"House Rules"

"House Rules" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> The War Room

Message

Attack Condor -> "House Rules" (2/14/2003 12:08:00 AM)
Sitting at work, mulling my turns to Grotius, Terp and Quark...and had an interesting discussion with Q about house rules. (I'm not in a game with any house rules, so this isn't a complaint, just a discussion starter :) ) Q has Efate, I have Basse built up to level 4 airfield and have parked massive amounts of B25, B26, my A20, and a Hudson squadron there. They make the short run to Efate, use the IJN base as target practice, but do so at 1000 ft to maximize their effect. He knows they're coming, almost every day. He knows I know he knows. He just can't do anything about it. He has no AA there and no CAP. He took Efate and L'ville early on using the blitz, but I have taken L'ville back (Q did charge a high price on my APs and Aks though :D). I toyed with the idea of taking Efate as well, but where else is there such an available source of practice for my bombers? And yes, when my B17s need the practice, I'll rotate them in as well for their turn at the buffet. Which brings me to my question (finally) - why the house rule against 4E bombers not bombing <1000 feet? Shouldn't the blitz technique be punished for not providing AA to provide air defense? Curious to other opinions on the subject as well. :)

bilbow -> (2/14/2003 4:37:36 AM)
I don't use house rules - never found them to be necessary. As for 1000 ft bomber strikes, you will get a better effect, but there is a penalty applied to morale and, if present, flak. So it is really sefl-adjusting. You exchange a greater effect for greater damage to planes and morale. If that's your choice, do it. In my case I never use bombers during daytime below 6000 ft- the benefits IMO just aren't worth the penalties. I'll settle for strikes that may be less effective but my force is preserved and has gained experience. I wouldn't be gaining experience is I was constantly replacing casualties. Also, High morale units are more effective.

Feinder -> (2/16/2003 12:39:51 AM)
Concurred. I don't really use my medium bombers at 1000'. Exactly because of the substantial moral hit they take. Once that moral drops below 50, they may or may not fly. I'd rather fly constantly at 6000' than iffy at 1000'. I do use 1000' as my own ariel version of a "shock" attack tho. Put a bunch of planes at 1000', hopefully put his base on the ropes, then go back to 6000' to keep it suppressed. -F-

Mr.Frag -> (2/16/2003 1:00:33 AM)
4 engine bombers flying at 5000 or less should result in not only the morale penalty, but also double fatigue for each mission. Additionally, any form of CAP should be twice as effective on these planes, removing the defensive firepower advantage of the big bombers. This heavy defense bonus assumes that these planes are flying in a standard box formation, where they support each other with guns, making attacking them very tough. Since this formation is not going to get used at low altitudes, the benefits of this self support should be completely lost. This is one house rule that should be built into the game ... NO 4 engine bombers < 6000 feet. Personally, they should just remove the altitude choice as that level of control is certainly not available to theater commanders.

Attack Condor -> (2/16/2003 3:25:36 AM)
I am now aware of the morale hit they take - I did send 25+ bombers to Efate @1000ft, but I [I] knew[/I] there was no CAP or AA (See "Battle of the Newbies" AAR). 12 hours and 107 runway hits later, I started a buffet line where each squadron went in once a day to keep the pressure up, then stood down for 5 days. I didn't even think about morale being affected. Thanks for the info :)

mogami -> Bomber formations (2/16/2003 3:36:21 AM)
Hi, I don't think the game reflects the change in formation required for land targets versus ship targets. Against land targets the airgroups use a box formation but against naval targets they have to change into a "line ahead" formation. Also I think we need to study the effects of altitude on the bombs. The bombs for use against ships were designed to be dropped at certain heights (in order to obtain the energy needed to penetrate) The reason for the historic altitudes for attack had more to do with the bombs then with accuracy or morale. (Torpedo plane pilots were not braver then level bomber pilots, they just had to go in at lower altitudes. The level bomber pilots would have done the same only their weapons would not perform properly) As time passes. UV/WITP will acquire more accurate attention to detail. When the data bases aquires all the stats for every type of weapon tactics will need to be changed in game to reflect it. (You could still send your bombers in low, only to see the increased number of hits result in bombs bouncing off)

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.8125