectation is that they are indeed lost. That is why those raids were rarely done. There is, in fact, huge risk in doing them. You wish to do actions which IRL were highly risky and then to have an unrealistic outcome and blame the game. I don't claim to be Mr. Genius, but I am smart enough to understand the risks inherent with your type of op and avoid them. [;)] Continue to blame the game for your actions and there is a name for that. ORIGINAL: LoBaron LOL, tbh I have no idea. First I thought you just did not understand the root cause of your defeat and needed help, now I rather believe you should chose an easier game... +1 to both of the above. btbw, please lower the anti.....people are only trying to help.

btbw -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 5:01:30 PM)
LOL. Why you talk about carriers? Mistakes? Me? It example. 40 B-17 attacked ships in port. 8 hits in flattops, 2 hits in port buildings. B-17 SO SMART. They dont attackes ML stayed here, 3 CAs, bunch of merchants etc. Wonderful B-17 directly attacked and hitted ONLY main ships like swarm of dive bombers. I understand when AB/DB/TB choose who to attack and make 25% hits from their attacks. It close to historical and it why that classes was born. BUT. Slow stupid blind B-17 maintained course (for gain accuracy, change speed on 10mph or alt for 100 feet and you will lose for 100-200 feet from aim point even if you luck, no maneurs - it stop bomb sight work and need to make attack round again, clinbs do miss too) without ability for TARGET except leader ( in that big pool under feets). All bombers going from SAME course (it mean not individual targeting and correcting course with sighting on enemy ships). All drop bombs with leader (it give small chance to carpet area and hit target with may be ONE bomb). So how 8 B-17 hit ONLY flattops on area on 5000000 square meters without hitting other ships? I see here WRONG formula. Level bombers must have area effect formula and damage ships despite of their rank or size.

btbw -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 5:06:31 PM)
So guys try be constructive and dont see where carriers, how much CAP and what i must to do with all your opinions how to do something. B-17, accuracy, selectivity - it target of this thread. JFYI accuracy of B-17 against dot-target like warship was near 1%. Accuracy against area target like huge building - 30%. ONLY ONE warship touched by B-17 [sm=crazy.gif]

bk19@mweb.co.za -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 5:07:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: btbw LOL. Why you talk about carriers? Mistakes? Me? It example. 40 B-17 attacked ships in port. 8 hits in flattops, 2 hits in port buildings. B-17 SO SMART. They dont attackes ML stayed here, 3 CAs, bunch of merchants etc. Wonderful B-17 directly attacked and hitted ONLY main ships like swarm of dive bombers. I understand when AB/DB/TB choose who to attack and make 25% hits from their attacks. It close to historical and it why that classes was born. BUT. Slow stupid blind B-17 maintained course (for gain accuracy, change speed on 10mph or alt for 100 feet and you will lose for 100-200 feet from aim point even if you luck, no maneurs - it stop bomb sight work and need to make attack round again, clinbs do miss too) without ability for TARGET except leader� ( in that big pool under feets). All bombers going from SAME course (it mean not individual targeting and correcting course with sighting on enemy ships). All drop bombs with leader (it give small chance to carpet area and hit target with may be ONE bomb). So how 8 B-17 hit ONLY flattops on area on 5000000 square meters without hitting other ships? I see here WRONG formula. Level bombers must have area effect formula and damage ships despite of their rank or size. To replicate anything like this kind of detailed behaviour you will need to be using a game that models these aspects with a much finer degree of granularity. Have a look at Microsoft Flight Simulator or other simulators of its kind. In a game such as this, unless you have a quantum chip set on a very expensive PC you are unlikely to be able to model the dynamic behaviour that you seek.

