newbie wondering (Full Version)

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



Message


pertsajakilu -> newbie wondering (3/5/2003 8:02:07 PM)

Hi!

Just bought the game couple weeks ago. Itīs marvelous. Learning curve is quite a high and AI is enough for me at the moment. I doubt that I never have time to play e-mail game.

I have ocassionally played pacwar and this game is good addenum..

So far I have only played allies.

Couple questions if someone would kindly answer.

I tried to make a big b-17e squadron and disbanded 3 squadron to 1. Wanted to get big attack, not 3 planes. It was about mid oct 1942. At first all looked fine. Over 20 planes and pilots, the squadron was in cooktown.

I moved squadron to Moresby ( 6 airfields and plentiful support ). What happened: 11 planes in reserve, 3 being repaired and 12 in use.
I let the pilots rest after transfer and started operations. I was very careful and no losses, but some damaged during the operations. All the time reserve planes dimished until none. Now I have 12 planes and over 20 pilots in squadron???? What happened?

Second one:
How pilots gain experience? Of course by training but in action. I have noticed that bomber crews gain easily exp by flying naval search ( and getting contacts ) or am I imagining whole thing? After hard fights seems that exp is declining. IE fresh unit has exp 80 and after a couple hard fight exp is 75. Combat lossess and replacement pilots are inexperienced???

Secondly it seems that all the best pilots get killed after they have 4 - 6 victories.


I have read AARīs and I have seen that players put B-17's attack altitude at 1000 feet. Was it done in real life in pacific? I donīt recall reading anything like that. Those attacks shoud have very high AA-losses.
I think that that kind attacks are most unrealistic. Not very important matter, just wondering.

Regards

Arto




Mr.Frag -> (3/5/2003 9:08:36 PM)

B-17's have a squadron size of 12, the group shrunk down to it's proper size.

Any successful action gets the pilots a chance to gain skill. The more dangerous the action, the more likely it seems.

You need to watch fatigue & morale, both of which when high or low will cause a higher likelihood of pilot induced error resulting in death (operational losses).

The 1000 foot attack is something thata lot of us debate as to validity for large 4 engine bombers.




SpitfireIX -> (3/5/2003 9:42:18 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr.Frag
[B]

The 1000 foot attack is something thata lot of us debate as to validity for large 4 engine bombers. [/B][/QUOTE]

The following article should settle the question of whether or not B-17s were used for skip bombing: [URL=http://www.afa.org/magazine/valor/1290valor.html]http://www.afa.org/magazine/valor/1290valor.html[/URL]

The fact that B-17s were used extensively for skip bombing was confirmed to me by my great uncle, Bill Singer, who was Ken McCullar's bombardier (although fortunately for Uncle Bill, he was sick and couldn't fly the day that McCullar's plane crashed).

We can debate the accuracy of the modeling of skip bombing by heavy bombers in UV (personally I can't really comment, as I always save my heavies for airfield attacks), but the fact that historically they were used in this role during this time period is indisputable.




Feinder -> (3/5/2003 10:55:28 PM)

I tried to make a big b-17e squadron and disbanded 3 squadron to 1. Wanted to get big attack, not 3 planes. It was about mid oct 1942. At first all looked fine. Over 20 planes and pilots, the squadron was in cooktown.
It doesn't do you much good to build a squadron with more than the max aircraft for the type (in the case of B-17s, it's 12; in the case of B-25s, it's 16; it's the number in parenthesis). Extra planes will go into reserve and/or eventually wind up back in the replacement pool. Also, when you're combining squadrons, look for the squadron with the best commander ratings, and fold the other squadrons into it (even if they're bigger than the squadron with the better commander). Every little bit helps.


I moved squadron to Moresby ( 6 airfields and plentiful support ). What happened: 11 planes in reserve, 3 being repaired and 12 in use.
I let the pilots rest after transfer and started operations. I was very careful and no losses, but some damaged during the operations. All the time reserve planes dimished until none. Now I have 12 planes and over 20 pilots in squadron???? What happened?

