P1Y OR G4M (Full Version)

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



Message

Bobthehatchit -> P1Y OR G4M (12/6/2012 4:27:43 PM)

Hello.

Options please, considering whether to concentrate on Betty or Ginga/Frances production, in past games I have not really used the P1Y much and the G4M is a much more known quantity.

P1Y is faster and better armed and armoured but has maintenance issues according to my books.

Interest to know peoples experiences using the P1Y operationally.

Thanks.

Neil.





JSG -> RE: P1Y OR G4M (12/9/2012 5:58:06 PM)

You can look up the maintenance class in the editor.

The P1Y's speed means a lot, but the key for bombers such as these is really to keep them away from fighters almost all the time and to train their crews in both naval search and naval torpedo attack (torpedo enabled during naval attack training, even if no HQa is on-site).

Use them to negate vast areas of oceans to the enemy's convoy shipping. It's unlikely your enemy will be able to protect a great many convoys with CVE-based fighters against 2E torpedo bombers.

Even if he does, the protected convoys are easy prey for your carrier-cruiser task forces once spotted by the 2E bombers AND the CVEs will not be available to support fleet actions (such as protect invasion fleets to free up carrier groups for more offensive cover tactics).

Don't spend any torpedo-capable aircraft on attacks against target on land unless it's a Barracuda or Ryusei (= torpedo-armed dive bombers).


In the end, the difference between a G3M and a P1Y is surprisingly small if you use them like this (not the least because of the G3M's great range).



Bobthehatchit -> RE: P1Y OR G4M (12/27/2012 2:37:59 PM)

Thanks for the reply.

I concur I am using both air frames, the range of the Betty is very usefil in a search capacity and to hit unescorted (by air cover) convoys at long range, whilst the P1Y are used to defend front line base from invasion TF whilst flying from a safer location using drop tanks to increase the range.

The P1Y seem to be much more durable with reguards to flak damage from later war Allied ships.



John 3rd -> RE: P1Y OR G4M (12/27/2012 4:47:36 PM)

P1Y: GOOD aircraft and not nicknamed ' lighter.'



Bobthehatchit -> RE: P1Y OR G4M (12/27/2012 7:22:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

P1Y: GOOD aircraft and not nicknamed ' lighter.'



Amazing what difference some armour and re-sealing fuel tanks can make.



Puhis -> RE: P1Y OR G4M (12/27/2012 8:21:21 PM)

When you start getting P1Ys, range is not that important any more. Any competent allied player will protect convoys, so unescorted long range bombers just get killed. And at least my pilots have difficulties finding any targets past range 7 or 8...



Bobthehatchit -> RE: P1Y OR G4M (12/27/2012 9:02:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

When you start getting P1Ys, range is not that important any more. Any competent allied player will protect convoys, so unescorted long range bombers just get killed. And at least my pilots have difficulties finding any targets past range 7 or 8...


I have to admit to beating up on the AI, so it does send the odd convoy in to harms way....

I have them based put of Kusaie Island to cover Mili, Makin, Makin Tarawa Ocean and Naura, they managed to put down a Essex, Independence and Washington down all on there own with Shidens running interferance. Mine will hit all the way out to 15 hexes, Ive got loads of naval search out Jakes up front and Emilies backed up by a low skill betty unit fly long range seach.



Chris21wen -> RE: P1Y OR G4M (12/28/2012 8:45:55 AM)

One of the problems I have with them is they will insist on making attacks on TF at bases with the corresponding results in losses.  The only way I have found to stop this is to shorten the range so as not to include any base that I think has fighters.   Setting search directions to avoid bases does not appear to work, should it?



JSG -> RE: P1Y OR G4M (12/30/2012 2:42:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

One of the problems I have with them is they will insist on making attacks on TF at bases with the corresponding results in losses.  The only way I have found to stop this is to shorten the range so as not to include any base that I think has fighters.   Setting search directions to avoid bases does not appear to work, should it?


I know this, it was already a problem in Uncommon Valour with Port Moresby fighters decimating Bettys.

You CAN help with said search directions, but not in the way you made it sound:
Your Bettys won't attack convoys that don't get reported. So save for sightings by subs and coastwatchers they will usually only attack where your search aircraft fly to (and where your recons and bombers report from after their missions).
A partial fix to the problem is thus to search with short range in direction of fighter bases (keeping in mind that CAP is quite good in about 3-4 hex radius usually) and search really long range only in harmless directions.
You may even search "behind" the fighter nest if you have a second air base for some flanking search arcs (Rossel Island for search behind Port Moresby, for example).


Another partial fix is to switch your bombers' naval attack on and off depending on the situation. It doesn't hurt to send them on "80% nav attack training + 20% rest" while a big convoy is at or very close to a major fighter base in range, for example.


Finally, there are army bombers of often sufficient range. You may use them (with 250 kg bombs and not extended range mode, no "100 kg bombs" Ki-48 and the like) for powerful 10,000 ft port attack missions at night (50+ aircraft per night for a good punch). That's a quite promising approach against hostile shipping when hostile fighters are a problem for your other anti-shipping efforts.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.9365234