btbw -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 5:14:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bk19@mweb.co.za quote: ORIGINAL: btbw LOL. Why you talk about carriers? Mistakes? Me? It example. 40 B-17 attacked ships in port. 8 hits in flattops, 2 hits in port buildings. B-17 SO SMART. They dont attackes ML stayed here, 3 CAs, bunch of merchants etc. Wonderful B-17 directly attacked and hitted ONLY main ships like swarm of dive bombers. I understand when AB/DB/TB choose who to attack and make 25% hits from their attacks. It close to historical and it why that classes was born. BUT. Slow stupid blind B-17 maintained course (for gain accuracy, change speed on 10mph or alt for 100 feet and you will lose for 100-200 feet from aim point even if you luck, no maneurs - it stop bomb sight work and need to make attack round again, clinbs do miss too) without ability for TARGET except leader� ( in that big pool under feets). All bombers going from SAME course (it mean not individual targeting and correcting course with sighting on enemy ships). All drop bombs with leader (it give small chance to carpet area and hit target with may be ONE bomb). So how 8 B-17 hit ONLY flattops on area on 5000000 square meters without hitting other ships? I see here WRONG formula. Level bombers must have area effect formula and damage ships despite of their rank or size. To replicate anything like this kind of detailed behaviour you will need to be using a game that models these aspects with a much finer degree of granularity. Have a look at Microsoft Flight Simulator or other simulators of its kind. In a game such as this, unless you have a quantum chip set on a very expensive PC you are unlikely to be able to model the dynamic behaviour that you seek. OMG. It all? We dont have wargame? We have game with war theater and non-historical, non-realistic airplanes inside? Dude, why you need WITP AE then? Quantum chip, lol. Bachelor with some knowledge of probability theory can make model of Level bombing. You dont need to have quantum chip and Jakob Bernoulli for that.

David The Great -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 5:16:27 PM)
Nothing points to the fact that 1 bomber hits 1 ship, being docked in rows one could argue that 1 bomber hits several ships. About the hit chance, out of 312 bombs dropped only 9 hit targets, the one on the BB has minor effect, being not able to penetrate, the other is a different story, so the hit chance is rather low, you should be glad he dit not fly his mission at 100 ft. As written before, putting ships in port in range of 4E bombers is a risk, one i would rather not take.

Grfin Zeppelin -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 5:33:47 PM)
So your carriers were damaged and burning you disbanded them at port, thats fine and reasonable but, all of them ? Next time leave the cripples behind and move the rest into safety. Also in such a situation remove the planes especially the fighters and place them at the airfield to protect your precious and fly in even more fighters. These are things you could have done after bringing yourself in this kind of mess. As stated before, using carriers in remote locations is risky and if something goes wrong yer in big podoo. Your situation only barely has something to do with are 4Es broken or OP or not. You made a mess out of it and need to rethink that whole situation. YOU operated them there, YOU disbanded them at a port so stop blaming and draw your conclusions.

d0mbo -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 5:39:37 PM)
Guys, btbw is convinced the game is WRONG and he is RIGHT. Nothing is going to alter his thinking right now. This happens a lot to people who lose irreplaceable CV's, for whatever reason. It could be you or me the next time :) btbw: don't post when you are mad. It only creates an ugly and unpleasant thread like this one. Come back when you have settled down and you are able to make reasonable posts. Even if you would have a point right now, the way you post in this thread won't help to get it across to others.

btbw -> RE: B-17 supremacy (2/4/2012 5:44:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gr�fin Zeppelin So your carriers were damaged and burning you disbanded them at port, that fine and reasonable but, all of them ? Next time leave the cripples behind and move the rest into safety. Also in such a situation remove the planes especially the fighters and place them at the airfield to protect your precious and fly in even more fighters. These are things you could have done after bringing yourself in this kind of mess. As stated before, using carriers in remote locations is risky and if something goes wrong yer in big podoo. Your situation only barely has something to do with are 4Es broken or OP or not. You made a mess out of it and need to rethink that whole situation. Thank you for lesson. But again. I dont worry about these scenario. I talking about bug in game. B-17, right now, it long-range, well-protected, well-defended DIVE BOMBER. In really, they was useless againt maritime and slightly useful against land targets (area). It all what i want by opening this thread - B-17 as level-bomber. In my cause AAR must look like 1-2 hits in flattops and 6-7 hits in a hundred other ships and harbour. It how work real math for area bombers.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.90625