I pretty sure damaged aircraft are swapped into the replacement pool for a fresh plane (when it can be repaired). But because you had planes in reserve (actually at the airbase), it put the damaged plane in the replacement pool, but then drew a fresh plane from reserve (which is faster than drawing form the replacement pool). As you deplete your reserve aircraft in the squadron, you'll then start drawing from the replacement pool. Don't worry, the "missing" planes didn't get sent to Iceland. They're just in the replacement pool will be drawn normally.


Second one:
How pilots gain experience? Of course by training but in action. I have noticed that bomber crews gain easily exp by flying naval search ( and getting contacts ) or am I imagining whole thing? After hard fights seems that exp is declining. IE fresh unit has exp 80 and after a couple hard fight exp is 75. Combat lossess and replacement pilots are inexperienced???

Any mission gets a pilot experience. Putting pilots with 55 experience on CAP is dangerous, so that's why they have "Training" so you can work them up in the rear areas in less danger. However, "Training" has a dimishing return the higher exp a pilot has (about 65ish). Then your pilot will gain more exp by flying real missions. Yes, ASW and Search will gain you experince (slowly). Stick time is still stick time. The average exp of a squadron will drop as it recieves replacesments, because the replacements are of lower experince. US pilots normally start around 60, Japanese pilots start around 50. However, if you end up drawing ALOT of replacements at once (maybe because you lost 200 planes in a turn), the experience of the replacements will be much lower (on the order of 30 exp instead of 50). A "slow draw" is good for cigars and experience for pilot replacements. Another way to work up experience for you fighter-bombers (like P-39s) is naval and AF attack. If you can escort them, they'll gain exp by bombing, instead of having them get eaten alive by Zeros. Your bomber can also bomb "abandoned" red dots for exp (and there's obviously nothing there to shoot back at them). Personally, I think it's kind of cheezy, but it does work.

Secondly it seems that all the best pilots get killed after they have 4 - 6 victories.
As Frag said, watch your fatigue. Those guys with 4-6 kills probably have pretty good exp ratings (85+), which means they're likely to win a dog-fight all things being equal. The great un-equalizer is fatigue. Still, you're going to lose alot of pilots, no matter how hard you try. Most pilots will never get to 5 kills. Even fewer will make it to 10. Just take the perspective that they're all going to die, and if any survive, then you're happy.

I have read AARīs and I have seen that players put B-17's attack altitude at 1000 feet. Was it done in real life in pacific? I donīt recall reading anything like that. Those attacks shoud have very high AA-losses.
I think that that kind attacks are most unrealistic. Not very important matter, just wondering.

If you fly your bombers under 6000' they take a hit to moral (where, if it goes below 50, they must roll under their moral in order to fly for the day). Furthermore, you will notice significanly higher Flak losses at 1000'. At 6000' the effect most Flak is negligable. I don't usually fly my bombers at 1000', that's more of a "shock" attack by bombers to initially suppress a base (usually about 50% more hits), and then move them back up to 6000'. But I don't normally like 1000', I'd rather fly consistantly at 6000' than have to worry about Flak and moral at 1000'.

-F-




Mr.Frag -> (3/5/2003 11:46:37 PM)

I have no issue with Skip Bombing, it was an excellent tactic used against naval vessels. A very high skill rate is required by the pilots using this tactic, and they suffer painfully from flak which is pointed pretty much straight at them and can not miss...

Bombing LAND targets at 100 feet is a completely different issue and INSANE! At that altitude, dropping a 500 pound bomb without a special delay device would result in you blowing up your OWN AIRCRAFT.

Just how long do you think it takes for that bomb to fall 100 feet and explode?

What makes you think an aircraft flying a few hundred knots is going to escape the blast radius and not take extreme damage from the debris and shock?




Yamamoto -> (3/6/2003 1:59:09 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr.Frag
[B]
Just how long do you think it takes for that bomb to fall 100 feet and explode?

What makes you think an aircraft flying a few hundred knots is going to escape the blast radius and not take extreme damage from the debris and shock? [/B][/QUOTE]

It's even worse than that. It doesn't matter ifthe plane is flying mach 2. When you drop the bomb it is going the same speed. The only difference is what effect air resistance will have on it. You are quite right that the plane would blow itself up. I think planes attacking at 100 feet should only use their guns.

Skip bombing is different because the planes turn off before the bomb hits the ship. By the way, do Japanese level bombers ever skip bomb? I know the navy level bombers carry torpedoes but teh army ones carry bombs. I hope they skip bomb if set to 100 fet just like the allied ones.

Yamamoto




Mr.Frag -> (3/6/2003 2:20:53 AM)

Out of curiousity, does anyone happen to know when the Ballute Retarding system came into widespread use to allow low altitude bombing? I know the Mk 80 series came around sometime in the 50's.




Feinder -> (3/6/2003 3:19:41 AM)

They're not retarded bombs Frag, they're "altitude disadvantaged".

:^)
-F-




Mr.Frag -> (3/6/2003 3:51:29 AM)

Funny enough, I remember learning all about these when I blew up my plane by dropping bombs from < 1000 feet

#1: Fly under radar

#2: PULL UP BEFORE RELEASING BOMBS!!!

I loved Tornado (way way back). First flight sim to ever model Toss Bombing so you didn't have to fly through your bomb blast :D




pertsajakilu -> (3/6/2003 1:35:46 PM)

Thanks for everyone!

Of course there is a max size for squadron, but I forgot that. UV has so many details that I just canīt remember them all yet.

Itīs interesting that B-17īs really did skip bombing. Luckily Japs had no 40mm bofors.

The article didnīt really mention how heavily defanded targets were. Was attacks performed all time at nights.

I really cannot imagine b-17 skip bombing attacks against German coastal convoys. At least daytime.
Or I am all wrong. :-)

Regards
Arto




SpitfireIX -> (3/7/2003 9:43:37 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr.Frag
[B]I have no issue with Skip Bombing, it was an excellent tactic used against naval vessels. A very high skill rate is required by the pilots using this tactic, and they suffer painfully from flak which is pointed pretty much straight at them and can not miss...

Bombing LAND targets at 100 feet is a completely different issue and INSANE! At that altitude, dropping a 500 pound bomb without a special delay device would result in you blowing up your OWN AIRCRAFT.

Just how long do you think it takes for that bomb to fall 100 feet and explode?

What makes you think an aircraft flying a few hundred knots is going to escape the blast radius and not take extreme damage from the debris and shock? [/B][/QUOTE]

[B]Mr. Frag[/B], why do you imagine that skip bombing doesn't require a delayed fuse? Hitting the water at 200 mph activates the bomb just as surely as hitting the ground does. See here for a lesson from WWII on skip bombing [URL=http://www.kensmen.com/combatlessons4.html]http://www.kensmen.com/combatlessons4.html[/URL]

In addition to delayed fuses, retardation parachutes were available for low-level attacks. Unfortunately, they didn't always work (modern retarded bombs have four separate metal-leaf drogues, so that even if one fails the other three will still slow the bomb). I saw an interview on The History Channel with a B-25 pilot--he said if the 'chute detached from a bomb, the only thing they could do was haul back on the stick and pray--he said that one time this happened, and he actually saw the bomb bounce off the ground and climb _above_ the plane. But he survived, obviously.

I don't know that heavies were ever used for low-level ground attack. But clearly they _could_ have been, with a low chance of being blown to smithereens.




Mr.Frag -> (3/7/2003 10:49:05 AM)

Yep, you go haul back on that stick in an aircraft that climbs 900 feet per minute on a nice cold day... whoops, thats the B-17G, not the dog we've got in early UV timeframe, whoops, we are in the nice hot tropics and your climb performance is dramatically reduced ... guess you gotta pray a real big amount :D

While the B-25's where modified to have very high forward facing firepower, including the addition of a actual 75mm cannon, thats the B-25, which was used for skip bombing and all sorts of other tricks. It is NOT a heavy bomber.

Please lets not mix up medium bombers and heavy bombers when we tell the tales of who did what ...

This discussion was and always has been aimed at the fact that HEAVY bombers, which are pretty much unstoppable by flighters due to the large number of guns they sport and their extremely high durability numbers (60+ in UV) are being used for literal strafing runs, doing insane amounts of damage :D

You wanna use your medium bombers at 100 feet, feel free, too bad you can't load your torpedoes on the B-25 like I can in the Betty. It could carry them.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.9375